> It does. That's a clear indication of the preference of one kind of citizen vs another.

Like literally every other country in the world. The children of British citizens, even if born abroad, get citizenship. You can buy citizenship in New Zealand. Every country has its own unique immigration policies, and the ones in Israel are absolutely legal and normal by international standards.

Additionally, a Palestinian state would be much worse for minorities if judging by literally every other Muslim country in the world. So I don't think this argument is very valid if what you're advocating is replacing something that you don't deem good by something that you deem worse.

Wanna talk about second class citizens? Jews already had second-class citizens status in the Arab world before 1948, but after 1948 they were expelled, lost even more rights, got their property nationalized etc.

> The moment European migrants started stealing land with EU guns, they started a war.

Factually not true. (1) Jews purchased the lands (even though Jewish residents weren't allowed to own land there during the Ottoman days, again, this is what REAL second-class citizens look like), (2) Jews were under American and British arms embargo, they had to smuggle weapons from wherever they could get it, it's not like it was a European push, (3) the Jews in Europe were referred to as "brown" by the locals, in fact they fled persecution there because they didn't belong, (4) as I mentioned above, 850,000 of them were actually living in the region and got kicked out of neighboring Muslim countries, (5) many Jews were already living in that exact area, (6) it literally says so in the bible (which Islam is derived from) that this was the land of the Jews, so implying that they don't belong there (like you did) is a bit dishonest. You can say that the fact that Jews are from there doesn't matter, but not that they are just some European migrants.