"The last time this piece of land was governed with a capital was by the jews 2000 years ago" is a really odd formulation. I take it that it's part of Jewish exceptionalism, that their colonisation of the land was different to all the other colonisations before and since, including modern Zionist colonisation. Wouldn't having Jerusalem as a capital be trumped by having the Crusader "Kingdom of Jerusalem"?Im absolutely correct. Not only that, it was swamp land most of it. Arabs started flooding back when they could see the Jews were making the land flourish. No interest whatsoever before this. Almost 1 MILLION Arab jews were kicked out of their countries in 1948 and very many retuned to their historic homeland. Further, the last time this piece of land was governed with a capital was by the jews 2000 years ago before most were exiled by the romans. 600 years BEFORE Islam. SO please tell me why Islam make such claims on the land which has been colonised multiple times, the last colonisation being the Ottoman Empire before the British took control.
Anyway, on this sort of argument the Jews took over a land flowing with milk and honey (not a swamp) in around 1270 BC, colonised it, were exiled from it in 586 BC by Babylon, then after the Persian and Greek empires, the Jews only had control for about 80 years before the Roman colonisation, then the Diaspora in 70 AD. So that's about 800 years of Jewish government. Excluding 200 years of the Crusades, it was under Islam from 636 - 1922. Over a thousand years. How's that for a claim to the land?