From the Lebanese daily Assafir, on the rounding up of more of the Israeli spy ring in Lebanon, as reported by SANA (my emphasis):

“One of the prominent figures in the network confessed  that Israel has put itself on the alert 4 days before arrest of the two Israeli soldiers and provided its inactive spy cells with directives and technologies regarding targeting centers and headquarters of Hizbullah party in all Lebanese territories particularly in the Beirut's southern suburb.”

Israel uses on-the-ground local spotters to determine where to drop its bombs.  The spotters were told to be ready four days before the Israeli soldiers were captured, meaning that Israel had to have known that they would be captured, and when they would be captured.  If they had been captured in a surprise attack by Hezbollah inside Israel, Israel could not possibly have known that they would be seized, or when.

The captured Israeli soldiers were captured inside Lebanon (summarized here; see also here and here and here).  That means the self-defense pretext is a lie, and the concept that Israel has a right to defend itself, spouted by all its apologists, is irrelevant (the Hezbollah missiles were only sent after the Israeli attack was well under way).  In fact, Hezbollah only poses a military threat inside Lebanon defending it from Israel, and is absolutely no military ‘existential’ threat to Israel itself, meaning that all the discussions by the disgusting apologists for war crimes, fine considerations of when you can murder citizens under the pretext of ‘self-defense’, is immoral bullshit.

The only logical conclusion is that the Israeli generals sent a group of Israeli soldiers into Lebanon on a suicide mission, intending that they be killed and/or captured by Hezbollah.  It would not surprise me if they let Hezbollah know the soldiers were coming by broadcasting the information over signals they knew Hezbollah was monitoring.  The soldiers, of course, wouldn’t know what was planned for them, and would have assumed that this was just another of the many illegal Israeli incursions onto Lebanese territory.  In other words, the Israeli generals sent their young conscripts over the Lebanese border with the intention that they be captured or die, all in order to create the excuse for the pre-planned attack on Lebanon.

I’m sure the relatives of the soldiers are proud of them, on the assumption that their sacrifice was made to protect Israel.  I wonder how they’d feel if they realized that their sacrifice was really made in order to fill the swimming pools of the settlers, and that Israel, as a direct result of this foolishness, is actually much less safe.

(snip)

The following passages in italics are from

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/26/wmid26.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/06/26/ixnews.htmll

Last night two Israeli soldiers were killed and another kidnapped in a dawn attack by Palestinian militants who tunnelled under Gazas heavily protected border.

The attackers, believed to number seven or eight, surprised Israeli forces when they appeared at first light through a tunnel on open ground 300 yards inside Israel near a kibbutz.

Gaza is built on old semi-consolidated sand dunes. It is extremely unlikely that anyone could tunnel 500, or more, yards in the sandy ground of Gaza (300 yards into Israel plus 200 yards of no-mans land plus more to the tunnel entrance), without the tunnel collapsing at some point.

They split into three groups before launching simultaneous attacks on three Israeli defensive positions - a look-out tower, plus a tank and an armoured personnel carrier, both dug in, facing Gaza.

If you were only seven or eight, would you split into three groups? If you were only two, or three, would you attack a tank over flat ground, manned by four soldiers waiting inside to kill you?

They blew open the tanks rear doors with a missile fired from point-blank range before tossing grenades inside. Two of the tank crew died and another was severely wounded but the final crew member, the gunner, was forced out of the wreckage at gunpoint.

The rear doors are blown off and a few grenades popped inside. Tanks are not made to fall apart. Blowing off the rear doors would have taken a blast sufficient to seriously hurt those inside. The grenades would have then made mincemeat of them. One wonders if it is standard practice to wear a bulletproof vest inside a hot tank. One would think that the tank would be bulletproof enough not to require such a vest. Can Israeli tanks stop bullets, or not?

Later reports, from the New York Times and Guardian, tell use that Shalit suffered only minor injuries to his abdomen and one arm, even though everyone else in the tank was severely wounded or killed. Shalit would have been less than three feet away from those killed (there is no spare room in a tank).

Israeli trackers said they found his blood-stained bulletproof vest close to the Gaza perimeter fence.

The militants force Shalit to take off his bulletproof vest and leave it close to the Gaza concentration camp fence, in order to help the Israelis with their investigation.

By the way, whose blood is it on his bulletproof vest? Since later reports indicate it wasn't his, I guess he had the other soldiers blood and guts all over him. This means that he was very close to those killed by the grenades, which means he should have been severely injured, or killed, himself.

Meanwhile, two other militants attacked a nearby concrete watchtower.... The troop carrier was also damaged in another attack but it was unoccupied. The attackers then escaped back into Gaza by cutting their way through the perimeter fence.

Interestingly, the attackers escaped easily by cutting through the (electrified) perimeter fence, yet cutting through the perimeter fence in order to get in, was so hard to do, that they burrowed through half a mile of sandy ground instead. Something wrong with this story, perhaps?

After all this commotion, the soldiers in all the nearby Gaza concentration camp guard-towers, manage to miss a few Arabs running the 300 yards, over flat ground, back to the perimeter fence, miss them when they cut through it, and miss them running across no-mans land to safety. Any why, you may ask, did they not return through the tunnel they had painstakingly dug? Perhaps, they wanted to prove the total incompetence of the Israeli soldier.

If you believe this sad tale, I have a bridge to sell you.

The Hamas political leadership sought to distance itself from the incident last night when a spokesman said it had no knowledge of the fate of Cpl Shilat. Ghazi Hamad, a spokesman, said: "We are calling on the resistance groups, if they do have the missing soldier to protect his life and treat him well."

Yes, the Hamas political leadership had no idea of the fate of Cpl Shilat, as the story is a total fabrication.

If you are not already convinced that the whole story is a fabrication, ask yourself; What were the four Israeli soldiers doing in the tiny confines of that dug-in tank? Ask your self; How long were they going to continue sitting in that tank? All day perhaps, or till they roasted in the desert sun? Or, till another group of four took over on the next shift? And of course, having four soldiers in just one tank, wont provide a defense, so there will have to be hundreds of tanks and hundreds of soldiers all sitting in these tanks,...

all waiting,... all waiting,... all waiting,.... for exactly what?

Waiting for Palestinian children to throw stones at them, perhaps? Perhaps, waiting attentively for militants to dig a half mile tunnel through sandy soil, pop up, and rush them over flat ground, but not attentively enough to see them approach? Perhaps, they were waiting for the Egyptian army to materialize, Star Trek like, from their bases hundreds of miles away on the other side of the Suez canal? I dont know,... you tell me why?

Yes, the story is a total fabrication. A fake provocation to start a war.

(snip)