e_sistani

First of all I would like to apologize for my earlier behavior, I am sorry I didn’t mean it, but it seems like you are undermining every piece and every word that I tell you, anyways I don’t expect you to acknowledge them so it’s okay. So here:

1.The land was indeed bought, often at exorbitant prices, but from rich absentee owners, who did not live on it or cultivate it. When the late Ottoman Empire was bankrupt and in dire need of money, it sold huge tracts to rich Arab merchants in Jaffa, Beirut and other cities, who bought them as an investment. The Arab Felaheen (farmers), who had tilled the land for many generations, were mere tenants. When the KKL bought the land, the Felaheen were driven out, often with the help of the Turkish, and later the British police. In spite of all this effort, when the United Nations resolved in November 1947 to partition the country between a Jewish and an Arab State, less than 7% of the land belonged to Jews. Only a part of this area belonged to the KKL, the rest to private Jewish owners in the towns and the agricultural "colonies". Logic would have dictated that with the founding of the State of Israel, the KKL transfer its lands to the State. After all, that was the idea of collecting the money. But this did not happen. In fact, the very opposite took place: the new state transferred to the KKL millions of dunams of land expropriated from Arabs - the refugees who were not allowed to return ("absentees" in legal language), those who had remained in the country but were absent on a given day from their villages ("present absentees"), as well as Arabs who became citizens of Israel. It is important to keep this in mind, since it disproves the big lie that hovers over the whole debate: that the KKL land was bought with the money of the Jewish people. The greater part of the present KKL land was not bought at all, but conquered in war and transferred to the KKL. – Gush Shalom

2.The Hebron massacre broke out after many disputes between Israel and Palestine over access to the western wall, and yes it was wrong to carry out such a cruel act, but again the act was carried out by Arab mobs, and the majority of Arabs were against it. On Friday, August 23, Arab mobs attacked Jews in Jerusalem, Motza, Hebron, Safed, Jaffa, and other parts of the country. The Old City of Jerusalem was hit particularly hard. By the next day, the Haganah was able to mount a defense and further attacks in Jerusalem were repulsed. But, the violence in Jerusalem generated rumors throughout the country, many carrying fabricated accounts of Jewish attempts to defile Muslim holy places, all to inflame the Arab residents. Palestine Arab Riots 1929

3.I’m saying that the feud wouldn’t have taken place if Britain hasn’t facilitated the establishment of a Jewish state. As Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, said : We shall try to spirit the penniless [Arab] population across the border by procuring employment for it in transit countries, while denying it employment in our own country

4.The harassing led to intensification of events.

5.Hafez al-Assad (Syria president) rejects a statement made that day by Shimon Peres (Israel foreign minister), that Syria would accept a demilitarized Golan Heights.
Assad takes that statement to mean (as I do), a DMZ entirely on Syrian land (unilateral demilitarization). (Golan belongs to Syria, it’s under military occupation by Israel).
Assad then proceeds to explain, in the next sentence, that he’s happy to demilitarize Golan, or part of it, provided the zone straddles the border, and is not hosted entirely on Syrian land, if Israel shares the burden of it, mutually demilitarizes an equal portion of its own adjacent land, hosts an equal portion of the international observers, the DMZ-watchers (bilateral demilitarization). - Ken Stein

6.Syria charged that Israel was constantly harassing Arab farmers in the Demilitarized Zone and opening fire on Syrian military positions, while Israeli armoured tractors were cultivating Arab land in the Demilitarized Zone, backed by Israel armed forces illegally placed there. Syria informed the Security Council that the grave deterioration along the demarcation lines was the result of the dual Israel aim to increase tension so as to justify subsequent large-scale aggression against Syria and to expand its illegal occupation of the Demilitarized Zone by liquidating the rights of Arab cultivators. Syria stated that in every instance where there was a Syrian firing, it was in return of provocative Israel fire directed against peaceful Arab farmers or Syrian posts – wikipedia, so what self defense are you talking about, and what incursion, why do you think the six days war broke out?? Because of Israel’s provocations of the Arab nations, they were agitated and so they retaliated. Another issue was the water issue: Arguably 50% or more of the water that Israel uses is unilaterally appropriated from water that should fairly go to its Arab neighbors. Even the New York Times used the word "theft" when quoting an "Arab" in connection with Israel's appropriation of regional water resources. ("Hurdle to Peace: Parting the Mideast's Waters" by Alan Cowell NYT, 10.10.93 p. 1)

7.All Arabs want is their land back. The Arab’s occupation of the land is a different issue, simply because the Byzantines (Romans) back then were mistreating the Jewish presence in Palestine forcing them to convert into Christianity, and the Arabs came and kicked the Byzantines out, they did not prosecute the Jews, they did not drive them out of their homes. It’s not a matter of logic, I am not proposing a new philosophy or concept or logic for that matter, all I am saying is that Israel have came after thousands of years from the Arab settlements in Palestine, and simply drove them out of their houses and lands just because their forefathers once lived there, but then again they left it, if they truly wanted the land they should have came back and drove the Romans out and have taken the land but they didn’t. You don’t expect to come back after all of that time and take the land from the Arabs all nice and prospered and claim it as your own. Let me give you an example, imagine person A had a puppy, but he left it. Person B then found the puppy, took it home, looked after it, until it grew up, the two then became inseparable they grew to love each other and can’t be parted, Person A then comes back after all those years and asks for it back, do you expect person B to simply hand the dog over after all of those years?? Of course not. That is why I am telling you Arabs shouldn’t pay for the Jews mistakes, the Jews left their lands and didn’t fight for it.

8.I will make sure to stop by every Israeli house and conduct a survey so I could come up with the exact number… what kind of question is that?? I don’t know how many numbers, but I know that plenty of Israeli’s support the idea of a third temple. Third Temple - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

P.S: If the reason by which the Jews insist on occupying Israel is because it is god’s Promised Land to them like they claim, then that claim is invalid, because according to you religious books are not historical books thus it provides no means of sound and valid proof of anything.