Oslo is not a legal agreement

[Hollie]

Please be clear. We are not discussing violations of the Oslo Accords. We are discussing their validity.

So show me where the Oslo Accords prevent Palestinian from holding the four rights you outlined in your post.

Where does Oslo prevent Palestinian self-determination? Where does it prevent Palestinian independence? Where does it legislate away Palestinian sovereignty?

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

Nowhere.

Oslo OKs all of this.

Where do islamic terrorists have a right to further the goals of their "Charter"?


Nowhere.

None of that is in the Isra...er...uhh...the Hamas charter.

You are just deflecting.

Sidestepping and deflection. It's your usual tactic.

Your day job is teaching Islamo-tap dancing, right.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Please be clear. We are not discussing violations of the Oslo Accords. We are discussing their validity.

So show me where the Oslo Accords prevent Palestinian from holding the four rights you outlined in your post.

Where does Oslo prevent Palestinian self-determination? Where does it prevent Palestinian independence? Where does it legislate away Palestinian sovereignty?

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

Nowhere.

Oslo OKs all of this.

Where do islamic terrorists have a right to further the goals of their "Charter"?


Nowhere.

None of that is in the Isra...er...uhh...the Hamas charter.

You are just deflecting.

Sidestepping and deflection. It's your usual tactic.

Your day job is teaching Islamo-tap dancing, right.

Oh jeese, is that all you have? Why do you post here?

 

[Hollie]

Please be clear. We are not discussing violations of the Oslo Accords. We are discussing their validity.

So show me where the Oslo Accords prevent Palestinian from holding the four rights you outlined in your post.

Where does Oslo prevent Palestinian self-determination? Where does it prevent Palestinian independence? Where does it legislate away Palestinian sovereignty?

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

Nowhere.

Oslo OKs all of this.

Where do islamic terrorists have a right to further the goals of their "Charter"?


Nowhere.

None of that is in the Isra...er...uhh...the Hamas charter.

You are just deflecting.

Sidestepping and deflection. It's your usual tactic.

Your day job is teaching Islamo-tap dancing, right.

Oh jeese, is that all you have? Why do you post here?

Yet another of your fraudulent claims that has come crashing to the ground.

And the Islamist terrorist welfare fraud that is UNRWA continues, islamic terrorist thieves get rich and Islamist terrorist Pom Pom flailers continue with their flaccid excuses.

It's called Pal'istanian Mentality™

 

[P F Tinmore]

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?

Nowhere.

Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

Nowhere.

Oslo OKs all of this.

Where do islamic terrorists have a right to further the goals of their "Charter"?


Nowhere.

None of that is in the Isra...er...uhh...the Hamas charter.

You are just deflecting.

Sidestepping and deflection. It's your usual tactic.

Your day job is teaching Islamo-tap dancing, right.

Oh jeese, is that all you have? Why do you post here?

Yet another of your fraudulent claims that has come crashing to the ground.

And the Islamist terrorist welfare fraud that is UNRWA continues, islamic terrorist thieves get rich and Islamist terrorist Pom Pom flailers continue with their flaccid excuses.

It's called Pal'istanian Mentality™

If you keep up with these dumb posts you are going to get fired.

 

[Shusha]

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?
Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?
Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

A few excerpts (emphasis mine):

The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the JordanianPalestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognise their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the two sides agree to the following principles:

In order that the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip may govern themselves ...

These elections will constitute a significant interim preparatory step toward the realisation of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and their just requirements.

Jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and Gaza Strip territory, except for issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations.

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbours, and other issues of common interest.

Upon the entry into force of this Declaration of Principles and the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the Jericho area, a transfer of authority from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the authorised Palestinians for this task, as detailed herein, will commence.

with the view to promoting economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, authority will be transferred to the Palestinians in the following spheres: education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. The Palestinian side will commence in building the Palestinian police force, as agreed upon. Pending the inauguration of the Council, the two parties may negotiate the transfer of additional powers and responsibilities, as agreed upon.

the transfer of powers and responsibilities from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the Council. The Interim Agreement shall also specify the Council's executive authority, legislative authority in accordance with Article IX below, and the independent Palestinian judicial organs.

In order to enable the Council to promote economic growth, upon its inauguration, the Council will establish, among other things, a Palestinian Electricity Authority, a Gaza Sea Port Authority, a Palestinian Development Bank, a Palestinian Export Promotion Board, a Palestinian Environmental Authority, a Palestinian Land Authority and a Palestinian Water Administration Authority and any other Authorities agreed upon, in accordance with the Interim Agreement, that will specify their powers and responsibilities.



And that is just the Declaration of Principles. I could go on. I stopped only in an effort to keep the size of the post down. The entire document(s) demonstrate a clear intent to transfer power from one government to another being formed in order to bring fulfillment to the premise of the agreement -- a peaceful settlement where the rights of both peoples to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity is brought about.

Further, there is absolutely nothing in the document which invalidates the Palestinian people from obtaining SD, I, S and TI. Your premise is completely false.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?
Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?
Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

A few excerpts (emphasis mine):

The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the JordanianPalestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognise their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the two sides agree to the following principles:

In order that the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip may govern themselves ...

These elections will constitute a significant interim preparatory step toward the realisation of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and their just requirements.

Jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and Gaza Strip territory, except for issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations.

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbours, and other issues of common interest.

Upon the entry into force of this Declaration of Principles and the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the Jericho area, a transfer of authority from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the authorised Palestinians for this task, as detailed herein, will commence.

with the view to promoting economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, authority will be transferred to the Palestinians in the following spheres: education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. The Palestinian side will commence in building the Palestinian police force, as agreed upon. Pending the inauguration of the Council, the two parties may negotiate the transfer of additional powers and responsibilities, as agreed upon.

the transfer of powers and responsibilities from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the Council. The Interim Agreement shall also specify the Council's executive authority, legislative authority in accordance with Article IX below, and the independent Palestinian judicial organs.

In order to enable the Council to promote economic growth, upon its inauguration, the Council will establish, among other things, a Palestinian Electricity Authority, a Gaza Sea Port Authority, a Palestinian Development Bank, a Palestinian Export Promotion Board, a Palestinian Environmental Authority, a Palestinian Land Authority and a Palestinian Water Administration Authority and any other Authorities agreed upon, in accordance with the Interim Agreement, that will specify their powers and responsibilities.



And that is just the Declaration of Principles. I could go on. I stopped only in an effort to keep the size of the post down. The entire document(s) demonstrate a clear intent to transfer power from one government to another being formed in order to bring fulfillment to the premise of the agreement -- a peaceful settlement where the rights of both peoples to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity is brought about.

Further, there is absolutely nothing in the document which invalidates the Palestinian people from obtaining SD, I, S and TI. Your premise is completely false.

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbours, and other issues of common interest.

That is my point. Those are non negotiable items.

 

[montelatici]

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?
Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?
Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

A few excerpts (emphasis mine):

The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the JordanianPalestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognise their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the two sides agree to the following principles:

In order that the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip may govern themselves ...

These elections will constitute a significant interim preparatory step toward the realisation of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and their just requirements.

Jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and Gaza Strip territory, except for issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations.

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbours, and other issues of common interest.

Upon the entry into force of this Declaration of Principles and the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the Jericho area, a transfer of authority from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the authorised Palestinians for this task, as detailed herein, will commence.

with the view to promoting economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, authority will be transferred to the Palestinians in the following spheres: education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. The Palestinian side will commence in building the Palestinian police force, as agreed upon. Pending the inauguration of the Council, the two parties may negotiate the transfer of additional powers and responsibilities, as agreed upon.

the transfer of powers and responsibilities from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the Council. The Interim Agreement shall also specify the Council's executive authority, legislative authority in accordance with Article IX below, and the independent Palestinian judicial organs.

In order to enable the Council to promote economic growth, upon its inauguration, the Council will establish, among other things, a Palestinian Electricity Authority, a Gaza Sea Port Authority, a Palestinian Development Bank, a Palestinian Export Promotion Board, a Palestinian Environmental Authority, a Palestinian Land Authority and a Palestinian Water Administration Authority and any other Authorities agreed upon, in accordance with the Interim Agreement, that will specify their powers and responsibilities.



And that is just the Declaration of Principles. I could go on. I stopped only in an effort to keep the size of the post down. The entire document(s) demonstrate a clear intent to transfer power from one government to another being formed in order to bring fulfillment to the premise of the agreement -- a peaceful settlement where the rights of both peoples to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity is brought about.

Further, there is absolutely nothing in the document which invalidates the Palestinian people from obtaining SD, I, S and TI. Your premise is completely false.

Your paper will just result in negotiations that will go nowhere because the Israelis will never cede sovereignty to non-Jews, i.e. the Israelis will never cede control of territiorial sea, air space or agree to not maintain control of land borders directly or through a third party (Egypt). And, the IDF will never leave the West Bank or cede sovereignty over the settlements.

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

Uhh,

 

[Hollie]

Where do the Palestinians have self determination without external interference?
Where do the Palestinians have independence and sovereignty?
Where do the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity?

A few excerpts (emphasis mine):

The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the JordanianPalestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognise their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the two sides agree to the following principles:

In order that the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip may govern themselves ...

These elections will constitute a significant interim preparatory step toward the realisation of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and their just requirements.

Jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and Gaza Strip territory, except for issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations.

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbours, and other issues of common interest.

Upon the entry into force of this Declaration of Principles and the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the Jericho area, a transfer of authority from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the authorised Palestinians for this task, as detailed herein, will commence.

with the view to promoting economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, authority will be transferred to the Palestinians in the following spheres: education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. The Palestinian side will commence in building the Palestinian police force, as agreed upon. Pending the inauguration of the Council, the two parties may negotiate the transfer of additional powers and responsibilities, as agreed upon.

the transfer of powers and responsibilities from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the Council. The Interim Agreement shall also specify the Council's executive authority, legislative authority in accordance with Article IX below, and the independent Palestinian judicial organs.

In order to enable the Council to promote economic growth, upon its inauguration, the Council will establish, among other things, a Palestinian Electricity Authority, a Gaza Sea Port Authority, a Palestinian Development Bank, a Palestinian Export Promotion Board, a Palestinian Environmental Authority, a Palestinian Land Authority and a Palestinian Water Administration Authority and any other Authorities agreed upon, in accordance with the Interim Agreement, that will specify their powers and responsibilities.



And that is just the Declaration of Principles. I could go on. I stopped only in an effort to keep the size of the post down. The entire document(s) demonstrate a clear intent to transfer power from one government to another being formed in order to bring fulfillment to the premise of the agreement -- a peaceful settlement where the rights of both peoples to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity is brought about.

Further, there is absolutely nothing in the document which invalidates the Palestinian people from obtaining SD, I, S and TI. Your premise is completely false.

Your paper will just result in negotiations that will go nowhere because the Israelis will never cede sovereignty to non-Jews, i.e. the Israelis will never cede control of territiorial sea, air space or agree to not maintain control of land borders directly or through a third party (Egypt). And, the IDF will never leave the West Bank or cede sovereignty over the settlements.

Why would Israel not want to maintain control if it's borders with a virulently hostile Islamic terrorist entity wanting to strike?

If you actually took the time to compose a coherent post rather than mindlessly cutting and pasting your usual scripts, you might discover how laughably inept your scripts really are.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

Uhh,

Among your more compelling, thoughtful contributions.

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

Post of the day!

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

Post of the day!

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

".... because I say so".

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

Post of the day!

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

".... because I say so".

Not so. That is what international law states as I mentioned in an earlier post.

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

Post of the day!

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

".... because I say so".

Not so. That is what international law states as I mentioned in an earlier post.

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

I always get a chuckle when you take it upon yourself to stutter and mumble various incoherencies about international law.

 

[Shusha]

Post of the day!

The Oslo agreement is invalid.

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

I would like to see a link to that clause.

 

[Eloy]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

While Gaza and the West Bank are occupied, in any future permanent status talks with Israel and the USA on one side and the Palestinians on the other, it is easy to predict who will be giving and who will be taking.

In the Oslo Agreement II, on all crucial issues -- Jerusalem, water, reparations, sovereignty, security, land -- the Palestinians gained nothing. The Oslo Agreement has led to permanent Israeli domination where Palestinian self-rule means Reservations in the West Bank for Palestinians, just like Gaza has become.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore

Okay, so stop. First you said that the Oslo Accords violated "the law of treaties" and "the rules of occupation".

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated universal human rights.

Then you said that the Oslo Accords violated the rights to self-determination, independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

And NOW you are trying to argue that treaties are invalid when they make peace agreements for such things as borders, citizenship, security, relations with neighbors and other issues of common interest.


Pick a goal post, dude. And plant it. And keep it where you planted it.

I believe that the Geneva Conventions state that while under occupation, any agreements made by the occupied people and their leadership, with the occupier are not valid. Petain's agreements with the Nazis, for example, were not considered valid. A belligerent occupation must end before agreements between the former occupier and the occupied have validity. This is logical in that an occupied people may subject to agreeing to conditions that go against their interests and in favor of the occupier.

While Gaza and the West Bank are occupied, in any future permanent status talks with Israel and the USA on one side and the Palestinians on the other, it is easy to predict who will be giving and who will be taking.

In the Oslo Agreement II, on all crucial issues -- Jerusalem, water, reparations, sovereignty, security, land -- the Palestinians gained nothing. The Oslo Agreement has led to permanent Israeli domination where Palestinian self-rule means Reservations in the West Bank for Palestinians, just like Gaza has become.

What else can be done with the hyper-religious Islamic Death Cult except to keep it contained?