Attacker shot on scene, succumbs to wounds; Of the victims, four moderately wounded, one lightly so.12:38 27.11.15 | 0 comments
Quote "The border line of Israel was set by the UN, not by the Mandate. And that border line was the Green Line." There is nothing in Int'l Law that legally empower any UNGA to make any law or illegal any UNGA recommendation unless a vote is adopted at the UNSC in line with the U.N charter. As for the Mandate for Palestine , it was adopted as legally binding for Int'l Law by the UNSC for the question of Israel territorial borders , sovereignty. Up to this day the Mandate for Palestine is valid in Int'l Law and was never invalidated by the UNSC. Quote "The moment Israeli forces crossed that line, they became occupiers of the West Bank. " Consequently our biblical heartland are part of the said mandate and Israel presence in our biblical heartland is legal , is lawfull, There is nothing in Int'l Law that brandish Israel presence in our biblical heartland as illegal , unlawfull or as belligerant or as 'occupiers'. Quote "Joseph E. should take this up with the Justices of the High Court of Israel who have unanimously ruled that Israel is the "belligerent occupier" of the West Bank." the High Court of Israel and ICJ ruling leaned on UNGA resolutions that are illegal as if it was a source of law, all without checking its accuracy or legal standing , the General Assembly of the United Nations can only, in principle, issue 'recommendations' which are not of a binding character, according to Article 10 of the Charter of the United Nations ,the General Assembly has no legal power to legislate or bind its members by way of recommendation . consequently both the High Court of Israel and ICJ ruling labeled the "illusion" that a General Assembly resolution can have "legislative effect."