Iconos

Iconos
Volcán Popocatépetl

domingo, 11 de octubre de 2026

Jewish supremacist parties surge in popularity among first-time Israeli voters: Poll

Young Israelis who plan to vote in the upcoming Knesset elections more strongly support the most extreme and racist political parties than do voters in the broader Israeli population

News Desk

OCT 9, 2026

https://thecradle.co/articles/jewish-supremacist-parties-surge-in-popularity-among-first-time-Israeli-voters-poll

Israel's Jewish supremacist political parties are growing in popularity among young, first-time voters ahead of this month's Knesset elections, according to a poll published by Ynet on 9 October.

The poll sampled the opinions of 543 Israeli voters aged 18 to 22.

It found that National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir's Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party received the support of 8.88 percent of these voters, equivalent to 15 Knesset seats.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich's Religious Zionism party enjoys the support of 8.09 percent of young voters, the equivalent of 14 seats.

If only young, first-time voters participated in the election, the two parties combined would win roughly 19 percent of the vote, or 29 Knesset seats.

In contrast, Smotrich and Ben Gvir's parties won just half that amount, 10.84 percent of the vote, for a combined 14 seats, in the 2022 elections.

Following those elections, Jewish Power and Religious Zionism joined Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, forming one of the most extreme governments in Israel's history.

Jewish Power and Religious Zionism enjoy strong support among religious nationalist Jews who advocate for the violent expulsion of Palestinians from the occupied Palestinian West Bank and Gaza.

They support the construction of illegal settlements and outposts as part of a broader campaign to colonize the Palestinian territories with Israeli Jews and create Greater Israel.

Many of the estimated 500,000 new voters in next month's elections have participated directly in the genocide in Gaza as conscripts in the Israeli army.

Both Jewish Power and Religious Zionism outperformed Netanyahu's Likud in the new poll. Likud received 7.95 percent of support among young voters, the equivalent of 14 seats.

Former prime minister Naftali Bennett's Together alliance also polled well among young voters, receiving 8.98 percent, or 16 seats.

The Yashar party of opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot, who is seeking to oust Netanyahu as prime minister, received 8.75 percent, enough for 15 seats.

The Joint List, made up of parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel, received 5.23 percent, enough for nine seats.

Ben Gvir's Jewish Power and Smotrich's Religious Zionism will participate in an alliance in next month's elections with the Amcha Yisrael (People of Israel) party, led by former army general Ofer Winter.

The alliance is expected to do well among all Israeli voters in the Knesset elections. 

A survey published on Friday by the Israeli newspaper Maariv projected that the three Jewish Supremacist parties would win a combined 18 Knesset seats, four more than in the 2022 election.

sábado, 10 de octubre de 2026

China, EU reach consensus on areas including hybrid vehicles, rare earths after Beijing talks

By Ma Tong

Published: Oct 10, 2026

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202610/1371929.shtml

China and the European Union (EU) reached a 16-point consensus spanning trade and investment, export controls, intellectual property rights and World Trade Organization (WTO) reform at high-level talks in Beijing on Thursday and Friday, marking tangible progress in efforts to manage bilateral differences even as protectionist pressure continued to build within Europe.

The outcomes included an understanding on hybrid vehicle trade, measures to facilitate rare-earth export licensing and further discussions on market access and trade barriers, according to a joint statement released by China's Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) on Friday.

Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao and European Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security Maros Sefcovic held the second meeting of the China-EU trade and investment consultation (TIC) mechanism on October 8-9, engaging in pragmatic and productive discussions, according to the joint statement.

Both sides reaffirmed their commitment as key trading partners to properly managing differences under WTO rules, maintaining stable bilateral economic and trade ties and making them more balanced.

They agreed to hold the third meeting in March 2027 and maintain close communication in the meantime, including a ministerial-level video meeting in January.

The exchanges have drawn widespread attention, coming at a critical juncture for China-EU economic ties and just days before an October 15 to 16 EU summit in Brussels, where the bloc's trade relations with China are expected to feature prominently.

Chinese analysts said the agreement underscored the value of institutionalized dialogue in managing disputes, while offering a path toward common solutions and bringing greater predictability for future economic ties. They also urged the EU to follow through on the consensus in good faith and avoid allowing protectionist pressures to undermine the progress made through dialogue.

From dialogue to progress

Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng met with Sefcovic in Beijing on Friday, calling on both sides to make full use of the China-EU trade and investment consultation mechanism, maintain a stable and balanced partnership as key trading partners, and properly manage differences through continued dialogue. Sefcovic said China was an important economic and trade partner of the EU, expressing willingness to advance trade and investment consultations and strengthen cooperation.

Among the key outcomes, China and the EU agreed to continue exploring the possibility of lowering tariffs on certain products under WTO rules.

The two sides also reached an understanding on hybrid vehicle trade in line with WTO rules. On electric vehicles (EVs), they agreed to continue procedures related to company-specific price undertakings and reviews under the EU's anti-subsidy investigation into Chinese EVs.

On export controls, China expressed its willingness to continue facilitating export license approvals for rare earths and permanent magnets bound for the EU through a "green channel." The EU, in turn, will continue working with member states to facilitate the resolution of priority cases involving export licenses for dual-use items destined for China.

The high-level talks under the trade and investment consultation framework provided an important platform for managing differences over trade, industrial cooperation and supply chains, Cui Hongjian, a professor at the Academy of Regional and Global Governance at Beijing Foreign Studies University, told the Global Times on Friday.

Cui said the talks showed that both sides were willing to address trade disputes through dialogue. "Beyond the specific agreements, the talks could help establish a more predictable framework for managing differences and bring greater stability to China-EU economic relations," he added.

Shi Kang, a chair professor at Tsinghua University's PBC School of Finance, told the Global Times that the talks marked a key test of whether months of intensive negotiations could deliver tangible progress on issues ranging from new-energy industries to trade barriers and industrial rules.

The China-EU trade and investment consultation mechanism was established on June 29, when Wang and Šefčovič chaired its inaugural meeting in Brussels and set up four working groups on trade and investment balancing, export controls, intellectual property rights and WTO reform. By late July, the two sides had each held more than 20 consultations, according to MOFCOM.

While China and the EU broadly share the goal of resolving trade disputes, Cui noted that they still differ over the pace and approach to resolving them. "China favors a reasonable, orderly process, while the EU tends to link negotiations to its domestic political agenda and timetable," he said. 

Cui stressed the need for both sides to align their expectations and build on the progress made through continued consultations.

China has always believed that it serves the shared interests of China and the EU to stay committed to openness and cooperation, and resolve economic and trade disputes through equal-footed dialogue and consultation, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said on Thursday.

A call for pragmatism

During the talks in Beijing, Wang Wentao expressed concern over the EU's recent trade and economic restrictions, reiterating that China is not the source of the EU's problems, but a partner in solving them. He urged the EU to properly manage trade frictions and differences through dialogue and consultation, in accordance with WTO rules and with due consideration for each other's interests, according to the MOFCOM. 

Wang's concerns come amid mounting calls for tougher trade measures against China from European industry groups and political circles. 

In the latest move, 44 European industry associations representing sectors including metals, chemicals and automotive parts urged EU member states to act against what they called unfair Chinese trade practices that threatened European manufacturing and jobs, Reuters reported on Thursday.

The groups also urged the EU to make more effective use of existing trade defense measures, take a broader approach covering entire value chains, the report said.

Just a day before the Beijing talks, the European Parliament also called for tougher action against China's alleged "economic coercion" and urged the EU to consider using its Anti-Coercion Instrument over critical raw materials concerns in a report on EU-China relations.

Responding on Friday, a spokesperson for the Chinese Mission to the EU expressed strong dissatisfaction with and firm opposition to the report, saying it was steeped in ideological bias, advocates for the politicization of economic and trade issues and the overstretching of the concept of security in such matters. 

The EU needs to recognize that its current difficulties stem not from China, but from its own structural decline, marked by sluggish innovation, slow industrial transformation, a failure to develop new growth drivers and eroding competitiveness, Wang Yiwei, director of the Institute of International Affairs and the Center for European Studies at Renmin University of China, told the Global Times on Friday.

Resorting to short-term trade restrictions to address long-term industrial woes is a misguided approach, Wang said. "What Europe needs is industrial renewal, technological breakthroughs, digital transformation and stronger homegrown competitiveness - not blaming China or fueling trade confrontation."

According to the MOFCOM, both sides viewed the second meeting as a new starting point for deeper China-EU cooperation and tasked their working teams with advancing follow-up work, ensuring the agreed outcomes are implemented as soon as possible and preparing for the third meeting of the trade and investment consultation mechanism. 

Wang Yiwei added that despite their differences, deep economic ties and industrial complementarities made comprehensive China-EU decoupling unrealistic. "Continued dialogue and cooperation between the two sides would be important not only for bilateral relations but also for the broader multilateral trading system," he said.

viernes, 9 de octubre de 2026

Three Years of Gaza as a Ghetto of Genocidal Extermination

by Andy Worthington | Oct 9, 2026

https://original.antiwar.com/worthington/2026/10/08/three-years-of-gaza-as-a-ghetto-of-genocidal-extermination/

Israel is lost.

Every day for the last three years, the decent people of the world — in our untold millions — have been sunk in a pit of moral despair, weeping, having breakdowns or being permanently enraged by the most extraordinarily depraved example of full-spectrum, live-streamed barbarism in our lifetimes — the ongoing genocide of the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip by the State of Israel.

The trigger for Israel’s ongoing genocide was, of course, one particularly bloody day, October 7, 2023, when militants from the Gaza Strip, which had been maintained by Israel as an “open-air prison” for the previous 16 years, broke out through the perimeter fence and went on a killing spree in southern Israel in which 1,195 people were killed, and 251 others were taken hostage.

These are the bare facts, and, for anyone like myself who is an intuitive lifelong pacifist, they are, of course, deeply unpalatable. 1,124 Israelis and 71 foreign nationals, who all had hopes and dreams and loves and fears, were killed on October 7. 367 of them were members of the Israeli security forces, while the rest, including 36 children, were civilians.

We should mourn them all, but we cannot regard their deaths in isolation, because, in response, beginning on the evening of October 7, 2023 and continuing ever since, the Israelis have killed, at the barest minimum, 75 times as many Palestinians over the last three years, including over 21,500 children — at least 600 times as many children as were killed on October 7.

In total, according to statistics with which no one can seriously argue, 74,228 Palestinians have been killed and 175,188 injured (many very severely so) by Israeli forces over the last three years, although those figures are undoubtedly a serious undercount (see my notes at the end of this article). The remains of at least 8,000 Palestinians are still buried under the rubble, and untold numbers of others are unaccounted for, or are dying of secondary causes beyond the direct military attacks — of starvation and disease, and of everyday ailments, grievous wounds or chronic pre-existing health conditions, few of which can be adequately treated in a healthcare sector that has been deliberately destroyed by Israel, and from which it is still deliberately preventing the delivery of essential medical supplies and equipment.

According to an invisible assessment of the relative value of lives that Israel uses, and that has been shamefully adopted by most western leaders, we’re meant, today, to continue mourning those who died on October 7, 2023, while completely ignoring the genocidal carnage visited on the Palestinians ever since.

In the narrative of unique trauma and victimhood that Israel has maintained since October 7, the attacks on southern Israel were entirely unprovoked, and those killed or injured in response — even though they constitute over 10 percent of Gaza’s population — must all be regarded as legitimate targets or as acceptable “collateral damage”, as Israel continues to seek “total victory” in its “elimination” of Hamas.

That, of course, is untrue and unforgivable. The attacks by Hamas militants and other Palestinian factions on October 7, 2023 didn’t occur in a vacuum, and were not the actions of terrorists who, entirely unprovoked, sought to destroy the State of Israel.

They were, instead, a response — the bloodiest to date, but a response, nonetheless — to 75 years of oppression by the Israelis, dating back to 1948 when Jewish terrorist settler militias founded the State of Israel in an orgy of genocidal violence, killing 15,000 Palestinians, erasing 500 towns and villages and forcing 750,000 Palestinians from their homes, and into exile in neighboring countries, where their descendants still live in refugee camps, as well as in the Gaza Strip, administered by Egypt, and in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, administered by Jordan.

The militias were formed by Jewish settlers who arrived in Palestine, mostly from Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, in their hundreds of thousands from the 1920s to the 1940s, after the British government, in the most ill-advised foreign policy decision in human history, offered Jewish people around the world a homeland in Palestine in 1917, which they proceeded to facilitate after they took over the running of Palestine in 1923 from the Ottoman Empire, defeated and dissolved after the Second World War.

After seizing control of 78 percent of Palestine at its blood-soaked founding in 1948, the State of Israel proceeded, in 1967, to seize the remaining 22 percent after the Six Days’ War, taking Gaza from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.

Israel was condemned internationally for these occupations, but, shielded by its perpetual ally, the US, ignored all UN resolutions demanding its withdrawal, and established various punitive mechanisms to consolidate its control — amongst them, the widespread arbitrary imprisonment of Palestinians without charge or trial, killings with impunity, the colossal expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank, policed through huge barrier walls and demeaning and dehumanizing checkpoints, and, in Gaza, the entrapment and isolation of the entire population after Hamas won elections in 2006, via a total land, sea and air blockade, in place since 2007, and with the entry and exit of all goods and people strictly controlled and largely and deliberately rationed or prevented.

In response to periodic rocket attacks by militant forces within Gaza, Israel also undertook, every few years, what was sickeningly and euphemistically described as “mowing the lawn” — military attacks, lasting for weeks or months, in which thousands of Palestinians were killed.

In total, between 1948 and October 7, 2023, an estimated 100,000 to 130,000 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces, compared to an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 Israelis killed by Palestinians.

No one seeking to define the events of October 7 as pure, unprovoked evil should be allowed to forget the previous 75 years of Israel’s sustained oppression, dispossession and slaughter of the Palestinian people — and that is without even getting into the alarming subtexts of that particular day.

These include the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu was repeatedly warned of impending attacks, but chose not to inform the intelligence services, the fact that former defense minister Yoav Gallant has admitted that Israel used the Hannibal Directive on October 7, killing an untold number of its own people to prevent them being seized as hostages, and the fact that, despite irrefutable evidence to the contrary, the almost unthinkably cynical lies that were told about 40 beheaded babies and mass rapes on October 7 have never been properly refuted, and continue to feed the seemingly endless genocidal hysteria, in some quarters, that has transformed Israel into a state that now lives only to kill.


Western government’s complicity in endorsing Israel’s open-ended “right to defend itself” and in designating Hamas as a terrorist organization

Despite the long history of Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, in which the events of October 7 were part of an ongoing conflict between oppressed people on the one hand, and their almost infinitely better-armed oppressor on the other, all of this was immediately forgotten, as western leaders, simultaneously, endorsed Israel’s open-ended and undefined “right to defend itself”, even though no such right exists in international law.

Even worse was the endorsement for open-ended barbarism that western countries had already given to Israel by helpfully proscribing Hamas — in its entirety, and not just its military wing — as a terrorist organization.

The US led the way, in 1997, while the EU, having designed Hamas’s military wing as terrorists in 2001, expanded that designation to include the entire organization in 2003. The UK, which also proscribed Hamas’s military wing as terrorists in 2001, only belatedly — under the ferocious Zionist Priti Patel — expanded that proscription to include the entire organization in December 2021. Other notable countries that have proscribed the whole of Hamas as terrorists include Australia, Canada, Japan and New Zealand.

The problem with these sweeping designations are two-fold. Firstly, they completely and deliberately erase the rights of an oppressed and occupied people to militarily resist their occupation, as enshrined in the UN Charter and recognized in the additional protocols to the Geneva Conventions in 1977, and secondly, by erasing any distinction between Hamas’s military wing and its administrative government, they have, in Gaza, paved the way for Israel to be able to claim that almost anyone it has targeted and killed was a terrorist.

It cannot be underestimated how cynical, devious and wrong these ever-expanding western terrorist proscriptions are.

Firstly, Hamas are not terrorists; they are a legitimate resistance movement, but secondly, and even more crucially, if an entire government — and not just its military wing — is proscribed as a terrorist organization, it becomes theoretically legitimate for Israel, as it has demonstrated so sickeningly for the last three years, to target and murder doctors and medical staff because they work for the Health Ministry, professors, academics and teachers because they work for the Ministry of Education, farmers because they work for the Ministry of Agriculture, judges and lawyers because they work for the Ministry of Justice, all emergency services workers, all of the police, all water engineers and sewage engineers, and many, many other people whose work was, in any way, even tangentially connected to Gaza’s administrative government.

Automated warfare: how the impact of Israel’s attacks on Gaza was multiplied through the sweeping use of AI-driven military targeting

Having directly facilitated the unbridled slaughter of Palestinian civilians, western governments also failed to show any alarm that, from the very beginning of Israel’s unprecedented attacks on Gaza, the destruction was so intense that it resembled nothing less than some of the most extraordinarily sickening campaigns of the last year of the Second World War — the firebombing of Tokyo and the destruction of Dresden, and, in their intensity, the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It looked like carpet-bombing, which, after the Vietnam War, was outlawed as a war crime in the 1977 additional protocols to the Geneva Conventions, but it was actually even worse, as was only revealed in November 2024, when Israel’s +972 Magazine published the first of two revelatory articles that disclosed how, although there were undoubtedly many elements of arbitrary and indiscriminate carpet-bombing in Israel’s devastating aerial assaults, the Israelis had manufactured a cutting-edge excuse — the use of military targeting driven by AI (artificial intelligence).

In the first of these articles, “‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza” (which I wrote about here), the journalist Yuval Abraham, after discussions with seven current and former members of Israel’s intelligence community, revealed how Israel had deliberately launched mass bombing campaigns against what were described as “power targets”, including “private residences as well as public buildings, infrastructure, and high-rise blocks”, to “create a shock” that would reverberate powerfully and “lead civilians to put pressure on Hamas.”

Deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure to achieve a political aim is, of course, illegal under international humanitarian law, in which all parties to a military conflict “must at all times distinguish between civilian objects and military objectives.” It is also a central component of the additional protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1977, and its status as a war crime was spelled out in the Rome Stature of 1998 establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC), which states that “intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives”, constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.

It should also be noted that deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure to achieve a political aim is a hallmark of terrorism, but, through the connivance of the most powerful states in the world, as discussed above, only those resisting occupation and oppression are regarded as terrorists, while state parties are, it seems, always to be regarded as beyond reproach.

For those paying attention, Israel’s focus on “power targets” was not new, as it first emerged, in 2006, as the Dahiya Doctrine, named after a neighborhood in Beirut, during one of Israel’s many “wars” on Lebanon, deliberately “targeting economic interests and the centers of civilian power” that allegedly supported Hezbollah, to persuade the population to turn on them.

In the first weeks of the assault on Gaza, as the article explained, “Israel bombed the Islamic University of Gaza, the Palestinian Bar Association, a UN building for an educational program for outstanding students, a building belonging to the Palestine Telecommunications Company, the Ministry of National Economy, the Ministry of Culture, roads, and dozens of high-rise buildings and homes — especially in Gaza’s northern neighborhoods.” And this list is, of course, only a snapshot of the immense destruction that Israel rained down on the whole of Gaza’s infrastructure.

A “mass assassination factory”

More shocking than this revival of the Dahiya Doctrine, however, was +972 Magazine’s revelation of the existence of an AI system, “Habsora” (“The Gospel”), which is able to “‘generate’ targets almost automatically at a rate that far exceeds what was previously possible”, creating what a former intelligence officer described as a “mass assassination factory.”

When Israel first began using AI in its attacks on Gaza, in 2021, former IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi said of it that it “processes a lot of data better and faster than any human, and translates it into targets for attack”, adding that it “generated 100 new targets every day”, contrasting that with times in the past “when we would create 50 targets per year” in Gaza.

AI programs require targeting parameters, however, and it was clear that, to create so many targets, low-level Hamas members, who would never have been targeted before, were included along with senior commanders, and, in addition, all notions of proportionality and acceptable “collateral damage” were swept aside.

The article noted how, according to the intelligence sources, the “Habsora” program “generates, among other things, automatic recommendations for attacking private residences where people suspected of being Hamas or Islamic Jihad operatives live”, and Israel “then carries out large-scale assassination operations through the heavy shelling of these residential homes.” These “assassination operations”, inevitably, included all the members of the “suspected” militants’ families, but no one cared anymore.

One source explained that “a senior intelligence officer told his officers after October 7 that the goal was to ‘kill as many Hamas operatives as possible’, for which the criteria around harming Palestinian civilians were significantly relaxed.”

In one case, involving “a single top Hamas military commander”, the sources explained how the Israeli military command “knowingly approved the killing of hundreds of Palestinian civilians” during his attempted assassination. “The numbers increased from dozens of civilian deaths [permitted] as collateral damage as part of an attack on a senior official in previous operations, to hundreds of civilian deaths as collateral damage”, one source said.

In addition, the sources “confirmed that the Israeli army has files on the vast majority of potential targets in Gaza — including homes”, and that, as a result, they knew “the number of civilians who are likely to be killed in an attack on a particular target.”

“Nothing happens by accident,” one source said, adding, “When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target. We are not Hamas. These are not random rockets. Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.”

Another source, clearly appalled, said, “To my understanding, today they can mark all the houses of [any Hamas military operative regardless of rank]. That is a lot of houses. Hamas members who don’t really matter for anything live in homes across Gaza. So they mark the home and bomb the house and kill everyone there.”

Sweeping and ill-defined human targets

Even graver revelations emerged in a follow-up article in April 2024, “‘Lavender’: The AI machine directing Israel’s bombing spree in Gaza”, which I wrote about here, in which six Israeli intelligence officers spoke about an AI program specifically used to “mark all suspected operatives in the military wings of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), including low-ranking ones, as potential bombing targets.”

The sources explained that, “during the first weeks of the war, the army almost completely relied on Lavender, which clocked as many as 37,000 Palestinians as suspected militants — and their homes — for possible air strikes”, exceeding the total number of militants — 30,000 — estimated to be in Gaza.

As the sources added, during this period, “the army gave sweeping approval for officers to adopt Lavender’s kill lists, with no requirement to thoroughly check why the machine made those choices or to examine the raw intelligence data on which they were based.” One source “stated that human personnel often served only as a ‘rubber stamp’ for the machine’s decisions, adding that, normally, they would personally devote only about ’20 seconds’ to each target before authorizing a bombing — just to make sure the Lavender-marked target is male.”

“This”, the article added, “was despite knowing that the system makes what are regarded as ‘errors’ in approximately 10 percent of cases, and is known to occasionally mark individuals who have merely a loose connection to militant groups, or no connection at all.”

The sources confirmed that those identified were generally targeted in their homes — “usually at night while their whole families were present — rather than during the course of military activity”, because it was “easier to locate” them there. The sources also revealed that one particular tracking program was, sickeningly, known as “Where’s Daddy?”

The sources also explained how, once the decision was made to target all low-level militants, there was no other option but to turn to AI to make the decisions, which were beyond the capacity of human operators to check. “They wanted to allow us to attack [the junior operatives] automatically”, one source said, “That’s the Holy Grail. Once you go automatic, target generation goes crazy.”

In an explanation of how sweeping the program was, the article stated that the “Lavender” software “analyzes information collected on most of the 2.3 million residents of the Gaza Strip through a system of mass surveillance, then assesses and ranks the likelihood that each particular person is active in the military wing of Hamas or PIJ”, giving everyone a rating from 1 to 100, based on “how likely it is that they are a militant.” The program was then instructed “to locate these same characteristics — also called ‘features’ — among the general population.”

Anyone “found to have several different incriminating features”, the sources explained, “will reach a high rating, and thus automatically becomes a potential target for assassination”, even though the “features” incriminating them might be nothing more than “being in a Whatsapp group with a known militant, changing cell phone every few months, and changing addresses frequently.”

One source explained how often mistakes were made, stating that a common error occurred “if the [Hamas] target gave [his phone] to his son, his older brother, or just a random man. That person will be bombed in his house with his family. This happened often.”

Expanding the program to include civilians

While everyone should be horrified that such an imprecise system was used automatically to generate targets for killing without any human oversight, the sources also revealed how easily the system strayed into defining civilian employees of the Hamas government as legitimate targets when its parameters were tweaked to make up for shortfalls in the numbers of targets required by death-hungry commanders.

One source talked about “times when a Hamas operative was defined more broadly, and then the machine started bringing us all kinds of civil defense personnel, police officers.” This particular source thought that “it would be a shame to waste bombs” on them, because, although “they help the Hamas government, they don’t really endanger soldiers.”

While this source appeared to be blithely unaware of the illegality of targeting civil defense personnel and police officers, another said he was “bothered by the fact that when Lavender was trained, they used the term ‘Hamas operative’ loosely, and included people who were civil defense workers in the training dataset.”

This source also explained the perils of expanding the program to include civilians working for the Hamas government, because doing so “made Lavender more likely to select civilians by mistake when its algorithms were applied to the general population.” In the source’s words, “Since it’s an automatic system that isn’t operated manually by humans, the meaning of this decision is dramatic: it means you’re including many people with a civilian communication profile as potential targets.”

I’ve previously written extensively about +972 Magazine’s revelatory articles about the horribly flawed AI-driven military targeting in Gaza, and the loosening of any definitions of proportionality and acceptable “collateral damage”, and I’m doing so again in this article because they are so crucial to understanding how horrific AI-driven military targeting is, and how it has been used to justify the extraordinary and unacceptable death toll in Gaza.

I’m glad to see that, with Rachel Szor, Yuval Abraham has expanded his coverage into a documentary film “NAZA” (“collateral damage”), which has caused hysteria in Israel because it so clearly conveys crucial truths about how sweeping genocidal intent can be disguised as clinical military accuracy.

Genocidal intent and the persistent implementation of genocidal actions

Nevertheless, the main thrust of Israel’s actions remains what it has been since the beginning — genocidal intent, as openly expressed by senior government officials immediately after October 7, and as manifested not only through broadening the scope of acceptable “collateral damage” beyond anything previously imagined in its disguised carpet-bombing, but also through its destruction of almost the entirety of Gaza’s built environment, and its persistent, and almost incessant sieges on supplies of food, water, fuel and medical supplies.

The Genocide Convention specifically defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”, including, inter alia, not only “killing members of the group”, and “causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group”, but also “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”

Everything Israel has been doing over the last three years has been designed not just to kill, but also to “deliberately inflict on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”, as I have discussed in most of my nearly 100 articles over the last 36 months.

While the sieges have been almost relentless, punctuated only briefly for a six-week period during a ceasefire in January and February 2025, and have not even been adequately relieved since the supposed ceasefire over the last year — the terms of which Israel has deliberately and persistently flouted — the entire history of the last 36 months is one of relentless efforts to kill the Palestinians by all means imaginable.

A brief list of the almost bewildering number of grave crimes that have taken place includes Israel’s destruction of Gaza’s entire healthcare sector and the “war” on its hospitals and its doctors, through invented and illegal assertions of the hospitals’ use as Hamas “control and command centers”, its evacuation orders for almost the entire population to supposed safe zones that were subsequently bombed, its destruction of water and sewage systems, its withholding of fuel for generators, its snipers and armed quadcopter drones persistently targeting civilians, and especially children, the rounding up and abuse of countless civilians, many of whom subsequently disappeared into Israel’s brutal gulag of torture prisons for Palestinians, overseen by the monstrous Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, the license to kill anyone regarded as remotely suspicious at any time, the brazen murder of five-year old Hind Rajab and her family, the brazen killing of foreign aid workers, the brazen point-blank murder of 15 paramedics and aid workers and the botched attempts to hide the evidence, the “genocide within a genocide” in northern Gaza from October 2024 to January 2025, when everyone was ordered to evacuate, and those who remained, for whatever reason, were regarded as “enemy combatants” who could be summarily executed, the killing fields established by the joint US-Israeli Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) as a murderous alternative to the aid supplied by UNRWA and international NGOs, and the targeted killing of journalists in numbers never witnessed before in times of war, and subsequent slanderous allegations that they were all Hamas operatives.

This list barely scratches the surface of the enormity of Israel’s genocidal depravity, and, throughout, it has wheedled and lied about everything it has done, and has continued to deny any wrongdoing, even as its pundits, former politicians and members of the public have openly declared that everyone in Gaza should be killed, even children, because they will only grow up to become terrorists.

While Israel’s genocidal intent has been widely recognized, and the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant in November 2024, for war crimes and crimes against humanity, no significant opposition to its actions has been undertaken by any of its western supporters, even as it has expanded its horrors into the West Bank, where government-backed settler violence is ever-increasing, and southern Lebanon, where it has inflicted Gaza-style destruction and extermination on the Lebanese people, under the same genocidal context of conflating Hezbollah with Lebanese civilians, and indiscriminately slaughtering as many of them as possible.

Throughout, the US, whether under Joe Biden or Donald Trump, has continued to supply Israel with weapons, as has Germany, and, throughout the west, pliant governments have embarked on furious authoritarian clampdowns on their recalcitrant citizens.

The ever-growing backlash against Israel

Despite this, the people have refused to be cowed. Recent polling shows that the people are prevailing over the complicit politicians — and the largely compliant mainstream media. Israel’s carefully cultivated support for many decades — through bribery and bullying — has collapsed, with polls showing that it is hated by a majority of people in a majority of countries worldwide.


Faced with moral disgust on an unprecedented scale, there are, finally, signs that at least some corrupt western governments are starting to recognize that three years of a genocide that Israel still doesn’t want to end, in which civilians are still being killed on a daily basis without any possible justification, and Israel’s leaders —
Netanyahu, defense minster Israel Katz and the two far-right ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich — are only stepping up their genocidal rhetoric is increasingly difficult to defend, and that a genocidal “forever war” is not what they signed up for when those calls from Tel Aviv came though, three years ago, telling them all, in no uncertain terms, that they must openly declare in unison that Israel has “the right to defend itself.”

How can Israel be allowed to continue “defending itself” when all it is defending itself against is the lives of civilians, from Gaza to the West Bank and Lebanon, who continue to be regarded as legitimate targets because Israel has deliberately forgotten how to distinguish between civilians and combatants?

How can Israel be allowed to continue “defending itself” when it wants dead anyone who, even in their thoughts alone, poses a threat to its claims that it has a God-given right, 3,000 years old, to everything in the Levant that it eyes up as its own, and that, if the indigenous people won’t recognize that, they all deserve to be killed; or, in an even more extreme interpretation, that they all must be killed to ensure Israel’s safety, and to cement its divinely-ordained rights?

In recent weeks, as the leadership of the Labour government passed from the staunchly Zionist Keir Starmer — who was put in place to defend Israel at all costs, even though he was an empty shell lacking any leadership skills — to another Zionist appointment, the rather more palatable Andy Burnham, one appointment — of Ed Miliband, the only Jewish person amongst Labour’s Zionist elite, as foreign secretary — led, finally, to a recognition that Israel has been committing unacceptable crimes under international law, which has largely been buried over the last three years.

In a speech in Parliament, which was supposed to be a “comprehensive reset” of UK policy towards Israel, but which was, nevertheless, largely full of ongoing support for the genocidal entity, Miliband managed, at least, to support the hugely important findings of the International Court of Justice in July 2024, declaring that Israel’s entire post-1967 occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem is illegal, and to demand its withdrawal and an end to complicity in its crimes by UN member states, and also recognized the findings, in September 2025, of the UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, that Israel was engaged in war crimes in Gaza. (The UN Commission also found that Israel was engaged in a genocide, but Miliband wasn’t prepared to go that far).

He also condemned Israel for its proposed E1 settlement in the West Bank, which would completely cut off the West Bank from East Jerusalem, and prevent any notion of a future two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine question, to which most western nations, nominally at least, claim to be committed, and announced the imposition of sanctions. Eight Muslim-majority countries followed his lead, while, just two days ago, over 500 European former ministers and senior officials urged the EU to take action.

Of course, all of this means very little against a backdrop in which the government refuses to do anything meaningful to isolate and punish Israel, but I believe Ed Miliband to be a decent man, and, at the very least, a weather vane for a wider recognition, upheld with such endurance by campaigners over the last three years, that Israel’s behavior, its unwillingness to even contemplate bringing its depravity to an end, and the ever more unacceptable utterances of its leaders have reached a point that is no longer either tenable or tolerable for those in positions of power to continue to give it unconditional support.

“Zionism is racism”

On Sunday, the UK’s Green Party went even further, with party members passing a motion declaring that “Zionism is racism”, proposed by the British Palestinian artist Lubna Speitan on behalf of Greens4Palestine. The full text, and a detailed explanation of the reasons why the motion was proposed, are available here.

The motion stated, “The Green Party declares itself to be an anti-Zionist party”, adding that it “rejects attempts to normalize the racist subjugation and oppression of Palestinians; to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism; to deny or minimize Palestinian human rights; to create hierarchies of racism; and to normalize or attempt to justify apartheid, ethnic cleansing or genocide.”

The motion also affirmed that “definitions of anti-Jewish discrimination should not equate Jewish identity with Zionist ideology or political practice. As with any ethnicity or faith group, no single political ideology should be ascribed to an entire people.”

In addition, the motion also affirmed “the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination, including the[ir] right … to resistance and liberation from Israeli occupation, domination and subjugation”, and acknowledged, correctly, that “the struggle to achieve that liberation by all available means under international law is legitimate.”

It also endorsed “the call from Palestinian civil society to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era”, and called for “the release of all Palestinian prisoners of conscience (including Marwan Barghouti), the end of the use of administrative detention of Palestinians by Israel, and the treatment of Palestinian combatants in accordance with international humanitarian law.”

Domestically, the motion also called for “the removal of Palestine Action from the list of proscribed organizations” under the Terrorism Act 2000 — the UK’s single most unacceptable act of punitive authoritarianism on behalf of Israel — and called for “the release of all prisoners detained for non-violent direct action in support of Palestinian rights and the end of the genocide, apartheid and the illegal occupation of Palestine.”

It also supported “the establishment of a single democratic Palestinian State in all of historic Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital, equal rights for all, and the right of return for Palestinians and their descendants.”

In explanatory notes, the motion made clear that “Zionism is a political ideology which called for the creation – and, now it exists, the continuity – of an ethno-nationalist Jewish State in historic Palestine to the exclusion and/or domination of the non-Jewish population”, adding, “The real, material manifestation of Zionism has been the historic and ongoing dehumanization, displacement, dispossession, disenfranchisement and destruction of Palestinians … based upon European settler-colonial systems of domination and oppression, which has also created racial hierarchies between Jews of different ethnicities in Palestine.”

Zionism as genocide, and its inevitable end

None of this ought to be even remotely contentious. Zionism, founded in Europe in the late 19th century, was, explicitly, a movement to create a national state for Jews in Palestine, where a mixed population of Muslims, Christians and Jews had been living for centuries, with a Muslim majority from the 12th century onwards, and with, at the start of the British Mandate in 1922, Muslims making up 78% of the population, Jews 11% and Christians 10%. Zionism, however, sought to establish a Jewish majority state, explicitly occupying as much of the land as possible, and with as few Arabs as possible.

It’s a sign of how deranged the discourse protecting Israel has become that the backlash against the Green Party motion has been immense. No one seems to want to recall that, 51 years ago, in 1975, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution condemning Zionism as a form of racism. That was withdrawn in 1991, under pressure from Israel and President George H. W. Bush, but it not only remains as true now as it was in 1975; Israel’s actions over the last 35 years — and, especially, over the last three years — have confirmed, more than ever, that it is a racist endeavor of such ferocious depravity that its leaders — and far too many of its people — now believe not only that the unending slaughter of Palestinian civilians is divinely ordained, but also that the Palestinian population should not just be minimized, but erased entirely.

Polling in Israel shows around 80 percent support for the forced expulsion of the Palestinians, which is not only unforgivable in and of itself; it also conveniently ignores the fact that there is nowhere for them to go. While the most fanatical settler enthusiasts, like Ben-Gvir and Smotrich and the monstrous settler matriarch Daniella Weiss fulminate endlessly about the need for other countries to step up and fulfill their dream of the “voluntary migration” of the Palestinians, the world’s nation states either recognize that this would be the greatest example of mass ethnic cleansing in modern times, and want nothing to do with it, or, in many cases, are so consumed with a rising tide of far-right anti-immigrant sentiment that they are seeking to close their borders entirely, and certainly won’t open them to welcome a displaced people who have been designated, collectively, as terrorists, not only by those seeking to get rid of them, but also by their own governments.

As I have repeatedly stated, the illusion of “voluntary migration” is nothing less than a deliberate and deeply cynical smokescreen for the continuing extermination of the Palestinian people.

No one, of course, has any idea how all this will end, whether Israel, as would be morally appropriate, will collapse under the weight of its own contradictions and the self-inflicted mental health costs of its own genocidal violence, or whether the world will, eventually, isolate it as a pariah state, as happened with South Africa. No route is clear to the realization of either a two-state or a one-state solution, but the people of the world are adamant, by a clear majority, that a no-state solution of steady and relentless extermination is a moral stain that can no longer be tolerated.

Israel is lost, and terminally so. Only the means of its collapse and its epitaph remain to be written.