Reuters still misconstruing, denying Jewish rights to live in territories

Ask a Reuters correspondent why Jews feel they have rights to live in Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank") and he or she is sure to scoff it is because they see it as their "biblical birthright".  In the nearly 500 Reuters stories we have covered over the last 18 months, not once has a Reuters staffer had the integrity to report that Jews were granted the legal right, under League of Nations and United Nations resolutions, to live anywhere in the original Palestine Mandate west of the Jordan River.  Despite numerous Arab and subsequent European attempts to marginalize and in some cases, criminalize Jewish settlements, these internationally sanctioned rights have never been abrogated.  Yet, Reuters correspondents persist in their duplicitous efforts to suggest that settlements in Judea and Samaria are illegal:

Some 500,000 Israelis and 2.5 million Palestinians live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, areas Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 war.
Palestinians fear settlements, which the World Court has deemed illegal, will deny them a viable state. They say construction in settlements must stop before peace talks, frozen some three weeks after they began in September, can resume.

As we're noted many times, the opinion by the World Court in 2004 with regards to the Israeli security barrier was just that, an opinion, entirely advisory and non-binding as per the court's own published charter:

It is of the essence of such opinions that they are advisory, i.e., that, unlike the Court’s judgments, they have no binding effect.

Thus does Reuters, which is deeply hostile to Jewish nationalism and legal rights, spuriously cite a wholly irrelevant body and its opinion rather than the only resolution of genuine standing on the matter.

A continuing and grave violation of the Reuters Trust Principles and code of ethics.