Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent
Speaker 2: coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about,
Speaker 2: it just means the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 2: But enough with that, let's get to the show everything.
Speaker 2: Good morning everybody, it is Tuesday. We have a bread
Speaker 2: show for everyone today. What are we apping?
Speaker 1: Indeed, we do a lot to get into this morning.
Speaker 1: Bb Netanya who's speaking out taking questions really from the
Speaker 1: first time extensively since October seventh, So some pretty noteworthy
Speaker 1: comments there will bring you all of that. This comes
Speaker 1: as an internal government document from an Israeli ministry was
Speaker 1: released which gives some indication of what they might want
Speaker 1: to do after this GASA offensive is finished. So we'll
Speaker 1: break all of that down for you. We'll also have
Speaker 1: new revelations about how AID may roll out. Republicans sort
Speaker 1: of making their opening bid, wanting to tie support for
Speaker 1: Israel together with cutting money from the IRS from the
Speaker 1: agents that would go after a wealth tax sheet, So
Speaker 1: we'll talk about that and it's process. I actually genuinely
Speaker 1: don't know what its prospects are. We can debate all
Speaker 1: of that, debate all of that. We also have some
Speaker 1: new US government state sponsored censorship efforts that we want
Speaker 1: to tell you about and break down for you, and
Speaker 1: also some global censorship as well around the issue of
Speaker 1: Israel and Palestine. New pull out of IO with some
Speaker 1: very good news for Donald Trump, good news for Nikki Haley,
Speaker 1: actually very bad news for viag Ramaswami and Ron De
Speaker 1: Santis confronted over the conspiracy which has swept the Internet
Speaker 1: of which I am a true believer, which is that
Speaker 1: he is wearing secret heels within those really weird and
Speaker 1: ugly boots that he wears all.
Speaker 2: I will hold my commentary.
Speaker 1: I have a full analysis an investigation for you in
Speaker 1: that block. We also are very honored to have the
Speaker 1: brother of one of the Israeli citizens who is thought
Speaker 1: to have been taken hostage by Hamas. He is joining
Speaker 1: us in study. We actually just recorded the interview. I
Speaker 1: really hope that all of you take the time to
Speaker 1: listen to what this man has to say about how
Speaker 1: he wants the hostages to remain front and center, and
Speaker 1: also about how he continues to hold on to hope
Speaker 1: for peace, which is just, you know, an extraordinary testament
Speaker 1: to his human spirit. So I really hope you guys
Speaker 1: stick around for all of that, because it's just so
Speaker 1: important as we cover these big picture geopolitical machinations to
Speaker 1: remember the innocent human beings that are caught in the
Speaker 1: middle of this and are suffering so greatly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he was a real reminder for that for both
Speaker 2: of us. You know, probably why we're in a somber
Speaker 2: mood right now. Just please take a listen. You should
Speaker 2: watch it. He talks about his sister, he talks about
Speaker 2: some of the bigger pictures stuff, and he brings it
Speaker 2: back to what's the most important to the humanity at
Speaker 2: the all of it. So anyway, let's start with Benjamin Netzenya,
Speaker 2: who finally facing some questions from the Western press. We've
Speaker 2: picked out three separate bites that we thought were the
Speaker 2: most important. The first was about asking him about calls
Speaker 2: for ceasefire. Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 3: I want to make clear Israel's position regarding the ceasefire,
Speaker 3: just as the United States would not agree to a
Speaker 3: cease fire after the bombing of Pearl Harbor or after
Speaker 3: the terrorist attack of ninety eleven. Israel will not agree
Speaker 3: to a cessation of facilities with Ramas after the horrific
Speaker 3: attacks of October seventh. Calls for a ceasefire are calls
Speaker 3: for Israel to surrender to Hamas, to surrender to terrorism,
Speaker 3: to surrender to barbarism. That will not happen, Ladies and gentlemen.
Speaker 3: The Bible says that there is a time for peace
Speaker 3: and a time for war. This is a time for war,
Speaker 3: a war for our common future. Today we draw a
Speaker 3: line between the forces of civilization and the forces of barbarism.
Speaker 3: It is a time for everyone to decide where they stand.
Speaker 3: Israel will stand against the forces of barbarism until victory.
Speaker 3: I hope and pray that civilized nations everywhere will back
Speaker 3: this fight because Israel's fight is your fight. Because if
Speaker 3: Ramas and Iran's access of evil win, you will be
Speaker 3: their next target. That's why Israel's victory will be your victory.
Speaker 3: But make no mistake, regardless of who stands with Israel,
Speaker 3: Israel will fight until this battle is won.
Speaker 4: There's a lot to be said there.
Speaker 2: I would say that this is why with Neta Yahu
Speaker 2: you can, honestly at a certain point you just need
Speaker 2: to respect his wiliness. That is one of the most
Speaker 2: calibrated message for American audiences by a foreign leader I've
Speaker 2: ever seen, as delivered in basically perfect, near accent lists English. Second,
Speaker 2: we talk about Pearl Harbor nine to eleven, why don't
Speaker 2: we just pluck those two events, you know, out of
Speaker 2: thin air. Axis of these are all things which the
Speaker 2: American public and specifically the constituencies in the US that
Speaker 2: are most supportive of Israel.
Speaker 4: This is purely activating for all of them.
Speaker 2: Integrating the Bible, you know, into that discussion, a nod
Speaker 2: to the evangelical supporters. I mean, and again we always
Speaker 2: say it's like when something's released in English, it's talked
Speaker 2: about in English, it is purely calibrated mostly for a
Speaker 2: US audience. That's entirely how I read that, Crystal.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: One of the things that I noted is they've long
Speaker 1: been making comparisons with nine to eleven Yes, and that
Speaker 1: cuts in both directions, because on the one hand, it's
Speaker 1: like yes, that takes Americans very clearly, you know, especially
Speaker 1: Americans at a certain age back to that day the
Speaker 1: whore they felt, the you know, desire for revenge and
Speaker 1: the patriotism and the nationalism that's what the country at
Speaker 1: that time. But it's a double edged toward too, because
Speaker 1: the way we've reacted was foolish and it just sewed
Speaker 1: more chaos, more destruction. It did not make us safer
Speaker 1: or make anyone safer, and not to mention, you know,
Speaker 1: led to the mass killing of so many civilians. So
Speaker 1: I think that's why there's now the addition of let's
Speaker 1: also talk about World War Two and you know, the
Speaker 1: Nazis and the attack on Pearl Harbor as a further justification.
Speaker 1: And Sagara is actually curious of what you make of
Speaker 1: that historical comparison, because you know, when I think about it,
Speaker 1: like there is no diminishing the horror that Israel and
Speaker 1: Israeli citizens suffered on that day. I mean, far be it,
Speaker 1: especially after we just talked a gilly to diminish the
Speaker 1: suffering from those people in the whoror they felt the
Speaker 1: way that it shook them to their core. But to
Speaker 1: compare that to the extermination of millions of Jews and
Speaker 1: a Nazi Germany, which was incredibly powerful versus Hamas, which is,
Speaker 1: you know, ragtag Israel is a much more powerful position
Speaker 1: backed up by the most powerful superpower on the planet.
Speaker 5: I don't think the analogy.
Speaker 2: Quite holds well, and that's where the difficulty of it
Speaker 2: and every situation is unique. I mean, really, what I
Speaker 2: thought I were to guess one of the reasons why
Speaker 2: you want to bring up Pearl Harbor is because of
Speaker 2: the bombing campaigns that the US and the Western Allies
Speaker 2: undertook against Nazi Germany and against Japan. However, it's not
Speaker 2: they're not exactly looked upon the most kindly, even though
Speaker 2: they probably were necessary in order to win and to
Speaker 2: fight the war. However, you know, you would say at
Speaker 2: that time, it's a little bit different because the Japanese
Speaker 2: Empire is not like a ragtag group of dudes with rockets.
Speaker 4: Inside of Gaza.
Speaker 2: The Nazi regime, you know, the Nazi Colossus, at least
Speaker 2: as it was at one point, is certainly not the same.
Speaker 4: So, yeah, it's a little bit different.
Speaker 2: All of these things, as you said, come back to
Speaker 2: you can read into it whichever one you want. You
Speaker 2: could say that there's a lot of people who would
Speaker 2: even just beat what I said, they would say that
Speaker 2: the fire bombing of Tokyo wasn't necessary, that the only
Speaker 2: thing that really capitulated the Japanese was the atomic bomb.
Speaker 2: A lot of there's a lot of alternative historians. It
Speaker 2: might even be the mainstream view now that the bombing
Speaker 2: of Dresden and all of that was totally unnecessary in
Speaker 2: order to win the war and actually counterproductive.
Speaker 5: Is it analysis of a lot of historians.
Speaker 2: I'm not really entirely sure where I fall on that.
Speaker 2: I think some of it is hindsight and all of that,
Speaker 2: but we're not in hindsight right now. We're in today,
Speaker 2: and we get to decide how and what with the
Speaker 2: way we conduct ourselves. In general, the world came together
Speaker 2: post World War Two and just said, hey, this type
Speaker 2: of response, let's just make sure that never happens again,
Speaker 2: and let's outlaw it for all time. Of course, there's
Speaker 2: been many hypocrisies, but I think to your point, and
Speaker 2: this is where I found it interesting that the Western
Speaker 2: press was able to ask bebe about collective punishment. I
Speaker 2: could not imagine President Bush three and a half weeks
Speaker 2: into the War on Terror ever being asked something like that.
Speaker 2: So to me, it was a change in that. This
Speaker 2: is where a reporter asked BB about it. Let's take
Speaker 2: a listen to.
Speaker 6: What he said.
Speaker 7: People can't understand why so many have people civilians have
Speaker 7: to die in this process. You argue that Amas is
Speaker 7: putting them up as human shields. He's had a good
Speaker 7: enough excuse. Are you inflicting here collective punishment on the
Speaker 7: people of Palestine?
Speaker 3: Not assume civilian has to die. Tramas merely has to
Speaker 3: let them go to the safe zone that we created
Speaker 3: in southeastern Gaza Strip. There's a safe zone there. Not
Speaker 3: a single civilian has to die, but Ramas is preventing
Speaker 3: them from leaving, keeping them in the areas of conflict.
Speaker 3: So I think that you should direct your questions to Hamas.
Speaker 3: But I can tell you one thing. We're going out
Speaker 3: of our way to prevent civilian casualties.
Speaker 4: So he says that there's a safe zone there in
Speaker 4: the south.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is where it's a little bit difficult
Speaker 2: because we know that there have been multiple air strikes
Speaker 2: that have happened.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just a blatant lie. They told people
Speaker 1: to move south, you know, which is Reignine. And we'll
Speaker 1: get into some of the potential plans for Gaza after
Speaker 1: the invasion and what that might look like. But you know,
Speaker 1: has obviously read nine a lot of fears about a
Speaker 1: second Nakba. That southern part has not been free bombing.
Speaker 1: It's not like it has been a safe zone, not
Speaker 1: what whatsoever. So that part is just a total lie.
Speaker 1: Is Hamas preventing them from leaving? I don't know, because
Speaker 1: you did have close to, you know, somewhere around a
Speaker 1: million people who did leave the North for the South.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they've been displaced internally exactly where it's very difficult
Speaker 2: to actually get a report out since there's no journalists
Speaker 2: in there, which Israel is not allowing them.
Speaker 1: But we know for sure many, you know, probably close
Speaker 1: to a million people have fled the North now that
Speaker 1: has left quite a number still remaining in the North.
Speaker 1: But you know, if Hamas is trying to prevent them
Speaker 1: from leave, they're not doing a very effective job.
Speaker 5: So there's that.
Speaker 1: There's also this, you know, question of collective punishment, and
Speaker 1: even if you buy all of the Israeli propaganda, which
Speaker 1: I don't about, how they're doing everything they can to
Speaker 1: avoid targeting civilians, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, when
Speaker 1: you look at this just mass, indiscriminate bombing campaign of
Speaker 1: civilian infrastructure that's been happening for weeks now at this point,
Speaker 1: I think it's very hard to take that seriously. But
Speaker 1: even if you do, the fact that you have imposed
Speaker 1: a complete siege, complete with including at one point telecon,
Speaker 1: an internet blackout on this population, no food, no water,
Speaker 1: no fuel, et cetera, there is no other way to
Speaker 1: define that than collective punishment. The last thing I will
Speaker 1: say here on this, You know this question, even if
Speaker 1: you again buy into the idea of like all Hamas
Speaker 1: is using civilians as human shields, is imagine if Hamas
Speaker 1: was operating in Tel Aviv and was using Israeli citizens
Speaker 1: in a hospital, let's say, or in a school or
Speaker 1: in a marketplace as human shields. Do you think the
Speaker 1: Israeli government would think it was an appropriate response to
Speaker 1: then just go in and blow up that hospital and say, well,
Speaker 1: to hell with those Israeli citizens because Hamas was using
Speaker 1: them as human shields.
Speaker 5: Of course they would. Of course they wouldn't.
Speaker 1: And so it really exposes the very disparate treatment and
Speaker 1: view of civilian lives depending on whether they are Israeli
Speaker 1: loves or whether they are Palestinian lives. And I also
Speaker 1: just think, you know this logic that he offers of well,
Speaker 1: it's really all Hamas's fault, and any civilian who dies
Speaker 1: it's one hundred per percent Hamas's fault. That's equivalent of
Speaker 1: the logic that like the Harvard students used when they
Speaker 1: said it's israel sole responsibility that those Israeli citizens were massacred.
Speaker 1: That is completely morally bankrupt. Of course, the Israeli government,
Speaker 1: there's some responsibility, and they are not.
Speaker 5: Supposed to be a terrorist organization. They are supposed to.
Speaker 1: They're holding themselves out as this beacon of the civilized world.
Speaker 1: So act like it, don't lower yourself to their standards.
Speaker 1: But you know obviously that that ship has sort of sailed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I honestly would just appreciate it if they were
Speaker 2: a little bit more honest. And actually I look to
Speaker 2: their defenders here in America, and their defenders are in
Speaker 2: America are basically like, yeah, they have to do it,
Speaker 2: that's what they should do.
Speaker 4: That's the only way in order to wipe it out.
Speaker 2: And they're like, sure, it's not in compliance with the Internet,
Speaker 2: I mean international law is fake, right, because you know,
Speaker 2: what is it? Possession is nine tenths of the laws. Like,
Speaker 2: if you can do it, then is it really the law? Well,
Speaker 2: not really, uh, And.
Speaker 1: They're certainly exposing that international law is completely faked.
Speaker 5: I've no doubt about that.
Speaker 4: I've always believed that. It's part of the reason I
Speaker 4: don't often use it.
Speaker 2: So my thing for Israel and them is that they
Speaker 2: need to just be honest about what they are doing.
Speaker 2: Part of the reasons why they won't is because they're
Speaker 2: actually partied in some cases to some of the Geneva Conventions,
Speaker 2: to the United Nations and others, which would put them
Speaker 2: up for censure. But in the way that they're conducting
Speaker 2: the war, I mean, they've come under criticism by the US,
Speaker 2: by all these other organizations, and yet it does just
Speaker 2: expose like the fundamental divide of you know, we're backing
Speaker 2: our ally, so is most of the Western world, and
Speaker 2: then we try and reverse it and turn it around
Speaker 2: on Russia and Ukraine. Everyone's like, wait, what are you
Speaker 2: talking about? And so for me, it's like, let's all
Speaker 2: just be very honest about what's going on here, about interest,
Speaker 2: about allies, about who we support, and about how we
Speaker 2: don't because that's what confuses the entire game and honestly
Speaker 2: just makes a mockery whenever we try to use it
Speaker 2: against somebody else. So the last thing that he was
Speaker 2: actually asked about, which is especially fascinating, was are you
Speaker 2: going to take responsibility for what happened?
Speaker 4: Are you going to resign? And he had a very
Speaker 4: interesting defense.
Speaker 8: Let's take a listen, sir, it seems that the level
Speaker 8: of support that you have amongst the Israeli public has
Speaker 8: dropped considerably. So the question is how can you continue
Speaker 8: to lead this country effectively during a very difficult time,
Speaker 8: And have you at all considered stepping down.
Speaker 3: The only thing that I intend to have resign is Kamas.
Speaker 3: We're going to resign them to the dust benef history.
Speaker 3: That's my goal, that's my responsibility. That's what I'm leaving
Speaker 3: the country to do.
Speaker 4: That's the only thing I'm going to resign.
Speaker 2: Okay, but the Israeli public definitely feels a certain different
Speaker 2: kind of way. Let's go and put this up there
Speaker 2: on the screen. Just for example, even from the Wall
Speaker 2: Street Journal, Netsagnah, who fights for his political survival in
Speaker 2: the face of a devastating intelligence failure, the hostage crisis,
Speaker 2: and the launch of a brutal and grinding war. The
Speaker 2: Israeli Prime Minister is struggling to rally the public to
Speaker 2: his side, and they just show, I mean, we've played
Speaker 2: for you, you know, videos and instances of people in
Speaker 2: the Israeli public or Sha outing out his own ministers
Speaker 2: out of hospitals. In some cases, people are smearing red
Speaker 2: paint on the headquarters of the Leakud party to look
Speaker 2: like blood, the message being that you have blood on
Speaker 2: your hands. And that question highlights one that crystal. He
Speaker 2: keeps getting a Hebrew where they're like, hey, what are
Speaker 2: we going to do about this investigation? He's like, first,
Speaker 2: we'll fight the war, then we'll have the investigation. And
Speaker 2: it kind of reminds me, honestly of nine to eleven,
Speaker 2: where in the immediate aftermath we never asked the big question.
Speaker 2: We're like, how did this happen? We just reacted. By
Speaker 2: the time the nine to eleven Commission report came out,
Speaker 2: we were in Iraq, it was like nine to eleven
Speaker 2: was forgotten. And then we had an even more stunning
Speaker 2: intelligence failure just to back that up. So I'm coming
Speaker 2: back to what you said, which is, let's actually remember
Speaker 2: and honestly, you know, you'll rarely hear me say this
Speaker 2: something good that President Biden said, where he said, look,
Speaker 2: you know, after nine to eleven, we were filled with
Speaker 2: rage and we did a lot of things which we
Speaker 2: eventually came to regret. And I would urge you don't
Speaker 2: go down that same path, because when you do, you'll
Speaker 2: find yourselves just like us seven trillion dollars or whatever, bankruptcy,
Speaker 2: thousands of American servicemen who are dead who knows untold
Speaker 2: millions and others who've been touched by the war suffering
Speaker 2: PTSD not to mention all the civilians that died in
Speaker 2: the process, but honestly, it just seems like we're going
Speaker 2: right down the same thing. And the worst part is
Speaker 2: that we have a politician here who has the incentive
Speaker 2: to keep the war going as much as possible, or
Speaker 2: to keep the Supreme Commander in this case, has the
Speaker 2: utmost incentive not to rally the nation, but to preserve himself.
Speaker 2: It's a very bizarre alignment of interest, and honestly, he
Speaker 2: should resign, like from a if you really believe it,
Speaker 2: if you believe in the integrity of the State of Israel, Like,
Speaker 2: how can you have a politician with misaligned interests who
Speaker 2: is up there at the top, especially in a coalition
Speaker 2: style government like in Israel with the parliamentary system, I mean,
Speaker 2: switching people in and out is not that difficult compared
Speaker 2: to like a president and yeah, compared to a president
Speaker 2: in four year election. So there's these parliamentary systems of
Speaker 2: government are actually designed to be anti fraph jut to
Speaker 2: move quickly in situations like this, as we saw during
Speaker 2: Second World War or even the First World War in
Speaker 2: some instances in the British system. And yeah, I mean,
Speaker 2: just to see how that is for the public, it
Speaker 2: must be intolerable. I cannot imagine, you know, being in
Speaker 2: a similar situation trying to be a citizen who wants
Speaker 2: to rally to my cause and then having a prime
Speaker 2: minister who you know, you were sketched out about but
Speaker 2: at this point both is responsible at least in some
Speaker 2: form for the failure, but now has a direct interest
Speaker 2: not necessarily in the same as everybody in the public,
Speaker 2: which we're going to talk about in a little bit.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, he is incredibly constrained by his desire
Speaker 1: to hold on to power. And there's a variety of
Speaker 1: ways that that influence operates on him. One is, even
Speaker 1: though he's formed this quote unquote unity government, et cetera,
Speaker 1: very telling that he refused the calls to push out
Speaker 1: some of his most extreme coalition partners like Ben Gavere,
Speaker 1: because he still has his eyes on I got to
Speaker 1: be able to form a coalition after this is all over.
Speaker 1: And it's not an accident that he ended up in
Speaker 1: this coalition with these absolute extremists and true genocidal lunatics,
Speaker 1: because it was very difficult for him to be able
Speaker 1: to form a government at all. So he forced into
Speaker 1: this position of building this coalitional government that has these
Speaker 1: incredibly extreme elements. And so the fact that even in
Speaker 1: this moment when it was necessary to form this war
Speaker 1: cabinet in this unity government, he refused those demands to
Speaker 1: push out those elements because he's thinking down the road,
Speaker 1: I got to get them back in if I'm going
Speaker 1: to hold on to power. The other piece is when
Speaker 1: you have a prime minister who, even before this dramatic failure,
Speaker 1: was already really unpopular, extremely divisive, under fire for corruption,
Speaker 1: under fire for his attempts to basically take over the
Speaker 1: judiciary to get out of his corruption troubles.
Speaker 5: That leaves you very little room to maneuver.
Speaker 1: So if there is something that is in the best
Speaker 1: interests of long term peace that maybe the Israeli public
Speaker 1: is not super excited about because right now they understandably
Speaker 1: just want revenge, you're not going to have the bandwidth
Speaker 1: to do that. So he is under tremendous pressure and
Speaker 1: he has no room to navigate, and that really constrains
Speaker 1: and really impacts what he is doing here in the
Speaker 1: way that he is prosecuting this war.
Speaker 5: And as you already pointed out, Soger, he.
Speaker 1: Also because he put out this like, yeah, well I'll
Speaker 1: have to answer questions including me, but not till after
Speaker 1: the war is over. Every incentive to keep this war
Speaker 1: dragging out as long as possible. You know, there was
Speaker 1: a very interesting incident that really ignited a firestorm within
Speaker 1: Israel of controversy around him, where he put out this tweet,
Speaker 1: and this was detailed in the Wall Street Journal piece.
Speaker 1: He put out this tweet publicly blaming the security failures
Speaker 1: not on not taking any responsibility himself, but on Israel's
Speaker 1: defense and intelligence services. He says he hadn't been warned
Speaker 1: of Hamas's intention to start a war. This hascounter to
Speaker 1: a lot of reporting at this point. He said that
Speaker 1: defense and intelligence officials had assessed that Humas was deterred.
Speaker 1: There was such an uproar he actually deleted the tweet
Speaker 1: and apologized. But this is clearly trying to plant the
Speaker 1: seeds of how he wants to try to pass the
Speaker 1: buck and you know, try to delay until perhaps memories
Speaker 1: have faded and perhaps the rawness of emotion has faded
Speaker 1: to say, well, it really wasn't me, It was those guys.
Speaker 1: They're the ones that failed. They're the ones that led
Speaker 1: you astray. In spite of the fact that his whole
Speaker 1: claim to power and justification for his position as prime minister,
Speaker 1: for his government, etc. Was I am mister security, I
Speaker 1: will keep you safe. So the fact that this happened
Speaker 1: on his watch, in spite of the way he had
Speaker 1: framed himself, I mean, this is incredibly politically devastating.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and just to highlight again how difficult and different,
Speaker 2: you know, public opinion in Israel may be than to
Speaker 2: how you might hear in the US press. Put this
Speaker 2: up there on the screen. This is just from two
Speaker 2: days ago, and Reuters from an internal poll, almost half
Speaker 2: of Israelis want to hold off on any invasion of Gaza,
Speaker 2: in what may indicate a major dip in support for
Speaker 2: the planned next stage of the operation. They Israel has
Speaker 2: vowed to support it now from the actual breakdown quote
Speaker 2: asked if the military should immediately escalate to a large
Speaker 2: scale ground defensive, only twenty nine percent of Israelis agreed,
Speaker 2: forty nine percent said quote it would be better to wait.
Speaker 2: Twenty two percent were undecided. And I think a huge
Speaker 2: reason for that is the hostages. These hostages are at
Speaker 2: the center of the minds of a lot of the
Speaker 2: Israeli public around how to respond. And then furthermore, Crystal,
Speaker 2: we have some even more polling which is really interesting
Speaker 2: around how the actual Israeli public is feeling and also
Speaker 2: about the actual calls for Netanyahu. So we've always been
Speaker 2: trying to highlight here the Israeli voices like Hairetz, which
Speaker 2: is like a center left publication. They publish an editorial
Speaker 2: just yesterday. Put this up there please on the screen
Speaker 2: that highlights exactly what we're talking about here. They say,
Speaker 2: this is the headline, Natagna Who's coalition must remove him?
Speaker 4: Immediately.
Speaker 2: The message at netanaw who posted on his social media
Speaker 2: accounts in which in the midst of the war he
Speaker 2: blamed those heads of the Defense establishment, necessitates his immediate
Speaker 2: removal as Prime Minister after this post, notwithstanding the fact
Speaker 2: that he deleted it and apologized weekly. Every Israeli, the
Speaker 2: President of the State and others once and for all,
Speaker 2: they need to continue at his faithful time is to
Speaker 2: gamble with Israel's future. So what they continue to say is,
Speaker 2: you know, this isn't just our analysis. This is quite
Speaker 2: a few people who are inside of the country. However,
Speaker 2: we do want to make sure that people understand. You know,
Speaker 2: people in Israel are not just like kumbay a piece.
Speaker 2: It's not that they want to hold off on an
Speaker 2: invasion because they're so concerned about Palestinians or Palestinian lives.
Speaker 2: They want to hold off an invasion because they want
Speaker 2: to make sure that their citizens are safe. Understandable sentiment.
Speaker 2: We just want to be very clear about what they
Speaker 2: actually think. Let's put this up there please on the screen.
Speaker 2: This is from a poll of the Israel Democracy Institute.
Speaker 2: So for example, they ask to what extent do you
Speaker 2: trust each of the following institutions on the government, it
Speaker 2: is forty eight point seven percent. The vast majority of
Speaker 2: people not at all, do not trust the government on
Speaker 2: not so much, it's twenty nine point nine. It's interesting too,
Speaker 2: you can look at the breakdown between Jews and Arab
Speaker 2: citizens of Israel in terms of people who actually trust
Speaker 2: the government quite a lot. In Israel, it's thirteen percent
Speaker 2: and an additional five don't know at three So people
Speaker 2: are very decided on the issue. That's interesting. So that
Speaker 2: does highlight netsa Nau's problem. But let's go to the
Speaker 2: next one here. Please, to what extent do you think
Speaker 2: that Israel should take into consideration the suffering of the
Speaker 2: civilian Palestinian population in Gaza when planning the next phases
Speaker 2: of the operation there, not at all. You have forty
Speaker 2: percent of the general public. However, there's a big breakdown
Speaker 2: between Jews and Arabs. Forty seven point five percent of
Speaker 2: Jews say not at all, one point two percent of
Speaker 2: Arabs on not so much. It's an additional thirty five
Speaker 2: point nine percent. So the vast majority of Israeli Jews
Speaker 2: saying they should not take into consideration civilian population of
Speaker 2: the Palestinian people. But you do have four percent of
Speaker 2: Arabs who vehemently disagree. Now in terms of the flip,
Speaker 2: in terms of people who say we should very much
Speaker 2: take into consideration they're suffering. It's a vast majority of
Speaker 2: the Arab Israeli population which says that they should. There
Speaker 2: is a big, big flip there.
Speaker 1: It's basically a complete reversal. Keep this up on the
Speaker 1: screen because I want to highlight these other pole questions
Speaker 1: as well. You can just see very clearly here the
Speaker 1: sectarian divide between these are Jews and these are Arab Israelis.
Speaker 1: So these are not you know, people who are living
Speaker 1: in the West Bank, are living in the Gaza strip.
Speaker 1: These are Arab Israelis their view of what's going on.
Speaker 1: And so here you see eighty three percent of Jews
Speaker 1: saying basically like, don't really care about the civilian Palestinian population,
Speaker 1: and it's completely reversed for Arabs eighty three percent say
Speaker 1: I care quite a lot, or I care very much
Speaker 1: about the Palestinian civilian population in Gaza visa VI this war.
Speaker 5: Keep this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: The next question here, do you agree or disagree that
Speaker 1: when undertaking military operations the IDF should ensure it is
Speaker 1: not breaking international laws and rules of war. So basically like,
Speaker 1: how do you feel about war crimes? And you've got
Speaker 1: a very large split here as well. In terms of
Speaker 1: Jewish Israelis, you have it split more or less fifty
Speaker 1: to fifty whether they care much about international law or
Speaker 1: rule of war. With Arabs completely different story. Again, it's
Speaker 1: about eighty three percent who say, yes, you should be
Speaker 1: caring about whether you're breaking international law and rules of war.
Speaker 1: And the last one we wanted to highlight here, which
Speaker 1: is very relevant both to the next conversation we're about
Speaker 1: to have and also to our conversation that we had
Speaker 1: with Gilly Roman, whose sister is in Israeli hostage, and
Speaker 1: your opinion, should the State of Israel conduct negotiations with
Speaker 1: Hamas for the release of kidnapped Israelis in return for
Speaker 1: the release of Hamas prisoners from Israeli prisons. Here there's
Speaker 1: a real you know, there's a real divide among Jewish Israelis.
Speaker 1: You have the first first responses, Yes, they should do
Speaker 1: these negotiations immediately, even if it means halting the fighting.
Speaker 1: Not a lot of take us there with Jews. Overwhelmingly
Speaker 1: that's the position with Arabs at sixty percent. The next
Speaker 1: response is yes immediately, but don't stop the fighting. That's
Speaker 1: the place where the plurality of Jewish.
Speaker 5: Is rallies stand.
Speaker 1: And I would say, based on our conversation with Gilly,
Speaker 1: that's what he thinks. Basically, thirty seven percent say continue
Speaker 1: to negotiate, but also don't stop the fighting. Only six
Speaker 1: percent of Arabs hold that view. The next position is
Speaker 1: not right now, only at the end of the fighting.
Speaker 1: That is a relatively fringe position even among Jewish is
Speaker 1: rallies at only fifteen percent. And then the just flat
Speaker 1: out no, don't negotiate at all is actually pretty popular
Speaker 1: among Jewish is rallies about twenty six percent, So that's
Speaker 1: the most popular position. So the bulk of the public there,
Speaker 1: in terms of Jewish Israelis say either negotiate, we keep fighting,
Speaker 1: or don't negotiate at all, just fight and we'll see
Speaker 1: what happens later.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, look, unfortunately, I think it mostly tracks
Speaker 2: with US public opinion. Post nine eleven would if you
Speaker 2: would ask people in the United States, be like, should
Speaker 2: we care at all about Iraqi civilians? In October of
Speaker 2: two almost what twenty one years ago to almost to
Speaker 2: the day. At this time when we were deciding all
Speaker 2: these things, everyone what ninety some percent would have been like,
Speaker 2: absolutely not wipe them out. I mean, I'm sure you
Speaker 2: remember too. Course, I grew up in Texas, so I
Speaker 2: heard this one a lot. They're like, I don't care.
Speaker 2: You know everything I need to know about Islam I
Speaker 2: found out in September eleventh, two thousand and one, like
Speaker 2: all of these dumb refrains, which you know, to be honest,
Speaker 2: And I even heard this from Darryl Cooper who was
Speaker 2: on our podcast. He's like a lot of the guys
Speaker 2: who had heard that from He's like, they ended up,
Speaker 2: you know, going to serve in the military and then
Speaker 2: finding themselves just like either reversed or just really hopeless
Speaker 2: and sad about how the entire situation turned out. So again,
Speaker 2: you know, history certainly does seem to rhyme in this situation.
Speaker 2: I guess the entire point of this is just to
Speaker 2: show you that Israel is in a complex place in
Speaker 2: terms of how it's people feel, in terms of what
Speaker 2: they want. But I think one thing that they all
Speaker 2: are pretty much united around is they don't trust their
Speaker 2: government and nets and Yahoo is at the center of
Speaker 2: all of that, and unfortunately, I guess for us is
Speaker 2: he is our number one negotiating partner and or messaging person,
Speaker 2: you know, to the American public around all of this.
Speaker 2: It's very dangerous, I think, for that country to have
Speaker 2: him at the helm at this time whenever. He's going
Speaker 2: to be so controversial to so many people inside his
Speaker 2: own country and so many people inside of ours. Let's
Speaker 2: move on, Ben to some just basic news around the
Speaker 2: actual invasion and one of the preeminent goals for a
Speaker 2: lot of the Israeli public, which is the return of
Speaker 2: the hostages. Let's go and put this up there on
Speaker 2: the screen. The IDF said yesterday that a female Israeli
Speaker 2: soldier who had been kidnapped by Hamas was quote released
Speaker 2: during IDF ground operations. The IDF is saying that the
Speaker 2: soldier was medically checked, is doing well and is met
Speaker 2: with their family. The details of this are a little
Speaker 2: weird actually, because it appears that she was not being
Speaker 2: held in a tunnel. She was being held in an
Speaker 2: area very close to where some of these really military
Speaker 2: operations were, didn't have a lot of military guard around her.
Speaker 2: And this isn't just an Israeli a hostage. This is
Speaker 2: an IDF soldier who was taken captive by Hamas. So
Speaker 2: I don't know, maybe it was a screw up or
Speaker 2: something like that by Hamas. Clearly they had some intelligence
Speaker 2: to that effect. They went in and they rescued her.
Speaker 2: It came at the same time of the release of
Speaker 2: a new video of some of these hostages. Of course,
Speaker 2: let's keep this in mind before we even play it.
Speaker 2: These hostages are being held against their will and under duress.
Speaker 2: So it's not like we can take everything that they
Speaker 2: say as truth or how they are actually feeling. But
Speaker 2: we wanted to play it just to give you the
Speaker 2: at least, this is the message that Hamas wants the
Speaker 2: hostages to project to the Israeli public, which is going
Speaker 2: to have some sort of impact. So take the caveat
Speaker 2: and now let's put this up there on the screen
Speaker 2: and I'll read some of the tough subtitles.
Speaker 6: They say.
Speaker 2: Biby Nechayahu, we are in Chevy Chevy Hamas twenty three
Speaker 2: how many days? It's been twenty three days, she says
Speaker 2: to the two people sitting next to her. Yesterday there
Speaker 2: was a press conference with the kidnap to families. We
Speaker 2: know that there was supposed to be a cease fire.
Speaker 2: You were supposed to free us all. You had to
Speaker 2: free us all, and instead we are driving in your
Speaker 2: political security, military and political chaos. And there's nods there
Speaker 2: from some of the people who are next her because
Speaker 2: of the mess that quote you made on the seventh
Speaker 2: of October, Because there was no army there, no one came,
Speaker 2: no one listened to us. And we, innocent citizens, citizens
Speaker 2: who pay taxes to the State of Israel, are in
Speaker 2: Chevy in conditions, not conditions. This one is a difficult one.
Speaker 2: You are killing us. You want to kill us ally,
Speaker 2: You want to find a way to kill us all.
Speaker 2: Not enough, you killed everyone. Not enough Israeli citizens were killed.
Speaker 2: Free us, Free us, now, free their citizens, free their prisoners,
Speaker 2: free us, free all of us, and give us, give
Speaker 2: us to return to our families.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 2: Really horrible situation there. I can't imagine what these women
Speaker 2: are going through.
Speaker 6: Again.
Speaker 2: Who knows whether any of that is true, whether they
Speaker 2: have guns pointed at their heads, but it's clear that
Speaker 2: Hamas wants to exploit that message and to hammer at
Speaker 2: home something that you would talk to almost immediately crystal
Speaker 2: about the divisions in the Israeli public around the moving
Speaker 2: of IDF soldiers from the border with Gaza to the
Speaker 2: West Bank in order to protect settlers, leaving people there
Speaker 2: feeling very exposed. Many of them are really more like
Speaker 2: Israeli leftists, they're like peace activists in some cases. Those
Speaker 2: two old ladies who were released, Ryan did a great
Speaker 2: job of kind of talking about them and their their
Speaker 2: peace legacy.
Speaker 4: People haven't gone.
Speaker 2: They've been into Gaza before to provide medical services to
Speaker 2: Palestinian people.
Speaker 4: So these women, we.
Speaker 2: Don't know much about them, but of course they're being
Speaker 2: exploited and they're being projected here. But the message that
Speaker 2: they are trying to get across is that Hamas is
Speaker 2: desirable at this point of a ceasefire, but obvious to
Speaker 2: take advantage or at least, you know, for whatever purposes.
Speaker 2: But you know, it also gets to the difficulty of
Speaker 2: the hostage situation and what they are then demanding. It
Speaker 2: seems that they are saying, we want the release of
Speaker 2: all of our prisoners in exchange. Now, the details of
Speaker 2: any sort of hostage swap and all of that are
Speaker 2: very you know, the nebulous in some cases, like sometimes
Speaker 2: they're saying well, we want the release of all Hamas
Speaker 2: people who were taken on October seventh, or actually want
Speaker 2: all Palestinian prisoners who are being held by Israel or
Speaker 2: in some cases have been held now for decades in
Speaker 2: Israeli prison. And then all of this is of course
Speaker 2: being negotiated in Katar, where the reports indicate that the
Speaker 2: head of the Israeli Masad actually just traveled to may
Speaker 2: not have met with Hamas directly, but as meeting with
Speaker 2: other representatives where Hamas has representation.
Speaker 1: There as well, a group of the family members of
Speaker 1: Israelis who are being held hostage release that their position
Speaker 1: is they support a swap of all prisoners for all prisoners,
Speaker 1: or all hostages for all hostages. So at least some
Speaker 1: portion of the hostage family members like that is their position.
Speaker 1: They want to negotiate, they want to make that deal.
Speaker 1: I also want to mention the fact because I think
Speaker 1: this is really significant as well in understanding you know,
Speaker 1: this entire dynamic. There were a lot of Palestinian day
Speaker 1: laborers from Gaza who are actually in Israel on the
Speaker 1: day of October seventh. They were there, you know, on
Speaker 1: a work permit to work. They usually work in you know,
Speaker 1: the very difficult, dirty, low paying industries that Israelis don't
Speaker 1: want to do, so they give.
Speaker 5: Gazens work permits.
Speaker 1: This was part of the idea to sort of like
Speaker 1: placate this area and try to keep tensions and security
Speaker 1: concerns at bay. Thousands of them are missing, a number
Speaker 1: of them have been confirmed taken I would say, basically
Speaker 1: hostage by the Israelis as well. So when we're talking
Speaker 1: about Palestinian prisoners who could be part of some theoretical deal,
Speaker 1: which again you have to consider you're dealing with mas here,
Speaker 1: so how much you.
Speaker 5: Take them at their word, etc.
Speaker 1: But when you're thinking about Palestinian prisoners, I just want
Speaker 1: people to understand the type of people that could be
Speaker 1: involved in that. You know, some of them are undoubtedly
Speaker 1: you hardened Hamas terrorists, no doubt about it, but some
Speaker 1: of them are also just regular Palestinian day laborers who
Speaker 1: are being held now in indefinite detention in this very
Speaker 1: sort of like Guantanamo Bay type system that Israel has
Speaker 1: set up exactly for you know, this type of situation.
Speaker 1: So that's sort of the bigger picture of the potential
Speaker 1: swap that is being discussed.
Speaker 5: Here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. So that's the context for the current
Speaker 2: hostage situation in terms of the military operation. So I've
Speaker 2: been checking military operations obviously continue. The tanks remain inside
Speaker 2: of Gaza. It appears that they are doing some sort
Speaker 2: of movement to encircle the city, Gaza City. We broke
Speaker 2: a lot of that down yesterday, but there hasn't been
Speaker 2: anything significant that's happened in the last twenty four hours.
Speaker 4: Of course, we will keep you guys all updated.
Speaker 1: Part of what we've tried to keep the focus on
Speaker 1: here from the beginning is not only what is happening
Speaker 1: right now and the horrors of it and the details
Speaker 1: of it and the geostrategic importance of it, but okay,
Speaker 1: what's the plan for after? And to make the nine
Speaker 1: to eleven comparison again, you know, I mean, going into
Speaker 1: a rock at all was foolish, But we also went
Speaker 1: in without a real plan for after, at least not
Speaker 1: when one that made any damn sense. The Israeli government
Speaker 1: has been very insistent under net and Yahoo that like,
Speaker 1: we haven't really thought about that. First, We're going to
Speaker 1: go in and do this thing, and then we'll figure
Speaker 1: that out down the road. The US has reportedly in
Speaker 1: one of these you know, handwringing dispatch is very concerned
Speaker 1: about that, trying to pressure them to come up with
Speaker 1: a plan. So we are starting to get some leaks
Speaker 1: and some details about some of the plans which are
Speaker 1: being crafted and floated in what I would describe as
Speaker 1: basically like a domestic and international kind of trial balloon.
Speaker 1: Put this up on the screen from Haretz. The Israeli
Speaker 1: Intel Ministry suggests relocating Gaza to Sinai after the Hamas War,
Speaker 1: so completely pushing Gazans out of the Gaza strip and
Speaker 1: into the Egyptian Sinai desert after the Hamas War. Again,
Speaker 1: this was a leaked document that gave a number of
Speaker 1: possible suggestions, but this was the one that they felt
Speaker 1: was like the best idea.
Speaker 5: They say.
Speaker 1: A draft document prepared by the Israeli Intel Ministry suggests
Speaker 1: an option to initially relocate Gaza's population to tense cities
Speaker 1: in northern Sinai. This is the first indication of a
Speaker 1: possible exit strategy to the war by the political leadership.
Speaker 1: Among a number of suggestions in this new document drafted
Speaker 1: by the ministry is the possible relocation in the current
Speaker 1: wars aftermath. It suggests Israel mite initially relocate them to
Speaker 1: ten cities, to be followed later by the establishment of
Speaker 1: permanent communities in northern Sinai. So this is a permanent relocation,
Speaker 1: is what's being floated here. Document presents two additional alternatives.
Speaker 1: One would permit the Palestinian Authority, which has partial control
Speaker 1: of the West Bank and which was ousted from Gaza
Speaker 1: by Hamas in two thousand and seven, who control Gaza
Speaker 1: with its current residents remaining. Another option would have Israel
Speaker 1: established local Arab rule by Gaza's residents, who remain in
Speaker 1: their home offices in their homes after the collapse of
Speaker 1: the Hamas regime. The Prime Minister's Office said in response
Speaker 1: to this article is an initial document of the kind
Speaker 1: that can be found in dozens of iterations at all
Speaker 1: levels of the government and the security services. The issue
Speaker 1: of the day after has not been discussed at any
Speaker 1: official forum in Israel, which is now focused on eliminating
Speaker 1: Kamas's governmental and military capabilities in Saga. As you know,
Speaker 1: I've long thought that it was complete bullshit that they're like,
Speaker 1: we haven't even thought about that, because even before this
Speaker 1: war they had thought about it. There had been position papers,
Speaker 1: there had been articulated political positions. You know, Netnyahu famously,
Speaker 1: as the head of Lakud, has been totally opposed to
Speaker 1: any sort of Palestinian statehood. That's why he was interested
Speaker 1: in propping up Hamas because he knew it Hamas could
Speaker 1: not be negotiated with, there would be no appetite for
Speaker 1: peace with Hamas. He also knew that keeping the residents
Speaker 1: of the West Bank versus the Gaza strip was also
Speaker 1: good for thwarting Palestinian statehood. So that's why they prefer
Speaker 1: this idea of let's be honest, what it would amount
Speaker 1: to the textbook definition of an ethnic cleansing. They prefer
Speaker 1: that because if you allow the Palestinian authority control over Gaza,
Speaker 1: then you have this little glimmer of a possibility at
Speaker 1: Palestinian statehood. And the reason we should take this seriously
Speaker 1: Number one, the reporting is that this was intentionally leaked
Speaker 1: to a group of basically like right wing activists to
Speaker 1: try to get it out into the press. Again, that's
Speaker 1: why I call this as sort of like trial balloon
Speaker 1: to see how the Israeli population responds to it, but
Speaker 1: more importantly to see how we respond to it. Yes,
Speaker 1: and we also have some indications from your recall, we
Speaker 1: covered Tony Blinken's discussion with President CC of Egypt, and
Speaker 1: one of the things that he said really stood out
Speaker 1: to me about how, you know, oh, they put off
Speaker 1: the table like any relocation of Gazans. Let's put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen from Reuter's Egypt. CC rejects transfer
Speaker 1: of Gosen's discusses aid with Biden, and so it was
Speaker 1: a real red flag to me that that had even
Speaker 1: been seriously discussed from the US Secretary of State with
Speaker 1: the President of Egypt and was again an indication that
Speaker 1: this whole oh, we don't know what we want to
Speaker 1: do thing was a bluff and they actually had some
Speaker 1: ideas behind the scenes of what they wanted to do.
Speaker 1: They just want to really come out and say it publicly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it's I agree that it's probably a
Speaker 2: trial balloon, and it is one where the I would
Speaker 2: even say the less importance is us is how the
Speaker 2: Arab world will react to this. And I think it's
Speaker 2: interesting that CC, it seems, had had some sort of
Speaker 2: inkling around this. I mean, let's also remember CC has
Speaker 2: a pretty good intelligence network. It helps whenever you are
Speaker 2: a dictator of your entire country, and they're the ones
Speaker 2: who actually warned the Israelis about October seventh, just a
Speaker 2: couple of days before, just like just so you know,
Speaker 2: clearly probably had some heads up that something like this
Speaker 2: was being planned. I just don't think it's honestly even feasible.
Speaker 2: They can try and trial balloon in all they want.
Speaker 2: If they were to try and forcibly relocate a million
Speaker 2: people or so into the Sinai it would absolutely spark
Speaker 2: regional war.
Speaker 4: There's no question.
Speaker 2: It also flies in the face of all US policy,
Speaker 2: bipartisan US policy now for multiple administrations. I believe even
Speaker 2: since the Bush administration, whenever it came to the policy
Speaker 2: of the United States government it has been now for almost
Speaker 2: two decades. Is we believe in a two state palicy
Speaker 2: and solution. This is the opposite of that. Also, it
Speaker 2: flies in the face of the previous way that we
Speaker 2: thought about Sinai, about the removal of Israeli troops about
Speaker 2: I think even to this day, they're still US peacekeepers
Speaker 2: at least in the region or nearby, because I know
Speaker 2: that sometimes they had to run in with isis my
Speaker 2: point being is that this is dead on arrival for
Speaker 2: the entire international community. And it is, though I think dangerous,
Speaker 2: especially if it's dangerous if it's came about the way
Speaker 2: that you said. It's one thing to be leaked because
Speaker 2: people are concerned about it. It's way of the thing
Speaker 2: to be leaked because they're like, no, no, no, guys, let's
Speaker 2: let's float this and let's see. Yeah, what their response is.
Speaker 2: This would set up. I believe this actually would set
Speaker 2: up a complete showdown with the Arab world. Where is
Speaker 2: this is the plan and this is what they actually
Speaker 2: want to commit themselves too.
Speaker 4: That's it, We're going to work. There's no question.
Speaker 1: They also included in here details about the way they
Speaker 1: would sell the international community and the Arab world and
Speaker 1: the US in particular on this idea. And I mean
Speaker 1: it's unfolding. The plan lays out. Some of these phases
Speaker 1: have already unfolded. So the ideas, Okay, first we push
Speaker 1: them out of northern Gaza for their safety. For southern
Speaker 1: Gaza also not safe, but we'll put that aside for
Speaker 1: a moment. Then we do the ground invasion. We push
Speaker 1: them out of the strip altogether, again for their safety.
Speaker 1: You remember early on with the Biden administration, there was
Speaker 1: a lot of talk of these humanitarian corridors. That is,
Speaker 1: the idea of like, oh, we're going to open these
Speaker 1: humanitarian corridors so that people can flee the fighting and
Speaker 1: keep them safe with of course we'll let them return,
Speaker 1: and then after that basically making the case that actually
Speaker 1: be better off for them. And you know this is
Speaker 1: so destroyed now on Gaza they can't possibly return home.
Speaker 1: So there's a whole strategy here laid out of the
Speaker 1: type of propaganda that would be used and the way
Speaker 1: it would unfold to try to effectuate this outcome.
Speaker 5: Now, I agree with you.
Speaker 1: I think the fact that Blinken made those comments publicly,
Speaker 1: that we haven't been hearing similar language about humanitarian corridors
Speaker 1: in tense cities, etc. From the Biden administration, I think
Speaker 1: is also another indication. But just a couple other pieces
Speaker 1: on this, So just to give you an insight into
Speaker 1: how the net Nyahu government thinks about this issue and
Speaker 1: how different it is from the US typical conception of like, oh,
Speaker 1: we're in this peace process and working to a two
Speaker 1: state solution, et cetera. The option of reinstating the Palestinian
Speaker 1: Authority rule in Gaza is described in this report as
Speaker 1: the least desirable desirable because quote, the division between the
Speaker 1: Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza is one
Speaker 1: of the main obstacles today preventing the establishment of a
Speaker 1: Palestinian state.
Speaker 5: So again, the reason they.
Speaker 1: Don't like the idea of the Palestinian Authority being in
Speaker 1: Gaza is because that would open up the possibility of
Speaker 1: a potential to state or some sort of peace solution.
Speaker 1: So just so you have an insight into how they're thinking.
Speaker 1: And one last piece that I'll put out here, which
Speaker 1: came out maybe last week, which also shows that the
Speaker 1: seriousness and the thought that's being put into this plan.
Speaker 5: Very similar plan.
Speaker 1: Was craft and put out publicly by an Israeli think
Speaker 1: tank that has ties into this government. Let's go and
Speaker 1: put this up on the screen. This is a report
Speaker 1: from this I actually wasn't familiar with this New Lines magazine.
Speaker 5: It seems like.
Speaker 1: Sort of like a neoliberal my vibe in terms of
Speaker 1: their ideology. The headline here is as the Middle East
Speaker 1: reels and new Option takes shape, expulsion. Years of careful
Speaker 1: diplomacy have been overturned by the current wave of violence,
Speaker 1: forcing major powers in the region and beyond to look
Speaker 1: for new policies, however extreme. So they go on to
Speaker 1: report put this up on the screen. Just this week,
Speaker 1: a right wing Israeli think tank headed by the country's
Speaker 1: former national security advisor publish a report on various scenarios
Speaker 1: for the future of Gaza, including a detailed plan for
Speaker 1: the expulsion of its Palaestinian population to Egypt. In the
Speaker 1: paper by the Jerusalem based Miskov Institute for resign As,
Speaker 1: Strategy and Natural Security, only one suggestion for a Postmas
Speaker 1: future is deemed viable for Israel's long term security, the
Speaker 1: quote transfer of the Gazia population to Sinai or other countries.
Speaker 1: Author of the report says that Washington can play a
Speaker 1: crucial role by pressuring these countries to either contribute resources
Speaker 1: or taken displaced Palestinians themselves. Although international law says forced
Speaker 1: his placement of civilians as a war crime, the author
Speaker 1: of this report argues transferring Gazins to Sinai could be
Speaker 1: legally justified as self defense in a time of war.
Speaker 1: So again just shows you this is something that's being
Speaker 1: seriously considered. I think being floated as a trial balloon
Speaker 1: both of the air world to us, to the Israeli population,
Speaker 1: and is very much part of the thought process and
Speaker 1: consideration of what the Israeli government would like to do.
Speaker 1: The last thing I'll say about them, I mean putting aside.
Speaker 1: I know people feel a certain way when you use
Speaker 1: these terms. I mean, if you look up the definition
Speaker 1: of ethnic cleansing, this f it's the definition. So put
Speaker 1: that aside. If you don't care about the morality of it,
Speaker 1: how are you going to be more secure if you
Speaker 1: just push these people out done a complete knappa. They're
Speaker 1: in Egypt, like you no longer even have your like,
Speaker 1: you know, blockade and your deep surveillance, et cetera. That's
Speaker 1: part of why I actually think that this won't fly
Speaker 1: is because I don't know that these really public even
Speaker 1: if they don't care about the civilians and any of that,
Speaker 1: are going to feel safe under this certain area.
Speaker 4: I just think this is not going to happen.
Speaker 2: This might be their wildest dream and like if they
Speaker 2: had total power, they could, but because there's no way
Speaker 2: the international community will ever allow the.
Speaker 1: Same thing, is I can't totally put it off the
Speaker 1: table just because of you know, these multiple reports coming on,
Speaker 1: it's clearly being floated behind the scenes, et cetera.
Speaker 5: And also because it's not.
Speaker 1: Like any of the potential post war strategies makes a
Speaker 1: lot of sense, like there are no good options.
Speaker 4: I agree with you.
Speaker 2: I mean, here's why I think it is gonna happen.
Speaker 2: I think they're gonna set up some sort of DMZ.
Speaker 2: This is why they're in the northern part of the country.
Speaker 2: That's where they're doing everything. They're going to go into
Speaker 2: Gaza City, They're basically going to level it. Then they're
Speaker 2: gonna take minimal casualties as much as possible. They're gonna
Speaker 2: set up some multiple kilometer demilitarized zone which is mine
Speaker 2: to all of hell, and then they're basically going to
Speaker 2: say they dismantled Hamas, but let's be honest, like it
Speaker 2: didn't actually happen, and then they're gonna pull out there.
Speaker 2: You take minimal casualties, you quote unquote send a message.
Speaker 2: Nothing actually fundamentally changes. Hamas will still remain like quasi
Speaker 2: and power, which means that the right wing government can
Speaker 2: always be like say, we don't have every serious negotiating power.
Speaker 2: The problem in all of that is the hostages of course.
Speaker 2: And also, and that's another thing where you almost want
Speaker 2: to take them at their word when they say it's
Speaker 2: a months long military operation.
Speaker 4: You can read it two ways.
Speaker 2: You could be like, whoa, they're really gonna go into
Speaker 2: hand to hand combat. But the more that I see
Speaker 2: the way that they're conducting themselves, I don't see it.
Speaker 4: I mean, they're barely getting out of these tanks.
Speaker 2: You have very special forces rates, they are very very
Speaker 2: concerned about Israeli casualties. So if you are that concerned
Speaker 2: about it, there's no scenario where you're going to be
Speaker 2: seriously engaged in what it would take to militarily accomplished
Speaker 2: a subjective. The best thing you could do is just,
Speaker 2: like I said, set up some sort of DMZ and
Speaker 2: you probably, unfortunately, because this is one of one of
Speaker 2: the best things that was really was between the two groups.
Speaker 2: They're probably end the guestworker program completely and not allow
Speaker 2: Palestinians to even cross the border for anything in the future.
Speaker 2: I think that just seems like the most likely sum there.
Speaker 1: Think about the Israeli public, So the idea of they're
Speaker 1: going to eliminate hamas.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's not going to happen. It's just not possible.
Speaker 5: It's not gonna happen.
Speaker 1: Right, they know that they're not fools, right, there's no way,
Speaker 1: and there's no other government structure in place, and you know,
Speaker 1: I mean there haven't any elections there in what seventeen
Speaker 1: years or whatever like, Yes, it's not like there's some
Speaker 1: thriving democratic society that can put up together another government.
Speaker 1: So the idea of we're going to root out Hamas, no,
Speaker 1: you're not, okay, So how is Israeli public going to react?
Speaker 1: Even with Okay, we have this DMZ and we have
Speaker 1: these additional security procedures, etc. But we're gonna let Hamas
Speaker 1: remain in control. I just can't imagine the Israeli public
Speaker 1: supporting that. So, like I said, the reason I don't
Speaker 1: think you can rule it out is because number one,
Speaker 1: we've already seen them executing a number of these phases.
Speaker 1: Number two, you know, even prior to this war, this
Speaker 1: was clearly like the desire of especially certain elements of
Speaker 1: Natna Who's coalition, if not him himself, but I think
Speaker 1: also himself based on prior support and comments. There is
Speaker 1: no good other option. And I just don't know. I
Speaker 1: don't know how it plays out. I don't know where
Speaker 1: it does. I don't know what the Israeli public will accept.
Speaker 1: And I really want people to fit with the fact that,
Speaker 1: according to this official government ministry report, they would actually
Speaker 1: rather keep Hamas there than let in Palestinian authority because
Speaker 1: that would open up the possibility of peace. So they
Speaker 1: would rather have Hamas in charge than have a possibility
Speaker 1: of a Palestinian state. I just want you to understand
Speaker 1: that's the ideology we're dealing.
Speaker 2: With, definitely, especially if the current government, and the other
Speaker 2: possibility is the Israeli public it gets sick of war
Speaker 2: and then they're like, look, let's actually get serious about this.
Speaker 2: If anybody, if any public could do it, it would
Speaker 2: be people whose grandfathers died in the Holocaust, whose fathers
Speaker 2: had to fight in the nineteen seventy in nineteen sixty seven,
Speaker 2: in nineteen seventy three wars, and men whose current generation
Speaker 2: has had to live now with debilitaring terror attacks.
Speaker 4: That can go two different ways.
Speaker 2: You know, you can go one way where you want
Speaker 2: complete revenge, but if that doesn't become politically sustainable, then
Speaker 2: you turn to the other. So I would hope that
Speaker 2: we can bet on that prevailing, but of course that
Speaker 2: is not something that we can count on in the future.
Speaker 1: Well, the last thing to say on potentially more hopeful
Speaker 1: or moderate note or whatever is I mean there aren't
Speaker 1: really like there aren't real leftists left in the kanessid
Speaker 1: Like it's this whole society has shifted dramatically, right, which
Speaker 1: is how Nniahu ends up in power. But you know
Speaker 1: he is and his coalition is the most extreme in history,
Speaker 1: and he's hanging out to power by his fingernails. So
Speaker 1: it's not even close to clear that he and his
Speaker 1: government would be the ones coming up with and implementing
Speaker 1: whatever the strategy is for the day after.
Speaker 2: Yes, exactly right. Let's move on to the AID part.
Speaker 2: This is kind of a fascinating conversation. There was a
Speaker 2: new plan that's been revealed, so of course Speaker Mike Johnson,
Speaker 2: the new Speaker, said his first act was passing a
Speaker 2: resolution in support of Israel. The second thing that they
Speaker 2: really wanted to do was get some Israel AID on
Speaker 2: the floor. Well that Israel AID, as I brought you
Speaker 2: guys in news yesterday. They're breaking it apart from Ukraine AID.
Speaker 2: Now it's going to be fourteen billion. Now instead of
Speaker 2: just paying or just I guess borrowing that additional fourteen billion,
Speaker 2: they wanted to do an offset, and so the way
Speaker 2: they've decided to pay for it is by cutting funding
Speaker 2: for the IRS, which was included in the Inflation Reduction Act.
Speaker 2: Here's Speaker Johnson in an interview that just yesterday describing
Speaker 2: the strategy. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 9: This is a matter of good versus evil.
Speaker 10: I think what Prime Minister dot Yahu said just a
Speaker 10: couple of days ago is exactly right. It's good versus evil,
Speaker 10: it's light versus darkness. I spoke with him on the telephone.
Speaker 10: I think it's Saturday night. I've known him for some time,
Speaker 10: and we spoke in those very clear terms, and we
Speaker 10: understand what's at stake here, and I hope that everyone
Speaker 10: will put politics aside.
Speaker 9: Get that bill over the line. We're going to have
Speaker 9: pay fors in it.
Speaker 10: We're not just going to print money and send it overseas,
Speaker 10: because the other concern we have that is overwriting this
Speaker 10: is our own strength is a nation which is tied
Speaker 10: to our fiscal stability. My desire in the first draft
Speaker 10: of this bill is to take some of the money
Speaker 10: that has been set aside for the building and bulking
Speaker 10: up the IRS. Right now, they have about sixty seven
Speaker 10: billion dollars in that fund, and we'll try to take
Speaker 10: the fourteen point five necessary for this immediate and urgent need.
Speaker 9: We'll deal with the rest of that issue later.
Speaker 2: Do you think that will drive away some Democrats in
Speaker 2: the Senate even or here in the House.
Speaker 10: It may, but my intention is to call Leader Shumer
Speaker 10: over there and have a very direct and thoughtful conversation
Speaker 10: about this.
Speaker 9: I understand their.
Speaker 10: Priority is to bulk up the IRS, but I think
Speaker 10: if you put to the American people and they weigh
Speaker 10: the two needs, I think they're going to say, standing
Speaker 10: with Israel and protecting the innocent over there is in
Speaker 10: our national interest and is a more immediate need than
Speaker 10: IRS agents.
Speaker 2: All right, he's setting up a showdown over the IRS.
Speaker 2: Let's put this on the screen. We got some of
Speaker 2: the bill text here just to show you guys, so
Speaker 2: as you can see, the House GOP wants to offset
Speaker 2: the fourteen point three billion israel A supplemental with IRS
Speaker 2: funding from the Inflation Reduction Act.
Speaker 4: We've got the bill text there that lays it all out.
Speaker 2: So Chrystal, I know that you disagree with this on
Speaker 2: a policy, but I got to be honest, I think
Speaker 2: it's a brilliant play because they're basically daring the Senate
Speaker 2: and Biden to choose IRS funding over funding for Israel,
Speaker 2: which at the very least is politically popular.
Speaker 6: For now.
Speaker 2: IRS funding is certainly not politically popular. You can try
Speaker 2: and phrase it in different ways, but especially with no
Speaker 2: protections inside of the bill to make sure that they
Speaker 2: are not going after poorer people. It's one of those
Speaker 2: where they are setting things up I think for a
Speaker 2: difficult headline in the future. That said, Chuck Schumer has
Speaker 2: already rejected the plan. Schumer says not because of the
Speaker 2: IRS thing, although it's obviously the reason. He's like, well,
Speaker 2: it doesn't have Ukraine, we have to do it together. Yeah,
Speaker 2: And then President Biden has rejected it out of hand
Speaker 2: for the similar reason.
Speaker 4: Neither of them doing though for the IRS funding.
Speaker 2: So if this is the sole thing that moves from
Speaker 2: the House floor, it will be quite a dare.
Speaker 4: And they already have.
Speaker 2: A Democratic vote, at least one Democratic vote said you
Speaker 2: would join.
Speaker 1: Them, Well, I don't want funding going to Israel.
Speaker 5: So if this screws that up. I'm in support of it,
Speaker 5: but can he talk for a.
Speaker 1: Second about how stupid this is because the money that
Speaker 1: they're talking about stripping from the IRS not only is
Speaker 1: to go after wealthy tax cheats, it's also to finance
Speaker 1: a free tax filing system, this one for ordinary people,
Speaker 1: which is something I know even you support. It's like
Speaker 1: one of the few good things that the government is
Speaker 1: actually planning to do for us. And it's like, all right,
Speaker 1: let's make sure Turbo tax can still extract their pound
Speaker 1: of flesh from every American when it comes to tax time.
Speaker 5: Way to go, GOP.
Speaker 1: But the other level makes it so stupid is because
Speaker 1: the money you spend on IRS agents actually like returns
Speaker 1: more than the money you're spending, So it's not like
Speaker 1: this is a pay for This would actually further increase
Speaker 1: the deficits.
Speaker 5: So anyway, it's.
Speaker 1: Just obviously political political gimmick. I thought Matt Stoller had
Speaker 1: a good take. He said, so the new speaker wants
Speaker 1: to finance a foreign nations war by cutting a free
Speaker 1: tax filing program for Americans and eliminating tax audits of
Speaker 1: the wealthy ladies and gentlemen America. First, how does this
Speaker 1: all plan on? I really have no idea because you know,
Speaker 1: Speaker Johnson is very interested in Israel funding as well. Yes,
Speaker 1: mean Bebe is like his buddy. He's already talked to him.
Speaker 1: He's very ideologically, he's very like personally religiously committed to Israel.
Speaker 1: So he also is extremely committed to Israel funding. You know,
Speaker 1: he has already signaled that he accepts the basic argument
Speaker 1: in favor of Ukraine funding. So I don't know how
Speaker 1: this all plays out. Ultimately, my guess is that, you know.
Speaker 5: The things that I would want to happen, which is
Speaker 5: no way.
Speaker 1: To Ukraine or Israel, are probably not going to happen.
Speaker 1: They probably find some way to shoehorn both of these
Speaker 1: things through, So we'll see. But this is clearly, like,
Speaker 1: you know, an attempt to I even think the congressman,
Speaker 1: who's the Democratic congressman who said that he would vote
Speaker 1: for this, he said it's like politics by political mail,
Speaker 1: or like they're trying to phrase like the way they
Speaker 1: would go after Democrats, which is precisely what it.
Speaker 5: Is going on.
Speaker 4: It definitely is what happening.
Speaker 2: That's why I'm like, well, honestly, I think it's kind
Speaker 2: of smart Will it work again, I don't know. Let's
Speaker 2: put the next one up there on the screen. As
Speaker 2: I said about Chuck Schumer saying that actually it's the
Speaker 2: Ukraine exemption. He says that exclusion of Ukraine and the
Speaker 2: inclusion offsets is going to quote make it much harder
Speaker 2: to pass the Senate. Obviously, it's up to him on
Speaker 2: whether it comes to the floor. But Israel is a
Speaker 2: massive priority for Chuck Schumer and for a lot of
Speaker 2: Senate Democrats and for Republicans. I don't think the Senate
Speaker 2: Republicans would have any issue, and then you only need
Speaker 2: a couple of Dems actually to join. But Schumer, of
Speaker 2: course would have to bring it to the floor. Now
Speaker 2: I don't know how that will come about. Already, the
Speaker 2: sole objection I've seen so far from Joe Manchin says,
Speaker 2: I'm fine with the IRS funding cut, but we got
Speaker 2: to have Ukraine in there too. Susan Collins also saying
Speaker 2: effectively the same thing.
Speaker 4: It's a showdown. We'll see how it goes.
Speaker 2: The House is going scheduled to vote on it at
Speaker 2: least sometime in the next week or so. Then it
Speaker 2: will make its way over to the Senate. They're going
Speaker 2: to have to decide if they outright rejected or not,
Speaker 2: and then the two bodies will come to a head,
Speaker 2: and obviously the President is going to be on the
Speaker 2: side of Chuck Schumer. So we'll keep you guys updated.
Speaker 2: But it is an interesting little political wrinkle that the
Speaker 2: GOP was able to get in there for their headline. Now,
Speaker 2: speaking of Ukraine, aid, there was a remarkable per new
Speaker 2: profile of President Zelenski in Time magazine that we just
Speaker 2: had to bring you. I found with this quote Crystal
Speaker 2: buried forty five paragraphs in all the way at the bottom,
Speaker 2: which is job dropping, honestly whenever you read it out loud.
Speaker 2: So let's please put it up there on the screen.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna read it to everybody in full. This is
Speaker 2: a quote from this reporter who was embedded with President
Speaker 2: Zelenski and his team both during their US trip and
Speaker 2: then in Kiev and also critically after the October seventh
Speaker 2: attack on Israel. Quote, amid all of the pressure to
Speaker 2: root out corruption, I assumed, perhaps naively, officials in Ukraine
Speaker 2: would think twice before taking a bribe or pocketing state funds.
Speaker 2: When I made this point to a top presidential advisor
Speaker 2: in early October, he asked me to turn off my
Speaker 2: audio recorders so he could speak more freely. Quote Simon,
Speaker 2: you are mistaken. Simon is the profiler, he says.
Speaker 6: Quote.
Speaker 2: People are stealing like there's no tomorrow. Even the firing
Speaker 2: of the Defense minister did not make officials quote feel
Speaker 2: any fear, he says, because the purge took so long
Speaker 2: to materialize. The president was warned in February the corruption
Speaker 2: has grown rife inside the ministry. He dithered for more
Speaker 2: than six months, giving his allies multiple chances to deal
Speaker 2: with the problems quietly or explain them away. By the
Speaker 2: time he had acted ahead of his US visit, quote,
Speaker 2: it was too late, says another senior presidential advisor. Ukraine's
Speaker 2: Western allies are already aware of this scandle by then,
Speaker 2: and soldiers at the front have begun making off color
Speaker 2: jokes about Resnikov's eggs a new metaphor for corruption.
Speaker 3: Quote.
Speaker 2: The reputational damage was done. You know things are bad
Speaker 2: whenever the freaking guys on the front line are aware
Speaker 2: of an egg scandal as something that is a standalone.
Speaker 2: There's so much more in this piece, but to me,
Speaker 2: it's just like the hubris. They think they can just
Speaker 2: admit this out loud and get another sixty billion dollars.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is one of the most corrupt nations
Speaker 2: in the entire world ahead of this warp, openly acknowledged
Speaker 2: by the Western government and by many others. We have
Speaker 2: now reports that the Biden administration held off for over
Speaker 2: a year on raising corruption to the Ukrainian government.
Speaker 4: We knew it was real, we decided not.
Speaker 2: To raise it. And what's shocking to me is that
Speaker 2: inside the regime itself they are completely fine with it.
Speaker 2: And not only fine, they are openly stealing everything that's
Speaker 2: not nailed down to the floor because now they're like,
Speaker 2: oh well now the funding might dry up, so we
Speaker 2: got to steal as much as we can. I mean,
Speaker 2: these people look that make the Afghans look like charitable
Speaker 2: NGO operators or something. It's crazy to me that they'll
Speaker 2: just admit this.
Speaker 1: There's a lot that comes through in this piece as well,
Speaker 1: in terms of like reality sort of setting in, but
Speaker 1: it's not really setting in. They have this line, they
Speaker 1: say Zelenski the usual sparkle of his optimism, a sense
Speaker 1: of humor, his tendency to liven up a meeting in
Speaker 1: the war and with a bit of banter, a body joke,
Speaker 1: body joke. None of that has survived into the second
Speaker 1: year of an all out war. Now he walks in,
Speaker 1: gets the updates, gives the orders, and walks out. They
Speaker 1: have left him without the means to win the war,
Speaker 1: only the means to survive it. On the contrary, his
Speaker 1: belief in Ukraine's ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into
Speaker 1: a form that worries some of his advisors. It is immovable,
Speaker 1: verging on the messianic, he deludes himself. One of his
Speaker 1: closest aids tells me in frustration, we are out of options,
Speaker 1: we are not winning.
Speaker 5: But try telling him that.
Speaker 1: So there's a sense like he is very aware, and
Speaker 1: this is you know, comes through in the piece that
Speaker 1: Western support is kind of crumbling, you know, especially now
Speaker 1: with Israel has stolen the spotlight, so it's really been
Speaker 1: put on the back burner. The counter offensive didn't go well,
Speaker 1: and there's a reckoning internally within Ukraine about like why
Speaker 1: didn't go well and whose heads need to roll because
Speaker 1: it didn't.
Speaker 5: Go well, et cetera.
Speaker 1: So you've got that they're facing another brutal winter where
Speaker 1: there are likely to be blackouts and electricity failures, and
Speaker 1: you know, potentially civilian infrastructure targeted by the Russians, et cetera.
Speaker 1: And there's this quote in here too about like last
Speaker 1: winter they blamed Russia. This winter, are they're going to
Speaker 1: blame us that we didn't get it together to try
Speaker 1: to protect them during this time. So there's an awareness
Speaker 1: of all these things, but there's no willingness to acknowledge
Speaker 1: the reality that there needs to be some sort of
Speaker 1: a deal cut, needs to be some sort of an
Speaker 1: end in sight. And you know, there's even there's a
Speaker 1: lot of focus, understandably from US and from a lot
Speaker 1: of the international prosspot, like what weapons they need and
Speaker 1: what weapons systems, et cetera. Part of what comes through
Speaker 1: in this piece is like weapons are one thing. We
Speaker 1: don't even have the men to fire the weapons. The
Speaker 1: average age of a Ukrainian soldier is like forty five
Speaker 1: years old average age. And so the reporter says, when
Speaker 1: I raised these claims with the senior military officer that
Speaker 1: some of the units were refusing to follow orders, he
Speaker 1: said some commanders have little choice in second guessing orders
Speaker 1: from the top. At one point in early October, he
Speaker 1: said the political leadership in Kiev demanded an operation to
Speaker 1: take a certain city, a strategic outpost in eastern Ukraine
Speaker 1: that the Russians have held and fiercely defended for nearly
Speaker 1: a decade. The answer came back in the form of
Speaker 1: a question, with what retake it?
Speaker 2: With what?
Speaker 1: They don't have the men or the weapons, says the officer.
Speaker 1: Where are the weapons, where's the artillery? Where are the
Speaker 1: new recruits? So you're facing almost like muteness conditions on
Speaker 1: the ground in the front lines in some of these areas.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the most poignant one to me was the exactly
Speaker 2: what you reference his own advisors saying, quote, he deludes himself,
Speaker 2: we are out of options, we are not winning.
Speaker 4: Try telling him that.
Speaker 2: This is These are actual Ukrainian presidential advisors. Let's underscore
Speaker 2: exactly what you just said about the actual personnel, where
Speaker 2: they say that the shortage of personnel is more dire
Speaker 2: than the deficit in arms and in ammunition. I mean,
Speaker 2: I don't think it takes a genius to figure out
Speaker 2: that when the average age is forty three years old, quote,
Speaker 2: they are grown men now, and they aren't even that
Speaker 2: healthy to begin with. This is Ukraine, not Scandinavia, as
Speaker 2: they so aptly put it. They know that they're not
Speaker 2: fighting with a full deck. And this is really sad
Speaker 2: because we have no idea what the actual number of
Speaker 2: casualties are. We know it's probably more than one hundred
Speaker 2: thousand that are dead, could be more than that. What
Speaker 2: we do know, based upon unfortunately about the number of
Speaker 2: prosthetics that are being manufactured, is that it is now
Speaker 2: roughly equivalent to what the British Army was suffering for
Speaker 2: casualties who have lost limbs from the First World War.
Speaker 2: When you put those two things together and you consider
Speaker 2: that Ukraine is a tiny country comp with the amount
Speaker 2: of personnel that are available compared population wise, will fight wise,
Speaker 2: manufacturing wise at the British Empire had its disposal at
Speaker 2: that time.
Speaker 4: It doesn't take a genius to figure out that in
Speaker 4: a war of attrition, you're gone, You're going to lose.
Speaker 4: Your best hope is probably that things stay where they
Speaker 4: are right now, because in the long run, things are
Speaker 4: about to get very, very difficult for you forty three
Speaker 4: years old. I mean, this is like you read about
Speaker 4: countries in.
Speaker 2: Their absolute like last death throws start to get forty
Speaker 2: three fifty year olds, and then of course what comes
Speaker 2: next usually kids age fifteen or some sixteen, sometimes thirteen,
Speaker 2: you know, that get drafted or or end up in
Speaker 2: auxiliary forces or whatever behind the lines, and then they
Speaker 2: end up getting put it in danger. I mean, this
Speaker 2: is this is like existential, but they're not behaving as
Speaker 2: if it's existential, because when you do, and I think
Speaker 2: this is why I honestly blame us more for this
Speaker 2: than anybody else. We gave him the delusions that he
Speaker 2: could be in this to win back every square inch
Speaker 2: of his territory, including CRIMEA That's what the American political
Speaker 2: establishment basically told them. And then at the same time,
Speaker 2: on the corruption side, it's our fault.
Speaker 4: We're the fools.
Speaker 2: If somebody is going to take your money and steal it,
Speaker 2: is that on them or is it on you for
Speaker 2: being enough of an so much of an idiot. They
Speaker 2: not only give them fifty billion, they give them an
Speaker 2: additional fifty billion on top of that, even when you
Speaker 2: know that they're massive criminals.
Speaker 4: That's that's America's fault.
Speaker 2: And even right now, I mean, it is an open
Speaker 2: question whether we're not going to send these people an
Speaker 2: additional sixty billion dollars. If I had to bet, I
Speaker 2: would probably bet on the side of sending it to them.
Speaker 2: I think the American political establishment doesn't care about any
Speaker 2: of this. I will say, you know, this, this profile
Speaker 2: and all of that, it's making the rounds on Capitol Hill.
Speaker 2: I had multi two sitting US senators who highlighted my
Speaker 2: tweet about that. But that's two out of a body
Speaker 2: of one hundred. Yeah, the vast majority, they're just gonna
Speaker 2: ignore it. They're going to pretend like it doesn't even exist.
Speaker 1: I agree with you that it's our fault, and I
Speaker 1: actually think this line that they have in here, you know,
Speaker 1: Zelenski feels betrayed.
Speaker 5: By his Western allies.
Speaker 1: They have left him without the means to win the war,
Speaker 1: only the means to survive. It is basically accurate. And
Speaker 1: it is now really quite confirmed that the US and
Speaker 1: the UK in particular, at the beginning of this war
Speaker 1: scuttled a potential peace deal that was being negotiated by Turkey,
Speaker 1: and the thought was that, you know, this would be
Speaker 1: quick and easy, and Russia was falling apart and they
Speaker 1: were a mess, and maybe we can get regime change.
Speaker 1: We had all these like fanciful Maximus aims, and so
Speaker 1: we scuttled this potential negotiation that could have ended this
Speaker 1: conflict and ended this you know, total nightmare and horror
Speaker 1: of a war. And we didn't want that. Not they
Speaker 1: didn't want it, We didn't want it. So yeah, now
Speaker 1: you're in this Noman's land. Keep like, keep feeding the
Speaker 1: thing even though it's you know, it's not going to
Speaker 1: be enough to win. And the public is you know,
Speaker 1: has lost its interest in its appetite for continuing to
Speaker 1: be proxies in this conflict and all the while a
Speaker 1: very dangerous situation. It's just it's a complete mess, and
Speaker 1: it is You're right, it is absolutely a mess of
Speaker 1: our making because you really can't blame the Lensk like
Speaker 1: this is his country. You can't blame him for the
Speaker 1: decisions and everything that he's trying to do. But we're
Speaker 1: the ones who, you know, have really been driving the
Speaker 1: train and pushing this direction from the beginning. And you know,
Speaker 1: there will be a reckoning one day, there's no doubt
Speaker 1: about it.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, I hope that it comes sooner rather than
Speaker 2: it took us twenty years to wake up to the
Speaker 2: grift in Afghanistan. It's taken us about two years, but
Speaker 2: we still spent the same amount of money and arguably
Speaker 2: even more on this one. So joke really is on
Speaker 2: the US taxpayer and on all of us for not
Speaker 2: listening in the first place.
Speaker 1: Speaking of Afghanistan and nine to eleven, the nine eleven
Speaker 1: and vibes continue, and especially some of the war on
Speaker 1: terror expansion of the security state that we saw in
Speaker 1: the wake of nine to eleven. We now have the
Speaker 1: White House, you know, with Korean John Pierre spokesperson here
Speaker 1: classifying a new group of Americans as quote unquote extremists.
Speaker 5: Let's take a listen to this exchange.
Speaker 6: Good bye.
Speaker 11: I think the anti Israel protesters in this country are extremists.
Speaker 12: What I can say is what we've been very clear
Speaker 12: about this when it comes to anti Semitism, there's no place.
Speaker 12: We have to make sure that we speak against it
Speaker 12: very loud and be very clear about that. Remember, what
Speaker 12: the president decided when the President decided to run for
Speaker 12: president is what he saw in Charlottesville in twenty seventeen,
Speaker 12: when he saw neo Nazis marching down the streets of
Speaker 12: Charlottesville with vile anti Semitic just hatred. And he was
Speaker 12: very clear then and he's very clear now, and he's
Speaker 12: taken actions against this over the past two years, and
Speaker 12: he's continued to be clear. There is no place, no
Speaker 12: place for this type of violent despite despite this kind
Speaker 12: of rhetoric, we hear you.
Speaker 11: Guys don't talk about extremists all the time. It is
Speaker 11: usually about Maga extremists. So what about these protesters for
Speaker 11: making Jewish students feel save on college campuses? Are they extremeists?
Speaker 12: I've been very very clear. We are calling out any
Speaker 12: form of hate, any form of hate, it is not acceptable.
Speaker 1: So basically likening their protesters to the neo Nazis who
Speaker 1: marched in Charlottesville. Let's take a look at some of
Speaker 1: the official government actions that are being taken here.
Speaker 5: Put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: Biden administration unveiling new actions on Monday to combat anti
Speaker 1: Semitism on college campuses after an alarming uptick and incident
Speaker 1: since the Israel Hamas War. The Departments of Justice and
Speaker 1: Homeland Security are partnering with campus law enforcement to track
Speaker 1: hate related threats and provide federal resources to school was.
Speaker 1: According the plan, which was shared exclusively with NBC News,
Speaker 1: some of what they'll be assessing include specific incredible threats
Speaker 1: that are flagged online. So listen, you might hear that,
Speaker 1: let's work. You know, everyone should be completely opposed to
Speaker 1: anti semitism, which is disgusting, and there is no doubt
Speaker 1: there has been a rise in anti semitism. There's no
Speaker 1: doubt that some of the protesters have expressed anti Semitic sentiments.
Speaker 1: It's also very clear that, you know, the two thirds
Speaker 1: of American public supports a ceasefire, which is completely at.
Speaker 5: Odds with the White House, something they have called repugnant.
Speaker 5: You also have.
Speaker 1: Many Jewish protesters who are in support of a ceasefire
Speaker 1: and in support of a Palestinian statehood, et cetera.
Speaker 5: So to paint with.
Speaker 1: This broad brush is incredibly disturbing. And I will just
Speaker 1: say that, you know, you hear these things like, oh,
Speaker 1: combating anti semitism, like who could be against that? But
Speaker 1: we saw the way that these things were used after
Speaker 1: nine eleven and the way that yeah, we're just we're
Speaker 1: going after you know, we're going after isis we're going
Speaker 1: after the terrorists. And next thing you know, you have
Speaker 1: enabled and justified this massive surveillance bureaucracy and security state expansion,
Speaker 1: and you know now when you're expanding to a new
Speaker 1: massive group of extremists from the White House podium. This
Speaker 1: is something that people should be very concerned about. However
Speaker 1: you feel about this conflict or those protesters specifically.
Speaker 2: Even reading the details of this Biden thing, the Departments
Speaker 2: of Justice and Homeland Security are partnering the campus law
Speaker 2: enforcement to track hate related threats and provide federal resources
Speaker 2: to school. Oh, campus law enforcement, you mean the kangaroo
Speaker 2: corks that have basically been set up across this country
Speaker 2: for the last like fifteen years in the modern era.
Speaker 4: Of like me too, I don't think so.
Speaker 2: These are the people I trust, probably least on the planet,
Speaker 2: And these are the last people that you want adjudicating
Speaker 2: what is hate speech and what is not. And I
Speaker 2: would just ask everybody to remind themselves of how they've
Speaker 2: all covered themselves in glory over the last decade or so.
Speaker 2: If you want to go look at some of these
Speaker 2: quote unquote sexual assault case that have played out in
Speaker 2: most of these college campuses, which are completely devoid of
Speaker 2: like any due process or for amend protections and have
Speaker 2: just been handled outrageously, you would not want the White
Speaker 2: House and the government to be surging these people with
Speaker 2: even more power. And then it goes to the question
Speaker 2: of like, now, how are you going to hand are
Speaker 2: you gonna be monitoring students on campus Wi fi and
Speaker 2: on networks? Like is this going to constitute expulsion? How exactly?
Speaker 2: And what does hate speech even mean? Because if you
Speaker 2: look back to what he said, Peter Doocey anti Israel
Speaker 2: pro Now, listen, you can agree or disagree with what
Speaker 2: that means. There's a difference between anti Semitic and anti Israel.
Speaker 4: And that's a very critical Israel is a nation state.
Speaker 2: That's like saying that it's hate speech to be anti
Speaker 2: Saudi Arabia or something like that. Well, there's a difference
Speaker 2: meaning anti Islam and anti Saudi Arabia. Same thing that
Speaker 2: applies to every country. As we always would want to
Speaker 2: remind people about America, you can be as the Bush
Speaker 2: administration or the US invasion of Iraq and not be
Speaker 2: against the American people, which is what most normal people
Speaker 2: would understand. You know, across the world, it's only extremists
Speaker 2: that kind of conflate the two, people like Osama bin Laden.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I'm very worried about this, especially the campus element,
Speaker 2: because that's how it all starts.
Speaker 4: And who knows.
Speaker 2: I mean, for what purpose can you can you repurpose
Speaker 2: this new like campus surveillance network. I mean, this is
Speaker 2: like McCarthyism. That's you know, back in the day, that's
Speaker 2: that's exactly what they used to do.
Speaker 5: Very much like mccarthurism.
Speaker 1: And your point about what how do you define hate
Speaker 1: spich as a critical one because there has been a
Speaker 1: multi decade effort to conflate any criticism of the Israeli government,
Speaker 1: of the occupation, of the blockade, of Zionism, the political
Speaker 1: project of Zionism, and to paint that as anti Semitic,
Speaker 1: which is not accurate whatsoever. You can be critical of
Speaker 1: a government, you can be critical of, you know, Zionism
Speaker 1: is a political ideology. You can be critical of a
Speaker 1: political ideology. Himself, he says he's a Zionist, he's not Jewish.
Speaker 1: So you can be a Zionist and be Jewish or
Speaker 1: not be Jewish. You can be an opponent of Zionism
Speaker 1: and be Jewish or not be Jewish, et cetera. So
Speaker 1: to conflate those things with just being against the Jewish
Speaker 1: people and being an anti Semite is just wrong, it's
Speaker 1: just inaccurate, it's not correct.
Speaker 5: But there has been a long term project.
Speaker 1: Actually, I just saw another clip of the guy from
Speaker 1: the ADL saying, you know, we should all see that's
Speaker 1: very clear now that criticism of Zionism is anti Semitism. No,
Speaker 1: one hundred one million percent reject that. In fact, I
Speaker 1: mean the beginning, in the early days of Zionism, there
Speaker 1: were all kinds of competing ideological camps among the Jewish
Speaker 1: people about whether or not they supported Zionism, about the
Speaker 1: different types of Zionism, about the way it should be effectuated.
Speaker 1: So there's been a long vibrant political debate around the
Speaker 1: political ideology of Zionism. You can't take that off the table.
Speaker 1: And if you're painting people who have a critique of
Speaker 1: that as extremists or radicals or terrorists or you know,
Speaker 1: need to be tracked by the federal government like this is.
Speaker 1: This is incredibly terrifying and again really encompasses a broad
Speaker 1: swath of the American public who don't agree with the
Speaker 1: Biden administration's opposition to a ceasfire. Two thirds of Americans
Speaker 1: and eighty percent of Democrats support a ceasefire so are
Speaker 1: they extremists those two thirds of Americans that you know
Speaker 1: the Biden White House previously labeled as repugnant for supporting
Speaker 1: a ceasefire. You mentioned the McCarthyite climate. I think that
Speaker 1: is incredibly accurate. Every day we get more and more instances.
Speaker 1: Usually we don't cover them every day because it would
Speaker 1: just get tedious because there's so many of them. But
Speaker 1: we'll give you a couple of examples here, This one
Speaker 1: flagged by our own Ryan Graham of Counterpoints, and of
Speaker 1: course of the intercept put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: We have a Providence City councilman, Miguel Sanchez, who was
Speaker 1: fired from the Governor's staff. So he's a councilman and he
Speaker 1: also worked for thement governor where he worked in constituent services.
Speaker 1: After introducing a resolution condemning terrorism and ethnic clean past
Speaker 1: unanimalists unanimously posting about attending a pro Palestine rally. His
Speaker 1: post also called for an immediate ceasefire and condemned all
Speaker 1: attacks on civilians. He was fired on Friday, with his
Speaker 1: public comments sited as the reason for the firing, and sager,
Speaker 1: just to like be sure, I went back and looked
Speaker 1: at all of his public posts on Twitter, and it's
Speaker 1: very like nothing he says should in my opinion, you
Speaker 1: can be controversial just about like protecting civilian life. And
Speaker 1: yes he is very sympathetic to Palestinians and their humanity
Speaker 1: as well. But he's fired for his job for posting
Speaker 1: just you know, sort of basic political statements, which of
Speaker 1: course as a city councilman and someone who's also a
Speaker 1: public figure, I mean that is also part of what
Speaker 1: he is elected to do.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean look, I also looked at it and
Speaker 2: tried to make sure it's like he didn't say anything
Speaker 2: like Harvard esque or anything.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it wasn't like there was no Gohams. It was
Speaker 1: always very careful to abhor the loss of civilian life,
Speaker 1: no matter whether it was Israelian Palestine.
Speaker 2: Obviously the gov can have whoever he wants on staff,
Speaker 2: so whatever. But it's obvious also like where this is
Speaker 2: coming from, and I do think it is really dumb.
Speaker 2: I again, you know, come back to the architecture of
Speaker 2: the post nine to eleven movement. I would recommend people
Speaker 2: go watch Glenn Greenwall had a great segment about Fire
Speaker 2: and the First Amendment Organization where Fire who really is
Speaker 2: like taking up the mantle of what the aco you
Speaker 2: used to be. Has been coming out very hard against
Speaker 2: some of these has been coming out very hard against
Speaker 2: things like this and other censorship efforts that have been proliferating.
Speaker 2: So I recommend that people go and look at some
Speaker 2: of their statements and Glenn as well, who did some
Speaker 2: work on this, because I think it's now more critical
Speaker 2: than ever, even if you disagree. I mean, some of
Speaker 2: these people think people are crazy, but it doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: It's like, that's not what the point of all of
Speaker 2: this is. And I think it's very sad to watch
Speaker 2: as people are as people are embracing all this and
Speaker 2: really frankly undermining a lot of the free speech groundwork
Speaker 2: that's been laid over time.
Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, let's go ahead and move on to
Speaker 1: Iowa here, and a new poll that came out is
Speaker 1: pretty interesting in terms of where the Republican race is at.
Speaker 1: Let's put this up on the screen from Steve Kornaki,
Speaker 1: the very latest here. Go ahead and put the poll
Speaker 1: numbers and e one up on the screen. So Trump
Speaker 1: is basically the same forty three percent doing just fine
Speaker 1: and dandy there in Iowa. DeSantis not doing so well,
Speaker 1: drop down three points to sixteen percent. He's now tied
Speaker 1: with Nikki Haley, who has searched ten points to sixteen percent.
Speaker 1: She was the big mover in terms of this poll.
Speaker 1: Next is Tim Scott is seven percent, Chris Christy four percent,
Speaker 1: Vivike Ramaswami four percent, Doug Burgham three percent, and Asa
Speaker 1: Hutchinson at one percent.
Speaker 5: But a lot of.
Speaker 1: People noted it if you dig into the data. One
Speaker 1: of the things that was interesting here is while Vivik
Speaker 1: has remained static in terms of his overall percentage of support,
Speaker 1: his favorables have taken a massive hit. Put this up
Speaker 1: on the screen from Dave Weigel. He says his Iowa's
Speaker 1: fade is notable. No change in overall supports in summer,
Speaker 1: but negatives way up from twenty to thirty seven percent.
Speaker 1: Biggest jump in unfavorables of any GOP candidate. And uh saga.
Speaker 1: I saw our great friend Marshall making some phenomenal points
Speaker 1: about this, but basically like the more he did podcasts
Speaker 1: and the more people got to know him, the less
Speaker 1: they wanted.
Speaker 5: To know him.
Speaker 2: That's probably I wonder how much of it is podcast
Speaker 2: I wonder of it how much honestly came off from
Speaker 2: the debate and just the the what did the gen
Speaker 2: zs call it? Pick me syndrome? Pick me girl or
Speaker 2: pick me guy? Now people have accused me of being
Speaker 2: a pickmy guy before really amanly reject said analysis. But
Speaker 2: my point is that I believe, I believe that that
Speaker 2: is the way that the vernacular would apply as in
Speaker 2: trying to put yourself at the center of attention. There
Speaker 2: are a couple of mistakes. The big mistake I think
Speaker 2: that he made is it's clear that the second lane
Speaker 2: in the Republican Party is not to be a Trump defender.
Speaker 2: It is to be like the moderate it girl, which
Speaker 2: explains Nicki Haley, which is Look, the vast majority of
Speaker 2: Republicans support Trump. The vast majority of Republicans support Trump,
Speaker 2: like policy and all that, but there's a small little
Speaker 2: percentage which doesn't. And it's clear that that small little
Speaker 2: percentage likes old GOP. So the bet by DeSantis, by
Speaker 2: Ramaswami and others was that this number two lane could
Speaker 2: exist where you are somehow a Trump alternative, but you're
Speaker 2: supportive of Trump. But it's just very clear that if
Speaker 2: people want Trump or anything to do with him, they're
Speaker 2: going to pick him. For people who want DeSantis, it's
Speaker 2: still going to be the vast majority of people who
Speaker 2: may feel affectionately about Trump but want to move on
Speaker 2: from him. And then that whatever group is left, those
Speaker 2: are just going to be very traditional Nicky Haley style
Speaker 2: suburban Republican voters, the very traditional you know, a small
Speaker 2: business owner, pro Israel, mostly boomers, let's be honest, and
Speaker 2: she's like made in a lab, I think for them.
Speaker 2: So at the end of the day, I just don't
Speaker 2: think his political lane existed. I'm not even quite sure
Speaker 2: how much any of it had to do. I just
Speaker 2: think that when is unfavored went up, it's going to
Speaker 2: be really amongst that group of who the only people
Speaker 2: who exist were anti Trump or even up for grabs,
Speaker 2: like that's who they are. And of course they're going
Speaker 2: to find anything that he says repellent because he's such
Speaker 2: a big defender of them.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I think there's a lot to that.
Speaker 1: I think you're also right that that first debate, which
Speaker 1: he was very divisive in and some people liked it,
Speaker 1: and clearly a lot of people like it, didn't say
Speaker 1: well with them, and he even kind of showed his
Speaker 1: hand when in the second debate he came out and
Speaker 1: was like, I know a lot of people thinking that
Speaker 1: I'm like, no, it all, smart ass. You literally gave
Speaker 1: up the game of I got some feedback back and
Speaker 1: y'all really didn't like that much how I was, and
Speaker 1: he tried to sort of be more subdued than that
Speaker 1: second debate. That was a tell that under the surface
Speaker 1: of the initial positive reviews there were some problems in
Speaker 1: terms of Haley. Just to you know, make the case
Speaker 1: for some possible Trump alternative, which you guys know I
Speaker 1: have never really believed in, but I'll go ahead and
Speaker 1: try to make the case. You just had Mike Pence
Speaker 1: drop out, DeSantis is fading, does he ultimately drop out?
Speaker 1: You could imagine a coalessing basically around Nicky Haley before
Speaker 1: you get to the caucuses. And Trump support is pretty solid.
Speaker 1: Sixty three percent of Trump supporters say their minds are
Speaker 1: already one hundred percent made up and they will definitely
Speaker 1: back him. But you know that means forty percent of
Speaker 1: them are still kind of in the market and chopping
Speaker 1: around and considering. And if you have this huge coalescing
Speaker 1: around Nicky Haley from all of the other candidates and
Speaker 1: a lot of media outlets.
Speaker 4: Who knows.
Speaker 5: Maybe again I don't really see it, but you never know.
Speaker 1: That's the best case I can possibly make for her.
Speaker 1: We also, though, could not resist the real news and
Speaker 1: the really important stuff today, which is there is long
Speaker 1: We haven't mentioned it on this show yet.
Speaker 2: To be clear, we never brought it up. It's been
Speaker 2: foisted upon us and we just have chosen to take it.
Speaker 1: But I have been privately consuming this content. There is
Speaker 1: a whole conspiracy, which I would one might say it's
Speaker 1: more of like a.
Speaker 5: Confirmed fact at this point.
Speaker 1: What I want's call it consc a discussion of debate
Speaker 1: over whether Ron DeSantis is secretly wearing high heels with
Speaker 1: these like custom made boots with like a heel lift inside,
Speaker 1: and there's so much evidence online. If you look at
Speaker 1: these pictures, you're like, no one's feet are shaped this way?
Speaker 5: Why are you walking like this? Why are you sitting
Speaker 5: like this?
Speaker 13: Like?
Speaker 1: Why do you always wear these ugly ass weird boots.
Speaker 5: So he was.
Speaker 1: Confronted on this allegation on the PVD podcast with Patrick
Speaker 1: Batt David. Let's take a listen how that went.
Speaker 13: I'm sure your marketing team points out how they're trying
Speaker 13: to troll you in the marketplace. Okay, I'm sure they're
Speaker 13: doing that. Can you bring this one clip? I know
Speaker 13: you were on what do you call it?
Speaker 3: On? What was it?
Speaker 13: Bill Maher and Bill Maher talked about the boots. I've
Speaker 13: seen you walk with these boots. Gohead and play this
Speaker 13: clip this on TikTok went viral. It doesn't have a
Speaker 13: million views, it doesn't have you know, ten million views.
Speaker 13: This thing's got one point two million life and and
Speaker 13: some people are wondering.
Speaker 14: How do they I don't even know. I haven't seen that.
Speaker 13: What there's They have not shown this to you, Okay.
Speaker 13: What they're trying to say with this is that in
Speaker 13: your boots you have heels.
Speaker 14: No, no, no, those are just standard off the rack.
Speaker 14: Luke Casey, how governor eleven.
Speaker 13: Five to eleven? Okay, why don't you wear tennis shoes
Speaker 13: and dress shoes?
Speaker 14: I do wear tennis shoes when I work out. Yeah
Speaker 14: you do.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 2: I got a gift for you.
Speaker 6: I'd love for you to wear. Okay.
Speaker 13: I shop at Fergamo.
Speaker 14: Okay, I don't accept gifts. I can't accept that.
Speaker 5: So brutal your reaction, I mean you will deny it.
Speaker 2: I mean yeah, I mean, look, the issue is that,
Speaker 2: given the analysis of the walking and of the way
Speaker 2: that I've also seen his boot placed whenever he's sitting,
Speaker 2: it shows still like an elevated calf as if he's
Speaker 2: wearing a heel.
Speaker 4: I have to come down on the side of heel up.
Speaker 2: The only way that it is possible is I'm on
Speaker 2: the Lukezy website and I believe I'm looking at the
Speaker 2: exact model that DeSantis has and in it it does
Speaker 2: have like a semi substantial heel lift to it. Okay,
Speaker 2: so it's like a little bit of a heel. I mean,
Speaker 2: I'm wearing dress boots right now, for example, just so
Speaker 2: we can put these where Okay, all right, let me
Speaker 2: cut to it and like, which way will it actually
Speaker 2: show it?
Speaker 6: Like this?
Speaker 13: There?
Speaker 4: There?
Speaker 5: There you go, right.
Speaker 9: All right, all right.
Speaker 5: On the desk as he copped in this once.
Speaker 2: All right, three two one, So I'm wearing dress boots,
Speaker 2: like for example, people can see there is like a
Speaker 2: slight heel that is on there.
Speaker 4: But when I walk, if I were to.
Speaker 2: Stand up right now, like you can look at my
Speaker 2: calves and like I'm still able to stand up completely right.
Speaker 2: So that is why you know even when I do,
Speaker 2: Because that's why I had to test out. I don't
Speaker 2: actually often wear dress boots. I just got these, so
Speaker 2: I'm like, oh, maybe it's like a dress boot thing,
Speaker 2: but I don't think so. And I've looked also, so
Speaker 2: Marshall actually at his wedding he wore cowboy boots with
Speaker 2: this suit, and he also didn't look like and I
Speaker 2: believe there's simply I don't think it's the same thing
Speaker 2: they're to Covis.
Speaker 4: But in terms of the.
Speaker 2: Heel lift, whenever we were like, his gait did not
Speaker 2: appear to do the same thing. So, based upon my
Speaker 2: anecdotal evidence, my own personal experience, and from the videos,
Speaker 2: I have no choice but to conclude that he is
Speaker 2: likely wearing some sort of heel lift.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I assembled a little bit. There's tons of
Speaker 1: evidence in addition to this online, but I did assemble
Speaker 1: a little bit of my own evidence to present to
Speaker 1: the audience. Go and put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: So this is DeSantis walking. Why are you walking like?
Speaker 5: That's not weird? It is way to walk, So.
Speaker 1: Why are you walking in this strange way? All right,
Speaker 1: all right, go to the next video. This is a guy.
Speaker 1: The next video is of a man wearing heels who
Speaker 1: is not used to wearing heels, and it's a very
Speaker 1: similar gait.
Speaker 5: Is it not to me?
Speaker 1: This is very persuasive and compelling evidence that there is
Speaker 1: something going on with the boots. Now, Kyle and I
Speaker 1: have been having this ongoing debate. Obviously it's a look,
Speaker 1: it's a ridiculous thing, and sirey, you can go through
Speaker 1: the history, because we're looking at it. There have not
Speaker 1: really been short presents, at least in modern history, so
Speaker 1: it's not like it's an illegitimate concern. But Kyle and
Speaker 1: I have been debating, like, obviously it's a ridiculous thing
Speaker 1: to do in the first place.
Speaker 5: But let's assume you did it.
Speaker 1: You read the stats, who were like, okay, there are
Speaker 1: no US presidents who are short. I got to add
Speaker 1: at least like three inches here to my game or
Speaker 1: else there's no way I'm going to win. So you
Speaker 1: do it and you get caught, do you just continue
Speaker 1: the liar?
Speaker 5: Do you come clean?
Speaker 4: You gotta lie?
Speaker 2: You take it to the grave. You maintain your five
Speaker 2: to eleven until the death. We're all professional liars anyway,
Speaker 2: who cares, you know, it's like, and who's really gonna
Speaker 2: ever find out about it? And also to your point,
Speaker 2: so I've got the history and the data in front
Speaker 2: of me, it is an existential crisis for him to
Speaker 2: even be five eleven the only.
Speaker 1: President there is no way, it's not a chance.
Speaker 2: The only president in the modern era to be under
Speaker 2: five foot eleven and a half is Jimmy Carter. And actually,
Speaker 2: this is what's really crazy. Even in times when malnutrition
Speaker 2: in this country was rampant, we still mostly picked tall presidents.
Speaker 2: And our tallest president ever is Abraham Lincoln. Obviously he
Speaker 2: grew up what you know, the whole story of the
Speaker 2: log cabin in the eighteen thirties is like you think
Speaker 2: he was getting fed well, George, I actually didn't even
Speaker 2: know this. George Washington was six foot one and a half.
Speaker 2: That's actually the same height as I am. People like
Speaker 2: Chester Arthur six ' to two, Thomas Jefferson six foot
Speaker 2: two inches and a half. I mean, at that time,
Speaker 2: you know, to grow that big, that is very very atypical.
Speaker 2: But even six foot guys like James Monroe, John Tyler,
Speaker 2: James Buchanan, James Garfield Warren G.
Speaker 4: Har Arding.
Speaker 2: Gerald Ford was six foot Joe Biden is six foot.
Speaker 2: Trump is actually our third tallest president ever. He was
Speaker 2: six foot three lbj six foot three and a half.
Speaker 2: And as I said, the only president of the modern
Speaker 2: era to be below five foot eleven and a half,
Speaker 2: which was George W. Bush, to be clear, is Jimmy Carter,
Speaker 2: who came in in five foot nine and a half. Also,
Speaker 2: that's why previously I've been talking about Mike Johnson and
Speaker 2: I was like, man, he's only five eight. This is
Speaker 2: what I'm saying, Like, look, don't hate the player, hate
Speaker 2: the game. It's like most people who make it to
Speaker 2: the very very top of American politics are pretty tall.
Speaker 2: You don't don't you know, don't blame me for that.
Speaker 2: That just appears to be the way that voters respond.
Speaker 2: There's probably a lot of ingrained bias and all these
Speaker 2: other things that obviously all throughout history has applied to
Speaker 2: our politics.
Speaker 1: It's very clear, Well, there is something helpful about this,
Speaker 1: which is that pee Butooter Juge's five foot eight according
Speaker 1: to him, there we go not even me that, so
Speaker 1: that makes me helpful. Perhaps he will never be president.
Speaker 1: So that's one glimmer on the side of the bias
Speaker 1: against short people here.
Speaker 5: But you know, Desantist could have owned this.
Speaker 1: He could have been a trailblazer, an icon for short
Speaker 1: men everywhere. Instead, he's you know, decided to go in
Speaker 1: this much more shameful, humiliating, embarrassing direction. The other thing
Speaker 1: I had to note about the clip too of him
Speaker 1: with Patrick Patt David is like there's.
Speaker 5: Not even a hint of a smile.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, you know, Well that's a political skill exactly.
Speaker 1: I mean that's the other issue is like I actually
Speaker 1: think a more skillful politician could have handled this in
Speaker 1: a way that was charming, that was funny, et cetera.
Speaker 1: But I mean, he doesn't crack a smile. Also, you're
Speaker 1: totally when you say like, oh, I never saw anything
Speaker 1: about this, you are such a liar. You want of
Speaker 1: course you've seen something about That's like, it's impossible, it is.
Speaker 1: There is no way that you have not seen this.
Speaker 4: These are so self obsessed.
Speaker 2: There's just so obviously looking at whatever is.
Speaker 1: Also, if you had genuinely not seen it, then you
Speaker 1: wouldn't have reacted in this way.
Speaker 5: You would have been like, what what is it? What
Speaker 5: are they saying, you know, like, what are there.
Speaker 2: Here's what he would have done if it was for
Speaker 2: real and he really wasn't wearing them, he would have
Speaker 2: taken off his boots live on the air and kind
Speaker 2: of done something like I just didn't be like, you
Speaker 2: see anything right, and that actually would have settled it
Speaker 2: for all time.
Speaker 4: I also think, well, here's okay, let me say this.
Speaker 2: Just because it's a men's wear thing, this is one
Speaker 2: of the reasons why it's pretty difficult actually to wear
Speaker 2: cowboy boots with a suit. The issues of those cowboy
Speaker 2: bits are very tall, and unless you have like perfectly trailered,
Speaker 2: perfectly tailored trousers, it's going to be difficult for you
Speaker 2: to achieve perfect fit. Even the boots that I'm wearing
Speaker 2: right now, like I have those things that are on
Speaker 2: the side which help you kind of put them on.
Speaker 2: These are Chelsea boots. They sometimes interfere with the pants.
Speaker 2: So actually Patrick is right, just wear dress shoes. It's
Speaker 2: an easy way to actually solve all of this. And
Speaker 2: also just so you know, you you can get dress
Speaker 2: shoes with lifts in them, or you can get dress
Speaker 2: shoes which have a little bit more of a heel.
Speaker 2: A lot of guys do that he doesn't.
Speaker 5: Went a little bit more.
Speaker 2: Well, then that's that's in the He was a like.
Speaker 5: At least three inches to what he's got going on.
Speaker 2: So I come down on the side off he's wearing
Speaker 2: heel lifts. Also for anyone who's like, why are you
Speaker 2: even covering this? Guys, we need to have some fun
Speaker 2: in our lives. Okay, this is this is the fun
Speaker 2: that we get to. We get to have the viral
Speaker 2: tiktoks and all that. It basically convinced me if I
Speaker 2: ever meet him, I'll probably have a chance, you know,
Speaker 2: at least in the next year or so.
Speaker 4: I'm gonna scope it out and see how Tali actually is.
Speaker 5: Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: Another thought I had is didn't he play on the
Speaker 1: like Harvard baseball team or something.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 5: I wonder what they listed.
Speaker 1: His height at, which usually sports sports, Yeah, sports statistics
Speaker 1: are usually inflated, you know anyway, so if they weren't
Speaker 1: even listening him at five to eleven, then you know,
Speaker 1: he's like usually they.
Speaker 5: Add like a couple of inches to whatever they claim.
Speaker 4: The heights in of the Yale baseball team.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's great. Yale, Harvard, whatever, It's all the same.
Speaker 1: So anyway, that would be another avenue of investigation for
Speaker 1: any sluice out there that that did occur to me,
Speaker 1: but I was too lazy.
Speaker 5: To actually pursue.
Speaker 1: You heard it here first, Okay, time to make the
Speaker 1: heart art ist turn in history from Rhonda Santis's Hill
Speaker 1: lifts two matters of literal life and death and the
Speaker 1: human beings who are suffering in the midst of what
Speaker 1: is happening in Israel and in Gaza.
Speaker 5: Let's go ahead and get to our guest, Gilly Robin.
Speaker 2: Joining us now is Gilly Roman. He is the brother
Speaker 2: of missing Israeli citizen Yard and his sister. He's in
Speaker 2: Washington to bring awareness about Israeli hostages and in order
Speaker 2: to make sure that we keep the spotlight on them. So, Gilly,
Speaker 2: we are so honored to have you here in the studio.
Speaker 2: Thank you for joining us. Thank you so Gilly, you're
Speaker 2: here in Washington. We were connected through some mutual friends,
Speaker 2: and I was told that you're here in order to
Speaker 2: raise awareness about the hostages. So just tell us about
Speaker 2: why you've decided to make this trip here to Washington.
Speaker 2: What you want people to know and what you want
Speaker 2: people to know about your sister.
Speaker 6: As well as you say it is about awareness.
Speaker 15: It's crucial for us that the American people will not
Speaker 15: only stay bierside, that will stay stand with us. And
Speaker 15: for that it's important and even vital for me, first
Speaker 15: of all to share this our specific human story as
Speaker 15: a representative of over two hundred associating stories of innocent
Speaker 15: civilians being held hostage inside of Gaza by Ramas, and
Speaker 15: also to expand the explanation of why is it a
Speaker 15: shared story, why this attack is not only on us,
Speaker 15: but it's also on our shared values on the Western world.
Speaker 15: This is something that it's important for me to lay
Speaker 15: out and explain. And this is why I've been to Berlin. Also,
Speaker 15: my sister is a German citizen. Alongside her is a
Speaker 15: residentship show. We've been to Berlin and I extend this
Speaker 15: message message as well over there, and now I'm doing
Speaker 15: it here.
Speaker 1: Kelly, if you don't mind, can you share what unfolded
Speaker 1: that led to you know your sister being missing and
Speaker 1: you expect being held hostage by her.
Speaker 15: Yes, so, my sister and her husband alone and my niece,
Speaker 15: her daughter Gef and she's three and a half years old,
Speaker 15: went to visit alone's family in Kyboots, Perry. They by
Speaker 15: the way, they lived there as a family for almost
Speaker 15: four years, and they just left two months ago because
Speaker 15: then was not willing to stand the routine, as we
Speaker 15: call it, of piecel attacks over the heads of her
Speaker 15: and her family and her young daughter. So they just left.
Speaker 15: The Keyboots are very lovely Keyboots, a very peaceful Keyboots,
Speaker 15: except from the fact that it's been attacked.
Speaker 6: Every now and then. But they went to visit.
Speaker 15: We just finished a family trip in South Africa, all
Speaker 15: of us together in a small caravan. We came back
Speaker 15: on Friday and they went to Shabad dinner and on
Speaker 15: Saturday morning, the Alams woke all of us up in
Speaker 15: Tel Aviv in the south and they went to the shelter.
Speaker 15: We exchended some messages, very worried about her. Initially the
Speaker 15: regular warris and then it expanded when we saw pictures
Speaker 15: of terrorists inside with jeeps. Armed terrorists in different cities
Speaker 15: around the Kaza border. We understand that their cuboots might
Speaker 15: might also been infiltrated, and it did. Last correspondent was
Speaker 15: at ten am, and we know that around ten twenty
Speaker 15: they were abducted from their home. Her firstly Alan's mother,
Speaker 15: Geffriend's grandmother, was taken outside of their home. We saw
Speaker 15: it because Hamas published the video of her being taken
Speaker 15: alongside with three other civilians outside of the outs of
Speaker 15: their houses. It was kind of like a calm walk,
Speaker 15: so we said, maybe they are being gathered collected. But
Speaker 15: a few days later we saw the continuation of this video,
Speaker 15: so it on Instagram. Then Habas publish the four civilians
Speaker 15: dead on the ground in their own pool of blood.
Speaker 15: This is how we found out she was murdered. That
Speaker 15: was confirmed a few days afterwards by the Israeli authorities. Afterwards,
Speaker 15: his sister Carmel was taken and she's also been probably
Speaker 15: held hostage in Gaza. And then then alone and Geffen
Speaker 15: were taken together, put inside of Mitsubishi with four armed
Speaker 15: terrorists and a driver, taken towards Gaza. And what happened
Speaker 15: is they decided to escape. They decided to run away
Speaker 15: from a moving car. They seized an opportunity where the
Speaker 15: terrorists took off the car for a few minutes, leaving
Speaker 15: them with only the driver driving towards Kaza. They just
Speaker 15: jumped off. Geffen was in the hands of my sister.
Speaker 15: They started to run for their lives. Then the terrorists
Speaker 15: noticed them started to run after them, shooting in them.
Speaker 15: And at that point he then realized that it's not
Speaker 15: efficient enough when she's holding Geffen, and she decided to
Speaker 15: let go of the most pressure thing in her life.
Speaker 15: I'm sure that many people will understand and relate. Gave
Speaker 15: her too alone and he was able to run faster
Speaker 15: to find a hiding spot. He hid there with Keefen
Speaker 15: for over twelve hours, no food, no water, absolute silence
Speaker 15: with a three year old, and then through dark time
Speaker 15: he started slowly walking in this battlefield full of terrorists.
Speaker 15: Managed to arrive in the morning to the entrance to
Speaker 15: the Kyboots where our troops were already present. And then
Speaker 15: we got a phone call for him explaining what happened,
Speaker 15: because we were, of course worried at home, but hoping
Speaker 15: they were as I said, collected maybe somebody negotiated for them.
Speaker 15: We waited for a call from here then and he
Speaker 15: explained to us what happened, and he told us as
Speaker 15: the last time he saw my sister when they diverted
Speaker 15: after she gave geffen to him and she was stopping
Speaker 15: to hide behind the tree from the bullets. So this
Speaker 15: is what we know for sure that happened. The other
Speaker 15: information that we have is just once I ended this
Speaker 15: conversation and I.
Speaker 6: Have to go to Bery to the battlefield and look
Speaker 6: for her.
Speaker 15: So I just put my uniform on I'm an officer
Speaker 15: in reserve and got into our family car straight to
Speaker 15: the battlefield and just day after they worked with our
Speaker 15: troops on the ground, the units after Union, because they
Speaker 15: replaced almost on a daily half daily basis, to inform them,
Speaker 15: to explain to them, to convince them to come with
Speaker 15: me to find the special union, the special trackers that
Speaker 15: will help us. The area and the kits were liberate
Speaker 15: only on Tuesday, so only on Tuesday and Wednesday we
Speaker 15: will be able to do extensive searches, not just one
Speaker 15: hour two hour searches. So the last search was almost
Speaker 15: five hours. It was very extensive with the trekkers and
Speaker 15: they came to the conclusion according to the footsteps that
Speaker 15: they that witness around the area of the tree. Because
Speaker 15: I also asked Alan to come back again and find
Speaker 15: the exact treach and he found it. Just imagine that
Speaker 15: he had to come back to the place where he
Speaker 15: was running from. So they concluded that she was taken
Speaker 15: again into Gaza, most probably without a fight, which is
Speaker 15: very courageous of my sister. She's a very wise person.
Speaker 15: So I guess that when she understood that she cannot
Speaker 15: run away, she just went with them because we didn't.
Speaker 15: We didn't find any signs of blood or injury or struggle.
Speaker 15: And we really hope that she is there. It's a
Speaker 15: very twisted hope, but this is the hope that we have.
Speaker 6: It, Yeah, the best that we can have.
Speaker 15: That she is in the hands of probably the most brutal,
Speaker 15: in humane people on earth right now, but they have
Speaker 15: her life at their hands inside of Gaza, and we
Speaker 15: hope that she's healthy and relatively safe. And it's more
Speaker 15: than three weeks we are we're soon going to get
Speaker 15: to four weeks without my sister, without any knowledge of her,
Speaker 15: without any sign of life, any sign of her health.
Speaker 15: So also the sense of urgency is something that it's
Speaker 15: important for me to convey.
Speaker 2: I can't imagine. And so what can have you received
Speaker 2: communication from the Israeli government on this? Have they been
Speaker 2: able to tell you anything about that? And how has
Speaker 2: that process been I know there's been you know, we
Speaker 2: can only read in our you know, the English media
Speaker 2: and Israel. There's been some I know, some tension with that.
Speaker 2: Maybe you could speak to that firsthand. Our audience would
Speaker 2: certainly love to hear from me.
Speaker 15: So in terms of information specifically to our case, the
Speaker 15: information that the authority have and the military, it's the
Speaker 15: information that we gave them.
Speaker 6: We were much more informed than them.
Speaker 15: There are some people who are the idea has more
Speaker 15: information with different sources. We will not elaborate, not in
Speaker 15: the case of my sister, and we are really hoping
Speaker 15: and looking forward to get some information. And I trust
Speaker 15: that they're doing their utmost best. I know that they
Speaker 15: invest a lot of efforts in order to get some proof,
Speaker 15: but it's extremely difficult. You need to understand that it's
Speaker 15: not the situation that everyone were captured together, being held
Speaker 15: together and being taken care of together. It's probably very scattered,
Speaker 15: not all of them in the hands of Haramas. My
Speaker 15: sister is most probably in the hands of Haramas because
Speaker 15: we know which unit, let's say, took them, because they
Speaker 15: identify themselves. But this is more or less what we know,
Speaker 15: and obviously the lack of information and the helplessness is
Speaker 15: the most excruciating part of this all.
Speaker 1: Yeah, of course, Yeah, it's a night that you're living
Speaker 1: right now. I can't even imagine when you have seen
Speaker 1: there have been a few hostages that have been released.
Speaker 1: There have been a few hostage videos that have been released,
Speaker 1: you know, obviously under draws from hamas a new one
Speaker 1: just came out yesterday. As a matter of fact, what
Speaker 1: are the emotions or what are you feeling when you're
Speaker 1: seeing these pieces of information lead down?
Speaker 15: So I would say it's contradicting emotions. So on the
Speaker 15: one hand, I'm very happy, not for me, but just
Speaker 15: for them, just to see people. I think everybody should
Speaker 15: be happy when you see people, innocent people being rescued
Speaker 15: and getting back to their families reunited. And that helped
Speaker 15: me to imagine me reuniting with my sister and you
Speaker 15: see that time. It's hard for me not to smile
Speaker 15: when I'm when I'm thinking about it, to think about
Speaker 15: her and Gift and reuniting again those two who were
Speaker 15: almost inseparable. On the other hand, I think we are
Speaker 15: going through a continuous terror attacks things that day, and
Speaker 15: part of this terror horrific experience that we have is
Speaker 15: the manipulation made by Hamas. So I see this release,
Speaker 15: this video alongside with a press release and different twisted
Speaker 15: information that maybe there is an exchange, maybe there will
Speaker 15: be a humanitary gesture, maybe today fifty people, maybe to
Speaker 15: day ten people. All of this I consider as severe
Speaker 15: manipulation that's opposed to extend the terror that we are
Speaker 15: experiencing as family and in general as Israelis and around
Speaker 15: the Western world. So I really try not to raise
Speaker 15: hopes regarding this incident, to be.
Speaker 6: Glad for the people who got the people alive.
Speaker 15: But also to remember that it doesn't say a lot
Speaker 15: about my sister, because at the same it does say
Speaker 15: that maybe this is our hope that she's been treated
Speaker 15: as they are treated. But we also know that Haramas
Speaker 15: can treat different people in the diferent ways. So when
Speaker 15: we when we imagine that maybe she has a relatively
Speaker 15: safe day and being treated like we know that some
Speaker 15: of the hostes that have been released are treated.
Speaker 6: I the same.
Speaker 15: The same chances are that she's been beating every day
Speaker 15: God for being raped or tortured or whatever you can
Speaker 15: there is. There isn't any horror I know that we
Speaker 15: are right now on the verge of of Halloween. Yeah,
Speaker 15: it's a horror, So this there isn't a horror that
Speaker 15: we can imagine that that is that is out of
Speaker 15: the question with Hamas So for me in terms of
Speaker 15: my hopes and what I conclude from that, I try
Speaker 15: not to conclude anything because this is just a twisted
Speaker 15: game that I really try and it's very hard, but
Speaker 15: I'm trying to hold myself not to play to their hands.
Speaker 4: Of course, yeah, I can. It must be so difficult
Speaker 4: if you do.
Speaker 2: You have confidence right now that the government is doing
Speaker 2: everything possible. When you're here in Washington, are you going
Speaker 2: to be meeting any lawmakers or you know, any other
Speaker 2: decision makers and other thing. What's what's your message to
Speaker 2: them about how you want us to be resolved?
Speaker 15: Yes, of course, so it's hard to say if they're
Speaker 15: doing everything possible. But I'm more reassured in the last
Speaker 15: few days, at least from the side of the right
Speaker 15: government that they invest more and to put it more
Speaker 15: in a top priority. I think it's also related to
Speaker 15: the change of government that we had. What happened is that,
Speaker 15: as you probably know, we had a very right wing government,
Speaker 15: the most right wing government that we ever had. And
Speaker 15: also some of the ministers in that government expressed their
Speaker 15: let's say lack of I wouldn't say empathy, but lack
Speaker 15: of attention towards the hostages issue. Put in first the
Speaker 15: need of victory, which I and dismantal of Haramas and
Speaker 15: taken out of which we all agree upon. I think
Speaker 15: everybody understand it has to happen. They have to pay
Speaker 15: the utmost price for for these atrocities.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 15: But there they were kind of voices saying that we
Speaker 15: should not take into consideration the houses will we will
Speaker 15: deal with them after the war will be over, which
Speaker 15: is completely unacceptable. And I think that now after some
Speaker 15: more moderate, more moderate kinnessed members party UH enter the government,
Speaker 15: I feel that there is a little bit of shift,
Speaker 15: but maybe just the shift the shift of time and
Speaker 15: and the way that they decided to certainly conduct this issue.
Speaker 15: So I don't know how to read into it, but
Speaker 15: but I think that the day is already going to
Speaker 15: invest in more. And also I'm being asked a lot
Speaker 15: about the ground invasion and the and uh. So I
Speaker 15: think that currently Israel is working in a pretty calculative manner,
Speaker 15: not letting Hamas decide what should we do and when
Speaker 15: should we do and on the other side, not doing
Speaker 15: things that are irrepairable it's hard to get back then
Speaker 15: are too dangerous for our people. I'm watching very closely,
Speaker 15: very carefully, and i want to say that one of
Speaker 15: the things that are also reassuring is the commitment that
Speaker 15: we see by the US, also by Germany and some
Speaker 15: other Western actors, very firm commitment not only to the
Speaker 15: general issue, but specifically to the hosted issues. And for me,
Speaker 15: it's vital to be here to talk to you and
Speaker 15: to the public, but also to different officials and politicians
Speaker 15: in order to remain this issue a top priority for
Speaker 15: all of them, not just because they are American or
Speaker 15: German citizens, just because they are human beings, people, people
Speaker 15: we are talking about over thirty kids, help their babies,
Speaker 15: elderly people, ill people, women of course mothers. This is
Speaker 15: something that nobody should accept and I'm saying it over
Speaker 15: and over again. This is the case study of terrorism.
Speaker 6: There they are.
Speaker 15: We are just the guinea pigs of the West at
Speaker 15: the moment, and they watching closely what is being tolerated
Speaker 15: by the West, what is not being tolerated by the ways.
Speaker 6: What is the price price egg of it?
Speaker 15: How much the West is going to accept, fight for
Speaker 15: the for the release of the hostages. What will be
Speaker 15: the consequences for Hamas of this kind of uh of behavior?
Speaker 15: And I think that every single terror organization and terror
Speaker 15: and terror supporting actors in the world are currently watching
Speaker 15: all of us, not only as well, all of us
Speaker 15: trying to see what are we going to do, what
Speaker 15: are we going to accept, and what we are are
Speaker 15: we going to accept? So this is really crucial, not
Speaker 15: just for us. This is why I said I said earlier,
Speaker 15: it's not just staying by our side, it's stating with us.
Speaker 1: Gilly, you, in addition to being the brother of Ardan,
Speaker 1: you've also been peace activists. Has the experience of this
Speaker 1: whorror change your political views? Has it changed your view
Speaker 1: of what peace would require and what it.
Speaker 5: Might look like?
Speaker 15: So yes and no, I would say I would start
Speaker 15: with that, Yes, maybe it's easier to comprehend. I invested
Speaker 15: a lot in peace education. That was my leading role.
Speaker 15: In my previous job as a head of international boarding
Speaker 15: school for Peace in Israel, I had a lot of
Speaker 15: Arab students Palestinians who from the West Bank, from Gaza,
Speaker 15: from different Muslim countries, alongside Israelis and internationals. I invested
Speaker 15: a lot in conversation about the conflict and resolution and reconciliation.
Speaker 15: I think it's vital and I think that we have
Speaker 15: to seek compromise. What these days taught me reminded me.
Speaker 15: Let's say, amplified is the thing that cannot be compromised,
Speaker 15: and the thing that cannot be compromised is the deodistic
Speaker 15: ambitions to eradicate certain people. Certain state is not by
Speaker 15: the way, it's not only our state, and it's not
Speaker 15: only our people and values, and you cannot negotiate. And
Speaker 15: we did a lot of simulation of negotiation and a
Speaker 15: lot of conversation, and I hope they will be able
Speaker 15: to find the ground to do it again, because the
Speaker 15: Palestinian cause for liberation for independence is a legitimate cause.
Speaker 15: I have a lot to say about how complex it is,
Speaker 15: but I think we can all agree it's legitimate that
Speaker 15: they will seek for it, and they will criticize the
Speaker 15: Israel for some of the things that we are doing,
Speaker 15: but the cause for eradication, the killing of people and
Speaker 15: the ambition to create another Muslim empire without Western values
Speaker 15: and without burstern people. Let's say it's completely inacceptable and
Speaker 15: we cannot compromise on that, and that I think really
Speaker 15: amplified the need to be clear about this distinction, to
Speaker 15: fight very firmly against the ambition and all the actors
Speaker 15: that are supporting this ambition. And on the other side,
Speaker 15: this is the part where my views have not changed, that.
Speaker 6: We have to still find a way.
Speaker 15: I honestly don't know how will it be done, to
Speaker 15: find a way to build trust again, to find a
Speaker 15: way to deal honestly and patiently with the relevant issues,
Speaker 15: with the legitimate issues with the conflict, which is very, very,
Speaker 15: very complex. But I believe that a longer years can
Speaker 15: be resolved if there will be no integration, very sick
Speaker 15: integration between the Palestinian cause and the Geodistic cause. As
Speaker 15: long as this integration is happening, there is nothing to
Speaker 15: talk about, and the Israeli people will never feel secure,
Speaker 15: and you will never feel secure, and once it will
Speaker 15: be diverted, it will be separated. I hope we'll be
Speaker 15: able to find this kind of solution, and I can
Speaker 15: say it's a history teacher. In the end, conflicts ends.
Speaker 15: It's just a matter of whether it's happened in your days,
Speaker 15: in your children days and your grandchildren days. No conflict
Speaker 15: less forever, forever. So just what is my ambition that
Speaker 15: it will happen in our time? But this compromise will
Speaker 15: have to be a secure compromise, it will have to
Speaker 15: be a reasonable compromise for.
Speaker 6: All sites.
Speaker 15: So as you say it's a complicated answer.
Speaker 1: Well, I think it's unimaginable that you are able to
Speaker 1: hold on to that hope in this time, and I
Speaker 1: think that should be a source of inspiration for everyone.
Speaker 6: And just imagine that.
Speaker 15: My sister gave Geffen to alone to protect her life,
Speaker 15: to protect her future. She was willing to do this
Speaker 15: sacrifice and be separate from her daughter in order to
Speaker 15: secure her future. So of course I'm very worried about
Speaker 15: my sister. I want her back, But also I share
Speaker 15: the same the same goal as as she does, which
Speaker 15: is to secure the future of my niece, which is
Speaker 15: composed by these two parts that I told you, which
Speaker 15: is the radication of the radical geodistic ambitions and trying
Speaker 15: to find a sort of solution, a sort of path
Speaker 15: for peace.
Speaker 6: So I think for me it makes sense.
Speaker 5: Kelly, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: We will pray for you every day and good luck
Speaker 1: on your trip here. I hope that you know people
Speaker 1: with power are listening to your message. I hope you
Speaker 1: guys are listening to this message as well, and we'll
Speaker 1: be thinking a.
Speaker 5: Lot about you.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Gillie, thank you, thank you.
Speaker 15: I have a good day and thanks to the audience always.
Speaker 2: We'll see you guys later