"The incident near the border was the first deadly attack carried out by Palestinian militants since a cease-fire went into effect in the coastal strip 10 days ago." This from Haaretz, your basic Israel opposition newspaper.

What Haaretz wrote there would be quite compatible with it being u known whether the bomb had been placed prior to the ceasefire.

In any case if it were all post ceasefire, that wouldn't necessarily indicate that Hamas was breaking the ceasefire. After all the most deadly bomb explosion in the Irish troubles took place at Omagh after the ceasefire was in operation; fortunately the British government didn't respond to it as an IRA act - which it wasn't.

I note that the Israeli government did not hesitate in order to investigate these kind of considerations before carrying out a reprisal attack.

Moreover before this bomb Israel had already broken the ceasefire on several occasions according to this Press Association report :

"In the days immediately following the ceasefire there was shelling by Israeli gunboats and some gunfire along the border - including the killing of two men Palestinian officials identified as farmers - but there were no serious clashes."

Could it possibly be that the expression "no serious clashes" means the only deaths or injuries incurred were Palestinian farmers and suchlike?