Hoffstra,
et al,
We are talking about an anti-Israeli story.
Israel has been confiscating Arab private property for "security reasons" and ending up handing it to Jewish settlers, for decades.
This is how they do things.
There is no reason to think this is case isn't just another example of Israeli land grabs for feigned security reasons, in order to put the land under Jewish control.
Its disgusting that you are defending this.
THIS is why people hate Israel, and you think its kosher.
(COMMENT)
The story itself, cites the farmer-infiltrator connection. That is a "security issue."
Any country would have taken action; even the US.
You are reading all kinds of accusations into it. You are convinced that Israel did something wrong. That some poor Palestinian was deprived of his property. You don't even pretend to give an objective view.
According to the story, and that is all the information we have, "Palestinian farmers in this area helped infiltrators to cross the border into Israeli-controlled territory."
Document confirms World Zionist Organization allocates land to settlers in Jordan valley said:
But following a number of incidents in which Palestinian farmers in this area helped infiltrators to cross the border into Israeli-controlled territory, the entire area was declared a military zone.
SOURCE: Document confirms World Zionist Organization allocates land to settlers in Jordan valley
The story itself does not challenge the accusation that "a number of incidents in which Palestinian farmers in this area helped infiltrators." That was injected into that argument.
There were a number of ways the Israeli's could have approached it. One was "eminent domain" and the other was "confiscation." In either case, the property will be eventually returned.
Now, of course, the pro-Palestinian will take the view that the farmer(s) should not face a consequence for their action. And I understand that. They support infiltration operations against Israeli Occupation --- I get it. But I'm at a disadvantage. I only go on what the story says. I don't have this insider knowledge that suggests the farmer(s) were "falsely accused," that they were denied "due process"
(whatever due process is in the Middle East), "feigned security reasons," or that other conditions were not taken into considerations --- that this is some sort of organized theft. I did not get that from the article
(did the article say that). What did the Article say? What did the Article argue was wrong?
Most Respectfully,
R