The British Mandate was issued to establish the Homeland for the Jewish people in both areas: Palestine and Transjordan. The latter ( 75% of the whole lot) was taken away and given to aliens. ALL of Palestine belongs to Israel - isn't that obvious ?

At long last we are beginning to see evidence that Israeli's actually believe that they own their land and are not merely defending their squat, whilst awaiting International eviction. Well done David Ha'iviri for your sanity and conviction!

Remember the General who prayed before battle not for "Victory", but for the Gods to plant a seed of doubt in enemy's heart?

The piece is missing the obvious. Israeli occupation of the terrorities is considered illegal under international law, and annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by any other country. The idea that showing normal life across the green line will lead to greater international acceptance is not realistic. We have seen it is other places with less conflict. In spite of normal life in Northern Cyprus, the Turkish Republic of Cyprus is not recognized by any other country.

This was a very good article. Let as many Jews come to Israel as possible. It is our homeland and G-d gave it to us. Once we truly believe in that, then He will come through for us.

He is the one who needs convincing.

The same international law can't be applied to the Northern Cyprus and Judea-Samaria-Jerusalem. Israel recaptured the land after the defensive war. While Turkey was aggressor. Jordan occupied Judea-Samaria-Jerusalem for a short period and never ever after considered to claim this territory as part of the country. Many Arabs who live in so called West Bank have Jordanian passports. Arabs never considered to follow international laws when they attacked and deliberately provoked in numerous occasions Israel's military response. What international law allows Hamas to fire rockets, commit kidnappings, murders, terrorist acts against Israelis? The idea of showing coexistence between Jews and Arabs is the best medicine against the violence. I am always wondering: Why there is so little written about successful Israeli Arabs in the media?

First Question: The occupation of the West Bank is for security purposes, correct? If so, why would Israel offer monetary incentives for civilians to move their when the settlers inflame the situation as we have seen with recent mosque burnings, the attacks on the IDF, and the decades of vandalism against Palestinian farms? Second Question: The economic blockade of the Gaza Strip has not weakened Hamas, correct? The blockade has however, punished the 1.6 million civilians living there for Hamas's actions. What justification is there for continuing the economic blockade, and for the collective punishment of the civilian population, 900,000 of which are children? Third Question: Why is the separation barrier placed on Palestinian instead of Israeli soil? Fourth Question: Jews define themselves by race as well as a religion, correct? If Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank live under military law and suffer a lack of freedom of movement or right to protest, while the Jewish Israeli settlers do not, how is this not Apartheid? Fifth Question: If we are to believe the Israeli government it is the Palestinians who are an impediment to peace. However, have the Palestinians not put forward detailed plans for borders, security issues and their position on the right of return? If so, where is the Israeli proposal? Sixth Question: If Netanyahu wants negotiations without preconditions, how should we define settlement construction? To continue constructing settlements on occupied land is precluding the possibility that that land should be part of a Palestinian state, correct? I would be very grateful if anyone can offer a logical argument for any of the above.

and are incorporated into international laws .

to the "British Mandate" from Egn*land to give away Palestinians homes to Europeans? Please note that Abram also came from Ur, Babylonia to Canaan/Palestine as an migrant

claimed by a modern people consisting primarily of Slav and Anglo Saxon converts to the faith without ethnic genetic ties to the region....A region where two more recent major religions have superseded their claim to be "gods people". Let the religious wars begin

No -- Israel's presence in Judea-Samaria is totally, unquestionably legal (read Resolutions 242-338). The dispute concerns the settlements and comes down to clashing interpretations of international law, coupled with morbid hypocrisy and a dash of antisemitism.

First under international law for it to be 'occupied' it needs to meet two conditions. The 'occupier' has to not have a legal claim to the land. The second part is the people claim need to have said legal claim. Gaza, Judea and Samaria meet neither condition. Our claim to the land is enshrined in the UN Charter and the Covenant of the League of Nations - so we do have legal claim to the land. Whoops that means that it ain't 'occupied' by us. The there is the little fact that the Arabs do not have any legal claim to the land. Nobody on this planet has managed to date to produce said legal claim. So the Arabs are the illegal 'occupiers' of our lands, not the other way around. So much for the claim of international law.

Why is this government so stupid? This is the one question I have never been able to figure out.

in your head by enemies of Israel who do a much better job than Israel ever has of getting the story out. Their version of the story is not correct. Settlements are NOT illegal according to international law. BUT, because Israel has not (and for the life of me I don't know why) ever hit back with the truth and confronted the propoganda. Therefore, like you, most people belive things that are not actually fact. This is Israel's fault. If we have any chance of getting through this Israel must change its official hasbara policy and start doing what needs to be said and done on a massive level. It must come from the official governement to have the needed effect. It will take time to sink in. People will need to check the facts (finally) given. But as the article states, there is no reason not to if we really do care to survive.

Can you please tell me what part/section/sub-section of interantional law you are relating to. As clearly stated in the piece by David Ha'ivri, under international law "Territory won in war that was forced on the victor belong to the victor and does not need to be returned" PERIOD.

There's only one obstacle to Israel claiming all of The Land of Israel including the 'west bank' and that's the absurd need for the approval of the 'international community'. Forget about the 'international community and start building homes for Jews! The land is yours! Take it!

There are a number of countries that occupy territory that is not recognized by other states. Morocco controls the Western Sahara region, China occupies Tibet, and yes, Turkey occupies Cyprus. Russia occupies the Kuril Islands. Meanwhile, India and Pakistan fight over the control of Kashmir, each declaring the occupation by the other. Depending on one's POV, Great Britain occupies the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands off the coast of Argentina. The reality is though, that none of these states have been the subject of diplomatic attacks like Israel, due to either lack of concern, or lack of power (notably in the case of China and Tibet).

So annex the territories and give the Palestinians citizenship. We'll see how that turns out.

Sorry Rain, you are missing the obvious ! Neither Israel's so-called occupation of the "territories" , neither Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem are illegal under International Law ! If you are somewhat acquainted with Middle-Eastern politics, then you are aware about the existence of UN Resolution 242, that remains till this day the cornerstone for policy in the Middle-East. This Resolution was voted a short time after the six-days war, when Israel still got hold of the Sinai Desert. Prof. Eugene Rostow, who has been the Dean of the School of Law at Yale, and author of Resolution 242, stated the following : in case of a peace agreement between Israel and its neighbours, Israel will have to withdraw from the Sinai Desert, a territory that never was part of the "Jewish National Home". For the other territories the UN had no legal power to require from Israel any other withdrawal, being bound by Article 80 of its Charter (the Charter of the UN) to the decisions of the League of Nations voted in 1922, and called the "Mandate for Palestine". This Mandate gave the Jews the "IRREVOCABLE RIGHT" to settle anywhere in the area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, a Right unaltered in INTERNATIONAL LAW and valid to this day, again, thanks to ARTICLE 80 of UN's CHARTER. This is and remains the essence of UN Relolution 242 !

Let me start off by saying that I'm making Aliyah this Summer and joining Tzahal in the Fall. Let me also state clearly that I'm almost certainly going to vote for Netanyahu and the Likud in the next Election. I'm not Smol. East Jerusalem and Ramat HaGolan were formally annexed. The Latrun Salient became Israeli Territory by virtue of the fact that the State claimed the Land and it was 100% No man's land from 1948 until 1967. These are all part of Medinat Yisrael. The West Bank is not part of Medinat Yisrael. The West Bank is a Military Zone. Civilians should not be allowed to live in an Area administered by the Army, period, end of discussion. The 500,000 or so Settlers should not be removed from their Homes, but no other Citizens of the State of Israel should be allowed to live there. The West Bank is No man's land. It would be a different story if Israel annexed it, but that is never going to happen. If Begin and Shamir didn't do it, nobody will. The areas that need more people right now are the Negev, the Galilee, Ramat HaGolan, and East Jerusalem. Right now the State is only prioritizing East Jerusalem, and ever so cautiously. While it is extremely important to Build and allow people to live in Jerusalem Neighborhoods like Gilo and Homat Shmuel, it is no less important for the the other three to be populated as well. I would argue that it is critical for the future of Israel. Why is the State building more Homes in a Military Zone? Why does anyone need to apologize for demolishing Homes in a Military Zone? The Fringe Settlers (a very, very small percentage of Settlers) who participate in Price Tag Terrorism should know that their actions will be met with an uncompromising attitude. Right now that isn't the case. Anyone who attacks an Israeli Soldier is a Terrorist, period, end of discussion. The Ichud Leumi are Terrorists. "Israel is committing no crime by building and developing its heartland. Standing up to the core of the argument with good answers has proven very effective, where it has been tried." Well David, I'm standing up to your ridiculous and hollow argument. Your move.

You do remember that the Israeli Supreme Court has on more than one occasion stated that the West Bank is under belligerent occupation by Israel, don't you? You also remember that not one country recognises Israel's annexation of E.Jerusalem, and almost all believe settlement outside the Green Line to be illegal?

It seems that Surrealism has been invented in Israel. When the Israeli Supreme Court states that the "West Bank" is under belligerent occupation by Israel, this same Supreme Court breaches International Law. Please read talkback nr. 25 !

The presence of Israel in Palestinian territory [occupation], is legal under the UN.[ thanks to the US always havn yr back on the SC, yr welcome.] But see how you just slide in "the dispute concerning the settlements" like it IS the same matter? Under InternationalLaw, an occupying force can NOT transfer their OWN people into the territories of the occupied. Nor transfer people to other areas. You could see why this would be a good idea ,can't you? But with Holy Israel, some are blind.

The West Bank (including E.Jerusalem), Gaza Strip and Golan Heights do not belong to Israel, and were never part of the partition in '47. Previous declarations sought to create a Jewish 'homeland' and not a state, and cannot be used to justify the movement of Israeli citizens (Jewish or not) into occupied territory, which is illegal under the 4th Geneva Convention. You quote one professor, but the legal advisers for every major nation have told their governments not to recognise the annexation of Jerusalem or the settlement, including Israel's benefactor, America. When faced with overwhelming consensus opposing their position, Israel has relied on political lobbying to hold back the tide. Abbas may force everyone's hand soon if he asks the SC to rule on the legality of the settlements, and the American government will have no option but to voice their opposition to Israel's actions.