Here: "In April 2002, during Operation Defensive Shield, the Israeli army surrounded Palestinian towns and
refugee camps in the West Bank, and entered them in force, systematically demolishing homes in
That was in a battle during a war, you joker.
It was the humane alternative to bombing the area.
Other armies just bomb the area in these situations. Israel uses bulldozers because it allowed for the destruction of installations without hurting or, G-d forbid, killing too many innocent civilians.
Incidentally, "refugee camp" is newspeak for "Arab village". The word is supposed to trigger sympathy for the Arabs. Jewish villages made up of people who fled 60 years ago are not called "refugee camps" because that would trigger similar sympathy for Jews. (Jewish refugees also don't get any money from the UN, not even if they are half Arab.)
I'll show you how this works:
Village or town founded after 1948 and populated by refugees from then:
Arab: "refugee camp"
Jewish village or town in the West-Bank or Arab village or town in Israel:
Arab settlement in Israel: "town" or "village"
Jewish settlement in the West-Bank: "outpost" or "settlement"
It didn't occur to the UN (or the media) to treat Jews and Arabs the same. Arabs live in towns and refugee camps, Jews live in settlements and towns.
There is a 3000-year old Jewish "settlement" in Hevron, surrounded by an Arab town settled 1000 years ago.
That's one of the "settlements" Obama wants destroyed, I think.
Anyway, I find it interesting that "Israel uses bulldozers in a battle even though bombing the area would be easier" transformed into "Israel bulldozes innocent families' homes for no reason".
And you don't think this is anti-Semitism???
Let me rephrase your quote, without changing its truth value:
In April 2002, during Operation Defensive Shield, the Israeli army surrounded Arab towns in the West Bank, and entered them in force, systematically demolishing buildings manually instead of bombing the area."
The changes I made to remove the propaganda:
1. "Palestinian" became "Arab". (I refuse to acknowledge that only Arabs are "Palestinians". If the land is called "Palestine", then certainly both Jewish and Arab inhabitants would be "Palestinians".)
2. "towns and refugee camps" became "towns". (The UN and the media do not differentiate between Jewish towns settled by Jewish refugees and others, I don't see why this has to be done with Arab towns.)
3. "systematically demolishing homes in many areas" became "systematically demolishing buildings manually instead of bombing the area". (I added the logical explanation for why one side decides to use bulldozers to destroy buildings in a battle. I also figure that "buildings" is more correct, since Israel destroyed mainly police stations and other non-civilian buildings and "homes" really is a word used for "house" when one wants to draw attention to the idea that families live there. It is more honest to say "buildings" when the target were buildings in general rather than homes specifically.)
You can change any news story to add your propaganda.
Take this example:
"Traffic police were attacked by drunk car driver. The armed drunk wounded a police officer and then walked into incoming traffic where he was hit by a car and died before the ambulance arrived."
(I made this up.)
This can be rephrased, without changing the truth value:
"Armed government units were involved in a fight with a civilian attending a social event. The civilian died on the spot. One officer was wounded."
It's the same story, but the focus is on different aspects of it. Both versions are true.
It becomes a lie when I retell the same story as:
"Armed governments units generally kill innocent civilians coming home from parties."
And that's what became of this story about the destruction of buildings during a battle.
The truth: Israel had once decided to use bulldozers to destroy buildings instead of bombs.
The other true version: Israel bulldozed "homes" during a battle with terrorists.
the lie: Israel bulldozes the homes of innocent people for no reason.
(Note that Israel doesn't do this any more. It proved too good a propaganda fodder for the terrorists. I still think it was an excellent idea. Note that I think that WHAT REALLY HAPPENED was the excellent idea. I do NOT think that the lie about destroying the homes of innocent people is true and that that was the right thing to do.)
So you destroy innocent people's homes, people who had nothing to do with the terrorism. If that's your opinion on it, then I truly feel sorry for you.
I am sorry, I might not have made myself clear enough.
I do NOT BELIEVE that Israel was destroying innocent people's homes. If I at any point implied that I think it was OK for Israel to do something instead of telling people repeatedly that it was a lie that Israel did this, I apologise. I meant to make it perfectly clear that I considered it a lie.
(And I thought I had totally exaggerated it with my many replies explaining the same thing over and over again. And yet here we are and some people still think that I believe the lie and support Israel perpetrating what the lie says Israel did.)
Take the higher road, and stop the fighting. If they're so wonderful and noble and what not - then take the friggin high road.
That's what the Jews did when the Germans screamed "death to the Jews". Since then we know that the world will simply watch.
It will NEVER happen again. The high road is, for non-Jews, something the Jews can take on their way to death.
I found the article I wrote about this some time ago: