Tony Judt takes aim at settlements http://blogs.jta.org/ENTRY_PERMALINK_HERE/tony-judt-takes-aim-at-settlements/ Tony Judt takes aim at Jewish settlements in the West Bank. en-us uheilman@jta.org Copyright 2009 2009-06-22T;19:07:01-05:00 Comment by Salomon Benzimra sbenzi@sympatico.ca Judt a “historian”?  He may know something about medieval Europe, but certainly nothing about recent Middle East history. Judt a “professor”? Well...I can only feel sad about his students and the distorted narratives he is teaching them. The good professor should have a look at Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine, recognized under international law since July, 1922 and do one of the following: a) admit his error and issue an apology, to be displayed in the NYT as prominently as his original article, or… b) tell us why the provisions of the Mandate are no longer valid, who abrogated them, and when it did happen. Anything short of the above is unbecoming of a respected academic. Judt a “historian”?  He may know something about medieval Europe, but certainly nothing about recent Middle East history.
Judt a “professor”? Well...I can only feel sad about his students and the distorted narratives he is teaching them.

The good professor should have a look at Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine, recognized under international law since July, 1922 and do one of the following:

a) admit his error and issue an apology, to be displayed in the NYT as prominently as his original article, or…

b) tell us why the provisions of the Mandate are no longer valid, who abrogated them, and when it did happen.

Anything short of the above is unbecoming of a respected academic.

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by N. Shuster nashu24@yahoo.com If it weren’t so dangerous, it would have been merely boringly predictable. This Tony, whatever his surname is, or whatever his academic credentials are, would have been just another windbag spouting off the usual platitudes about Israeli “violations of international law” if it weren’t for the fact that he, as is his ilk, is contributing flammable fuel for the Islamofascist match. Not to understand the Israeli case and to ignore the realities of a sixty-year siege (long before the “occupation” and the ‘illegal settlements") is to engage in a horrific fantasy, the kind GeorgeOrwell described as having a particular attraction for the idiot savants of the academe. I wish they would just go away, but I guess we’ll have to continue putting up with these incomprehensibly angry children of our people. If it weren’t so dangerous, it would have been merely boringly predictable. This Tony, whatever his surname is, or whatever his academic credentials are, would have been just another windbag spouting off the usual platitudes about Israeli “violations of international law” if it weren’t for the fact that he, as is his ilk, is contributing flammable fuel for the Islamofascist match.
Not to understand the Israeli case and to ignore the realities of a sixty-year siege (long before the “occupation” and the ‘illegal settlements") is to engage in a horrific fantasy, the kind GeorgeOrwell described as having a particular attraction for the idiot savants of the academe.
I wish they would just go away, but I guess we’ll have to continue putting up with these incomprehensibly angry children of our people.

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by Melvyn I. Marquis zadimel@verizon.net Unfortunately,the light that T.Macabbee would enjoy having the Israelis see on the subject of peace and goodwill with a Palestinian Arab state would be the exhaust of incoming missles from their neighbors’ launch sites.Regarding control of the West Bank, the Israelis would be worse than fools for not taking the necessary security requirements to protect their populations against the efforts by Hamas and Fatah-yes, the latter also-to eliminate the Jewish State.Nations interested in peace with Israel would receive the generous respect and sincere co-operation in building a solid future that should be demanded.Peace with Egypt resulted in the return of the Sinai and its oil field, and removal of civilian settlements and military bases in the Sinai ;peace with Jordan,a long continuous quiet border . Unfortunately,the light that T.Macabbee would enjoy having the Israelis see on the subject of peace and goodwill with a Palestinian Arab state would be the exhaust of incoming missles from their neighbors’ launch sites.Regarding control of the West Bank, the Israelis would be worse than fools for not taking the necessary security requirements to protect their populations against the efforts by Hamas and Fatah-yes, the latter also-to eliminate the Jewish State.Nations interested in peace with Israel would receive the generous respect and sincere co-operation in building a solid future that should be demanded.Peace with Egypt resulted in the return of the Sinai and its oil field, and removal of civilian settlements and military bases in the Sinai ;peace with Jordan,a long continuous quiet border .

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by Yisrael Medad yisrael.medad@gmail.com If you read Judt carefully, you come away with the impression that his anti-Zionism leads him to berate Israel for all its “settlements”, pre- as well as post-1967 communities.  Do awau with it all. http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2009/06/just-judt-jew.html If you read Judt carefully, you come away with the impression that his anti-Zionism leads him to berate Israel for all its “settlements”, pre- as well as post-1967 communities.  Do awau with it all.

http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2009/06/just-judt-jew.html

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by Norman Cone conenorm@gmail.com I don’t deny the fact, that I hate Tony Judt more than I hate Ahmadinejad. Iran’s mad man wishes to eradicate israel and he says it clear and loud. Judt wishes to eradicate Israel, because it is too “postmodern” for his leftist taste and starts his “explanation” with memories of his short life in a kibbutz. This self-hating Jewish enemy of a Jewish state makes me sick. I don’t deny the fact, that I hate Tony Judt more than I hate Ahmadinejad. Iran’s
mad man wishes to eradicate israel and he says it clear and loud. Judt wishes
to eradicate Israel, because it is too “postmodern” for his leftist taste and starts his “explanation” with memories of his short life in a kibbutz. This self-hating Jewish enemy of a Jewish state makes me sick.

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by John Farbarik johnfarbarik8310@msn.com Thank you Truthiness. Excellent comment. Thank you Truthiness. Excellent comment.

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by Fred chatdo8@aol.com In order to advance the argument being made by the Professor, it is necessary to distort everything else too.  That is the only way you can support the faulty conclusions.  By the way, is the Professor also an international lawyer?  What are his credentials in regard to the International Law? In order to advance the argument being made by the Professor, it is necessary to distort everything else too.  That is the only way you can support the faulty conclusions.  By the way, is the Professor also an international lawyer?  What are his credentials in regard to the International Law?

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by Truthiness Macabbee egolinsky@nyc.rr.com You’re right, Uriel; Israel has not “annexed” the West Bank, so I guess it’s just “quibbling” to point out how much land the settlers have taken.  Are they simply “borrowing” it?  It’s obvious that for the settler movement, this is HOW they’re going to get the West Bank, through “facts on the ground” rather than through official annexation.  But I suppose as long as Israel hasn’t “officially” annexed the land, nothing they do with it should be considered “illegal” in the eyes of the world, right? RE: counting Jews in East Jerusalem, Judt counts them because he is going by international law, not by what is convenient for Israel or her U.S. supporters. Pointing out picky issues like how many Jews live in Tel Aviv proper versus the municipality, or how right-wing he describes Bar-Ilan, is a way for you to avoid the substance of Judt’s arguments, which I don’t see you addressing in this blog entry. The various abstractions that the Palestinians have or have not yet accepted (the supposed “historically important” parts of Netanyahu’s speech) are diversionary tactics to avoid acknowledging that (a) Israel controls the land, (b) Israel has taken over and settled large swaths of it, and (c) Israel has total decision-making power over whether or not to give the Palestinians their own state.  Yes, keep “quibbling” over whether or not the Palestinians have had their “profound ideological conversion” yet as Israel continue to crush them under the Army’s boots.  How long can this go on?  How profound a conversion can an occupied people have? You’re right, Uriel; Israel has not “annexed” the West Bank, so I guess it’s just “quibbling” to point out how much land the settlers have taken.  Are they simply “borrowing” it?  It’s obvious that for the settler movement, this is HOW they’re going to get the West Bank, through “facts on the ground” rather than through official annexation.  But I suppose as long as Israel hasn’t “officially” annexed the land, nothing they do with it should be considered “illegal” in the eyes of the world, right?

RE: counting Jews in East Jerusalem, Judt counts them because he is going by international law, not by what is convenient for Israel or her U.S. supporters.

Pointing out picky issues like how many Jews live in Tel Aviv proper versus the municipality, or how right-wing he describes Bar-Ilan, is a way for you to avoid the substance of Judt’s arguments, which I don’t see you addressing in this blog entry. The various abstractions that the Palestinians have or have not yet accepted (the supposed “historically important” parts of Netanyahu’s speech) are diversionary tactics to avoid acknowledging that (a) Israel controls the land, (b) Israel has taken over and settled large swaths of it, and (c) Israel has total decision-making power over whether or not to give the Palestinians their own state. 

Yes, keep “quibbling” over whether or not the Palestinians have had their “profound ideological conversion” yet as Israel continue to crush them under the Army’s boots.  How long can this go on?  How profound a conversion can an occupied people have?

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00