Pure Zionism by the right in Israel

LOL!!!! the official resolutions of the United Nations Security Counsil and the International Court of Justice, and the Israeli Supreme Court, 100% outweigh the opinions of private individuals.



- - - Updated - - -

the official resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and the International Court of Justice, and the Israeli Supreme Court, 100% outweigh the opinions of private individuals.

sorry.

 

What Elie E. Hertz writes about is well researched, approved and accepted by zillion of people who do not live in frozen Newfoundland...

Name one <spurious nonsense> that Elie E. Hertz has mentioned to parse away from your better knowledge on the situation prevailing now in the Middle East...?

To seed the seed of discontent on this forum championing a failed cause is also absurd.

 

I'm only answering according what you write.

The two are open infront of my eyes, I have also the qoutes from the ones who drafted Resolution 242.

According to former ambassador Goldberg, one of the drafters:

And here is what Goerge Brown, the second drafter of Resolution 242, said in 1970:

And here is what Lord Caradon, the third Drafter of the Resolution, said to a Lebanese newspaper in 1974:

Source: http://www.acpr.org.il/pp/pp173-grief-E.pdf

So according to the drafter, Resolution 242 is not saying that Israel had to withdraw from all the territories, which means that Israel fullfiled that resolution when they withdrawed from Sinai.

It is a fullfilment of the British law, like it was stated in the UK Manual.

- - - Updated - - -

And the resolution that called the territory "illegaly" or "occupation", contradicting the Mandate, which jept it's validity thanks to Article 80.

 

The official resolutions of the United Nations Security Counsil, the Israeli Supreme Court, and the International Court of Justice, outweigh British law when it comes to international matters.

By the way, Israel is not a signatory to, nor have they ever sworn to uphold, British law in the West Bank.

so......just no.



- - - Updated - - -

this is the OPINION of private individuals.

and these opinions are outweighed by the official resolutions of the United Nations Security Counsil, the Israeli Supreme Court, and the International Court of Justice.

sorry..

 

And the resolution that called the territory "illegaly" or "occupation", contradicting the Mandate, which jept it's validity thanks to Article 80.

The British law is part of the laws that is respected in the West Bank, like the Jordanian laws and the Ottoman laws.
Israel is respected all those laws in the West Bank.

 

International law supercedes British law in international matters.

The resolutions of the United Nations Security Counsil, the Israeli Supreme Court, and the International Court of Justice, supercede British law when it comes to international matters.

- - - Updated - - -

mere private individual opinions, legally outweighed by the official declarations of the United Nations Security Counsil, the Israeli Supreme Court, and the International Court of Justice.

 

As I already said:
And this is contradicting the Mandate, which it's validity has kept thanks to Article 80.

 

mere private opinion, outweighed by the official legally-binding resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, the Israeli Supreme Court, and the International Court of Justice.

 

As I already said:
And this is contradicting the Mandate, which it's validity has kept thanks to Article 80.

 

your opinion is outweighed by official legally-binding declarations of the UNSC, ICJ, and Israel Supreme Court.

 

It's not my opinion, it is what the UN Charter says.

 

LOL!!!!!!! the UN Charter says no such thing.

those are you words, not the ones of the UN Charter.

 

So are you saying that Article 80 is not part of the UN Charter?

 

is that what YOU believe?

 

It is what the UN shows in their website- http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter12.shtml

Or maybe the UN is not telling the truth about their Charter?

 

why do you believe that?

 

That's what the UN shows in their website about their Charter. Or maybe the UN is not telling the truth about their Charter?

 

why do you think the UN is not being honest about their charter?

 

I never said that. I'm saying that according to the UN Charter (Article 80), the Mandate validity has kept, and that is cintradicting every resolution that says "occupation" or "illegal" regarding the reality in the West Bank regarding the Jewish presence there.

 

WRONG!!!!

Article 80 says the rights of Mandates are kept, but under several conditions.

Plus the Mandate doesn't say Jews can steal private Arab land and use it for Jew-only settlements.

 

Like Prof. Rostow said:

I already gave the source numerous of times.

 

The United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, and the Israeli Supreme Court all say he is wrong, and their official declarations are legally binding while Prof. Rostow was simply a private individual giving his non-legally binding opinion.

 

And their resolutions is been contradicted by the Mandate that kept it's validity thanks to Article 80. Because the creation of Article 80 was to keep the Mandate valid in San Francisco Confference.

 

no, they are not.

 

So are you saying that Article 80 is not part of the UN Charter?