I didn't refuse to answer the question. I directly answered the question here, very clearly.

(Attempt 3) I'll try again, do you deny that Jewish terrorist mass murdered innocent British civilians?

No, I haven't said anything about it, because it's not related to this thread.

The "No," is a direct, "No, I don't deny that," and then I go on to say "especially because it hasn't come up in this thread." I go on to discuss how it's not actually relevant to the thread at hand, but an attempt to deflect from the conversation at hand.

It's a very clear and well defined example of whataboutism. I have no issue acknowledging that there was terrorism in Israel's founding, I have issue with the fact that it's brought up and badgered after it was acknowledged in an explicit attempt to deflect.

From the wikipedia definition:

Whataboutism is a term describing a propaganda technique used by the Soviet Union in its dealings with the Western world during the Cold War. When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[1][2] It represents a case of tu quoque or the appeal to hypocrisy,[3] a logical fallacy which attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.

The term describing the technique was popularized in 2008 by Edward Lucas in an article for The Economist. Lucas said that this tactic is observed in the politics of modern Russia, along with this being evidence of a resurgence of Cold War and Soviet-era mentality within Russia's leadership.[1]

It's somewhat misleading to describe this as me refusing to answer a yes / no question, especially when it was asked once and the line immediately after it starts with "No," isn't it?