I am getting tired of the rampant anti-israeli comments on this board

[markvee]

Classy,

I side with neither. I will say that we do live in a country that permits one to have an opinion on either side of the fence.... and you cant 'hate' on anyone because they happen to fall on the other side of that fence.

SK.

Scorpion King said everything that needed to be said, but if the thread ended here, it would be like if Bruce Wayne died in the race car crash on the first page. Sure it would have been a good death, but it would not have been much of a thread.

 

[markvee]

As I said before, there are valid arguments to lay blame on both sides.....

Can anyone answer this simple question:

Since the Palestinians had absolutely nothing to do with the Holocaust, how can anyone blame them for resenting those who now occupy what was their land? If your land was stolen would you not have the right to fight for it any way you could?

I would like someone to justify this without resorting to the tired claim that it was a "necessary evil". Jews could have been given part of Germany with a LOT less outrage. Someone explain to me with facts & logic why the state of Israel had to be founded in Palestine.

Seriously, if there is some reason why the European Jews absolutely could not be settled anywhere other than Palestine (other than religious or historical, as the Palestinians have equally valid & more recent claims of this variety), please help me out.

The simple fact is that these particular wars would not have to be fought in the middle east if Israel had not been re-created in Palestine.

Before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, hold on for a second before you pull that Anti-Semite ace from your race card deck. Please note that I'm NOT saying Israel should not have been re-created in Palestine. I don't think it's my place to say one way or the other. I wasn't there. I am stating a simple cause & effect relationship.

The Arabs would not have been trying to eliminate the "Zionist entity" for almost 60 years if Israel had been founded elsewhere. This is an indisputable fact. However, it must be argued that if it was founded elsewhere there might have been similar issues in that locale.

Arabs wouldn't have attacked them in 1948, 1956, or 1967 if Israel had been founded elsewhere. This is also an indisputable fact. However, it must be argued that if it was founded elsewhere there might have been similar issues in that locale.

It is reasonable to assume that these issues could very well have occurred anywhere the land was taken from others to create a Jewish state. However, we will never know for certain because the fact is that the land was taken from the Palestinians.

The Israelis justly claim the right to exist. They are also right in taking any means & measures necessary to preserve their homes & their lives. They occupy it, the land is now theirs, a couple of generations of Israelis are natural born citizens. Fair enough.

However, if it is fair for them to use any means to protect their nation, land & lives it is equally fair for the Palestinians to do the same to reclaim what was taken. The land was theirs 60 years ago as surely as it was the jews over 1000 years ago.

Basically this is a situation where as far as I'm concerned, whoever can keep the land, deserves it. Right now this would appear to be the fairest option according to the history of the region. Whoever is the best at war will earn this land. It doesn't matter what race or religion you are, this land's price has always been blood & it always sells to the highest bidder.

I have no issue with the Israelis doing what they have to do to keep their country & their people safe from harm. that is their business, not mine & I wish them well. I have no issue with the Palestinians doing what they have to do to reclaim their country & keep their people safe from harm. that is also their business, not mine & I wish them well too.

Let me say this again loud & clear: I am not an ANTI SEMITE because I refuse to stand soley by Israel's side in this issue. I am not an ANTI ARAB or against ISLAM because I refuse to stand soley by the Arab's side in this issue. What I am is a CANADIAN. I live in Canada, not Israel/Palestine. This will only be our problem if we let it become our problem.

If you feel so strongly that one side or the other needs aid then by all means, sell your own personal property, buy yourself some weapons or medical supplies, go over there & risk your own life to fight if you want. Don't come begging to the people of Canada to spend OUR tax dollars & throw away OUR children's lives for YOUR problem.

I am neither Israeli nor am I Arab. I am Canadian. As a Canadian, I see no reason why we should invest anything in this cursed land. Not one dollar, not one more Canadian life, not one ounce of anything that could be put to use here for OUR people's benefit.

I personally condemn the innocent lives taken by both sides of this. I wish that it didn't have to happen, but wishing does nothing. No matter which side with which you choose to identify, Innocent lives are being lost. There's something to be said about stepping back & looking at the situation as a human being & seeing the overall tragedy it is....

The Dark Knight Returns! themexi is thebatman.

 

[markvee]

Nebraska Alliance - Times Herald
Lincoln, Nebraska July 19, 2006
** Why the World Should Stand Back and Let Israel Do What It Has To Do **
**by Dave Wilson, Capt. retired, US Navy

When I was in the Navy, I once witnessed a bar fight in downtown Olongapo (Philippines) that still haunts my dreams. The fight was between a big oafish Marine and a rather soft-spoken, medium sized Latino sailor from my ship.

All evening the Marine had been trying to pick a fight with one of us and had finally set his sights on this diminutive shipmate of mine... figuring him for a safe target. When my friend refused to be goaded into a fight the Marine sucker punched him from behind on the side of the head so hard that blood instantly started to pour from this poor man's mutilated ear.

Everyone present was horrified and was prepared to absolutely murder this Marine, but my shipmate quickly turned on him and began to single-handedly back him towards a corner with a series of stinging jabs and upper cuts that gave more than a hint to a youth spent boxing in a small gym in the Bronx.

Each punch opened a cut on the Marine's startled face and by the time he had been backed completely into the corner he was blubbering for someone to stop the fight. He invoked his split lips and chipped teeth as reasons to stop the fight. He begged us to stop the fight because he could barely see through the river of blood that was pouring out of his split and swollen brows.

Nobody moved. Not one person.

The only sound in the bar was the sickening staccato sound of this sailor's lightning fast fists making contact with new areas of the Marine's head. The only sound I have heard since that was remotely similar was from the first Rocky film when Sylvester Stallone was punching sides of beef in the meat locker.

Finally the Marine's pleading turned to screams.... a high, almost womanly shriek. And still the punches continued relentlessly. Several people in the bar took a few tentative steps as though they wanted to try to break it up at that point, but hands reached out from the crowd and held them tight. I'm not ashamed to say that mine were two of the hands that held someone back.

You see, in between each blow the sailor had begun chanting a soft cadence: "Say [punch] you [punch] give [punch] up [punch]... say [punch] you [punch]were [punch] wrong [punch]". He had been repeating it to the Marine almost from the start but we only became aware of it when the typical barroom cheers had died down and we began to be sickened by the sight and sound of the carnage.

This Marine stood there shrieking in the corner of the bar trying futilely to block the carefully timed punches that were cutting his head to tatters... right down to the skull in places. But he refused to say that he gave up... or that he was wrong.

Even in the delirium of his beating he believed in his heart that someone would stop the fight before he had to admit defeat. I'm sure this strategy had served him well in the past and had allowed him to continue on his career as a barroom bully.

Finally, in a wail of agony the Marine shrieked "I give up” and we gently backed the sailor away from him.

I'm sure you can guess why I have shared this story today.

I'm not particularly proud to have been witness to such a bloody spectacle, and the sound of that Marine's woman-like shrieks will haunt me to my grave. But I learned something that evening that Israel had better learn for itself if it is to finally be rid of at least one of its tormentors:

This is one time an Arab aggressor must be allowed to be beaten so badly that every civilized nation will stand in horror, wanting desperately to step in and stop the carnage... but knowing that the fight will only truly be over when one side gives up and finally admits defeat.

Just as every person who had ever rescued that bully from admitting defeat helped create the cowardly brute I saw that evening in the bar, every well-intentioned power that has ever stepped in and negotiated a ceasefire for an Arab aggressor has helped create the monsters we see around us today.

President Lahoud of Lebanon , a big Hezbollah supporter and a close ally of Syria , has been shrieking non-stop to the UN Security Council for the past two days to get them to force Israel into a cease fire.

Clearly he has been reading his autographed copy of 'Military Success for Dummies Arab Despots' by the late Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt . Ever since Nasser accidentally discovered the trick in '56, every subsequent Arab leader has stuck to his tried and true formula for military success:

** Instigate a war. **

Once the war is well underway and you are in the process of having your ass handed to you... get a few world powers to force your western opponent into a cease fire.

Whatever you do, don't surrender or submit to any terms dictated by your enemy. That would ruin everything! All you have to do is wait it out and eventually the world will become sickened at what is being done to your soldiers and civilian population... and will force a truce.

Once a truce has been called you can resume your intransigence (which probably caused the conflict in the first place), and even declare victory as your opponent leaves the field of battle.

This tactic has never failed. Not once. In fact it worked so will for the Egyptians in 1973, that to this day they celebrate the Yom Kippur War - a crushing defeat at the hands of Israel - as a military victory! No kidding... it's a national holiday over there!

President Lahoud has already begun to shriek like a school girl to the UN Security Council to "Stop the violence and arrange a cease-fire, and then after that we'll be ready to discuss all matters."

Uh huh. Forgive me if I find that a tad hard to swallow. He allowed Hezbollah to take over his country. He allowed the regular Lebanese army to provide radar targeting data for the Hezbollah missile that struck the Israeli destroyer. He has turned a blind eye while Iranian and Syrian weapons, advisers and money have poured into his country. And now that his country is in ruins he wants to call it a draw.

As much as it may sicken the world to stand by and watch it happen, strong hands need to hold back the weak- hearted and let the fight continue until one side finally admits unambiguous defeat.

This is like Batman throwing one of Twoface’s thugs through a glass window.

 

[markvee]

Bottom line for me: the only just solution is a One State solution. It is not as quixotic as it might seem. There now exists substantial genetic research and evidence that proves that most Jews and 65% of Palestinians share unique DNA markers... which means that they are one and the same family. And both Jews and Muslims accept the authenticity of the proposition that we are children of Abraham.

Perry

Perry is also cast as Alfred, commenting to Batman that Robin is not a soldier, but a sweet young child.

 

[markvee]

themexi,

I don't agree with much of what you say...

But I only want to comment on one thing you say that, obviously, you (and many others) absolutely don't understand: the idea of "Chosen People" has never been that we are privileged or better than others... indeed, in many ways the exact opposite.

It means Jews were chosen (by God) to fulfill some very onerous duties and obligations -- a very difficult burden of integrity, morality and ethics -- that has not been placed on others.

And just so that no one misunderstands, I am not saying that over the course of history they have done so... at times, yes; at times, no. It's no easy task in a hypocritical world to live and be judged by a different standard than applied to all other nations of the world.

Perry

Superman to Batman, “WHERE?” (Written in firey laser vision).

 

[markvee]

Thank you for your courteous response, Perry. We needn't agree on anything to have a civil discourse. In fact, if we agreed on everything this would be neither a debate nor a discussion, it would be a convention; & conventions can be so very boring.

But I do have to voice a disagreement to your disagreement. I do, in fact, understand the idea & concept of a "Chosen People".

I understand that it is said that it is believed that god chose the Jewish people for the task of creating a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation. This burden also includes demonstrating to the world by example that god exists & takes an active interest in mankind. No small task there. I am aware of the difficulties in following the 613 Mitzvot & I am aware of the idea that the Jews are to suffer more than most peoples do in the pursuit of acheiving these tasks. I understand that the designation of chosen people does not, in & of itself make Jews better. They believe themselves to have been selected to play for higher stakes than the rest of us. Greater pain for greater rewards is a concept that even an agnostic such as myself can readily relate to & respect.

I am definitely not arguing that the Jews don't have taken on some heavy obligations. What I am arguing is that from the perspective of someone who is currently a non believer in any religion, objective observation will tell you that this conceit is by no means exclusive to any one religion & by no means makes any people particularly special.

Almost every religion believes that its followers were chosen (by their God) to fulfill some very onerous duties and obligations. One may not be faulted in thinking that this seems to be a theme in most religions. The fact is that almost every religion believes that they have been given a very difficult burden of integrity, morality and ethics that has not been placed on others. In the end, shouldering the burdens & obligations that whatever god you believe in has given you make you as unique, special, & entitled as just about everyone else.

Although the issues of religion seem to be the issue with the land, I contend that it too is only part of the story. Christians go to war with christians, muslims with other muslims, & while no incident comes to mind, I'm sure the jews have suffered the odd internal squabble as well. If you really pay attention to what all sides are communicating, this conflict is firstly about land, secondly about culture, & religion is a distant third.

The bottom line is that I believe what Israel is & what it will be, like any other nation, is entirely determined by the people that make up the nation. This is true whether or not one believes in the concept of god or of being chosen.

I believe that all the suffering & exiles, & expulsions have helped to shape & mold the Jewish people into a very tight knit, rich, interesting culture worthy of respect. The result of all of this may actually lead eventually to a nation of people so experienced in the ins & outs of polotics, of morality, of the good & the bad in the world that their experiences could be condensed & shared to benefit all of mankind. Who knows? Maybe that was how god planned it. That might be how I would want it to turn out If I had a say. Even if there is no god, the results could be beautiful enough to make all but the most stubborn believe.

Peace,

Batman goes for the kryptonite, in this case an olive branch.

 

[markvee]

Tha's too oversimplified for me. It is that, but also has many other components.

On this, we are in agreement. We may get there by much different facts and reasoning, but that is what makes life -- and discussions such as this -- interesting.

Very enlightened for an agnostic!!!

Perry

With a wink to Robin, Superman leaves Batman to continue his work underground, and Batman departs. The rest of this thread is like a sequel, “The Dark Knight Strikes Again”, not as good as the original, except for this one-liner about Mel Gibson by Gyaos:

He has enough money to buy the ice. Only jerks like Bill O'Reilly milk it for their own profit.

I don’t have cable and can’t watch O’Reilly, so I can only comment that this line sounds cool. Gyaos is cast as “My Name is Don – My Name is Rob.”

 

[basketcase]

Is that official info? I haven't seen anything official on the exact location of the kidnapping. Its all vague or based on which side you're talking to. The UN only states the Israeli soldiers were kidnapped along the border. Unofficially, the locations were given as Zarit on the Israeli side and Aitaa al Chaab on the Lebanese side.
On a happier note. UN resolution 1701 and a ceasefire could go into effect Monday at 7am.

What is "official" to you. The majority of the news media (including Aljazeera but not including most of the Arab media) reported that there were two incidents that day. (I have posted sources a couple times already) First was the attack on the Israeli patrol inside Israel where several troops were killed and two kidnapped. Shortly after, Israeli armor followed the attackers into Lebanon and were attacked there. It does make sense though that a border patrol would be within a couple hundred meters of the border. If there was clearly debris in both locations (which seems to me there was), which makes more sense? Israel attacked in Israel and pursued into Lebanon or Israel was attacked in Lebanon and then Hezbollah went into Israel, where by now the Israelis were alerted, to attack a tank.(The rest we know - bombing, rockets, etc.)

In terms of the peace, scratch that - ceasefire, it is a good deal for israel and Lebanon as long as the international forces do what they are supposed to. I can't see hezbollah going along easily though.

 

[basketcase]

On further reflection and having read the resolution, it does have it's flaws. Most glaring is that the resolution does not include the return of the kidnapped soldiers.

On the topic of "official" I'll add from the preamble of the resolution on the who attacked who.

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;

 

[*d*]

On further reflection and having read the resolution, it does have it's flaws. Most glaring is that the resolution does not include the return of the kidnapped soldiers.

On the topic of "official" I'll add from the preamble of the resolution on the who attacked who.

There is no doubt that Hezbollah fired the first rocket into Israel on July 12th. That's why Israel returned fire in self-defence. Hence the wording of 'Hezbollah's attack on Israel..'. But that doesn't account for the kidnapping. As for what I believe is official info -it would have to be the same as per the UN: ..the Israeli soldiers were captured along the border. I can't see myself being bias when both sides have different stories.
And you are right, I see nothing on the return of those soldiers in the new resolution, but than I also see nothing on Israel's return of the Lebanese prisoners either. Which btw is a breach of article 118 of the 3rd Geneva convention.

 

[Don]

Am I the only one that thinks it be better for both sides to duke it out and end it once and for all? Why this cease-fire? So both sides can recoup and start it over a few months later when Hezbollah carries out a suicide bombing or when Isreal kills some civilians in a targeted bombing?

 

[drrogers]

Worth Reading


Think this deserves your time to see what Dennis Miller said about Israel. Seems some who are not Jewish see it as it is..........

For those who don't know, Dennis Miller is a comedian who has a show called Dennis Miller Live on HBO. He is not Jewish.

He recently said the following about the mid-east

"A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Here we go.

The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention.

Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians." As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation."

So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" anymore to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths, until someone points out they're being taped.

Instead, let's call them what they are:
"Other Arabs Who Can't Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."

I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN.
How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David but if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living.

That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course -- that's where the real fun is -- but mostly they want Israel.

Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it -- for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth . . . you know that's really saying something.

It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim MiddleEast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.


Chew this around & spit it out: 500 million Arabs; 5 million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it.
And now these same folks swear that, if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals.

Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea?
Oh, that? We were just kidding.

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the Numbers.
Imagine 500 million Jews and 5 million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it .Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children?.

No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

 

[basketcase]

You have it the other way around. They will blame Israel at 20 minutes and then attack them at 21.

 

[emvee]

Am I the only one that thinks it be better for both sides to duke it out and end it once and for all? Why this cease-fire? So both sides can recoup and start it over a few months later when Hezbollah carries out a suicide bombing or when Isreal kills some civilians in a targeted bombing?

I am afraid you are right. Let's see how long this ceasefire lasts.

 

[fantasiafan]

since when is terrorism acceptable?

Since when is war acceptable?

 

[Perry Mason]

Markvee...

I don't know what you are smoking or drinking... but enjoy it!

But I do wish I could understand you!

Or, maybe not!

Perry

 

[solitaria]

Oh to have your depth of wisdom and knowledge, your sophisticated grasp of complex issues, and most of all, your balanced, equitable and utterly fair-minded approach (...which just happens to condemn every Israeli action as evil and wrap Hezbollah and Hammas in a cloak of justice and honour).

I condemn what Hezbollah and Hamas do. The needless killing of innocent people is wrong period. It just so happens Israel is doing a way better job at killing innocent people than both Hezbollah and Hamas combined. Hezbollah and Hamas have evil intent but they are impotent compared to Israel and the destruction and death it is responsible for during the same period of time.

What could be more transparent than branding every person with an opposing view as ignorant and un-informed?

I find the fact that you think Israel has justification for whatever they do silly and idiotic. What is ignorant and un-informed about your opinion is it neglects Israel´s role in the conflict even when it is obvious they are doing the exact same thing only on a grander scale. Even the crazy nutjob on the street corner and most of Europe can see that.

 

[solitaria]

You have been looking in the mirror much too long and so you think you have seen someone else... "What you see is a perfect reflection of what you project."

This is just a fancy way of saying I know you are but what am I.

Let´s face it you have a very personal stake in this conflict being a Jew. The hardest thing in life is admitting a moral wrong-doing and you probably view Israel as an extension of yourself in many ways.

I don´t have any bias as I have stated in another thread. I don´t have any religious associations and am neither Jew nor Arab. Both sides are wrong but Israel needs to be stopped. Unfortunately they have the backing of the US. All those innocent Palestinians that Israel has directly killed by their own hands is horrific especially compared to the other side. I understand the Holocaust and the never again mentality which causes the state of Israel to overreact at the tiniest of threats but using the kidnapping of two soldiers as an excuse to wipe out Hezbollah with complete disregard to civilian lives is just plain wrong.

 

[basketcase]

...
I don´t have any bias as I have stated in another thread. .... Both sides are wrong but Israel needs to be stopped. ....

That shows bias right there. Why are you singling out Israel as the party needing to be stopped. Could that not as easily apply for Hezbollah Hamas et.al? A non-biased person would state that both sides need to be stopped.

I assume that your response would be that Israel is a nation and Hezbollah isn't but I've argued that point before. Hamas has said they are stopping rocket attacks from Gaza which is a good thing. As they are the governing power there though, they need to make sure that gropus like Islamic Jihad and the Resistance Committees do as well. That is the smartest thing that they can do because it eliminates any Israeli excuse for doing a "better job" in retalliation. Unfortunately ego, honour, and pride get in the way and there will be a continuation of the tough talk and little progress.

The people with a vested interest in continuing the conflict on all sides (including the US and Iran) are the ones who need to be stopped.

 

[*d*]

My gawd are you ever full of crap. Once again you show yourself as a master of misinformation. Do people really take you seriously??? Vague or depends on who you talk to?? Really? Well how about talking to Mahmoud Komati, deputy chief of the Hezbollah's political arm. As loathed as I am to get anything from the Fox News web site, it is an Associated Press piece, which by the way has a better rep. for getting quotes straight than over half the junk you quote, any ways it goes on about how the leadership underestimated Israel's response to the "cross border raid".

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205546,00.html

What foggy world do you live in or is this the type of misinformation that you like to peddle, and if so how can anyone here believe anything you post????

Oh I give the under/over on Hezbollah breaking the cease-fire a total of 20 minutes and blaming Israel at 21 minutes.


bbk

Wow, you're abrasive. Can't you respond courteously? I asked 'basketcase', in a civil manner, if there was any official info on the location of the kidnapping. To date I have only seen news releases. Like the one you quote. The only thing official and impartial (and I use that word lightly) that I've seen is from the UN and they say the 2 soldiers were captured along the border. The Komati interview is not anything authoritative as it originally comes from an Associated Press article. The author, Faramarzi, may have even taken a few interpretive liberties and added an extra word or two that Komati never said. Other news media happily took the interpretive interview and run with it. But Komati never once said there was a cross-border raid. Those are Faramarzi's words. Faramarzi never actually quotes him as saying those words. When it comes to where the Israeli soldiers were actually captured, Faramarzi only states that Komati said 'from a military base'. Where was that base? Not sure, but in the very same sentence Faramarzi says that Komati charged 'that Israelis had taken Hezbollah leaders from their homes at night'. I take it the Hezbollah leader's homes are in Lebanon.
Also take note of this Faramarzi statement in the article: 'In the past, he [Komati]said, Israeli responses to Hezbollah actions included sending commandos into Lebanon, seizing Hezbollah officials and briefly targeting specific Hezbollah strongholds in southern Lebanon'.
What were Hezbollah's actions? Where did those Israeli commandos go?
Lots of questions and only interpretive news to answer them. In fact AP where the ones that originally stated a Lebanese police report, that Hezbollah had captured the Israeli soldiers in Lebanon. Other western news stories originally said it happened in the Lebanese town of Aitaa al-Chaab. Don't get me wrong, I have no love for Hezbollah. They very well could have crossed the border into Israel and kidnapped those soldiers. Hezbollah's spiritual leader, Nasrallah was eager enough to carry out 'Operation Promise Fulfilled'. But there was nothing that even he said that indicated where the kidnapping took place.
So where is the official info? Or are you just going to fire insults at me again?