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.
When do we have.
Crystal indeed we do. We got a lot of breaking news with regards to Israel. So, first of all, Benny Gantz is out of the government of that war cabinet. He announced that he is pressuring for a ceasefire deal. We've got Tony Blincoln who is there in the region as well, So a lot to get to there and what that could mean. We have four Israeli hostages rescued and roughly one thousand Palestinians killed or injured in that operation by the IDF, and some questions about American involvement,
So a lot to get to there. That's very consequential. We have new polls outless some interesting insights into whether or not Trump's convictions are going to matter, and then whether or not people really care about them. Their beers to basically be not so much. Very interesting things coming out of Europe as well. They had the EO parliamentary elections, and in particular in France and Germany, huge surge for the far right. Macron Is announced snap elections, so that
is kind of fascinating. Sometimes that can be a canary in the coal mine for our own politics that we want to take a look at that. And we also have Brianna Joy Gray fired by the Hill, needless to say, Saga and I both have some thoughts and potential insights there to share with you.
I never heard of it, Iver heard of.
It, former Hill refugees ourselves. We've got some thoughts about what's going on there.
All right, that's right, Okay, Before we get to that, we actually have a major story coming later today. We weren't able to fit it in the show for timing reasons from Ryan Grimm. We're going to be interviewing him and he's to be breaking some major Supreme Court related news. So everybody stay tuned on all of our channels. We will be posting that and we'll email it out two premium subscribers as well. But we are expecting this to actually make some news and possibly picked up by the
mainstream press. So it's going to be a fun day here at Breaking Points. We want to support our work Breakingpoints dot com. We really appreciate it. But with that, let's get to the Bennigans news.
All right, So Benny Gantz announced a press conference and he made it official that he was leaving the war cabinet. We've got a little bit of the coverage from Sky Sky News, which has the advantage of being in English, so let's stick go listen to a little bit of what he had to say.
We can tell you that he is unhappy with the apparent lack of a plan for after the war with Gaza. He has been threatening to resign. He was going to release a statement yesterday, but the news that those four Israeli hostages have been rescued from Gaza. Nemative statement was delayed until today, But in the last few moments he has resigned from the Israeli war Cabinet. He says in Nettigna, whose government political considerations are impeding strategic decisions in the
Gaza war. He also says that Benjamin Netanyah, who is preventing real victory, we are leaving emergency government.
He says.
He also calls on Benjamin Netanyah, who to set an agreed election date, and he's been calling on the defense minister. You have Galant to be brave and do what is right and presumably follow his lead by resigning from the war cabinet.
There was also a major military official who just announced his resignation as well, who was in charge of the Gaza aryans. And I've basically failed on October seventh to keep Israeli safe Benny Gance. As part of that press conference, he also apologized to the hostage families and asked for their forgiveness, saying, quote, we failed. The responsibility is also mine. So you guys will recall the war cabinet is made up of Yaho was Benny Kantz, and you of Galant,
now moderate in the Israeli context. Always keep in mind none of these people are against the war. None of them are quote unquote moderate. However, there are some differences in terms of how they wanted to approach things. Gans in particular, is more favorable towards the ceasefire deal that has been floated by Joe Biden. You have Glant seems to be more in that direction as well. Both of them have been pushing for a plan for the quote
unquote day after. And so that's why Sager is really noteworthy and also not surprising that he points in Nan Yahoo and says, basically, you're putting politics first. You don't actually care about the war, you don't care about the hostages, you don't care about Israel, you care about your own political survival. And Gance had previously issued an ultimatum basically saying, listen, you need to call for elections. We need some sort of concrete, workable plan for the quote unquote day after
in Gaza. Otherwise I'm leaving the war cabinet, And that, in fact is what he has done. Now.
Yeah, it's really interesting.
Really, what it comes down to is the both domestic political situation, but also Ganz is not an idiot. He basically has the taskit backing of the United States, the Biden government, the European Union.
He's not facing any international problems.
If Netta Nah Who goes away a he's likely going to face a criminal trial for his own corruption allegations that pre date long October seventh. But second, you know, he's actually got to grapple with his political legacy. Just to explain to people because it's a little bit confusing, this does not actually bring down the nets On Yahu government. His old coalition pre October seventh coalition still stands. He
has sixty four seat majority in the Israeli Parliament. The question then comes to the shakiness of that the calling for the election, and really the way I guess people could think about it for historical context is when Clement Attlee left the government of the Wartime Coalition after Britain won the Second World War and they called for an election and actually Churchill ended up being defeated, so possibly
there could be some parallels there. The point, though, is just that the shakiness brings effectively domestic politics, as in like Capital Pe politics back to the country of Israel, which has been totally united on domestic front. Interestingly enough, this is the only question is the timing of the so called hostage mission because and we're going to get to this, but it really affected Benny Gantz. He originally
had the speech on the books for withdrawing. The day of the hostage release, he ended up having to cancel a speech. But that is probably the single most popular thing that Netanya, who has done since what since October seventh, prior to that, the best thing that he possibly could have done for his political futures. So this actually does raise the question of maybe he could survive. It's certainly possible.
It's going to be a big question of both international politics, how these really people themselves feel about it, and also don't forget this, but Gance could still lose.
It's very very possible.
It could be that some liqued successor to Netsa naw who are somebody who's like him, actually does end up prevailing in intelection, none of the baggage, same hardline policy, very very possible for the future.
So right after October seventh, both Benny Gantz and yay Are Lapede, who is like the opposition leader, were approached about joining this you know, temporary war cabinet government, and Gants demanded that the far right, most far right Psychosmotrich and ben Gevere were h They didn't have to be pushed out of government entirely, but they couldn't be part of the war cabinet, and Lapede had a more more hardline position of these guys can't be involved in all
and that's my condition, and Nanna who said no, and so yeah, you're Lapede remained outside of the war cabinet government. I read a Haretz analysis that basically, you know, really said, Benny Gantz has sort of propped up Netanyahu here, has really given him a legitimacy that he didn't deserve, and gave him a sort of grace with the public that allowed him to persist in this role for this long. Now.
The counterside of that would be while Gants pressured for you know, the original ceasefire deal that led to you know, very brief pause in hostilities and the release of a certain number of hostages, and perhaps if Gance hadn't been in the war cabinet, maybe that wouldn't have happened. Perhaps, but there were other pressures on NETANYAHUO at that point as well. So that's some of the Israeli domestic debate, to the extent that there's a moderate coalition in Israel.
They basically feel that Beny Gance stayed far too long and perhaps shouldn't have ever taken part in this to begin with. So, as I mentioned before in Sagio alluded to, it can put us up on the screen Tony Blank and State Department. Our Secretary of State will arrive in
Israel today and meet with Gance and Netan Yahoo. The US is also pushing this supposedly Israeli cease fire deal that of course now Israel is not willing to actually back some resolution through the UN Security Council, so the US is sort of working on pushing that through the UN Security Council. There's a lot of questions over it appears that the hostage deal isn't really moving anywhere anyway.
So I'm seeing all these headlines that are like Beny Gance leaving the government complicates the hostage cease fire negotiations. And I don't really know that that's the case, because it doesn't appear that they're actually really moving anyway. So if anything, maybe it shakes it up, maybe it shakes something loose. I don't know. We can put this up on the screen. Also about the domestic political reaction from significant Israeli political figures. Netanyahu molds dissolving the war Cabinet,
Ben Gavier is demanding a seat at the table. We've got Bibi putting out this strange tweet. In my opinion, cryptic doesn't actually mention Benny Gance, but this is let's clearly who's this is about. He says, Israel is in an existential war on several fronts. My son, this is not the time to abandon the campaign. This is the time to join forces citizens of Israel. We will continue until victory and the achievement of all the goals of the war, primarily the release of all our hostages and
the elimination of Hamas. My door will remain open to any Zionist party that is ready to get under the stretcher. And this is by the way the Google translates, so I don't know the reason it seems weird, might be because of the Googol translation, but anyway, ready to get under the stretcher and assist in bringing victory over our enemies and ensuring the safety of our citizens. We've got opposition leader Yayer Lapide saying Gansas and Eisenkott's decision will
leave the failed government is important and correct. The time has come to replace this extreme and reckless government with a sane government. That will lead to the return of security to the citizens of Israel, the return of the hostages, to the restoration of Israel's economy and international status. So this is the primary opposition leader to Netnyaho. Of course, he's very interested in elections sooner rather than later. And then you have National Security Minister Itamar ben Gavir. Put
this next one up on the screen. He says, as a minister in the government, chairman of a party, and a senior partner in the coalition, I hereby demand to join this cabinet in order to be a partner in determining Israel's security policy in the current times. It's time to make brave decisions. So one of the most psychotic members of the Netnyahu coalition now asking to be included in the war cabinet. At the same time, we can put this up on the screen in terms of I
alluded to this before. Where we are with the ceasefire negotiations, washing post headliness bye, Biden's urging ces fire deal shows no progress. As I alluded to before, they're pushing this UN Security Council resolution. Whether that gets through, whether that makes a difference, I don't know. Seems kind of unlikely,
but they're reporting here, they say. More than a week after President Biden declared a decisive moment in the eight month Israel Gaza war and besieged both sides to quickly approve a US back ceasefire deal, there is dwindling evidence
that either has bought what he is selling. Despite Biden's personal and very public urging, his dispatch of senior administration officials to the region, the drafting of a new UN Security Council resolution, and the marshaling of allies to join in a course of approval, neither Israel nor Hamas appear to have budged on their wide divergence over the proposed
roadmap to permanently end the war in Gaza. Israel's successful rescue forour hostages early Saturday, while welcomed my further complicated administration efforts bolstering Prime Minister Ntnia, whose insistence on a full military victory and release of all remaining Hamas led hostages before Israel's guns are silenced. So the big divide in terms of a ceasefire is basically Hamas once the war to end in Israel bb Nagna, who does not want the.
War to end.
So that has been a fairly unbridgeable divide for some time now. Biden tried to put pressure on through this big speech that he gave and you know, rhetoric effectively, but Soger once again appears that he is set up for a massive humiliation here because he's unwilling to actually use the tools and levers that the US government has outside of his own rhetoric, which clearly has been insufficient.
It reminds me a lot of the Obama administration's handling of Syria. It was very similar. It was very haphazard. It was all over the place. They would try inspect ceasefires, they'd try and inspect grand bargains. At the same time we had our own radical what were they called moderate rebel policy.
It was just like a failure.
Oh but also Asad can't use chemic weapons, but also if he does, maybe, but also maybe he didn't. It's just it's a like a just complete incompetence. And that really is a lot of the same characters are involved, literally, Brett McGirk and others who are the ones jet setting. Anthony Blincoln was in the State Department at that time,
and they seem to just re recreating that policy. They're banking everything on this ceasefire agreement, which neither side particularly seems like they want to do, and they also are
banking everything on this very bizarre Saudi normalization deal. Arguably, that Saudi deal is going to be the most important thing that could come out of this, because they're effectively going to give the Saudi is an extension of non NATO major ally status and security guarantee the entire country, which is insane, just so everybody understands, and change of our policy to the region almost dramatically escalates, you know, US involvement and basically ties US to two countries in
the Middle East, as opposed to just kind of trying at least to be above traditionally is what we always tried to do. We always usually wanted a balance of power approach here. We would explicitly align ourselves in legal fashion with a single nation and then almost guarantee some sort of confrontation with Iran coming down the title. Of course, that's you know what a lot of people in this town want, so don't put that past them. But there's
a lot of very consequential stuff that's happening here. I do think if netshen Yahu is replaced, even with somebody like Dance. Look, you may not like the policy whenever it comes to Gaza, but internationally I do think there would be a mayor change. I think some sort of like ceasepile and or hostage deal seems a lot more likely. Those guys Netsion Yahu is basically dead, you know, his future is very uncertain for them. It's not the same, you know, they don't have all the baggage of the past.
They want to try and they can see. They're not stupid for what the future looks like for the nation. They want to dig themselves out of that hole. So in a way, I think that against Lapee led government, anything like that would be a dramatic improvement, you know, for Israeli policy going forward.
The difference is again neither as opposed to the war. Neither has any issue with the you know, massacres that have been committed and the fact that Gaza has been effectively annihilated, reduced to rubble, the massive number of deaths
and civilians who've been killed. None of them have any issue with that, you know who, though faces pressure from the far right, I mean the literal terrorists who are in his government, and so he is constantly trying to split the difference between you know, maintaining some acceptability to the you know what is the Israeli mainstream and these you know, really hardline I think very fair to say,
fascist individuals that are in his government. And so that's where he is pressured, which is why you know, you see him, you'll hear him say things that can be directly contradictory depending on the time. Benny Gantz and Yayr Lapede are more likely to be influenced by the public that's on the side of we just got to get the hostage.
Yeah, and more like you know, the traditional secular coalition of Israel.
Right exactly. And so there is we've covered the polls here again. The Israeli public, Israeli Jews have no issue with the horrors that have been inflicted by the idea. If you have a number who say, hey, I haven't gone far enough, you only have four percent who say they've gone too far, So that's not where the pressure lies. However, we have also seen polling that says there is a clear majority in favor of prioritizing the release of the
hostages over this fantasy of complete elimination of Hamas. And so if you had a Lapede or a Gance who had more power, they would be pressured war by that. Public sentiment and public opinion could lead to a different outcome. But I mean, Nanayahu shows no signs of calling new elections. There's no imminent sign that his government is going to
collapse and force his hand there. So he's a wily guy, and you know, with his political life on the line, and also, by the way, facing corruption charges that could literally land him in prison. At this point, he seems to be hanging in there, and he's thinking, hey, you know, as friendly as Biden's been towards me, I can I can. If I can hang in there through the November elections, Trump will be an even greater buddy to me and
go along with whatever I want to do. So I think that's a calculation for him at the point.
I wouldn't bet against him.
I think I also think I'd probably give him fifty percent chance of survival. But that's a lot less than has been in the future. Ye see, I don't know. I mean, things are definitely shaking up there and it will go in two directions, are either going to lose in the center left slash center right will take power, or he will remain in power by making common cause with you know, much more of the far Israeli right either, you know, I mean both, and that's the thing, let's
not diminish it. It will have still a major consequences for foreign policy. If that latter case I just describe takes it, you know, cease fires not only off the table, just won't care anymore.
They won't even pretend, you know, to look at it.
In terms of west Bank too, there could be a lot of different changes. While aganst government is going to handle that very very differently going going forward, and it's going to be a lot more receptive to US pressure and like I guess public management of Israeli perception in the future with the European Union with the US.
So they have a choice and we'll see which way.
And BB hasn't really tried to even like put a reasonable face. Yeah he does the horors they're inflicting, whereas Gance may go to greater lengths to sort of, you know, provide some sort of cover for what.
They're the war.
It's very possible I mean, you know, you know, in a lot of ways, you can look at it like this. They're like, look, the Ratha thing, it's not gonna happen. Our partners are broadly like not really with us. We could just sign this ceasefire deal we call it when you know, we just move on and then there'll be some whatever, some humanitarian the blaming aid trucks, et cetera.
It's I wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility.
Yeah, but none of that's coming anytime soon.
No, I don't do it.
Yeah, that's the bottom line. Okay, let's move on to this hostage rescue slash massacre that occurred over the weekend. We can put this up on the screen. One woman, this is Noah Arkhamani, who was captured at that Nova Music festival, and she really became quite famous because there was some horrifying video of her being captured and taken away crying out for her boyfriend. This is one of
the other male hostages who was released. But as part of this quote unquote rescue mission, you had just an absolute massacre, one of the deadliest days that we have had in this entire Gaza war. You can see here the rubble. You can see dead bodies, you can see the injured, and reports are that from the Health Ministry that two hundred and seventy four Palestinians were killed in this effort to rescue the four hostages. We can put this up on the screen. From the Financial Times, they
have some more details about what occurred. Their headline here Israel's raid to free hostages takes a horrific toll on central Gaza. Hundreds of Palestinians killed and injured, and gun battles and bombardment that accompanied the operation. I'll read you a little bit of this again so you can get some of the details. The raid which freed those four hostages was a boost, they write for Netnyahu's government, which has spent the last week arguing whether to agree to
a US backed plan to end the fighting. But the devastating firepower used by Israeli forces also made June eighth the deadliest day for Gazans in months, with Enclave's Health Ministry saying the raid, which was accompanied by gun battles any fierce bombardment, had killed two hundred and seventy four Palestines and injured six hundred and ninety eight One medical chief described the horrific scenes in his hospital after the raid.
The director of the Alaximarder's hospital said, they came with horrific injuries, torn lower limbs or upper limbs, some with broken skulls, their brains pouring out, some shot in the abdomen. Indian testines. There are women, children, the elderly. Houses have
been destroyed and families wiped out. I also wanted to note from that article you had the chief Israeli military spokesman, Daniel Hagari, because this is giving credence to those on the net Nyahu side of the equation who say, hey, we don't need a cease fire, even though that's the way that obviously the largest number of hostages were released by far, and overall Israel has still killed far more
hostages through their military operations than they have rescued. But it's giving credence to this idea of oh no, we don't need a cease fire deal. We can just you know, we can just do this again and just you know, massacre hundreds of Palestinians to rescue the rest of the hostages. But Daniel Hagari, even the Israeli military spokesman rejects that view, saying, we know that we cannot do operations to rescue all
of them because the conditions won't allow it. We saw already that what brought the biggest number of hostages home was a deal. There is no argument about that. And so Sagar, I mean, you know, it's one more instance where it's just very clear in terms of the US political elite, certainly the Israeli political elite, but with our own political elite, that Palestinian lives just don't count the
same way that Israeli lives do, you know? To celebrate this mission and listen, I think the hostages should be released. You know, I'm happy for these hostages that they are home with their families, but at the cost of hundreds of Palestinians, this is celebrated as a victory. And you know, a thousand dead and injured war that are trapped under the rubble and this is considered a victory. I mean, it just shows you how grotesque the immorality around this has become.
I look, I think it's a tragedy, but this is a complicated one because this is one where they actually did achieve militarily what they had sought to now listen.
I will say this, the.
US military does not conduct operations this way. They would never have pulled the trigger. The circumstances are a little bit difficult because what happened is is that the vast majority of the debts occurred after they had stormed the apartment building and then apparently the vehicle that the Israelis were in and broke down. They were getting fired on by RPG, so they called an air support. Basically, clear out the road, take the hostages out, take them to the helicopter.
I agree.
I mean it's an absolute tragedy, the number of civilians killed here.
It also was intentionally placed.
I just think militarily, this is a very different operation then let's saying carpet bombing the crap out of a refugee camp and saying, well, we hit a single terrorist. It was genuinely was in port of a rescue like hostage mission. You could see a Western operation like the US something like this go down in a similar situation where our guys get bogged down, the hostages are there, the vehicle that they're in, you have to call in air support. At that point it is a matter of
life and death. I just think this one is is a little bit different.
I don't think so. No, it is they bombed a rotted marketplace in the middle of the day.
Yeah, I mean they're there.
Hundreds, nearly three hundred Palestinians murdered to rescue four people. You're right, I mean, on the one hand, our military would not have green lent this operation. On the other hand, we were actually involved in some capacity. According to the New York Times, there was an American role team of the US Hostage Recovery Official station in Israel assisted in the Israeli military's effort by providing intelligence and other support.
But going back to your I mean, if you had imagine Omar Badar, I'm taking this from me, he made this calming Ynswery. I think it's so important if you had Hamas massacre close to three hundred Israelis to rescue four of their prisoners. By the way, Israel holds thousands of Palestinian hostages, no one would accept that. No one would accept that them going into massacring and as the kids, women, civilians in a busy, crowded marketplace, taking out entire multi
story apartment buildings to get four people. No one would look at that math and say that that's acceptable. So why is it acceptable when it's Israeli.
I would flip it around and say, I think you're making a media point. I don't even disagree with you.
I mean, obviously people in the media cut like a lot more slack. But I mean, each any nation, group, etc. Has the ultimate responsibility to look out for its own troops and for its own people.
In this particular case, their people are at risk.
They also have a responsibility to follow the laws of war. Wow, which means listen. Hamas held these hostages in residential areas. That is a war crime. Yes, that does not alleviate the responsibility of Israel or any other nation to take precautions when it comes to civilians. The fact that Hamas does something wrong doesn't give you a get out of jail free pass. And that's the way that they've acted. That's the entire justification for this entire genocide. They did
bad things, they committed war crimes on October seven. True, So that gives us a green light to do whatever the hell we want to do and not care one bit about Palestinian civilians. I mean, this was the deadliest day we've seen in Gaza in months. It's wholly unjustifiable, especially given the context that there is a deal on the table to rescue all of the hostages without killing
a single Palestinian civilian. So if beaming at Yahoo and the rest of the military establishment and these far right goons actually care about the hostages, then they would agree to the ceasefire deal that they supposedly put forward themselves. So it's no, it's not justifiable. And they also, let's put this piece up on the screen. They also, as
part of this disguise combatants in civilian clothing. This is a picture, by the way, this isn't fully verified, but this is the image that was floating around of this civilian vehicle AID truck. This is a helicopter that landed right by the quote unquote humanitarian peer. The US is saying, oh, no, we had nothing to do with it. You know, we didn't use the peer, et cetera, et cetera. But that helicopter is literally right next to the pier. So you make of that what you will. But put this next
piece up on the screen. This is from ken Roth. Disguising combatants in civilian clothing to commit hostilities constitutes perfidy. That is a war crime. And this is not from you know, Palestinian sources, which nobody seems to believe. This is from Israeli news sources. Israel's rescue team reportedly enter the area in a furniture truck driven by a female
soldier in civilian clothes. There's a good reason why this is a war crime, which is if you're using civilian trucks, if you're using especially humanitarian AID trucks, think of how much danger AID workers have already been in in this conflict. So now you're basically putting an even greater target on their back because there's a suspicion now if you see an AID truck that it could be idea of soldiers coming in to commit another massacre. So that's why that's considered a war crime.
But this is where I just disagree.
It's like, well, then all you know US special operations are quote unquote a war crime.
It's ridiculous.
I mean, our people are talking about, well, you think we haven't sent CIA agents and Delta Force operatives disguised in civilian garb to go smash and grab or like rescue our own hostages or rescue West.
Of course, a truck in an AID truck AID truck.
Yeah, I agree, I wouldn't do it. Obviously these realized you're going to be doing different things. But this is what I'm saying about the whole discourse run quote unquote, war crime, et cetera.
Like it's a lot of it is just a farce.
It's not the way that people actually operate in a military environment.
I think, not the way they operate in a military environment. But the reason that we have it is that we have language to talk about why it is wrong and why it should be out of bounds, and so that there is some way to put pressure and not just out well might read. I mean, they can murder people, so why not let's just look the other I guess it's fine. They got four people, so, you know, killing three hundred and injuring another seven hundred, reducing another entire
neighborhood to reubele. I guess it's fine because they can do it.
No, it's that Look, at the end of the day, they were also under like a huge amount of fire. This was a very different environment they're under RPG.
So if you want the hostages back, do the ceasefire. G Yeah, I agree, you don't have to murder a single Palestinian. There don't have to be little kids with their limbs blown off and getting amputations with no anesthetic and no mom and no dad, and by the way, you know, a lot of hatred in their hearts and God knows what they're going to want to do when they grow up.
I agree that I wouldn't operate this way, but I just think this is very, very substantively different than a lot of the carpet bombing operation that we've seen all throughout Gods, or the intentional withholding of humanitarian aid, et cetera. But like, are we really going to say that operators are allowed to go into a war environment and not you know, be.
In humanitarian aid trucks?
Yes, Look, I'm just not going to say that because given the fact that any US citizen or others who are if I ever get you know, abducted, do whatever you need in order to get me back.
And I think that's all a lot of do do with ceasfire deal.
Well, c that's the thing, you're pretending like this was the only option, murdering three hundred people and injuring seven hundred others, that that was the only no. And by the way, guess what the reports are from the Health Ministry that other hostages were killed, including potentially an American citizen. That's possible unconfirmed report. Okay, that's not confirmed. Yeah, but
we do know that. What we had a quote from Israeli hostages, just one of the ones that just released, who was talking to ha Retz who said, our greatest fear was the idea of bombing that we heard. So don't talk to me about you know, this is fine because it got the hostages back. No, if you care about the hostages, do the ceasefire deal. That's what Betty Gantz, who you know, I'm no fan of. That's what he's saying. That's what the Israeli public is demanding. That's what the
protests are all about. That's, by the way, even what the Israeli military Mary spokes for some Daniel Hagari is saying, like this is not sustainable. The way to get the hostages back isn't to murder little kids. It's to do a ceasfire deal and end this war. So no, I don't think it's excusable. And if you look at the look at past historical examples, of successful hostage rescue missions.
There was a thread that somebody put out online. I wish you had it in front of me, but you'll see like zero civilians killed, zero, maybe three civilians killed, two hundred and seventy. No, it's not proportionate. It's not acceptable, especially again when there is a deal on the table that could bring all the hostages home and not require a single death.
I don't disagree that they should take the ceasefire deal. I agree the US military never would have done this. We have how much higher level of professionalism, thank god, in terms of the people that we run. Our substantive disagreement is about the idea that you're not allowed to use like military force in the course of a hostage rescue mission.
Which did I say that no? But I didn't say that no, son, How is that a disagreement?
But that's what happened.
Three hundred people killed is unaccepted.
In the middle of that operation, their car broke down because they were getting RPGs and machine guns fired at them, and they called in air support. That the exact same thing that any Western style military would do.
In the exacts.
They provided cover and bombing on the way in and the way out. They did it during the day when there was a busy marketplace there, and that's how so many civilians were murdered. Not to mention, they took out multiple residential buildings, not just the two that the hostages were being held in. Not to mention, very possible that they killed their own hostages in this operation. So no, we wouldn't have done it. It's not acceptable. We have
also committed workers. I'm not like excusing us and pretending like we're angels, but I just don't see how you look at this and say this was this was fine, this was acceptable. Well, it seems to me, what's you're arguing.
I think it is substantively different than many of the other things that have been committed on.
Would they say the same thing they said, Oh, well, we've bu on the refugee, we got a Hamas batty, so it's fine, we accomplished our military goals.
How is this different because they were in the middle of our rescue operation?
This literally is different.
Insanely disproportionate. Insanely disproportionate. I mean, it's just it's outrageous to say that it's acceptable to have three hundred dead to rescue four people when you could get them all of the hostages and protect all of the hostages who are again at risk because of the idea bombing operation without killing a single person. I just, I mean, I just can't agree with with this whatsoever.
The reason that I'm pushing back Crystal is because of exactly like the ken Roth rhetoric, this idea that you know, you're never.
Like you can't dress in civilian garb.
I mean, I just think at a certain point we all need to stop living in a fantasy land where everybody is just going to be abiding by the laws of war.
We're not living in a fantasy. We're living in a nightmare. Yeah, people in Gaza are living a hell on earth. And so it's disgusting to me that we have US politicians who claim this as a victory when again, if the shoe was on the other foot and it was four Palestinian hostages who were rescued in an operation that killed hundreds of Israelis, no one would say that was okay, And it wouldn't be okay. I wouldn't say it was okay.
But because Palestinians are so dehumanized and considered so inconsequential, it's just fine to wave your hand as it's fine for it to be collateral damaged.
As I said, I think you're arguing against media personalities, which I don't even necessarily disagree with what I'm saying. And honestly, though, if I was looking at it from a Hamas perspective, I was Palestinian and four of our guys need to be rescued, and then people were shooting it of the people who are going to go rescue them, and you did whatever a token order to get them out, I'd be like, yeah, I mean, I'm not saying that's a good thing, but if I was in their position,
I'd probably do the exact same thing. Most rational nation states and or military groups would do that.
Now, it's not true.
You just said that we wouldn't do it. No, well, you just said we wouldn't do it, Tager.
You would not plan an operation this way. But if we found ourselves in a situation.
Then point to the people where we did something. It's been a long time I went to a single example. No, Klen Again, I think I'm not saying we're perfect, right, we commit war crimes. Also, I've been very critical, but you can't say any rational nations state would do it, and also say we never would have done No.
I said, we wouldn't plan a military operation this way, but incessarily in a similar circumstance though if our people were under fire in the middle of a hostage rescue mission there was no other way to get out. Absolutely US military would probably pull the trigger in the same way.
But you can't point to an example where it's happened.
Well, it's been I mean, I said, I don't even know the last time I had a major rescue operation. I want to say it was Kayla Mueller with under Ice I was almost I think seven eight years ago.
Since the last time.
Now we've operated in a very different environment, I can't necessarily say the same thing. I think, again, we have a much higher level of professionalism and conduct than the way that they could the way that they execute military operations. But the disagreement, as I said, is both about the difference in the way that they're quote unquote killing terrorists and terrorizing the population as opposed to a single thing.
And my big disagreement is with a lot of this idea that you know that we're just supposed to condict military operations in some sort of world where everybody just abides by the laws of war.
It's not like they weren't getting shot at bombed by Yeah.
That we should avoid at times. I think we should avoid massacrering hundreds of innocent civilians. Okay. And by the way, there's a hostage deal on the table. And by the way, this puts hostages further at risk, and by the way, its fuels the hatred that will lead to more terrorism in the future. This was a political play for bb Netanyahoo in order to keep his grip on power at the expense of a thousand Palestinians between the dead and
the injured. Okay, there was nothing justifiable about it, and I think it is a disgusting worldview that just dismisses this level of quote unquote collateral damage as being acceptable in any context.
We move on, okay, but this is what I'm saying. You can't just say it's a disgusting world viehica. Then there's no operation.
Ever where the right of self defense or military hostage rescue can happen under this.
It's just not.
True.
The contrue I'm talking to a bigger generality, which, look, I have not disagreed that there shouldn't be a Ceaspire deal. But like, I'm sorry, this is just a that is frankly a pie in the sky like worldview where everybody signs contion.
You know what, and the realities I would like to live in, but I acknowledge I don't live in that world. But even acknowledging the imperfect, imperfect world we live in, you also have to admit that our military wouldn't have
greenlit this operation. That you can't point to another hostage rescue mission that led to hundreds of deaths, and so to pretend like this is all fine and good and just in the normal course of operations, No, this is outrageously side of what the world has looked like and what quote unquote rational nation state actors, including our own very imperfect country, has done in the past.
No what again, Like I'm just going to reiterate, like it is.
It really does come down to what it was going to look like in the context of an actual military operation. Whenever you're literally rescuing hostages, a vehicle breaks down, it's like, what are you supposed to do? You know you're going to die or you're going to You're going to get your way out. There actually is a zero sum game. Whenever it comes down, you're supposed to get a back situation.
You are supposed to protect civilians. You are supposed to if you are a soldier, guess what part of your responsibility is to risk your life to protect civilians.
Agree with that?
Okay, well that's not what happened here. Okay, so no, but and again, don't green light such a dangerous operation to start with if it's going to potentially lead to hundreds of deaths, and if you care about the hostages, do the cease fire deal. So I just you know, on every level, I find it outrageous that is considered in any way justifiable or acceptable.
I agree that the ceasefire deal should happen, and in some ways I think we're almost tooken past each other. But I guess where I really my major objection comes down to is a lot of the worldview that is put forward, I would say by a progressive left in the context of this conflict just leaves no room for like a military to operate, and in a military to operate in a manner which I think is quote unquote justifiable,
not necessarily saying in this particular instance. What I mean by that is hostage rescues, the ability to conduct war.
You know this idea that you're not supposed to disguise yourself.
At this point, I mean it's listen. The official number is close to forty thousand dead. We both know it's probably far more.
It's probably one hundred thousand.
When we know that more bombs have been dropped on Gaza Strip than World War Two, The devastation is more extensive than dressed in right, When we know you have the largest population of child amputees in the world, When we know that starvation has been used as a tool of war, When we know that our political class, and the Israeli political class, and the entire Israeli society, with very few extremely brave exceptions, so trivializes Palestinian lives, that
hundreds of Palestines being murdered to rescue four people is considered acceptable, when we have seen what's happen over all these months. How are you going to criticize the progressive left or whatever terminology you use for saying that this is unacceptable? Listen, I was never someone who said that there was absolutely no room for any sort of military
operation in the wake of October seven. But as we've discussed from the beginning, the way they've gone about it from the jump has been unacceptable from their own national security interests and certainly from the interests of respecting any sort of humanitarian and lives of Palestinians. I mean, you have people who are starving to deuv you' a famine, you have humanitarian aid is completely blocked, you have an
entire hospital system that is completely decimated. And so to say it's been unreasonable to object to the way that this war has been conducted, I just I find not completely outrageous.
I said, That's not what I said.
What I said is it's unreasonable to expect that it is unreasonable to apply, let's say, the same level of outrage logic, et cetera, that we would on a bombing a military or a refugee camp, or leveling a building in order to kill one or two people who allegedly may or may not have been there, as opposed to an operation where the fire was the vast majority of the death according to the Washington Post and according to the Financial Times, occurred after the hostages were successfully rescued
and their vehicle broke down. There was a result of Hamas RPG's machine gun fire, and there basically was a zero sum game where they were either going to die or live and be able to shoot their way out. That is a very very different situation and one in which collateral damage is genuinely a.
Tragedy, but is very very different.
But it's not I would have looked at But it's not different because to do if you buy that logic, that's the same as accepting like, oh, but you know the refugee came. Yeah, they killed two d No hold on, let me finish, because they say, we got to it was a legitimate military targment. There were two humas, bad guys. We got those bad guys collateral damage. It's sad this war war.
In this particular case, they actually did send special operating troops into the ground, didn't kill that many people on the way in allegedly at least according to the multiple ride ups and others things that I have seen, and that the vast majority of the casualties were suffered after they actually did what I have been saying they should have been done from the beginning, which is put their own soldiers at risk and grab their hostages in order to get them out, and or if you want to
kill a terrorist in a refugee camp, you should do exactly this. You should drop people down on the ground and you should go and kill them, and then you should get yourself out.
So I think we also need to acknowledge that those reports are coming from what the IDF is saying to.
What else are we supposed to do?
I mean, listen to Palestinians who are on the ground, who were talking about what happened.
Yeah, and they're saying that the most vast majority of.
The death So why did they have to decimate multiple apartment buildings that weren't holding hostages? What about that?
Also?
What about the people who were buried under the rubble in these apartment buildings had nothing to do with holding hostages? What about the air cover that they provided quote unquote air cover that they provided on the way in, which also included gunfire and bombing. So I mean, I just listen.
I think we should just move on because we're obviously not going to agree on this, and you know, I just I think it's wholly unacceptable to think that four hostages and by the way, other hostages possibly killed and put it risk in exchange for three hundred Palestinian lives and another seven hundred who have been you know, maimed and seriously injured and more reportedly under the rubble. To think that that's acceptable or justifiable, I just we're just
not going to not get agree, all right. There was another thing that was put out by Israel, claiming that a New York Post wrote this up. This all comes directly from IDF sources claiming that an Al Jazeera journalist was holding three hostages in his home. This man's name is Abdallah al Jamal. No one is disputing that he was in fact killed by the IDF along with his
family members when his home in Gaza was stormed. The Israeli military or the Israeli government rather put out a statement claiming number one that he was an Al Jazeera journalist and number two that he was holding hostages as per usual. No evidence of this was offered whatsoever. So let's put this next piece up on the screen. First. By the way, Israel had claimed that he was holding the woman Noah who Noah Argamani hostage in his home. Then when it became clear that wasn't the case, they
claimed that he was keeping the three male hostages. That the story was shifting and there were a lot of inconsistencies here. For one, Abdullah apparently lived in an apartment that was on the first floor in a multi story building. Israel claimed those hostages were found on the third floor. And it also you know, they didn't now for any evidence, so this is very much in dispute. It also comes and we can put this next piece up on the screen from Al Jazeera. They put on a statement saying
the ex account of the Israeli Ministry of Defense. In some Israeli websites quoted the name of a house name journalists from Gaza called Abdullah al Jamal and claimed that he works with Al Jazeera, that his name was linked to what happened in Israeli armies liberation of four prisoners in the central Gaza strip on Saturday. Al Jazeera Media Network confirms that he never worked with the network. He did contribute to an op ed in twenty nineteen, and
these allegations are completely unfounded. Network stresses that these allegations are continuation of the process of slander and misinformation aimed at harming Al Jazeera's reputation. Professionalism and independence. So it appears like and this was verified by the way, by other news outlets. He contributed to an op ed in twenty nineteen. So to calm like now to zero journalists is a stretch in any way. They don't offer any evidence that he had anything to do with holding the hostages.
Yeah, this was going on.
This was going everywhere because Jamal works for and maybe you can tell me more about this for some organization registered here in the US called Palestinian Chronicles, which is a five oh one c three organization. So I guess it was up in the air the question of whether he and by the way, why does any of this matter, because of a lot of the claims around journalists, and so we wanted to actually break down and to look
at it. I agree, based on the circumstances, it does look like they originally claimed that he was holding a certain hostage and then based on the floor number that they then changed afterwards as possible that he lived in the building. The reason why again this matters, is that I have seen this blown up all over the American right and like the pro Israel right, because now they're going after Palestinian Chronicles five oh one C three tax Rice here in the US.
But from what it looks like he did live in the built.
Now, I mean that's not necessarily a good thing, you know, in terms of whether he knew or not whether these people were being held in the same apartment building as him. But from what they said, their story has changed twice now so far as to whether he lived or whether he was holding these people or not. They also said that his father was responsible, and that's the part where I'm very confused about from the initial explanation.
Well because the father was also killed in the raid. So you know, they're just they're Israel should offer some evidence. If they have evidence to back up these claims, then you know, at this point they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt in any respect. And so the things that are very suspicious is number one, the story shifting right.
Number two, the fact that they really tried to time to al Jazero, which I mean it's preposterous, like I've contributed to some opbed at some newspaper sometime in the past, and that doesn't make me part of their journalistic staff, right. And given the fact that they've i mean, they've banned al Jazeera and Israel, and they have tried to paint them quote unquote humas, So they were clearly trying to use this guy to further their own propaganda talking points.
And then when you have these questions about like the you know, the floor number he lived on is not the one that they claimed that the hostages were being held on. Just you know, there's a lot of reasons to be very skeptical, I would say, of the claims that they are ultimately making here.
Yeah, I'm waiting to see because this actually could turn into a big thing here in the country in terms of congressional investigating. This could be basically become the next like five oh one.
C three thing.
That's one of the reasons we want to get to the bottom of it here on the show.