That's a curiously anodyne response, Vim. Yes it's my opinion that the British government's official position is pro-Israal: we're certainly not anti-Israel and I don't believe we're merely neutral, either. But the reasons I gave for this I stated as matters of fact: you're presumably not denying them, then? And if they're true, they seem to the actions of an actively pro-Israel government, don't they?
You listed two activities of the British government that were "pro-Israeli". Someone else might list activities that were "pro-Palestinian" or "pro-Arab". Whether you think that this is enough or sufficient or a good thing is obviously a partisan point, and as such is your own opinion. Personally, I feel that the British establishment is institutionally pro-Arab, especially the foreign office, but again... so what? And does that add up "bankrolling Zionism from day one", which was the statement in question? No, I don't think so.
Hang on a minute: what exactly did the inhabitants of those refugee camps, many of them women and children, ever do to the Lebanese Christians? I mean, PERSONALLY. What did they do that meant they deserved to be raped, maimed and killed? Because if they are guilty by virtue of being Palestnian then you're saying that people can be held collectively responsible on the basis of ethnicity...
I didn't say that the Palestinians deserved to be massacred. I said that the Israelis didn't massacre them, which they didn't. I said that Israeli protesters, responding to international criticism, took to the streets to protest the massacre, and as a result a government inquiry was held and found that Isreali AF were "indirectly responsible" and recommended the sacking of certain personnel, all of which happened.
As to what the inhabitants of the camps personally did to Lebanese Christians, well, in all probability nothing at all. Just as in all probability the residents of Damour had done nothing personally to the Palestinians. These things happened; it's not a question of whether one side or another
deserved it (a perfectly monstrous thing to suggest).
Elie Hobeika, for example, the butcher who lead the Phalangists in the massacre of Palestinians, had his fiancee raped and murdered along with several members of his family by Palestinians at Damour a couple of years before the massacre.
I'm not trying to justify Sabra and Shatila, I'm trying to demonstrate that there were reasons for it occuring other than Sharon wanting to set his dogs on the Palestinians.