Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Coverage that is possible.
If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal, Indeed, we.
Do lots to get to this morning.
We're going to start with fears of a broader war escalating out of Israel's war on Gaza. Also some images emerging that people are comparing to Abu Grabe two point zero and could have a similarly radicalizing impact. So we'll break all of that down for you. So a major free speech controversy, a university president out at pen We will get into all of that and really enraging me anyway, We'll give.
You all those details.
More dire numbers for Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton jumping into the fray. We also want to break down for you a major abortion case unfolding in the state of Texas with the potential to royal politics there and across the country.
I'm taking a look at.
The life of a poet who was killed in by the Israelis over last week. And we also have an Israeli poster who's going to join us to talk about what is going on in terms of domestic politics with regard to bb Net and Yahoo. But before we get to any of that, this is the last week to get our very very special Christmas sweater.
Go ahead and put it up there on the screen. I modeled a little bit for some people on Instagram. It is the very last week. We've only got a few left if you want to be able to get it and wear it during the Christmas season so you can prostlytize such a great show. Also, we've got our yearly memberships which remain on discount for the rest of the year. This is a way for you guys can help us out and build for the election season.
Again, I say it every show, but it's shocking.
A year from now we will be at least finally done with the voting part of the twenty twenty four election, which is wild and is nuts, but is one of those you guys are really helping us build for that season plan remain nimble and to be able to bring you all the best content that we possibly can and what is sure to be an absolutely wild and probably trying time, but we will be there with you throughout every step of the way, so breakingpoints dot Com to be able to take advantage of that.
All right, let's go ahead and get to the latest out of Israel and start with those fears of a broader war, escalation possibilities on multiple fronts. Let's put this up on the screen. Huffin and Post actually has been doing a good job with some of their reporting during this conflict, and they had a major piece breaking down some of the risks and with sources inside the administration raising alarm bells. What they say here is Gaza may soon become a bigger war. They've got the highlights.
They say.
US officials fear Israel wants weapons to fight in Lebanon. Israel will not share plans with the Biden administration or Congress. That reminds me of Ukraine. There, top officials discuss a Rock and Syria escalation. AID organizations are ringing alarm bells more than.
They ever have.
We give you a few of the details from within this piece that are really crucial to understanding where we are and what the risks are. They write, one week into the resumed Israeli military campaign in Gaza, US officials and foreign policy experts are increasingly afraid that Israel's operation will fuel a broader conflict, drawing in Lebanon and expanding throughout the Middle East, potentially forcing American troops into the fight.
One of the key pieces here that I found really noteworthy is you have Biden administration officials who are worried that the weapons that Israel is requesting from the United States right now, which by the way, we've been approving with no qualms whatsoever, they won't tell us what they actually want to use those weapons for, and that has raised grave fears from the White House and the Biden administration that those weapons are intended to be used in
Lebanon against the Lebanese militia Hezblah. They have a senior fellow at a Middle East Institute think tank quoted as saying this last week, the level of concern in DC about a potential war on the israel Lebanon front has gone up three or four notches. You also have despite repeated calls for Israeli restraint, US intelligence assesses the IDF are committed to quote business as usual, with only limited
concern about civilian casualties. According to a US official and their suspicions, the renewed campaign is actually bloodier than the
previous offensive in northern Gaza. And of course the longer that this war continues, the more brutal and bloody the conduct of this war, the more possibility of escalation across the region from the Huthis, from Hesbalah and from other actors who will feel compelled to stand up for Palestinians, and you will obviously inflame tensions, not to mention, of course, the human carnage that all of that will will create.
So that's effectively where we are. But it's it seems like the biggest concerns right now, Sager, are on the Lebanese front.
Yeah, well, a couple of different places, because some multiple things could escalate all at the same time and each could create like a poly crisis, if you will. So let's go and put this up there on the screen for what people can see. The Huthis are now warning that they will target every single ship which is headed
to Israel. Now we've broken it down before, but the Red Sea remains one of the most strategic choke points in the entire world, and the Houthis have already shown at least a limited capability at the very least in disrupting global shipping, skyrocketing insurance rates and targeting Israeli flagged vessels, as well as shooting at the very least that uk flagged and other places with US guided missile destroyers engaging
drones and other things. So the war on the Sea actually could have this most significant impact on the global economy. But from oil shipping to weapons production, food, the same thing that happened in the Black Sea after Ukraine is the same thing that we could be seeing here. And imagine two major global conflagrations in two of the most strategic choke points in the entire world. For thee that's a massive job for the US Navy and one that
would significantly heighten tensions. But you're also right, let's go and put this up there on the screen in terms of what we see from the bide from the Netanyahu administration currently telling Biden behind the scenes quote, Israel will act militarily against the Yemen's Huthies if the US won't.
Of course, Yemen and Israel are not all that close together, which would mean a significant increase not only in the air war, but likely the use of strategic missiles, you know, medium range missiles as well as well as missile defense systems, and this conflict crystal. I have no doubt the Hasbolo one,
I think would also be a conflagration. But I think the Yemen one is the single biggest threat to embroiling the United States in a broader war, simply because we have already shown a willingness to shoot down multiple missiles fired from Yemen with our guided missile destroyer. Our missile destroyers also have stepped up as the protection role in the Red Sea for the UK flag ship vessels and all that. So it's only a matter of time, and
it only takes and these look the Houthis. They may have better technology than than Hezbolah and or the Hummas inside of Gaza, but this is still you know, rinky dank. At the end of the day, it only takes a single missile to go off course and to kill a US sailor and that's it.
It's game on.
And I don't think people have understood the strategic importance of what that will look like. On top of the Hezbolah situation, which threatens to also bring Syrian militias into the war. Remember, they can escalate against our troops there already. The ground force commanders in Iraq are sounding the alarm. But like we are sitting ducks here for all of the you know, equipment and missile defense and all that stuff we have here pitidly little rockets that come in
and out. You can ask US forces it's served in Iraq. Eventually one's going to hit somebody. Yeah, and that, you know, takes things to another level. So we're in We're not in a good place right now in the Middle East.
So that's the danger with regard to the houthis the other thing. I mean, they're effectively waging and economic war on Israel because they're saying no ship that is headed for Israel is going to get through here. Specifically, they say, if Gaza does not receive the food medicine and needs all ships in the Red Seat bound for Israeli portse regardless of their nationality will become a target for our armed forces. Now that obviously creates risks and dangers for
those ships in the region. But the other thing it does is it massively spikes the insurance rates for any Israeli ship and any Israeli flagship or any ship that is heading to Israel that is going to have a major economic impact globally but in particular on Israel. So that is the leverage that they are planning to use in this conflict. And it's not just a thread at this point. I mean, they already obviously have taken clear action, and now you have Israel effectively saying, hey us, you're
not doing enough. Which listen, they can find their own business. They can find their own business on that front. But they're saying, if you don't take more action, we're going to get more involved. But that's not the only place. As I was saying before with regard to Lebanon, put this up on the screen. They are also directly threatening Hesbla. This is from the Times of Israel. The headline here
reads national Security Advisor. This is the Israeli National Security Advisor indicates war against Hesbela likely once Hamas is defeated. So they are saying pretty clearly here that they don't really want the second front in the war right now, but they are very much testing the waters for potential war against Hesbela after they wrap up their war on Gaza. The quote here is we can no longer accept Hesbela's Radwan force sitting on the border. We can no longer
accept Resolution seventeen oh one not being implemented. That refers to a UN Security Council resolution from two thousand and six that barred any Hesbela presence from within almost thirty kilometers of the border with Israel as directly if there would be a war in the north. This national security advisor said, the situation in the North must be changed, and it will if Hesbola agrees to change things via diplomacy,
very good, but I don't believe it will. He goes on to say, therefore, when the day comes, Israel will have to act ensure that residents of the North are no longer displaced in their land and to guarantee for them that the situation in the North has changed. She said Israel doesn't want to fight simultaneously on two fronts, indicated it would therefore tackle Hesbla after Hamas has defeated.
He said, Israel has been quote making clear to the Americans we are not interested in war in the North, but that we will have no alternative but to impose a new reality if Hesbela remains a threat, And that part about that UN resolution peace is being read effectively as like a trial balloon for justification for some sort of like international justification is basically like the cover that they would use to justify to the US why they have to then wage this war on Hesbela.
Yeah, it's reminds me of whenever we invaded Iraq because Saddamis wasn't complying with these UN resolutions. Right, that'll totally be a proper justification. I actually read this as a way for Netan Yaho to be able to wind down things in Gaza but remain in the state of war for Israel, so that he can stay in power as
long as possible. The longer that we more that we get away from October seventh, the less the questions of hey, so what did you do on October sixth exactly, and why did all of these people just simply ignore these intelligence warnings? The more that we can make the situation about what's going on with external threats to the State of Israel. The better it is from Neta Yah, who every day that the war goes on is better for
him and for the Israelis. They're telegraphing they're going to need about two more months or so inside of Gaza. That's a long time for the people in Gaza. It's not a long time for nata Yahu. So what's the better way to do that? You escalate the war with Hezbolah and then it's a lot like what happened with Iraq.
By two thousand and four, the national debate in this country had nothing to do with Bin Laden and al Qaeda and had everything to do with the security situation in the country, which had nothing to do with nine to eleven in the first place.
It's a great distraction strategy and.
It's what helped win Bush his second term in two thousand and four. I'm the one who's going to keep us safe by continuing the war in Iraq and not in Afghanistan. So I think Natanya, who's you know, watched this entire thing play out in many ways. He played an integral role in some of the events that were happening at that time.
That's his best strategy for reelection.
Well, and this is something we can talk to Dahlia, our Israeli polster about today. She was just interviewed in The New Yorker and she was pointing out that almost everybody wants Netanyahu gon his very little support left.
The expectation is that as soon.
As the war is over, he's basically going to be forced down or have to resign. But if you ask people, hey, do you want him to go right now, it's only about a quarter of people who want him to go right now. The remainder say, after the war is over, then we want you to go. But you know, the sense is like, we can't have this change in this chaos in the midst of this conflict, so we need to keep him there.
Until the war is over.
So yeah, he has every incentive in the world to drag this thing out as long as possible. And I mean this is classic politics, one on one. We see it here all the time. We saw it, you know, it came to mind. It was a very different situation.
It's not analogous, but after what happened in East Palestine and Ohio, and there was all these calls for increased rail safety, and of course the rail companies didn't want that whatsoever, and so their whole strategy was, well, let's just let's do a study, let's push it out, let's delay it and let the heat die down. It's the
same strategy that's being deployed here. He's hoping that people forget how up set they are, how disappointed they are, how much he failed, how much his doctrine which he has bet on to keep his power, which was effectively to block any hope of a Palestinian statehood, to promise he could control the height of the flames, to promise he was mister Security and no one had to worry about anything, and you could just maintain the status quo indefinitely.
That was his whole doctrine that.
Completely failed on October seventh, not to mention the incredible intelligence and security failures that led them to fail in anticipating and in responding to those massacres and those atrocities that Hamas committed on October seventh. So he's hoping that over time people will forget that, and the rawness of
that emotion will go away. And so saga. I think you make a fantastic point about why they're saying, Hey, after this war is over and after you know, whatever the US decides, we're actually done watching us commit these atrocities in Gaza and force us to stop there. This is the next front in the war that we're going to open up, and this UN resolution is the fig leaf of justification that we're going to use for continuing there.
Good luck.
I mean, that's one of the this like for Gaza, for all the fear of escalation, at least for now, it's been about two months or so that military operations have continued in the Strip, and we haven't seen mass mobilization, but it's still very young in the conflict and the fear of escalation and the way.
Things can go in Yemen and in Hesbolah.
Also, don't forget about Syria, don't forget about our roles there and all of our other allies that we have across the world. This could significantly cause a massive conflagration, and it can happen very very quickly. As I laid out, all it takes is a single US sailor one missile that goes the wrong way.
Same with the Israelis.
We've already seen misfires from the Israelis, if you'll remember Crystal that accidentally fired into Egypt. These are very very confusing situations when things go hot like this, so we never know, and it's clearly in the direct interest of the Nets and Yahu government to continue this as long
as possible. Hesbola would be the perfect excuse. I think though that given the way things are going in Gaza, and we'll talk about this in a military that would be look Hesbola, as we've always laid out as significantly more militarily capable as low as well as the Houthis in Yemen, and it would cause a hell of a lot more idea of casualties and even what they've seen in Gaza right now, so the population would also, you know, it would give them a reason, I think, to rebel possibly.
I'm not sure you know what the political situation would remain, but you start seeing hundreds and hundreds of killed in action and thought tens of thousands of people who are wounded.
It's a small country.
You don't have that many young men who are capable, right and got three hundred thousand in total strength.
And there's been a huge economic impact as well, and will probably cover this tomorrow, but Haret's actually uncovered that the IDF was lying about their casualty figures by.
An astonishing amount.
So we'll get into some more of that tomorrow and what we can glean of what the casualty numbers actually are, and they are much higher than what the Israelis have been presenting. Also unfolding this morning, the IDF has been forced to apologize after shocking photos emerged of Palestinians who had been detained, men military aged men who had been detained, and these humiliating photos came out that many people were called.
You know, it was like Abu Grabe two point zero the nature of these They were stripped down to their underwear, blindfolded, hands bound, forced to kneel. And initially so the IDF is claiming, hey, we weren't the ones that released these photos. Well, someone among your ranks obviously were the ones that released these photos. Initially they were saying, oh, these are all
Hamas militants who surrendered. Now they're admitting that according to their numbers, which take this with a million grains of salt, they say it was only ten to fifteen percent of these men were actually Hamas militants, and they said that although it had been necessary to strip them to ensure they weren't carrying explosives, showing the photos was needless and humiliating. After a global outcry, let's go ahead and put these photos up on the screen so you can see what
we're talking about. For those of you who are just listening, this is a video that you can see here of these men stripped down to their underwear on the ground. These individuals are being forced to kneel, also in their underwear, with their hands bound. These are being transported in trucks, and again the original story we're getting as oh, these are all Hamas militants who are surrendering. You can see this man who is carrying a gun and he is
coming forward and laying it down. One of the immediate questions that emerged here is you're about to see another version of this same video, and Al Jazeera and others reporting that it appears they made this man do this twice for their little propaganda video that they're filming here.
And this man has.
Been identified as a small business owner, by the way, with no known ties to Hamas, so that's where we are. Let's go ahead and put this next piece up on the screen. The Israeli military originally sat on Thursday at appo hundred hundreds of people suspected of terrorism. Of course, now they are walking all of that back, and NBC reported on who these men actually were, so even before Israel admitted that many of these men were civilians. You
can see this individual who's circled here. This is a journalist. This is a journalist for at the New.
Arab's Arabic Service.
Others are relatives of a DC based fundraiser for a UN agency. So people were able to spot civilians in this picture. In these pictures. Mainstream outlets actually, you know, did journalism and exposed that these were not, in fact all Hamas militants, and I think that's what pressured the IDF to actually come out and have to apologize and acknowledge that these were They claim some of them were Hamas militants.
You can take that with a grain of salt, but.
It's important to remember also what they were originally saying when they were originally pressed on these photos, which spread like wildfire and can have tremendously radicalizing impacts. Not to mention just you know, the amoral nature of humiliating these men who, most of whom did nothing wrong. Mark Regev, who's a senior advisor to Israeli Prime Minister and Netnyahuo, was questioned by Sky News on why they did this and what exactly was going on here.
Just listen to his response.
What was the purpose of the exercise that was going on at that point in that part of Gaza.
First, I will remember it's the Middle East and it's warmer here, and especially during the day when it's sunny, it's to be asked to take off your shirt. It might not be pleasant, but it's not the end of the world.
But the fact that some of those were taken in that particular incident have now been released suggests that they were not members of Hamas. And whilst you were entitled to rind people up in that manner, what the IDF is not entitled to do under the Geneva Convention is breached the Third Convention, which you did, didn't you when you filmed them in those positions.
So once again, I don't think we're talking about formal material that was released, and we have to look to have the video deal.
If it proves to be filmed by the IDF, that's neither here nor there. Neither is the temperature in the Middle East.
Understand, I understand, But I think the important thing he is to remember these are military aged men who were arrested in a combat zone, and as you've reported, people have already been released. We have no intention of keeping innocent people in custody.
Which I agree with it, but I'm sorry to press you on this point. But if people have been released because they're not members of Hamas, if this was filmed by the IDEF, it is a clear breach of the Geneva Convention, is it not?
So once again we have to look into where the video came from. It's not official video that was released by the State of Israel.
If it were filmed by the IDF, as I just said, it would be a breach of the Geneva Convention, would it not.
So I'm not familiar with that level of international law.
It's the Middle East, it's warm, and I don't really understand internation is.
The other problem? Well, then here's the other thing.
And take all your soldiers' phones away, because who else is behind a machine gun which is an idea of convo was taking pictures of these guys and spreading it on social media. That's something that you as soldiers have learned a long time ago, and turking their phones away from these people because by the road, we shouldn't be trusted twenty two year olds with them.
And by the way, listen, the IDF was also bragging about how they were rounding up militants. So I don't totally take them at face value either when they say they're so unhappy with these photos things.
So let's actually just get to the crux of it. I mean, I think there's a reasonable question. I'm like, okay, well, there's a justification here about the visual check for suicide bomber and first suicide vest.
I think that's entirely reasonable.
Actually, I look though, to people who actually served in the US military during Iraq, especially at the time two thousand and four and onward, when we had to deal with a very similar situation. And actually one of the generals who was in charge of that time, major General Charlie Herbert, who's now retired, let's go and put this up there on the screen. He was part of the coalition inside of Iraq, and this was the analysis he gave.
He says, quote, I don't question the need for visual checks for suicide vests, that standard standard operating procedure when dealing with the suspected bomber. But in thirty four years of challenging infantry soldiering, I have never once seen scenes like this in the idea of photos, not once do a cursory online search and trying to find equivalents. Isis maybe abu grabe, but you will not find many photos of soldiers in democratically elected nation treating suspects like that.
Don't suggest that it is a standard practice.
It looks far more to me like a determined, deliberate effort to humiliate the great and to humanize. It is not one million as bad as what Hamas did on October seventh.
But that's not the point, is it.
So I really look to the people who professionally were in charge at that situation. And one of the things that has also come out, and I went back and checked as well, is that the FDF initial release at SDF, which were the Syrian Democratic Forces, which were the US backed coalition against Isis, whenever they would round up literal ISIS fighters who let's all remember, those are the guys
who are responsible for enslaving and raping their wives. And even they did not strip them, and they would line them up and make sure that they were to make sure that they didn't have their arms.
They would separate women and children.
But even amongst the men, they're largely I wouldn't say they're treated humanly per se, but they were not treated in a similar fashion. And that was people who I think have the best justification for just shooting all these people in the head. And that's the problem I think for Israel is that from a recruiting level, this is going to be a real problem, and it's already spread across WhatsApp, across the entire Arab world, which is far more online today.
And they were in two thousand and four.
You can ask any person who was in command in two thousand and four, two thousand and five in Iraq, the Al Qaeda in Iraq and all of the Islamic propagandists, Abu Grabe was the number one recruiting tool that they had, those photos that they published and spread everywhere, and which US commanders eventually, at least, I guess to our credit, we apologized for it, and we were like, look, this
is totally against everything that we stand for. I forget what that woman's name was, Lindsay or whatever she was. I believe they were court martialed and they were brought before military justice. The US commander in Iraq, I think is Ricardo Sanchez at that time, even was reamed out by President Bush and others said this is not what we're all about.
So I think the IDF has got a problem on their hands.
And it also just is one of those where when you only have ten to fifteen percent, that's a propaganda disaster. If you know, they didn't find a suicide vest, and then people were like, well, why did they have weapons in the first place. Another lesson that we all learned in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Syria. A lot of people in these places have guns. A lot of normal citizens just like we do. They've got rifles and other things, and not only protect their own property. It's actually a
deep part of Arab culture now at this point. So you know, a lot of a lot of their explanations just do not really rise to what they initially put out there. And some of their propagandists here in the West who were like, well, this is exactly how America dealt with POW's in Iraq. It's like, no, we actually
did not do that very intentionally. And then ask ask anybody who served five oh six, you know, and all the way throughout, unless you were a Guantanamo type detainee, you were not seeing something like this.
It is sort of remarkable to see the just like reflexive pro Israel voices online just auto defend these photos and cheer them, also cheer them say oh, this is Hamas surrendering and this is great, this is fantastic, this is fully justified. And then even the IDF having to come out and apologize for these images and distance themselves all this was not we had nothing to do with this.
With this, okay, then who was it who released.
The photos, Who was it who took the photos, Who was it who took these multiple videos that ultimately emerged. And you know, the first thing that came to mind for me was actually there was a deeply researched piece about how the FBI so intentionally radicalized this young muscle man.
This was classic War on Terror era tactics, you know, to effectively radicalize these young men and then entrap them in some sort of a plot so that they could be oh, look at us, we're disrupting terrorism, we're keeping people safe, et cetera.
Et cetera.
Of course, these plots never would have been hatched if the FBI wasn't pushing them in that direction anyway. But in one of these instances, I believe it was for this man who supposedly was gonna bomb Harold Square, it was the images of Abu Grave that they used to try to get him on the path to radicalization. This was the most effective propaganda tool for our own FBI in radicalizing people, and obviously for is Miss Jihattist to
radicalize young men and to their cause. So when you think about the supposedly the core goal here, which I think is total bullshit for reasons that we've discussed previously, but the idea that we're going to eradicate hamas, you are creating more militants. You are radicalizing people far more
effectively than you are. You're certainly not deradicalizing anyone, and you're doing it far more effectively radicalizing people than you are at actually identifying and capturing hamas militants or killing them on the battlefield. So let's also be clear, you know, put this next piece up on the screen. This is putting us at risk because around the world it is very clear that we are one hundred percent behind Israel's action.
So when things like this emerge, it's not just the Israelis who are taking the blowback here, it's also US. Case in point here, the US stood alone in the world to veto this UN resolution that not only demanded an immediate ceasefire, but also call for the release of all the hostages. So you can't even pretend this is like about the hostages. We have to get the hostage. No, this resolution called for the release of the hostages. This is you know, the fifteen member Security Council. The vote
was thirteen to one. We were the one, by the way, with the UK abstaining it. Says in this article the US is isolated. Stand reflected a growing fracture between Washington and some of it's closest allies over Israel's months long bombardment of Gaza. France and Japan were among those supporting
the call for a ceasefire. We also enabled the Russians to grand stand here, saying that history will judge Washington's actions in the face of what the Russian deputy UN ambassador called a merciless Israeli bloodbath.
So all of.
These talk right, exactly, absolutely right.
But as these images emerge, as we learn more about the atrocities being committed on the ground, keep in mind those are US made bombs. No, everyone sees through Biden's little leak into the process of oh, We're so concerned or Tony blinkin coming out. Too many innocent civilians have been killed. Everyone sees through that. Everyone knows Washington has greenlit all of these actions. We stand behind Israel, we
say there's no red lines. We have done nothing other than leak to the press, how morally concerned we are to actually stop any of this from happening. So it's not just people being radicalized against Israel, it's them being radicalized against us too. So keep that in mind when you see any of these images emerging here.
I am very worried about it, I really am.
And I just think I'm going to apply the same logic that I did to Ukraine, is Israel and Ali.
Yeah, is it worth the level of blowback? And now just think about this too.
It's been two straight months, even on this show and every other show, this is the number one topic of conversation for a faraway third world ethnic conflict, which is what it is at the end of the day. Does it really bear the total obsession of the global elite? And then think about this about all the people in the region and about our support in the same way that we had everybody turned against us after Iraq, even
though everybody was with us after nine to eleven. I'm really worried about what And Glenn Greenwall's been making this point as well, about polarizing the rest of the world against us. First, we did it on Ukraine, a conflict which again has no bearing on any of us. You could actually make a better argument, I think for why it is. The situation in Ukraine has more effect on US national security than you can for Israel. And yet that is what our elites and all this stuff decided
is the number one, single most important thing. I think it's literal madness. And we're exerting all this foreign policy and bleeding all of this soft power and capital abroad for what. And we very rarely have gotten very much out of this deal. But they're powerful political constituencies here in America who this is their soul. This is what they have worked for seventy five years, and they've been very, very successful at doing it. So I guess congratulations to
all of them. That's actually a perfect segue to our next segment about the campus canceled culture her madness that is going on right now. BRA got everybody an update over the weekend where the Penn Wharton Board called for the resignation of then president of UPenn Liz McGill, even after a hostage video that she put out in which she apologized for her quote unquote appalling remarks and to
try to make and set the record clear. It wasn't enough, but we still never played the video for you, so we wanted to give people a taste.
Let's take a listen.
There was a moment during yesterday's Congressional hearing on anti Semitism when I was asked if a call for the genocide of Jewish people on our campus would violate our policies. In that moment, I was focused on our university's long standing policies aligned with the US Constitution, which say that speech alone is not punishable. I was not focused on but I should have been the irrefutable fact that a call for genocide Jewish people is a call for some of the most terrible violence.
Human beings can perpetrate. It's evil.
We are seeing signs of hate proliferating across our campus and our world in a way not seen in years. These policies need to be clarified and evaluated.
Clarified and evaluated.
And so even though she basically caved in video and was like, Okay, guys, I'll just make our speech policies on campus even more draconian and stupid, wasn't enough for the donors and for the board. Let's go and put this up there on the screen. The president, Liz McGill, has officially now resigned amid the quote unquote controversy over anti Semitism.
And at least they're honest.
Here after leaving from intense pressure from donors, politicians, and alumni.
I think donors and the politicians going to be the number one and number two forces you and everybody from the freaking governor of Pennsylvania, Josh Shapiro, Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren, even you know, all these so called like people who stand for liberal values and all of this, who came out on top of the billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, who has been the ringleader, and multiple other billionaires, including one who said he would withhold a one hundred million
dollar donation from the University of Pennsylvania. But a lot of this is about long standing tensions about policies on campus. So, for example, donors have pressured McGill repeatedly prior to her testimony to try and to cancel Palestinian literary events that happened in the summer. So this is even pre Crystal October seventh Palestinian events that were happening on campus, where this was a huge and facilitating part of the reason
that she was ultimately told to resign. Now, I think let's lay out a couple of things, because the number one critique is like, look, we're just giving him a taste to our own medicine.
Okay, congratulations.
You know why, because the new policy that is being set forth by the University of Pennsylvania is ten times worse. And if you think you're on the right and you are going to escape this, you are delusional. Putting this up there on the screen, this is the new policy that is being floated. The Wharton Board of Advisors has proposed this resolution that will punish any student or faculty member that quote uses hate speech.
Or celebrates murder or genocide.
Students will not celebrate or advocate for the murder, killing, genocide, or annihilation of any individual, classmate, quote, or any group of individuals in our community. Students, faculty, and employees will not engage in hate speech, whether veiled or explicit, that incites violence. Students will not use language that threatens the physical safety of community members. Students will who violate the
above standards will be subject to immediate discipline. And I laid this out over the weekend, Christal, I want you to weigh in here as well. The initial value of the judgment was this, anybody who calls for a harm to another group of people should be immediately expelled.
Well, what the hell does that mean?
We've now lived through a decade of safetiest language, where writing op eds is considered violence against black people, where believing in like sex, believing in like sex at birth is considered genocide against trans people. Who do you think that this is going to be used against this type of language? And yeah, would they have immediately called for
expulsion on that. Yes, Okay, they're hypocrites. So what the point is is that what we have here is clearly a policy which will be used to wield expulsion against anybody who just goes against whatever the quote unquote current thing is. And sure that might be Israel today, but in my opinion, this new anti anti Semitism thing, this is the new BLM, This is the new like anti racism. And to be honest, it might even be more powerful.
Oh in terms of there's no doubt about it.
Look how they capitulated, instantly capitulated, Like no one has been more effective at fighting free speech and ensuring and enshrining censorship than this movement right now. So effective, instant capitulation, it's incredible. I mean, reading this resolution, students will not engage in hate speech.
Whether veiled or explicit.
What does that mean?
And that's the other.
Piece of this is there is not like you would think, seeing this whole freak out, which is one hundred percent completely manufactured to distract from the horrific images coming out of Gaza, you would think from this freak out that there's some epidemic of college students just out there like
I want to genocide the Jews. No, they're talking about chance like from the River to the Sea, which many people when they say it mean one state with equal rights, that's not a genocide, okay, Or things like globalize the into fada Intofada is for many people. Yes, both intofadas contained some violence, but it is also just a means
of calling for resistance. So you're going to leave it to these university administrators to decide what is hate speech and what isn't you know, many people feel right now that Israel is conducting at cleansing and on their way to a genocide. Is showing the Israeli flag tantamount to hate speech, tantamount to calling for genocide and violence against groups of people on university campuses. It could be construed that way, should it be, of course not. It's insane
when these university presidents were asked the question. Yes, it was awkward, of course, when someone's like, do you condemn genocide?
Is it against the policy?
If you're trying to, you know, actually lay out your policy in a way that's nuanced, it's gonna sound kind of bad. But they had the right position of listen, if it's directly bullying and harassing student, of course, but if it's just speech, then no, that's free speech. So the two pieces, the three pieces of this that drive me insane is Number one is completely manufactured. No one ever gives the actual statements that students are making. I've
never seen anyone offer an example. Maybe there's one out there, but I've never seen anyone offer an example where students are directly like, let's genocide the Jews. Okay, that's number one, completely obviously manufactured. Number two the hypocrisy of these people who three seconds ago were free speech absolutists, anti cancel culture, etc. Flip on the dime and are more effective at getting censorship enshrined than anyone has been.
That's number two.
And number three the fact that this is being so dishonestly portrayed of what is actually unfolding on these college campuses. You know, this is what the ADL, for example, wants. They want any criticism of the state of Israel, any criticism of Zionism, which is a political project, to be construed as anti Semitic and quote unquote violence against Jewish people.
And it is utter and complete nonsense, complete nonsense. And by the way, one thing that does make Jewish people less safe is by tying every Jewish person to a state that is right now committing horrific atrocities and making it so you can't critique that. I mean, this just
to me is like the definition of insanity. And I think when we look back at this period and we're really able to take in the thousands of kids that have been killed, the journalists who have been massacred, the utter destruction of Gaza on a level greater than even the bombings that we were doing in World War Two of Dresden and other German cities, When we really take that in and we realize the bulk of our national conversation was focused on invented, like not even real calls
for genocide on college campuses that didn't even happen, we're gonna think this was utterly and completely insane. But right now, so many people are just caught up in the moment.
Yeah, this is now, this is what they do. It's pretty amazing. Let's go and put this up there on the screen too, so you can see this. So we've got actresses like Noah tishbe Amy Schumer, Deborah Messing who are now calling for the FBI to investigate these groups on campuses and for quote universities to ban them everywhere.
Oh my god, this is.
For Glenn greenwaal, Yeah, probably already is mitigating.
By the way of it, they almost certainly are.
And then I actually appreciate this one the most because this person just came out and put it all in the open. Let's put this next piece up on the screen. I actually want to read some of it to you. To fight anti Semitism on campuses, we must restrict speech. This is Professor Claire Finkelstein, a Briddle Professor of Law and Philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania. She is also a member of the school's Open Expression Committee and chair
of the Committee on Academic Freedom. Can you believe that this is the law school chair of academic Freedom and Expression committee who says that we must restrict speech. And she lays it out on completely and entirely in a way that you can't even make up. She just says university presidence should resist a conclusion of free speech rather than confront the conflict. Conflict between the commitment to free speech and the commitment to eliminating the hostile environment facing
Jewish students on campus. People affirm their commitment to both, but by time, by setting up task courses to problem started the problem. Some have attempted to split this difference. Countering speech with more speech might just mean adding to hateful rhetoric on campus and would not solve the problem. Universities can set up all the task forces that they want while war and groups are busy calling for each
other's violent demise. She then lays out a multifaceted case as to why, actually, under the Civil Rights Act and Title seven, that they must ensure campuses don't descend into hostile environments, that public universities should not be bound by the First Amendment, and even private ones like pen, Harvard and MIT, and then ultimately just says this, though expression and academic freedom are critically important values in higher education,
there are other values that universities must promote as well, like encouraging civil dialogue, cultivating critical listening, and developing the skills to build community relationships. So there's basically everything you want for a censorship minded person in here. And this is safetyism. This is just pure safetyism in a nutshell.
It's what I've fought against, from BLM to this trans nonsense, to now this, they're all the exact same in terms of the way that they phrase their red Everything is genocidal, everything is calling for elimination. Maybe the other side has a point, as you said, calling for global into paduct.
Maybe you should ask somebody what they mean by that.
You should ask somebody about the phrase or whatever from the river to the sea. Some people might mean wiping off the face of Israel. Maybe some people mean another thing. And I'll even say something even more controversial. I believe in the First Amendment, and I believe in for a complete First Amendment guidance. Even if you were calling for genocide, I don't think you should be expelled. I'll say it same on Kanye he tweeted out the swastika. Fine, sorry,
it's a free country. You can do that in this country, and I think you should be able to do so. There's no Hitler was right exception to the First Amendment. You can think it's abhorrent, which I do, but that doesn't mean that you should ever crack down on those people's ability to talk. And this is their a creating something out of nothing, but also setting the precedent for something I think is genuinely very dangerous all of this like harm and safety ism and all that.
And I've laid it out before, but I'll just say it again.
What most American Jews who are behind this, they're just mad they're not considered marginalized within the Dei regime. But the thing is, the de I regime itself is bad. The de I regime itself is how we got to the point where you're constantly morally equivocaing.
Why should these universities take positions on this shit anyway? They shouldn't. These academic professors and all these people should have a very simple guideline, ma'am.
Whenever on our college campus, we have the First Amendment as our guiding principle. If you violate that by explicitly turning into action against another student.
You will be expelled.
Yeah.
Period, That's it. Everybody else can do whatever they want.
And also, let me just say too, I don't want to put this on all Jewish people. There are a lot of Jewish students out there who think this is nonsense. So who are by away by the way, protesting alongside those who are calling for you know, for peace and a ceasefire, and who may even be saying things like globalize the Intifada or from the River to the Sea. Okay, so this is, you know, an elite effort to quash any sort of pro Palestinian speech. This is something that
has been waged for many years. This is one of the primary reasons why I have always said, even if you are not principled on this issue, which you should be, you should just support for free speech, whether it benefits your side or the other side. This has always been
the most fraught cancel culture issue. So while it was the right that was claiming the mantle of free speech, absolutism and anti cancel culture, etc. It was always that, you know, any critique of Israel that was the fastest way to get you canceled or lose your job, or be shamed online, etc. So these things cut really quickly in both directions, which is why you should just have a principled stance on the issue. There was one line in that op ed that you were reading from that
just made my mind completely explode. She writes privileging free speech on campus relative to other values, emphasizes skill that pose the greatest challenge to our democracy, and fails to cultivate the skills democratic societies most need. What So being for free speech is bad for democracy. I mean, this is insanity. This goes against you know, the entire like
idealized American democratic project. And I just think it comes from You've got a lot of cynical actors here who just you know, they want to weaponize it when it's convenient for them.
That's very clear.
But I also think that this whole safetyism instinct and this whole quote unquote pushback against free speech comes from an America that is really lacking in confidence, from people who don't trust each other, have been told that, you know, fifty percent of the country is evil, and so they have to be contained and they have to be controlled, and it is the first step to you know, increased authoritarianism in this sort of police state attitude that is
anathema to an actual vibrant, functioning democracy. So to read this in the Washington Post and really wrap your heat around what this person is arguing, it just makes you completely crazy.
Yeah it makes me crazy too, But I also know that this will be the prevailing ideology.
And let's go to the next part here. Let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen.
So this is one where we just can't look away because the flip on a dime from saying things like affirmative action is bad to now instituting straight up Jewish quotas has now taken a mere twenty four hours. Here's Pallenteer. This is a company that has security software. They license the CIA to a lot of other financial institutions, and all that, they say, we Palenteer, have been committed and let's please leave this up to defending the principles that
make democratic rule possible. Since our founding two decades ago, our software embodies our values and commitments. We believe these values must be backed up by actions. So they say students on campuses are terrified and have been instructed by administrators to hide their judaism. I do not believe that that has literally ever happened. They say, we are launching an initiative for students who, because of anti Semitism, fear for their safety on campus and need to seek refuge
outside traditional establishments of higher education. They are welcome to join Palenteer, and we are setting aside one hundred and eighty positions for them immediately. More details to follow. So there's a lot going on here. One is that this is a straight up quota. There's no other way to describe it. This is a quota for Jews at an
American company. Someone might want to tell them that that violates the most basic practices of hiring and of discrimination, regardless of whether it's applied to blacks or whether it's applied to Jews. And I've definitely criticized it whenever I've seen it in that direction, and they I probably look, I don't know all the people behind Palenteer. I only want to point one person. He is somebody who I have heard rail against racial admissions preferences.
And it's like, what happened? Man.
I'm not going to drop names, but it's like one of those where that's not what you do whenever you're friends with somebody. But it's outrageous. And you know, you see too, a guy like Ben Shapiro, who has been against this type of stuff for and again, has made millions of dollars preaching against it, and now immediately put this up there.
He says, love this, love this, Yeah, we.
Love it, and then love racial quota, as Glenn.
Pointed out hours later, he followed up and said, but they should open it.
Up to everyone, regardless of whether they fear anti Semitism or not.
Time to take the talent pool of the entire college and university scam and hire them away. And look, I have respect for Ben on some levels, mostly at a business perspective, but for me to watch somebody like this who so clearly just abandoned so much of what they stood for, to directly get and self involved in a conflict, and then to cheer on things happening again in the United States saying, you know, the direct quota systems for saying and allegedly make up shit like people have been
told to tie to their Judaism on campus. Show me one example of that. And same with these students. I'm gonna keep calling these people. I hate doing it because I hate targeting individual ones, but they're the ones who put themselves in the discussion.
One of them claims that one of their.
Professors called them a dirty Jew, and it's like, okay, name him, then name him, because if you can't, then I don't believe you. My Smallet rule is, I don't believe you if you're gonna make an allegation like this unless you've got literal proof on video or and they're like, oh, well, we feel unsafe because we have to walk past posters who have written I walk past.
Annoying posters here in Washington.
All the time. Try to live in here during BLM. It's annoying as hell. Guess what, that's life. I could also have the freedom to get up and leave the city any time that I want.
That's the whole point.
Or all of these rbg's a hero ones, which I would hope at least piste us both off Crystal.
About how she's a feminist here.
I mean I can't, or all of the what are those dumb ass signs like in this house we believe, you know whatever.
It's like, yeah, everything your life, man, Just you know.
I sent you a photo just yesterday one of my neighbors who has got a gay Pride flag with the Israeli star in the middle of it.
And you know that's a whole I just walked past.
It's right next to the Slava Ukraine, and I just keep walking my.
Dog even though it annoys me, because that's a free compry.
This is the rough and tumble of democracy, friend, this is how it is. And yeah, so that those press conferences that Republicans are organizing where they have these like privileged Ivy League students come out and be like, oh my god, I saw a poster.
I had to walk.
Protest well, and not only that, Okay, if it was the other way, if it was Democrats organizing these press conferences, and it was transactivists, or it was black students or any other marginalized minority, Ben Shapiro will be first in line to mock the hell out of them as being little privileged snowflakes crying about having to see you for imposters, okay, and now like that turn on a dime and seemingly zero self awareness, and with the Palanti your thing in particular,
I mean, this isn't even affirmative.
Action, right, Oh yeah, it's worse. This is straight up quotas.
Which very few people on the left or liberals or whatever even call for an American life, you know when it comes to minorities who have suffered vast discriminations around our history. So you're just instantly like, yeah, quotas, I'm good for it. If they're you know, if they've experienced anti semitism on campus, quotas.
We're ready for it.
It's wild to watch how few people have any sort of consistency when it's a group that they have an affinity for, when it's a group that they see themselves either as part of or as an ally of. And
this has been it hasn't been across the board. There have been some people who have been like, you know what, like the bag give them credit here, right, He's he's been consistent, And there have been a few people on the left who have tried to be consistent even when it was more you know, the right that was.
Pushing for free speech.
I would just really please everyone, regardless of whose side you feel like benefits in this particular moment, please try to have some shred of dignity and some shred of a principle that is consistently applied here, because otherwise you're going to end up endorsing things that make you look absolutely ridiculous and should not be tolerated in any sort of situation.
Would not agree more.
At the same time, here, for domestic politics, things have probably never looked worse for President Joe Biden.
Let's go and put this up there on the screen.
Hillary Clinton has now stepped up as quote a key player in Biden's reelection. Clinton ad posted a one million dollar fundraiser at her Georgetown home. That ought to do it because money is what she was lacking in the twenty sixteen campaign.
That's not necessarily a good sign. They say.
Clinton's re emergence is emblematic of the larger Democratic effort to fully deploy high profile allies in Biden's re election fight. While Obama has appeared in fundraising, some Democrats would actually like to see him even more visible on the campaign trail. You're very eager to get our surrogates engage, one of the Biden campaign people said, pointing to the Clintons and the former first couple Barack and Michelle Obama.
So that obviously is going to do it.
And just in a sign of why Hillary is getting involved, is just how bad things are going for President Biden.
Let's go and put this up there on the screen.
He now has the lowest approval of any president ever in the history of presidential polling at this point in his presidency. That includes Jimmy Carter in nineteen in the nineteen seventies.
So most of these aren't even close.
Thee most of these are not even close.
Trump is actually, I guess maybe the closest one.
Well, the thing is with Trump is that he was always low, but he was just consistently low. And for him that forty one percent, it never necessarily went above that, but enough people were willing to vote for him even though they didn't like him, that it would end up saving him.
Biden does not have nearly that same.
Level a floor of people who would fall crawl over broken glass to make sure that he's voted for. And because even though he is polarizing against Republicans, he's not animating in the same way for his Democratic base. And so if they don't want to come out and to vote for him, then he's in very, very serious trouble. And it's not just on approval rating, which is not necessarily is I just laid out with Trump indicative On the economy, things are absolutely brutal for Biden. Please put
this up there. This is just polling from yesterday. The standard of living is worse than their parents was age eighteen to twenty nine. Thirty nine percent say yes. The majority say yes. In the millennial demographic most difficult economic time for the US, multiple people say it is ways that you tell how the economy is doing their own experiences. People that you know professionally, is your income keeping up with inflation?
Only twenty four percent say yes it is.
The vast majority seventy six percent say that it is not so on almost every every economic metric, Crystal, it is not working for the American people. And on a polling front, things remain absolutely brutal. And the Trump evidence of his strength is crystal clear. Put this up there too, from the Wall Street Journal. They have now officially shown Trump with a commanding lead forty seven percent for the election if it was held today say they would vote
for him. Only forty three percent say Joe Biden. And a huge part of that, crystal is specifically because of people who voted for Joe Biden and are going to stay home in twenty twenty four. And that's the critical block. It's not even that Trump has necessarily picked up a
lot more votes. It's just that ninety five percent of the people who voted for him last time around say that they will do so again, and only sixty or eight seventy percent of the people who say that they did in twenty twenty would vote for him again in twenty twenty four.
They also found they did measure it with the third party candidates in and they found that when you include everybody, it widens the lead for Trump. But RFK Junior in particular, he's the only one of the canon's that does in their poll anyway take more from Trump than he does from Biden. So in any case, take that for what it's worth, because obviously there's a lot of challenges and hurdles for all of their third party candidates to be able to get on the ballot, So who knows who's
going to be on the ballot where. But overall, the addition of third party candidate to this mix is probably only more trouble for Joe Piden, which is I guess did why they're desperately and foolishly pulling the Hillary Clinton lever thinking that is going to somehow save them in any way.
You know.
The economic stuff is very interesting. There's a whole debate raging on econ and political Twitter about whether the economic woes that the American people are reporting are imagined. Are they in their head, are they just persuaded by TikTok disinformation and negative media reports, or are people.
Really going through it?
And one of the things that this poll asks people is like, hey, are you saying these things about the economy because of what you've heard is happening with other people? Or are you talking about your own personal financial situation? And overwhelmingly, guess what, guys, they said, it's about me and what I'm experience in my life. And we have that number up there before of how many people overwhelmingly they say, no, my wages are not keeping up with inflation.
As we've discussed here as well. Remember the story of the Biden administration is a story not only of inflation, but also if all the covid eras social safety net programs being stripped away. We have tracked here repeatedly the way that high interest rates have screwed the housing market and made housing more affordable than at almost any time in history. We've tracked here how people are increasingly maxing
out their credit cards. So when you look at these consumer spending numbers and you're like, oh, if everybody seems all right, they're spending normal amounts of money, or they've even increased the amount of money that they're spending, guess what. They're racking up massive amounts of debt to do that.
We've tracked also how you know these new like installment pavement companies that you can use online or even at the grocery store sometimes, how they have seen a massive increase in business where people are using installment plans even to pay for basic things like groceries. So, if you know where to look, the signs are all over the place that things are going poorly, and you can't just look at the unemployment rate. You certainly can't just look at the stock market. You have to look at this
combination of factors and soccer. One other thing that we had talked about before is there's also a huge age divide here. If you are older and you have savings, the higher interest rates may be good for If you already have a home and you have savings, the high
interest rates might be good for you. If you're young and you're trying to buy a house and you're looking at these mortgage rates and the housing prices that continue to go up have not gone down at all, you are going to feel like I have no hope of ever becoming a homeowner and having some sort of a stable life and having you know, being able to move past this phase of procarity that I feel like I'm always going to exist in So it's no wonder why
you also see a generational divide about how people feel the economy is doing.
No question at all, especially with those young voters. That's a big constituency for Biden whenever it comes to who he needs to rely on. And they actually did some
math on this. For every like one or two percent, that equates to about ten thousand votes, And that is the margin of victory for exactly what you see in Georgia and in Michigan previously, Pennsylvania, Arizona and all these other must win states that Biden has the headwinds in Biden is currently facing because I don't think people understand just how miraculous, honestly, by the margins that he won in the electoral College. It looks like Georgia and Arizona
just flipped. No, they were so razor thin for the margin of victory that it even if he was just a few points lower in his approval than when he was elected, he would be facing trouble to be double digits down by I mean, what fifteen to twenty percent in terms of his approval margin since he took office.
That's a disaster.
I mean, it's just one of those where we have not seen this like since Jimmy Carter. And I think that he has given Carter a run for his money in terms of the global crisis situation, the same thing that happened under Carter. The belief that he is handling of the economy is a disaster. And with Trump, Trump is almost Reagan Esque in this one respect, where you
can project whatever the hell you want. You know, for a lot of people who are voting for Trump, it's just like last ditch because he pisses off the left. Some are small business Republicans who would vote for a Republican anyway, and then some are At this point, Trump is going to get the anti Biden vote in the same way that many of the people voted for Reagan did solely because its screw you to Jimmy Carter. So I think that Trump is in a very beneficial position.
But also he is his own worst enemy.
We can't lie about that, very true.
Yeah, And the more that he is like in the news and in the headlines and as his trials unfoldless and who knows, there's a new CNN poll out this morning of Georgia and Michigan. Georgia has Trump up by five forty nine.
Forty four.
Michigan, where of course there is a large Arab American population, has.
Trump up by ten fifty to forty. It has him up by ten.
So there's just no spinning that Biden is dramatically behind in terms of his reelect. Now, if you dig into this Wall Street Journal poll, they try to pull out a few things of like, well, this could be a decent sign for Biden. The issues that he's ahead on are handling abortion, which we're going to talk a little bit more about in the next block. If that continues to be a major focus of American politics, maybe that
rescues him. You also have voters who are undecided suggest they could be persuaded to back Biden nearly a year from now. So you have some people who are kind of on the fence who seem like maybe they're a little bit tilted towards Biden over Trump, but that's far from a sure thing.
They also talk.
About how when voters talk about personal qualities, they still view Biden in a more favorable light than Trump. So voters say the word corrupt applies more to trum than to Biden. Biden is seen by more voters as honest. A felony conviction for Trump, who faces ninety one charges and for criminal prosecutions, would shift the head to head Pellett to give Biden a slight one point lead.
That's kind of amazing to me.
So even if this dude is found guilty, if he's convicted of one of these felony charges, that only gives Biden a one point lead, which is obviously within the margin of error. And also, who knows how people are actually going to react to those things versus how they think they're going to react to those things, But that's their spin is effectively like, if this ends up being more of a contest of values versus issues, then Biden
potentially has a possibility of pulling things from behind. And then abortion is the thing that Democrats are really betting on. There was just a peace out about how they're going to stake a lot of Biden's reelection on the issue of abortion, not even promising to do anything affirmative to reclaim the rights that have been lost, but just to serviceable work against for the deterioration of women's rights.
Yeah, I mean, I think that abortion remains probably the single biggest flashing red light, and I think it is actually the only hope that Biden has left. And the reason though, is it's potent, it is actually relevant, and it's especially the most relevant in all the states that needs to win, like Michigan where you had a huge
win for abortion on the ballot, Georgia. I mean, we haven't seen it tested yet, but it certainly is one where it could activate the suburban constituency who Biden needs to drag out.
Arizona the same thing.
So really, in the states where Biden most needs turn out to go up, he's got abortion there. The only question is how Trump is going to navigate it. But Trump hasn't been all that successful. He's trying to distance himself from it at the same time take credit for it. So it's one of those where he could lose evangelical votes in the same process.
I don't think he can really effectively distance himself from it, not only because I mean, listen, you're the guy who put these people on the Supreme Court, number one, so you're just going to have a hard time making the argument that this isn't on you to begin with. And also just because of party affiliation. I think it'll be
very hard for him to dodge. But this is actually a great segue to the next piece because the issue of abortion does continue to loom large, and I think will continue to loom large because you have cases still unfolding, challenging the laws, some of the more draconian laws that have been passed in states across the country. The latest comes down of Texas put this up on the screen. So the Texas Supreme Court has now paused a judge decision that would have allowed a woman to terminate a
pregnancy in which her fetus has a fatal diagnosis. So this woman's name is Kate Cox. She lives in Dallas. She's a mother of two. You know, she would love to have this healthy baby girl, but her fetus has been diagnosed with a deadly genetic condition which will allowed only to live for potentially a few days out of the womb. There's no doctor who was saying that this fetus could survive, and yet in the state of Texas, she is has been banned from being able to have
an abortion. This is having huge physical health costs on her her She's had to be admitted to the hospital with horrific pains and cramping because of the problems with this pregnancy. A lower court had ruled that she could go forward with the abortion, and now the Texas Supreme Court has stepped in and halted that judge's order, although.
The case is still ongoing.
What the Texas Attorney General had argued is that the state would suffer a quote irreparable loss should Kate Cox be allowed to terminate her pregnancy. He writes, because the life of an unborn child is at state, the court should require a faithful application of Texas statutes prior to determining that an abortion is permitted. And that is the
side that this Texas judge sided with. Let's go and listen to Kate spoke to NBC News about how painful this has been for her, how painful this has been for her family.
Let's take a listen to what she had to say.
It's a hard it's a hard time, you know, even with you know, being helpful with the decision that came from the hearing this morning, there's there's still we're going through the loss of a child. There's no outcome here that I take home my healthy baby girl, you know. So it's hard, you know, just uh, you know, grief. But I think that you know, joy and grief can co exist, and there's you know more, there's moments of joy. So I'm really grateful for my wonderful two children that
I have and my wonderful family. And you know, it's a moment of sadness that we really have a wonderful life here in our in our home state. And so, you know, I just try to count my blessings.
And as if that wasn't enough, Sager put this last piece up on the screen, Ken Paxton Again, the Texas ag has threatened to prosecute any doctors, to file criminal charges against any doctors who did perform the abortion on this woman.
This was after.
The lower court judge had ruled that they may do So, how do you think this, polls, guys, forcing this woman to deliver to term this baby who has no prayer of surviving going through all of the tortuous trauma and physical pain that is involved in this, the state forcing you to do that, and criminalizing any doctor who would you do the right thing and perform this procedure for
this poor woman who is clearly suffering. It's pure insanity and you know when Republicans try to say, oh, well, let's shift the subject and let's talk about Democrats and their extremism on this issue. These are the stories that are actually unfolding, that people are witnessing and seeing the extremism and the fringe views in action. I can't imagine it's even a majority of Texans who support this direction of their own elected leadership here.
Yeah, and actually, this is the one thing.
This is actually a faithful interpretation of a lot of the evangelical view on this issue, which is why I think it's such a loser politically, because what they would say is, look, there's always a chance, and yeah, if it perishes after it's born, even though the median survival is like two point five to fourteen point five days and a ninety to ninety five percent chance that it won't survive even a single year, that that would set
the preconditions for that would basically set the preconditions for using it as for a eugenics like policy for down
syndrome and for all of oodes. And I fully understand that, and I agree it's actually a massive moral quandary and all that, but we also do live in a democratic in a democratic country, and it's very clear through the way that the American people previously supported the row versus weighed consensus was such that dealing with these types of issues, dealing also with you know, rape incests, you know, exceptions to the life of the mother and severe health trauma
and all that was a decision that Americans are broadly comfortable allowing their citizens to make for themselves. And I think most people can listen, you know, to this, and it does fly in the face too, of a lot of their abortion messaging for the Republicans, as you were talking about, with late term abortions. This is not like a Lena Dunnam woman who is like.
I wish I had had an abortion.
She's like, I've had two kids, Like I'm dealing with trauma myself, Like he was a situation. She's like, I wish this wasn't a situation that I'm in. And I think a lot of people too can really sympathize just with the basic idea of like, I cannot believe that the state is telling me to they can make the decision for me at the level of not only criminalizing it, but ordering it from a judge. So that's one where it look. You know, this is this is Biden's only chance.
I think it's his only chance. We talked previously about Kentucky. Abortion was a huge driver of the Democratic vote in Kentucky, and that ve ad that was run against Daniel Daniel Cameron was a woman who'd been raped by her stepfather when she was twelve years old, and she just looks directly into the Cameron She's like, Daniel Cameron would force me to have to carry his I mean, these are brutal.
This is just a place where electorally the results are in and all the pro life cope around how this wasn't going to materialize an.
Electoral blowback is just it's absurd.
Now at this point, I think a story like this is animating enough that it could have significant electoral impact. I really believe if Biden has a chance, and it's one of the reasons I still say fifty to fifty, it's because of abortion. I don't think he's got a prayer on anything else, but it's potent enough that it really could.
Yeah. I don't think Hillary Clinton is going to rescue him. No, but the Kentucky example is a great one because listen, Democrats have been getting their ass is kicked on abortion in state of Kentucky for years, and that turned like this the minute that Roe was overturned by the Supreme Court, and that ad with that young woman straight to camera talking about her experience and against Daniel Cameron, that was one of the most powerful ads in that entire election
and helped secure a Democratic victory for Andy Basher in a state that is very red in terms of Kentucky. So when you think about these stories like Kate Cox's playing out across the country, the type of, you know, very evocative stories that Americans just instinctively find this horrifying that the government could force this woman to carry this baby to term. Trump's going to be getting asked questions about this. You know, what is he going to say?
I genuinely don't know what he would say in reaction to this.
It's hard to.
Know because I mean, he's obviously very uncomfortable on the issue. He had the instant reaction of like, this is going to be bad for Republicans, and he's right, But he's the one who put these Supreme Court justices on the bench. I mean, this was the key promise that honestly got them elected back in twenty sixteen and kept evangelicals in line, who are now, you know, his most fervent based of supporters.
So I do think that this is, you know, the one big issue that hangs over the twenty twenty four election. That and the Trump criminal charges are the two things that could potentially flip things and third parties. So there are a lot of wild cards here. But you know, the trauma that these women are facing is I think going to be a central component of how things.
Are unfold.
Crystal, what are you taking a look at?
Well?
A global outcry has erupted over the death of poet, academic and activists Rafought all Arrear at the hands of the Israeli government. Now, ra Fought was not only a
beloved intellectual in Gaza. He was a window to Americans and to the English speaking world into the Palestinian struggle, regularly giving interviews, posting updates that allowed us all to see the reality of life inside of Gaza, forcing us to reckon with the pain, the peril, the hopes, the dreams and the nightmares of the Palestinian people.
We know that it's very bleak, it's very dark. There's no way out if there's no autor there is no way out Gaza, what should we do? Like drown, like commit mass suicide? Is this what is it I want? And we're not going to do that? And I was telling somebody, some friend the other data. I'm an academic. Probably the toughest thing I have a tone is an
expo marker. But if this really is invade, if the project has charged us open door to door to massacres, I'm going to use that markers throw it at the soldiers, even if that is the last thing that I would be able to do. And this is the feeling of everybody. We are helpless, We have nothing to lose.
In the wake of his killing, people from around the world shared this poem. Author by Refought, translating it into at least dozens of languages in order to share his
powerful testimony to the world. That poem reads, if I my sty you must live, to tell my story, to sell my things, to buy a piece of cloth and some strings, so that a child somewhere in Gaza, while looking heaven in the eye, awaiting his dad who left in a blaze, and bid no one farewell, not even to his flesh, not even to himself, seize the kite, my kite you made ying up above, and thinks for a moment that an angel is there bringing back love.
If I must die.
The mourning of this beloved figure, an outpouring of humanity, was met with a truly repulsive inhuman response. As justification for the murder of this man, people shared a tweet that Rafot had sent mocking one of the more absurd claims made about the Hamas atrocities committed on October seventh, the claim that a baby was found burned in the oven. That lie, like many others, has now been debunked by
the Israeli outlet Heretes. In other words, Rafot was right to mock this claim, and of course that no tweet, no matter how good or bad, should mark someone for assassination should go without saying. But unfortunately, far too many have bought the genocidal perspective that there are no innocent Palestinians. These tweets were enough to convict him as guilty in their minds and justify his death sentence. And make no mistake, Rafat was sentenced to death. He was assassinated by terrorist
government that decided they wanted him dead. That is the conclusion of human rights organization Euromed Monitor. They write, the Israeli airstrike that killed Professor Rafat Ala Reir was apparently deliberate, that is the conclusion of Euromed Monitor. On Friday, the apartment where Rafat and his family were sheltering was surgically
bombed out of the entire building where it's located. According to corroborated eyewitness and family accounts, This came after weeks of death threats that Rafot received online and by phone from Israeli accounts. Now, it is probably too simplistic to say that Rafat was targeted for assassination because of his tweets, even though prominent accounts like Barry Weiss had used those tweets to vilify him not long before the Israeli government.
Did mark him for death.
But Rafat was already well known to Israeli authorities, not new to outspoken activism. In fact, this wasn't even the first time Israel tried to kill him. In twenty fourteen, they bombed his house. He survived. More than thirty members of his family, however, were killed. The bigger question to me isn't whether we're fought was targeted.
He clearly was.
It's whether his assassination was part of larger programming program targeting intellectuals. Is Israel systematically eliminating peaceful thought leaders, calculating that their very existence and ability to humanize Palestinians and draw attention to the Palestinian cause constitutes a threat to Israel's criminal apartheid regime. After all, every day the list of doctors, journalists, and aid workers who have been killed
grows longer. Seventy six journalists have already been killed by Israel. That's more than any other conflict in at least thirty years, and at least some of these killings we know now have been intentional. Reuter's AFP, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch all assessed that an Israeli attack which killed a Reuters videographer and injured six other journalists was in fact a deliberate targeted attack Targeting journalists.
Of course, is war crime. But it's not just journalists.
Declassified UK has tracked extensive list of Palestine intellectuals and thought leaders who have all been killed by the Israeli government.
Take a listen.
There's a clear pattern that Israel is targeting the best and brightest of Gaza. They are going, as you said, they're going after everyone who might provide a way of living a human life in Gaza. So they're going after lawyers, they're going after medics, they're going after teachers and journalists. Yes, well very I mean one of the most. I mean,
it's also horrific. Is beyond words. But the Al Jazeero was shut down in Israel and then the day after they bombed and killed the family of the Al Jazeera correspondent in Gaza. So that was a statement. It was saying, we will kill your family. They didn't even kill him,
they killed his family. So I just want to I think this is part of what needs to change, is the narrative is that this is not none of these a mistakes, that they're targeting the best and brighters to Gaza because they want to destroy any remnants of human life in Gods that they want to make it unable to do. So, I just wanted you guys to talk about what you think Israel's goal is.
Well, actually they also target the peace activists and it's shocking, even those who called for beast they are targeting them. For example, they targeted my friend Ahmadabortima, the founder of the A Good Much of Return. He is my best friend and he has always been one of the most vocal voices for the peace for resistance.
I'm reminded also of what one official told nine seventeen magazine of how Israel is conducting its bombing campaign.
Quote nothing happens by accident.
When a three year old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it's because someone in the army decided it wasn't a big deal for her to be killed. The follows then, that when a doctor, or journalist or a scholar is killed, it's because the Israeli government wanted them gone. Targeting makes on another level. There may be no state in the world which so clearly understands the power of words and stories, and by extension, those who wield those words and stories, as the state of Israel.
How else, after algi you convince a diaspora of people with different languages and cultures living or all over the world that there are actually one people that they should get behind what must have seemed a preposterous project at the time to settle and colonize historic Palestine. How else do you provide moral cover for the world's superpower to fund and arm you and provide you diplomatic cover even as you systematically violate international law through legal settlements in
a legal blockade, an official policy of apartheid. How do you kill thousands of children and then go on CNN with a straight face and claim you're doing all you can to protect civilians?
Oh yeah.
The Israeli government understands the power of propaganda, how essential it is, how dangerous those who can pierce their own veil of propaganda really are. They also understand how essential it is that they block any educated moderates who might represent a quote partner for peace. NETANYAHUO, of course, has long sought to thwart the establishment of a power Palestinian state by elevating extremists like Hamas.
Wouldn't it be convenient to use this moment when the US has.
Officially given you carte blanche to command any atrocities that you like to wipe out any alternative Palestinian leadership class. So while Rafat didn't wield a weapon, he was nevertheless armed and dangerous, as are the truly heroic journalists risking their lives to show us these horrors. The doctors who are sacrificing everything to provide the best care and comfort that they possibly can in impossible circumstances. All of these
individuals are uniquely dangerous for a simple reason. They force us and the world to reckon with the basic humanity of Palestinians, to sit with what it must be to be trapped in a prison your whole life, to watch the whole world abandon you, to be subjected to daily indignities and periodic horror. These heroes are vastly more dangerous to the Israeli regime than Hamas because the instant the world truly recognizes the full humanity of Palestinians is the
instant that the Israeli project of dehumanization ends forever. And so Sager, people were really shocked because and if.
You want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot com.
For more in depth understanding of the Israeli domestic political situation. We are fortunate to be joined this morning by Dalia Shindlen. She is a political scientist and Israeli polster. She's also a policy fellow at the Century Foundation and a calmnist for Awratz. Welcome, Dahlia, Thank you for having me.
I'd like to also just put in there that I have a new book out called The Crooked Timber of Democracy in Israel.
Promise I'm fulfilled fantastic link in the description.
Absolutely, thank you for letting us know about that. So first of all, let's put this up on the screen. You were recently interviewed by Isaac Chotner in the New Yorker. The headline here is what October seventh did and didn't change about Israeli politics, And I'd love for you to start with an assessment of how people feel about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanya, who we all know he's tremendously unpopular, that huge majorities want him gone, either not now or
after the war is concluded. But give us a little bit of depth on the nature of the critique of him. What are people really frustrated with and how much has that shifted since October seventh.
Yeah, I think the.
First thing you have to understand is that attitudes towards Prime Minister Nasaanya who have shifted since November one, twenty twenty two.
In other words, he was already doing poorly.
His government was doing poorly his coalition partners and other ministers because of the government's plans to overhaul the Israeli Judiciary and essentially eviscerate the independence of the Israeli judiciary.
And there was an enormous backlash all year.
I'm sure people know that there were protests every single week, and already the ratings had been dropping.
Now nevertheless, Ntagne, who was essentially still for the.
Most part during the year considered the most credible leader in the country, still sort of had the best ratings in terms of question about who's most suitable to be prime minister, simply because people weren't really shining a light on anybody else. But after October seventh, I think it was a final straw for many people in Israel, including a great number of the people who had voted for the parties of the current coalition and for Ninitaanyahu's party
back in November. And what we saw is over forty percent, close to half, but let's say over forty percent of people who voted for Lekud, who are longtimely could voters and quite devoted to mister Nintania, who felt like this was a breach that they simply could not overcome in the sense of, you know, the state had failed to protect its own citizens, those people who were still voting for Nittaia, who had forgiven an awful lot, including four
active corruption cases, sorry, three active corruption cases, and you know, this government that had been doing things that they absolutely don't like, and they had stuck with in tan Yahoo. But the idea that the state was unable to protect its citizens, the fact that the state seemed to have been seemed to seem to have been unable to follow the intelligence to correctly assess what was going on, led to much deeper questions about the competence of.
The government overall in a much longer term sense. And I remember, and it's now who has been.
Prime minister almost consecutively since two thousand and nine, with just about a year and a half break, and so for many people that was a final straw. His ratings have plunged, his government's ratings have plunged, his party ratings have plunged. The question of trust and government has plunged. But I would be cautious about assuming that that means people are moving away from the broader political ideology of the right wing.
And that's something we can discuss.
Yes, I think it's very important and actually something I took away from your interview, But I also wanted to dig into something you flagged. Just because he's very unpopular and most people think you should go, they don't think that he should go right now. Can you tell us about how people are reconciling that. They're like, well, as long as the war is in place, we should have him there, even though we don't think that he's fit to hold office.
Yeah.
Well, keep in mind that by most surveys we have this question, the total number of people who want him to go, either now, in the middle of the war, or after the war is between seventy and seventy five percent. It's a huge majority. That's the first thing to keep in mind. No incumbent wants to see that kind of number. And I would you know, again, in most of the surveys that we have, about a quarter of the respondents would like him to go right now, which is a minority,
but it's not nothing in the middle of wartime. And I think that the you know, the overriding sentiment. Honestly, isn't that hard to explain. People were absolutely shocked by what happened in October seventh. It was something that Israelis not only couldn't have predicted, they couldn't have even imagined it, with maybe the small exception of a very few people who are monitoring those border outposts, you know, in army and Army intelligence and you know, and Israeli intelligent services,
but who weren't taken seriously enough. But the vast majority of the population couldn't even conceive of something like this, so that you have to realize the shock of uncertainty and instability was added to, of course the national trauma of so many people being killed, slaughtered, atrocities, kidnapped, et cetera, and then immediately.
Launching into war.
And I think that at a time like that, it makes sense that people don't immediately want to go into something like an election cycle or a major government shakeup, especially because it's not clear even if you avoided elections and simply had a coalition shakeup, and you know, re re established a new coalition with a different leader, or you know, or somehow the couldward to decide that antenna who's out is That leads to tremendous instability, and I
think most people couldn't really conceive of that, with the exception, as I said, of about a quarter of the population who believe that every day he's still in power actively either you know, endangers the war effort and really diminishes the country's prospect for getting through it, and they feel like he really is a danger as long as he's in power despite the war. But yes, you know, more than about close to twice as many would prefer that
he leave after the war effort is over. I would also point out that there's a problem with that because there's no.
Clear end date for this war.
The kinds of goals and aims that the government has set for the most part, other than bringing the hostages back, which is a beast objective, the idea that Hamas can be destroyed militarily and as a governing power is not something that's very easily measurable, or at least the government has not explained how it plans to measure that, And so when people say we want him gone when the war is over, that is a pretty amorphous future aim.
So Dahlia.
One of the things that October seventh represented was the stunning failure of the net Yahoo doctrine. The idea that you could sort of maintain this brutal status quo for Palestinians, that you could thwart the establishment of any sort of Palestinian state or any sort of justin lasting peace, and that he could quote unquote control the height of the flames. So how are Israelis processing the failure of that doctrine.
Does it lead them more in the direction of questioning that maintenance of the brutal status quo and more in the direction of, hey, maybe we need to after this is over, try to figure out some sort of a lasting and just piece, or does it lead in the opposite direction of No, we need to do the security state harder, we need more machine guns mounted at the border, we need a more right wing and militaristic leader in charge here.
Well, this is exactly, you know, the most complicated question that I.
Think those Israelis who believe that there should be some sort of negotiated political resolution are struggling with to figure out. And I think the reason is that Israelis right now are focused very much on the short term and the immediate aim of dealing with the war and just coping day to day. I mean, I don't want to get into the comparison because what Gosins are coping with day
to day is intolerable. But from Israeli experienced, people are dealing with what they know about, which is, you know, two hundred thousand people who've been evacuated and who are displaced, you know, sirens and rockets falling all over the country, and the scent from the center to the south and
also in the north. So people are thinking very short term about immediate dilemmas, you know, should there be a cease fire in exchange for hostage release or immediate dilemmas like that, And I think that the question of the long term do people analyze Natanyahu's doctrine as a policy?
Right now?
They're thinking very immediately about his failures, about how they many feel like he's betrayed the country's security, as I mentioned before. But I have to say that with all the polls that have been done, and there have been at least twenty five polls that I know about, it's very hard to get at this longer term sense of whether Israelis are analyzing his policy as a doctrine.
There's been lots of articles about it.
Of course, there was a major one in the New York Times yesterday exposing in great detail the decisions made over the course of the last decade to supply Hamas with lots of money through Katar. That's being widely covered in the Israeli press, but ultimately Israelis knew about it anyway, even before in the New York Times expose, which was excellent, But they knew about it, and I think that they're just not quite at the level of analyzing the specific policy.
Having said that, I am keeping a very close.
Eye on what I would have expected to have, and which is that over time, over a few months to maybe the next year, Israelis are likely to become more hardline. And I say that based on how Israelis have responded over the course of you know, half a year to a number of years following other phases of wars and escalations,
particularly when they involve major violence against Israeli civilians. When that happens, Israelis tend to self identify more as right wing, which is a very clear statement of the kinds of positions they espouse, you know, supporting more militarist solutions, opposing concessions as Israelis see concessions, and more than anything, voting for right wing parties who will not make concessions or
undertake political negotiation towards a two state solution. So I think we have to understand that when people say their right wing, it involves the policies they support and very clearly predicts which kinds of parties they will elect in the next elections. The last thing I'll say about where israelis are going. You know where I expected them to go and where they so far show that they're going, which everything must be taken with a grain of salt.
But for the most part, in most in every single survey, we see the parties that are benefiting from the loss of trust and the government and the Coalition Parties is a sort of right wing but considered centrist, pragmatic right wing party headed by former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, who has joined the War Coalition. Which is interesting primarily in that the votes that we don't see people flocking to the further right ultranationalist, extremist, theocratic, Jewish supremacist parties
are presented called religiosignism or Jewish Power. And it's interesting because those were the parties that had a kind of surprisingly good result in the November elections, but they have not been doing particularly well. We're seeing all of the runoff votes going to a more what Israeli's view as a more moderate right wing party.
If that holds, it'll it.
Means that Israelis may turn to the right, but maybe not to the far extreme right.
Very interesting Zgan scene is sort of like a more competent version of Netanyahu.
Is that the idea.
Honestly, he's certainly seen as having you know, a great deal of security creed credentials because he's at an entire career in the military, which is obviously the most you know, what Israelis really want right now during the war. But I think the main thing, if I had to conjure what Israelis generally think about Gans is that he's not compromised by having the particular kinds of personal political, personal
and political interest that Tanyahu has. Because he's facing those corruption cases, there aren't many parties that would agree to go into a coalition with him. He is therefore kind of slavishly beholden to those extremist, you know, ultranationalist far right parties and of course the ultra orthodox parties, which frankly between you know, leaving the kudaside and Tanyaga's parties. All those other parties together represent only a minority of
Israeli society. The ultra nationalist religious Jewish parties and the ultra Orthodox parties. They only represent a minority, which means that this government is is alienating the majority of citizens. And so I I think that they see the Natanya who is in a compromised position, and he cannot represent either the people's general orientation as we saw, that's why the protests against the government policies were so sweeping all year.
But they also see that he's neglected basic competence of running you know, the state functions and the ministries and even to the point of neglecting Israeli security. And I don't think they see gans as being compromised in a way that would lead to those failures.
Even though I have to say that Gains is seen as kind of a blank slate. Nobody really knows what he stands for other than day to day pragmatic gotcha, no management.
He's not a visionary Dahlia.
I know that you said that many Israelis are just focused on kind of like the day to day getting through whatever is next, and we'll think more about the long term in the future. But you know, the Ntnaho government has very much rejected the Biden administration's ideas for what Gaza could look like after this war is concluded. You know, they floated the Palestinian authority Netna, who says
that's completely off the table. They have floated plans that they, you know, seem to prefer of pushing all or many of the Palestinians out of the Gaza strip into Egypt and other surrounding countries. What is your sense of what the Israeli people actually want, I mean, what is the interest in any sort of a resolutionist to go back to the status quo?
Is it to quote thin out the population?
As Netnyahu has asked one of his top aids to come up with plans for What do they actually envision for the future.
That's a very tough question.
I have to tell you that all the survey research I had done up until October seven showed that already Israeli's you know, were deeply despairing of anything like a negotiated two state solution. That was, by the way, a mirror image on the Palestinian side, because I do conduct a joint Israeli Palestinian research, and both sides showed only a minority about thirty five percent roughly thirty five to forty percent, who supported a negotiated two state solution before
October seventh. Now, interestingly, after October seven, the numbers have declined, but not a huge amount. The lowest I've seen was about twenty nine percent, But I've also seen surveys showing about thirty five percent, So it still seems like that is a solution that is more credible than any other solutions. Certainly in terms of other options for democratic based negotiated political frameworks for resolution, there's nothing else that comes close.
But that is only a minority. It doesn't bode well for the future, and I think that Israelis are having a very hard time in envisioning, partly because they're not getting leadership on the issue. The Israeli government has not proposed certain not since October seventh, but frankly not before October seven, for a very long time, for at least a decade, since the last serious negotiations under Secretary of
State John Kerry in twenty thirteen fourteen. For about a decade Israelis have not even heard their leaders talk about something like a diplomatic resolution to the Israel Palestinian conflict. Now, I don't really think it's fair to say that all of Israel wants to expel all Palestinians, but let's face it, Israelis are feeling very emotional right now, extremely traumatized and angry.
I don't want to pretend that those sentiments don't exist.
I will say, we all know the document that was circulated as in not very almost a sham ministry, But I don't want to understate the value of that, you know, the importance of that either because people in the government are talking about those kinds of plans, and we see what's going on on the ground with Palestinians being systematically dislocated from you know, major parts of Gaza, especially Gaza City, being practically destroyed, uninhabitable, it won't be inhabitable for years
to come. You know, we're seeing you know, herting together the Palestinian population in the south and conditions that are frankly unlivable.
At this moment.
It very much looks like there are forces that maybe don't want to say it explicitly, but that they hope lots of cousins would leave. And I think that, you know, I have to acknowledge that I'm sure that that sentiment does exist in Israeli society. We've seen it in earlier
years as well in survey research. But I'd like to hope that if there's a pragmatic leadership, that they would start leading, rather than only following a public that is feeling, you know, really not at its finest moment, understandably, but that leadership would say these are not things that any you know, country should be considering, you know, expelling the population, nor assuming that you can in any way control of
Palestinians militarily forever. I think the only possible approach that is both morally, legally and politically correct is to achieve and negotiated political resolution of some sort.
But I have to say that for those of us who've been working on that issue for so.
Many years, I'd say I think I've reached up to decades. At this point, it looks frankly more hopeless than ever. It doesn't mean that doesn't mean we'll stop trying, but it is a very hard sell in Israel right now.
I have to remember that Dahlia.
One last question for you, which is I saw a whole come out of Israeli Jews, and fifty eight percent, I believe was the number who felt that the IDF wasn't doing enough, wasn't aggressive enough in terms of their bombing campaign in Gaza and the ground invasion. Of course,
we're watching the images here. We've seen the thousands of children killed, as you said, Gaza city rendered uninhabitable, et cetera, one point eight million, dousands displaced, and it was only I believe one point eight percent of Israeli Jews who felt the IDF had gone too far in this campaign.
Wonder if you can help us make sense of that.
You know, are Israelis seeing the images coming out? Are they aware of the mass civilian death toll, which you know is at least sixty percent civilians and probably much higher.
You know, just help us understand this.
Yeah, I think that you know. Of First of all, I'm not going to try to excuse it.
I just think that if we're going to try to explain it to some extent, Israelis aren't confronted with the visuals as much as anybody.
For example, watching Elgazero.
Would be even watching Elga zero English, which I often do, gives you a much much more up close, you know, sense of exactly how vast the devastation is and how apocalyptic it is. And most ra Asraeli as we're watching Israeli news, so they're not getting quite the same level of visual imagery.
But having said that, my personal theory and I.
Don't really have survey data on this, is that Israelis do essentially know at a bigger level. You really can't avoid the broads, you know, the broad contours of what's happening and the information in this day and age people are on social media, you know, and even the israel It's not like the Israeli media is exactly hiding it either.
Of course, there's much more focus on the Israeli experience.
So I think that when I hear that kind of thing, a they're not you know, it's not as they're not as emotionally or viscerally connected to the level of en scope of devastation in Gaza. Even if they know the numbers, they don't feel it and see it, you know, in their bones when they when they you know, encounter the news media.
And I think the other aspect if I had to try to.
This is quite speculation, but I think that there may be a sense that the more, you know, the tougher Israel is right now, and the more aggressive the campaign is, the faster this will come to an end.
Now, I'm not pretending that again, like, let's not pretty any of this up.
You know, the Israeli public is feeling aggressive right now, but I also think that people are really devastated living through this war. I mean, the country feels very much on you know, partly shut down. Everybody's depressed and running into shelters all the time, and I think that from the Israeli perspective, nobody really wants this to go on.
People often don't even want to ask each other how they're doing.
Because they're afraid to get the answer of how terrible everybody feels. And everybody's losing people all the time. So I think that part of it is, you know, there's
certainly elements of you know, fury and vengeance. There's also elements of there's nothing else Israel can do because again Israeli public hasn't been told to think about diplomatic options in a very long time, and the sense that maybe if we just you know, if Israel just goes in very aggressively in part that it eventually will you know, achieve that aim of destroying from US as governing and military power and bring.
This to an end.
Add to all that the sheer kind of confusion and frustration about how Israelis are supposed to expect a hostage release, knowing that the government that the more aggressive the attack, the armed military campaign is, the less likely they are to get the hostages back, and it leads to a lot of I think mixed feelings behind the numbers.
Wow, this has been incredibly insightful.
We really appreciate you taking the time and we would hope to have you back on sometime soon and we'll have a link to your description.
So thank you, thank so much.
Thank you.
All right, we'll see you guys later.
M hmm