RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: Colonial Allegations
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
(PREFACE) I'm not sure you even understand what you are saying.
boundary/ies
The imaginary lines on the surface of the earth which separate the land territory or maritime zones ( continental shelf and EEZ ) of one State from that of another. Ideally, as a matter of common sense but little more, a land boundary should be easy to identify and diffi cult to cross: ... In relation to land boundaries, there is no corpus of law especially for resolving boundary disputes, and recourse is made to the rules for acquiring title to territory in international law ( see territory, acquisition of ).
In relation to maritime territory, special rules have emerged from conventions. For the territorial sea and contiguous zone , in the absence of agreement as to the boundary, a State is not entitled ‘to extend its territorial sea or contiguous zone beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea …
Delimitation of International Boundaries ( 1974 ); Sharma , International Boundary Disputes and International Law ( 1976 ); Brownlie , African Boundaries. A Legal and Diplomatic Encyclopaedia ( 1979 ); Tanja , The Legal Delimitation of International Maritime Boundaries ( 1989 ); Charney and Alexander , International Maritime Boundaries ( 1993 ).
SOURCE: Parry & Grant encyclopaedic dictionary of international law / John P. Grant and J. Craig Barker.
-- 3rd ed. Copyright © 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. pp 69
Israeli settlers are a necessary, integral, and active part of the settler colonial project. Without the settlers there would be no Israel. They reside on territory stolen from another people.
(COMMENT)
.
Several times in the past, I have had to re-address this Anti-Israeli • Pro-Palestinian unsubstantiated Claim that the settler program is, under A/RES/15/1514 (Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples) or under the recognition of the Special Committee on Decolonization (AKA: C-24) somehow alters the agreement to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs •
ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which
assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C".
The unsupported claim made here by our friend P F Tinmore, is reaffirmed (because of this very allegation) every so often when the C-24 Site is searched for anything even remotely pertaining to "Palestine"(see below) in whatever form the territory may be addressed. This search is not only carried out for any connection with any Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT) world-wide but search crossed the entirety of the UN Decolonization effort.
I will call your attention to the Middle East North African Region - and - Eastward to the Pacific Rim. There is no NSGT in the entire expanse. Now, if our friend wants to address US Responsibilities like
American Samoa or
Guam, that is an entirely different story.
Search Results:
Israel has "say so" territory. Its borders are recognized as de facto borders. It has no legal territory. It has no borders to dispute.
(COMMENT)
.
And this non-sense you spew ("It has no legal territory.") only serves to demonstrate how little you understand of the subject. And please, let us not jump back to the argument that the 1924 Treaty of Lausanne has established any claim to any territory. You cannot use the "Article 30 or the Nationality Section" to replace "Article 16 of the Territorial Section."
See the:
◈ Israeli-Jordanian Treaty (1994) → Article 3 - International Boundary
◈ Israeli-Egyptian Treaty of Peace (1974) → Article 2 - The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel...
Other International Boundary and Demarcation Issues include:
Most Respectfully,
R
www.economist.com
