If the Jews (European converts to Judaism) took the land by conquest, it puts in question the de jure existence of Israel, given that with the establishment of the UN, the taking of land by armed conquest is contrary to international law.
And all historic accounts point to military conquest.
Nobody has shown where Israel legally acquired any land.
No matter how many times Rocco or others have posted numerous documents and agreements on this Board (San Remo, for instance), you haven't wanted to accept them. So it's no use anymore. Anyway, Israel is a member state of the U.N. (So is Palestine, on West Bank territory, although they're not fully independent yet, thanks to ppl like Tinmore.)
Let me understand. You believe that "documents" that state that land inhabited by native people should be taken from the native people and given to inhabitants of other places, in this case on other continents, should be accepted, not only by neutral third parties, but also by the native inhabitants? Do you realize how crazy that sounds when laid bare as a concept.
Is the concept any saner than the Treaty of Tordesillas signed by the Pope, Portugal and Spain which "gave" the Americas to Portugal and Spain based on a meridian, east to Portugal and West to Spain?