Tens of thousands of Palestinians left without water as Israeli firm cuts supplies –

Do you object to the term "dissident groups"? It's considered perfectly appropriate for Northern Ireland to refer to groups like CIRA and RIRA post-GFA. I see no reason why it can't be applied to similar groups in Israel-Palestine post-Oslo. Or do you just want to maintain a collective blame argument in which all Palestinians are held responsible for anything done by any of them?

So long as most of Palestinians or substantial part of them support terror against Israel my answer is "yes".

And do you hold this both ways? i.e. can Israelis legitimately be held collectively responsible for any Israeli action against Palestine so long as a substantial part of Israelis support the use of violence against Palestine?

Of course Israelis are responsible for any Israeli action. The rest of your question is nonsensical because Israelis don't support violence against anybody, including non-existing state of Palestine.

They support the continuation of a military occupation against Palestinians.

Polling suggests many also support the expulsion of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Also, as I've bolded, this post makes it very clear that you're starting from the assumption that inherently Palestinians are violent but Israelis are not, collectively.

Source?

Well, this frequently used poll was performed soon after the war in Gaza, when many Israelis were outraged by anti-israel statements of part of Israeli Arabs.

There are no Palestinian citizens in Israel.

That's not assumption but fact.

A few interesting polls in here: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/ispotoc.html

For example:
- This January, ~45% of Israeli Jews supported annexing the entire West Bank.
- October 2010, ~46% opposed dismantling even 'most' of the settlements.
- This April, ~48% said it was more important that Palestine "recognise Israel as the state of the Jewish people" than a peace agreement be reached.
- December 2014, 47% opposed (compared to 41% supporting) the Clinton Parameters for a Palestinian state, i.e. Israeli annexing ~5% of the West Bank (not including East Jerusalem) that would result in 80% of settlers remaining in place, as well as the "Jewish areas" of East Jerusalem.

Also interestingly (though admittedly less directly relevant to the point at hand), as recently as this April, 71.5% of Israeli Jews did not believe there even is an occupation, including 49.9% who were "sure" there isn't.

So Palestinians aren't allowed to be outraged at decades of their violent expulsion, dispossession and military occupation, but Israeli Jews are allowed to be outraged because people voice some political opinions they disagree with.

"Palestinian citizens of Israel" is what the bulk of those of the Israeli state insists on calling "Arab Israelis" identify as. Unless you're going to argue that only state-designated identities are 'real', by which logic there are no Kurds in Turkey, and there were no Cornish people in the UK until 2014.

So you're just going for straight up racism then. Good to know.