newspaper1

Being against genocide and Israel occupying my government isn't a "culture war", which is exactly why people across the political spectrum from left to right are anti-Zionist.

I'm very, very glad it was news. We need to know when Google is breaking the law. Now let's hold them responsible.

You think Google should just get to do whatever they want? I don't. Get the permit. We should throw everyone responsible into prison.

> Failure to get a permit is non-news for almost every entity on Earth.

Corporations should not break the law, period. Weird that anyone would defend that.

They cut down part of a forest without a permit. That is a factual statement. It doesn't matter what kind of trees they were.

I'm going to say that deforesting without a permit is quite a bit worse than not releasing vaporware.

This isn't about a "slip up", it's the modus operandi for Google since it was young. Press releases instead of real releases. I can't count the number of times I've clicked on a "launch" story from Google on HN only to end up on a blog post with an embedded youtube video, and nothing else. Google just doesn't get it, and this is one of the many ways that manifests.

9/11 was an Israeli attack on the US, so yes that's terrorism. Even if we take it at face value, it was a drop in the bucket compared to the millions killed by the US in acts of terrorism in the Middle East. Also, the Europeans genociding the Indigenous Americans was the worst terrorism this planet has ever seen.

> From my perspective, you seem to be making a common error that do-gooders make: projecting your own psychological state onto that of the average criminal.

I know many people who have broken the law. Like most people, I break it all the time. The US already has the largest prison population in the world. Clearly that doesn't work, and common sense would agree. Putting people in prison is not just costly, every person has connections to society that get damaged. And that's not even getting into over-armed, sadistic police running around everywhere. The real crime is that my tax dollars are stolen to support this fascist force.

> Consider historical cases, like that of the Comanche - it took many wars to stop them and force them to stop just killing people for sport.

You're talking about the genocide of Indigenous Americans. You know the Comanche aren't the bad guys right?

We're too far apart to continue this conversation.

Obviously you can't quantify exactly how much it will improve. My point being that instead of spending our money to make the world a worse place, making our actual country a better place will very obviously reduce crime. The money is helpful, but eliminating police and our military presence around the globe are the biggest wins. We need to stop employing sociopathic sadists armed with heavy weaponry and we need to stop imprisoning so many people (US has the largest prison population in the world).

> Why are most other countries able to spend much less?

Because they don't have an armed force of "police" constantly damaging their society and they don't ship off their children to commit terrorist acts abroad and allow them to come back violent, radicalized and full of PTSD. We should follow their lead.

Yes, distributing explosives into the public is terrorism, regardless of if they're discovered or not. I'll add that this mossad agent is also, by definition, engaging in terrorism since he's trying to cause mass fear that they've distributed explosives worldwide.

Some of what gets labeled as "terrorism" is very legitimate resistance. For instance, there's little difference between the Haitian Slave Revolt, the Pueblo Revolt, the Warsaw Rebellion and the Al Asqa Flood (Oct 7th). Yet only the latter is labeled as "terrorism". Repressed people or people forced off their land always have the right to armed resistance. It's also debatable if anyone living on stolen land can be considered a "civilian".

Putting bombs in consumer devices and releasing them into the public is always going to be terrorism.

Wow, well that's to be expected but also terrifying. Thank you for pointing this out, I actually just submitted it here as more people should see this.

Edit: So this hit the front-page almost immediately and has 20 comments but also got instantly flagged. I really wish the mods would put in some kind of protection against flagging Israel stories like this, they're very important.

Israel stands alone in its cyber crime though. I'm not aware of any other country that has committed an act of mass terrorism by blowing up consumer devices.

3% on military and 4% on police. So yes, 7% more spent on improving the country instead of making it worse is certainly a huge improvement.

California notoriously does not house the homeless nor feed them, leading to massive amounts of crime by people with mental illness having to live on the street. It also has some of the worst wealth inequality on the planet. When a 1 bedroom shack costs >$1M, you've basically taken a sledge hammer to any concept of a society.

20% of US GDP goes mostly to social security, imagine how much crime we'd have if we didn't spend that and every senior citizen had to scavenge for food! I would say at least 99% of of the money we spend on police and the military should instead go to social support and local infrastructure improvements.

Incorrect on all counts: https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/impact-of-social-welfar...

Obviously investing in social health improves crime rates. That's just common sense (and backed by all historical data).

Abortion is not a 90/10 issue. Jaywalking is a more accurate analogy. When you turn normal people into "criminals", the law ceases to have meaning.

This is a myopic view of the situation. Suppose you had $100M to spend. What would lower crime more:

1. Helping to shelter the homeless, deal with mental health issues and make sure people are properly fed.

2. Build a mass surveillance network at the expense of all of the above.

Regardless, mass surveillance is far worse than any amount of car theft.

> Our charter is to responsibly develop and maintain advanced AI for the long-term benefit of humanity.

Seems like a good time to remember that Dario Amodei’s wife pitched Jeffery Epstein on funding her porn site.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2026/08/14/who-is-...

She's mainstream, just because you don't agree with her doesn't mean she's not. Trump is also mainstream, I don't agree with him but he is. We're not talking about podcasters or people xeroxing newsletters, these are elected officials.

She's literally a sitting US representative for Michigan.

I agree it's racist, but they also allow converts:

> Converts to Judaism who wish to immigrate to Israel are evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the Israeli Interior Ministry, which determines whether the conversion was sincere in its view

There are many ways in which Israel differs. For one it's a 78 year old colony that excludes the indigenous Palestinian population from returning to their ethnically cleansed homes. They also allow people to convert to Judiasm and enter, so it actually has nothing to do with their ethnicity and is solely based on religion.

It's complicated when all election options are beholden to Zionist interests. I think many Americans are in denial about how dire the situation is. If you voted for Trump, you are responsible for what he is doing because it was clear he was compromised but! if you voted Biden you would also be responsible because it was clear he was compromised.

This isn't conjecture, both of these presidents have been openly operating for Israel. Biden even went on live tv and lied about seeing 40 beheaded babies.

You basically have Tomas Massie and Rashida Tlaib as the only mainstream politicians that are actually standing up to the Zionist takeover of our government. It's hard to say what the way out of this mess looks like, but voting for a Zionist in Zionist controlled elections is not it.