A modern-day fallacy

I wonder if Aristotle, when complying his list of logical fallacies 2,000 years ago, overlooked this one or if it genuinly is a modern-day fallacy. We'll call it the Fallacy of Uneven Deconstruction.

As mentioned in the previous post, referring to the Bible as the legitimizing source of the Jewish right to Eretz Israel is not a good argument.  It is wrong from an argumentative point of view, and it is unfortunate because it can't be logically defended when liberals pounce upon it every time get the chance.

What is worth noting however is that the same critically minded liberals surprisingly give a pass to whatever  narrative the Palestinian Arabs come up with as their claim to the land of Palestine. So the Jewish narrative is deconstructed while the Arab is accepted: hence the fallacy of uneven deconstruction.   

The reasons to why this is so will have to be the subject of a separate comprehensive post. But to lift part of the suspense: Palestinians receive uneven and unwarranted protection due to being the pet victims of liberal Westerners.

Once we're aware of the uneven deconstruction, it starts to make sense why Israel always seems guilty and Palestinian Arabs always innocent. The political Left, so proud of its egalitarian ethos, conveniently forgets about equal treatment when it comes to how Jewish vs Arab stories are perceived.

Faith in argumentation

Yoel Meltzer writes at ynet that there is a lack of clarity in Israel as to why the land belongs to the Jews. He continues:

[T]here is only one thing that is capable of providing us with the level of certainty that is needed to keep from buckling under to the escalating local and international pressure. Simply stated, it is the unwavering belief that the Land of Israel was given to the Jewish people by God. ... It is this, and not the Holocaust or a UN vote, which is our real claim to the Land of Israel.

In the comments section Meltzer goes on to nail his point home:

I'm not trying to convince the world with the "God argument" but rather trying to get my own people to wake up! We need to convince ourselves of our right to the land before we can convince the world. 

What he is propagating is that Jews should use a religious narrative (the "God argument") to ensure the unyielding strenght of the community. 

Let’s follow through with this thought. It in effect means that the Jewish nation would have to be unanimous in not doubting this belief system, at least in public. As soon as doubt appears, questions will need to be answered, and there are no good answers as to why this particular claim to the land is better founded than that of the people next door.

What are Meltzer’s answers should he be faced with the assertion that God, or Allah, in fact gave the land to the Arabs? The problem is that there are no tools of argumentative logic to prove that his narrative is more relevant than another supposedly divine claim to the land.
Divinity is not an objective category. It’s a question of accepting or rejecting the story, not of lining up arguments to actually prove your point to be more valid than others. Building the strength of a society on a divine claim won’t work  unless people are unanimously accepting the belief. And certainly you can't expect a whole nation to be undoubting, let alone expect the world to do so.

It takes an argument that can be evaluated against other claims within an objective framework to build the strong foundation that can be proven right when it is attacked.