Carol C, your Q. earlier - nonono. I wrote (emphasis added) "**If it should be answered that Arafat is exempt because he does not lead a nation-state at formal war**, then Israelis need only harken back to the early days of the Irgun guerrillas ..."

My point, ineptly expressed, was simply that *Arafat* must not be let off the hook simply because he's not prime minister of a nation or general of an army as such. That's all. If only Sharon is now accountable, then the Israelis in future could escape trial by *switching* to guerrilla terror tactics (which they used to be *very* good at) *instead* of organized military operations. It's not a serious suggestion; it's just to support the point that if both sides commit atrocities, both sides must stand so accused.

As for reference to Israeli "deep anger and frustration", that was, quite frankly, satirical of the proposition that the Palestinian terrorists conduct their suicide/homicide bombings because they feel severely pissed off and terribly thwarted and we must be understanding of this.

I agree with McGrath.