"You have no justification for your disdain of the commenters here."

And your uncouth method of discourse disqualifies you from being anyone I would ever listen to seriously. It also identifies you, and many of those with similar opinions, as (dare I say it again) particularly clueless.

Learn to behave like a human being, and then perhaps your opinions will deserve respect.

"Palestinian media reported that the [bombing of Ghayan Nizar] was not a planned assassination, but rather a routine bombing of a target suspected by the IDF to contain weapons.

The IDF has code named such operations "roof knocking," in which the army informs the residents of s suspected building that they have 10 minutes to leave the premises. In some cases, residents of suspected houses have been able to prevent bombing by climbing up to the roof to show that they will not leave, prompting IDF commanders to call off the strike. In these cases, Channel 10 reported Thursday, the IAF sometimes launches a relatively harmless missile at the corner of the roof, avoiding casualties but successfully dispersing the crowd.

Sources familiar with Ghayan's record said he was one of the people who encouraged Gazans to climb on rooftops to prevent bombings.

It appears that the "roof knocking" technique was used in the assassination, but Ghayan decided to stay indoors with his family, and the army opted to bomb the house anyway.

A lecturer at Gaza's Islamic University, Ghayan, 49, had mentored suicide bombers and would sometimes go on patrol with Hamas fighters. He was known for his close ties to the group's military wing and was respected in Gaza for donning combat fatigues and personally participating in clashes against Israeli forces. He sent one of his sons on an October 2001 suicide mission that killed two Israeli settlers in Gaza.

He was also an outspoken advocate of renewing suicide bombings against Israel. Hamas said Israel would pay a "heavy price" for his death. Ghayan was one of the most extreme opponents of Fatah, and supported violence against Fatah's men during Hamas' seizure of power."

So the Israelis weren't even trying to kill the one senior guy, just to knock down his house. He preferred to be a martyr. If guys like that were interested in helping their fellow Palestinians to have a better life, rather than obsessing on the destruction of Israel, there would be no wars.

"ondellette, who knows more about the Geneva Conventions than all the rest of the letter writers here combined."

I appreciate what you are saying, and particularly the gentlemanly way in which you said it. On the other hand, I know a lot of extremely intelligent people who are fools, and ondelette's recent post demonstrates that he is indeed one.

'Learn to behave like a human being, and then perhaps your opinions will deserve respect.-- zenwick

Didn't you say that earlier today?'

Yes, I said it to omooex earlier today. People who think they are smart, but are too self-possessed to listen to the other side, but instead mock them, are fools, and are not worthy of respect. I'm trying to help educate them, but I understand it's a long shot.

By the way, I never said I'm in favor of the current Israeli action. In fact, I am not. I was just trying to have a civilized discussion of the issues, in the midst of what basically seems to have been a little antisemitic kaffee-klatsch.

... and just when I thought all the anti-semites had gone to bed.

Great screen name, BTW. I like the irony.

Once again, I am pleasantly surprised to find someone interested in conversation rather than attack.

You'll need to educate me: in what way is Israel in violation of international law by controlling its borders with Gaza? Every nation in the world controls its borders. The border with Gaza has been a main avenue for terror attacks against Israeli civilians for more than twenty years, so it stands to reason they will be restricted. It surprises me that the borders are open at all.

The bottom line is that Israel has always wanted peace with its neighbors, but that peace has never been available. The Palestinians could have had their state for the asking, at any time since 1967, by agreeing to live in peace and by foregoing the destruction of Israel. That has never been on the table until now, and is still not on the table where Gaza is concerned.

It's an arguable point. According to Wikipedia:

"Because the Palestinian Authority in Gaza does not believe it has sufficient control of the area at this time, foreign observers such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, Human Rights Watch and various legal experts have argued that the disengagement will not end Israel's legal responsibility as an occupying power in Gaza."

I don't believe the Geneva Conventions ever contemplated a situation where the previously occupied population continued to actively dedicate itself to the neighboring country's destruction, using primarily terrorist means.

Having said that, I generally agree with you, in that Israel might be better served in the long run by being less restrictive. However, I don't believe that what they are doing is illegal.

I would take the trouble to argue with you, but (as many here) you are simply a scoundrel who indulges ad hominem, so I won't bother. I hope you will think better of yourself one day.