"Tiananmen Square was an internal atrocity all too common outside of democracies like Israel and Western countries."
So we trade with States who commit atrocities that are "all too common" but not ones who just commit "rare" atrocities - how do you tell the difference between the two?
As I said on the thread this discussion belongs on, your defence of Israel, "if any of those countries believed Israel responsible they would not have warm and friendly relations with such a criminal state" is now blown clean out of the water.
As I said, and you have just repeated, "business is business" whether the customer commits atrocities or not - now indication whatever of the world's clearly stated condemnation of Israel's 'terrorist state' status, which is beyond dispute.
Massacres of civilians, such as Deir Yassin and Lidice, are still considered war crimes and atrocities - it is no excuse that they were happening on both sides, all it means is no better or worse than those you have been attacking on "the other side"
Israel is a war criminal and always has been.
To deny the WP attacks on schools and hospitals is about as disgusting as it gets.
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

PHOSPHORUS AND EXPERIMENTAL WEAPONS

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH AGAIN

It was fully reported at the time and photographs and eye witess accounts were showing the horrific results.
You have just been given more of the same of attacks on UN schools in Gaza - I assume you are going to continue to deny the use of chemicals - it appears to be what you do best.
At least David Irving makes an effort with his Holocaust denial - yours is just denial in the face of evidence.
And please don't tell me which thread to make my postings to again - neither you nor Tinkerbell have any authority on this forum, and if either of you ever did it would be time for us all to go somewhere else - the end of free speech as we know it, so to speak.
Jim Carroll