While G-8 leaders cobbled together a statement on the Mideast conflict in a bid to display unity, the criticism of Israel and the cease-fire call contrasted with the U.S. stance. Washington has rejected calls for an immediate cease-fire and blamed Hezbollah for the conflict's intensity.

Russia's Foreign Ministry said "international humanitarian law" demands that strikes be launched only against military targets, even if there are suspicions that civilian facilities could be used to support military actions.

Russia has consistently rejected Western accusations that it has used too much force during its wars against rebels in Chechnya, in which thousands of civilians have been killed. The Kremlin refers to the conflict in Chechnya as an anti-terrorist operation.

The statement also echoed Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's calls for an immediate cease-fire, saying it was a "first step that cannot be delayed." The United States has said Israel has the right to defend itself and that what is needed is a "meaningful" cease-fire.

A cease-fire would allow civilians to safely leave areas affected by the fighting, the ministry said.

Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Saltanov met Thursday in Damascus with Syrian President Bashar Assad, who said Syria was prepared to help promote a cease-fire, according to another Foreign Ministry statement.

But Israel's ambassador to Russia rejected the notion of an immediate cease-fire, saying it would not end the Hezbollah threat.

"Let's say a cease-fire is declared tomorrow - 8,000 rockets will continue to threaten Israel," Ambassador Arkady Mil-Man told a news conference. "The essence of Hezbollah won't change overnight."

Mil-Man also underscored Israel's friendship with Russia, while criticizing Russia for not recognizing Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations.

"We believe it's wrong and it's not helping things," Mil-Man said of Russia's position.

Russia is prepared to provide Lebanon with urgent humanitarian aid, the Foreign Ministry said.

It also said that Russia hoped the U.N. Security Council would take a broad approach to the growing crisis, warning that "it is unlikely to be successfully overcome" if efforts to tackle the problem do not encompass all its aspects.

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono wrote to UN General Secretary Kofi Annan to express concern over the conflict and pledge Jakarta's readiness to contribute to a possible UN force there, his spokesman said.

"The president expressed support for the formation of an international force under a UN mandate and Indonesia is willing to participate in such a force by contributing at least a battalion," spokesman Dino Patti Djalal said.

The letter followed his call Tuesday for a ceasefire between
Israel and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah militia, whose capture of two Israeli soldiers 10 days ago triggered the violence.

Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation, has no diplomatic ties with Israel.

More than a week of Israeli airstrikes and incursions into Lebanon have left more than 330 dead in Lebanon and hundreds of thousands had fled their homes fearing that the Jewish state could mount a full-scale ground offensive.

Annan has called for an immediate cessation of hostilities and for an expanded contingent of peacekeeping troops to be deployed in the region.

G8 leaders -- from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Russia and the United States -- have also proposed an international stabilisation force for Lebanon, where the UN currently has a 2,000-strong contingent.

Muslim-majority Malaysia said it was also considering sending troops, pending UN Security Council approval.

Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak said that Malaysia, the current chair of the world's largest grouping of Islamic countries, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, was well placed to send soldiers.

Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar added: "The international community ... should make every effort to ensure that these aggressive military actions by Israel do not lead to a widening of the conflict involving other countries."

"It is no good for the United Nations to say they are concerned about the humanitarian catastrophe. What are they doing about the humanitarian catastrophe? That is important," he said.

Asian newspaper editorials also called for the international community to act swiftly to prevent an escalation.

Japan's most-read paper, the conservative Yomiuri Shimbun, commented: "Before it becomes too late, the international community must take quick actions to prevent the situation from deteriorating."

The Asahi Shimbun, an influential liberal daily, said in an editorial: "Isn't it a time to establish a framework in which extremists would take part in dialogue? It is the role of the international community to build the foundation for it."

Australia's Financial Review criticised world leaders for taking too long to respond to the crisis, singling out the United States.

"The international community led by the United States, has been slow to respond to what is becoming an extraordinarily destructive regional conflict that threatens a wider war.

"This tardiness reflects poorly on the US's international leadership role and is partly a consequence of the fact that its energies have been dissipated on a war in Iraq gone awry."

China's People's Daily called for both sides to sit down and talk.

"History tells the peoples of the Middle East that armed force does not solve the enmity between the Arabs and the Israelis.

"Only if a political road is followed will it be possible to replace war with talks, fighting with consultation, extremism with reason, and hostility with tolerance."

Hong Kong's South China Morning Post also said more needed to be done.

"Only a multinational stabilising force will bring peace to the region, but those capable of making that happen -- the UN, the US and Britain among them -- are watching and commenting instead of taking action," it said.

Privately some senior ministers said they were "appalled" that Mrs Beckett had failed to visit the region to demonstrate British concern at the scale of the Israeli bombardment. Mrs Beckett told the Cabinet that those calling for a halt to hostilities, including the French government, were in effect demanding a one-sided ceasefire.

She told MPs Britain was committed to ending the conflict and maintained that Britain had urged restraint on all sides, and said she "regretted" loss of life.

But MPs queued up to criticise the Government. Joan Ruddock, Labour MP for Lewisham Deptford and a former minister, asked Mrs Beckett: "There can be no doubt that Hizbollah started this conflict. But would she not agree that the response by Israel with 300 Lebanese civilians dead, 1,000 injured, and half a million people dispossessed, is utterly disproportionate?"

Michael Ancram, the former shadow foreign secretary, asked: "Does she believe that the action taken by the Israeli government, understandable initially as a response against terrorism, is proportionate or disproportionate?"

Chris Mullin, a former Foreign Office minister, said: "Is it not just a tiny bit shameful that although we rightly condemn Hizbollah for what they have done, we can find nothing stronger than the word regret to describe the slaughter and misery and mayhem that Israel has unleashed on a fragile country like Lebanon?"

Mrs Beckett insisted that Syria and Iran were "giving support" to Hizbollah. She said: "Syria finances Hizbollah and facilitates the transfer of weapons including thousands of weapons which appear to be supplied by Iran."

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: "Both myself and others have repeatedly asked for the Prime Minister to support an even-handed response. We all accept the Hizbollah should be condemned.

"Tony Blair must now accept that Israel's actions are disproportionate and amount to collective punishment. There should be an immediate ceasefire as Kofi Annan has now confirmed."

In particular they demanded the removal of the plaque that pays tribute to the Irgun, the Jewish resistance branch headed by Menachem Begin, the future Prime Minister, which carried out the attack on July 22, 1946.

The plaque presents as fact the Irgun's claim that people died because the British ignored warning calls. "For reasons known only to the British, the hotel was not evacuated," it states.

Mr McDonald and Dr Jenkins denied that the British had been warned, adding that even if they had "this does not absolve those who planted the bomb from responsibility for the deaths". On Monday city officials agreed to remove the language deemed offensive from the blue sign hanging on the hotel's gates, though that had not been done shortly before it was unveiled last night.

The controversy over the plaque and the two-day celebration of the bombing, sponsored by Irgun veterans and the right-wing Menachem Begin Heritage Centre, goes to the heart of the debate over the use of political violence in the Middle East. Yesterday Mr Netanyahu argued in a speech celebrating the attack that the Irgun were governed by morals, unlike fighters from groups such as Hamas.

"It's very important to make the distinction between terror groups and freedom fighters, and between terror action and legitimate military action," he said. "Imagine that Hamas or Hezbollah would call the military headquarters in Tel Aviv and say, 'We have placed a bomb and we are asking you to evacuate the area'."

But the view of the attack was very different in 1946 when The Times branded the Irgun "terrorists in disguise". Decades later, Irgun veterans are unrepentant. Sarah Agassi, 80, remembers spying in the King David Hotel.

She and a fellow agent posed as a couple. They danced tangos and waltzes, sipped whisky and wine while they cased out the hotel.

On the day her brother and his fellow fighters posed as Arabs delivering milk and brought seven milk churns, each containing 50kg of explosives, into the building. Ms Agassi waited across the street until her brother rushed out. She said that she then made the warning call to the British command in the hotel.

Sitting in the luxurious hotel lobby, she expressed no regret. "We fought for our independence. We thought it was the right way . . . If I had to fight for Israel, I swear even now I would do anything."

There are 25,000 US nationals in Lebanon and they will arrive in Cyprus at 2,000 a day. The 2,300-strong 24th Marine Expeditionary Force is offshore with assault ships and destroyers. The purported reason for such a heavy military presence is to "help the civic powers" in the evacuation. But US diplomats privately acknowledge fear of an attack by Hizbollah. The first batch of Americans who came, on chartered ferry, the Orient Queen, are staying at the International State Fair complex in Nicosia, two huge halls with 1,152 orange camp-beds.

For many, the 10-hour journey out was fraught. More than 100 had forced their way out of the ship at the port of Larnaca after waiting more than an hour in stifling heat. Some objected to the barrack-like accommodation and the basic facilities. "I was hungry and when I tried to get food at four in the morning they stopped me," said a tearful woman. "Now I am told I am not on the list to go out tonight. We have to put up with more of this."

Mona al-Makki, 48, from Chicago, holding her three-year-old niece, Samira, on her knees, added: "I know they are having to look after a huge number of people, but this is not a place you want to spend any amount of time.

"I guess our attitudes are coloured because while we are sitting here, good homes belonging to our relations in Beirut have been destroyed by the Israelis without a murmur of protest from our President. I was asking, 'Why the hell is no one in Washington doing anything about this?' "

Gabriel Mansouraty left Beirut in 1981 during fierce fighting that led to an Israeli invasion. He settled in El Paso, Texas, as a manager of a plastics company, and took his American wife and two sons to Lebanon to show how the land of his birth had made a success of itself after years of strife.

"None of my family had seen Lebanon and I have not been back for 25 years," said 53-year-old Mr Mansouraty. "I was amazed by what has been achieved, the new buildings, the restaurants, the roads the great lifestyle. One only really appreciates that if one knew how devastated the place was. And now this.

"The Israelis have destroyed the buildings, the roads and that lifestyle. They have put the country back 30 years. I cannot believe this all happened because of the capture of two soldiers. This must have been months in planning.

"The only good thing is this; back in 1981 it was Christians fighting Muslims with the Israelis instigating much of it. This time the Israelis have united the people. I stayed in a Christian neighbourhood and people there opened up their homes to the Muslims."

Emile Maroud, also a Christian, believes there is an Israeli agenda aimed at stopping Lebanon making progress. He said: "I had no time for the PLO and I have no time for Hizbollah. But this is about more than that. Israel does not want to see another modern, progressive state in the region."

A Royal Navy assault ship, HMS Bulwark, has evacuated more than 2,000 British and dual-nationals. Martin and Denise Carlin, from Burnley, in Lancashire, were visiting their daughter, son-in-law and three grandchildren.

Mrs Carlin, 48, said "It has been a nightmare. It was a war zone. I won't be back for a long time, if at all. This has really put me off."

The conflict: Day nine

* US marines land on Lebanese soil for the first time in 20 years to assist with evacuation of more than 1000 Americans. The US military pulled out of Lebanon in 1983 after a suicide bomber destroyed a barracks in Beirut killing 241 service personnel. British citizens continue to be evacuated.

* Fierce fighting breaks out on the Lebanese side of the border after an Israeli patrol is ambushed by Hizbollah fighters. Al-Jazeera says four Israeli soldiers were killed. Israeli military says it sustained six casualties.

* Hizbollah fire 30 rockets into northern Israel but no casualties are reported. Israeli jets drop 23 tonnes of explosives on a bunker in south Beirut hoping to assassinate Hizbollah's leader.

* Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen, whose country holds the EU presidency, calls for a ceasefire to the conflict and expresses 'grave concern' over humanitarian situation. EU gives Lebanon €10m in aid.

* UN Secretary General Kofi Annan calls for immediate cessation of violence and condemns Israel for using excessive force. Hizbollah's actions are holding "an entire nation hostage," he says but Israel's actions are weakening the Lebanese government and putting civilians at risk.

* A Palestinian teenager is killed in central Gaza's Mughazi refugee camp as militants and troops exchange fire. Israel carries out a series of air strikes on Mughazi, killing two militants and injuring dozens of civilians. A 10-year-old Palestinian girl dies from wounds sustained in an air strike on Wednesday.

* Washington refuses to pressure Israel into declaring an immediate ceasefire. "We seek a long-term cessation of hostilities that's part of a comprehensive change in the region and part of a real foundation for peace but no one has explained how you conduct a ceasefire with terrorists," says US Ambassador John Bolton.

The overwhelming endorsement was a positive boost to the Bush administration which has exclusively backed Israel in the conflict, blaming Hezbollah, Syria and Iran.

The resolution follows a similart unanimous vote by the Senate on Tuesday, which together with the House delivers a virtual 100% endorsement of Israel's policies in the Middle East.

Senator John McCain said the Lebanese people and government must pay a price for Hezbollah attacking Israel from its territory.

He and others were attacked by the minute number of reprsentatives who voted against the resolution, saying it went too far, and was supported as a result of the Israeli lobby,and the self-interest of members who were pandering to Jewish voters.

'I'm just sick in the stomach, to put it mildly,' said Rep. Nick J. Rahall.

Rahall, together with a small band of others opposing the resolution, submitted a draft alternative that left out reference to holding Lebanon responsible for Hezbollah's actions, and called for restraint from all sides. Rahall said the proposal was 'politely swept under the rug,' which he says reflects the influence Israel has in Congress.

'There's a lot (of lawmakers) that don't feel it's right, but vote yes, and get it the heck out of here,' Rahall said.

Rep. Darrell Issa, who co-sponsored the alternative resolution was in agreement. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobby 'throws in language that AIPAC wants. That isn't always the best thing for this body to endorse,' Issa said.

'This is the usual problem with any resolution that talks about Israel, there are a lot of closet naysayers up there in Congress, but they don't want to be a target of the lobby' of Israel, said Eugene H. Bird, president of the Council for the National Interest, a group that harshly condemns Israel's military campaign.

'These guys aren't legislating. They're politicking,' said James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute.

According to The Associated Press, an AIPAC spokeswoman said Congress's overwhelming support for Israel reflects the support of U.S. voters and not any pressure applied by lobbyists. 'The American people overwhelmingly support Israel's war on terrorism and understand that we must stand by our closest ally in this time of crisis,' said Jennifer Cannata.

The Administration recognizes that anything short of what it calls "a permanent cessation of hostilities," in which Hizballah is deprived of the means of restarting them, will be counted as a victory for the radical Shi'ite movement. Having acknowledged that the Lebanese government is too weak to disarm Hizballah, as required by U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, the Administration views Israel's military campaign as the best way to achieve the same outcome, by pummeling Hizballah until it is ready to put down its weapons and allow the Lebanese army to take control of the border.

But Secretary Rice, who heads for New York Friday to coordinate activities with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, will face pressure from diplomatic allies who want an immediate cease-fire. European, Arab and U.N. diplomats share the goal of a deal that not only frees the two captive Israeli soldiers and stops Hizballah rocket fire, but also puts the Lebanese army in control of its southern border, protects Israel from further provocations and pursues the disarmament of Hizballah. But they're not convinced those goals can be achieved through a military campaign that has destroyed much of Lebanon's communication infrastructure and energy supplies, and looks likely to send hundreds of thousands of refugees pouring into an already tense and overburdened Beirut. The Israelis are hoping their retaliation for Hizballah's blatant provocation will turn the majority of Lebanese more forcefully against the Iran-backed group, which retains massive popular support among Lebanese Shi'ites. Even if that were to occur - which is far from certain - it could threaten a resumption of civil war, particularly if the Israeli offensive has weakened the already shaky central government.

Implicitly criticizing the U.S. delay in starting a peace mission, Annan's deputy, Mark Malloch Brown, on Wednesday stressed the need for an immediate cessation of hostilities. "The Middle East is littered with the results of people believing there are military solutions to political problems in the region," he told reporters.

But analyst Jon Alterman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies sees Rice's late entrance into the diplomatic fray as prudent: "At this point, both Hizballah and the Israelis feel they can advance their cause by turning the screw a few more times," he says. "That's not where you want to start a negotiation. You want to start when both sides are starting to look around and say, where's this really going?"

But it's more complicated than that, because there are many more with a stake in the outcome of the crisis than the two sides fighting. They include:

- The U.S., which finds itself balancing its desire to see Hizballah "defanged" with some of its other regional interests that may be damaged by the fighting, and the rising pressure from most of its allies to expedite its intervention.

- The Lebanese government - a fragile coalition at the best of times, whose leaders, though outraged at Hizballah's dragging them into war, nonetheless see Israel's campaign as threatening the democracy they've tentatively been constructing since a U.S.-led international campaign forced Syria to leave.

- The pro-Western Arab regimes, who have, uncharacteristically, largely avoided criticizing the Israeli offensive - because they see the Hizballah provocation as an Iranian power play in their backyard - but whose citizenry hail HIzballah as a champion of the battered Palestinians. Nowhere will the street-level passions stoked by Israel's campaign be more fierce than in Iraq, where Shi'ite followers of Muqtada al-Sadr are already rallying in support of Hizballah.

- Iran and Syria, the key regional sponsors of Hizballah, who each arguably have their own reasons for wanting to see the crisis first escalated, then resolved on terms favorable to Hizballah.

- Washington's European allies, many of whom fear the U.S. is gambling recklessly on Israel's being able to achieve its military objectives, at risk of the crisis spiraling out of control and creating a humanitarian and political disaster.

If the gamble pays off, and Hizballah is crying uncle a week from now, the U.S. will have vindicated itself in the eyes of allies, and inflicted a stinging defeat on the likes of Iran and Syria. If not, the Bush Administration may find itself drawn into some hitherto unthinkable diplomatic minuets to untangle a dangerous mess in southern Lebanon.

The plans emerged following two days of meetings in New York with United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and envoys he sent to the region this week. Although Annan called Thursday for an immediate cease-fire, that is opposed by the United States. The Bush administration says the United States and the U.N. agree on the wider diplomatic goals for the region.

Earlier, White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration is working hard to end violence in the Mideast and that criticism of its measured response is coming from people who want "egg-timer diplomacy."

"Nobody has been more active than we have," said Snow, defending administration policy amid continuing U.S. opposition to a quick cease-fire without built-in steps for longer-term stability in both Israel and Lebanon.

Making the rounds of the morning network news shows a day after Rice went to the U.N., Snow said most of the peacemaking efforts have been behind the scenes.

Meanwhile, Israel resumed airstrikes Friday and prepared for a possible ground invasion, warning people in the south to flee.

Asked on NBC's "Today" show whether Washington was trying to discourage Israel from any notion of a ground invasion, Snow replied: "We have not been doing military collaboration or planning with the Israelis. But what we have been doing instead is urging the Israelis to use restraint."

Also, the White House announced on Friday that British Prime Minister Tony Blair, a leading U.S. foreign policy ally, will meet with Bush next Friday at the White House. The Middle East crisis will be high on the agenda.

The administration also made plans to press for another Senate vote on U.N. ambassador John Bolton, whose temporary appointment expires at the end of the year.

A key Republican who had opposed Bolton's confirmation before, Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said he would now support Bolton for the post, citing the tense Middle East situation and what he said was Bolton's good performance.

Bolton's nomination remains before the Senate. Snow said White House officials are discussing with Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., how to proceed - whether to begin committee hearings again or to try to bring Bolton's nomination up directly for a Senate vote without new hearings.

Bush appointed Bolton during a congressional recess in 2005 after Senate Democrats and Voinovich blocked a vote.

On the Middle East violence, Snow on Friday urged patience with the administration's methodical approach.

"The people who are talking about too little, too late, they may not be keeping the diplomatic scorecard," he told NBC.

"Everybody who wants this kind of egg-timer diplomacy, who thinks, OK these things ought to happen quickly, you don't understand human nature," Snow said. "Terrorists are not going to say, 'You know, that's right, I'm going to pick another career.' "

"Many times, they're going to fight to their death, and we hope that doesn't happen in Lebanon."

Prime Minister John Howard said he was satisfied with the progress of the evacuation plans and defended the government's handling of the situation.

"It could be the largest movement of Australians overseas ever in our history, and I think the Department of Foreign Affairs has done a remarkable job in very difficult circumstances," he told national radio.

"And I think some of the criticism is quite unfair and I reject it."

Some leaders of Australia's large Lebanese community have complained that the government's response has been slow and uncoordinated compared to the evacuations organised by countries such as the United States and Britain.

More than 160,000 Australians claim Lebanese ancestry, making them one of the largest ethnic groups after Britons, Italians and Greeks. There are also some 25,000 dual Lebanese-Australian nationals living in Lebanon.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer rejected as "absolutely, completely and utterly untrue" suggestions that Australia was making less effort in evacuating its citizens because those at risk were of Arab descent.

"We don't discriminate between people on the basis of their ethnicity, we focus very much on just getting Australians out," he said.

It was hoped every Australian citizen who wanted to get out of Beirut would be out by Sunday, he said.

"We can't give any guarantees because it's going to depend on the situation in the port there in Beirut which is fairly chaotic," Downer said.

Australian taxpayers would cover the cost of the rescue effort and those evacuated would not be asked to contribute.

Downer said the government faced fresh problems on what to do with the evacuees once they were out of the danger zone.

"Having got them out, to either Turkey or Cyprus, which is basically the situation, then of course there becomes a question about what happens to them next," he told ABC Radio.

"In the case of Cyprus, there just isn't going to be the infrastructure to support all these foreigners arriving there.

"So we are going to have to get people out of Cyprus to hubs, probably hubs in the Middle East and Europe, but we haven't finalised the details."

Several hundred Australians have managed to get out of Lebanon on ships operated by other nations, including Britain and Greece.

But Australia's own rescue efforts have suffered several setbacks, including the double-booking of a ferry chartered via a Turkish company which failed to arrive at Beirut's increasingly crowded port on Wednesday.

"I stress it's very chaotic," Howard said. "Arrangements have broken down in the past, not only for Australia but for other countries, and there's no guarantee that won't happen in the future."

Moving to Israel is something Joel and Debbie have talked about for years. "It was really part of our dialogue ever since courtship," Joel said, adding that Debbie was more of the driving force behind their decision to finally come. Joel, 37, and Debbie, 36, met during their student days at Columbia University. After marrying, they lived for several years in Riverdale, New York before settling in Joel's hometown of Sharon, a wooded community of some 18,000 people about 22 miles southwest of Boston.

Sharon is known for its strong Jewish presence. According to the web site of the local Catholic church, the town?s population is 75 percent Jewish. Joel was not sure of the exact numbers, but recited a list of the local Jewish congregations: three Orthodox, two Conservative, one Reform and one Reconstructionist.

For a committed Jew, the town is about the best place one can imagine in the Diaspora, Joel said. He made it clear that the family's decision to relocate to Modi'in was not because they were unhappy in Sharon. "It's an amazing community. We enjoyed a wonderful suburban lifestyle, with three kids and a dog, a wonderful house [about 2,400 square feet], a two-car garage, eight-tenths of an acre, and it's close to my parents."

Debbie, originally from Los Angeles, has also come to love New England and said that she will especially miss the fall, when the leaves change colors and the family goes apple picking. Israel may lack this verdant charm, but it offers a different kind of beauty, she explained. More importantly, the Israeli landscape is imbued with a deeper sense of purpose for her: "You sense not only the physical history of the land, but also the history of all the people who have died to protect it and worked so hard to build up this incredible gift for the Jewish people, and I feel like I have to accept it if I'm able to do that."

American history fails to engage Debbie in the same personal and profound way. "I don't feel that same connection, and it's ironic, because I'm a seventh-generation American and that's pretty rare."

Joel and Debbie hope their children - Noam (7), Meirav (5) and Liron (four months) will develop the same type of ties toward Israel. "We're hoping that they'll look to Israeli soldiers as heroes rather than the commercial superheroes and princesses that seem to dominate American children's media," Debbie said.

If Wayne Madsen's sources are correct, the Israelis are now using poison gas against the "uncivilized tribes" of Lebanon. "According to a former U.S. weapons expert who served in Iraq, the artillery shell in a photo taken in Lebanon (see photo here) is a chemical weapon delivery device. It is being handled by an Israeli Defense Force soldier and Hebrew lettering can be clearly seen on the armored vehicle. Another chemical weapons shell of the same type can be seen lying on the ground to the right. It is not known what type of chemical is in the chemical canister, however, gas dropped by the Israelis in villages in southern Lebanon has resulted in severe vomiting among the civilian population" (see as well this schematic). "Media commentators have scoffed that Israel, with its relatively unique history, would ever use chemical weapons or poison gas in any war. It is precisely because of that perception that they are using such weapons. The deniability factor prevents the media from taking seriously the credible reports of banned weapons being used by the Israelis."

Of course, the stenographers laboring diligently for the corporate media would not dare to mention Israel's well-documented history of biological and chemical terrorism against innocent and unwitting Arab non-combatants.

In 1948, as the Zionists ethnically cleansed Palestine, the Acre aqueduct was targeted. "The Zionists injected typhoid in the aqueduct at some intermediate point which passes through Zionist settlements," writes Salman Abu-Sitta, president of Palestine Land Society in London. According to Abu-Sitta, a report issued by the Lebanese Red Cross

stated that there are at least 70 known civilian casualties, others may not be reported. It was determined that the infection is "water borne", not due to crowded or unhygienic conditions as claimed by the Israelis. It was decided that a substitute water supply should now come from artesian wells or from the agricultural station, just north of Acre (see map), not from the aqueduct. Water chlorine solution was applied, inoculation of civil population started, movement of civil population was controlled (lest refugees heading north towards Lebanon will carry the typhoid epidemic with them, as intended by the Zionists)....

The city of Acre, now burdened by the epidemic, fell easy prey to the Zionists. They intensified their bombardment. Trucks carrying loudspeakers proclaimed, "Surrender or commit suicide. We will destroy you to the last man." That was not a figure of speech. Palumbo, in The Palestinian Catastrophe, notes the "typical" case of Mohamed Fayez Soufi. Soufi with friends went to get food from their homes in a new Acre suburb. They were caught by Zionist soldiers and forced at gun point to drink cyanide. Soufi faked swallowing the poison. The others were not so lucky, they died in half an hour.

In addition, the Zionist state attempted to poison a water system in Gaza. The commander of the Egyptian Forces in Palestine communicated the following to General Headquarters in Cairo:

15.20 hrs, 24 May [1948] Our Intelligence forces captured two Jews, David Horeen and David Mizrahi, loitering around army positions. They were interrogated and confessed they had been sent by Officer Moshe to poison the army [and the peoples'] water supply. They carried with them water bottles divided in the middle. The top part has potable water and the bottom part has a liquid contaminated with typhoid and dysentery, equipped with a rear opening from which the liquid can be released. They confessed they were members of a 20-strong team sent from Rehovot for the same purpose. Both have written their confession in Hebrew and signed it. We have taken the necessary medical precautions.

Salman Abu-Sitta also suspects two cholera outbreaks, one in Egypt and a second in Syria, claiming the lives of over 10,000 people, were caused by the Israelis, although the evidence is less convincing.

In a report entitled Bioterrorism and Biocrimes: The Illicit Use of Biological Agents since 1900, Dr. W. Seth Carus of the Center for Counterproliferation Research, National Defense University, stated under a subtitle, Case 1947-01: "Zionist" Terrorists 1947-1948, "Jews plan to use this inhuman weapon against the Arabs in the Middle East in their war of extermination." Carus also documents the comments of David Horeen's sister, Rachel Katzman: "I met one of [my brother's] commanders in a lecture in Jerusalem. I asked him whether my brother had really attempted to poison wells. 'These were the weapons we had', he said, 'and that's that.'"

Israel has plenty of other weapons, gratis the United States and its own burgeoning weapons program, but it appears it prefers to augment its arsenal with chemical weapons. "The Palestinian ministry of health revealed on [July 11, 2006] that the Israeli army has used a new type of explosive in its offensive on the Gaza Strip. These explosives contain toxics and radioactive materials which burn and tear the victim's body from the inside and leave long term deformations.... The ministry showed that most of the injuries which the hospitals receive result from huge explosions which cause burning and severing of limbs, including the inner parts of the body. This causes long term deformations.... It is added that doctors in Gaza have been forced to amputate limbs of at least 12 injured Palestinians as a result of injuries sustained in the current Israeli offensive on the Strip," reports Electronic Intifada.

In an earlier instance, the IOF apparently used an "unidentified gas" in the Khan Younis refugee camp. "Medical sources at Nasir Hospital in Khan Yunis have announced that more than 40 Palestinians suffered a strange case of hysteria and nervous breakdown because they inhaled a toxic gas fired for the first time by the occupation army during the bombing of Palestinian areas," the Voice of Palestine in Ramallah reported (see the script for the documentary film, Gaza Strip, a PDF document). "Specialists believe that this is an internationally banned nerve gas. Dr Muhammad Abdallah Abd-al-Mun'im, official in charge of medical teams who treated the injured, said that the gas bombs fired last night on the western camp of Khan Yunis gave off heavy yellowish and highly-concentrated smoke. Those who inhaled it, he said, suffered a nervous breakdown and vomited blood. Abd-al-Mun'im said this gas is not the same kind that was fired by the occupation forces previously and that it is the first time that the doctors have seen this."

Indeed, the corporate media, faithfully pro-Israel, may "scoff" at the allegation Israel is now using chemical weapons in Lebanon. However during the 1982 invasion the Soviet Union accused Israel of using "barbarous" weapons, including chemical weapons (see this timeline posted on the Vermonters for a Just Peace in Palestine/Israel website).

When it comes to using biological and chemical weapons, Israel is a junior partner to the United States, most recently accused of using chemical weapons in Fallujah, Iraq. According to Dr. Khalid ash Shaykhli, an Iraqi health ministry official, "the US military had used internationally banned chemical weapons, including nerve gas," according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Of course, the corporate media scoffed at this allegation, too.

Chalk it up to the deniability factor.