The same chunk of population "should" (??) think that the Israeli ancestors killed Jesus, and that the Jews will go to hell if they don't accept Jesus as their savior - so - people are weird.

> A good chunk of the US population believes the Israelis were literally chosen by God

There is more to it, not only that but they believe that the Jewish state of Israel is needed for Jesus to return to earth.

This belief comes from Thessalonians 2:1-4

"1 Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to Him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be easily disconcerted or alarmed by any spirit or message or letter seeming to be from us, alleging that the Day of the Lord has already come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way, for it will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness—the son of destruction—is revealed. 4 He will oppose and exalt himself above every so-called god or object of worship. So he will seat himself in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God."

So the "temple" is required for the anti-Christ to arise, and for Jesus to return.

Now as to if that actually means the physical Third Temple of Solomon... this is up for theological debate. Some Church Fathers held that the anti-Christ would indeed arise from a physical Third Temple. While other Church Fathers held that the 3rd Temple in Christianity was technically the Church, and so the anti-Christ would arise from her.

Either way, if you side with the first view there is no qualification for a state to be present in order to rebuild the physical Third Temple.

Protestant Evangelicals in America by and large take the first stance I mentioned, and are pretty stalwart in their belief the State of Israel is the vehicle through which this will be achieved.

There is no similarity at all between Israel and the crusader kingdoms: different historical circumstances, different aims.

I do not think so. Not outside the US anyway.

The legitimisation lies in the alternatives having been (historically) the Soviet Union, and (now) China.

And if you scratch the surface, you will quickly realise that their apology is bullshit.

Israel wanted the US involved and conducted a false flag operation:

“Some intelligence and military officials dispute Israel's explanation.[79] Dean Rusk, U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote: I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous.[80]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

There's also many voices saying it was a coverup.

The survivors themselves say it was deliberate.

Fine, not wrong, but you missed the rather heavy factor of the western powers feeling they owe a huge debt to the Jewish people for turning their boats back during the Holocaust. It's a "no one helps you til you help yourself" scenario, now that a state exists with a mission to give Jews safe refuge and self governance, they have (some of) the world's sympathy.

its not merely because of a few lobbyists and evangelicals' wacky eschatology

I wouldn't call it easy, no.

Oh right, I see what you mean.

Still, I believe there is a difference. First, it feels like anyone willing to pay enough will convince NSO to "help" them. It's not the same with firearms (in 99% countries in the world): you can't just pay a private company to go rob a bank with firearms.

Then for the police and the military, it's usually restricted to professionals. In my country, if a police officer gets their gun out (I'm not talking about firing), an investigation follows. If they fire their gun, a bigger investigation follows, they make the news, and the officer may lose their job (or be affected to a desk job for the rest of their career).

It seems a lot easier to get access to NSO than to actually fire a gun, and to me that's a good thing. I don't want a police like in the US. To the point where I do believe that it should be as hard to access NSO as it is to use firearms.

Which is obviously 6 letters

CFAA is criminal law with specific parameters. the accused must have attempted or conspired to attempt to bypass a restricted system. Demonstrating how to steal money from a bank vault for example is not a crime, neither is teaching others how to do so for a fee or providing them with tools that can aid them in that endeavor. Especially when the other party is a government, it is reasonable to assume they will operate within the bounds of their own law. Red teamers, pentesters, security researchers, security training providers couldn't exist if the CFAA prohibited this. It isn't like their customers come to them and ask "hey, we're gonna spy on a journalist, can we buy pegasus". At the very least, it needs to be established that it is reasonable to presume pegasus will be used to break a law, it could be used for lawful reasons (which exist) and I'm sure they'll make their clients sign waivers to protect themselves fro such presumption.

Anonymity isn't a crime (at least not yet), and it alone cannot be used to presume criminal intent. It isn't a crime to offer services anonymously. Perhaps not paying your taxes (if income could be proven) is something they can go after (and fail).

The civil system can be used, if it is the government that is the plaintiff. Random companies suing is not enforcement since companies act in their interest, not in the interest of public policy and regulation. Waiting for events that align with corporate interests is not regulation, it is coincidence.