>Just because an exchange of money takes place does not at all mean that it's not under duress.
The average sale is over 50 times the value of the property.
>A camp prisoner selling their personal property, or their talents to a prison guard is not a fair exchange of value either.
Your analogy is really really wrong.
>These settlements can't exist without the frequent application of violence.
That is a correct statement, but if you actually deconstruct it the argument isn't the one you are trying to make.
Without the violence towards Jews the settlements would not be needed at all, if a Jew can buy a house in Hebron which had a vibrant Jewish community up to it's slaughter during the Arab revolts at the end of the 19th century and live there in peace and quiet there would be no need to call it a settlement.
Many of these "settlements" aren't towns, they aren't cities, they are apartments that were purchased in a town where Jews used to live and were driven out.
This includes places like Hebron and Jerusalem, because according to the press and some people a Jewish family moving into a house in E. Jerusalem is a new settlement, or at least an expansion of an existing one.
If Jews could live there without the fear of violence there would be no reason for the "infrastructure" which causes so much "inconvenience" to Palestinians, I'm pretty sure that the Jews would also prefer it that way, they might actually be able to open a window.
