The arguments that Ari De-Levie made in his July 7 "Community View," "'Right of return' a bogus issue," may seem, on the surface, convincing. However, once they are scrutinized, they look absurd.

Take, for instance, his first argument about the right of return. Admitting that Palestinians left their country during times of war, though not forcibly (which is the case), he agrees that if they "come back after hostilities, that's return." He denies, however, that right to their grandchildren.

The same can be said about the Jews. After destroying the Temple in AD 73, and the second revolt (AD 132-135), the Romans dispersed the Hebrew Jews in the Roman Empire and prohibited their presence in Palestine. Had Ari De-Levie brought his argument to its logical conclusion, he should have also denied the right of return to the grandchildren of the Hebrew Jews who left Palestine in the 2nd century.

Not only is Ari De-Levie giving that right to the descendants of the Hebrew Jews, but also to the Eastern European Jews who are, according to some scholars, descendants of the Khazars (an empire located between the Black and the Caspian Seas) and consequently have no historic connection to Palestine.

The descendants of the Khazars, who converted to Judaism in the 8th century, as well as the grandchildren of the Hebrew Jews have no more right to live in Palestine than the Christians of the world just because Christ was born in Palestine.

These kind of nonsensical arguments are consistently made by Israel's apologists whose ideology skews their logic.

July  12, 2003