No, an accusation would be "Israel did it". What you have here is expressing that there is evidence that Israel did it, but not actually making the accusation.
I do not think we share the same logic.
They stated that they believe it was Israel, and hence have taken an action against the State of Israel.
That is certainly blaming Israel for the assassination,
by all means.
The Israeli FM is talking about the murder, which the British have not actually accused the Israels of(yet). I am talking about the forging of passports. See the rather large, unsubtle difference?
No, Lieberman is speaking about the entire incident, including the forging of passports and the act itself.
In case you were not aware, the two actions are bundled together - when blamed for one, you get blamed for the other - and vice versa.
You can do it, I know you can.
And you can avoid referring to me personally and instead focus on my words.
I have enough to say about the person behind Redress that I keep to myself, the least that is expected from you is to do the same.
You most certainly are spinning. You are saying the only reason Britain is enforcing their laws is an election.
You offer absolutely no evidence to support that position
You yourself have brought zero evidence for your arguments, while I am more than fine with admitting that it is my own opinion based mainly on the fact that an election is coming soon.
The intention of the British Government for the action is really minor and next-to meaningless here.
The action itself is concerning.
and don't consider the more logical position that Britain is pissed that it's citizens had their passports copied and forged copies with new pictures made.
They could be pissed and have simply noted that they are pissed.
The moment they have decided to take action against Israel, without having the required evidence, is the moment I have had my disagreement with them.