Solar Power pays off for enterprising Palestinians.

[Phoenall]

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?

To what in my reply, as it has all been covered in other threads over the last few weeks.

 

[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?

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.

Link?

 

[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​

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.

Does that mean that the information is not true?

 

[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.

Link?

Oslo accords

 

[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

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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

 

[Hollie]

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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

Where was this country of "Palestine"?

 

[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?

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.

Link?

Oslo accords

I notice you did not quote a passage or provide a link.

Sorry, I don't do the wild goose chase thing.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you have to look much deeper than this.

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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

Where was this country of "Palestine"?

The UN Armistice Agreements gave the info on Palestinian land and international borders as of 1949.

 

[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.

Does that mean that the information is not true?

NO it means it does not work as you want until the required 35 states have ratified it. Until then it is nothing but a pipe dream of a few people like yourself. It is not International law or even a recommendation just a treaty that will be lost in the annals of time until some other moron thinks it is International law and uses it against Israel

 

[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​

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.

Does that mean that the information is not true?

NO it means it does not work as you want until the required 35 states have ratified it. Until then it is nothing but a pipe dream of a few people like yourself. It is not International law or even a recommendation just a treaty that will be lost in the annals of time until some other moron thinks it is International law and uses it against Israel

Does that mean that the information is not true?

 

[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.

(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.

Link?

Oslo accords

I notice you did not quote a passage or provide a link.

Sorry, I don't do the wild goose chase thing.

You did not say what you wanted a link too, so I gave you the treaty that covers it all. All you need do is go back a page or two and read Roccor's posts on the same subject

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you have to look much deeper than this.

(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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

Where was this country of "Palestine"?

The UN Armistice Agreements gave the info on Palestinian land and international borders as of 1949.

Correct the borders of the mandate of Palestine, not the nation of Palestine. Or have you forgotten the parts that stated " shortened to Palestine from now on "

It seems that only you does not yet understand what this means ?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you have to look much deeper than this.

(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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

Where was this country of "Palestine"?

The UN Armistice Agreements gave the info on Palestinian land and international borders as of 1949.

Jews were buying land before 1949, as you know. Your silly chicken dance is a typical deflection when your attempt at argument self-refutes.

 

[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.

Does that mean that the information is not true?

NO it means it does not work as you want until the required 35 states have ratified it. Until then it is nothing but a pipe dream of a few people like yourself. It is not International law or even a recommendation just a treaty that will be lost in the annals of time until some other moron thinks it is International law and uses it against Israel

Does that mean that the information is not true?

Are you having a problem understanding English again

NO it means it does not work as you want until the required 35 states have ratified it. Until then it is nothing but a pipe dream of a few people like yourself. It is not International law or even a recommendation just a treaty that will be lost in the annals of time until some other moron thinks it is International law and uses it against Israel

 

[P F Tinmore]

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.

Link?

Oslo accords

I notice you did not quote a passage or provide a link.

Sorry, I don't do the wild goose chase thing.

You did not say what you wanted a link too, so I gave you the treaty that covers it all. All you need do is go back a page or two and read Roccor's posts on the same subject

The requested info was not in his post.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

Where was this country of "Palestine"?

The UN Armistice Agreements gave the info on Palestinian land and international borders as of 1949.

Correct the borders of the mandate of Palestine, not the nation of Palestine. Or have you forgotten the parts that stated " shortened to Palestine from now on "

It seems that only you does not yet understand what this means ?

The Mandate was not a place.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

The Jews only bought about 6-7% of Palestine. It was still Palestinian land. Jews buy land in the US and it is still US land. Land does not leave the country when it is purchased.

Where was this country of "Palestine"?

The UN Armistice Agreements gave the info on Palestinian land and international borders as of 1949.

Jews were buying land before 1949, as you know. Your silly chicken dance is a typical deflection when your attempt at argument self-refutes.

That refutes my post how?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I've answered this a half dozen times, if not more. please make note of the answer.

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

(REFERENCE)

A/RES/37/43 3 December 1982
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

(COMMENT)

OK please notice the way it is worded. This NON-BINDING Resolution does not say anything specifically about the Palestinians, but speaks about three (3) kinds of entities:

• Namibian people,
• The Palestinian people,
• All peoples under foreign and colonial domination,
​

The Namibian People do not include the Palestinians, which is a second group. And the Neither the Palestinians and Namibian do not include All people under foreign and colonial domination.

In 1982, the West Bank was sovereign Jordanian territory. The Jordanians did not abandon the West Bank until 31 July 1988; and in November 1988 made its declaration:

Palestinian Declaration of Independence

• Despite the historical injustice inflicted on the Palestinian Arab people resulting in their dispersion and depriving them of their right to self-determination, following upon UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947), which partitioned Palestine into two states, one Arab, one Jewish, yet it is this Resolution that still provides those conditions of international legitimacy that ensure the right of the Palestinian Arab people to sovereignty.

• Whereas the Palestinian people reaffirms most definitively its inalienable rights in the land of its patrimony: Now by virtue of natural, historical and legal rights, and the sacrifices of successive generations who gave of themselves in defense of the freedom and independence of their homeland; In pursuance of Resolutions adopted by Arab Summit Conferences and relying on the authority bestowed by international legitimacy as embodied in the Resolutions of the United Nations Organisation since 1947; And in exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its rights to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory, The Palestine National Council, in the name of God, and in the name of the Palestinian Arab people, hereby proclaims the establishment of the State of Palestine on our Palestinian territory with its capital Jerusalem (Al-Quds Ash-Sharif).
​

In 1982, the Arab Palestinians had, by their own participation in the Jordanian Parliament of April 1950, were sovereign under the Hashemite Kingdom. The Arab Palestinians were not under a foreign domination; certainly not a Israeli domination. In 1988, after the Hashemite Kingdom abandonment the Palestinians to Israel, the Arab Palestinians were then not denied the right of declaring sovereignty, independence and the right of self-determination.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense.

The UN Armistice Agreements gave the info on Palestinian land and international borders as of 1949.

(COMMENT)

This is absolutely - 100% - incorrect!

There were 4 Armistice Agreements. However, none of the four agreements was with any entity called Palestine. There is no cease-fire line with Israeli forces on one side and an Arab-Palestinian Force on the other.

Both the Egyptian Treaty and the Jordanian Treaty set the International permanent boundaries and dissolved the Armistice lines. Armistice Agreements are replaced by Peace Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

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.

Link?

Oslo accords

I notice you did not quote a passage or provide a link.

Sorry, I don't do the wild goose chase thing.

You did not say what you wanted a link too, so I gave you the treaty that covers it all. All you need do is go back a page or two and read Roccor's posts on the same subject

The requested info was not in his post.

Yes it was, unless you have islamonazi glasses that blank out the words defending the Jews