Because the answer is so clear, I do not propose to engage in an extended analysis.  Speaking to Canadians is boring. Listening to Canadians is monotonous and pedestrian. Reviewing the history of Canada is like watching paint dry.  Monochrome paint. Flat white, non-glossy.

Of course Canada does not have the right to exist and were anyone ever to think it worthwhile to attack, it would have no right to defend itself.  It is stolen land, whose foundation is a bedrock of apartheid and persecution.

Just applying the rules proposed for Israel, of course, except with far greater justification.

Prior to 1500, hundreds of indigenous nations were in possession of Canada, with an aggregate population estimated to exceed 2,000,000.  During the final decade of the 16th century, rapacious Europeans devised the self-serving doctrine of discovery, granting themselves the right to colonize and possess the lands of the aborigines.  Over the next two centuries, French and British explorers, missionaries, and fur traders established settlements on Aboriginal lands.

In 1763, establishing a pattern of surrender for the ages, France ceded most North American territories to Britain.  In 1867, Britain made its policy of apartheid official with the Constitution Act (British North America Act, which established the Dominion of Canada and granted it authority over “Indians and lands reserved for Indians”).  In 1876, just to underscore the point, the Indian Act was adopted, establishing federal control over indigenous identity, governance, land, and culture.  Indian ceremonies were banned and Indians were denied voting rights.

Fast forward to 1982, when Canada finally gained full control over its constitution.  Note that indigenous leaders opposed patriation.  This seems unduly churlish, unless one considers that from 1880-1951 cultural ceremonies were banned under the Indian Act, movement off reservations was restricted in 1885, and amendments to the Indian Act made it illegal for indigenous people to raise funds or hire lawyers for the purpose of advancing claims to land.

Starting in 1960, things started to improve for Indians and in 1982 various existing aboriginal and treaty rights were recognized.

It would appear, however, that the people who took the land, from the ocean to the ocean, have no intention of giving it back, notwithstanding much lip service to stolen lands.

Just for the purposes of comparison, though it is clear that a Jewish state can not expect the same treatment as a non-Jewish state (we are, after all, Jews), Jews are the indigenous people in Israel, all citizens, regardless of race or religion, have enjoyed full civil rights since Israel was granted independence in 1948, there have been self-governing Jewish states at various times over the past 3,500 years in Israel, there has never been a Palestinian state in the region, and Palestinian Arabs are relatively late arrivals.  There is no one with a claim to the land, either legal, moral, or historical, superior to that of the Jews.  The same is not true of Canada.

So if Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state or defend itself is questioned, it would appear to be lights out for Canada, despite the significant contributions Canadian society has made (i.e., hockey, Celine Dion, and men named Gord and Lorne).

A fortiori, if we need to part with colonial, apartheid Canada, there is not much of a case to be made for Australia.

The British invasion of Australia began in 1788.  Prior to that time, there appear to have been 60,000 years of indigenous civilization, with hundreds of nations comprised of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with distinct languages, laws, and cultures.  So it will come as no surprise that the British pronounced the land “terra nullius” (land belonging to no one), and proceeded to violently capture, massacre, and dispossess the indigenous people, not even bothering to enter into the meaningless treaties that had worked so well for them in Canada.  There was conflict and resistance, but the aboriginals didn’t stand a chance.  Not only was there apartheid, with Aboriginals denied the franchise, but there was genocide.

The ironically named “protection” laws controlled movement, vocations, marriage, and child custody of aboriginals.  Many were forced onto missions and reserves and their children removed for “training,” most of them never to return.

Meanwhile, Australia became fully sovereign and independent of Britain in 1986, 38 years after Israel achieved independence.  Indigenous people received the right to vote in federal elections in 1962, 14 years after Palestinian Arabs in Israel.  In 1975 (!) racial discrimination was outlawed.  In 1993, terra nullius was overturned, but . . . the land was not returned to the aboriginals. In 2023, a proposal for a constitutionally guaranteed indigenous advisory body was rejected; reconciliation only goes so far.

So, does Australia have rights to exist and defend itself?  Certainly not as persuasive as those belonging to Israel.

No real reason to examine the United States, or all the Arab states formed with a stroke of a pen after World War I.  You get the point.

But in case any of you missed it, to all of you woke morons who question the right of Jews to our ancestral homeland, where we have maintained sovereignty whenever we were permitted to or able to seize it by force of arms over thousands of years, where we have treated latecomers and colonists equally and equitably, where everyone votes in free and fair elections, where our legitimacy was established by formal resolution of the United Nations and maintained in a series of defensive wars, where we have accomplished miracles with the help of God and our own resilience, to each and every one of you:  go play in traffic (the foregoing phrase was much less polite before Ahuva edited it out) and Happy Passover.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)