Thye say they have circumstantial evidence and it is compelling. I think in the US, indeed even in England, though not in Scotland, circumstantial evidence is sufficient to win a trial.
Did they really present any kind of evidence, though?
"Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Israel had never been supplied with "any proof that Israel was involved in this affair" and that he regretted Britain's decision."
So Israel was not even presented with any evidence.
That's the way third world nations operate, not first-world civilized western democracies such as the UK, and is highly disappointing.
I'll repeat and state it again, though, that this is certainly not a big issue, and the British government's actions are not exaggerated.
While they are definitely disappointing, they are still acceptable.
By using the passports of British people you intended to leave a trail that led to Britain, not Israel.
They have also used Israeli citizens' identities, Austrian phone lines, American credit cards, and Irish, German, Australian and French passports.
It is more than clear than beyond the empty grief of the agenda-motivated, there is nothing that points out towards one of the above countries.
Certainly not Britain, as you claim.
A British passport is respected all over the world. You have undermined its integrity. Countries will not know if a British passport is a British passport or an Israeli assassin.
Most of the countries wouldn't care, since the assassins of the terrorist chief(that you accuse of being Israeli) have targeted a terrorist chief.
In addition you put at risk the lives of the people whose identity you stole.
Their lives were never at risk, certainly they are not at risk now.
No it was to put the blame on other countries than Israel. Not the way to treat allies.
As Kaya has already said you have done this before in the 80's. We were as cross then and you gave your assurance this would never happen again.
And as far as Israel is concerned, this has never happened ever since.