The wider context here is that the TikTok ban had significant support on the grounds of, what politicians and Zionist lobbying groups called, "anti-Israel bias" and "support for Hamas". Not just the explicitly stated "China Bad" motivations.
The opposition to TikTok on grounds of it's Chinese ownership had been on a slow burn right up to October 2023, when it picked up steam in the wake of the early response to the Gaza War. US politicians were furious that the youth weren't buying the Bipartisan Approved Position(TM) on Israel.
Considering that major world organisations, even holocaust remembrance ones, are now calling Israel's actions genocide, that fury has aged like the finest bottle of raw milk.
Hence:
> and the implication that their intent surely must be to issue pro-Israel propaganda
That is indeed the implication made, for the reasons above, I don't think it is unwarranted.
Not really: this past few years, listed companies tend to be _very_ pessimistic on their quarterly projection, and then reveal that either: it wasn't that bad, and nothing change, or that is was great, and their valuation shoots up. Weirdly the market doesn't react over those pessimistic projections, so it seems it's just a safe play for CEOs. They started doing that in Europe as well.
You'd be surprised. A lot of sellers don't "cash out" from paypal all that often, letting tens of thousands pile up. (And inevitably, some of them get hit with arbitrary account closures and have that money seized)
I wouldn't be quite so sure about that. The AI industry has entirely relied on 'move fast and break things' and 'old fart judges who don't understand the tech' as their legal strategy.
The idea that AI training is fair use isn't so obvious, and quite frankly is entirely ridiculous in a world where AI companies pay for the data. If it's not fair use to take reddit's data, it's not fair use to take mine either.
On a technological level the difference to prior ML is straightforward: A classical classifier system is simply incapable of emitting any copyrighted work it was trained on. The very architecture of the system guarantees it to produce new information derived from the training data rather than the training data itself.
LLMs and similar generative AI do not have that safeguard. To be practically useful they have to be capable of emitting facts from training data, but have no architectural mechanism to separate facts from expressions. For them to be capable of emitting facts they must also be capable of emitting expressions, and thus, copyright violation.
Add in how GenAI tends to directly compete with the market of the works used as training data in ways that prior "fair use" systems did not and things become sketchy quickly.
Every major AI company knows this, as they have rushed to implement copyright filtering systems once people started pointing out instances of copyrighted expressions being reproduced by AI systems. (There are technical reasons why this isn't a very good solution to curtail copyright infringement by AI)
Observe how all the major copyright victories amount to judges dismissing cases on grounds of "Well you don't have an example specific to your work" rather than addressing whether such uses are acceptable as a collective whole.
> but have no architectural mechanism to separate facts from expressions
Sure they do. Every time a bot searches, reads your site and formulates an answer it does not replicate your expression. First of all, it compares across 20.. 100 sources. Second, it only reports what is related to the user query. And third - it uses its own expression. It's more like asking a friend who read those articles and getting an answer.
LLMs ability to separate facts from expression is quite well developed, maybe their strongest skill. They can translate, paraphrase, summarize, or reword forever.
This is a baseless assertion of emergent behaviour.
> Every time a bot searches
We are talking about LLMs by themselves, not larger systems using them.
> LLMs ability to separate facts from expression is quite well developed
It is not. Whether you ask an LLM for an excerpt of the bible, or an excerpt of The Lord of the Rings, the LLM does not distinguish. It has no concept of what is, and what is not, under copyright.
I don't see how that follows. It can learn a false "fact" while not retaining the way that statement was expressed. It can also just make up facts entirely, which by definition then did not come from any training data.
> The idea that AI training is fair use isn't so obvious
> Observe how all the major copyright victories amount to judges dismissing cases on grounds of "Well you don't have an example specific to your work" rather than addressing whether such uses are acceptable as a collective whole.
Well, all a judge can/should do is to apply current law to the case before them. In the case of generative AI then it seems that it's mostly going to be copyright and "right of publicity" (reproducing someone else's likeness/voice) that apply.
Copyright infringment is all about having published something based on someone else's work - AFAIK it doesn't have anything to say about someone/something having the potential to infringe (e.g. training an AI) if they haven't actually done it. It has to be about the generated artifact.
Of course copyright law wasn't designed with generative AI in mind, and maybe now that it is here we need new laws to protect creative content. For example, should OpenAI be able to copy Studio Ghibli's "trademark" style without requiring permission?
> Well, all a judge can/should do is to apply current law to the case before them
This is true, and I do not mean to suggest it is bad. But rather, that it leaves uncertainty. These cases can all be struck down without reducing the possibility that if one does stick, the entire industry is at stake.
> Copyright infringment is all about having published something based on someone else's work - AFAIK it doesn't have anything to say about someone/something having the potential to infringe (e.g. training an AI) if they haven't actually done it. It has to be about the generated artifact.
A notable problem here is that AI models are not "standalone products" but tools provided as a service. This complicates the situation.
Take Disney/Universal's case against Midjourney, which is both about the models but also the provision of services.
Even if only the latter gets deemed illegal, that's ruinous for the big AI companies. What good is OpenAI if they can't provide ChatGPT? Who would license a LLM if the act of using it creates constant legal risks?
> The very architecture of the system guarantees it to produce new information derived from the training data rather than the training data itself
A “classical” classifier can regurgitate its training data as well. It’s just that Reddit never seemed to care about people training e.g. sentiment classifiers on their data before.
In fact a “decoder” is simply autoregressive token classification.
Whether or not it's "essential" is kind of irrelevant for the ergonomics; Languages do exist that provide only closures. (And yes, the likes of Java do struggle a bit with function pointer ffi) Similarly, "we need this because low level" has never made C++ more tolerable.
The thing about rust is that it's complexity is self-contained and follows established rules. If one understands data ownership, one only needs to be told what a closure is for all these edge cases and problems to make sense.
Contrast the complexities of JavaScript, many of which still boil down to "Some doofus 30 years ago didn't do any homework and made bad design decisions for type coercion". Just "fuck you, go memorize these behaviours".
> Whether or not it's "essential" is kind of irrelevant for the ergonomics;
The thing about essential complexity is you always pay for it. Either during compile or execution. Java has concept of thread safe but doesn't track it via types. You still need to take it into account when working with it.
It's not strictly about the money. (Though it is absolutely also about that)
> Dealing with unexpected job terminations (fired or laid off) is the problem.
Herein lies the problem. This gives employers absolutely massive leverage over the employees, which lets them coerce things like ridiculous unpaid overtime and downright abuse.
Even if you pay the same nominal salary, the H-1B is "cheaper" if you can force them to work 60-80h whereas a top-class American is just going to demand 40h weeks. (Though in practice, those extra hours rarely see increased productivity, so whether it's actually cheaper for outputs obtained is up for debate.)
Contrast: Europe. Tech salaries are low by US standards, but you don't see as much of the outsourcing & migrant worker hype around it. European labour laws mean you can't set up a sweatshop in your branch office, and European migrants to the US won't put up with labour abuses as much.
> Contrast: Europe. Tech salaries are low by US standards, but you don't see as much of the outsourcing & migrant worker hype around it. European labour laws mean you can't set up a sweatshop in your branch office, and European migrants to the US won't put up with labour abuses as much.
Europe actually has had more direct export of the jobs. No need of specialist visas when the jobs were already exported away to EE. The EU allowed for companies to arbitrage away tech jobs to relatively poorer countries in the EU. And there's very little need for native top talent as there's very little native innovation happening within the EU in software - it's only a fraction of the amount happening in the US. And that's why those who can often tend to work for American companies in the EU, or migrate if they can.
> But every article I've read on this makes no statement about whether any of these hundreds of people were actually working without an appropriate visa
This is because ICE is being particularly tight lipped about those details.
The New York Times got their hands on the records for 11 detainees.
6 on B1/B2 visas.
4 on 90-day waivers.
1 Unknown.
ICE claims visa violations, but the records do not state what work the detainees were actually doing. This is especially relevant for the B1 visas, which do permit certain business activities (including applicable ones for this situation; Meetings, trainings, "installation, service, and repair of foreign-bought machinery".
Of particular note is that in one case (out of these 11), ICE's records state there was no visa violation. The worker was deported anyway, forced into a "voluntary" departure.
Personal opinion: The degree to which hyundai may or may not have violated the law or operated within previously-tolerated gray areas remains to be seen. But the actions of ICE here are not those of a competent government organisation.
There should be clear records, they should be able to readily answer press questions. And yet they don't.
Worse still is that one person deported despite there being, even by ICE's own admission, no visa violation. Hard to assume good faith in incomplete or withheld records with such shit going on.
And what are other foreign companies to do with this? "Move your manufacturing to America! Oh btw even if you follow all laws to the letter a local chud may deport your workers for being not white enough and ruin the entire project" is an interesting sales pitch.
The point is not to be effective (at the stated goals), or follow the laws, or be competent at following the laws.
The goal is to ‘look tough’ for the base, demonstrate the power to act without having to follow the laws, and overall - inspire fear. To extract concessions and inspire fear based loyalty.
The weirdest part to me is that people still don’t seem to understand this?
> The weirdest part to me is that people still don’t seem to understand this?
It's possible to understand this perfectly and yet prefer to try and argue a more reasonable interpretation, hoping whoever you're talking to won't pick up on bad faith.
What I really don't get is what makes them so convinced that the state apparatus they're such a fan of won't be turned on them? Even if you look like you belong, say the right things, hold the right opinions, you never know when you're going to accidentally get on the bad side of someone who is willing to tell a convincing lie or has connections.
They're either not the brightest bulb in the shed, or they're not actually from the US and have no skin in the game.
>What I really don't get is what makes them so convinced that the state apparatus they're such a fan of won't be turned on them?
They genuinely believe that the vast majority shares their opinion, through ignorance and personal filter bubbles from social media.
So if it gets turned back on them, that would be "wrong" and "undemocratic" because their beliefs ARE democracy, because there's "more" of them. They believe that could only happen through fraudulent elections.
I'm talking more on an individual level. Police states can be weaponized to settle petty and personal grudges, and it doesn't matter if the victims are in the "majority" or not.
"My neighbor is actually a Canadian citizen who is using stolen identity papers." is the next logical level of SWAT-ting someone.
> “The weirdest part to me is that people still don’t seem to understand this?”
The weirdest part will be any middle class worker who doesn’t later say, _I was a supporter, because I believed he would bring back manufacturing and jobs. I was wrong._ Everyone else is a cultist or wealthy.
The last couple guys in recent memory who did this kind of thing weren’t (actually) good for wealthy people either. Germany and Italy didn’t exactly do well in the whole ‘preservation of Capital’ angle at the end of the war.
> "...weren’t (actually) good for wealthy people either..."
Especially if you're invested in adding to the US's electrical capacity:
GOP Bill Adds Surprise Tax That Could Cripple Wind and Solar (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44421749)
Their argument was Trump personally delaying the departure by one day to ask if anyone wants to stay and train American workers. I.e. they understand they messed up, but don’t want to admit any mistake.
idk after this fiasco, Hyundai will have a big time trouble finding competitive workers who would want to go to the USA...
I mean, prior to this, just a small possibility of being sent to the US was a big perk (job descriptions often highlighted this in bold fonts)
Hence, companies would rotate people to hush complaints ("that guy gets to go to the US more than me!")
now... if being sent could mean "you could be banned from entering/working in US", it's a big no-no
Anyway, this will mean extra costs + less competitive people going to the USA (they should be forced to go, so... it'll probably be people with career dead-ends, whom americans might not want to 'learn from'...)
the only fix to the issue: officially commit huuuuge working visa quota for s.koreans...
Everyone will adapt the same way as businesses adapted to local specifics in other countries. Russia was wild, China was hard, most of Africa is crazy, but if there are money, entrepreneurial energy will channel towards it. The real losers here are American consumers, because extra risks (or privileged access to market premiums for locals) will be included in price.
..except no one had to "adapt" -- those workers were supposed to go back after the set-up work is over, and Americans would get the jobs after the set-up work.
this isn't some low-skill burger-flipping workers staying permanently and replacing a whole career of american citizens' jobs...
US just had to turn a blind-eye, wait until those workers are done with the set-up and leave for good
And now... things got ugly too quick -- I doubt even Trump wanted this.
My pet theory is... this is a classic example of an political double-spy (Tori Branum) being "cooperatively passive-aggressive"
(if party a shouts for A, get inside party a, and go to the extreme far-end of A to show A is bad -- though in reality, some middle-ground was what party a was initially aiming for)
> "Well, they should have hired Americans", even if that is completely infeasible
Who determined it is infeasible and how was it determined? Show me the data and the process that lead to this conclusion. It's a car assembly plant, not a semiconductor fab that requires niche advanced degrees only available in Taiwan.
Surely the required labor can be found across a country of 300 million people, or easily trained from other adjacent fields that have lost workers due to economic driven redundancies or who want to switch careers for whatever reason.
>Then, when these places stay poor, they'll blame foreign governments, Democrats, "bureaucrats in DC"
Why shouldn't they be blamed? They're the ones telling their voters at election times that there'll be a factory opening where they live and then the voters rejoice and think "woo-hoo, more jobs for us" but then the bureaucrats are like "well, actually, those jobs will go towards imported foreigners, not to you, because you're not qualified enough or some other bullshit reason" and then the voters will clap back with "well I'm a product of YOUR education system mf-er, so it's YOUR fault that I'm not qualified enough". If you were them, wouldn't you be pissed too?
Funny how HN likes to criticize and gaslight people that it should be societally acceptable that foreigners being brough to take manufacturing jobs from locals, but they throw a hissy rage fit when H1Bs are being brough to the US to take their cushy tech jobs. Hypocrisy much?
Edi: love the empty angry downvotes with no explanation and no counter arguments simply because my detailed argument goes against the narrative. Means I'm right.
> Who determined it determined it is infeasible how was it determined? It's a car assembly plant, not a semiconductor fab that requires niche advanced degrees only available in Taiwan
It's not a car assembly plant. It's a battery factory. There is a car
> Surely the required labor can be found across a country of 300 million people, or easily trained from other adjacent fields that have lost workers due to economic driven redundancies or who want to switch careers for whatever reason.
When it is operational, probably. But right now it is being built and most of the Korean workers were engineers and technicians specializing in installing, testing, and bringing up highly technical specialized battery manufacturing equipment from Korea.
> They're the ones telling their voters there'll be a factory opening where they live and then the voters rejoice and think "woo-hoo, more jobs for us" but then the bureaucrats are like "well, actually, those jobs will go towards imported foreigners, not to you". If you were them, wouldn't you be pissed too?
These were temporary workers to install and bring up the equipment, and train US workers to operate it. Once running it was indeed going to employ mostly US workers, around 3000 directly and maybe another 5000 US jobs would be created in the domestic parts of its supply chain.
There is also a car factory in the same campus. That is running and most of the workers are US citizens. Hyundai has emphasized training local workers.
>When it is operational, probably. But right now it is being built and most of the Korean workers were engineers and technicians specializing in installing, testing, and bringing up highly technical specialized battery manufacturing equipment from Korea.
OK good point. But then why hasn't Hyundai US management made sure to get their imported workers legal visas or that the people they hired had their visas up to date? Surely when you're running a business visa and immigration laws is another one of the things on your checklist, similar to having to follow OHSA laws, fire safety, fire drills, first aid, diversity and sensitivity training, etc and all the other stuff companies operating in the US have to follow.
Also be aware, my original comment was target that person's comment specifically, not the issues from the article.
I most humbly suggest that your finger is pointed in the wrong direction.
The ASMR deportation videos from the Homeland Security department and the fetish this maga movement seems to have in brutalizing foreigners coming to the US would indicate to me that the paperwork is not the problem.
Maybe that is the underlying point. Why does the US government, this administration, and its supporters have a fetish for chaining up foreigners and putting them in deportation camps housed no better than cattle (alligator alcatraz?)? Do they not consider the consequences of this?
US sales pitch: "Please build factories here, but I reserve the right at my own discretion with no warning to parade your employees in chains and stuff them into poorly maintained detention centers. Then to kick them out of the country and blame you.".
Who says they didn't? There is only one party here who acted in bad faith, and it wasn't Hyundai.
In fact, this party has a — by now well-established — track-record of precisely this bad behaviour. They haven't even tried to hide their actions, only their individual faces. They've been public about their disdain for the law, for humanity, and their general evil plans.
And here you are accusing their victims of crimes you, like them, have no evidence of.
>There is only one party here who acted in bad faith, and it wasn't Hyundai.
Oh, so you were there present witnessing the arrests, and then you managed to check their visas to confirm Hyundai was 100% squeaky clean?
Then why aren't you with Hyundai suing the US government for abuse. Lawyers will have a field day with this if what you say is true.
>In fact, this party has a — by now well-established — track-record of precisely this bad behaviour. They haven't even tried to hide their actions, only their individual faces. They've been public about their disdain for the law, for humanity, and their general evil plans.
If you're talking about the evil Chaebol Hyundai here, then you'd be right, as it indeed has a very poor track record for legal violations:
### Hyundai Motor Group Controversies (Korea & International)
- *Korea: Embezzlement (2006–2007)*
Chairman Chung Mong-koo got a suspended sentence for embezzling ~$106M for bribes and family control. Exposed chaebol corruption.
- *Korea: Labor Disputes (Ongoing, peaked 2014–2016)\*
Violent strikes over wages and conditions cost $2.4B in production. Unions criticize Hyundai's autocratic management.
- *Korea: Whistleblower Retaliation (2016–2017)*
Engineer Kim Gwang-ho exposed safety defect cover-ups, faced retaliation, and sparked U.S. probes and recalls.
- *Korea: Family Succession Feuds (1990s–2010s)*
Chung family power struggles led to splits and nepotism allegations, highlighting chaebol governance issues.
- *International: Fuel Economy Fraud (2012–2014)*
Hyundai/Kia overstated MPG for 1M+ U.S. vehicles, paid $300M in fines and credits.
- *International: Diesel Emissions Cheating (2015–2022)*
Accused of using defeat devices, Hyundai settled for $192M in the U.S. and recalled millions globally.
- *International: Safety Defects (2010s–2020s)*
Engine fires and brake issues led to 3M+ U.S. recalls and $100M+ in fines, tied to whistleblower claims.
"It was the Hyundai Corpo that broke the law! They're stealing American jobs! That's why ICE targeted them! No, I have no evidence, only blind belief. Why are you even asking me for evidence?! What about when Hyundai did bad things in the past???!!?1?"
You can't do factory bringup without people on site; this is also something people have observed in the other direction when outsourcing to China, you need to send someone from the design team to the production line.
It's not clear to me what visa one is supposed to use for this or even if one is available at all.
A lack of clarity that is less likely to persist thanks to this event. Obviously we need better policy here, or a clarification of the law, and thankfully we now will get it.
To respond to your edit, my guess people downvote you because you completely misunderstood the situation and did not care to correct you when the situation was explained so many time, and probably think you're disingenuous.
I think you're not, so I'll try to explain:
When the technicians I work with install a new windfarm/gas plant router to connect them to electricity markets (they probably do other stuff but my job is the software part of networking, so I only know about that), we could hire a local contractor with CISCO cert, and it would certainly be cheaper than fly out 20 workers to Argentina, Australia, Romania or Mexico. We don't, because our employees will use the same technique, the same methodology each time, for every client, and we will never have to guess how the installation was done, because we know. You can put a price on trust, but it's really expensive. If we had plants in the US, I guarantee we would do the same, for the same reasons, unless the government bought our trust (which is basically reimbursing our losses if the plant fails because the installation wasn't done as our technicians would have).
Unless we hire permanent workers as we did in Romania because we took a big market share there, training someone to follow our procedure, highly personalized, for a week to a month of work is just not worth it, especially when so many specialties are needed for like one hour on one site. We do hire locals to run the day-to-day operations, but the installation, it's just not worth it. Better to fly a tech team every 5 years, that stay like a month, look around, fix shit, then leave.
For the second part: you misunderstood the situation. The workers were only there for the installation of the assembly line (and probably training for the B1s), not to work full-time.
Note that at least some of the workers have basically the same job as our technicians, network engineers, people I work with a lot and that I really respect. To see that parade, picture and video of them being taken on purpose while in chains (not handcuffed, in literal chains) to humiliate them on purpose, and seeing so many Americans cheer in front of that makes me hate most of you. Sorry, I know 'not all Americans', only a third, but still. Cheered because workers are publicly humiliated. That's what your country looks like from the outside.
> To see that parade, picture and video of them being taken on purpose while in chains to humiliate them on purpose and seeing so many Americans cheer in front of that makes me hate most of you
Firstly, where do you see me cheering for that? I never said I approved of that. I was explaining how things work from the perspective of the people living there since they're less likely to be here commenting on HN.
Secondly, who is this "most of you", you claim to hate? I am not even from the US and don't approve of that, I was explain you the thought process of the people who approve of that, since it's simple and quite obvious. Your hate for me is unfounded.
> Cheered because workers are publicly humiliated.
I'll explain you again why the people there cheered. Put yourself in their shoes, you have no good education, no work opportunities, nothing, and suddenly when a factory opens in your town but instead of you getting jobs there, you see foreigners without working visa getting jobs there. Wouldn't you also cheer when you see law enforcement taking them away chains for the unfairness you perceive? To them it doesn't matter all the things you explained here about knowledge transfer and shit, that is irrelevant, what matters is that there's job opportunities that go to outsiders and not to them and they feel wronged by the system so seeing people in chains gives them a sense of retribution.
I can't believe I have to explain it several times, such basic stuff like the 'crabs in a bucket' mentality and why they cheer for such events unfolding. Are people THAT oblivious to this fact of life?
HN users aren't above this themselves. You'll see the same mentality crawl out of them if they're struggling to land jobs but see companies hiring H1B workers instead.
> That's what your country looks like from the outside.
Again, not my country, but if you asked the people there they will agree with my interpretation of the things because it's just basic human psychology.
No need to worry though. Hyundai will also give a "gift" to Trump just like Tim Cook's $300k 24 karat solid gold Apple stand, and Trump will make everything go back to normal and everyone wins. Trump got to look tough to voters by parading foreigners in chains and Hyundai gets to keep making money in the US like before. It's how business is done in banana republics.
Interestingly, the same happened in Western France 10-15 years ago or so, when my father worked in construction, with detached polish and Romanian workers. The unions and workers worked really hard (with the help of journalists and judges) to find proof of illegal employment, found them, arrested the CEOs and RH responsible, put some in prison and fined them backbreaking amounts.
My father was not a direct part of that (he stopped working in construction late 2013 and the exploitation continued until 2014 I think, and was judged in 2016), but he hosted two polish workers (or maybe the same twice), as some of his old friends did. No one would've cheered because we're not idiots, we know who we have to struggle against.
If you zoom out a bit, the consensus on this issue is pretty status quo: the bad guy is the government (ICE), not large multi-national corporations (hundai).
The bias is toward free market libertarian small government anti-populist cosmopolitanism. From that incentive structure all opinions flow.
> Surely the required labor can be found across a country of 300 million people, or easily trained from other adjacent fields that have lost workers due to economic driven redundancies or who want to switch careers for whatever reason.
Okay, so, you want to build a factory, installing vast quantities of specialised equipment, some of which likely literally only exists in your other factories. Do you (a) send over experienced technicians from one of your other facilities for a few months or (b) spend a few years training locals to do your highly specialised stuff, then when it's done in a few months fire them?
> Do they think they're above it? Are they stupid and don't know what they vote for?
They're somewhat out of touch with tech, and caught up in police narratives around encrypted apps blocking their attempts to find pedos. Tech firm lobbyists sell them some lies about the capabilities of these systems.
Ultimately these are politicians stuck in the notion of "but the police can open your [physical] letters, this isn't any different" completely unaware of how times have moved on.
Matters like how people are already being harassed by CSAM being sent to their DMs, how people raid discord servers and try to have them taking down by spamming CSAM, etc, are completely lost on these politicians.
On top of that it's just cowardice. Not daring to be seen as "aiding pedos".
> 5:10 "475 were illegally present in the United States"
Not quite; The figure includes those with visa.
"Illegally present in the United States or in violation of their presence in the united states, working unlawfully"
This also leaves open the question of what "violation of the visa" entails here. They may well have been working within their visas, only for ICE to arbitrarily rule otherwise.
It gets a little confusing because ESTA(which South Koreans are eligible for) is valid for both tourist and business use, and is a visa waiver.
As this comment[1] states with an official source:
> A B-1 visa may be granted to specialized workers going to the United States to install, service, or repair commercial or industrial equipment or machinery purchased from a company outside of the United States, or to train U.S. workers to perform such services.
Maybe the business use of ESTA also covers the above use cases?
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/tiktok-ban-israel-... (Note: Article from November 2023)
The opposition to TikTok on grounds of it's Chinese ownership had been on a slow burn right up to October 2023, when it picked up steam in the wake of the early response to the Gaza War. US politicians were furious that the youth weren't buying the Bipartisan Approved Position(TM) on Israel.
Considering that major world organisations, even holocaust remembrance ones, are now calling Israel's actions genocide, that fury has aged like the finest bottle of raw milk.
Hence:
> and the implication that their intent surely must be to issue pro-Israel propaganda
That is indeed the implication made, for the reasons above, I don't think it is unwarranted.