This came up in the comments of another post where I had labelled (now former) Obama administration "green" czar Van Jones an anti-Semite for claiming the entire history of Israel since 1948 was an "occupation" thus making Israel an illegitimate state.
Oh no(!) claimed a commentator. This is merely "criticism" of Israel! Not a statement about it's right to exist!
Nonsense. Not only is it nonsense, it is unthinking, uncritical nonsense. This can be proved by looking at the history of the region. If the intervention of the UN and other Western powers makes the existence of Israel an occupation, well why isn't Jordan, which was created by the same kind of mechanism not also an illegitimate occupation? (A Google search of the sentence "Jordan is illegitimate" returns 3 hits. "Israel is illegitimate" returns 491,000.)
Now, given the similarity in the manner of their birth, what distinguishes the primary difference in the responses to the creation of the state of Jordan versus the state of Israel? Could it be that Israel is a Jewish state while Jordan isn't? Sure seems like it to me.
It should seem like it to every thinking person.