Secondly, saying this never happened because they shelled just outside the school instead of the actual building itself doesn't change much. Does that mean those people are still alive? Does that mean I can explode a bomb outside your house as long as I don't hit the house itself?

Thirdly, what about attacking the UN aid compond? Was that UN spin again? Seeing as your link is taken originaly from the Jeruselem Post, I would count to heavily on using spin as an arguement.

Finally, on a slightly unrelated note, in the same blog article you linked to, the author writes in the same vein about a Gaza man who is responsible for the deaths of his family because he put them in harms way by not leaving when the evermore ironicaly named Isreali DEFENCE force contacted him and told him to leave.
By that logic every Gazan is responsible for their own death for not leaving the land that Abraham signed an eternal lease for with God for. And also by the same logic every Isreali killed by a bomb is responsible for their own death because they didn't leave the land that used to be Palistine.

I also delight in the irony that your source decided to name his/her blog after a gun.

Here's something from http://glock21.blogspot.com/2009/02/un-retracts-school-bombing-claims.html

UN: IDF did not shell UNRWA school

A clerical error led the UN to falsely accuse Israel of shelling one of its Gaza schools in the Jabalya refugee camp during Operation Cast Lead, the international organization admitted this week.

For close to a month, the UN accused the Israel of hitting the educational compound ran by its Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, which was sheltering more than 1,300 Gazans as the IDF battled Hamas in the camp on January 6.

The strike made international headlines and was one of the many incidents of civilian deaths that led nongovernmental organization and international politicians to call for Israelis to be charged with war crimes for the 22-day military offensive.

…

Israeli defense officials noted that in two previous reports, the UN had stated that the IDF attack had been against the school and not outside the school.

In addition, the defense officials said it was not certain that the number of casualties reported by the UN, 43, was accurate and that Military Intelligence had noticed Hamas attempts to cover up the identity of those killed in the strike.

"We know of at least three terrorists among the dead," one official said. "It is clear that there were more people killed but Hamas has been covering up their identities."

Why wasn't this information released sooner? Because the UN told staff to keep their mouths shut while they used the incident to depict a false but politically powerful impression to aid their anti-Israel efforts. From Haaretz:

Questions about the veracity of the claims that the school had been hit by the IDF were also raised last week by the Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail. The newspaper said that a teacher in the UNRWA compound at the time of the strike "was adamant" that no people had been killed inside the compound.

The newspaper quoted the teacher as saying that, "I could see some of the people had been injured… But when I got outside, it was crazy hell. There were bodies everywhere, people dead, injured, flesh everywhere."

The newspaper said that the teacher had been told by the UN not to speak to the media.

At the time of the attack there was some confusion as another UN school incident had occurred earlier in the same news cycle that had Hamas apologists coming out of the woodwork wailing about a UN school full of refugees being bombed… which also turned out to be inaccurate and based on grossly inaccurate UN descriptions. As it turned out the "bombing" was actually an missile airstrike against a mortar crew in the area, confirmed by witnesses. More on that here.

In the end no UN schools were bombed or even attacked. But at the time anyone watching the media coverage and buying into the UN deceptions would have sworn that cowering refugees in UN schools were being bombed by Israeli forces.

And as usual, all corrections get almost zero attention and often come way beyond the attention span of our news cycles.

Ordinary Palestinian civilians are no more criminal than ordinary Israeli civilians. It's instructive, to me at least, that you would use the term 'ordinary Palestinian civilians' as it implies that Israel is deliberately targetting them yet it's these same Palestinians who've been living under the brutal regime of Hamas for three years now and hardly a protest from the world media.

C'est La Craic: I haven't written any comments about Limerick.

William: Same as reply to C'est La Craic.

The ordinary Palestinian civilans are not criminals and deserve none of what Israel is doing to them.

Your thinking is every bit as unfeeling, hypocritical and authoritarian as the clergy you have been criticising on this site for the last two years. You sound just like a bishop defending his abusing priests.

Regarding the numbers killed and injured, you know exactly what point I'm making. Don't play games with me or ever take me for a fool.

Truly Andrew, in your case the old maxim holds. The abused becomes the abuser. I suppose I could say the same about Israel.