"You have failed to make the distinction between someone who’s been imprisoned for a crime (the Palestinian prisoners) and someone who’s been imprisoned for being a Jew (Shalit). I don’t judge people by their race or ethnicity, but I’m getting the impression that some of you guys do."
That is a ridiculous statement. Shalit was not imprisoned because he was a Jew. He was imprisoned because he was a legitimate military target, who was caught by those resisting an ongoing military occupation, and then used as a bargaining chip to get some of their own fighters returned. That has nothing to do with him being a Jew.
It would be like saying that Australian soldiers are being targeted in Afghanistan because they are Christian. They are being targeted because they are part of an occupying army.
It interests me how Israeli apologists constantly speak of the "criminality" of Palestinians who kill Israeli's , yet never of the criminality of the Israeli's who kill many, many more Palestinians. It stinks of a deep seated racism, where the only lives of value are Jewish ones.

@Rhys, Shalit was not a “legitimate military target”, but even if he was the only reason he’s seen as one is because he’s a Jew. Let’s face it, the only reason Israel is seen as an “occupier” is because they are predominantly Jews. If Israel were an Arab state, the Palestinians would not be kidnapping its soldiers, sending in suicide bombers or lobbing missiles at them. And the Afghanistan analogy doesn’t work. These are Israeli soldiers defending Israel’s borders, not halfway across the world fighting in someone else’s war. As for criminality, I’m discussing the article, and the article is about Gilad Shalit being swapped for 1027 convicted criminals. Shalit is not a criminal. He was a conscript doing his job. You also clearly don’t know how to distinguish between killing and murder. When Palestinians lob missiles and rockets at Israel from civilian areas, Israel has every right and need to defend itself, and if the Palestinians don’t care enough about their citizens to fight fair it’s their fault if innocent civilians are killed. There’s nothing criminal about self-defence, especially when it’s as restrained as it is. I’d love to see how you’d feel if Palestinians were blowing up buses and cafes and so forth in your local town. You don’t think that’s criminal? But you do think that firing back in self-defence is? You’re warped.

Lindy,

Thanks for the reference. I withdraw my comment.

Montgomery,
Why is it self defence when Israelis kill Palestinians, yet it is murder when Palestinians kill Israelis? Why is it that in the opinion of people like yourself the Palestinians commit wanton acts of violence against Israelis and the Israelis "retaliate". I read the papers and I am well aware that Israel is the initiator more often than not.
You state that the Israeli Army are only protecting their borders. Where exactly are those borders then? In addition to protecting borders they are also controlling a population who are not Israeli citizens, on land they have lived on for many hundreds of years. That is called a military occupation.
Like many Israeli apologists, you make the absurd claim the Palestinians carry out attacks on the IDF due to a hatred of Jews. Of course it has nothing to do with the ongoing occupation, the wanton killing of Palestinians, far too often children, the demolishing of houses and the ongoing theft of land and water resources. Not to mention the blockade of Gaza, the collective punishment of 1.5 million people.
You also talk about the restraint shown by the IDF. I didn't notice much restraint during operation cast lead. I reckon the parents of the 400 children killed during that wonderfully restrained massacre would disagree with you. Or maybe those children were all terrorists too.
People have a right to retaliate against these crimes. Or are you suggesting they should they simply stand by idly and accept such treatment from the ever virtuous Jewish State?

Rhys, it’s absurd to say that Palestinians hate Jews, is it? Perhaps you’d like to explain these Hamas clips:

http://mideastparalleluniverse.blogspot.com/2010/10/what-part-of-hamas-hatred-of-jews-dont.html

350 words is far too little to have a debate about a conflict that’s been going on for decades, and you’ve clearly made up your mind anyway. You really should try seeing both sides of a situation instead of interpreting everything to fit into your worldview and putting your own spin on it. I have a great deal of sympathy for the Palestinians who don’t engage in terrorism, but they need to stop blaming Israel for their problems. The Palestinians have been betrayed by their fellow Arabs and their own leaders. Hamas deliberately builds military installations in the middle of populated areas - what sort of people expose their own population recklessly like that? Israel supports a two-state solution, but the Palestinians refuse to even recognise Israel’s right to exist. Even the King of Jordan saw that Israel wasn’t responsible, saying “Since 1948 Arab leaders have approached the Palestine problem in an irresponsible manner.... they have used the Palestine people for selfish political purposes. This is ridiculous and, I could say, even criminal.” And what about the Syrian PM Khaled Al-Azm: “Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees... while it is we who made them leave.... We brought disaster upon ... Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave.... We have rendered them dispossessed.... We have accustomed them to begging.... We have participated in lowering their moral and social level.... Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson, and throwing bombs upon ... men, women and children-all this in the service of political purposes ....” Israel supports a two-state solution – all the Palestinians have to do is recognise Israel and stop engaging in terrorism, but they won’t, will they?! As Ms Gora noted in her article, if the Palestinians put down their arms today there’d be peace, but if Israel put down its arms there’d be no Israel. Can you deny that?

Montgomery states... "all the Palestinians have to do is recognise Israel and stop engaging in terrorism, but they won’t, will they?! As Ms Gora noted in her article, if the Palestinians put down their arms today there’d be peace, but if Israel put down its arms there’d be no Israel. Can you deny that?"

That is about the most ridiculous quote I've ever read, (other than the "land without a people for a people without a land") and simply repeating it doesn't make it true.
The Palestinians commit acts of violence "because of the occupation". No occupation, no violence.

What sort of two state solution are the Israeli's interested in? They have spent the past twenty years shifting more and more (over half a million) Jews into the occupied territories. They have then built a great wall snaking in and out of the West Bank, dividing it into a series of Bantustans. They have taken control of all the major water resources. The Israelis have done everything in their power to ensure that no viable two state solution can ever come to pass.
Netanyahu accepts the idea of a two state solution, provided there is a permanent Israeli military presence there, they have no military of their own, Israel controls all the borders and air space. Does this sound like a sovereign nation to you?
You obviously feel that the Israelis should not have to live in fear of violence by their neighbour. But do you extend the same curtesy to the Palestinians? Given their track record I certainly would not want the Israelis as my neighbour. And if they were I would want to be well armed.
I strongly oppose all acts of violence against civilians. However, it is the IDF that kills by far the most civillians.
At least the Palestinians have some kind of moral right to resist occupation. This morality is entirely missing with the Israelis, whose objective appears to be to steal as much land as possible and drive out or impoversih as many Palestinians as possible.