PSA: Buy a $30 thin client from eBay. Install Ubuntu (or your distro of choice), then install and set up pi hole, then use premade ad lists to block amp links (and whatever else you want).
Because a pihole doesn’t stop people from sharing AMP links, it only prevents you from viewing them. So it’s probably not a good answer to give when someone recommends that other people not use AMP links.
Don’t get me wrong, a pihole is good to have for anyone who has the competency to set one up. They’re not the answer to stopping people from sharing AMP links, is all.
What do you call indescrimate shooting at civilians in the hope to kill terrorists, the systematic displacement of civilians, the cutting off of crucial infrastructure and aid?
I’m pro-Palestine, I think what Israel is doing in Gaza is definitely a genocide, but seriously, what do you think would happen from a geopolitical standpoint if Biden said “yeah, I think the ICC is right, please stop this genocide Bibi”? The US can’t afford to lose Israel as an ally so it needs to be subtle.
The US can’t afford to lose Israel as an ally so it needs to be subtle.
Israel is not in any way a critical US ally. Their influence in the region is basically non-existent and their inclusion in our various Middle Eastern adventures would do more harm than good so they’re never asked. They’re a client state heavily dependent on US arms and diplomatic protection, not some highly desirable ally we need to carefully court.
This is not true. Israel is most certainly America’s crucial ally. Are American politicians funneling money into Israel (more so than any other country in history even ukraine) just for fun?
This is a sick way of thinking, that we would have allies in spite of them committing genocide, but neither is it new territory for the US. That said, what is the ‘realpolitik’ reason that we “can’t afford to lose Israel as an ally”?
Seriously, we already left Saudi Arabia get away with chopping up a journalist for a US publication for that reason. And have a base in Iraq. And ostensibly Pakistan is our ally. And Turkey is in NATO. How many allies do we need in that area? And why do they all have to be terrible?
Israel and the US share a lot of Intel and military technologies.
I’m not saying that the US shouldn’t ditch Israel - they should, but they need to undo a few ties first. People here expect it done in a few weeks and that won’t happen.
What terrorists? Israel legally speaking Israel does not have the right to defend itself. Oct 7 was a success MILITARY operation and no, mass rape and the other atrocity propaganda did not happen.
They may not have done the biggest atrocities that were rumored, but they still purposefully kidnapped civilians, which I’m pretty sure is a war crime.
In the end, it doesn’t matter how he defines it. We are signatories to the UN and the UN definition in Article II of the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide” is:
“In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
a) Killing members of the group;
b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
Note the language: “ANY of the following acts”.
Israel is now 5/5 with the relocation of children from Gaza to the West Bank.
I’ve heard the argument that it isn’t genocide because Isreal doesn’t intend to destroy Palestinians. I guess their defense is that Isreal is just incredibly inept at fighting a war? I don’t buy it. How anyone can deny the genocide after the World Central Kitchen incident is beyond me.
Meaning a) would indicate any nation at war with a nation with a defined identity (most ).
Is technically guilty.
I am not questioning if Israel is. There actions are over the top whatever.
But that definition is extreamly broard in a world that dosenot ban defensive wars. Few would argue a single response on a nation that attacked yours is invalid.
Yet by that definition. Hamas committed genocide on Oct 7 and Israel repeated it with their first response.
Absolutely no violent attack on one nation from another. Dose not involve killing members of a nation ethnic or religious group. As that describes every one.
So seems like a law very open to being considered wrong and reinterpretation as the nation considers it.
The convention says that these acts must be committed with the intent of destroying an identity, and not simply committing them against a group with an idenity
But that then make it impossible to proove in any case where the commiter is not vocal…
IE if Israel says its self defence. Absolutly no one can proove their motive.
Allowing crap like the claims all folks objecting are just antisemitic. Cos lets face it. There history was one of the few cases where the nazis were open about plans.
That part is true. It is usually extremely difficult to prove. It’s why the case on whether it’s genocide can take years. And why people saying the ICC hasn’t said its 100% genocide yet aren’t arguing in good faith. They said it’s plausible, which is already huge. Anything more wasn’t realistic, as it will take them most likely literal years to finish the case out, but we can call it as we see it before then.
In this case, it’s still okay for everyone else to say it because we don’t have to prove it legally, and it’s pretty obvious to the eye and ear with the mountain of evidence given by South Africa. Luckily, Israeli government officials and soldiers have said openly many statements basically proving that they want to do a genocide. They’ve called Palestinians animals, compared Gaza to Amalek, said they need to erase the Gaza strip from the earth, said there are no involved civilians, been encouraging another ethnic cleansing through emigration as well (“If there are 100,000 or 200,000 Arabs in Gaza and not 2 million Arabs, the entire discussion on the day after will be totally different.”), etc. Those quotes and statements have always helped me feel more comfortable calling it what it is.
They have to maintain some veneer of legitimacy for international audience as well. They’re not going to nuke Gaza lol. Other than that, they’re going at a pretty damn good click, though. They got down to only one major city left and Northern Gaza is completely uninhabitable.
The more he talks about this topic the less enthused I am about his candidacy. I mean, the alternative is fucking horrible. But it would be nice to have a better choice than between ‘bad and terrible’, at least when it comes to foreign policy.
I refuse to take any advice from the people that spent like a full decade shitting on Al Gore and the idea of global warming. No, I don’t care that they pivoted well after global warming was settled science and public opinion started to shift to viewing it as cringe to be a climate change denier.
They made an episode trying to make up for that where I think one of the secondary characters is trans? I couldn’t tell you the specifics of it because I haven’t watched it, I just remember it being decently received at the time by a fair amount of trans people that I follow on various platforms. Not beyond reproach but not the fucking nightmare that the Mrs Garrison shit was.
And my expectations are rock bottom. All he needs to do is just step back and not take a side rather than proactively support Israel’s genocide. The people who organized the “uncommitted” drives would love to instead organize for Biden, but he just keeps popping into the news to remind them the job isn’t done and he’s still bad on the issue.
The American people can ignore foreign war crimes in favor of domestic issues. Africa’s got some going on right now that haven’t even warranted a mention in the presidential race. We’d just like to not be proactively supporting them.
All this attention being paid to Keep is making me nervous. It’s the only Google product besides Gmail that I think is actually good nowadays and there’s a very good possibility that it’s because it hadn’t been significantly updated in a decade.
Googe Wallet (2011) became Android Pay (2015) became Google Pay (2018) became Google Wallet (2022), except in some places. Also, except in the US (and maybe elsewhere?) where Google Pay is still around but just to send money between people.
Google Talk (2005) and Google+ Messenger (2011) sort of became Google Hangouts (2013), which was part of Google+ (2011) which became Hangouts (2013), which became both Duo (2016) and Allo (2016) but then during both Duo and Allo became Hangouts Meet (2019) and Hangouts Chat (2019) which became Google Meet (2017 -- Yes, Hangouts Meet was still around) and Google Chat (2017 -- Yes, Hangouts Chat was still around). Google Allo died in 2018 and Duo died in 2022.
Inbox (2015) became a better gmail Android app than gmail actually was. Inbox discontinued in 2019 with the advertisement that gmail integrated Inbox's features (it didn't add most of them). This spawned other 3rd party gmail handling apps to take its place.
Google Play Music (2011) podcasts split into Google Podcasts (2018) stopped having releases in 2021 and rolled up/is rolling up into YouTube Music (2015). Google Play Music became YouTube Music in 2020.
Right now there's even Android Auto and Android Automotive simultaneously to pretty much do the same thing but are not the same. Android Automotive itself exists as Android Automotive with Google Automotive Services and also as Android Automotive without Google Automotive Services.
Android Auto for Phone Screens was replaced with Google Assistant's driving mode.
There are many, many, many more crazy branding issues but I just don't feel like continuing. Google has also killed at least 54 hardware lines, 59 apps and 210 services.
You didn’t even mention some of the best fragmenting stuff with those products. Like now Google Podcasts is being discontinued and rolled into Youtube Music. Or when SMS messaging was rolled into Hangouts… and then split back out into Google Messages.
I own a WearOS device (Galaxy Watch 4). If you want to see Google at its most hilariously incoherent, buy one of those. Youtube Music for my watch is spectacularly broken. I thought it would be cool to go for a run with just my watch instead of having my phone clonking around in my pocket. Lol, nope, can’t download playlists, and can’t download any of my uploaded albums that start with letters after the letter “L” because it can’t list more than 100.
I think you left out the part about how there are currently 2 different apps in the Play Store called “Google Meet” with no obvious differentiation. And it’s been that way for months, since they deprecated Duo.
I understand the point that you’re trying to make, but you are inflating this tremendously to exaggerate the evolution of these products.
First of all, you’re talking about the progression of products over the course of nearly 20 years. For some perspective, that was the era of Windows XP. You can take a similar exercise to explore the discontinuation of software on other platforms, including those that don’t exist at all any more.
Secondly, you’ve combined app categories that don’t fit. Google+ was a social network, Hangouts was a chat app and Duo was a video calling app. Simply saying that Hangouts and Allo combined to become Chat and Hangouts Meet and Do combined to become Meet wouldn’t quite have the same ring to it, I guess.
Finally, you’ve conflated technologies. Android Automotive OS is an entire OS running in a car that is maintained by the OEM in much the same way as Android is on phones. The availability of Google services is mandated by OEMs, so I’m not exactly sure how this even ties into the argument you’re trying to make. Incidentally, this has nothing to do with Android Auto, which is an extended display for your phone.
Google has been around for 25 years and always has chased innovation. They create a ton of things, see what sticks, then iterate or pivot. While I too have been frustrated by the discontinuation of service I liked, I can appreciate that much of what we have today is thanks to this very culture.
Whenever I hear this kind of complaint, it sounds to me that people just want Google to be more like Apple or Microsoft and churn out minor improvements to their existing money makers with minimal innovation.
In regards to your last paragraph, yeah that is what we want. Stable products that we can actually rely on. You sound like an engineer who has no clue what people actually want in a product. No one gives a shit about “innovation” that doesn’t bring people real, consistent value.
And that’s why Google is dying a slow death. It’s a company basically run by arrogant engineers trying to jerk each other off for promotions.
Certainly we have different needs and consequently a different perception of what a stable product entails.
Nevertheless, from a product perspective, the variety of what Google offers is simply so broad that of course it will always mean that things are discontinued. Google builds and maintains a wide variety of products, from word processing, file storage, communication and creativity apps and services, to fully fledged operating systems and browsers, hardware including phones, tablets, watches and laptops, and of course web mastering tools for discovery and monetization.
Inevitably there will be gaps in individual needs when a product portfolio is so broad. (As an aide, I’d even argue it does so unrivaled since other tech giants don’t dabble in nearly as many areas.) My take on this is that the frustration scales with that breadth.
Equally so, there are ample examples of stable products at Google. There’s a strange sentiment on the web to make a tally of those that were discontinued, no matter how unused or irrelevant they had become. (I would challenge you to review that list and identify a handful that you would genuinely use today.)
None of this is to say that I mindlessly support this tech giant. I just find it so odd how this community continues to be an echo chamber where everybody just repeats something to the effect that everything used to be better. The mantra of this community appears to be the prophecy that every single household name in technology is currently in the process of certain death. In the case of Google, I personally find today’s Gmail, Calendar, Drive, YouTube Music, Pixel, Android, Android Auto and effectively every other Google service that I use to be the best version of that service and sufficiently safe, stable and reliable for my needs. In any case, I don’t aspire to go back to whichever early-2000s variant existed before.
Finally, you’ve conflated technologies. Android Automotive OS is an entire OS running in a car that is maintained by the OEM in much the same way as Android is on phones.
...Incidentally, this has nothing to do with Android Auto, which is an extended display for your phone.
I mention both as they are intended to provide the same functionality, regardless of the underlying technology -- integration of a vehicle's Infotainment with a Google provided ecosystem. In-fact, Android Auto apps are compatible with Android Automotive, because, technical 'why' aside, the function to the end-user is the same.
Google has been around for 25 years and always has chased innovation. They create a ton of things, see what sticks, then iterate or pivot.
According to many Googlers over the years, the reason many of these projects eventually discontinue and fail isn't because things 'aren't sticking' but rather due to the internal culture, in that to set yourself apart and get good performance ratings, you must always strive to be on teams that are doing something new. This leaves little to no resources for maintaining the 'old' regardless of how much people like them (or not).
While I too have been frustrated by the discontinuation of service I liked
I don't know about everyone else, but I wrote what I wrote, not because I'm frustrated about a discontinuation of any service I liked from Google. That happens. It is because the branding and evolution of products are confusing and sometimes, they even coexist. From my perspective, it often seems as if there is no actual long-term plan or guidance for many services that have come and gone with no signs of that changing.
The perception of the chaotic mess that Google brings with many of its services past, present and probably the future is at least something that I felt I wanted to criticize. They deserve it regardless of the supposed intentions behind the curtain.
Whenever I hear this kind of complaint, it sounds to me that people just want Google to be more like Apple or Microsoft and churn out minor improvements to their existing money makers with minimal innovation.
That's your opinion I suppose but it is not mine. My opinion is that Google should at least change the perception of their products to have clear and clean plans as they evolve. This would give me a reason to trust their branding more.
You mentioned Duo and Allo, which co-existed along with Hangouts for a time. The utter confusion and lack of interoperability created a confusing schism within the same userbase that used them at the time. You could argue that somehow they 'innovated' chat and video conferencing but they didn't even call one something like Hangouts Chat and Hangouts Video when they segregated the functions with a clear passover from Hangouts itself.
I think people would just prefer Google appears to be less arbitrary and in disarray about their products. If we are to believe some of the people that actually worked on these products, then that is going to require a culture change within.
Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response. I genuinely agree with effectively everything you’re saying.
As an aside, there is another way of looking at your same examples: effectively all of the services you listed continue to exist, sometimes even after 20 years, albeit repackaged or renamed with only in the worst case a hiccup for users to migrate. In the case of the chat functionality from G+, it simply evolved to what it is today. Perhaps I was too harsh and strung up on the remark about discontinued services.
This has been my main question these few days, the ever hyped and ‘perfect’ Iron Dome. And Mossad, an Intelligence agency considered one of the best in the world. Where did the failure happen?
Don’t get me wrong. This attack was a tragedy. But what happened to the security infrastructure that Israel is so proud of
Especially when they’re in trouble for corruption charges and making sweeping changes to their country’s justice system to help themselves at the detriment of their democracy?
I hate agreeing with conspiracy theories but everyone here gets what they want. Everyone being Hamas and Bibi, and what they want being sticking to power.
When you look into the kind of stuff that happens worldwide, you’ll quickly realise that the usual conspiracy theories become tame in comparison to the real world. There’s a credible reason why an apartheid state would synthesise conditions for further oppression.
As a lesser known example, is Operation Car Wash in Brazil. You might remember a few years ago current President Lula was under investigation for corruption. Then the Car Wash leaks[1] happened and showed the whole thing was a right wing legal campaign with actual US agents involved.
It was reported that Mr. Dallagnol had called Lula da Silva’s arrest “a gift from the CIA”.
That is just the thing. It was the same with GB and the IRA. Terrorist organization and the hard-line governments they oppose have a simbiotic relationship to their mutual benefit and the detriment of anybody else.
The dome is pretty great but hamas claims 5k missiles launched and other sources say at least 2k. There’s no way they’re going to intercept them all. As for the intelligence failure, who knows.
I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. It’s the first question my wife asked when I told her about it. Neither of us believe that this could have happened without Mossad knowing about it.
To be fair, it’s possible for an intelligence agency to know of a possible attack, and not have anything done about it, without a conspiracy to let it happen, if issues with communication between parts of said agency or between it and the government as a whole lead to warnings not being properly shared with the right people or not being properly acted upon.
I think the world is full of secret agencies, that are less competent than they claim.
Mossads public image was to neither deny or acknowkledge. It is not hard to imagine, that the world and the mossad itself were misjudging. Hybris is a hell of a problem.
Full article text>A Sydney sailor who survived months at sea eating raw fish and drinking rainwater with his dog is “stable and very well”, his doctor has said. > >Tim Shaddock, from Sydney, and his dog Bella were found stranded in the Pacific Ocean after their boat was damaged in a storm, weeks into their trip from Mexico to French Polynesia. > >Shaddock’s doctor told 9News the man had “normal vital signs”. > >Professor Mike Tipton, an ocean survival expert, says luck was only a part of the pair’s incredible story. > >“It’s a combination of luck and skill,” he told Weekend Today. > >“And also knowing for example, as Tim did, that during the heat of the day you need to protect yourself because the last thing you want when you’re in danger of becoming dehydrated is to be sweating.” > >Tipton said the key element for survival was being able to secure a fresh supply of water - and for Shaddock this came down to climate and location. > >“These voyages of any great length tend to occur in the Pacific,” he said. > >“If you look back through history, they tend to occur in warm environments because if it was a cold environment you don’t survive long enough.” > >Nonetheless, he described Shaddock’s rescue as a “needle in a haystack” situation. > >“People need to appreciate how small the boat is and how vast the Pacific is. The chances of someone being found are pretty slim,” he said. > >How did the ill-fated journey unfold? > >Shaddock and Bella departed La Paz in Mexico three months ago, but just weeks into the voyage they were hit by a storm, which crippled their vessel. > >The pair got the bare essentials by drinking rainwater and eating raw fish for months. > >They spent their days waiting, and hoping for rescue. > >Salvation came about two months later when a helicopter accompanying a tuna trawler spotted the drifting boat. > >When Shaddock was found, he appeared to be healthy and in good spirits - all things considered. > >“I have been through a very difficult ordeal at sea,” he told 9News. > >"I’m just needing rest and good food because I have been alone at sea a long time. > >“Otherwise I’m in very good health.” > >The 51-year-old is still on his way back to dry land, where he will be met with further medical assistance. > >His companion Bella is also looking safe and well. > >Tipton said it would have been an isolating few months and likened Shaddock’s story to a real-life Cast Away, referring to the 2000 movie tarring Tom Hanks. > >He said having Bella onboard would have helped a “tremendous amount”. > >“I think that may have well made the difference,” Tipton said. > >"You’re living very much from day-to-day and you have to have a very positive mental attitude in order to get through this kind of ordeal and not give up. > >"But also, having a plan, rationing yourself in terms of water and food, is really the secret to long survival voyages. > >“Just imagine how dark and lonely it would feel out there at night time.” > >Tipton added Shaddock will need to slowly wean himself back onto a normal diet. > >“It has to be a slow return to normal and he will probably need to be kept an eye on for several months.”
Don’t see why. Everyone doesn’t have that familial bond with pets/animals. If it came down to it I’d eat my pet and I wouldn’t think twice about it. Odds are they’d eat you vs starving to death
No. We seperate ourselves from animals. We’re the same resource devouring idiots with an inate need to fuck and pass on our genes. The only differences between us and animals is 1. We’re better at it and 2. We’re aware of it.
Futurama sums it up perfectly to me: And so, life returned to normal, or at least as normal as it gets in this primitive dirtball inhabited by psychotic apes.
I don't think it crossed his mind a lot. Dogs don't deal with starvation nearly as good as humans do. Things already get life-threatening for them after 5-7 days with no food. Humans can go 10x as much. So the fact the dog made it 3 months means they had somewhat regular access to food.
If you add that the companionship the dog gave was probably invaluable. And keeping down raw dog meat is another level from raw fish. I don't think eating the dog was much on his mind.
Water, sun, and drowning were probably a much bigger threat on their lives than starvation.
I can’t speak for him. But, as someone who has had a dog as a family member, that dog may have made the psychological difference. Whole, “If not for me, then for this dog that is counting on me.”
I thought it was to go to war? Before that the US pubic was super anti-joining WWII (like 80+%), then all of a sudden, for the first and last time in history of logic, in the middle of a world conflict no less, they put all of their navy eggs in one lil basket & announced that very publicly to everyone.
it was actually done to prevent a war, as weird as it may sound.
It was meant to intimidate the Japanese and prevent them from attacking the US. kind of a “look at us, we put our fleet closer to you, we are ready to fight you, so don’t even try to attack us!” move. didn’t really work out as planned though.
It was also done to intimidate the Japanese into stopping committing their Atrocities in China.
So no, it was most certainly not done to enter a war.
I know what was the formal rhetoric, yet nobody can explain how grouping ships (that Japanese already knew about & their numbers didn’t suddenly increase) in a very defenseless way helps intimidate anyone that does not come for a guided tour - which wasn’t really needed as they intentionally posted detailed photos in papers & sent the seamen on vacation.
Not to mention that you can’t intimidate someone with a bad tactical decision, this isn’t a split second decision-making, all of it takes months of planning. And all the documented warnings within the military were just ignored as false positives.
And US didn’t really give a damn about China at that time (no political pressure either), but they owned quite a lot of debt and other interests towards various European countries. But the public was still full of veterans from previous wars & Nazi propaganda was hitting strong in US (eg rich manufacturers & exporters like Ford, but also “common folk” responded to their, em, “racial theories”).
But above all that, everytime since the civil war when US arms industry didn’t get a big hike in spending seemingly extremely provoked preventable attacks happen that saway the public option in a big way for the next two decades (then hippies come, get criminalized, a few years of peace, etc).
So in about 10 years or so US will rig live nukes (in a random city like Las Vegas) & connect them to a big red bottom, pay Hollywood to make action movies about it … then sad times of money over mass tragedy continue.
On January 27, 1941, Grew secretly cabled the State Department with rumors passed on by the Peruvian Minister to Japan: “Japan military forces planned a surprise mass attack at Pearl Harbor in case of ‘trouble’ with the United States.” – wiki/Joseph_Grew
Edit: Oh, my bad, US did go beyond politics & actively blockaded resources to Japan.
AMP links are bad for security. In an ideal scenario, there should be a bot to fix this link, but please respect the rule of the instance you’re posting on - lemmy.ml is a privacy-oriented Lemmy instance. The commentator above you shared a proper link with you, instead of complaining, all you have to do is just edit your original post link with what they have shared.
“It also said no aid trucks have entered the territory in the past two days via a floating pier set up by the US for sea deliveries, and warned that the $320m (£250m) project may fail unless Israel starts providing the conditions humanitarian groups need to operate safely.”
"The UN Genocide Convention lists five acts that fall under its definition. … Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”
In the end, it doesn’t matter how he defines it. We are signatories to the UN and the UN definition in Article II of the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide” is:
“In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
a) Killing members of the group;
b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
Note the language: “ANY of the following acts”.
Israel is now 5/5 with the relocation of children from Gaza to the West Bank.
“I don’t think there are any innocents there now, not now and not when I said those things,” Vaturi said.
“I urge you to do everything and use Doomsday weapons fearlessly against our enemies,” Gotliv wrote on social media platform X, calling upon Israel to use “everything in its arsenal”.
In November, Galit Distel Atbaryan, Israel’s former public diplomacy minister, called for Gaza to be “erased from the face of the Earth”, stating that the besieged enclave should be “wiped out” by a “vengeful and vicious” Israeli army.
Last week, lawmaker Moshe Saada said that widespread calls he had heard from the Israeli public to “destroy all Gazans” had proven that the “right-wing was right about the Palestinian issue”.
I’m not saying they can’t prove it. They might be able to, the problem is connecting public statements to official Israeli policy.
“I don’t think there are any innocents there now, not now and not when I said those things,” Vaturi said.
It’s not right, but he said this after an evacuation of the area.
“I urge you to do everything and use Doomsday weapons fearlessly against our enemies,” Gotliv wrote on social media platform X, calling upon Israel to use “everything in its arsenal”.
This is pretty vague and specifically mentions “enemies”
In November, Galit Distel Atbaryan, Israel’s former public diplomacy minister, called for Gaza to be “erased from the face of the Earth”, stating that the besieged enclave should be “wiped out” by a “vengeful and vicious” Israeli army.
This guy isn’t even in office, it is ironic he was a diplomacy minister
Last week, lawmaker Moshe Saada said that widespread calls he had heard from the Israeli public to “destroy all Gazans” had proven that the “right-wing was right about the Palestinian issue”.
This is a pretty good example but he never says that the right-wing policy is to destroy all Gazans, just that the public wants it.
It’s not such an easy thing to prove. There are plenty of right-wing extremists in Israel’s government right now, it’s likely they have crossed the line with their rhetoric but rhetoric isn’t policy. I have yet to see any smoking gun evidence that Israel specifically intends to commit genocide (in a legal sense, not a moral or colloquial way).
Taking genocidal actions without intending to commit genocide… is that better or worse? I mean, I don’t see how Israel could do what they’re doing without intent…
google.com
Top