Israeli attacks are military operations, while Palestinian attacks are acts of terrorism. It is acceptable for USA to ship weapons to Israel (even in the midst of an indiscriminate bombing campiagn), whilse it is un-acceptable for Syria or Iran to ship weapons to Hezbollah. It is acceptable for Israel to possess a nuclear weapons arsenal and not be party to the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty, while it is un-acceptable for Iran to pursue nuclear energy whilst it is party to the Nuclear non-Prolieration treaty and be under the wtchful eye of the IAEA. Palestinians fighting for their right to return to their homes, are menacingly labelled terrorists. Meanwhile armies with superior weaponery and a nuclear arsenal is called the Israeli Defence Force. Ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is called dis-engagement. Precison / surgical bombs (being sold to Israel by the US) are infact weapons of mass destruction. Israel attacks Lebanese civillian infrastructure in defence. Hezbollah attacks Israeli military targets in acts of terror. Israeli occupied territories are refered to as disputed territories. People that are effectively squatters are called settlers, to give the impression that no one was there before them. The Berlin Wall-like structure being built to unilaterally impose new borders for Israel is refered to as a Security Fence. Does everyone remember the Berlin Fence? Olmert Says: “We want to live our lives in peace and in good neighbourly relations,” he said. “Unfortunately, there are those who misinterpret our wishes for peace in the wrong way." Olmert Does: * Draws first-blood on civillians, in Gaza Strip. * Savages civillian infrastructure in Gaza Strip, destroying poer station, hospitals and buildings. * Savages civillian population in Gaza Strip. * Kidnaps several members of a democratically elected government in Gaza. * Draws first-blood on civillians, in Lebanon. * Savages the infrastructure of the entire country of Lebanon. * Savages the lives of the entire Lebanese population. A summary of an article in the Independent by Robert Fisk, "When journalists forget that murder is murder" [18 August 2001] What on earth has happened to our reporting of the Middle East? George Orwell would have loved a Reuter's dispatch from the West Bank city of Hebron last Wednesday. "Undercover Israeli soldiers," the world's most famous news agency reported, "shot dead a member of Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction yesterday in what Palestinians called an assassination." The key phrase, of course, was "what Palestinians called an assassination". Any sane reader would conclude immediately that Imad Abu Sneiheh, who was shot in the head, chest, stomach and legs by 10 bullets fired by Israeli "agents" had been murdered, let alone assassinated. But no. Reuters, like all the big agencies and television companies reporting the tragedy of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, no longer calls murder by its real name. Editors around the world are requesting their journalists to be ever softer, ever more mealy mouthed in their reporting of any incident which might upset Israel. Which is why, of course, Israelis are so often reported as being killed by Palestinians while Palestinians, some as young as 10, are killed in "clashes" – "clashes" coming across as a form of natural disaster like an earthquake or a flood, a tragedy without a culprit. One sure way of spotting Israel's responsibility for a killing is the word "crossfire". Palestinian-Israeli conflict has produced a unique crop of verbal trickiness. The Israeli siege of a city has become a "closure", the legal border between Israel and the occupied territories has become the "seam line", collaborators for the Israelis are "co-operators", Israeli-occupied land has become "disputed", Jewish settlements built illegally on Arab land have become "neighourhoods" – nice, folksy places which are invariably attacked by Palestinian "militants". So just watch out for the following key words about the Middle East in television reporting over the next few days: "targeted killings", "neighbourhood", "disputed", "terrorist", "clash" and "crossfire". Then ask yourself why they are being used. Merged Post: 0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 4,170 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since September 29, 2000. 60+ new Jewish-only settlements have been built on confiscated Palestinian land between March 2001 and July 11, 2003. There have been 0 cases of Palestinians confiscating Israeli land and building settlements. After the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier near the Gaza Strip, Israeli launched a brutal military attack on Gaza destroying power stations, government buildings, schools, hospitals and other civilian infrastructure. Later they kidnapped several members of the democratically elected government. Among the many recent acts of terror committed by Israeli forces was the shelling of the beach in Gaza in which 8 members of one family were killed. This blatant act of Israeli terror was followed by the official denial of responsibility although the Israelis had been shelling the Gaza Strip at the time the family on the beach was hit. Experts working for the US-based Human Rights Watch group assessed that the shell had likely been fired by the Israelis from the north of Gaza. Seeds of disinformation were slipped into media reports that a land mine had caused the explosion, a claim so offensive that it was eventually dropped. Merged Post: PLEASE EVERYONE TAKE A LOOK AT THIS VIDEO. INCULDING YOU FERRET. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHA2NLzrcYE...related&search=
Gosh I feel so sad after watching that vid. I knew most of the stuff already .What Sharon said was really despicable and wtf is up with letting girls write messages on artillery shells that are gonna murder innocents. The people of palestine and Lebanon have suffered so much and yet Israel still refuses to stop with their madness.
Palestinian attacks are justified, while guided missiles are "indiscriminate bombing." It is acceptable for a nation to support a group willing to blow up a bus with plastic explosive and nails, while it is not acceptable for another nation to ship laser-guided small detonation munitions in hopes of reducing high civilian casualties in an urban area. It is acceptable for a nation to possess a nuclear weapon while screaming for the death of another based on their religion. A person with a uniform, an identification badge, and a real chain of command is labeled as a terrorist. A person who picks up an AK, fires into a crowd from a car, and speeds off is labeled as fighting for his home. Anti-semitism is acceptable in modern day times because Jews occupy a part of the Middle East. A small-detonation munition designed to reduce high civilian casualties is a weapon of mass destruction, but a suicide belt on a bus is not. There's a reason that they're not buying 500-pount dumb bombs instead of 250-pound composite laser-guided bombs. An attack on a bus full of civilians is a military target. A bridge is not. A fence designed to secure a nation's borders is labeled as oppression. Daily terror attacks, sometimes reaching 200 Katyushya rockets in a single day, is not. It is acceptable for a man to use a group of Arabs to further his cause, while it is unacceptable for another to acknowledge that there are men such as the first in this world. Arabs have: - Deliberately attacked Israel within hours of its conception, with the Israelis facing sometimes 5 to 1 odds - Terrorized civilian commerece, forcing people to live in fear in this modern world because a madman could be at the bus stop with a bomb - Sent a mother of four sons into a crowd of people, telling the mother that she will recieve great rewards in Heaven for killing a large group of people - Abducted Israeli civilians, numbering in the hundreds, for propaganda purposes since 1948 - Fired mortars into Israeli towns and Katyushyas into Israeli cities and then had the audacity to claim that the Israelis "struck first" - Refused to attack a group of armed Israeli soldiers, choosing instead to suicide-bomb a McDonalds inside Israel - Left millions of Israelis standing in fear just a few yards from bomb shelters, leaving children afraid to even travel to school A Reuters dispatch, on day of the killing of a senior Hezbollah terrorist by Israeli forces, was published pertaining to the murder of an Israeli family in their home by a Palestinian terrorist. This article went on to state that this madman had shot the husband in the stomach, leaving him to bleed on the floor as his daughter was killed from multiple gunshot wounds. A mother left cradling her son in a crawlspace was forced to watch the murder of her husband and daughter, unable to cry out for fear of her own life and that of her son. The dispatch then goes on to describe the Palestinian's possible motives and even had the audacity to call it "the tit-for-tat struggle that exists in the conflict." It did not call it a tragedy or even a murder, just a killing, another statistic in this tit-for-tat world that exists. It then accuses the Israeli forces of war crimes, stating that they deliberately targeted a building full of innocents while blatantly leaving out the fact that two seperate trucks containing Katyushya launchers were parked within twenty five yards of the building, "danger close" for any air-to-ground weapon, even after the Israelis had released UAV footage of the launchers on the ground two days after the incident. It seems to believe that the Israelis can now see through buildings, with the ability to judge who is armed and who is a child behind two-foot thick concrete. The murders, the item that had given the article its headline, recieved just one paragraph, not even a fourth of the article. And very, very cute video. I especially like how it claims an "evil, British plot" from a statement supposedly made in 1983 that is in present tense, describing what will happen if they were to allow the Jews a homeland. From the context, each of the other statements were made from 1906 to 1948. So, where would a picture of a relatively young British male taken on forties-dated film (there is a quality difference in the pictures of modern people and those of the forties) doing attached to a statement made in 1983? By the way, that statement was not made by the person in question. A quick google search proved otherwise. Try again. It claims Israeli girls are taught to hate Palestinians because they wrote messages on artillery shells. They did it in WWII against the Germans and nobody complained then. Nobody. It was common practice. Palestinian riots claim that they will kill Jews, the evil, the scum, the any other name under the sun. And yet you do not raise a finger. Instead, you open your mouth and call it justified. And a few Israeli school children wanting to raise a bit of morale at an army post are not? The trip was to make the soldiers a bit more happy, to break up the routine of loading and firing and sitting around waiting for a fire mission. The children those of many of the soldiers there, actually. They're children. They're young and they have no idea how certain things can be viewed by others. They saw it as making their daddies smile. You're blaming them for it? It claims that an Israeli prime minister says that he will "bury every Palestinian child born in Gaza." Googling the speech, with a combination of the first two sentences and the date produced an identical speech, but with that particular line not included. The line above was in bold on the video. Still other photos have been edited by the news media. Reuters created quite a little scandal after one of their Lebanese photographers used Photoshop to draw a formation of jets, claiming that they were dropping chemical weapons over Beirut. They were deploying flares to prevent a missile to hit them, to draw the heat-seeking warhead away from the plane, in combination with chaff used to prevent a radar-guided missile from tracking them. There was one plane, not the seven shown. This picture and others like it is used in these "what the world needs to know" videos, presented as fact and proof of Israeli "war crimes." You should check the impartiality of your videos, posting ones that show actual evidence, not just the chosen parts that support your bias.
Lebanon supports Hezbollah. Whether they really do or they are too scared to say other wise they have to deal with whatever decision Hezbollah makes.
Up until recently, a significant portion of their parlaiment was composed of active Hezbollah members, with many sympathisers who weren't as open who are still there. The average Lebanese, I can't speak for. However, their parlaiment's composition is widely known.
Arabs have every right to Jerusalen. It is a Muslim holy land as well. I was in full support of the Palestinians against Israel. All the Palestinians wanted was a piece of the holy land that does not only belong to Jews and Christians. The Palestinians don't even have a place to call their own, and they live in deplorable conditions because of the Israelis. But the US totally backs Israel Merged Post: exactly Merged Post: Ok well Machiavelli has pretty much summed all my arguments up, so ya I for the most part agree with him We never said we did not care about Israelis dying. Its still bad, but far less have died compared to Palestinians
That is completely false. Here is the real facts After the 2005 elections, Hezbollah won fourteen seats in the 128-member Lebanese Parliament. In addition, Hezbollah has two ministers in the government, and a third is endorsed by the group. 14 out of 128 is clearly not a majoirty. And the majoirty of the goverement is run by either christian or sunni political groups. Merged Post: Stop making complete generalzation's How can you say Leabanon supports Hizbullah? Some people do but that does not constuate Israel to kill thousands of innocent civilans.
I said "significant." Eleven percent of a parlaiment and two cabinet members is not a significant number? We've got less independants over here in our Congress. They had the influence there up until recently. And it is a fact that there are sympathizers to Hezbollah in the parlaiment. There are, strangely enough, some who support them in the US. Don't tell me that I'm "making stuff up" and then re-state what I say.
"letting girls write messages on artillery shells that are gonna murder innocents." You said. - Do you know what terrorists do ? They wear the same clothes as the civilians, they hide behind women and children, they use civilian cars, houses and so on to launch misseles. - Terrorists attack civilians. Yes, the Isreali army has killed civilians, but at least they try not to harm civilians. And the other day, i saw how 5 so called "civilians" were loading a bomb in their car, they got shot.. and yet the terrorists organisations keep saying they are civilians. - The Isreali army warn before they attack.. have you seen a suicide bomber warn harmless civilians ?
Nobody is defending the terrorists here. Whats the point of warning the people if your'e destroying the road network so they can't leave. And if you destroy their homes . This "Israel warns them" talk is ridiculous because they have no right to be doing what they are in the first place. You can't destroy A city and then say.....oh well the terrorists are hiding there.
Apparenlty the way they justify what the Israeli army is doing to innocent people in the middle east is that the terrorists are doing the same thing. So by their reasoning Israel can do the same.
Tell the leaflets that, Lionheart. There are photos of them on the ground, even. They were warned days in advance that the Israelis would target roads, bridges, and anything afiliated with Hezbollah. Were you there to recieve them? No. Don't tell me they weren't dropped. There are photos of them being dropped into Lebanon, even. Unfortunately, three or four days gives you plenty of time to at least get some form of hard cover if they couldn't get out. They identified targets that would be attacked, gavea timeframe that they would be attacked, and attacked them within that timeframe. It's pretty clear to me. Nobody is defending them. Their attacks are just justified, where the Israeli attacks are "terrorism" and "oppression." Wrong again. Unless you can get me definate proof (i.e. GPS coordinates in the guidance computers) that the Israelis are targeting civilians directly with their smart bombs/"weapons of mass destruction," it isn't, by legal definition, terrorism. Just a common misconception. But I do beg you to show us that definate proof, it'd be quite interesting to see.
Building and roads? you seem to have forgotten the buildings full of children hiding who later got all blown up.
