Reply #7: I don't follow...

[Lithos]

Here is the UN news story concerning his comments from Nov. 2003.

While recognizing Israel’s “right and duty to protect its people against terrorist attacks” and noting that it began the barrier began after a sharp rise in Palestinian terror attacks in 2002, he adds: “That duty should not be carried out in a way that is in contradiction of international law, that could damage the longer term prospects for peace by making the creation of an independent, viable and contiguous Palestinian state more difficult, or that increases suffering among the Palestinian people.”

http://www0.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=9005&Cr=Palestin&Cr1=

Mr. Annan's comments concerning Gaza were:

In Palestine, Israel has continued extrajudicial killings, the use of disproportionate force in densely populated areas, wide-scale house demolitions, construction of a West Bank barrier and other activities. In the last couple of weeks, we have witnessed a terrible escalation of killing and injury that has reached absolutely unacceptable levels. Apart from the manifest contraventions of international law, such actions hinder the search for peace and deepen the bitterness that prevails among Palestinians and the indignation felt in the international community. We condemn those acts, and call on Israel to refrain from further violations of international law and to meet its obligations under the Road Map, especially halting settlement activities and ending the use of violence.

http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=938

If given the assumption that it is acceptable to destroy a home whenever a tunnel is found leading from it, this would have given the Israeli's rights to destroy exactly two homes. Maybe a few more if it were acceptable to destroy homes along the path of the tunnel. However, apx. 200 homes were destroyed in the two week long operation which left several thousand homeless, most of whose families had no connection to the tunnel.

Considering that even if it were militarily necessary for what really was a civilian operation, the Israeli government failed under accepted International Law to recompense these people for their loss.

Regarding the assassination of Rantisi. Without defending Rantisi's character and actions, suffice it to say there is a distinct difference between what happened in Brazil which was done without Executive level approval by low to mid level police officials and Israel which carried the stamp of the Prime Minister.