Reply to: The Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004 in the Matter of the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as Submitted by the International Court of JusticeMyths and Facts, Inc., 2005 - 160 страница |
Садржај
Introduction | 5 |
1 Testimony Testifying Against Israel | 9 |
2 The Mandate for Palestine | 21 |
3 Jerusalem and the Holy Places | 37 |
4 Resolution 181 the Partition Plan | 47 |
5 UN Charter Article 51 Customized | 65 |
6 Terrorism | 69 |
7 Selfdefence Legitimate Use of Force | 83 |
9 UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 | 93 |
10 Territories Legality of Jewish Settlements | 97 |
11 The Supreme Court of the State of Israel | 117 |
12 Arab Consistent Behavior andPrecedent for Fencing | 125 |
13 SelfDetermination | 131 |
14 The International Courtof Justices Mandate | 137 |
15 Epilogue | 145 |
Back Cover | 161 |
Чести термини и фразе
Administration of Palestine adopted Advisory Opinion aggression aggressor Arab League Article 22 Article 51 Assembly Resolution attacks Bench Box at www.MEfacts.com British broken link Charter cites civilians Court of Justice Declaration digit number xxxxx document uses extensive East Jerusalem entitled establishment experience a broken extensive links force Fourth Geneva Convention Holy Places Ibid ICJ opinion ICJ's ignores illegal International Court international law Internet italics by author Jewish National Home Jewish settlements Jews Jordan River Julius Stone July Keyword League of Nations Mandate for Palestine Mandatory Occupied Palestinian Territory occupied territories Oslo Accords Palestinian Arabs paragraph Partition Plan peace political Powers principle Professor Julius Stone provisions recognized rejected relevant Resolution 181 Resolution 242 rule Search Box security barrier Security Council Resolution self-defence self-determination Six-Day War status Supreme Court Syria terrorism terrorist Transjordan UN Charter UN General Assembly United Nations West Bank