Last summer's Israel - Hezbollah/Lebanon war: WH involved in planning (test case for Iran)

[tex-wyo-dem]

In these days where the drumbeat for war with Iran gets louder, let's not forget last summer's Israel - Hezbollah/Lebanon war and the real reason why it happened.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact

WATCHING LEBANON
Washington’s interests in Israel’s war.
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Issue of 2006-08-21
Posted 2006-08-14

In the days after Hezbollah crossed from Lebanon into Israel, on July 12th, to kidnap two soldiers, triggering an Israeli air attack on Lebanon and a full-scale war, the Bush Administration seemed strangely passive. “It’s a moment of clarification,” President George W. Bush said at the G-8 summit, in St. Petersburg, on July 16th. “It’s now become clear why we don’t have peace in the Middle East.” He described the relationship between Hezbollah and its supporters in Iran and Syria as one of the “root causes of instability,” and subsequently said that it was up to those countries to end the crisis. Two days later, despite calls from several governments for the United States to take the lead in negotiations to end the fighting, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that a ceasefire should be put off until “the conditions are conducive.”

The Bush Administration, however, was closely involved in the planning of Israel’s retaliatory attacks. President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney were convinced, current and former intelligence and diplomatic officials told me, that a successful Israeli Air Force bombing campaign against Hezbollah’s heavily fortified underground-missile and command-and-control complexes in Lebanon could ease Israel’s security concerns and also serve as a prelude to a potential American preëmptive attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations, some of which are also buried deep underground.

<snip>

Cheney’s office supported the Israeli plan, as did Elliott Abrams, a deputy national-security adviser, according to several former and current officials. (A spokesman for the N.S.C. denied that Abrams had done so.) They believed that Israel should move quickly in its air war against Hezbollah. A former intelligence officer said, “We told Israel, ‘Look, if you guys have to go, we’re behind you all the way. But we think it should be sooner rather than later—the longer you wait, the less time we have to evaluate and plan for Iran before Bush gets out of office.’ ”

Cheney’s point, the former senior intelligence official said, was “What if the Israelis execute their part of this first, and it’s really successful? It’d be great. We can learn what to do in Iran by watching what the Israelis do in Lebanon.”

The Pentagon consultant told me that intelligence about Hezbollah and Iran is being mishandled by the White House the same way intelligence had been when, in 2002 and early 2003, the Administration was making the case that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. “The big complaint now in the intelligence community is that all of the important stuff is being sent directly to the top—at the insistence of the White House—and not being analyzed at all, or scarcely,” he said. “It’s an awful policy and violates all of the N.S.A.’s strictures, and if you complain about it you’re out,” he said. “Cheney had a strong hand in this.”

<snip>

The surprising strength of Hezbollah’s resistance, and its continuing ability to fire rockets into northern Israel in the face of the constant Israeli bombing, the Middle East expert told me, “is a massive setback for those in the White House who want to use force in Iran. And those who argue that the bombing will create internal dissent and revolt in Iran are also set back.”

Nonetheless, some officers serving with the Joint Chiefs of Staff remain deeply concerned that the Administration will have a far more positive assessment of the air campaign than they should, the former senior intelligence official said. “There is no way that Rumsfeld and Cheney will draw the right conclusion about this,” he said. “When the smoke clears, they’ll say it was a success, and they’ll draw reinforcement for their plan to attack Iran.”

<more>

(emphasis mine)

[KoKo]

1. Thanks for the repost of this article from Hersh....n/t

[tex-wyo-dem]

3. No problem...best for us DUers to not forget how everything is connected...

Another quote from the above article:

"Earlier this summer, before the Hezbollah kidnappings, the U.S. government consultant said, several Israeli officials visited Washington, separately, “to get a green light for the bombing operation and to find out how much the United States would bear.” The consultant added, “Israel began with Cheney. It wanted to be sure that it had his support and the support of his office and the Middle East desk of the National Security Council.” After that, “persuading Bush was never a problem, and Condi Rice was on board,” the consultant said."




Cheney is the real muscle behind the Neocon's wet dream trifecta (Iraq, Iran & Syria).

[CJCRANE]

2. Cheney always seems to be in charge of things.

WTF is the point of * being there..?

[Jacobin]

4. He's in charge of the Office of FuckingThingsUpBigTime

[Robson]

52. OoFTUBT- Incompetence Inc.

Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld (now Rice) the neocon management team of this administration (DBA OOFTUBT - Incompetence Inc.)

[jpak]

5. Yo Dead Eye - what we learned in Lebanon was that Hezbollah gave the IDF a bloody nose

and what we learned in Iraq was that PNAC imperial preemptive war policies do not work.

Get some brains morans...

[Dover]

6. Lebanon and Iran seem like apples and oranges to me.

How could Lebanon who has no serious defenses compare to Iran?

I think it's more likely that it was one step toward cutting off supply routes/communication, etc. to Syria which is aligned with Iran, and pushing Hezbollah back from the border regions with Israel. If they are considering attacking Iran they must also consider Syria which has a mutual defense agreement with Iran. And it also sits right on Israel's border.

[TahitiNut]

7. "if you complain about it you’re out.”

Absolute fealty is required in the Cheney/Bush Regime ... Amerika is now a medieval fiefdom.

[tex-wyo-dem]

8. I think that this conflict was also seen by Bushco as an opportunity to bait Iran and Syria...

into taking direct action against Israel, thus justifying any military strikes against these countries and expanding the regional war. If Iran and Syria didn't take the bait, the conflict could still serve as a PR campaign via the MSM to link Hezbollah directly to Iran and Syria and further soften the public to future conflicts with these countries.

The plan, however, largely backfired when Israel went completely overboard in their response, which turned world public opinion against them.

[Shaktimaan]

9. The only good news about the Israel/Lebanon War

was that it solidly proved the lunacy of the idea that America might be able to fly into Iran and destroy it's nuclear capabilities with a few days of bombing, thereby ending the whole issue easily.

I remember the conviction at most of the conservative boards I frequent that knocking out Iran's underground nuclear facilities with airstrikes would be an easily accomplished and fully effective strategy. Not anymore. If Israel, who has undeniably strong motivation, top notch American equipment and hugely skilled pilots, can't knock out Hezbollah's capabilities after a month then America should probably rethink an all-airstrike jubilee for Iran.

[bemildred]

51. An excellent point.

There were actually a number of different motivations at work in the 2nd Lebanon War, the OP merely bringing up one of them, but it is surely true that had it "worked" better, we would have seen a lot more of it, and that would have been a bad thing.

[calzone]

10. I do not believe that Hezbollah.....

....crossed into Israeli territory to kidnap those 2 soldiers. I've read strong evidence to the contrary. The Israeli soldiers were part of a probe into Lebanese territory. I understand that the vast majority of the world press goes along with the Israeli-territory version, but they weren't there. The incident is unresolved IMO.

[oberliner]

11. Secretary-General condemns Hizbollah attacks across blue line

Calls for immediate, unconditional release of Israeli captives

The following statement was issued today by the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan:

The Secretary-General condemns the attacks by Hizbollah across the Blue Line, which resulted in Israeli deaths and injuries, and the capture of two Israeli soldiers. This violent act is a blatant breach of Security Council resolutions 425, 1559, 1655 and 1680.

The Secretary-General calls for the immediate and unconditional release of the Israeli captives. This incident, and subsequent developments, which endanger an already volatile region, demonstrates once again how urgent it is that the Lebanese Government extends its control over all Lebanese territory and prevents such attacks across the Blue Line.

It is essential that all concerned exercise maximum restraint at this time to avoid any further escalation. All should respect fully their obligations under international humanitarian law.

The Secretary-General appeals to leaders in the region and beyond to do their utmost to contain this conflict by obtaining the release of the soldiers and pressing for restraint.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2006/sgsm10563.doc.htm

[calzone]

15. Great, this probably means.....

....the Sec. General was a victim of the same flawed or manipulated info as all the rest of the MSM.

[oberliner]

19. Adla Massoud in Beirut (from Al Jazeera)

With aerial bombardment and a naval and land blockade of Lebanon intensifying, many Lebanese are divided over Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers.

Some politicians have expressed doubt about or condemned Hezbollah's cross-border raid on Wednesday.

http://english.aljazeera.net/News/archive/archive?ArchiveId=24502

[calzone]

20. Why did u post this?

It doesn't have anything to do with whether the 2 soldiers were captured in Israel or Lebanon.
BTW, Hezbollah now backs Aoun, a Christian. Imagine that, maybe they don't realize.....:-)

[oberliner]

25. Some politicians have expressed doubt about or condemned Hezbollah's cross-border raid on Wednesday.

"cross-border raid"

That's the Secretary General of the UN and an Al-Jazeera source reporting from Beirut stating that Hezbollah crossed the border into Israel.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[oberliner]

28. It's not an IDF press release

The Secretary General of the UN and a reporter from Al-Jazeerah are the sources that I've cited indicating that members of Hezbollah crossed into Israeli territory.

Here is another citation from Amnesty International:

On the morning of 12 July 2006, Hizbullah fighters (known as al-muqawama al-islamiyya, Islamic Resistance) crossed the border into Israel and attacked an Israeli patrol near the village of Zarit.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde020252006

One of your sources is an article on monstersandcritics by Weedah Hamzah of Deutsche Presse-Agentur written on July 12th.

That same reporter wrote the following in an article dated August 10th:

A cross-border raid by Hezbollah on July 12, during which it captured two Israeli soldiers and killed eight others, prompted the current Israeli offensive.

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/LSGZ-6SJHC3?OpenDocument

I am happy to have an honest debate about conflicting evidence and reporting.

Do you not feel that the United Nations, Amnesty International, and Al-Jazeerah are credible sources of information on this incident?

[Lurking Dem]

33. It doesn't matter.

Apparently the working theory is Jews lie.

And because we have some extraordinary magical powers, or something, people like those in the UN Security Council just take our word for shit.

So when Resolution 1701 states: Expressing its utmost concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and in Israel since Hezbollah's attack on Israel on 12 July 2006, which has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries on both sides, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons;

it doesn't really mean that Hezbollah started it.


When Nasrallah says: "We did not think, even one per cent, that the capture would lead to a war at this time and of this magnitude. You ask me, if I had known on July 11 ... that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not," Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said in an interview with Lebanon's New TV station.

he doesn't mean "operation" in the sense of exercise, campaign, or maneuver. He must mean a reaction to Israeli aggression on their side of the border because that's the only way it could have happened.


The New York Times is, of course, not a valid news source. Not like Counterpunch. So when they report: TURMOIL IN THE MIDEAST: ESCALATION; Clashes Spread to Lebanon as Hezbollah Raids Israel

*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information.
July 13, 2006, Thursday
By GREG MYRE AND STEVEN ERLANGER; GREG MYRE REPORTED FROM JERUSALEM FOR THIS ARTICLE, AND STEVEN ERLANGER FROM GAZA CITY. HASSAN M. FATTAH CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FROM BEIRUT, AND MICHAEL SLACKMAN FROM CAIRO. (NYT); Foreign Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 6, 1528 words



DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - The Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah surprised Israel with a bold daylight assault across the border on Wednesday, leading to fighting in which two Israeli soldiers were captured and at least eight killed, and elevating recent tensions into a serious two-front battle. Israel, already waging a military operation in the ...

it is not to be taken seriously. It's a Jew paper anyway.


When the BBC refers to a cross border raid they are just more victims of that Jewish magic that seems to afflict the MSM business.


I surely don't need a :sarcasm: tag but considering recent events here maybe I do.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lurking Dem]

36. You are the only one able to define yourself.

I haven't.

I find it hard to believe that CounterPunch is more reliable than the NY Times, but if you think so, that's your opinion. Others will decide for themselves.

[calzone]

39. Stop wiggling

You stooped to ad-hominem attacks.
As for the NY Times, the paper that kept it a secret for a year from the U.S. that we were being spied upon by our own government, the paper that excoriated the whistleblowers on the CIA cocaine smuggling operation during Contra-gate, the paper that had the journalists like Judy (neo-con prostitute) Miller and others deliberately relaying lies from the neo-cons designed to hurl us into a war that's killed over 1100 soldiers and 500,000 innocent Iraqis, the paper that contributed to the re-election celebration of George W. Bush.....no, myself and most informed liberal democrats don't trust them. I'd rather read the New Yorker.

[Lurking Dem]

42. Who's wiggling?

I think I made myself very clear.

I trust the vast majority of credible newspapers and statements from the UN more than I trust your biased sources.

And I think what you'd rather read is Charley Reese. Way to be an "informed liberal Democrat"! But someone who hates the NYTimes in toto, describes the ADL in, let's just say less than flattering terms, and believes, despite ALL evidence to the contrary, that Israel started the war with Lebanon is just a much better liberal than I could ever be. :sarcasm:



Today, there is no avoiding stating the plain truth: We have a Jewish problem."

http://www.tampabayprimer.org/index.cfm?action=articles&drill=viewArt&art=1471

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[calzone]

46. Correction to my earlier post.....over 3100 dead soldiers...

[calzone]

35. Why are you saying that I said the IDF....

...was the source for all the reports? I stated my belief that some of the reports were undoubtedly from IDF press releases, maybe you misinterpreted. I also pointed out that most if not all news is channelized, pre-filtered and pre-approved before release. I worked as a journalist for several years, I have some knowlege of how these things work. When it comes to govt releases, whether it's city, state or fed, the easy and tempting thing to do is run with it without checking too deep, if at all. Factors contributing to the dereliction of journalistic duties are plain laziness, the desire to wrap up the day and go home, the scramble to be first and unscooped, a personal agenda, naivite (yes, it happens to newspeople), fear of the danger of a war zone, deadlines, or in the case of Iraq, the fact that you're embedded and have nothing else since you can't leave the green zone (which btw, isn't safe either).
A number of different sites, sources and orgs rely often on the same news report or release. Once something is disseminated and picked up by the majors, it gets accepted as fact and re-reported.
I don't consider Amnesty Intl to be an infallible news reporting agency. I respect their work, and don't think they deliberately skew anything, but they can be wrong about details.
I can't explain Weedah Hamzah's change, perhaps he just accepted the most widely held belief among news orgs, he reported what he was told in July, I don't think he lied...do you?
The fact remains that Israel has lied and distorted the truth as a matter of policy. So have the militant Palestinians. But the bulk and by far highest degree of the dishonesty and perception management has been from the Israelis.
My links are numerous and stand on their own. They are as credible as any other, since the facts can only be gathered by journalists on the ground and in the area. There are conflicting reports, and you know which I believe.

[oberliner]

37. The credibility of sources

I would argue that the detailed report from the Secretary General of the UN would constitute credible evidence that the raid took place inside of Israeli territory. After all, there is a UN body specifically charged with monitoring that particular border (UNIFIL) and one would think that the UN would not go on record with such a detailed statement about this incident were they not pretty confident they had accurate information.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the Report of the Secretary General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, dated July 21, 2006:

"The crisis started when, around 9 a.m. local time, Hizbollah launched several rockets from Lebanese territory across the withdrawal line (the so-called Blue Line) towards Israel Defense Forces (IDF) positions near the coast and in the area of the Israeli town of Zarit. In parallel, Hizbollah fighters crossed the Blue Line into Israel and attacked an IDF patrol. Hizbollah captured two IDF soldiers, killed three others and wounded two more. The captured soldiers were taken into Lebanon."

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/EGUA-6RZPCR?OpenDocument

[calzone]

38. On credibility

You're welcome to place all your eggs faithfully in UNIFIL. However, Agent France Presse, Hindustantimes, Bahrain news, Asia Times and Voltairenet (which had journalists at the site before Unifil arrived) are credible sources. Voltairenet disobeyed the censorship restrictions that the IDF placed on them as a pre-requisite to access the area. And the UN peacekeeping forces are not known for intrepid, rapid and fearless immersion in dangerous areas. Judging by the fact that they were deliberately targeted by Israeli bombing during the Lebanese/Israeli conflict, I can't blame them.

[pelsar]

40. nothing like contradicting oneself....

Voltairenet disobeyed the censorship restrictions that the IDF placed on them as a pre-requisite to access the area.


i thought you said they were "captured" deep in lebanese territory....which hizballa controlled (btw, how did two humvees get so deep in to anti tank country of the hizballa?)....so i doubt israeli censorship restrictions applied since they obviously came from the lebanese side to get to the scene.

(or did they go before the IDFs invasion force to get there first?...in fact did the IDF even get there?

or never mind, such answers would require knowledge of the actual events as they happened.....

[calzone]

44. Your post, as usual, makes ....

...not the slightest bit of sense. I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[calzone]

45. I note with amusement that...

...you keep obsessively pounding away at this minutae and basically repeating yourself and the same weak argument.
Of the 3 links you gave, the first 2 use the term "cross-border raid" but in reality that term, even in context, can't definatively be taken to mean Israel or Lebanon. Be that as it may, the AFP has already reported that it was in Lebanon, and if the latter reports say cross-border raid that doesn't amount to a retraction. I invite you to find a statement by AFP that says something like "our earlier reports that the 2 Israeli soldiers were captured in Lebanon is incorrect, we're sorry for the cochonerie".
You say that the original AFP article in my post doesn't have a link, then post this response that specifically refers to the AFP article. What is that about? Are you playing little games?
You want the original link? You think anti-war.com and myself are lying? The article is dated july 12th, the day the hostilities started (one day after Israeli forces crossed into Lebanon and kidnapped 2 Lebanese civilians, one a DOCTOR) You can go to AFP's website and D/L it from their archives, it's only 3 euros plus VAT. Have at it.

The 3rd link you provide is the same link you referenced twice before. Simple repetition isn't debate. An argument isn't simple contradiction, an argument is a collected series of statements intended to establish a proposition. Contradiction is merely the automatic GAINSAYING of whatever the other person says. Now I want my 5 quid back, and I'm not going down the hall to "complaints", my head aches enuf already.
Now for the antiwar article. I read that before. It's interesting, but the guy is just plain sloppy.
He pontificates.....
The French news site www.VoltaireNet.org: “In a deliberated way, sent a commando in the Lebanese back-country to Aitaa al-Chaab. It was attacked by Hezbollah, taking two prisoners.”

"-However, this site says that this report is based not on its regular Middle-East reporter, but “grâce aux nombreux contacts dont il dispose sur place” – i.e., anonymous sources."

Not exactly. Here's the whole paragraph in context.

"Nous refusons pour notre part de nous aligner sur les porte-parole de Tsahal. En conséquence, la censure militaire israélienne a rejetté l’accréditation de notre envoyée spéciale au Proche-Orient, Silvia Cattori, et lui a interdit de se déplacer dans le pays et de rencontrer divers témoins des événements. Le Réseau Voltaire continuera cependant son travail grâce aux nombreux contacts dont il dispose sur place."

I speak and read French. This says what I've been saying. Translation.

"We refuse for our part to align with the spokesman of Tsahal. Consequently, the Israeli military censure rejecting the accreditation of our special correspondent to the Middle East, Silvia Cattori, and their prohibiting him to move about the country and to meet various witnesses of the events.

The Voltaire Network will however continue his work thanks to the many contacts it has on the spot."

Good for them! They won't take the official Israeli press release. Despite the fact that their reporter was arbitrarily denied authorization (probably b/c he didn't report what the Israelis wanted) and unsuccessful attempts to keep him away from witnessess, Voltairenet did honor to it's namesake and got information from people who were actually on the scene. Bravo! Pas mal, meks.
He goes on......
"The Associated Press reported that “The militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon”.

-This ambiguous or rather contrdictory formulation can clearly mean that the soldiers were captured across the border on Israeli soil; “southern Lebanon” may be used as a broad geographic term."

I missed that. I didn't realize that AP reported that the soldiers were abducted in Lebanon too.
The formulation isn't "ambiguous" to me. It's quite clear. I don't know what the guy's talking about.
I've been reading since the 3rd grade, and I was a straight A student all through school until the 11th grade when partying took precedence. I have no trouble interpreting that excerpt. I can't figure out why he does.

"However, the DPA report in German, posted immedialy after the kidnap (even before the tank incident) said the two soldiers had been abducted, according to the Hizbollah announcement, „from the border area“ („aus dem Grenzgebiet“)."

So?? I'm lost. How in hell does this negate the idea that the soldiers were abducted in Lebanon?
Unfortunately, I can't have a friendly exchange with this gent.

Here's another source for the story I believe, just for luck......

"Selon la police libanaise, les deux soldats ont été capturés en territoire libanais, dans la région de Aïta al-Chaab près de la frontière"

Translation: "According to the Lebanese police, the 2 soldiers were captured on Lebanese territory, in the region of Aita al Chaab close to the border. Additionally, the police complained about the interruption of the flow of doughnuts to the region."

http://fr.news.yahoo.com/12072006/202/liban-le-hezbollah-capture-deux-soldats-israeliens-sept-autres-tues.html

You can try and try, but what you can't do is erase or discredit the early contradictory reports. I mean, I could get more links and sources, I remember reading them at the time, but they're prob dead by now and it would be fruitless anyway, my point has been made.

[oberliner]

47. at least we both like Monty Python

I'll take common ground in the I/P forum wherever I can get it.

I actually think I have a pretty strong argument here and I wouldn't bother to continue pounding away if I did not think there was a chance that I might be able to convince you that the evidence supporting the claim that Hezbollah crossed into Israel is very credible.

Honestly, I am not trying to play any games with you here. I don't think you or antiwar.com is lying about the AFP report. I only mentioned them in this response because you listed AFP as one of the sources that support your argument. I have not been able to see the actual article since no link was provided so I don't know the full context, nor the name of the specific reporter (if available).

Although I enjoyed your Argument Clinic excerpt, I must point out that the Al-Jazeera link provided is a link to a completely different story.

The first Al-Jazeera story I cited was written by an Al-Jazeera reporter in Beirut.

The third link most recently posted is from an AFP story that Al-Jazeera ran on its website. I posted it in order to provide another example of AFP reporting on a "cross-border raid".

As regards to the Voltaire Network report, this is an organization founded by Thierry Meyssan, author of "9/11: The Big Lie" which posits that the 9/11 attacks were actually a false flag operation directed by the US government. Mr. Meyssan is currently the chairman of the network.

The website promotes conspiracy theories about 9/11 extensively. Don't you find the credibility of that source to be a little bit dubious?

[pelsar]

49. Voltaire Network

As regards to the Voltaire Network report, this is an organization founded by Thierry Meyssan, author of "9/11: The Big Lie" which posits that the 9/11 attacks were actually a false flag operation directed by the US government. Mr. Meyssan is currently the chairman of the network.

and that closes the case on the "creditability" of our latest visitor .....calzone

(not to mention ignoring Nassrallas own admitance of the operation.....)

[msmcghee]

48. This is getting pretty good.

So Israel went into Lebanon the day before and kidnapped two peeps, one a doctor. And no major news source says a thing about it - except one source in the world - and it costs several bucks to read it. How convenient. Of course, if that had happened UNIFIL would be required to provide a complete report on it to the UN. It's their job. I don't find anything in their archives.

Somehow I think the world would be quite interested to know all about this. But it is supposedly being kept away from the world's news sources for some reason. I guess all the other major news sources in the world just don't have the access to the truth that you do. Or just maybe they have better bullshit detectors.

The world's media also seem to be in the dark about the information that even Nasralah doesn't dispute - that Hisb'allah crossed into Israel, captured 2 IDF and killed six others - and that started the conflict that led to Israel's retaliation. That's the narrative that the UN does report as factual.

You make quite a bit of noise in the process of insulting people. I'd be far more impressed if you actually offered some real evidence that proved your sevaral fanciful points and showed that the UN is lying as you claim.

In the meantime I think I'll take the Secretary General's report to the UN and all the world's major news sources before I believe your fantasies.

Just curious. What do you think about the story that all the Jews were warned not to go to work at the WTC on Sept. 11?

[oberliner]

50. Pretty sure this is the incident being referenced

Israel captures pair in Gaza raid

Israeli soldiers have seized two Palestinian men in an overnight raid into the southern Gaza Strip.
The Israeli military said the two brothers were members of the militant group Hamas and were planning attacks on Israel.

Hamas said they were sons of a member but were not involved in Hamas. It called the abduction a crime.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5112846.stm

The incident was in Gaza, not Lebanon.

[oberliner]

24. duplicate

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[calzone]

14. I've backed up everything I've posted...

....when challenged and even when not. What have you done?

Right :-)

[Lurking Dem]

17. Let's review

Israel says that Hezbollah crossed the Lebanon border, kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers, and simultaneously launched missiles into northern Israeli towns.

The U.N. says that Hezbollah crossed the Lebanon border, kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers, and simultaneously launched missiles into northern Israeli towns.

Hezbollah says that Hezbollah crossed the Lebanon border, kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers, and simultaneously launched missiles into northern Israeli towns.

You've got....what? Oh yeah. Counterpunch.

[calzone]

21. You can make stuff up, but...

...it isn't serious debate.

"The U.N. says that Hezbollah crossed the Lebanon border, kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers, and simultaneously launched missiles into northern Israeli towns.

Hezbollah says that Hezbollah crossed the Lebanon border, kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers, and simultaneously launched missiles into northern Israeli towns."

Neither is true. And you cannot back it up.

[Shaktimaan]

18. By backed up do you mean

writing FALSE in all caps and declaring the matter debunked? It's all I've ever seen.

But I'm willing to look at the 'strong evidence' in this case. What have you got?

[calzone]

22. Is this the level of debate?

You're outright disdain for the truth? All the reader need do is search my username, the links are legion. You screwed up Shak. You've made a "material mis-statement of fact".
It's a sign of desperation. I expected better. Oh well.

[Shaktimaan]

23. wait, where's the serious evidence?

you left that part out.

[calzone]

26. This is not for you, since...

...you're not interested in honest debate. But here's some of the evidence I refered to, for those that may be following along.

"It all started on July 12 when Israel troops were ambushed on Lebanon's side of the border with Israel. Hezbollah, which commands the Lebanese south, immediately seized on their crossing. They arrested two Israeli soldiers, killed eight Israelis and wounded over 20 in attacks inside Israeli territory."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HG15Ak02.html

"The Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah movement announced on Wednesday that its guerrillas have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon.

"Implementing our promise to free Arab prisoners in Israeli jails, our strugglers have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon," a statement by Hezbollah said.

"The two soldiers have already been moved to a safe place," it added.

The Lebanese police said that the two soldiers were captured as they "infiltrated" into the town of Aitaa al-Chaab inside the Lebanese border."
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1742306,00050004.htm

"Lebanese police said that the two soldiers were arrested as they entered the town of Aitaa al-Chaab inside the Lebanese border. Israeli aircraft were active in the air over southern Lebanon, police said, with jets bombing roads leading to the market town of Nabatiyeh, 60 kilometers south of Beirut."

http://english.bna.bh/?ID=47348

"In the afternoon, the scene changed in the streets of southern Lebanon, which was the target of 32 Israeli raids that mainly targeted areas near the area where the two soldiers were captured in Aita al Chaab, close to the border with Israel."

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/article_1180404.php/Hezbollah_back_in_the_spotlight_after_capturing_soldiers

"According to the Lebanese police force, the two Israeli soldiers were captured in Lebanese territory, in the area of Aïta Al-Chaab, near to the border with Israel, where an Israeli unit had penetrated in middle of morning."
AGence France presse (link lost)

"Tsahal a envoyé un commando dans l’arrière-pays libanais à Aïta al Chaab. Il a été attaqué par le Hezbollah, faisant deux prisonniers."
Translation: In a deliberated way, Tsahal sent a commando in the Lebanese back-country to Aïta Al Chaab. It was attacked by Hezbollah, resulting in two prisoners.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article142056.html

"Voltairenet was operating under strict censorship orders from the IDF, which they disobeyed."
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2006/07/wartime_censors.html

"militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them. The forces were trying to keep the soldiers' captors from moving them deeper into Lebanon, Israeli government officials said on condition of anonymity."

Map showing Aita al-chaab (or al-shaab)


I could get more links with more info, but I think I've made my point.
I know, Shak will just poo poo it all as conspiracy nonsense, a standard tactic from what I've seen of his level of debate. Why haven't you accused me of being an anti-semite? C'mon. It'll make you feel good.:-)

[cali]

32. I must have missed that.

What have you backed up? Oh, never mind, people who are determined to believe something just because it fits into their idological view, are utterly hopeless. Have a nice day.

[pelsar]

13. ask HIzballa...

nassralla not just admitted that the war was a mistake but the kidnapping the soliders from israel was their idea...

but hey what does he know....he just planned it

on the other hand....fundamentalist type religious beliefs were never bothered by facts.

[calzone]

16. Completely irrelevant...as usual n/t

[pelsar]

29. ...syrian knows best......

your probably right the writer from Syria probably knows better- Sami Moubayed

but it does explain who you believe is "credible"...

[Shaktimaan]

30. I think my favorite part

is the assumption that the UN Secretary General has been fed incorrect information because the official UN reports differ from what was stated in a two sentence snip from a partially functional Bahrain government run news outlet whose content happened to be more to Calzone's liking. The UN Security Council is surely making their decisions based on less credible information than Calzone's esteemed sources.

Even Saudi Arabia has gone on record as faulting Hezbollah in this case. Perhaps thay are also blindly accepting the IDF's unconfirmed assertions. What I want to know is when is Saudi Arabia finally going to grow a spine and stop reporting everything Israel tells them as gospel truth? The Zionist influence reaches everywhere nowadays.

[cali]

31. There are several reasons

that your probe theory is implausible; the most obvious being that the IDF would hardly send a few ill protected soldiers across the border. It simply doesn't pass the smell test.