Missing the point
I do feel your post, along with others these past couple of months, have missed the point somewhat. Few people have argued that taking out a Hamas leader was unjustified (he had sworn to destroy Israel, after all). The issue is with implicating nationals of countries with whom Israel is supposed to be friendly.
Trying to make a link with 7/7 is misguided. However badly Britain was seen to behave in order to 'justify' those attacks, and despite the very real threat that Hamas poses, the international view of Israel is that it just doesn't seem to want to help itself. That's why the diplomat goes.
An interesting article in the FT a few weeks ago suggested the best thing that happened to the Irish peace process is when Irish Americans stopped perpetuating the conflict by sending money to buy arms, and maybe Israel would find better things happened to it if it wasn't the annoying little kid in the playground with its much bigger and stronger friend backing it up all the time. Would it be forced to grow up, the writer wondered?