By reading introductory material.

You can look at the FARA website, Israel barely spends money on lobbying. Hungary spent more last year than Israel did. They simply don't need to.

A 2 state solution is still wildly unpopular amongst Palestinians (both in the West Bank and Gaza), and since 10/7, is now a minority opinion (although still the plurality) amongst Israelis[1].

They also did try as recently as 2009, not that you'd have heard about it[2].

Also, the aid money the USA sends to Israel doesn't disappear into nothing any more than NASA's funding does. American aid to Israel (and to most places in the world) hinges on the condition that they only use that money to buy from American companies.

[1]: https://www.pcpsr.org/

[2]: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/israel-middle-east/articl...

NASA is exploring space, our money to Israel encourages US participation in genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and global war. I'm in the US and support a single state solution: Palestine. I think most people under the age of 45 are in agreement.

Indeed. Israel is the only country that can get the majority of UN condemnations for merely existing.

Yep, UN sanctions deployed on Israel for invading other countries are much worse that when Russia invaded other countries (sarcasm). UN really tried to set an example here.

The UN is irrelevant, when it comes down to it Israel has had the support of the most powerful country in the world (the US) for the last half century, despite doing basically nothing that's been in US strategic interests.

That's at a cold hearted strategic level, not even mentioning the war crimes, genocide and general moral bankruptcy

That's because its existence is predicated on the ethnic cleansing of indigenous Palestinians. It was literally formed via the Nakba, a brutal crime against humanity and it's been maintained through terrorism and now genocide. What's the point of the UN existing if it doesn't at least condemn these actions?

The golden age of western civilisation was n - 5 years ago, where n is the year the speaker got their first job.

The speaker, as in the person who started talking about golden ages? Well it surely if they think there was a golden age it couldn't be now, what with all the late stage capitalism and rising phobias and supremacies and people voting the incorrect people into office or countries out of unions.

> LLMs shape their BS into fluffy BS that isn’t particularly more effective.

But does take longer to disprove.

This guy has gone on a small anti-EU tirade elsewhere in the thread.

This is how political messaging has worked since I was born.

And that means only they can support it? This isn't the USA, there's no 2 party system where everything "we" do is good and everything "the other side" does is bad.

It means they, the EPP, are the driving force behind the current effort.

I'm not saying only they support it, nor do I believe most groupings in the EU are "good". I'm only saying the ones currently working on overturning the parliament vote are the Conservatives, seeing how they're the ones trying to force a revote.

Chat control is already illegal according to EU law, and has previously been ruled as such by the ECHR when Romania was trying to implement a chat control law that did actually pass, in 2014. But documents are documents (even the Rome statute), and can be rewritten.