I'm no expert in this area, but I think they did sign a withdrawl agreement with the Palestinians. That would indicate they involved the Palestinians. Furthermore, the PA government signed a truce indicating they would have a three month ceasation of hostilities. Within a couple of weeks, they were lobbing grenades and rockets again. The population is always held accountable for the actions of their government. It's unfortunate but true. Almost all Germans during WWII were innocent conscripts. We suspended aid to North Korea for this reason as well, though it is terrible for the population there is not always a better alternative. Israel is constantly pummelted with rockets and grenades and suicide bombers. The elected PA government has done nothing to curb this whatsoever, in fact endorses it. What is Israel supposed to do? There is no mind control option to bring the bad apples out of hiding without the use of force.

I agree it's a bad situation. I even agree that both sides are to blame, to an extent. Personally, I have no answers which is why I seldom participate in these discussions. It seems to me, though, that appeasement offers nothing but increased attacks. If a people and their government cannot even honor a three month agreement in exchange for something they ostensibly want very much, how can one negotiate with them?

The Palestinians claimed they would cease fire, but signed nothing with Israel. Israel is not a party to the 'hudna' since that was already a requirement dating back to Oslo I & II, Wye River, and the Roadmap none of which were ever carried out by the Palestinians. They have not had a single day without a minimum of 10 attacks in the last 12 years.

There was no 'couple of weeks' the rockets fell throughout the withdrawal and since. They has been one 24 period, though not in the same day when a rocket did not land in Israel. That is the closest there has been to a cease fire.

I'm still hoping for a single day of the PA honoring any one of their obligations. That would a breakthrough. Heck the PLO never even amended their charter, it still calls for the destruction of Israel. PLO Charter on UN Website and that was one of the most basic requirements of the very first accords.

1. Will this lead to even greater hostilities in the area?
Absolutely. If an agressive force marched its army into your land and abducted your democratically elected government, no country in the world would sit there and accept it.

2. How should the United States respond?
By supporting the International Community (for once) in its demand that Israel cease such actions. Without the US voice in support of this, Israel will carrying on doing exactly as it did and ignore world opinion, continue to blow up powerstations, bridges, roads and generally abuse the Palestinian people.

Now, before certain people jump in and say i'm defending the abduction of the Israeli soldier, i'm not. However, neither was it orchestrated by the government, and it was in response to the behaviour of Israel recently, including its dispicable murderous mortar shelling of civilians on beaches.

I used to hope for a peaceful solution to this - hoping (beyond realistic hope) that Israel would change its approach to this. However, it has repeatedly shunned the opportunity to do the right thing - waving to these opportunities as they pass by. I have now reached the perspective that the only way peace will be achieved is for either Israel to be no more, or for its Arab neighbours to be destroyed. And once again, although there is general (understandable) animosity between Israel and its neighbours, it is the Israel army that is regularly using its army to intimidate and invade NOT the other way around.

If the US foreign policy is actually to orcestrate peace in the area, it must act to stem the blood flow that Israel has caused.

How on earth can you blame only Israel here? What are they supposed to do in this case?

The Palestinian condition isn't wonderful, but they are in great part responsible for it, particularly if they cannot honor agreements for even a single day if what Loreng indicates is true.

The truly oppressed of the world harbor few grievances and have no dreams. They don't have the luxury. Do you know what the USSR did when four of their diplomats were kidnapped in Beirut by Hezbollah in 1985? They responded in kind by first abducting a family member of an Hezbollah leader and then killing him very very gruesomely. The hostages were given back right away and Russia was never targeted in Lebanon again. That's what a truly oppressive government does. They don't have many terrorist concerns either.

The "fanatic Likudist" crack came across as more than a little childish, designed more to inflame than elucidate. But since he provided some support to it by pointing out language in the Resolution that I somehow missed, I'll let it all drop.

So Dingo, I'm inclined to agree with you that our and Israel's actions in the past have left a lot to be desired. Where I think you still have blinders on, however, is in thinking that there's no chance of things turning around. Things have begun to turn around, and quite dramatically. Who would have imagined as late as two years ago that Israel would be unilaterally pulling out of all of Gaza, and that the U.S. response to it would simply be to demand even more action from Israel (such as a corridor between Gaza and the West Bank)? Does that count for nothing at all? I realize that you said earlier that that was a mere "strategic" decision on the part of Sharon, but all that really means is that Israeli politics (and, most likely, pressure from Washington) got the better of him.

Why are you insisting that the situation is hopeless when Israel (not "Sharon", since he was just the agent) agreed to make a very painful concession and has given a respectable mandate to a political party whose avowed goal is to make even more concessions?

let me respond by quoting my own post: "Now, before certain people jump in and say i'm defending the abduction of the Israeli soldier, i'm not."

A small group of people kidnapped a soldier, and triggered this typical Israeli overreaction. However, it wasn't the government that kidnapped him. Yet Israel kidnapped the elected government. Oh I know that Israel doesn't accept the validity of the elected Palestinian government, but they're the only ones that don't. Their point is pretty flimsy when they base their own behaviour towards Palestine on them not accepting the legitamacy of Israel. Pathetic really.

Pure and simple, Israel doesn't have the right to kidnapp an elected government. If it was ANY other country, especially an Arab one, they would have been forced with the threat of military invasion (if not just invaded outright). What happens to Israel? they get told off for being very naughty while Mr Peacemaker Bush does absolutely nothing. Anyone would think he was cowed by Jewish business interests in the US. But i'm sure THAT can't be the case. Anyway, that rant is going off topic...


and that is a very big if... Loreng is hardly mister neutral reliability on who is to blame, since he can never accept that Israel has done the smallest thing wrong. I'm sure, although I decided on a leave of absence rather than find out, he would have defended the bombing of the beach.

So, you are making the obvious connection between Israel's behaviour and a truly oppressive government then?

edited to add:

And yet they didn't exactly resist marching straight back in at the first opportunity... i hope for better, but i've stopped believing anything they say, because it always seems to turn out to be lies. It has been getting better, but it should never have been so bad.

OK, and realistically, what do you think they should have done in response? You said above that you think we should be trying to get Israel to cease its operations, but then what? Just let the hostage takers hold on to this guy? And "negotiating" a release inevitably means making some kind of concession in exchange for his release, which obviously will only encourage more of the same. So what realistically are Israel's options?

Unfortunately i'm no military tactician, but I know that its not general practice for military invasion to be the first option. Nor is it generally in the handbook that you round up the government of the country. Maybe you think the US and UK should have rounded up the Pakestani government for its alleged part in the 9/11 and 7/7 bombings? Or would that have handed the only remaining power and initiative in Palestine to the terrorists themselves, who would then become the only focus for the hopes of the people? Does that sound like a good idea to you, cos it certainly doesn't to me!

Maybe, then, the Palestinian government (or the UN on its behalf) should have rounded up the Israeli government for allowing the bombing of innocents on a beach? Or is it only ok when Israel does it to Palestine?

I don't know if there is a "general practice" for cases like this, whereby a government very hostile to you protects a group of people who've kidnapped one of your citizens and started making ransom demands. But to the extent that there is, I'd think that that government would have little basis for complaining if it's faced with a military response from you.

It would certainly be nice if many of the people jumping down Israel's throat over this had some constructive, realistic suggestions to offer.

The Palestinian Monitor claims upwards of 80% of the prisoners have been tortured which references material from El Fassed, Arjan (2004) Imprisoned Decency, Centre for Civil Society. B'tselem alleges 85% are abused and Miftah claims there are upwards of 3000 child prisoners have been arrested since 2000. None of these are flattering statistics.

These numbers address deficiencies in the prison and in their treatment. If you are referring to prisoners strictly beaten for confessions it would be smaller. Then again we've been waiting for Israel to declare the atomic weapons for what 40 years now? I can't see Israel verifying these figures anytime soon so we will have to be satisfied with secondary outlets.



I'm not so sure they issued the order. They might have learned about the kidnapping just like everyone else. Prove to me Hamas wields the power to release the hostage because I doubt they are calling the shots right now.

I don't think I indicated "there's no chance of things turning around." In fact under Barak I believe they came pretty close to negotiating an agreement. Unfortunately settler politics along with Sharon's sabotaging actions killed it in my view.

Not only Israeli politics but hard economics came in to play in the case of Gaza. A lot of money was going to protect a fairly small number of settlers. I've read an estimate of something like 60 billion dollars has gone into to building and defending the post-1967 settlements. Just on a pure cost basis the government was going to have to cut back somewhere.

Based on Israeli actions the pullout appears temporary and nonsubstantive. Gaza is now reoccupied. Israel still considers Palestinian land their back yard to come and go as they please. Arresting a democratically elected government for the kidnapping of one soldier is a bit much don't you think?

It is also not clear to me that the balance of efforts presently has been to pullout even more. It appears more to be trading off some settler areas that are hard to defend for other areas where expansion can be more readily consolidated, what you might call repositioning. I have little doubt that these old Likudist war horses are waiting for an opportunity to fulfill their expansionist dreams right up to the Jordan River. In the meantime they build walls both for the understandable purpose of sealing out terrorists but also to send a message that UN 242 is dead. Bush's complaints were simply dismissed. He knew better than to push the issue. He probably heard from Jerry Falwell and his crowd.

Unlike some folks on this board many Israeli officials have a more realistic view of Israeli actions and are ready to shoulder some of the moral burden of the past. Even when you read an old Patriarch like Ben Gurion you get the clear sense that he knew Israeli actions were often not morally defensible but believed say ethnic cleansing of Palestinians had to occur if Israel were to survive as a Jewish state. This is a discussion between Norman Finkelstein and former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami under Barak. Ben Ami was a negotiator at Camp David with the Palestinians, trying to resolve the border matter. There is a lot of other stuff including Israel's checkered history. See what you think.
Finkelstein and Ben-Ami discuss Camp David and other matters.

I was going by your first post on this thread, in which you reacted to the second question by calling it almost pointless, and saying that Israel was just going to do whatever it wanted anyway, and we'd back them up for it regardless.


You mean a government whose avowed goal is the destruction of the Israeli state? Maybe it is a bit much, but on the other hand, I can't really say what Israel should have done in response to this action. I haven't seen any realistic suggestions so far.


Even repositioning can have palpable benefits for the Palestinians. One legitimate beef they've had is that the guarded access roads to the various far-flung settlements spread througout the West Bank have effectively balkanized the Palestinian areas, and made them unviable "bantustans". If Kadima can succeed in repositioning the settlements so that the Palestinians can have a more integrated territory that they can freely move around in, that should improve the situation considerably.


Well, maybe that's true. If so, the question is, do the Palestinians intend to keep providing such opportunities?


And what exactly would Falwell do if Bush failed to do what he wanted? Throw his support to Hillary Clinton instead?

One of the reasons I don't quite accept the idea that Bush, or Washington in general, is acting entirely at the behest of the irrepressible pro-Israel crowd is the lack of public pressure brought to bear on the Palestinians under Arafat and Abbas, prior to the Hamas takeover. The al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade was and is an integral part of the Fatah movement and has been conducting terror attacks at least up until late last year, yet our leaders in Washington never highlighted this, even as Bush was proclaiming Abbas as a new type of leader, untainted by terror. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Why don't we hear from the Palestinian leadership on what they have already said.

The following are excerpts from an address by Hamas leader Khaled Mash'al at a press conference that aired January 29, 2006 on Al-Jazeera TV.

Hamas Leader Khaled Mash'al Presents Hamas Plan on Al-Jazeera TV: "We are Committed to... the Resistance and Adhere to its Weapons... As for Recognizing [Israel] and Amending Our Charter - Hamas is Not the Kind of Movement That Succumbs to Pressure... We Will Not Recognize it, No Matter how Much Time Passes... We Believe in Acting According to Stages..."

"The Legislative Council is one of the Oslo Accords' political frameworks, but the Oslo plan is over. It is no longer effective, and no one follows it anymore, and I don't think our people will accept the revival of Oslo, after it has been buried and eulogized by all."

"The Palestinian people has chosen Hamas with its known stances. If America wants to negotiate with Hamas - it is most welcome, but based on the positions for which the people chose us. If Europe wants to negotiate with Hamas - it is most welcome, but based on the choice of the Palestinian people. However, they must not impose conditions on us. Our internal affairs must not be subject to extortion and external pressure."

"America may not recognize a certain country, yet it succumbs to reality. Today we, the Palestinians, do not recognize the legitimacy of the occupation, but this does not mean I want to abolish Israel in a matter of moments. I have a plan of commitment to my land and my rights."

The following is a translation of an hate mongering and terrorism inciting anti-Israeli song broadcast on Sawt Al-Aqsa, , the Hamas radio station on August 16, 2005

The Al-Aqsa Brigades will make you tremble in Haifa and Tel Aviv They will strike you in Safed and Acre , Because we, our dear ones, Do not distinguish between [ Jewish] Palestine and [Arab] Palestine, For [as] Jaffa is the same as Gaza , Tel-al-Zuhour is the same as Rafah, And the Galilee is the same as Hebron . We make no distinction between the parts of the earth of the homeland. [i.e. the whole of Palestine is ours].

Foreign Minister, Mahmud Al-Zahar: Hamas will not hesitate to kidnap Israeli soldiers "to exchange for [Palestinian] prisoners, should the opportunity arise." [Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, March 7, 2006]

Interior Minister Saed Siam: "It is inevitable to kidnap soldiers to exchange for them... There is nothing the resistance cannot do. And when there is a goal and a good plan, the goal can be achieved... [In the past] Hamas succeeded in kidnapping and hiding bodies, but unfortunately, two bodies were handed over for nothing."

Minister Siam explaining policy of Kidnapping Fathi Hamad, Member Palestinian Legislative Council, Hamas "The Islamic resistance movement "Hamas" yesterday threatened to carry out kidnapping operations of soldiers in the Israeli army, in order to release Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. The threat was announced by Hamas Member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, Fathi Hamad." [Al-Ayyam, March 16, 2006]

Sheik Halid Al-Batash, Islamic Jihad "[Palestinian Authority] Prime Minister Ismail Haniyah emphasized the importance of forming a mechanism for the release of our heroic prisoners who are held in the jails of the occupation, without making concessions... Prominent Islamic Jihad movement leader, Sheik Halid Al-Batash... called for seeking different mechanisms for the release of our heroic prisoners. He emphasized that among the mechanisms is the kidnapping of Zionists to exchange for the release of the [Palestinian] prisoners." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah, April, 17 2006]

Sheik Halid Al-Batash, Islamic Jihad "The Islamic Jihad [Movement] says: kidnapping of Israeli soldiers - the fastest way for the release of the prisoners. Islamic Jihad movement senior official [Halid Al-Batash] called on the factions of the resistance to kidnap Israeli soldiers in order to exchange them for Palestinian prisoners, who Israel holds and refuses to release." [Al-Ayyam, May 9, 2006]

Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook is second in command of the political Hamas leadership in Syrian exile. In an interview, he tells SPIEGEL ONLINE that the agreement with Fatah on the foundation of a Palestinian state does not mean that his organization will recognize Israel. Hamas, he say, will remain committed to violence against its occupier. Der Spiegel (Germany) June 30, 2006
Spiegel Online

In short this is and has been an active plan by Hamas and the government is a terrorist organization, states that and they claim that there is no difference between the so-called 'Political' and 'Military' wings. This is a Western distinction that they do not recognize in any shape or form.

Protects a group of kidnappers? er... i don't recall the Palestinian government ever saying that they would protect them? Maybe the illegal alliance in Iraq should round up the Iraqi government when a group of insurgents (or freedom fighters) kidnaps someone? The same logic carries over.

What is most amazing in the never ending debate over Palestine vs Israel is that no Israel supporter ever seems to accept that Israel have done anything wrong!!? Why is that, Blackstone?

If you want a constructive suggestion, I would say the Israel government could support and assist the still weak Palestinian government in finding the culprits. They could also resist the desire to target the CIVILIAN population with their military efforts (power, water, transport), and allow aid and humanitarian aid to flow freely rather than just when they feel like it. All of these things would engender a postive working relationship. But that wouldn't actually serve Israel's motives, would it. The Israel military wing want to cause Palestine to fight back, because then they can blow them up.

Peace would be relatively easy to find if Israel actually wanted peace. Just as peace and allies in the middle east would be relatively easy to find if the US foreign policy wasn't to place them in their crosshairs. You don't make allies by persecuting them. Is it really so complex?



Words are words and actions are actions; Israel's actions speak equally loudly.

Yet Palestine is a 'terrorist state' while Israel is not? The only difference is that one uses a well stocked military to hit the civilian population and the other uses suicide bombs. I guess this means that if you have a tank you're not a terrorist, even if you do exactly the same thing with it.

Let me draw a quick parallel:
When the US (allegedly) voted in George W Bush, the world and its dog knew they were voting for a war lord.
When the Palestinians voted for Hamas, they knew they were voting for a smaller scale war lord.

The only reason many countries do business with the US is either out of fear of its military or fear of its business power. Aparently, might makes right, just as it does for the US's little brother, Israel.

They are the kidnappers. The Hamas government carried it out. This is not some unknown group they were members of the Hamas 'Military' wing and members of the PA Security Forces.

And Israeli haters like you seem to accept that the Palestinians can do anything they want and Israel is not allowed to defend themselves in any shape or form. Why is that, Genesisblade?



And what are those actions? Let's see over 100,000 terrorist attacks, including hundreds of suicide bombers, thousands of rockets, etc, etc. The state that they are going to kidnap Israelis and then they do, why should we not believe them?

No it means that you have no clue as to terrorism. Targeting civilians is the difference, Israel doesn't and the Arabs do that is the difference.

Read their own words. They said it, not me.

Why don't you offer us some proof of that statement because it has to be one of the most inane ever written.

No, they were a group of factions including some Hamas militants. The Palestinian government didn't organise or plan this... it was planned by a smaller faction who don't want peace any more than their opponents in Israel do.


Utter nonsense as usual. I have said many times over all these debates that Palestinians are not innocent, and that suicide bombing is wrong. Yet still, even now while you try to deflect my point, you still refuse to accept that Israel has done wrong. Once again, the world is wrong, and YOU are right. The soldier shouldn't have been kidnapped. Should the Israel army have once again invaded Gaza and attacked the INNOCENT civilian population?

Yes... hence equally loudly!

Israel doesn't target civilians? er... are you kidding me? So, which military groups were based on the roads, in the power stations, and on those beaches then? No wait, i'm sure you've got an excuse for it.


I hardly think it matches your 'Israel don't attack civilians' rubbish above. But since you ask for proof, how about the (miltiary and economic) threats against Iran for daring to develop nuclear power (not necessarily nuclear weapons), or North Korea for testing missiles. I won't bother with Iraq, simply because that demonstrated that even rolling over and playing dead doesn't necessarily prevent invasion. Question though: if China invaded South Korea, would the US let them get on with it? That's right - only the US and Israel can invade in response to 'terrorism' freely.

edited to add:

from here. The president challenging the terrorists hardly sounds like they are one and the same, does it.

How about some sort of proof? Please show us one iota to support that claim.

With the early statements by the leadership along with the act any halfway capable DA would have a conviction in court with the evidence presented. They said they would do this, and guess what they did. The terrorists that were kill have been identified as members of their security forces.


Simply amazing that an Army attacked INNOCENT civilian population and yet none have been killed. Boy and here I thought that the IDF could do that much. Have an answer for that? Deflect your point? Make one that isn't totally opposite of the known facts.

No, that is a fact. Did you not know that military groups use roads and power? Imagine our surprise that NATO bombed roads and powerplants as their first targets in Bosnia. Or the same in Iraq and Afghanistan. As for the beaches, you should direct that to those that committed the crime HAMAS. Please produce any proof that the IDF did this miracle shoot. I have yet to hear of any artillery piece that has a flight time of over 20 minutes.

I think that you are in a category all our own. The UN is the lead organization on Iran. So now we control the UN, now I must have that proof.

You might want to rethink that statement about North Korea as well. You are absolutely out of your mind if you think that we have threatened them with anything. It seems that the entire world doesn't agree with you.

Except it doesn't do anything of what you claim. Prisoner's Document Read for yourself and I want you to point out where in that declaration of war there is anything about recognition, two-state solution, cease-fire or peace anywhere in there.

Loreng provided you with a number of quotes from Palestinian government officials advocating kidnapping Israeli soldiers. This is why it's necessary to look at realities.


I guess you haven't read my posts on this thread very closely, have you?


Has this Palestinian government indicated any desire at all to find the culprits? Based on the statements quoted above, it would seem rather unlikely, but if you have any quotes indicating the contrary, I'd be interested in seeing them.


It's bizarre that you ascribe nobler motives to the Palestinians than you do to the Israelis. Aid was flowing quite freely before the Palestinians decided they didn't even want to maintain the pretence of recognizing Israel anymore.

Do you consider it even the slightest bit possible that the Palestinians would have considered a weakening of the operation to be a sign of weakness that could be exploited further? I know you seem to think that only Israelis are capable of such cynical thinking, but Palestinians are human, too.


So positioning troops in the roads, power stations, and beaches is the moral equivalent of walking into a crowded market and setting off a bunch of nail-packed explosives?

No, Loreng, how about you provide some proof that the kidnapping was run by Hamas and the government. This is YOUR claim, not mine. According to the press, it was Palestinian factions including some Hamas militants. I wasn't there. I don't know them. Maybe you do.

Obviously you're discounting the mortal shelling of the beach a few weeks ago. I don't see many military installations at the civilian power station that the Israel army attacked, or on the roads that they blew up to prevent humanitarian aid getting easily to them. I didn't say they had actually killed civilians in this attack. However, they have still targetted them. Try again Loreng. As for not killing civilians, we all know this to be true, but in your hard search for evidence maybe you can look here.

I do get so bored of 'debating' with you. You deny everything, even in the face of facts, and then either demand other proof or go strangely quiet. So here, Loreng, something more for you to deny: here and here with a quote from the guardian



And lets add this in for good measure:

You're right there about the US not yet threatening North Korea, however. But lets see how long Condi takes to come out with her threats. Just like she earlier did towards Iran, with the UN, not as part of it.

Then I guess the Observer/Guardian newspapers must be making it up, Loreng.

However, having read it, nowhere to they say in this charter -- a charter that mentions the usual things agreed by the UN such as freeing Jerusalem from the sole possession of Israel -- does it say anything about wanting to destroy Israel, or even wanting to attack Israel. It says it wants the rights, as written and agreed by the UN, upheld and met.

Finally, one bit on Israel's right to exist, by Hamas. Shame this has been overshadowed now by Israels latest invasion of Gaza. Shucks, who would have thought that would happen... http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/st...1802861,00.html

edited to tidy messed up coding

Right. but I don't see where they say they'll protect them (which is what Loreng was stating was the case).

it wasn't just aimed at you. And I asked you, because Loreng generally ignores it.

Not at all. I don't think i was ascribing motives at all. I was yet to go down the psych-evaluation route, although that was on my checklist of things to do today! Clearly the Palestinian kidnappers also don't want peace, although your answer does seem to miss my point. As i suggested, since peace was being worked towards, one government could have helped its weaker neighbour to sort out the problem, rather than just get back on with its war campaign again.


Replace 'positioning' with 'blowing up', and add in the acted on threats of ensuring that no-one in Gaza will sleep at night, and i'd say yeah, they are roughly the moral equivalent as far as attacking civilians. The only thing positioned on the beach on the June 9 was an Israeli mortar shell.

June 28, 2006
The Hamas-led Palestinian government on Wednesday called for a prisoner swap with Israel, saying Israel's invasion of Gaza would not secure the release of a captured soldier.

It was the first time the government has proposed exchanging the soldier for prisoners held by Israel, though militants holding the young man have made similar requests.

In a statement, the Palestinian Information Ministry said it is "natural logic" to carry out an exchange. "This has been exercised by previous Israeli governments with Hezbollah and the PLO, and this is what other countries do in conflict situations," the statement said.

By KHALED ABU TOAMEH The Jerusalem Post 2 July 2006
Hamas spokesman Mushir al-Masri said on Saturday that his movement wanted a prisoner swap similar to the one that was reached in January 2004, when Israel released senior Hizbullah members and 400 Pales­tinian prisoners in exchange for kidnapped Elhanan Tannenbaum and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers.

Der Spiegel (Germany) June 30, 2006


Guess that kind of says it all, the PA is the one calling the shots and making the demands.

Maybe you should get a better press source. The Guardian is not a real newspaper. We refer to them a Gossip Rags and other not so nice terms. All of your links to that paper proves that you have no source at all. And yes I demand proof to date you have cited Arab propaganda and anti-semitic British rags, neither are worth anything.

Yes again I am right, you continue to have no foundation for your ridiculous claims. By the way it's again the UN that is making the demands over North Korea. So you entire basis for making those statements is up to your usual level of accuracy.

Well Hamas says that they are.

Der Spiegel (Germany) June 30, 2006


But read the document and show me where it says those things. Come on I gave you the link read it and prove how wrong I am because I have no idea where those two so-called newspapers got their information from. I can and do read the original documents for myself, because of the extreme bias by papers like the Observer and Guardian who have repeated reported stories that were later proven to be totally false.

As for disappearing, you keep repeating the propaganda so why should any of us bother. When challenged you resort to false claims.

They've more than indicated their approval of this move, which puts the burden of proof on those who are claiming that they aren't protecting the kidnappers.


You can check it off, because that's exactly what you did when you suggested that scaling back the Israeli response would help the situation. You assumed the Palestinians would react positively, in spite of their own historical behavior. You did it again in this last post when you suggested that Israel should help its neighbor to sort out the problem, as if the neighbor has any desire at all to sort out the problem.


Being kept awake at night is the equivalent of having one's skin torn apart by flying nails? OK...

Well what about the settler who was murdered slightly before the the occupation of Gaza. The culprits were caught by the Palestinians, the IDF the raided the jail and secured the prisoners.

From BBC:



As for Lorengs selective quoting again, more complete transcripts are found here. Here is the first paragraph Loreng quoted.

Hmmm unlike Israel making demands then? actually, it sounded like a suggestion. And they're right - threats will not get the hostage released. But then, Israel knows this well - which is why they are doing it.



sure sure Loreng. The national broadsheet newspaper, the Guardian, is a 'rag'. No doubt the Times and Telegraph are too right? Anti-semitic? Maybe you should have read just one of those articles properly - if you had you would not have made so laughable a statement. Naturally, I went out of way to select anti-Jew or pro-Arab evidence. The world outside your shores, Loreng, is somewhat different a place. Suffice it to say, not all the world away from your Jewish-supporting media agrees with Israel's behaviour.

No, they didn't. Hamas isn't going to come out and say 'we recognise Israel'. However, it IS moving its position towards accepting Israel's existance. That is what the document was saying...


No, the evidence was examined by neutral parties. Maybe you missed that part? Or was it only that it didn't agree with the Israeli propaganda line? And i did read the whole document (unlike you apparently). As I explained, it didn't state 'we recognise Israel' but showed a clear move towards it by not saying the opposite as it usually would. Its all about interpretation, for sure. Naturally, you only see Arab hatred through your very tainted spectacles.

False claims? Says the king of false claims? Oh yeah here we go. Anything against Israel's actions is Arab propaganda, even when it is neutral and factual examination of shell debris found in children's bodies, and anything Israel says on the matter - even when obviously discredited by the facts - is the truth. I reckon you're just a wind up Loreng.

Demanding that their soldier is release and that they stop launching rockets at their cities. What an outrageous demand! Again their own statements PROVE that they are the ones that kidnapped and are holding that Corporal. They said they did it and yet you still claim that Hamas is lying about. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

Again Hamas stated that they have not, and will not recognize Israel or live in peace in a two-state solution. The Guardian is a RAG if they continue to ignore the facts. To report otherwise, which they did, shows us that they haven't the slightest clue as to the facts. And you using them as a source shows that you have not made one bit of effort to learn the truth. Who would I believe some reporter in London or the group that signed the paper? I know which I would believe since they are the ones that will be implementing what they think it says.

'Neutral Party' now that is . That's like saying the ISM is 'peace' organization. Give it a rest your knowledge of the Middle East is non-existent.


They were not exactly 'caught' by the police. They were being hidden and protected by those police. They were not under arrest for 'killing a Jewish settler' because it is not a crime in PNA to murder Jews. Not one single Palestinian has ever been arrested for killing a Jew by the PNA. That is a fact and you are free to try and disprove that.

As for my selective quote. I did not post the rest but please do, since it calls for the destruction of Israel 'However, we are realistic, and we know things are done gradually, in stages.' They stated that they do not recognize Israel - your quotes and they will not amend their charter - again your quotes. So what point are you attempting to make? They said that they are going to try and destroy by stages. Does that negate what I wrote? I don't think so.

Okay you wish to question my sources that's only fair. They are listed above but let's see my 'Jewish-supporting media'

Der Spiegel – A German newpaper
The Jerusalem Post – An Israeli newspaper
Palestinian Information Ministry – Palestinian government
Jerusalem Media and Communication Centre – A Palestinian site
United Nations Charter - Not sure how to classify that one
Al-Ayyam – An Egyptian newspaper
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat – A Jordanian newspaper
Sawt Al-Aqsa – A Hamas radio station
Al-Jazeera TV – A Kuwaiti Television station

So out of nine sources, one is Israeli, one international, one German, three Arab, and three Palestinian. I'll be darned, I didn't know that they were so supporting of Jews.

I was referring to much of the US news broadcasters... apparently i wasn't clear enough.

Is it worse a demand than that of the Palestinians wishing to have their prisoners back, or wishing to be able to go onto a beach without being blown up by Israeli shells? And their statements don't prove anything at all. If THAT is your evidence... where did the Palestinian government say 'we will release the soldier'? If they didn't say it, they didn't admit to kidnapping him.

They didn't report otherwise. They were quoting people as the final version of the prisoners' document hadn't been agreed yet:

Note the 'if' in the last paragraph. I highlighted it for you... (I can't actually believe I find myself defending something that doesn't need defending...)

? "Human Rights Watch" isn't a neutral party?

Fair enough, although i disagree. I'm not sure approval can be realistically parallelled with protecting. However, I guess the same logic carries over to the Israeli government protecting those who killed the family on the beach. I think it is clear that the Palestinian government doesn't control the individuals who attack Israel and who kidnapped this soldier. Whether the same could be said of Israel's government over its own army is questionable. However, the better situation would have been for Israel to help rather than do as it did.

no, of course not. But shooting them with guns, targetting the civilian population by cutting off aid and power, and by mass sleep deprivation, and by blowing up children on beaches IS, no?

Check. You did ask me for a suggestion!

It wasn't a psych-evaluation though. That would have been to consider how the Palestine government would have reacted (i reckon positively, although it would have been completely untested ground - certainly the terrorist element wouldn't have liked it, although the people would have probably been happy with moves towards a peaceful solution for once) or to evaluate whether the Israeli government would ever do that (who knows? never say never).

And which US news broadcasters would that be? And for that matter which one of them did I use as a source? I know the the Jerusalem Post is owned by a Canadian, is that what you meant? Honestly I doubt that Canadians wish be referred to as Americans.

Those people that they are demanding have been convicted of murder, rape, attempted murder, assault, etc. Is Israel going to let those criminals loose to attack Israel again? Not likely. As for Hamas yes they are the ones making the demands and they state that their 'military' arm and 'political' are one in the same. There is no such thing as splitter groups, etc. This a clan based culture and yes they know each other and who is holding whom.

As for Mr. Rabbo, well to say that he is lying would be too easy. First off there never was any such sections about a cease fire, two state solution or recognition, etc. to disagree to. Since they are not in the document in any shape or form to claim that some day they might agree to something along that line is like saying I have a chance to become the next Pope. Very unlikely, but since I am a human it might happen, if every other person on this planet ceases to exist and I actually want the job it is possible. I won't hold my breath for either. Note the 'if' in the last paragraph. I highlighted it for you... (I can't believe you are defending non-existent clauses in a non-existent document).

As for HRW. Let's see their 'expert' arrived the day AFTER Hamas cleaned the beach, removing who knows what. Announced that he 'knew that it was piece of Israeli artillery shells due to his long experience'. This is from a man that has never been in the military, never seen an artillery shell, never seen a piece of shrapnel, never performed a single test of the material provided by Hamas nor would he have a clue how to test it and yet he knows <