It’s obscene because it perverts the definition of genocide, which is precise: “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.”

Even if being charitable, isn’t Israel looking to, at least in part, destroy an ethnical group?

archive.is link: https://archive.is/BkPsu

So you can read this dipshit’s idiot writing without giving the New York Times any money for enabling him.

The moral obscenity is that it’s been 70 years since the holocaust and we still won’t admit when a genocide is happening if it’s at all inconvenient for us until we’ve personally toured the camps and seen the human soot. The victims of genocide wait for Kock-funded, glue huffing NYT columnists to agree amongst themselves, and the wider consensus of respected Kock-money takers, to agree that a thing is genocide. Colonial India. Apartheid. Vietnam and Cambodia. Iraq and Afghanistan. We’ll always be waiting on evil fuckwhits at the New York Times and the Atlantic and so on to agree that people are dying because other people really fucking loathe them and consider them bugs. But GOD FORBID we be semantically incorrect as to the degree of wanton murder and the bombing of refugee corridors.

Little Nazi shitbags.

The idea that their goal is to kill as many Jews as possible and the fact that they took hostages are antithetical.

one author whose articles I won’t be reading

Opinion

Discarded.

Really not interested in reading self serving justification of murdering civilians.

The author is a weasel without the courage to admit they support genocide against Palestinians.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Hundreds of thousands of Syrians were gassed, bombed, starved or tortured to death by the Assad regime, and an estimated 14 million were forced to flee their homes.

China has put more than a million Uyghurs through gulag-like re-education camps in a thinly veiled attempt to suppress and erase their religious and cultural identity.

It’s obscene because it perverts the definition of genocide, which is precise: “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.” Notice two key features of this definition: It speaks of acts whereas part of the genocide case against Israel involves the misinterpretation of quotes from Israeli officials who have vowed Hamas’s elimination, not the elimination of Palestinians.

If Israel were trying to commit genocide, it wouldn’t be putting its soldiers at risk or allowing humanitarian relief to arrive from Egypt or withdrawing many of its forces from Gaza.

Its founding charter calls for Israel to be “obliterated” and for Muslims to kill Jews as they “hide behind stones and trees.” On Oct. 7, Hamas murdered, mutilated, tortured, incinerated, raped or kidnapped everyone it could.

From the beginning of the war, Hamas has had a double aim: to kill as many Jews as possible, and to incur Palestinian fatalities to gain international sympathy and diplomatic leverage.

The original article contains 952 words, the summary contains 221 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!