Then, it should ring true whenever it is present. I.e. whenever one boycotts something it loses its right to bring the argument forward in future. Otherwise it risks being a superficial, subjective law, which is not a law and shouldn't be followed on a subjective basis. I.e. when Israel boycotts the "Durban" Conferences, it loses its right to have say what happens and must accept the resolutions. I beg you to accept that argument and see past the flaws WHY? Because I will then retort that Palestinian/Arab boycott of the 1947-8 Partition plan is evidence of Palestinian choice to not have a state and therefore this conflict is null and void, as like you said, since they boycotted it they lose the right to bring the issue of contention to light in the future. In which case, the whole issue of Gaza is irelevant as Gazans are trespassing the land they forclosed on by boycotting the process. Oh Short Sighted Manny, how I wish the world worked like your idiotic posts.
Ofir Akunis officially replaces Danny Danon as minister of science, technology, and space (Haaretz)
from the article: Israel urges world: Reject Goldstone report on Gaza