While the trolls rant

Well thats all right then.

Do the people that Israel brutally and illegally occupies know about this? Do the people who's land, property and water has been and is being stolen know about this ?

They should be told. It will be a great comfort to them. P

No RRZ is not all right for you to make outrageous and lying claims of brutal occupation when they're not true. Or for you to somehow think you will be given a free ride to peddle your falsehoods and fabrications - neither water nor land is being stolen from anyone.

Your attempt to denigrate Israel is both pitiful and devoid of intellectual honesty. Quite plainly you are a complete fraud down to your depiction of an anti-Zionist whenever you post your mendacious blogs.

All occupations are brutal

Ducks quack

Occupations are brutal

Mendacity is your middle name.

The security requirements of Israel, prompted by two violent insurrections and the constant barrage of rockets on its civilian population coupled with the supply to terrorist groups of more and more sophisticated weaponry, has forced Israel to impose restrictions on Arab residents of Judea and Samaria part of the territory which was awarded to the Jews by the League of Nations before any Arab Palestinian nation had ever been invented. The Arabs living in the disputed territory, typically, notonly dispute Israel's rights to it but also dispute Israel's right to even exist and wish to destroy by any means.
As to claims of apartheid if Israel were to give Palestinians full citizenship, it would mean the territories would have had to have been annexed by Israel. One can well imagine the apoplexy that would engender among the Jew haters who are the ones employing the "apartheid" canard. No Israeli government has been prepared to take that step.
Instead, through negotiations, Israel agreed to give the Palestinians increasing authority over their own affairs 98% of Palestinians are now self-governed.
Furthermore Jewish communities reside upon less than 1 percent of this disputed territory. There is an allegation that due to the classification of a portion of the territory as "state land" by Israel, 42 percent of it is controlled by Israeli Jewish councils. Even this claim however, has been rejected by the Chairman of the Council of Jewish Communities who puts the figure at 9 percent.
The principal impediment to Palestinian independence is not Israeli policy, it is not settlements it is not occupation and neither is it any of the other myriad of lies and falsehoods you post on this website it is the unwillingness of the Palestinian leadership to give up terrorism and agree to live in peace beside the State of Israel i.e. the utter rejection of the Jewish People's right to self determination in its own land.

Tell it to the birds

Area C is 60% of the West Bank. But this is hardly relevent since Israel controls the whole of it. It may subcontract out some of its dirty work in parts of it, but it can and would cancel these contracts whenever it's suited. If any parts of the West Bank are not controlled by Israel, how come Israel decides whether I may or may not enter them?

The League of Nations did not "give" ANYTHING to "the Jews".

".......Israel agreed to give the Palestinians increasing authority over their own affairs...."

GIVE ????? GIVE !!!!!!!

IN THEIR OWN LAND. !!!!!!!!

"Neither land nor water is being stolen from anyone".

You should tell that to the people of the Jordan Valley, or rather, once of the Jordan Valley.

We are consistently told that The League of Nations “ gave Palestine to the Jews “. It is hard to believe that such nonsense could gain any currency but it seems that it has.
A variant is that it was given to The State of Israel, despite the fact that Israel didn’t exist so could not be given anything or be capable of receiving anything. Then the massive leap to “ Israel therefore was simply recovering what it already owned when it occupied the west bank."
I ran this story past my cat and he thinks I am nuts.
In the closing stages of the war , including the time of the Balfour declaration, the British were all over the near east like a rash. At the end of the war there were 200,000 British troops in Palestine... the fact on the ground ( and I know Israel is very fond of facts on the ground). The British knew at the time of The Balfour Declaration that they would be in charge in Palestine at the end of the war, hence they were able to make declarations such as the one associated with Balfour.
The geography of the Palestine Mandate was agreed between Britain and France and the world was told that was how it was going to be.
The League of Nations duly mandated Palestine to the British.
Let me repeat. THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS DULY MANDATED PALESTINE TO BRITAIN. It did not “GIVE PALESTINE TO THE JEWS”
The Mandate included an acknowledgment that the mandatory power would be responsible for putting into effect the Balfour Declaration. “ Whereas the Principle Allied Powers have also agreed that the mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the government of His Brittanic Majesty, and adopted by the said powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”
So the British are in charge. It was their declaration, and are mandated to give effect to it.
So what was this declaration the British were mandated to implement ? The Balfour Declaration was issued in the form of a letter to Lord Rothschild, the then President of the British Zionist Federation.
“ Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by , the cabinet. His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this objective............”
IN Palestine OF a national home for the Jewish people.
The memorandum submitted by Weizmann and his Zionist colleagues to the cabinet proposed the establishment OF Palestine AS a national home for the Jewish people. This would clearly mean that the whole of Palestine was to be designated as a national home for the Jewish people.
This was specifically rejected by the cabinet
So the British are committed to work toward the establishment of a Jewish National Home somewhere in Palestine.
They don’t say exactly where and doubtless don’t know at this point in time.
What did the British mean by ” National home for the Jewish people “ ?
Well what they did not mean was a Jewish state in either the sense of a state carved out of Palestine with a Jewish majority. The demographics of the time would have made such an idea absurd. The events that subsequently made this possible could not possibly have been foreseen.
What they also did not mean was Jewish sovereignty and hegemony over an Arab population that was hugely in the majority.
When the question of independence for Transjordan arose they used the expressions Arab STATE and Jewish NATIONAL HOME in the same sentence.. a clear indication of them feeling that there was a difference.
When their problems in Palestine were such that the idea of partition finally occurred to them the size of Israel envisaged was about the size of my thumbnail. See the Peel Commission.
In any event they didn’t create a Jewish state, didn’t attempt to and had no intention of attempting to.
When Zionist aspirations had got so far out of sync with British intentions as to be regarded as dangerous, Herbert Samuel wrote a document that Churchill signed. This eschewed the notion of creating a predominantly Jewish state and limited Jewish immigration to “ the economic capacity of the country “ .
It read in part.........Phrases have been used such as Palestine is to become “ as Jewish as England is English”. His Majesty’s Government regard any such expectation as impractical and have no such aim in view.
The State of Israel came about by unilateral declaration and was subsequently recognised by the UN within its then boundaries. The UN couldn’t recognise a borderless state could it ?

Heavens another troll feeding frenzy!

bancek - completely incoherent.
armbach - hysterical I mean historical revisionist. The League of Nations awarded the mandate of Palestine to Britain - it didn't award Palestine to Britain to do with it as it wished but to reconstitute the Jewish homeland but don't let a few facts get in the way of your agenda.
Mary - let me see before 1967 there were no plans to grant independence to a people called Palestinian. In fact the PLO's original covenant written when it was formed in 1964 specifically states that it has no claims to sovereignty over "the West Bank" which it goes on to say is Jordanian. So if the 1967 Six Day War had not happened what would the Palestinians be claiming today as their land? I say claiming because they have never done is actually have a land, In fact Israel has given the Palestinians much more than they ever received under the Jordanians or would have if they were still running the show.
skovronek - the truth is very much the opposite. Over the years, Israelis have drastically decreased the amount of water they use while Palestinian consumption has increased. Before 1967, Israel’s water usage was approximately 500 cubic meters per person per year. Today, it is 70% less at 149 cubic meters per person per year. In that time, Palestinian water consumption has increased from 86 (what the Jordanians allowed them) to 105 cubic meters per person per year. The skewered Amnesty Report presumably upon which you accuse Israel of theft is laden with errors as well. For example, it claims Palestinian villages in the vicinity of Jerusalem, such as Beit Ula, are not connected to a water system. In fact, Beit Ula has been connected to the Palestinian water network of the Palestinian Water Authority since 1974.
Palestinians accuse Israel of stealing their water, despite the fact that the majority of Israel's water comes from within the pre-1967 armistice lines. Also forgotten is that Palestinian agriculture flourished after 1967 because Israelis introduced drip irrigation and other modern agricultural techniques. Prior to 1967, of the 430 Palestinian towns and villages in Judea and samaria under Jordanian rule, 50 had access to running water. By 1992, an influx of capital and infrastructure from Israel had increased the number to 260.
Year after year, the Israel Water Authority has delivered more water per year to the Palestinians than the amounts agreed upon in the Oslo Accords. Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority has threatened the water security of both themselves and the Israelis by digging 250 illegal wells and refusing to purify sewage water in violation of the Oslo Accords, instead dumping sewage into streams, causing massive pollution and threatening the lives of everyone.
Palestinian mismanagement has already destroyed the aquifer in Gaza, making the water undrinkable. The Palestinian Authority has received billions of dollars in international aid and large sums of money were earmarked for the Palestinians to build sewage treatment plants, but not a single facility has been constructed. This violates the commitment made in the Oslo Declaration of Principles for Cooperation on Water-Related Matters that states that water projects be environmentally sound. There are currently five sewage treatment plants located in the West Bank. Of these, the Palestinian Authority has only managed to keep one functioning. The Palestinian population in the West Bank exceeds 2 million. The one plant the Palestinian Authority has managed to keep functioning has the capacity to service 50,000 people - a huge disparity. In light of the Palestinian Authority's inability to serve its own people's water needs, one can understand Israel's reluctance to share more precious water resources.
Still, Israel has offered to supply Palestinians with desalinated water but, due to political posturing, Palestinian leaders have refused. As in many other fields the Palestinian leaders would rather their people suffered than accept assistance from the hated Jews.

Armbach it was not in Britain's gift - whatever you claim the British thought it meant the League of Nations thought otherwise and said so. All the Balfour Declaration did was verbalise Britain's intention to support the Jewish People's aspirations to re-constitue itself as an independent nation in its own homeland. Live with it -you have posted this nonsense before repeating it ad nauseum does not make it any more correct.

Israel controls the whole of the West Bank. It controls who enters and who leaves. For example - Jericho: Jericho is alledgedly under the control of the PA. Jericho is very close to the border, but the last house in Jericho is a couple of hundred meters from the border. The stretch of grass between that last house and the border is Area C.

Any authority it affords the PA is merely a subcontracted authority that it can and would, if it suited, revoke at any time. It further maintains control over the entire area by controlling its finances. It largely controls the funding of the PA, and withholds such funding whenever it is displeased.

If this were Israel we were talking about, would you be saying that Israel had authority over its own affairs?

In reality, we already have one state between the river and the sea, an apartheid state. That Israel won't declare annexation, is purely for cosmetic reasons as you've come very close to pointing out.

"All the Balfour Declaration did was verbalise Britain's intention to support the Jewish People's aspirations to re-constitue itself as AN INDEPENDENT NATION in its own homeland."

Where?

"whatever you claim the British thought it meant the League of Nations thought otherwise and SAID SO."

Where?

The League of Nations mandated Palestine to Britain and included in the mandate, a mandate to implement the Balfour Declaration.

Ok but I am still not sitting in the back of the bus

Israel controls Judea and Samaria because of security concerns - but notwithsatnding that 98% of Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria are governed by the PA and 100% of Gazans are governed by Hamas. Jewish control in Judea and Samaria is limited to 9% not 60% of the area only.
Your nonsensical and comical claim that Israel is an apartheid state might hold true if Israel had annexed Judea and Samaria like the Jordanians did and like the Jordanians then refused to give citizenship to the Palestinians living there. That is what apartheid means not your fanciful interpretation.
This autonomy over their own affairs is far more than the Palestinians ever enjoyed under respectively the Jordanians and the Egyptians. The Jewish people has historical legal and moral rights to reconstitute itself in its ancient homeland not something the Palestinians an entity which only came into being in 1964 enjoy so your rhetorical question has no basis.
Israel controls Judea and Samaria because the Palestinians refuse to negotiate a peace deal and renounce terrorism and since that would entail a recognition of the right of the Jewish People to self-determination in their own homeland. They have twice been offered a substantive deal for independence and have refused to even negotiate.