I'm not going to defend Irgun because it's indefensible. It is simply a matter of fact that the attack was on the headquarters of the British military.
Edit: Your subsequent edits are quite sick and disturbing. You should consider reverting your text to the original comment.
The attack was on a hotel - that's also a matter of fact, and similarly indefensible.
And I edited about 30 seconds to a minute after my initial post, to make my points clearer. I don't think that's unreasonable, much less "sick or disturbing".
Edit: Your subsequent edits are quite sick and disturbing. You should consider reverting your text to the original comment.