It's a post-hoc justification. In these spaces you're not allowed to say no to some groups, because being listened to isn't determined by your ideas or whether you are making sense, it's determined by your membership in particular "oppressed" groups.
So it's not that there is any actual connection between tranny liberation and Palestinian liberation, it's that the local Palestinian activists took over the conversation among activist groups, and the trannies had to let that happen because you can't say no to a group that's higher than you on the oppression stack.
So the choice for the trannies was to include Palestinians in their messaging (otherwise they'd be accused of ignoring the favored group, and get caught up in the leftist circular firing squad) or shut up. And trannies cannot shut up. Hence, that sign.
(This is the same thing that happened with most feminist groups in the 2010s: troons barged in and demanded to have their rights and needs "included", and they were higher on the stack, so the real women had to give in and rework their messaging to include men)
Don't try to look at it as an actual coherent ideology; it's all post-hoc, like I said. It's really about their desire to fit in within their little groups, and gain as much dominance as possible, and the hoops they have to jump through to do that.
What I am interested in is how it is collectively determined who is on top of the stack within these movements at any given time. My cautious theory is that it's the group that seems the most implicitly willing to do violence.
