Ambassador Peck & Nasrallah; Hizbullah vs Israeli kidnapping

Back



Ambassador Edward Peck & Sheik Nasrallah, interviewed on Democracy NOW!, explain the truth behind the horrific Israeli attacks on Lebanon beginning in July of 2006. Hizbullah's kidnapping of soldiers was retaliation for Israel kidnapping Lebanese civilians for prisoner exchange.

Channel: News & Politics
Uploaded: July 31, 2006 at 6:52 am
Author: RBoon

Length: 0:01:56
Rating: 4.63
Views: 5,269

Tags: Hizbullah Government kidnapping Israel Lebanon

Video Thumbnail #1:




Video Thumbnail #2:




Video Thumbnail #3:




Video Url:


Embed Code:


Video Comments:
yecheap (Saturday 12th of July 2008 07:07:12 AM)
Boy cott ISRAEL -ever since GOD divorced Israel they have been a curse
CannonFodder77 (Friday 17th of October 2008 12:27:41 PM)
KILLING `PALESTINIANS AT A RATIO OF "8 vs 1" YEAR AFTER YEAR AND THEN WANTING PEOPLE TO BELIEVE YOU ARE THE VICTIM OF TERRORISM AND ANTI SEMITISM IS SIMPLY LAUGHABLE BY ANY RATIONAL, LOGIC, RELIGION OR CREED!. NO EXCUSES ARE ACCEPTABLE FOR THESE LEVELS OF STATE TERRORISM!. NOT EVEN THE JEWS RELIGION ALLOWS KILLING BEYOND AN EYE FOR AN EYE! Sourse of "8 to 1" ratio: BT Selem Israeli Human Rights Group & Amnesty International ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hamza1947 (Saturday 29th of March 2008 08:22:24 AM)
Fuck zionism...
vistavision2 (Friday 12th of October 2007 10:10:40 AM)
peck must be one the last professionals whom does apply the correct term "captured israel soldiers" as opposed to the propagated "kidnapped" of which soldiers cannot be kidnapped buy the very nature of their profession. Israel was lookiing for an excuse to get its ass kicked as it happended. Israel appealed for a ceasefire first. Military control is not a strategy but a tactic: something israel leadership does not understand.
scuddycares (Friday 30th of May 2008 11:19:53 AM)
so by entering israel and attacking an israeli border patrol and then 'capturing' the israelis was in fact an act of war and agression by hezbollah, who started it. thanks for clearing that up.
vistavision2 (Friday 30th of May 2008 02:37:19 PM)
If you were to study history as opposed to propaganda. What act of war? A state of war exists and has existed between Lebanon and israel since 1948; and shall continue to exist until a peace agreement is completed. Laws of War govern armed conflicts. Peace is made between former enemies. is this clear enough? If I was a champ of revising history or fabricated religions then I would have elected to become a zionist.
scuddycares (Friday 30th of May 2008 03:34:43 PM)
is something i said false? what act of war you ask? i fully explained it already in the first post, and u act like theres a big blank on your face. now what? copy and paste what ive already said? ok! so by entering israel and attacking an israeli border patrol and then 'capturing' the israelis was in fact an act of war and agression by hezbollah, who started it. here in the real world, they are separate wars in '48 '67 '73' '82 '06. what muddled garbage u post. bye
vistavision2 (Saturday 31st of May 2008 09:46:57 AM)
It is self-evident that you cannot grasp the concept of international relations. In the "real world: wars are not over until there is a peace agreement: Laws of War and Laws of Peace (Neutrality) govern international relations and NOT propaganda. Get aq clue! The Arabs are not one state.
scuddycares (Friday 30th of May 2008 11:22:52 AM)
youre a champ of revised history. the israeli knesset had just authorized expanding the war one month after the war started, and then nasrallah agreed to all israeli demands for a cease fire. the israelis ceased firing, but needless to say, hezbollah didnt fufill any of the demands of the cease fire.
vistavision2 (Saturday 31st of May 2008 10:01:18 AM)
If Hezbollah had not fulfilled the agreement then the battles would still be raging; wouldn't they now. read "see spot run" to acquire some reasoning skills.