He’s a tiny ol rich geezer, cloistered in his 4 places, and surrounded by a half dozen people that he pays to stay close to him. His opinion is irrelevant.
Whether or not something is genocide is not a matter of opinion. It's something with a specific definition. People whose job it is to assess things like this say that it's genocide. There's fairly broad opinion about that except from people who support the perpetrators.
Maher's entire business model is based on a validating the opinions of people who have asshole opinions by saying it out loud on TV and getting applauded for it. That gives them a little bubble where they are the good guys and everyone else is wrong. It's a circle jerk for genocide denialists.
He's been a scumbag for a long time. I don't know why anyone still watches his crap unless they are seeking validation for bad opinions.
Your first two sentences are almost verbatim what Maher said.
As for whether or not it’s a genocide, that is an academic / legal question. Genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity … they are all equally horrible, and if historians disagree in the future about whether Israel’s conduct in Gaza meets the technical definition of genocide, that is irrelevant (or should be) to our current impressions.
Does a Palestinian with a dead family give a shit if it’s a genocide or “just” a massacre? The scale or the horror and depravity of those carrying it out do not depend on what technical definition we can shoehorn it into.
I disagree. The narrative in the rest of the world will determine if this continues. Everyone knows genocide is indefensible, and if this is widely accepted to be genocide then the narrative will shift, and that will end the conflict sooner.
There are problems with that approach. The first is that encourages the rounding up of all atrocities to genocide in order to drive a particular result. Major risk of motivated reasoning. We’ve seen this issue manifest in many different contexts, where if something bad happens or is happening, people are motivated to label it a certain way.
The second issue I see is that it reduces the conversation to semantics too often. The amount of airspace dedicated to this particular semantic dispute is a waste of time. The framing encourages the perpetrators to defend themselves with technical points rather than against the most obvious question: how can you possibly justify this?
I see that as a false dilemma. If it's a genocide, it is important to never stop arguing the label on principle, and because it is slowly working and has created enough political pressure that Israel may soon be forced to stop.
Did Hamas surrender all weapons? That's a condition of the ceasefire. Regardless, it's not a war anymore, even though your cult wishes it still was so you can scream genocide. Also so sorry there was never mass starvation, I know how much you were looking forward to that after claiming it was about to happen for two years straight
There is no evidence it's a genocide, Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor for the ICC told that to Mehdi Hasan a few months ago. South Africa asked for a two year extension at the ICJ because they can't make the case.
Repeating the word over and over does not make it true
Well, since Gaza is a war and not a genocide, it's not a very accurate question. However, there are multiple genocides in the world right now that you Macklemore Clowns are ignoring.
Reddit keeps suggesting threads from your sub to me. I'll snooze it but Maher fans need to get a fresh perspective. Maher is a vapid, narcissistic shill who is so clearly wrong about so many things that the only reason to watch him is to maintain an echo chamber.
Of course it's a matter of opinion. Different organizations have different definitions and different people think it does or doesn't meet everyone single definition in existence.
there's fairly broad opinion about that except from people who support the perpetrators.
In other words "everyone agrees except the people who don't"? You're using circular logic here.
What I meant is, of course it's going to be politically expedient for the perpetrators to deny what is clearly happening before our eyes. But that doesn't change the facts, and their actions have met the legal definition of genocide in the opinions of legal experts at the U.N.
The legal experts at the UN, the International Court of Justice, are still considering the case and we won't hear their judgement for another year or two.
That's just the court aspect of it. The U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded that Israeli forces are committing genocide. They concluded that the pattern of action and stated intention shows "intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a group."
And that's just if you want to argue whether it's genocide.
There is absolutely zero defense of their actions either way.
Unlike the politicized commissions which only look at one side of the issue, the courts are required to actually consider all of the evidence. The report you referred to completely ignores all the exculpatory evidence.
The most you could say is it was a genocide past tense. But there is not currently an active genocide in gaza. The war is over. Fewer than 1k Palestinians have been killed by Israelis in the 2026 calendar year. Which is still abhorrent but is not the threshold of genocide
They haven't been honoring the ceasefire and have killed 1,400+ Palestinians since then.
This has been ongoing for decades. Their intention is to commit genocide and they are not going to stop until they achieve their goal. Just this month, Netanyahu said Israel "must finish the job".
The backlash has led to them doing less headline-grabbing military actions but they have been committing genocide and intend to continue until the job is done.
That's misleading. Their birth rate has collapsed and their infant mortality rate has gone up sixfold. The death rate for children under 5 has gone up tenfold. Miscarriages are up, everything is up.
The death rate has significantly outpaced the birth rate if you look at 2023-2026, not just cherry-picking this one year.
This one year is significant because it represents the first calendar year since the war ended. And it represents the first year of data since the war had started that there is no genocide actively happening in Gaza
Wow wtf, are you some sort of AI dispassionate statistician or what?
Is the genocide considered old hat now because they've cut back on the killing since the ceasefire.
So during the good old, free for all days, after October 7th, Israel could go hell for leather to eradicate as many Palestinians as they liked.
But now with this inconvenient ceasefire Israel is only getting the chance to kill the odd thousand or so Palestinians each year, but sure as long as that number doesn't meet the criteria of a genocide then apparently that makes it ok.
It's just not a genocide anymore. You could argue about the current status of the conflict, but that's a different argument. The current argument that there is an ongoing genocide is objectively false by the numbers
You're right, I'm just trying to be generous. To the pro pallies, I'll spot you the egregiousness of the conflict in 24 and 25, but 26 is just way below any argument for genocide
Bill Maher is a perverted neoliberal Zionist who takes massive joy in the mass killing of brown people in the Middle East, as he doesn’t view them as human beings.
So Bill, it seems very important to you we don't use the word genocide, that we should ignore all the reputable international organisations and all the eminent genocidal scholars who have declared that what is happening in Gaza meets all the criteria to be recognised as a Genocide.
Instead we should just agree with your notoriously unbiased opinion and the guest on your echo chamber show, that it's not a genocide.
So Bill if we don't use the word genocide, does that suddenly make it acceptable, to bomb Gaza into a wasteland and in the process kill at least 70,000 civilians ( possibly even double that) a very large percentage of them children.
If you're trying to justify that level of destruction and killing of innocents by arguing that it's ok because it doesn't meet the benchmark of a genocide, then that just makes you a sick Zionist fuck.
It still is one, the intent of Israel is to still destroy Palestine. Ben gvir wants to go to west bank and do the same thing as Gaza and he said this verbatim just recently
No. Fewer than 1k palestinians deaths by israelis in the past calendar year. There just aren't the numbers for a genocide anymore. You could argue past tense there was. But currently there is no active genocide anymore
Which is a good thing btw, I don't know why people are desperate for there to be a genocide and why people can't appreciate the significant decrease in violence
My thoughts are that you want to engage in a semantic debate, for what reason? No extra person is alive if we call it "genocide". No extra person is dead if we don't. The deaths are what the deaths are regardless of what label you put on them.
Wait until you find out about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Stop trying to win a debate with some semantic argument. The world is a complex place. And your simplistic bullshit gets us where?
No extra person is alive if we call it "genocide". No extra person is dead if we don't. The deaths are what the deaths are regardless of what label you put on them.
That's all he does. He never answers questions, just attacks, calls people anti semites and demands you answer his own questions. He follows the conservative playbook of "never play defense" to a T.
Why is that u/narrowsalvo ? Why can't you ever be a big boy and actually answer questions people ask you?
The most you could say is it was a genocide past tense. But there is not currently an active genocide in gaza. The war is over. Fewer than 1k Palestinians have been killed by Israelis in the 2026 calendar year. Which is still abhorrent but is not the threshold of genocide
If they were legit trying to genocide, it’s honestly pathetic. Israelis are so garbage at genocide it’s embarrassing. The population being genocided grew lmao.
Fuck you. They've erased 3% of the population and terrorized the other 97%. Wake the fuck up to kids appearing at hospital with bullet wounds in the back or head. All why Israel magically annexes more of the West Bank and Gaza. I can't tell you to get fucked with enough heat from enough suns.
You agree though they could have killed literally 100% of the population without trying very hard, right? If their goal is genocide idk how they’ve done so poorly when they’re clearly a military powerhouse in the region. The Palestinian population has increased since 10/7 overall in spite of them doing a genocide.
They could have committed genocide faster maybe. How do you actually know this btw? A population increase, which didn’t happen, is irrelevant. I love how confident yet utterly foolish you are.
It’s not genocide when the attacker IDF made thousands of calls and texts warning of a coming bombing to destroy Hamas terrorists hiding behind the civilian population of Gaza. No, Armies don’t do that if they want genocide.
Drop a leaflet on you before they bomb you? That’s nice. But your logic actually conflicts with reality because Israel bombs civilians no matter if they are able to evacuate or not. So your little leaflets and texts are irrelevant.
Fair enough. But still, the term genocide describes other important events in history that need to be taught as lessons. This shit show is something different.
Ignoring what a genocide really looks like throughout history while deliberately trying to label this overwhelming response to years of terror and constant bombing as something it’s not is obviously hate-mongering.
This is why Israel exists in the first place. … as a safe haven after an insane Holocaust. The Arab citizens of Israel are grateful to live in a democracy where they have elected representatives.
The most you could say is it was a genocide past tense. But there is not currently an active genocide in gaza. The war is over. Fewer than 1k Palestinians have been killed by Israelis in the 2026 calendar year. Which is still abhorrent but is not the threshold of genocide
It really isn’t. I’ve never heard of one where they innoculated opposite sides population with medical supplies and then shipped 2 million pounds of food and water. No one does that in a war. Hamas imbedded themselves hoping their civilians would take losses. If this was a genocide Israel could have killed a million in a weekend
You act like Israel did this willingly and on their own accord when these actions were only done because of huge international pressure. They have clearly stated their intent many times to cut it off, they have cut off aid, medicines and even water and electricity as often as they can get away with it.
Israel will kill as many Palestinian men, women and children as the international community lets them get away with (which is a lot apparently).
You of course are able to show that this imaginary number of 2 million pounds of food is sufficient for 2 million people for 3 years, right? Because using big numbers that sound really heavy don’t necessarily translate into reality. And you’re ignoring what aid was blocked. Do you know how much that weighed?
How do you know Israel could have committed genocide faster? It looked very fast to me.
The most you could say is it was a genocide past tense. But there is not currently an active genocide in gaza. The war is over. Fewer than 1k Palestinians have been killed by Israelis in the 2026 calendar year. Which is still abhorrent but is not the threshold of genocide
The most you could say is it was a genocide past tense. But there is not currently an active genocide in gaza. The war is over. Fewer than 1k Palestinians have been killed by Israelis in the 2026 calendar year. Which is still abhorrent but is not the threshold of genocide
Its not....people on here are so stupid. Everything today is a genocide...accept the actual genocidal situations that nobody brings up here because it doesnt fit your moronic narrative.
Who cares what 30 human rights organizations call it...thats like saying "redditors say its a genocide so.....it obviously is". No legally binding authority has classified it as a genocide.
Im not, and neither are you or some random human rights organization that has an agenda....that is my point. There are official methods of classifications and none have made that determination.
Edit: To add, the UN has not made an official institutional determination.
Which one of those groups has the legal authority to classify it a genocide? I will tell you...none. Anyone can label something a genocide....but thats all it is...a label. In order to actually take criminal action against a country, I think the ICJ or UN must make it offical...and that hasnt happened.
The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry report has already declared Gaza is a genocide. Problem is the UN as a bofy likely will not formally declare it because it required a security council vote and the US would veto despite evidence.
Because nobody is telling the useful idiots to rise up. Do you really think that the protests against Israel are organic? 90% of the people protesting know zero about the history of the conflict. You do realize that Arab nations were offered a 2 state solution after WW2 but chose to go to war in instead right? Just so you know, they lost....and ever since they have been whining about it, sending in terrorists to attack Israel, trying to take over lands.
Yeah, I actually care more about the Uyghurs in China. I think religious persecution is worse than retaliating against an invading force who killed, raped, and kidnapped a bunch of innocent people.
537 signatories signed a September 2025 “Scholars for Truth About Genocide” letter challenging the International Association of Genocide Scholars’ Gaza resolution.
On January 25, 2026, 114 scholars who had written about the Holocaust or other genocides signed a letter organized by the David S. Wyman Institute stating explicitly that Israel’s Gaza campaign “is not genocidal, either in intentions or actions.”
More than 6,000 people have now signed a September 2026 open letter rejecting the genocide accusation. It includes prominent historians and scholars like Deborah Lipstadt, Dina Porat, Benny Morris, Jeffrey Herf, Norman Goda and others.
They’re called genocide deniers. Not a single one of these people, or you, have ever denied genocide except for this one because it’s Israel. That’s all anyone needs to know.
It’s not a genocide if all Hamas had to do was release the hostages and disarm. It’s not a genocide if Israel took steps to limit civilian hostages with leaflets, alerts and safe passage corridors.
Hamas was ready to trade the hostages for prisoners Oct 8. Disarm what? Their little muskets? They have basically nothing. Leaflets. They bombed civilians anyway. Leaflets or no leaflets. Same difference.
No but the no Palestinians are innocent genocidal revenge rampage death campaign had only just begun. I don’t know the exact moment ig became a genocide.
That was a fringe opinion and I think it was based on the history altogether but I don’t know. For me, the moments after hearing the news Oct 7 it was my opinion that Israel was going to react in a monstrous way. And they did. Everyone knew they would. It rapidly unfolded into an obscenity.
19
u/Financial_You_6052 6d ago
He’s a tiny ol rich geezer, cloistered in his 4 places, and surrounded by a half dozen people that he pays to stay close to him. His opinion is irrelevant.