Well, sure, recovery from incredible devastation will take decades and the energy required to clear and replace all the structures will not be environmentally friendly, that should all be obvious to anyone who knows anything about construction projects:
https://www.fairplanet.org/story/concrete-climate-change-environmental-injustice/
"To create Portland cement, limestone undergoes a calcination process, which releases large amounts of CO2 from the chemical reaction. This is the concrete industry’s dirtiest activity, releasing up to 50 per cent of the cement industry’s carbon emissions.
Additionally, to transform raw materials into clinker, cement’s intermediate product, large amounts of energy are required to heat, mix and cool the ingredients in giant kilns.
It is estimated that, in traditional kilns, one tonne of cement produces one tonne of carbon dioxide, although modernised factories have found ways to reduce these emissions.
Water Use
Cement creation is also highly water intensive, particularly during cooling after materials are baked at extremely high temperatures.
Nature Magazine estimates the concrete industry is responsible for nine per cent of all water withdrawals from the sector. Approximately 16.6 km squared of water is used annually for concrete production, and this figure is expected to soar as the demand for concrete continues to rise."
So, again, what are they trying to argue here? The only environmentally responsible option is to leave Gaza destroyed?
BitDefender is likely not using leaked data, but intentionally sold data? That kind of crap happens all the time.
Unless it’s not REALLY BitDefender, which also happens all the time. :) See all the MacAfee spam…