Occupation that doesn't exist Revisited

My blog-post stating the obvious – that in Judea and Samaria there is no "occupation" because no nation-state ever existed in the Land of Israel other than the Jewish nation – provoked two types of contrary responses: a) denial of the legal truth; b) disregard of the legal facts, by claiming that they're irrelevant.
Some people are greatly troubled when informed they've been misinformed, when facts that they took as truth are incorrect, and reality contradicts their world outlook. Some shudder to learn these truths: money doesn't grow on trees, the world isn't flat, and the sky isn't falling. So, too, people who are less-than-knowledgeable or less-than-truthful about the Middle East often hold such positions and believe such axioms that have only tenuous and circumstantial connection with the true reality in the best of cases. Misinformation and disinformation, thriving on blissful ignorance or blind prejudice, may be comfortable but are definitely illusionary and thus harmful.
An example of a response that denies the legal truth: "…you deny customary international law. You also insist on the ancient and irrelevant terms "Judea and Samaria", which are accepted nowhere except in right wing Zionism. It's occupied. See Article 42, Hague Convention of 1907."
I did as instructed. It's always best to check the source yourself, as it may be misquoted, quoted out of context, and sometimes doesn't exist at all!
Section three of the Hague Convention deals with "Military Authority over the Territory of the Hostile State" – and that's exactly my point: the key words are "hostile state"! In Judea and Samaria there was no "hostile state" – only an illegal occupier, namely Jordan.
Article 43 states: "The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant" etc. Again the key words are "legitimate power". In 1967 there was NO legitimate power ruling in Judea and Samaria. The last "legitimate power" was the League of Nations Mandate, established in order to restore the Land of Israel to the sovereignty of the indigenous people, the Jewish nation. So in fact – Israel is today the legitimate power in Judea and Samaria.
The truth is: I don't deny "customary international law", quite the opposite! Israel-bashers deny actual international law, substituting in its place invented, mendacious imaginary law that fits their bigoted propaganda, pre-conceived prejudicial notions or their notions conceived from ignorance.
As to the term "Judea and Samaria": those who prefer "West Bank" – out of ignorance or malice – give legitimacy to Arab conquest while denying Jewish rights.
An example of the response that doesn't argue the legal facts but claims they're irrelevant: "… there is a people living here who have developed distinct cultures in addition to common Arab culture, who don't have their own country".
First: the justice and morality of a position must have paramount importance and relevance. Justice and peace can only be based on truth.
Second: claiming that there is "a people" isn't true. There are non-Jewish "people" living in the Land of Israel, "people", but not "a people" who ever had a state or particularly deserve one today. Most loyalty in the Middle East is localized to town and clan, or is religious, but not national. Not every clan or collection of towns has their "own country". Moreover: the present implosion of imperially-constructed states such as Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, demonstrate that nationalism isn't a dominant factor in the Middle East, at least not since the Arab invasion of the 7th century.
There are some real nation-states in the Middle East, for instance: Egypt, Iran, and… Israel.
In contrast: are Hamas (which calls for a caliphate while insisting that there is no Palestine), the PLO, the people in Gaza, Hebron and Jenin, actually one people? Not really. If they were – wouldn't they have jumped at the opportunity to establish a state, in at least part of the "homeland", as the Jews did? "Palestinian" Arabs refused a state in 1936, 1947, between 1949 and 1967, in 2000 and 2008. Why? Because: "Palestinian" nationality isn't real. There are real people, but the nationality isn't real. It lacks real historical roots. It's a chimera based more on negative feelings towards Jewish sovereignty rather than on a positive ambition for a state. Negativity never built a house!
Recognizing Jewish sovereignty in all the land is moral, legal and just, and only through morality and justice can peace be achieved.