Finally a crack in the wall and we see the light

I repeat;
All International court decisions are based upon..............existing international, humanitarian and customary law.

That means that even an advisory opinion has the backing of legal precedent and accepted law. The advisory opinion is, if you like, a preview of what will happen when the court is asked for an enforceable ruling. Now that Palestine is a recognised State it is in a position to approach the courts for exactly that.

- - - Updated - - -

Ask politely.

 

If the wall was planned before then, then the Palestinians had plenty of opportunity to prove they wanted peace, which of course they didn't, don't and more than likely never will.

 

The extent of Jordans occupation and annexation of Palestine.

 

The Seperation Barrier doesn't violate international law until the ICJ issues an official ruling stating so.

 

It already has.

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=4&code=mwp&case=131&k=5a&p3=0

 

an advisory opinion is not an official ruling on a ICJ case.

no one has taken Israel to court regarding the seperation fence, and no official ruling has been made.

you're getting desperate and its blinding your judgement.

 

The international court is an official body and all of its rulings are official, advisory or otherwise.

 

Oh dear, the first time I meet you and I discover your interest in truth is zilch. Just been reading an article by Uri Avnery he begins by speaking about something discovered by Hitler but carried on by 'Zionists' - that is that if you tell a lie and it is big enough and you repeat it enough, people will start to believe it. Seems you have fallen foul of that. You are not alone. His article is moving, I imagine because it is written on the death of Ron Pundak one of the people involved in the 93 peace movement. I suggest you read it to educate yourself.

A taster

http://jfjfp.com/?p=58671

I need to go now.

 

Israel went from control of 2% of the West Bank prior to the Six Day War to the current possession of 42% of the West Bank. Less than 5% of building permits requested by Palestinians are approved; the number is much higher for those requested by Israelis. And then there is the situation of "illegal " (by Israeli law) settlements that somehow get better water supply, electricity and road maintenance than the nearby Palestinians do.

All of that is in the public record, as is the peculiar method of ensuring Palestinians can't buy back land by having most of it owned by the state and then "leased" to Israeli citizens. How many Israeli citizens do you know who actually have full title to their place of residence like they would in the USA, Pessimist?

 

Your jargon is used by rote and usually bereft of context, and it is derived from Leftist thought Moon. Saying the world is round isn't a personal attack. Drop the activist speak and use your own words and I won't have anything to point to (or hopefully need to point to).

 

advisory opinions have no force of law.

sorry.

 

Define ' force of law '.

 

That's better. Now see if you can keep your personal references bottled and I'll be able to enjoy your tripe without being offended.

 

really now??????

lol!!!!

 

Humour me. Define ' force of law '. It's your phrase, after all, and you've introduced it as if it's new material.

 

You've posted enough humor for the both of us.

Shall I next define "law"?

lol!!

 

That's not necessary. You've already demonstrated a fine ignorance of its international version.

No more red noses now. Define ' force of law '. PLease.

 

Good post!

 

Yes. I was just pointing out the facts to the Zionist who was trying to get rid of him.

 

Yep, that is the 800-Pound-Gorilla in the room that we are supposed to ignore, and if we point to this huge Gorilla, we are called names, like "Nazis" or "Anti-Semites".

If you point out that some crazy migrants from Europe committed crimes against Semites, then these crazy people call you an "Anti-Semite".

Yep, the legal issue is simple to understand, but if you refer to law they will accuse you of "denying the Jews the right to exist" (on the stolen land), and they will associate you with the "wicked Nazis" that wanted to kill all Jews.

It is boring if you use your mind and logic and think about existing laws.

But most people get emotional if the Hasbara-Team plays the "Holocaust card" and accuses you of "hating the Jews" and of wanting to commit (or refusing to prevent) a "new Holocaust" against the Jews.

When people get emotional, their mental abilities are just switched off and they cannot think reasonably any more.

That is what still happens to many people, but the tide is changing.

 

if you don't know what "force of law" means, I can't help you.

- - - Updated - - -

but in your case, you do hate Jews.

you have admitted to.

 

Ah, I've embarrassed you into inertia. My apologies. I'm sure you know what you think it means.

 

I have told you that nobody hates ALL Jews, and that it is normal to hate those Jews that hate you.

It depends on the Jews. There are decent Jews that are my favourite authors and Jews are among my friends.

But there are/were prominent Jews, like Ovadia Yosef, that hate me, they believe that I was created to serve the Jews, like a domestic animal has to serve their master. And these Jews have a huge number of followers in Israel.
There are Jews who believe that they have the right to kill me or the members of my family to take their liver:

These Jews have many followers around the world.

Would you expect me to love these Jews?

Are you kidding?

If somebody hates Jewish racists, then that does not mean that he hates "THE Jews", there are different Jews, some of them deserve love, others deserve hate, because they themselves are haters.


BTW, do you love people that hate you?

Do you love all Muslims? Yes or no?

Can you answer this simple question?

If you hate some Muslims, does that mean that you hate ALL Muslims?

You are just hiding behind the term "Jews".

You yourself hate some Jews (like Shlomo Sand or Israel Shamir, that are my favourite authors) and you probably hate most of the Goyim, and besides that you are constantly distorting statements of your opponents.

 

Arty, you have on more than one occasion expressed your hatred of jews. But like most you equivocate, while demonstrated an excellent facility for logical fallacy.

 

Does anyone want to discuss the OP

Seems this just another excuse for a urination contest between the legal vs illegal occupation/settlement factions?

Strangely this argument about legal/illegal is being waged by what can only generously be described as armchair lawyers. At times I am a guilty as anyone, but when this contest infests every discussion, it gets awfully difficult to discuss any other issue of substance with reagrd to the conflict and its resolution.