Your simple analogy as also been very helpful …

Submitted by Martin J. Malliet (Belgium), Sep 13, 2018 at 02:13

... for opponents of the Zionist project to (wilfully?) misunderstand it. Abdulaziz ibn Saud in an interview in 1943: "First, I do not know that the Jews have any justification for their claims in Palestine on the grounds that for centuries before the mission of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Palestine was Jewish land. The Romans had conquered the Jews, killing and scattering them so that no trace of their rule remained. The Arabs conquered Palestine over 1,300 years ago, freeing it from the Romans, and since that time it has remained Muslim. The Jews therefore have no right to the country, because all countries in the world have been conquered by people who have made undisputed homes in such lands. If we were to follow the Jewish theory, many of the settled people of the world would have to leave their homes." - Note the simplistic idea in the last sentence of people having to leave heir homes, when compared to the original idea in the Palestine Mandate

- The Council of the League of Nations - July 24, 1922: "Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." - Note how the last idea about Jews in other countries did not prevent the Jewish Nakbah.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".