Can Palestinian's and Israeli's ever be friends?

[Penelope]

Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?

That was the question that popped into my head when I saw the following picture...





...of Civil War veterans from the North and the South, coming together in 1913 to shake hands.

I'm thinking, if they can do it, why can't Palestinian's and Israeli's?

Simple:

"For The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews and slay them, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, and the stones and trees will say- O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."

Your cherry picking is ignorance .

 

[Penelope]

PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations

Netanyahu tells Women Wage Peace activists that he is ready to go to Ramallah to forge the solution 'two states for two people.'


The Prime Minister expressed his desire to return to the negotiating table and said, "I have no preconditions for negotiations. I am ready now to go to Ramallah or any other place in order to meet and hold direct negotiations without preconditions."

"We want to conduct negotiations with the Palestinians," he continued. "The solution is two states for two peoples - a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the national state of the Jewish People."

PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations

He knows the Palestinians will never go for it, So my answer is no. Two states for two people but no military for you, and you recognize us as the nations state of the Jewish People.

AND what is wrong with the Palestinians accepting the UN charter fully that says Israel is the Jewish state ? If Arafat could do it why cant the scum in charge today.

The AIDS infected Palestiinian Scumbag DIDN''T do it

It might have been the virus affecting his actions but he did accept Israel as the Jewish state.



Arafat recognises Jewish state and limit to return of refugees


Video: Yasser Arafat Recognizes Israel as a Jewish State

Read it all and not tidbits:

The White House

Bush Demands Arafat's Ouster Before U.S. Backs a New State; Israelis Welcome Tough Line

By ELISABETH BUMILLER and DAVID E. SANGER

Published: June 25, 2002

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/25/international/middleeast/25PREX.html


A Jewish state? `Definitely' - Features


Sharon started the 2000 intifada, when he and 1000 IDF went to the temple mount and claimed it as Israel's.

There is much speculation of how Arafat died, poison? Also he wanted 97% of the West Bank, and was upset about Russian immigrant return, while 200,000 Palestinians were remaining in Lebanon.

BUT THE LAST THING ISRAEL'S WANT'S IF PEACE.

 

[Phoenall]

So do You suggest balestinians will be bombed by an atomic bomb by Israel?

Or would it be that the balestinians will suffer from the deeds of their partners if they dare to bomb the reactor?

I'm saying Israel is the 4th most militarized country on the planet. There is no country in the ME that can even come close to that kind of firepower.

That is just tough isn't it, that is what happens when you constantly wage war against a nation that is prepared to defend itself from attack. And right from the start the arab muslims ganged up on the Jews and promptly got their butts kicked big time. That then set the scene for Israel to become a militarised force to see of any further arab muslim attacks. Like all Jew haters you want the Jews to just lay down and be walked all over by the arab muslims until there are no Jews left and the arab muslims are firing nuclear weapons at the US.

Your Jew Hatred shows in every single post you make based on LIES, PROPAGANDA and BLOOD LIBELS.

 

[Penelope]

So do You suggest balestinians will be bombed by an atomic bomb by Israel?

Or would it be that the balestinians will suffer from the deeds of their partners if they dare to bomb the reactor?

I'm saying Israel is the 4th most militarized country on the planet. There is no country in the ME that can even come close to that kind of firepower.

That is just tough isn't it, that is what happens when you constantly wage war against a nation that is prepared to defend itself from attack. And right from the start the arab muslims ganged up on the Jews and promptly got their butts kicked big time. That then set the scene for Israel to become a militarised force to see of any further arab muslim attacks. Like all Jew haters you want the Jews to just lay down and be walked all over by the arab muslims until there are no Jews left and the arab muslims are firing nuclear weapons at the US.

Your Jew Hatred shows in every single post you make based on LIES, PROPAGANDA and BLOOD LIBELS.

Your arab hatred shows in every single post you make, which are based on lies , propaganda and blood.

 

[Phoenall]

Tell us exactly what " negotiations" the Palestinians have proposed that the Israelis have rejected .

Leave occupied territory!

And rightly so as the Palestinians know what International law says about the occupation. Stop all belligerence, vilence and terrorism and agree mutual borders and the occupation will be lifted

Utter bull crap!

Occupation will continue as long as Israel is allowed to get away with it!

When Germany occupied France did they say "Yeah, well, stop all belligerence, violence and terrorism and agree mutual borders and the occupation will be lifted"?

No of course not...

Israel has NO intention of leaving occupied territory!

The occupation will last forever, Netanyahu clarifies | +972 Magazine

What do you mean by "Israel is allowed to get away with it" when International law and IHL say it is allowable.

Different thing all together and the law has changed since then, Germany invaded France with the sole intent of taking over. Israel did not invade Palestine and has consistently offered the land back in exchange for peace.

Your source is biased against the Jews so has no validity. If they had no intention of leaving Occupied territory then why did they leave the Sinai that was rich in everything they wanted, then the parts of Syria and Lebanon they occupied. The TRUTH proves that you are just spouting islamonazi LIES and PROPAGANDA

Which international laws would they be Phoney?

So, "occupied territory" was taken by what means? Israel has NO intention of removing itself from "occupied territory"...

Whether YOU consider my source biased or otherwise is immaterial... It is what is stated by Netanyahu that matters.... Facts that are undeniable from ANY source!

The TRUTH eludes you Phoney! As you were sucked into neo marxism you are now sucked into zionism.... Feeble of mind? What's next Phoney? Neo Thatcherism?

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

By armed response to armed attack from the arab muslims, or don't you see acts of war as armed attacks ?

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

No the truth eludes you as I can see the reality that you refuse to admit, this is shown by your use of biased and partisan sources because they preach your beliefs.

 

[Phoenall]

PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations

Netanyahu tells Women Wage Peace activists that he is ready to go to Ramallah to forge the solution 'two states for two people.'


The Prime Minister expressed his desire to return to the negotiating table and said, "I have no preconditions for negotiations. I am ready now to go to Ramallah or any other place in order to meet and hold direct negotiations without preconditions."

"We want to conduct negotiations with the Palestinians," he continued. "The solution is two states for two peoples - a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the national state of the Jewish People."

PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations

He knows the Palestinians will never go for it, So my answer is no. Two states for two people but no military for you, and you recognize us as the nations state of the Jewish People.

AND what is wrong with the Palestinians accepting the UN charter fully that says Israel is the Jewish state ? If Arafat could do it why cant the scum in charge today.

The AIDS infected Palestiinian Scumbag DIDN''T do it

It might have been the virus affecting his actions but he did accept Israel as the Jewish state.



Arafat recognises Jewish state and limit to return of refugees


Video: Yasser Arafat Recognizes Israel as a Jewish State

Read it all and not tidbits:

The White House

Bush Demands Arafat's Ouster Before U.S. Backs a New State; Israelis Welcome Tough Line

By ELISABETH BUMILLER and DAVID E. SANGER

Published: June 25, 2002

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/25/international/middleeast/25PREX.html


A Jewish state? `Definitely' - Features


Sharon started the 2000 intifada, when he and 1000 IDF went to the temple mount and claimed it as Israel's.

There is much speculation of how Arafat died, poison? Also he wanted 97% of the West Bank, and was upset about Russian immigrant return, while 200,000 Palestinians were remaining in Lebanon.

BUT THE LAST THING ISRAEL'S WANT'S IF PEACE.

The intifada started well before Sharron went to the Temple mount, which he had every right to do.

He died of AIDS as the latest report shows, and it is from French doctors not Israeli/Zionist sources. He was offered 97% of Palestine with negotiations over the remaining 3%. Was he also upset about the migration of Jews from M.E. Islamic nations returning to Israel ? That was the Palestinians problems and if they had curbed their violence and belligerence they would have lived in prosperity.


LINK from a trusted unbiased source

 

[Phoenall]

So do You suggest balestinians will be bombed by an atomic bomb by Israel?

Or would it be that the balestinians will suffer from the deeds of their partners if they dare to bomb the reactor?

I'm saying Israel is the 4th most militarized country on the planet. There is no country in the ME that can even come close to that kind of firepower.

That is just tough isn't it, that is what happens when you constantly wage war against a nation that is prepared to defend itself from attack. And right from the start the arab muslims ganged up on the Jews and promptly got their butts kicked big time. That then set the scene for Israel to become a militarised force to see of any further arab muslim attacks. Like all Jew haters you want the Jews to just lay down and be walked all over by the arab muslims until there are no Jews left and the arab muslims are firing nuclear weapons at the US.

Your Jew Hatred shows in every single post you make based on LIES, PROPAGANDA and BLOOD LIBELS.

Your arab hatred shows in every single post you make, which are based on lies , propaganda and blood.

And you are wrong as I don't hate arab's, I hate muslims that follow the koran's every word and rape, murder and steal because that is what it says to them.

 

[Rehmani]

They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.

That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel

Israeli attitude will destroy Israel, to change their attitude they have to be free from their elders who are using them by their brain wash; please see my signature comments.

HOGWASH and islaminazi propaganda because they know they are unable to defeat the Jews. They have tried and failed many times, and even the combined forces of 5 arab nations could not beat Jewish farmers fighting with farm tools and 19C guns.

They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.

That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel

Israeli attitude will destroy Israel, to change their attitude they have to be free from their elders who are using them by their brain wash; please see my signature comments.

HOGWASH and islaminazi propaganda because they know they are unable to defeat the Jews. They have tried and failed many times, and even the combined forces of 5 arab nations could not beat Jewish farmers fighting with farm tools and 19C guns.

How silly. Must be you are not Jewish.

 

[Rehmani]

They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.

That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel

Israeli attitude will destroy Israel, to change their attitude they have to be free from their elders who are using them by their brain wash; please see my signature comments.

Jews would be free once they all remembered their ancestors and the elders and prosper even more. That's the sole purpose of Israel today.
The freedom You're talking about is sold in Europe under the guise of "rights"...Israel seems to know the game of ME better.

Jewish don't anything they are brain wash by their elders.

 

[Rehmani]

...Jewish don't anything they are brain wash by their elders.

You need to go back to your English-Language teacher and get a refund for your tuition, Achmed...

Only "Know" is missing and you should not be that dump to complete the sentence.

 

[Humanity]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

 

[Phoenall]

They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.

That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel

Israeli attitude will destroy Israel, to change their attitude they have to be free from their elders who are using them by their brain wash; please see my signature comments.

HOGWASH and islaminazi propaganda because they know they are unable to defeat the Jews. They have tried and failed many times, and even the combined forces of 5 arab nations could not beat Jewish farmers fighting with farm tools and 19C guns.

They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.

That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel

Israeli attitude will destroy Israel, to change their attitude they have to be free from their elders who are using them by their brain wash; please see my signature comments.

HOGWASH and islaminazi propaganda because they know they are unable to defeat the Jews. They have tried and failed many times, and even the combined forces of 5 arab nations could not beat Jewish farmers fighting with farm tools and 19C guns.

How silly. Must be you are not Jewish.

Correct I am not Jewish but I support and defend their right to defend themselves from attacks and terrorism. Just as I support and defend the people of Syria's right to defend against attack and terrorism.

 

[Phoenall]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?

 

[Humanity]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?

Focus Phoney, focus....

You stated the Geneva Conventions is the "International Law" that gives the right to occupy territory... Proven a LIE.... Now it's Oslo because Geneva doesn't apply?.... Getting jumpy me thinks! Where does it state in the Oslo Accords that the "occupied territories" are legal?

There is only ONE country that does not consider the territory "occupied"... Which one do you think that might be?

Nah, didn't think you would be able to come up with any evidence to refute the words of Netanyahu...

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?

A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law.

http://www.treatylaw.org/vienna-con...ns-international-organizations/#_Toc253643621​

 

[Phoenall]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?

Focus Phoney, focus....

You stated the Geneva Conventions is the "International Law" that gives the right to occupy territory... Proven a LIE.... Now it's Oslo because Geneva doesn't apply?.... Getting jumpy me thinks! Where does it state in the Oslo Accords that the "occupied territories" are legal?

There is only ONE country that does not consider the territory "occupied"... Which one do you think that might be?

Nah, didn't think you would be able to come up with any evidence to refute the words of Netanyahu...

Who was the sovereign owners of the land of Palestine when Israel occupied it ?

If it was the UN then the Geneva conventions don't apply, if it was Jordan again the Geneva conventions do not apply. But if it was Palestinian sovereign land then the Geneva conventions do apply and they take into account any agreements made between the two parties. The Oslo accords are one such agreement that give Israel free reign in areas of Palestine

The Oslo II Accord (1995). Division of the West Bank into Areas, in effect fragmenting it into numerous enclaves and banning the Palestinians from some 60% of the West Bank. Redeployment of Israeli troops from Area A and from other areas through "Further Re-deployments". Election of the Palestinian Legislative Council (Palestinian parliament, PLC), replacing the PA upon its inauguration. Deployment of Palestinian Police replacing Israeli military forces in Area A. Safe passage between West Bank and Gaza. Most importantly, start of negotiations on a final settlement of remaining issues, to be concluded before 4 May 1999.

As Roccor has explained many times the Geneva conventions do not apply if the Palestinians are the occupied people

 

[Phoenall]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?

A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law.

http://www.treatylaw.org/vienna-con...ns-international-organizations/#_Toc253643621​

And what " peremptory norm of general international law " does Oslo conflict with. Give the law and its date of implementation and how Oslo applies ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."

Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?

Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?

A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law.

http://www.treatylaw.org/vienna-con...ns-international-organizations/#_Toc253643621​

And what " peremptory norm of general international law " does Oslo conflict with. Give the law and its date of implementation and how Oslo applies ?

Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour,
family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their
private property is protected.

The civilian population is in a tense and vulnerable position. The law
states that it must be humanely treated in all circumstances and pro-
tected from any acts of violence, including by third parties. The occupying
power may only put in place such measures of control and security as
may be necessary as a result of the conflict. Collective penalties, measures
of intimidation, terrorism and hostage-taking are prohibited.

The legal rights of the inhabitants of occupied territory cannot be curtailed
by any agreement or other arrangement between the occupying power
and the authorities of the occupied territory. This is intended to prevent
national authorities from being put under pressure to make conces-
sions which might not be in the population’s best interests or weaken
its legal rights.

Similarly, the inhabitants of the occupied territory cannot renounce their
rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention. This again is a safeguard.
It prevents the occupying power from exploiting the vulnerability of the
occupied territory by exerting undue pressure to undermine and weaken
the protection which the law affords.

Individual or mass forcible transfers and deportations of the civilian
population from occupied territory are prohibited.

The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian
population into the territory it occupies.

Destruction of property.
The occupying power is not allowed to destroy real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, to the State, to other public authorities or to social or co-operative organizations, except where such destruction is made absolutely necessary by military operations.

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

HAMAS is a product, not of Israeli Policy, but a resulting consequences of Palestinian politico-military actions.

Hamas is a product of Israeli policies.

(COMMENT)

When HAMAS (AUG 1988) was born, the month before the State of Palestine (NOV 1988) was declared. The basic content and position of HAMAS has not changed since it was first formally articulated in A/AC.21/10 16 February 1948. In the basic threat issued by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC), it is really the foundational content of the the 1988 Covenant. Take the basic points outline in the AHC Threat Letter, and wrap them around fundamentalist Islamic Radical Rhetoric, and you have most of the HAMAS Covenant. And those fundamentals are merely updated and polished a little more in the Political Bureau, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) Principle Position Paper of 2012.

In August 1988, when HAMAS published the Covenant, there was no Palestinian Territory in Occupation. It was formerly Jordanian Territory which had been severed and abandoned from the nation by Royal Decree.

What we all observe today, is a consequence of the Israeli necessity for a security deterrent against Palestinian Jihadist and Insurgents.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks for the link. It is a good read.

A/AC.21/10 of 16 February 1948

It explains why the UN abandoned resolution 181.

BTW, the rest of your post is a pantload.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You cut'n'paste well. But do you know what it means and how to apply it?

And what " peremptory norm of general international law " does Oslo conflict with. Give the law and its date of implementation and how Oslo applies ?
Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour,
family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their
private property is protected.

The civilian population is in a tense and vulnerable position. The law
states that it must be humanely treated in all circumstances and pro-
tected from any acts of violence, including by third parties. The occupying
power may only put in place such measures of control and security as
may be necessary as a result of the conflict. Collective penalties, measures
of intimidation, terrorism and hostage-taking are prohibited.

The legal rights of the inhabitants of occupied territory cannot be curtailed
by any agreement or other arrangement between the occupying power
and the authorities of the occupied territory. This is intended to prevent
national authorities from being put under pressure to make conces-
sions which might not be in the population’s best interests or weaken
its legal rights.

Similarly, the inhabitants of the occupied territory cannot renounce their
rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention. This again is a safeguard.
It prevents the occupying power from exploiting the vulnerability of the
occupied territory by exerting undue pressure to undermine and weaken
the protection which the law affords.

Individual or mass forcible transfers and deportations of the civilian
population from occupied territory are prohibited.

The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian
population into the territory it occupies.

Destruction of property.
The occupying power is not allowed to destroy real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, to the State, to other public authorities or to social or co-operative organizations, except where such destruction is made absolutely necessary by military operations.

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

(COMMENT)

The Oslo Accords are in no way preempting the application of something otherwise legal. What the passage on the concept of a " peremptory norm of general international law " is trying to convey --- is that you cannot (for example) you cannot enforce a contract (the legal instrument) to murder, since murder is always illegal.

Now you might have a case for the exploitation of the influence held by an Occupation Power. But even that is estranged from the truth. Yes, the Oslo Accord I (1993)(Declaration of Principles (DoP) on Interim Self-Government Arrangements) where were put together by Ron Pundak (Israeli), who just passed away in the last year. In diplomatic circles, he was known as the "Warrior for Peace." Pundak was the General Director of an NGO known as the Peres Center for Peace, from 2001 to 2012, focused on improving relations between Israelis and Palestinians. While the DoP was a product of an Israeli, the negotiation effort was not one of coercive atmosphere. The DoP was more than just a framework for the agreements. In it Israel accepted the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace. Both sides agreed that a Palestinian Authority (PA) would be established and assume governing responsibilities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Now there were then, as there has been since 1948, very powerful and influential Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, that focus all their efforts into derailing any mutual agreement between the two belligerents, that would lead to peace. These same powerful and influential Arab interests and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force that which has been made so far and any attempt to make a reasonable effort to negotiate a peaceful settlement in the future. HAMAS is just but one such force, using asymmetric warfare to achieve their political ends that have otherwise been out of reach.

I understand that there are some Arab Palestinians that periodically reaffirm here that the Arab Palestine will not recognize the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, the Mandate of Palestine, and Resolution 181(II), or any outcome that is derived from them. But this again, is the obstinacy of the Arab Palestinian people that want to undermine the decisions made by the Council of the League, the Allied Powers, and the General Assembly. They want to use complaints and conflict, instigated by there own hand, to coerce and pressure set the conditions for ever more fruitless conflict.

Most Respectfully,
R