Amherst deliberatly used smallpox-infested blanket to spread european disease among the indians.
Have you even read the page you refer to? It says that these were stories and that many doubt them. The Wikipedia article on him says the following:
"Although Amherst's name is usually connected with this incident because he was the overall commander and because of his correspondence with Bouquet, evidence appears to indicate that the attempt was made without Amherst's prior knowledge. Whether or not the attempt was successful is unclear."
Your source says that it might have been accidental, Wikipedia says that nobody knows whether the attempt was successful, yet you call it a genocide?
I want to live in your world.
And when you simply walk in and constantly seize land of a people, what do you think will happen on the long run? So, yhea, I guess genocide wasn't the main intend, but it was a clear consequence.
Genocide, like murder, implies intent.
And the question of land ownership is an interesting one. I don't see how all of North-America was "owned" by the people who lived there in 1492 just because they lived there.
Land can be used efficiently and inefficiently. And depending on one's opinion on humanity (should there be many of them or should there be few, should oneself be part of the many or part of those who have to die so that there only be few left), land should be owned either by people who use it efficiently or by people who use it inefficiently.
I like humanity and prefer efficient land use. And I don't care about the race or ethnicity of the people who live off the land.
I guess if drive over a walker accidently, it would not be drive-killing, since it wasn't my intention, right?
It wouldn't be murder. I don't know if "killing" is the legal term.