Solar Power pays off for enterprising Palestinians.

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Like when they bulldoze Palestinian homes to make room for illegal settlements.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

From above


Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Understand it yet ?

Now how are the settlements illegal if they are built on Jewish land again ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, one more time.

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

(COMMENT)

If the bulldozing property in Palestine helps promote greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety --- THEN, it is not illegal.

If the action is taken to meet the requirements of HR Article 43 (supra), then it is not illegal under the ICC Statute
Paragraph 2a(iv) --- Article 8 --- War crimes:

2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;​

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so Israel is illegally destroying Palestinian property.

That was my point.

But they aren't and that is the point that you miss. That international law works just as much for Israel as it does for the rest of the world. But then when it comes to Israel and international laws you think that Israel should not be allowed to have them. Or human rights, civil rights, religious rights or any other rights that you claim for the palestinians

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You got it wrong again.

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, one more time.

P F Tinmore,

I said no such thing about what was legal or illegal.

(COMMENT)

Whether there is an issue of illegal settlements has to do with the validity of the Oslo Accords. And I believe that the Oslo Accords where generally recognized as "LEGAL" given that Nobel Prizes were awarded for same.

The Wall advisory opinion (July 2004), only considered the wall in terms of Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; "

• that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;"
• that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
​

The CESCR, which did no become law until a decade after the 1967 Six-Day War, is Humanitarian Law and not criminal law. There is no international law that forbids the enforcement of immigration and customs laws and requirements; certainly not the CESCR.

Similarly, there is a flaw in the use of the CRC, which did not come into force until 1990. The Arab Palestinians [under Article 3(2) and Article4] is responsible for the child well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents. And is is the parents that have pledged not to negotiate with the Israelis which have level of Human Development. The Arab Palestinians required to undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.

Most Respectfully,
R

What does all that have to do with Israel bulldozing property in Palestine?

(COMMENT)

If the bulldozing property in Palestine helps promote greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety --- THEN, it is not illegal.

If the action is taken to meet the requirements of HR Article 43 (supra), then it is not illegal under the ICC Statute
Paragraph 2a(iv) --- Article 8 --- War crimes:

2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;​

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so Israel is illegally destroying Palestinian property.

That was my point.

(COMMENT)

The actions were justified under the ICC Article because it was necessary and militarily justified to meet the Article 43 Requirements.

Most Respectfully,
R

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

YES and now you understand how the law views the conflict, and until he law is changed that is how it will stay

 

[P F Tinmore]

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.

A treaty is void if it allows the violation of international law.

Article 53 Treaties Conflicting With A Peremptory Norm Of General International Law (Jus Cogens)​

​

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

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations - Treaty Law​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

Who has said they are illegal, where is the ICC/ICJ ruling on this. And if they are built without permits then they will be demolished. Just as the US does all the time. Do you know that the US destroyed more illegal homes last year than Israel did ?

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

From above


Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Understand it yet ?

Now how are the settlements illegal if they are built on Jewish land again ?

I do. You don't. An occupation is not sovereignty. The territory remains in the hands of the occupied.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, now you are just trying to twist the words around without giving any consideration to what was said.

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

What was done, was done to achieve several different purposes.

• Taking measures to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety:

√ Prevent the performance of offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent cases of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent intentional offenses of depraved indifference or the attempts on the lives of one or more persons,
​

• Protect the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, attempting to follow the:

√ Recommendations of the UN Special Committee of Palestine,
√ Follow the Steps Preparatory to Independence adopted by the General Assembly,
√ Counter threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence,
√ Prevent the intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of Israel,
√ Exercising the inherent right of selfdefense against armed attacks by Hostile Arab Palestinians,
​

The use of Non-violent means to protect and defend Israeli sovereign interests.

The question is: How can the settlements be illegal when the Arab Palestinian agreed to the establishment of Area C, with full Israeli civil and security control: in an internationally recognized agreement for which the Nobel Prize was awarded?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you have to look much deeper than this.

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.

A treaty is void if it allows the violation of international law.

Article 53 Treaties Conflicting With A Peremptory Norm Of General International Law (Jus Cogens)

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

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations - Treaty Law​

(COMMENT)

If the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) did not have the competence to execute an agreement such as the Oslo Accord, then certainly there is a question as to whether or not it could declare statehood.

If the Oslo Accords were not accepted and the Palestinian Authority never existed (because it was created by the Oslo Accords), then was there ever a legitimate government?

If there was no legitimate government and statehood is in question, then can the Palestinians invoke the ICC? In fact are any of the treaties they have signed actually legitimate?

Is Article 53 even applicable, given the wide recognition it received at the time it was concluded.

this is just another example of the Arab Palestinians trying to manipulate the laws to fit its imaginary world.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, now you are just trying to twist the words around without giving any consideration to what was said.

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

What was done, was done to achieve several different purposes.

• Taking measures to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety:

√ Prevent the performance of offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent cases of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent intentional offenses of depraved indifference or the attempts on the lives of one or more persons,
​

• Protect the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, attempting to follow the:

√ Recommendations of the UN Special Committee of Palestine,
√ Follow the Steps Preparatory to Independence adopted by the General Assembly,
√ Counter threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence,
√ Prevent the intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of Israel,
√ Exercising the inherent right of selfdefense against armed attacks by Hostile Arab Palestinians,
​

The use of Non-violent means to protect and defend Israeli sovereign interests.

The question is: How can the settlements be illegal when the Arab Palestinian agreed to the establishment of Area C, with full Israeli civil and security control: in an internationally recognized agreement for which the Nobel Prize was awarded?

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel defending its colonialism.

Where does Oslo say that stealing land is legal?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Are you saying that the Arab Palestinians did not agree to full Israeli civil and security control within "Area "C."

Israel defending its colonialism.

Where does Oslo say that stealing land is legal?

(COMMENT)

You just cannot trust the ArabPalestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you have to look much deeper than this.

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.

A treaty is void if it allows the violation of international law.

Article 53 Treaties Conflicting With A Peremptory Norm Of General International Law (Jus Cogens)

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

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations - Treaty Law​

(COMMENT)

If the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) did not have the competence to execute an agreement such as the Oslo Accord, then certainly there is a question as to whether or not it could declare statehood.

If the Oslo Accords were not accepted and the Palestinian Authority never existed (because it was created by the Oslo Accords), then was there ever a legitimate government?

If there was no legitimate government and statehood is in question, then can the Palestinians invoke the ICC? In fact are any of the treaties they have signed actually legitimate?

Is Article 53 even applicable, given the wide recognition it received at the time it was concluded.

this is just another example of the Arab Palestinians trying to manipulate the laws to fit its imaginary world.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, the whole thing is a big mess created by illegal external interference.

The solution is there, we just have to use it.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, now you are just trying to twist the words around without giving any consideration to what was said.

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

What was done, was done to achieve several different purposes.

• Taking measures to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety:

√ Prevent the performance of offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent cases of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent intentional offenses of depraved indifference or the attempts on the lives of one or more persons,
​

• Protect the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, attempting to follow the:

√ Recommendations of the UN Special Committee of Palestine,
√ Follow the Steps Preparatory to Independence adopted by the General Assembly,
√ Counter threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence,
√ Prevent the intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of Israel,
√ Exercising the inherent right of selfdefense against armed attacks by Hostile Arab Palestinians,
​

The use of Non-violent means to protect and defend Israeli sovereign interests.

The question is: How can the settlements be illegal when the Arab Palestinian agreed to the establishment of Area C, with full Israeli civil and security control: in an internationally recognized agreement for which the Nobel Prize was awarded?

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel defending its colonialism.

Where does Oslo say that stealing land is legal?

Stealing land ™

Can you provide specifics on the alleged Stealing land ™?

You repeat that slogan but don't provide anything but taqiyya.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, the General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 is not even applicable to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Israel is not a colonial asset of any other nation.

If anything, one might ask if the Arab Palestinians were political, economic, commercial, and diplomatic assets to the Arab League? It was the Arab League that represented the Arab Palestinians prior to the 1948 Conflict --- AND --- it was the ArabPalestinians that represented the Arab Palestinians in the Armistice agreements.

Nor, is there any Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT) anywhere in the Middle East.

Indeed, the whole thing is a big mess created by illegal external interference.

The solution is there, we just have to use it.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration

(COMMENT)

Who is the Colonial Power you are targeting?

Again, this is merely another attempt at gaining sympathy for one of the Islamic terrorist on the block that could not stand alone (not then and not now) or achieve any political objective they sought.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, the General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 is not even applicable to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Israel is not a colonial asset of any other nation.

If anything, one might ask if the Arab Palestinians were political, economic, commercial, and diplomatic assets to the Arab League? It was the Arab League that represented the Arab Palestinians prior to the 1948 Conflict --- AND --- it was the ArabPalestinians that represented the Arab Palestinians in the Armistice agreements.

Nor, is there any Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT) anywhere in the Middle East.

Indeed, the whole thing is a big mess created by illegal external interference.

The solution is there, we just have to use it.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration

(COMMENT)

Who is the Colonial Power you are targeting?

Again, this is merely another attempt at gaining sympathy for one of the Islamic terrorist on the block that could not stand alone (not then and not now) or achieve any political objective they sought.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to
self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national
unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights

 

[Phoenall]

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.

A treaty is void if it allows the violation of international law.

Article 53 Treaties Conflicting With A Peremptory Norm Of General International Law (Jus Cogens)

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

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations - Treaty Law​

Still waiting for you to show where the Oslo accords were in breach of international law ?

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.

A treaty is void if it allows the violation of international law.

Article 53 Treaties Conflicting With A Peremptory Norm Of General International Law (Jus Cogens)

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

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations - Treaty Law​

Not ratified according to your link, so do you want to try again


" Article 85 of the Convention provides that it enters into force after the ratification by 35 states (international organizations may ratify, but their ratification does not count towards the number required for entry into force). As of April 2014, the treaty has been ratified by 31 states and 12 international organizations. As a result, the Convention is not yet in force. "



Not many toes left to shoot at now tinny, time to retire with grace.

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, well, the reasoning is different.

(REFERENCE)

Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

(COMMENT)

More often than not, the idea to impose "Eminent Domain" is based on the concept that the action taken is in the best interest of the community or the greater good. The International Common Law serves to induce the application rules that induce efficient behavior.

In this case, while it may be more common for the action of eminent domain to be used in the rehabilitation of land and the improvement of revenues; it is not to prohibit its use to the exclusion of all other reasons. In this case, the use of "eminent domain" to build the security barrier or to prevent the further use of land or structures for dangerous purposes --- that allow the promotion of greater efficiencies in the measures imposed to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

From above


Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Understand it yet ?

Now how are the settlements illegal if they are built on Jewish land again ?

I do. You don't. An occupation is not sovereignty. The territory remains in the hands of the occupied.

Who in this case happen to be the Jews as the arab muslims stole the land by force in 1949. Remember that little escapade when the arab nations decided to breach the terms of the Mandate that they willingly accepted when it gave them 99% of the former Ottoman lands

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, now you are just trying to twist the words around without giving any consideration to what was said.

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

What was done, was done to achieve several different purposes.

• Taking measures to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety:

√ Prevent the performance of offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent cases of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent intentional offenses of depraved indifference or the attempts on the lives of one or more persons,
​

• Protect the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, attempting to follow the:

√ Recommendations of the UN Special Committee of Palestine,
√ Follow the Steps Preparatory to Independence adopted by the General Assembly,
√ Counter threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence,
√ Prevent the intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of Israel,
√ Exercising the inherent right of selfdefense against armed attacks by Hostile Arab Palestinians,
​

The use of Non-violent means to protect and defend Israeli sovereign interests.

The question is: How can the settlements be illegal when the Arab Palestinian agreed to the establishment of Area C, with full Israeli civil and security control: in an internationally recognized agreement for which the Nobel Prize was awarded?

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel defending its colonialism.

Where does Oslo say that stealing land is legal?

cant you read English, the land is no longer stolen as the rightful owners have taken it back. And area C was designated as Jewish by the Oslo accords, signed by the arab league appointed leader of Palestine.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Oh jeese, Rocco, where do you get this shit?

From the internet on such sites as the UN archives. are you saying that the Hague is wrong now ? ? ? ? ?

The Hague says it is OK to steal land for illegal settlements and illegal wall?

From above


Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Understand it yet ?

Now how are the settlements illegal if they are built on Jewish land again ?

I do. You don't. An occupation is not sovereignty. The territory remains in the hands of the occupied.

Who in this case happen to be the Jews as the arab muslims stole the land by force in 1949. Remember that little escapade when the arab nations decided to breach the terms of the Mandate that they willingly accepted when it gave them 99% of the former Ottoman lands

Link?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, now you are just trying to twist the words around without giving any consideration to what was said.

So it is justified to destroy Palestinian property to build illegal settlements and an illegal wall?

(COMMENT)

What was done, was done to achieve several different purposes.

• Taking measures to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety:

√ Prevent the performance of offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent cases of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power,
√ Prevent intentional offenses of depraved indifference or the attempts on the lives of one or more persons,
​

• Protect the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, attempting to follow the:

√ Recommendations of the UN Special Committee of Palestine,
√ Follow the Steps Preparatory to Independence adopted by the General Assembly,
√ Counter threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence,
√ Prevent the intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of Israel,
√ Exercising the inherent right of selfdefense against armed attacks by Hostile Arab Palestinians,
​

The use of Non-violent means to protect and defend Israeli sovereign interests.

The question is: How can the settlements be illegal when the Arab Palestinian agreed to the establishment of Area C, with full Israeli civil and security control: in an internationally recognized agreement for which the Nobel Prize was awarded?

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel defending its colonialism.

Where does Oslo say that stealing land is legal?

WRONG as there is no colonialism when the land was Jewish before 1948.

Read the replies again until you understand what the Oslo accords say.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you have to look much deeper than this.

Because that is what they agreed to do at Oslo, then when they realised what it meant just ignored all the other agreements until they wanted them to work in their favour.

A treaty is void if it allows the violation of international law.

Article 53 Treaties Conflicting With A Peremptory Norm Of General International Law (Jus Cogens)

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

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations - Treaty Law​

(COMMENT)

If the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) did not have the competence to execute an agreement such as the Oslo Accord, then certainly there is a question as to whether or not it could declare statehood.

If the Oslo Accords were not accepted and the Palestinian Authority never existed (because it was created by the Oslo Accords), then was there ever a legitimate government?

If there was no legitimate government and statehood is in question, then can the Palestinians invoke the ICC? In fact are any of the treaties they have signed actually legitimate?

Is Article 53 even applicable, given the wide recognition it received at the time it was concluded.

this is just another example of the Arab Palestinians trying to manipulate the laws to fit its imaginary world.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, the whole thing is a big mess created by illegal external interference.

The solution is there, we just have to use it.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration

Where are the Jewish colonies in the M.E then tinman as the land was bought and acquired legally.

It might if it wasn't for the arab league and its colonialism in Palestine, putting its people in charge of the Palestinians all the time

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, the General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 is not even applicable to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Israel is not a colonial asset of any other nation.

If anything, one might ask if the Arab Palestinians were political, economic, commercial, and diplomatic assets to the Arab League? It was the Arab League that represented the Arab Palestinians prior to the 1948 Conflict --- AND --- it was the ArabPalestinians that represented the Arab Palestinians in the Armistice agreements.

Nor, is there any Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT) anywhere in the Middle East.

Indeed, the whole thing is a big mess created by illegal external interference.

The solution is there, we just have to use it.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration

(COMMENT)

Who is the Colonial Power you are targeting?

Again, this is merely another attempt at gaining sympathy for one of the Islamic terrorist on the block that could not stand alone (not then and not now) or achieve any political objective they sought.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to
self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national
unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights

Again you are mixing up what is said, as it does not say that Palestine is under colonial domination as that is separated from the main body by the words "and all"

Seems that your education was a wasted enterprise and your parents should be demanding a refund.