With Naqba Day coming up (when Palestinian Arabs commemorate the catastrophe of the founding of Israel), Im Tirtzu has published a pamphlet exposing the lies and distortions which make up the Arab “Palestinian” narrative. Westbankmama provides a brief summary in English of the 70-page Hebrew pamphlet, outlining the main ideas of the document. In short, they are these:
1) The Arabs attacked the Jews.
2) The Arabs fled.
3) Who is really a refugee?
4) What about the Jewish refugees?
5) The Arabs sided with the Nazis.
Two points that might prove of greatest interest to those unfamiliar with the facts behind the rhetoric are #3 and #4. In defining refugees, “for every other refugee the world over, the status is just for a person with a long past in a region, and the status is for the person actually displaced. But for the Arabs displaced by the War in 1948, the status has been extended to those residing in a place for just two years, and the status was granted to his children and grandchildren.” And while the actual number of Arabs displaced (under the universal, and not the revised definition of “refugee”) in 1948 was 560,000, there were 900,000 Jews expelled or forced to flee Arab countries in the decade or so following the foundation of the State of Israel. In other words, as Westbankmama writes, “for every Arab refugee there are 1.5 Jewish refugees. All of the Jewish refugees were absorbed, mostly by Israel.”
For those who read Hebrew, the pamphlet can be found here. I also echo Westbankmama’s sentiments that this pamphlet should be translated into Arabic and Farsi and disseminated on the Web.
Shimshonit 
Of course the definition of what constitutes a refugee is a double-standard, even if we try to eliminate the double standard and say that it applies to all inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael and not just the Arabs. Because even if we ex post facto change what has constituted a refugee, then we would say that the Jews who were expelled at the time of the destruction of the Second Temple or earlier at the time of the destruction of the First Temple certainly lived there for a period of two years, and that their descendants for perpetuity would also constitute as refugees.
But then the Arabs would have to consider the fact that there can’t be two indigenous peoples on the same land, because then they would’ve been the same people. And that their claims must come later than the Jews because Islam didn’t exist prior to the 7th century CE and there are no records of a pre-Islamic Arab people who lived in Eretz Yisrael (because then they wouldn’t be Arabs).
So either the world has to admit that it has a racist double standard in saying that only Arabs could be refugees, or that the Jews have the only legitimate claim to the land. Because you can’t say in all honesty that the Jews have a legitimate claim and then deny that claim by seeking to set up a hostile state next to it which will undermine the security of the Jews’ claim.