In a July 24 Aljazeera interview, Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah suggests the Lebanese government knew of Hezbollah’s plans – and gave the green light;
Interviewer: “Did you inform them that you were about to abduct Israeli soldiers?”
Hassan Nasrallah: “I told them that we must resolve the issue of the prisoners, and that the only way to resolve it is by abducting Israeli soldiers.”
Interviewer: “Did you say this clearly?”
Hassan Nasrallah: “Yes, and nobody said to me: ‘No, you are not allowed to abduct Israeli soldiers.’ Even if they had told me not to… I’m not defending myself here. I said that we would abduct Israeli soldiers, in meetings with some of the main political leaders in the country. I don’t want to mention names now, but when the time comes to settle accounts, I will. They asked: ‘If this happens, will the issue of the prisoners be over and done with?’ I said that it was logical that it would. And I’m telling you, our estimation was not mistaken. I’m not exaggerating. Anywhere in the world – show me a country, show me an army, show me a war, in which two soldiers, or even civilian hostages, were abducted, and a war was waged against a country – and all for two soldiers. This has never happened throughout history, and even Israel has never done such a thing.”
Well, it’s happening now. The portrayal of Lebanon as innocent bystander has always been a stretch – Hezbollah has operated in Lebanon with impunity for years and has a good deal of popular support. As it is with the Palestinian territories – sometimes people get the government they deserve.
Via Ed Morrissey, who also has links to video.
Update: This seems to back up the Nasrullah interview:
A senior Hezbollah official said Tuesday the guerrilla group did not expect Israel to react so strongly to its capture of two Israeli soldiers.
Mahmoud Komati, deputy chief of Hezbollah’s political arm, also told The Associated Press in an interview that his group will not lay down arms.
Here we go…
“The truth is _ let me say this clearly _ we didn’t even expect (this) response…. that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us,” said Komati. He said Hezbollah had expected “the usual, limited response” from Israel to the July 12 cross-border raid, in which three Israelis were killed.
In the past, he said, Israeli responses to Hezbollah actions included sending commandos into Lebanon to seize Hezbollah officials or briefly targeting specific Hezbollah strongholds.
Hezbollah the victim. Who didn’t see that coming?
He said the Shiite group had anticipated there would be negotiations on exchanging the Israeli soldiers for three Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails, with Germany acting as a mediator as it did before.
Guess they anticipated wrong. Tough break.
Fox News Breaking: One of Top Three Hezbollah Leaders Killed in Southern Lebanon
Bob
Check out a few photos of some UN outposts – often you’ll see the Head-Choppers’ flag alongside or even above the UN rag. Tea-time is always a fun time at the outposts as you get to try yer traditional or an Indian or often the local terrorists brand of chai.
Very friendly, maybe too friendly some might say! And of course if the head-Choppers’ needed you to look the other way while they went about there terrorist business, well isn’t that what tea-time buddies do for each other?
Bob,
Don’t listen to the other guys. Tell everyone you know friends, relatives, work mates, etc “Supporting Israel is the equivilent of pissing on the Canadian War Memorial and the grave of the Unknown Soldier.”
They’ll love and admire you. Get some bumper stickers made … hand them out at malls. You have a real good chance of making the CBC National … you’ll be a hero!!!
Condolences to this soldier’s family….Here is a closer look at this man who signed up to be an observer….and his take on any targeting being “deliberate”….*highlighted* as some of his final thoughts….
3w.tv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060718/mideast_lebanon_UN_060716/20060718
“…….I cannot give you any info on Hezbollah position, proximity or the amount of or types of sorties the IAF is currently flying. Suffice to say that the activity levels and operational tempo of both parties is currently very high and continuous, with short breaks or pauses. Please understand the nature of my job here is to be impartial and to report violations from both sides without bias. As an Unarmed Military Observer, this is my raison d’etre.
What I can tell you is this: we have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both artillery and aerial bombing. The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters from our patrol base.
*****This has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity.****
I thank you for the opportunity to provide you with some information from the front lines here in south Lebanon.
Maj Hess-von Kruedener”
smells like someone farted. bloody bob trolls!! thought we near got rid of them damn rascals
The attack on the UN post appears, right now, to be egregious. Somebody in the Isreali Chain of Command needs to be held accountable.
Bob :
Those Peace Keepers had Hezballah flags flying. Gee I wonder why they where targeted.
Mark Steyn
07-13steyn.mp3
Kate may want to put the Picture up or not, But this site even shows the post that was hit & the flags it was flying.
No pity for those who take sides with head choppers. Sorry.
Bob :
Those Peace Keepers had Hezballah flags flying. Gee I wonder why they where targeted.
Mark Steyn
07-13steyn.mp3
Kate may want to put the Picture up or not, But this site even shows the post that was hit & the flags it was flying.
No pity for those who take sides with head choppers. Sorry. Frankly I would not pee down there throats, if they where on fire.
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2006/07/international-peacekeepers.html
Sorry tried to get the link in , before i mistakenly posted it too early.
This is a good war. Lotsa very bad people are being obliterated, their apprentice child terrorists are being dispersed — (although I hope not too many are being evacuated to Canada) — their bases/homes/rocket launching pads are being destroyed, and now, as a bonus, some UN enemy collaborators have been eliminated. They deserve that even if they are Canadian.
With any luck, all of the Unifil forces, which in the past have helped Hizbollah kill Israelis, will scuttle away and hide, as they should. They are worse than useless. They are enabling evil. They have watched these past few years as Hizbollah installed thousands of missiles. Why did they allow that? So Israeli children could be killed.
Owl
Are you calling for the deliberate murder of Candian Soldiers?
Please clarify.
Grey, please get some caffien.
Owl makes an excellent point. Those who stand by and watch bombs and rockets and AA being installed should not be alarmed when thos installations become targets.
Rule one! Move your kids and family away from weapons sites. duh? Aww, I never talk like that. What the heck, must be the heat. = TG
TG
So now you’re saying Canadian Soldiers deserve to be killed?
Prime Minister Stephen Harper:
Proud To Be a Canadian.
Thank you, Prime Minister.
God Bless Canada. …-
(Canadian PM) No peace in Mideast with Hezbollah
National Post ^ | 2006-07-26 | Allison Hanes
CAMBRIDGE – A proposed international military force in southern Lebanon should not just keep peace but root out terror, Stephen Harper said yesterday.
While the Prime Minister does not want to see Canadian soldiers as part of a peacekeeping mission in the region, embroiled in fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, he said at a news conference in southwestern Ontario that the force should seek to remove from the Middle East those non-state actors that have been able to stockpile weapons and launch attacks against Israel.
“It is the Canadian government’s hope that the international community will take this opportunity to deal in a forthright manner with this problem,” said Mr. Harper, singling out Hezbollah and Hamas.” …
“Mr. Harper also called the evacuation of Canadians from bomb-riddled Lebanon an operation without precedent in the country’s history.
He praised the public servants from a range of government departments who have been working both in Canada and overseas to co-ordinate the massive rescue mission, which has involved an armada of chartered ferry boats and commercial jetliners.”
More: Re co$t of evacuation…
“I can’t give you a cost estimate at the moment,” he said. “I can tell you that the instructions I gave when we began the evacuation process was that we were to spare no expense — that if necessary, we’ll fund it out of the contingency funds of the government of Canada.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1672381/posts
Prime Minister Stephen Harper:
Proud To Be a Canadian.
Thank you, Prime Minister.
God Bless Canada. …-
(Canadian PM) No peace in Mideast with Hezbollah
National Post ^ | 2006-07-26 | Allison Hanes
CAMBRIDGE – A proposed international military force in southern Lebanon should not just keep peace but root out terror, Stephen Harper said yesterday.
While the Prime Minister does not want to see Canadian soldiers as part of a peacekeeping mission in the region, embroiled in fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, he said at a news conference in southwestern Ontario that the force should seek to remove from the Middle East those non-state actors that have been able to stockpile weapons and launch attacks against Israel.
“It is the Canadian government’s hope that the international community will take this opportunity to deal in a forthright manner with this problem,” said Mr. Harper, singling out Hezbollah and Hamas.” …
“Mr. Harper also called the evacuation of Canadians from bomb-riddled Lebanon an operation without precedent in the country’s history.
He praised the public servants from a range of government departments who have been working both in Canada and overseas to co-ordinate the massive rescue mission, which has involved an armada of chartered ferry boats and commercial jetliners.”
More: Re co$t of evacuation…
“I can’t give you a cost estimate at the moment,” he said. “I can tell you that the instructions I gave when we began the evacuation process was that we were to spare no expense — that if necessary, we’ll fund it out of the contingency funds of the government of Canada.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1672381/posts
“A proposed international military force in southern Lebanon should not just keep peace but root out terror.
While the Prime Minister does not want to see Canadian soldiers as part of a peacekeeping mission in the region, embroiled in fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, he said at a news conference in southwestern Ontario that the force should seek to remove from the Middle East those non-state actors that have been able to stockpile weapons and launch attacks against Israel.”
PM Harper is spot on here – but now wait for the carping and whining from the usual suspects to begin.
Any “buffer zone” force is going to have to do two things to be successful:
1. Confront – and neutralize – the military arm of Hezbollah.
2. Control – not just monitor – all Lebanese border crossings with Syria, airports and ports.
The US and UK are giving it a by.
France now says fine but it shouldn’t be a NATO force.
If it goes in under the “UN peacekeeping” rubric, it will be worse than useless.
This dog won’t bite and Canada should give it a by too.
Gray: So YOU’RE saying that Israelis should be continuously and mercilessly bombed and terrorized without responding?
I would expect no sympathy if I casually stood by a sniper “observing” his actions/reactions when the police showed up. Hezbollah set up their post right beside the UNIFIL post and has had it there for an extended period of time. Any sane person with a shred of intelligence would realize that, once the shooting begins, they shouldn’t stand beside the target.
Of course, TG is not condoning the murder of Canadian soldiers…he is condemning the UN for complicity in their deaths for keeping the post directly in the line of fire.
You’re an a**hole.
JJM re a proposed international military force in southern Lebanon: “If it goes in under the ‘UN peacekeeping’ rubric, it will be worse than useless.”
And that’s because there is no peace, so how can any government or the U.N. credibly talk about a peace keeping presence in the region? It’s just more fuzzy, bleeding-heart thinking: If we want peace and say there is peace, then, magically, there will be peace. That’s whiney, childish, typically leftist thinking, not reality.
UNIFIL should have looked to its members’ own safety–not to mention the safety of the people of the region, which was their mandate, after all–by ensuring that Hezbollah’s actions were properly monitored and reported rather than becoming cozy with the Hezbollah terrorists. Given that it’s a U.N. force one is not surprised at their duplicity with Hezbollah forces, which is a sad statement on what one has come to expect from U.N. “peacekeeping” forces.
It’s easy to cry “foul” when the going gets tough, but it’s pretty clear that the UNIFIL presence has been sleeping on the job–or worse, consorting with one side of a conflict they’re supposed to be monitoring–which is inexcusable seeing as they’ve had almost 30 years to get their job done properly.
Yet another reason to scrap the U.N. and look for a viable alternative to a thoroughly corrupt, top-heavy, and ineffectual organization. And while we’re at it, maybe the U.N. could find someone other than Kofi Annan to head it up, someone with international credibility, who is honest and beyond reproach, bribery, and the racial-leadership lottery.
Is this too much to ask?
“UNIFIL should have looked to its members’ own safety–not to mention the safety of the people of the region, which was their mandate, after all–by ensuring that Hezbollah’s actions were properly monitored and reported rather than becoming cozy with the Hezbollah terrorists.”
It’s my experience with the UN, notwithstanding widespread incompetence and corruption amongst many (but by no means not all) of its national contingents, that its observers generally do monitor and report quite thoroughly.
However, the problem with all that UN monitoring and reporting is that it never leads to any concrete action.
The 800,000 or more people massacred in Rwanda were quite literally monitored and reported to DEATH by UN observers.
Oops! I’m writing too quickly.
The words in paraentheses at my line 6 should have read:
“(but by no means all)”
rather than:
“(but by no means not all)”
The death of UN “peacekeepers” is sad and to be mourned. However, the UN staff were not there performing their UN mandate, to supervise the withdrawal of Israeli forces, etc. They were scurrying about providing aid in the middle of bombardments, knowing that Hezbollah was deliberately using them as shields, and relying entirely on the superior capability of the Israeli’s to be precise. Well, you take the risk of error. I have not seen anything credible to suggest the Israeli hit deliberately targetted UN personnel. Erros happen. If you walk out in the rain with an umbrella with holes, you better expect to get wet.
I see that the political/ideological direction has been received. Had seen it earlier on another “conservative” site before posting my 9:48 PM last night: it was all UNIFIL’s and the UN’s fault.
I was only wondering why SDA was so slow on the uptake. Imagine the banshee screams if the other side had killed a Canadian UN observer!
“SDA” was working until midnight putting signage orders together.
Now, if the best you can contribute here is to accuse me of receiving political direction from my Masters in the Conservative Party, you know where the door is.
Anyone remember Canadian troops being bombed by American planes? In Afghanistan? During a war with terrorists? You’d almost think that war was unpredictable and messy.
Are some of the posters here deliberately trying to be thick or do they truly believe their drivel? The UN has posts set up next door to Hezbollah operations. It’s like riding around on a ten-point buck during hunting season and getting pissed off when you get hit with a bullet. Does common sense exist in the world anymore? You’d almost think that Hezbollah has it in their best interest to keep the UN right where it is.
If a Cdn UN observer was stationed at a post next to an Israeli base of operations on the front line and got hit with a bomb, the same logic stands. What in the world is the UN doing keeping their observers in such a ridiculous state of risk? Why would they leave their people in the direct line of fire? …Whereas I can guess what the Hezbollah apologists would say; “Israel is using the UN ‘observers’ as a human shield.” Sound familiar?
agitfact must be thick. No one is saying it is not the Israelis fault. The Israelis screwed up. What is lacking in credibility is the claim that the UN was deliberately targeted. The other point being made is that “friendly fire” is an intrinsic risk of being imbedded in a zone being bombarded, particularly when it is known the enemy uses the tactic of locating near UN locations.
The AP article by Faramarzi doesn’t really confirm anything in the Al-Jazeera interview. It only shows that Komati, Hezbollah’s political deputy chief, and Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s “Secretary General”, (are they modeled on the UN?) are singing the same song. Surprise, surprise.
There is no mention of collaboration by the Lebanese government.
Murray makes a good point: why take so long to profess shock and amazement at the Iraeli response?
agitfact said, “…Imagine the banshee screams if the other side had killed a Canadian UN observer!”
Like Ham, I would answer that had the U.N. operation located itself in the same vicinity as Israeli forces then the logic is: “U.N. observer, beware–and GET OUT!” This is a war zone, for crying out loud, not a chess board where precise and accurate moves are nearly always possible, and from an armchair.
JJM’s point is well taken: “…[U.N.] observers generally do monitor and report quite thoroughly.
However, … it never leads to any concrete action.” In this case, concrete action on the part of UNIFIL might have been to get out of the line of hostile fire.
hassle
If you can find one word I’ve written to say Isreal shouldn’t defend herself please do so. Rather, on another board, I have vigourously defended Isreal’s right to do so. However that right does not excuse any and all conduct.
I am astonished that on a presumably conservative board no one will condemn a poster who calls for the murder of Canadian soldiers. It is pathetic really. So much for your patriotism . . . .
If rejecting calls for the murder of a Canadian Soldier makes me bad name in your eyes, then it is an appellation I’Il wear proudly.
gray, would you kindly give the exact quote where a poster here “calls for the murder of a Canadian Soldier” (your words)? This is a long post, and a quick perusal doesn’t reveal it.
Calling for the murder of anyone doesn’t sound like the usual fare here, and I’m wondering if you’re either putting words in someone’s mouth or are taking a comment out of context. That seems a more reasonable explanation than taking what you’ve alleged at face value.
“even if they are Canadian.”
gray, you are splitting hairs. Note the word “if.” Owl, although somewhat bluntly, is stating that aiding and abetting a criminal, in this case Hezbollah, should be punishable. In this case, Israel has retaliated against crimes against its nationhood with force. Aiders and abettors beware – even IF IF IF IF Canadian. In this case, no one is suggesting the unfortunate Canadian casualty is involved with Hezbollah. But, based on the statements made by the Indian UNIFIL contingent, there does seem to be instances of collusion by UNIFIL with Hezbollah – thus leading to Owl’s statement.
Cherrypicking sentence clauses, presenting them out of context and then holding the writer(s) to account for some ridiculous assertion you then extrapolate could be considered somewhat unfair and misleading.
Gray said: “I am astonished that on a presumably conservative board no one will condemn a poster who calls for the murder of Canadian soldiers.”
Gray, threads move along so quickly.
It helps others to know where your charge comes from if the time the post, that caught your eye, was included.
There is an investigation into the latest deaths of UNIFIL.
And while that happens, this story about a Canadian-Israeli-Beduin being arrested for spying for The Hezbollah. This does add fuel to the ongoing debate about mulitple citizenship availabilities, in this country, even if he was not a soldier for Canada.
3w .jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292002968&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
“A Canadian-Israeli geographer, Professor Razi Salakh, has been under arrest for the past 18 days on suspicion of spying on behalf of terror groups, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) announced on Wednesday.
The man, a Beduin, does not live in Israel, but his family lives in the Nazareth area.
The Shin Bet and Galilee police apprehended the suspect as he was photographing military installations in the North…….”
and now, as a bonus, some UN enemy collaborators have been eliminated. They deserve that even if they are Canadian.
Posted by: owl at July 26, 2006 01:43 AM
Doesn’t seem to be hairsplitting to me. Just a literal reading.
They are addressing this topic on thread further up, I’ll post any follow ups there
Gray, your initial claim was that someone specified “Canadian soldiers”.
Your 02:49PM post only addresses “Canadians”.
What would be indicated by that ommission now?
I have another post waiting to come on stream, tied up for link-formatting, possibly.
But here is another link for your interest, from today, of canadian-lebanese coming back to this country, already known for their terrorism activities, IN Canada:
.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=f8b05859-b49a-4756-b5c5-e5da6501bd9e
…”Mr. Daher, who was born in Lebanon, is a former Alberta cinema owner who intelligence authorities have identified as a member of Asbat al-Ansar, an al-Qaeda-linked faction.
He is accused of running a terrorist support network based in the Edmonton area that used a Muslim charity as a cover for his alleged activities as an extremist fundraiser and recruiter.
The man, who is also wanted by the United States, had been living under house arrest at his mansion in the Bekaa Valley town of Karaoun with his wife and Canadian-born children.
Also believed to be living in South Lebanon was Fawzi Ayub, a member of Hezbollah’s elite terrorist unit, Islamic Jihad.
After taking part in a hijacking in Romania that left dozens dead, Mr. Ayub immigrated to Canada. He was later reactivated by Hezbollah, which gave him a new identity and sent him on assignment to Israel.
He was arrested in the West Bank town of Hebron in 2002, but two years ago he was sent back to Lebanon as part of a prisoner exchange between Israel and Hezbollah.
Hezbollah has had an active presence in Canada for more than 15 years. Canadian operatives have engaged in everything from auto theft to procurement of materiel. The network dissipated after Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon, but the resurgence of violence has the Jewish community worried.
Canadians leaving Lebanon are being asked for identity documents that are being screened against police, intelligence and immigration watch lists.”
gray: Thanks for responding to my question.
I don’t, however, see how you can jump from owl’s statement which, after all, was actually about “UN enemy collaborators” which MIGHT include a Canadian soldier, to the allegation that owl is “call[ing] for the murder of Canadian soldiers” and then, even more outlandish, suggest that posters on this thread condone the murdering of “Canadian soldiers.” Let me repeat: owl called for the elimination of
“UN enemy collaborators.”
You suggest that SDA posters’ so-called apathy in this regard is “pathetic really.” May I suggest that your literal reading of one post on this thread from which you make a giant leap to an unfounded conclusion is what is pathetic really?
Well I will say one thing, you guys are prepared to go down with the ship.
I mean talk about hairsplitting. Are you suggesting that Owl was talking about anyone else than the Canadian officer who has noted in the reports of the incidence form the very beginning? His words are quite explicit “they deserve that even if they are Canadian”. What do you think he meant ?
What would be indicated by that ommission now.
Nothing. The context has always been that it was Canadian soldier.
gray wrote: “I am astonished that on a presumably conservative board no one will condemn a poster who calls for the murder of Canadian soldiers. It is pathetic really. So much for your patriotism . . .”
But what owl actually said was: “and now, as a bonus, some UN enemy collaborators have been eliminated. They deserve that even if they are Canadian.”
Then, when challenged, gray implied that the above quoted accusation about an sda contributor (owl) suggesting “the murder of Canadian soldiers . . .” was a logical conclusion: “[It d]oesn’t seem to be hairsplitting to me. Just a literal reading.” (And I’m a monkey’s uncle . . .)
So much for gray’s IQ and/or language processing abilities. gray, you need some tutoring in interpreting text. Your “literal” reading is no such thing. Your inference from what owl actually said is nonsensical: so nonsensical that none of the patriotic sda posters got the same message– which would be, I believe, why we didn’t condemn it. (gray, I’ve just made an inference here. It’s one that makes sense. Therefore, it’s OK. Got it?)
gray, we conservatives at sda don’t mind a good debate. Opposing views keep us on our toes: Sometimes we learn something we didn’t know, sometimes we see and appreciate a different perspective, always, we need to reexamine our data in light of an opponent’s assertions.
However, when the assertion given is utter nonsense–as is the above statement about “the murder of Canadian soldiers”–as well as based on a gross misrepresentation of another poster’s remarks, a line has been crossed.
gray, you owe owl and the posters here an apology for insulting all of us. I talk of “toddler” behaviour to my students: That means irresponsible, self-referential, entitled, “me me me” behaviour. You made a mistake–a big one–and have confounded it by glossing it over. As usual: Toddlers never take responsibility for their behaviour and they persist in their magical thinking. That’s OK if you’re literally a toddler. It’s not OK if you’re not.
So, please smarten up.
I won’t say it again, gray, but one last time:
owl was referring to “UN enemy collaborators,” whatever nationality. You’re basically saying “my country[wo/man] right or wrong,” and owl’s saying, no, wrong is wrong, whether you’re a Canadian soldier doing something wrong or a Chinese one, or an American one, or….
I don’t know about going down with the ship, but I believe in saying what you mean and meaning what you say, and not playing around with language–because it matters.
That’s why “the pen is mightier than the sword” was…penned.
BTW, gray, you could also use some tutoring on the use of appropriate language: Intemperate or inaccurate language quite decisively undermines one’s credibility.
E.g., Your use of the word “murder” for the death of “UN enemy collaborators” in the present situation in Lebanon is altogether inappropriate.
(On consideration, I believe that the word “murder”, figuratively, might be a good one for what you appear to do to the English language and a good debate.)
The mind boggles.
What do comments about someone’s IQ or writing style have to do with a good debate?
If you could somehow convince me that owl was only speaking hypothetically and he didn’t know that the “UN enemy collaborator” ( a despicable statement in its own right) was a Canadian soldier, I might stop and think about it for a second. But that defies belief since the issue has been reported from the start as involving a Canadian soldier. Owl’s intent was quite clear and that you can’t or won’t see it, well clearly there is nothing I can do about that.
Take your last shots if you will. Really when it gets to this point, fact, figure or f**k off isn’t going to change anybody’s mind. I won’t respond further on this thread.
gray says it all: “What do comments about someone’s IQ or writing style have to do with a good debate?”
“The mind boggles.”
Yes, gray, it certainly does.