In Friday's Collegian, Sahar Oz defends the right of ethnic Jews to own Palestine. The logic behind this assertion is faulty, as I will attempt to explain.

History describes countless instances of people willingly migrating. Two examples are the Irish immigration to America during the nineteenth century and the Hispanic immigration to America going on today. Another example is the Jewish Diaspora that occurred around the year 900, when the Jews willingly left Palestine for Europe, to prosper in the infant European economy.

Yet, Sahar Oz argues that the Jews still have a right to Palestine because their ancestors lived there over 1000 years ago. If this logic is correct, then today's Irish-Americans have a right to travel to Ireland, evict a native Irish family, and steal their home, simply because their ancestors lived there. In fact, by Oz's logic, Irish-Americans have a stronger case than the Jews because their forebears abandoned their homeland merely 150 years ago, not 1,000.

If Oz is correct, then my Russian descent entitles me to kick a Russian family off its land in Vladavostok and move in. Of course, this assertion is ridiculous.

Descendants of the Jews who moved to Europe have no right to Palestine any more than my family has a right to Russia, or my Irish-American friends have a right to the Emerald Isle.

The Jews forfeited their "right" to Palestine as soon as they left for Europe. Palestine now belongs to the Arabs they left behind. And if the Arabs choose to have their own diaspora someday, Palestine will belong to whoever moves in behind them.