Others exist, of course, but they are not main subs.
By a quick look at the top 100 subs (link), I would say only worldnews can reasonably be described as pro-Zionist. I do not regularly go on all of these though, so can't say for sure I missed one. I can also be out of touch and have missed a change, but from memory none of those ring a bell.
I'm sorry, but most of the comments here are actually out of the loop.
The answer is "it's worldnews". It's the only main sub that has as many pro-Israel opinions. Yes, there are other international news subs which are much more pro-Palestine, the biggest probably being anime_titties (not a joke). So part of the users that would be more vocally against Israel have left indeed (or might have).
I'm not sure it's the mods, but I've seen cries of censorship from people both in anime_titties and Conservative accusing the worldnews mods of being biased against them, so who knows.
As for your last question, worldnews is actually now much more critical of Israel that it was in the first months after October 7th. You can regularly see pretty scathing criticisms of Netanyahu in general, and doubly so when they commit war crimes like from recent memory that "double tap" bombing that killed 20+ people that even Israel recognized as a "tragic mistake".
That's what I have seen after reading very regularly the comments on worldnews on that conflict for quite a few years now.
Also, on the flotilla thing it seems debatable that Israel did anything, since the Tunisian government itself denied it (source). And they are no friend of Israel.
Their CEO did fuck up with that, so for me they are on thin ice, but I haven't seen anything else problematic since then.
In 2024 alone, 17,000 people entered the EU illegally through Belarus — three times more than in the year before.
I assume. But that's only a fraction of the total amount of migrants and refugees...
If gender nonconforming sex happens in the hypothetical woods does anybody hear it?
That's a BrandNewSentence if I've ever seen any.
Digitalisation is a pretty large investment, and libraries typically have pretty tight budgets, so outside of governmental (or philantropic) intervention I assume it might happen very slowly or not at all. Old books are very fragile, so any intervention must be done very carefully.
And outside of that... while the contents can be saved with digitalisation, there is value in the object itself, and that's what they are trying to protect. They won't just abandon the items they protected for centuries because the text has been moved to another format.
You're right, it doesn't. What I'm saying is that is not a good argument to say it's "high-tech spyware" because run-of-the-mill data-stealing crap does the same thing.
While it's true that people should be wary of such apps (just being a data thief is enough for it to be bad), and there's a decent chance that is indeed is spyware..
Even those who manage to disable the app find it reappears automatically, confirming its nature as high-tech spyware.
Isn't this actually common behaviour in the usual bloatware crap that gets installed?
Thank you, this will take some time to go through haha. I'll come back at you if I get the chance.
Probably double the number of those people. Or worse.
We have a mountain of evidence, that small hospitals are providing far worse outcomes, even if you factor in transport times to larger facilities.
Do you per chance have interesting sources you recommend? I feel this must very much depend on the distance.
You're welcome.
At the time of writing, I had indeed not seen anything about a second attack yet. While I don't exclude the attention thing being a possibility, the video of the 2nd time is rather convincing of an aerial attack, and your arguments about Tunisia are also solid.
Who knows. At the very least, luckily nobody was harmed.