So you read one phrase--after the warning by Yoav that he was going to be provocative--and decided that was enough to go on?

Asking for a clarification about whether he means all pro-Palestinian actions are pro-Hamas is reasonable, but the language is consistent with the claim that there is a very strong pro-Hamas subset of pro-Palestinian protestors. As ChatGPT says, "In other situations, especially in more informal or conversational contexts, the statement might be used more loosely to indicate that a large subset of the first is considered to be the second. This can happen in cases where there's a common overlap between two categories, but they are not entirely identical. The speaker might be emphasizing the most relevant or significant aspect shared by both, rather than asserting a strict equivalence."

I would personally be more careful (and not "provocative"--I don't think provocation of that sort is helpful in most instances), but one phrase isn't enough to establish the claim, given the context that the content will be provocative (which generally means that some liberties are taken with turns of phrase).