Thanks Ben. My one of my favourites would have to be Portfolio (Hutchings and Dyble composing) as it such a simple and catchy ditty. Also respect to you and your family for the work that ye have done in the OT and Lebanon.

OVER 4 HOURS THE IDF BEGGED AND ATTEMPTED TO REASON WITH THE TERRORISTS AND PEOPLE INSIDE TO STOP FIRING AND GIVE IT UP. THE ARABS KEPT UP AND EVEN OPENED UP ANOTHER FRONT BY SHOOTING FROM THE TOP FLOOR IN ADDITTION TO THE BOTTOM FLOOR..AND INCREASED THE FIRE..FOR OVER 4 HOURS... THERE HAS TO BE AN END TO EVERYTHING EVENTUALLY.... THE ARABS DETERMINED THE END.... BY THEIR OWN ACTIONS, OR FAILURE TO ACT PROPERLY. 8 YEARS, 10,000 ROCKETS FROM THE ARABS .... MILLIONS OF LEAFLETS DROPPED, THOUSANDS OF CELL CALLS TO ARABS... RADIO TRANSMISSIONS TO THE ARABS BY THE ISRAELIS ***WARNING THE ARABS THAT THE ISRAELIS WERE ABOUT TO DEFEND THE ISRAEL LAND BY ATTACK OR ACTUALLY COUNTERATTACKING..... TO LEAVE THE AREA AT ONCE... I WOULD THINK THAT ANYONE STILL THERE WAS THE ENEMY.... THE QUESTION STILL REMAINS..... WHEN WILL THE ARABS STOP ATTACKING THE JEWS.... THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR OVER 3500 YEARS THE JEWS WERE BORN THERE DAVID RULED THERE ABRAHAM THE FATHER OF BOTH NATIONS WALKED THERE AND RAISED HIS FAMILY THERE. YITZHAQ NEVER LEFT ISRAEL AND JACOB WALKED AND LIVED THERE KING SOLOMON BUILT THE JEWISH TEMPLE THERE.. ON THE VERY SAME LAND THAT DAVID LIVED AND RULED.... YOU WILL NEVER EVER DIG AND FIND ANYTHING OF ANY MAKE BELIEVE ARAB PALISTINIAN YOU WILL FIND ARTIFACS OF KING DAVIDS CITY THOUGH... AND DAVID WAS NOT CHINESE..HE WAS A JEW.....

What's funny about these "eye witness" testimonies is that they always know what hit them. I don't think any of them could was able to identify if it was an air strike or an artillery shell or a tank or mortar boom... not to mention WHO fired it... If the building next to you was stuck with a missile would you know Goldstone??? Why do you think they would???

Let's look at it this way: Supposing London (now we know that both of you are from England) was being threatened by an imminent terrorist attack, say another subway bombing. Supposing the police had only several days to investigate, find and stop the perpetrators. And, to continue putting this threat within a social context (as I've cautioned you both to do but with no evidence that you understand), the people most threatened were yourselves, your family members, friends, colleagues and the living members of the old Fairport Convention folk group (minus the late and lamented Sandy Denny who died falling from the stairway in her home while she was in her prime). Suppose, furthermore, that the perpetrators were caught because the police used every means possible to find them including the torture of civilians in order to extract crucial information plus the intimidation of children who also had knowledge of the the whereabouts of the would-be perpetrators. Now, would you be thankful that the perpetrators were caught or would you have blamed the police for their methods? Remember, in life there are often dilemmas which provide for no easy answers. Perhaps you'd be willing to respond to this not so hypothetical situation which I've just brought up. Then, let me remind you, the state of Israel faces such dilemmas every single day. Now, would you be honest enough to respond and stop spouting declarations from the UN which obviously do not cover assymetric warfare situations. If you respond honestly and in a thoughtful manner, even if I disagree, you'll have gained a modicum of respect on this website.

With respect to "not replying" regarding "Staying Alive in the Mideast", I hope you realize that I am not always at the computer, I sleep, eat and workout. Besides, sometimes a person may reply and not be published and, at other times, the article in question has been replaced by a newer one. Finally, at times I really have to reflect on matters before I can make a reasonable reply. Whatever the reason, I have not dismissed you. In fact, you are invited to contact me personally through my email which I purposely publish underneath my name. Others have contacted me and, if you do, I will consider your remarks in a serious and respectful manner. So, in the future, if you have not received a response or are not satisfied with mine and wish to continue the discussion, kindly feel free to make personal contact.

Hi Galut, [This is the third time I’ve replied to you, this time I’m taking out a URL in case that is what is stopping the moderator(s) from posting this reply] < Whether or not your info about IDF is Correct> It is. Nobody here can dispute that the IDF have used Palestinians as human shields in light of the Israeli High Court ruling on the matter. <- your lack of condemnation of Hamas Tatics of using human shields demostrates a glaring bias on your part> Not at all. I fully condemn the use of human shields by any army/militant group including Hamas. However my posts on this thread are not about Hamas, I clearly stated that my posts are fully directed at those who would deny that the IDF have committed any form of war crime. Aside from being irrelevant in relation to the misconduct of the IDF there is no one here who would argue that Hamas is not guilty of war crimes. Simply put the issue here is not Hamas’s war crime, this is about the IDF war crimes and more importantly those numbskulls who would deny that the IDF commit war crimes. < by not condeming the use of humanshields on the part of hamas only adds encouragement to hamas to continue the practice....> If you apply this logic further then all those rabid posters who deny that the IDF have used civilians as human shields (and there are so many of these type of posters) are also encouraging the IDF to continue the practice. Galut which is worse, those who do not condemn Hamas for war crimes or those who do not condemn the IDF (supposedly the most moral army in the world) who actually made it a practice and policy to use human shields?

them so much?

The pretzel-twisted argument of Jonathan Dahoah Halevi does prodcue one chilling inference. That if members or former members of the IDF or IL leadership were in a synagogue they are natural targets. There may be many very attentive resistance Palestinians who have no doubt understood Halevi's argument and like the pretzel he has baked. His argument is a moral and practical disaster if accepted by all.

your silence on my post speaks volumes !

quote "[This is the third time I’ve replied to you",.... yes I've had that happen ...one time the will allow URLS the next they don't....not sure why.. ==== my basic concern here is the preception that only israel must sterolize its wars and hamas and other terror organizations which are more guilty of war crimes are simply left out of the disscussion ...they must be a part of the disscussion as thier actions of poking the Israeli Bear with thier qassams , mortors and sucide bombers ...precipitate the Israeli responces... for sure where there is provable evidence that the IDF activly violated war crimes law ...proseqution should be persued.... but in places like Gaza where it is known that hamas uses intimadation to make sure witinesses tell the story thier way ...investigators must be sure to dig deeper...

And in a brief, honest moment, Matty states, "absolutely nothing".

to believe everything they tell you without checking facts?

if your child was about to poke a sleeping bear with a stick....would you get mad at the bear or engage your child and tell him that is a dangerious thing to do..... that was the situation in 2005 when Israel evacuated Gaza and even gave them operational green houses to feed thier population and the thankyou that Hamas gave was thousands of rockets and mortors.... Israel initialy restrained itself but finaly had to close the borders...and then when israel had enough -cast lead- in the wild a bear would take out the one poking him....israel has shown itself to be a pretty tame and restrained bear.... in any war there is going to be unwanted casuaties....and intances of human violations against humanity ....and those violations IF varifiable ...prosequted.... with hamas, hezbulah And Fatah the use of unconventional tatics is a norm and the use of intimadation to carve its view of the truth is part and parcel of that same package...making it extremely difficult to straight and truthful answer....so the goldstones of this world will get dubious info at best....

My mother in law came from Bengazi, Libya. In WWII her house was bombed by the British. They were actually bombing a church across the street where the Nazis were storing weapons and her house was also damaged. Ok, so what? If houses of worship are used for military purposes, they should be destroyed. I don't recall anybody investigating the Brits for blowing up the church.

Houses of worship of all faiths are fair game in any war if ammunition and/or enemy combatants use them to hide or meet in. Especially so if they use the house of worship to fire from. In addition to the example given by 47, there were other churches bombed by all sides during WWII. There was some effort to spare certain historic churches, but it wasn't always possible. I'm a Christian and would hate to see any church, especially an historic one, bombed during war. But, war is war. If a church is being used by an enemy as a base of operations, the church should be bombed to help shorten the war. If one side believes enemy combatants have taken up residence in a house of worship so that it becomes like a base of operations, attacking that house of worship is necessary to ensure a quick defeat the enemy. As someone else has pointed out, Muslims have never respect other Muslims' mosques. Muslims have blown up enemy Muslims mosques, even during prayer services when noncombatants may be inside.

the church to be the gathering of like minded christians....the building where they meet is not concidered the body of christ....only a place to hold services... services can be held any where even in homes....

You are correct in that scripture teaches there is only one Church in the world. The Church consists of people and not buildings. The Christian Church doesn't have any one location. However, there are some Christian denominations that would consider a church to be more than a mere building if the church contained 'holy relics'. Things like bodies, body parts, or items they consider extra-holy. This belief is not taught in scripture, but has been taught by men/women. The only house of worship, spoken of in scripture, as being more than a mere building was The Temple in Jerusalem. I'd hate to be in the company of those who helped destroy it (either time). Since the Third Temple hasn't been built yet, that's the reason I said all houses of worship are fair game in a war. Muslims have blown up mosques, Jews don't have anything as holy and not-to-be-touched as The Jerusalem Temple and Christians have just buildings, which other Christians have blown up in war. I hate to see any house of worship damaged or destroyed for whatever reason, but to save lives by shortening a war, houses of worship must be considered a target if used as an enemy base.

I agree for the most part ... if a warring party utilizes a holy site to conduct attacks then at some point they have to expect it will be attacked.....hopefuly those that attack such a site will try to minamize damage to it.... but sometimes it will have to be completly destroyed... the blame must go to those who inappropiatly used the holy site.