Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

The settlers just hate it when the Pals murder Israelis.

"The phrase "Zion's redemption", a Star of David and the name of an Israeli soldier who was killed last month in the West Bank were spray-painted [by settlers] on the wall of the local mosque-cum-primary school in the village of Burqa."

-- Reuters

Did settlers steal Palestinian lands? YES.
What would "you" do if your land/property is stolen from you?

Jewish Settlers Retaliate After Shootings
New York Times

Jewish settlers enraged by increasing Israeli deaths in West Bank drive-by shootings turned to vigilante tactics today, stoning and shooting at Palestinian cars.

Zvi Shelef, 63, became the fourth settler killed this week when Palestinians fired on his car today in the northern part of the West Bank.

Later today, a 17-year-old Palestinian, Ahmed Salah Abu el-Hilu, was killed and another person was critically injured in a clash with Israeli forces near Ramallah, doctors said. The Israeli military said soldiers fired in the air.

In Bethlehem, Farah Bouto, 54, was shot and killed in front of his house by gunmen in a passing car. Mr. Bouto was questioned by the Palestinian police a year ago for selling land to Israelis.

Near Nablus, a settler opened fire on a Palestinian car, injuring two people slightly, the police said. Nearby, settlers stoned and beat a group of Palestinians whose car overturned after settlers threw rocks at it. One of the Palestinians was seriously injured, witnesses and doctors said.

They were not Palestinian lands. There is no country called Palestine. Jews have lived in the area for centuries and have the right to build settlements there.

ha ha ha ha ha.... Have you ever heard the term "possession is 9/10th of the law?"

From Israel-Palestine 101 by Jewish Voice for Peace.

Here, Advocate, maybe a Jewish voice will wake you up into reality about Israel.

http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/content/israeli-palestinian-conflict-101

Advocate says:


There was no country called Israel until 1947. Palestinians lived in the area that is now called Israel for centuries and were illegally evicted. They have the right to return to their previous lands and build settlements there.

Wrong. The Kingdom of Israel dates to the dawn of the Iron Age.



Hardly illegally. The Palestinians never had any right to live on Israeli land to begin with.



No they don't.

The Palestinians could have gotten 1967 borders had they only been willing to make peace. But that's all but over now. These peace talks under Kerry will be the Palestinians' last chance at 1967 borders. Once those talks fail, the Palestinians are all going to have to get used to being Gazans, because that is what they will end up becoming.

So the UN Declaration of 1947, which identifies this country and its name, is wrong?
Now we really are in deep doo-doo.

Palestinian land or Arab land, it's really a matter of semantics and Advocate is a past master at splitting hairs. This expedient is used by those without an answer and don't like being left looking foolish. Below is an article describing the Palestinians and their land
_________

"At the time of the 1917 Balfour Not only were a people already in Palestine, but they had a well-established society that was recognized by other Arabs as uniquely "Palestinian." It consisted of respected intellectual and professional classes, political organizations, and a thriving agrarian economy that was expanding into the crude Declaration and the beginnings of modern industry. There were about 600,000 Arabs in Palestine and about 60,000 Jews. Over the next thirty years the ratio narrowed as Jewish immigration increased especially as a result of the anti-Semitic policies of Adolph Hitler. However, on the eve of the 1947 UN plan to partition Palestine, Arabs still were a large majority, with Jews amounting to only one-third of the population——608,225 Jews to 1,2237,332 Arabs. When Max Nordau, an early Zionist and friend of Zangwill, learned in 1897 there was an indigenous Arab population in Palestine, he exclaimed: "I didn't know that! We are committing an injustice!"

Observes scholar John Quigley: "The Arab population had been stable for hundreds of years. There was no substantial in-migration in the nineteenth century."
*******

"It was only strong pressure exerted by the Truman administration that secured passage of the UN Partition Plan by the General Assembly on November 29, 1947, by a vote of 33 to 13 with 10 abstentions and 1 absent. Among those nations that succumbed to US pressure were France, Ethiopia, Haiti, Liberia, Luxembourg, Paraguay and the Philippines. Former Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles wrote: "By direct order of the White House every form of pressure, direct and indirect, was brought to bear by American official upon those countries outside of the Muslim world that were known to be either uncertain or opposed to partition. Representatives or intermediaries were employed by the White House to make sure that the necessary majority would at length be secured."

"The partition plan adopted as Resolution 181, divided Palestine between "independent Arab and Jewish states and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem. Future Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett argued that the resolution had "binding force," and Israel's Declaration of Independence cited it three times as legal justification for the establishment of the state. But the General Assembly, in contrast to the Security Council, has no powers beyond making recommendations. I cannot enforce its recommendations nor are they legally binding except on internal UN Matters.

"The Palestinians, as was their right, rejected the plan because it granted the Jews more than half of Palestine despite the fact that they made up only one-third of the population and owned only 6.59 percent o the land. In addition, the Palestinians maintained that the United Nations had no legal right to recommend partition when the majority inhabitants of Palestine opposed it. Nonetheless, by rejecting partition Palestinians did not reject their own claim to an independent nation. Their opposition was to a Jewish state established on Palestinian land, not to the Jews' right as a people.

"Jewish leader David Ben-Gurion advised his colleagues to accept partition because, he told them, "There is no such thing in history as a final arrangement––not with regard to the regime, not with regard to borders, and not with regard to international agreements."

"One of Zionism's great pioneers, Nahum Goldmann, expressed pragmatism in a different vein: "There is no hope for a Jewish state which has to face another 50 years of struggle against Arab enemies." "

Despite what some would have us believe, pragmatism still exists.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25308701

Unfortunately, the issue of water sharing doesn't answer the major question about stolen lands.

This is just more of the endless whining by the Pals. They should instead cease attacking Israel and its people and sit down with Israel and work out a reasonable agreement for statehood.

But I am not sure that this is possible when the Pal leaders fear assassination should they come to terms with Israel. Arafat expressed this to Bill Clinton.

The organization is more of an "anti-jewish voice" when you consider its goals. Even though a number of wars have been launched against Israel from the Pal areas, the group wants removal of the JDF from those areas. Remember, Israel cannot afford to lose a war. The Pals can lose one and bounce back a few years later.

The organization also calls for a boycott of Israeli companies that might profit from the occupation. It provides no support for Israel, but is entirely pro-Palestine.

Just like there is a divergence of opinions among, say, Japanese Americans, there is, naturally, a divergence of opinions among Jewish Americans. Thus, the organization is hardly a "Jewish voice."

It is not very difficult to cherry-pick statements made over many years to support your contentions.

The interesting thing is that Israel immedicately accepted, and lived by, the UN partition. It did that despite hundreds of attacks by the Pals, and the Pal seizure of part of the "internationalized" Jerusalem. The Pals desecrated Jewish holy places in this would-be internationalized area. The last straw for Israel were the Pal and other Arab forces attacks during the '67 war. As you know, Israel then took the rest of Jerusalem.

Israel has the "Jerusalem law" and always had been against an Internationalsed Jerusalem ("Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.")

Considering the Pal desecration, you can see why Israel was against an international Jerusalem. But the important thing is that Israel accepted it in the partitioning. The Pals didn't.

You continue to repeat "It did that despite hundreds of attacks by the Pals,.." even after we provide you with the number of casualties between the Jews and Palestinians. Are you really that dense? Do you really believe one Jew's life is more important than the thousands of Palestinians killed by Jews? Really?

If you really believe that, you are scum. Nobody ever thinks that the millions of Jews killed by the Nazi's were worthless lives.

I watched Schindler's List the past two nights. The scene where the train passes through the towers at Birkenau really impacted my sorrow for all those Jews, because I was on that tower during my latest visit to Poland.

I really feel sorry for your ignorance and inhuman feelings towards Palestinians.

Maybe not, but you've got to start somewhere, and at least they're cooperating about something.

You're not making any sense. That's an organization of Jews.



Do you have any understanding of logic? Probably not.