Scott Horton critiques the Zionist exclusivist plan, noting how Israel seized 78% of territory beyond UN recommendations, displacing 750,000 Arabs and establishing de facto apartheid since 1967. He argues Netanyahu's strategy of bolstering Hamas to thwart a Palestinian state backfired, allowing October 7th attacks due to intelligence negligence and neoconservative arrogance. Ultimately, the discussion reveals that current conflicts stem from deliberate land dispossession and imperialist foreign policy failures rather than inherent religious hatred or unchangeable desires for war. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Last Podcast Overview00:14:40
Fill her up.
You are listening to the gas humor.
We need to roll back the state.
We spy on all of our own citizens.
Our prisons are flooded with nonviolent drug offenders.
If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now.
Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.
You're listening to part of the problem on the gas digital network.
Here's your host, James Smith.
What's up, everybody?
Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem.
I'm very excited for this one.
Still out here in the Creek in the Cave in Austin, Texas.
By the way, come out, check out a show here at the Creek in the Cave.
Great comedy club run by Rebecca Trent, who is one of my favorite people in the world.
And I got on back with me, my boy Scott Horton.
Scott, it's been a while.
It's very happy to have you back on the show.
How's everything going?
I'm doing good, Dave.
Thanks for having me.
Okay.
Well, before we get into the meat of the podcast, you guys got your annual fundraiser going on for the Libertarian Institute.
Is that right?
Yeah, that's right.
And it's just starting off today.
We got the big thermometer at the top of the page, and I'm going to raise enough money that I can essentially just make payroll.
That's it.
We got no overhead other than just work that we do.
Period.
It goes straight.
Any dollars go straight into things being produced.
Such as, for example, we are just right now on the very eve of publishing Tom Woods' new book and Jim Bovard's new book and Keith Knight's new book.
Hell yeah.
And we just published one by Joe Mullins.
And so that'll bring us up to 13.
And then, you know, other than that, of course, we got all the best writers.
And, oh, and I should say before Joe, we published Laurie Calhoun's great book as well.
So that's, you know, a whole handful this year alone.
And then, of course, mine's coming up next year, my Russia book and whatever.
But, you know, it's a lot to brag about.
Seriously, like I got essentially, just like with my show, right?
Like I'm not the best interviewer, but I got a great tasting guests, man.
And it's the same thing with like the team that I put together here, you know, with the help of Shelda Richmond, of course, from the beginning here at the Institute.
I got, like I say, Jim Bovard is a senior fellow and Lori Calhoun.
And you might know that Ted Galen Carpenter, the most principled anti-interventionist at the Cato Institute, got ran out of there this year just for that very reason.
And he writes for me now and is senior fellow at the Institute.
And so then, and then I have this whole generation of all 27-year-olds, I think, which is, you know, Hunter, our editor, and Kyle, our news editor, Kyle, Hunter Durances, Kyle Anzalone, Connor Freeman, our assistant news editor, and Keith Knight, of course, our managing editor.
And we're also putting out Keith's book that I say.
I love this.
It's called Domestic Imperialism, Nine Reasons I Left Progressivism.
And that'll be coming out right on the heel of Tom and Jim.
And so, and then also Patrick McFarlane, he's like 31.
The rest of them are all like 27.
So I got these two generations of libertarians, you know, and that I'm right in the middle of running the thing.
You can bridge the gap.
You have to like explain.
Yeah, exactly.
You have to explain to the older guys like what Netflix is or something.
Yeah, exactly.
No cap.
I got to look it up myself.
Urban dictionary.
At least I know what the urban dictionary is.
I'm a middleman there.
But yeah, no, so it's just a great team of guys.
And then let me elaborate about these books.
So Tom Woods, of course, is the greatest libertarian opponent of the COVID regime all along, every day from the time that it began.
And this book, I don't want to give too much away.
So I don't shouldn't say too much about it all, but just to say that this is the, I think it's hard to say, this is essentially the very best of his emails that he sent out to his people all along, which are so good.
Which are so good.
And then I think it's okay to say too, that, no, that's too much.
I don't want to give it away.
It's just so good, man.
It's so damn good.
And of course, we're like, what's good about it?
Oh, my God.
It's so bad.
It's so bad.
And when I don't want to say too much.
I'm sorry.
I'm getting carried away.
It's called Diary of a Psychosis, How Public Health Failed Us During COVID Mania.
And it is unbelievable, Dave.
It is so incredible.
It is going to blow you away.
I know that you and Tom will, you know, have a great time mixing it up over the thing too.
Yeah, I can't wait.
It's just, it's just something else.
And then Bovart, you know, for people who don't know, I think people do know the great Jim Bovart, but he is probably like our most successful and important libertarian writer and journalist that we've got, certainly in our era.
He's published, I think, 15 books, just like Tom Woods has published like 15 books.
And they are, you know, they're like, you know, just complete like factual pummelings of you with, you know, just the kind of the way I like to write.
I mimic him in my style, where it's just factual claim after factual claim about hanging on his own words and your own sources.
And so it's just, but it's education and guns.
And so it's like what I would have written about foreign policy, only about American domestic policy and just about the police state and just every part of it.
And he's the author of Lost Rights, The Destruction of American Liberty, Feeling Your Pain.
That's from the Clinton years, of course.
A great chapter on Kosovo in there.
And Attention Deficit Democracy, The Bush Betrayal, Public Policy Hooligan.
And, you know, he's got like his list of endorsements includes, I swear, like there's no, no BS, like a dozen different government, like heads of government departments denouncing him as a horrible fraud and a liar and whatever for him exposing them in the Wall Street Journal and the Christian Science Monitor in USA Today.
And now he's writing for the New York Post.
You see what I mean?
Like he's our best guy out there really in mainstream publications here.
And so then get this, everybody.
So in 94, his book was called Last.
See, I fed it up.
I knew I was going to.
It was called Lost Rights, The Destruction of American Liberty.
Now, the new one is called Last Rights, The Death of American Liberty, which is the update.
And it's so damn good.
Just like with the Tom Woods book, you know, I'm the executive producer, right?
Like I've been managing the project while everybody else does the work, but I get to take a little bit of credit that like, this is my institute publishing this thing.
And I'm very proud that both of these books are going to be absolute, you know, huge bestsellers and will make a mark in libertarianism.
This is who we are.
This is what we stand for.
So says Bovart and Woods.
I'll tell you, it's cool because, I mean, we were friends before you started the Institute.
So I've kind of watched from afar, you know, you build this thing.
And it is kind of cool years later to go like that.
The books that you've put out would be a phenomenal.
Like, that's a great book list right there.
Like, you really want to get caught up on a whole lot of shit right there.
Literally on the last podcast, what we're going to kind of pick up on on this one is I did kind of like a brief overview of the early, you know, like Israeli history, not even pre-Israeli history kind of.
And like one of the first things, I was like, let me just start with like a list of recommendations.
And it was like, dude, coming to Palestine.
You got to go read that because it's so like if you just don't know about this stuff.
So that's my founding partner in the Institute, Sheldon Richmond.
It was me and Sheldon and Will Grigg.
And then unfortunately, Will died half a year later.
But Sheldon is my main partner in the thing, you know, from the beginning there.
And it is the best.
Oh, and let me just say real quick, because I got Biden brain here, but just because I go off, I'm so proud of the book project that we're doing here.
Just the whole Institute.
We got, what, four or five or six different podcast feeds.
Always leave out Tommy.
I don't know why, but Tommy ought to be at the head of the list.
He's great.
A wonderful podcaster.
Good friend of mine, Tommy Salmons.
And then, you know, all the other great writers and podcasters I mentioned, Kyle Anzalone and Keith Knight.
I mean, these guys are just heroic.
My right-hand man, Connor Freeman.
Uh, fantastic writer, all these guys.
So that's a libertarian institute, and just slash, donate if you want to help support what we're doing.
So thank you guys.
It says if, if you uh, if you're on board with this libertarianism stuff, there's not, there's no better institution that you could be helping out.
So please do if you can.
Um anyway.
So back to uh, with uh coming to Palestine.
One of the things that I love about that book too, is that um it's, it's um been particularly useful to me in the last few weeks because i've been going back and it's like they're, it's like it's standalone pieces right, so it's not like you can, kind of you could pick anywhere in that book and just start reading about it.
So if there's any particular like you know, like thing that you want, you're like oh, let me brush up on this, you can just go pick that, but anyway.
So I started the, the last podcast.
I said I.
I was basically saying that like for people, if they're, if they want to understand more about this history, if they want to do more deep dives, I recommended that.
Um Sheldon's book um I, I recommended um.
Like Noam Chomsky has done a lot of great uh writing on this stuff over the years.
Um, Norman Finkelstein has been really great and particularly powerful because he just has the jewiest name in the history of names, and so it's just, it's impossible to accuse anyone like you can't even finish the sentence.
I think you're an Anti-semite, Norman Finkel.
All right, this is just too much.
And then he's like yeah well, my mom lived your aushwit, so shut up.
He's like, you want to have a jew off?
You want a jew off?
Right here, i'll jew off.
Yeah, I play Jew for keeps.
Um, and uh, what else was I?
Uh saying?
What other good uh sources?
Oh uh, and of course uh, Darryl Cooper's uh series, Martyr Made podcast yes, is just phenomenal.
And the the series the original one was called uh, Fear And Loathing In The New Jerusalem, and then I don't remember the title of the more recent follow-up one.
It's just the last podcast episode he's got though yeah, Martyr Made, it's the addendum there, and that that takes you like, all the way from you know, the creation of the state of Israel into the the 1980s, and I think he said he's going to do another one.
That that brings, you know, the chapter one of Sheldon's book, Coming To Palestine is uh, as you say, they're all standalone essays and so anyone can find this one at the Institute as well, and I forget if you, if this was original to us or this was from a long time ago that we republished, but anyway, it's called um, depopulating Palestine, dehumanizing Palestinians, or maybe it's the other way around, I can't remember.
Yeah, Sheldon Richman dehumanizing Palestinians.
Google that.
That's the best single piece in that whole thing.
Anyway, it'll blow your mind.
It's about the the 47 48 war and the original founding, and it's well, that's.
We're going to talk about that a little bit because kind of what I wanted to do is just uh go, you know, I kind of I got up to about the creation of, of Israel somewhere around 47, 48.
And they just, and I just want to say again, and I'm sorry, too many disclaimers.
People were making fun of me because I started off the last episode with like 15 minutes of just disclaiming all of this stuff.
But again, the purpose of this is not, the reason I'm recommending these other sources, because I'm not claiming that any one podcast we do here is going to be like, this is the authoritative, like the full and complete history.
And of course, whenever you talk about history, we're all by definition cherry picking, right?
Because if you're telling things that happened in history, well, we don't have a hundred years to podcast on this.
So you can't say every single thing that's happened.
You have to, by definition, pick the things that you think are relevant and important.
So everyone's guilty of this.
But I will just say from my own perspective, I grew up just being presented with the pro-Israeli side of this and never really questioning any of that.
And I do think that so much of the American public still, that's just what they've heard, particularly the older generations.
Like that's just all they've ever heard is that side.
And that's still what's presented.
I mean, you did a video.
I don't remember.
It's really actually very entertaining.
You can find it up on YouTube somewhere, but if you, if you YouTube Scott Horton, Dennis Prager, Israel, you'll probably find it where there was this video that went super viral that Dennis Prager did has millions and millions of views on it.
And it's like one of those cartoon animation videos, but it's just, it's almost funny.
Like you, you just look at, I mean, his, and I'm not exaggerating if you guys haven't seen this, but the take is literally like, one side wants peace and one side wants war.
And then it's like, like things falling over.
And then he goes, one side offers land and the other side blows themselves up.
And that's the entire history of it.
And that's what you're supposed to know.
And even in this most recent Ben Shapira, like I did a debunking response to his one, it's just amazing where they'll, because like I'm, I'm starting by saying we're all cherry picking, okay?
To be fair, but their cherry picking is like, he goes, it's like in 1948, the Jews declared independence.
And then all the Arab surrounding nations tried to kill them.
Anyway, in 1967, and you're like, oh, that's all, that's all that is to be said.
And, but literally, I'm not exaggerating.
This is what I was told as a kid.
This is like what my family told me.
Like, that is the history is that we just, and, and the way you put it like that is just like, oh, we just want to be like independent and have our little thing.
And they're like, well, we want to murder you for that.
And so what's the conclusion there?
It's just like, well, I guess they got to do whatever they got to do to the Israeli.
They do because they're free, man.
Right.
Right.
And so anyway, so I guess starting, let's start in 1947, I guess.
Start with the partition recommendation.
So the British Empire is crumbling at this point all around, not just in Palestine.
But the British Empire is just, by the way, at this point, I should say, which I didn't really get into in the last podcast, but let's just say they've been dealing with problems from both sides.
It's not as if like the Jews have been like behaving and getting along with the British Empire, but the Arabs are a thorn in their side.
They're dealing with violence all around.
This whole thing is a catastrophe.
The Belfort Declaration clearly has not worked at all.
The idea that you can have a Jewish homeland with respect to the rights of the Palestinians was not the plan of the Zionists, and it's not the way it's being implemented here at all.
And so the British Empire throws in the towel and they kick it to the UN.
Well, and that's what's so important, right?
Is that the Zionist plan all along was to create an exclusivist state at the expense of the people who were already there.
And, you know, when Ben-Gurion, I forget his name, but this is Incoming to Palestine.
Ben-Gurion sent his scout to go and check the place out.
And the guy said, ah, well, we're going to have to go somewhere else because there's people everywhere.
And they decide, well, those people are just going to have to move.
Skincare Investment Bundle00:02:32
And that legend was always, and I don't know if this is actually true in the historic record, but the legend was always that the saying was, she's a beautiful bride, but she's already got a groom or something like that.
And I don't know if that quote is actually real.
I think they're like, oh, we can't actually find that in the historic record.
But regardless, that is kind of the sentiment.
It's like, oh, yeah, great piece of land.
One pretty big problem.
Yeah.
Totally occupied by other people.
So we just got to find something else.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Interra Skincare.
When you combined a biomedical engineer, martial arts, and a distinct frustration with the skincare products currently on the market, well, the answer is Interra Skincare.
Their founder, Nick Andrews, is a biochemical engineer by training, a former pharmaceutical industry Maven, and an enjoyer of martial arts, often found his skin worn and in bad shape after contact with the Mats, as well as his sparring partners.
Moreover, the few products that worked well had side effects he wasn't willing to put up with.
He knew there had to be a better way.
Nick took his biochemical engineering knowledge, an insatiable appetite to build the better mousetrap and became his own product development specialist.
A few years later, Enterra Skincare was born.
Enterra Skincare's mission is to revolutionize the skincare and hair regrowth industries by offering cutting-edge, scientifically advanced products that deliver real tangible results.
They provide their customers with the most effective solutions for skincare and hair regrowth needs, backed by rigorous research and development.
The team at Enterra strives to empower individuals to feel confident, beautiful, and rejuvenated, embracing their unique skin through their luxurious and innovative product range.
Their new line this holiday season aims to enhance your daily skincare routine and support your skin's aging.
The ageless bundle isn't just about skincare products.
It's an investment in skincare transformation.
Unleash the potential of your enhanced skin by reducing the signs of aging and radiate timeless beauty like never before.
Order your ageless bundle now and embark on a journey to age-defying radiance and confidence today.
Don't miss out on this incredible opportunity to transform your skincare routine.
Just go to enteraskincare.com.
That's E-N-T-E-R-A skincare.com and use the promo code problem for 10% off.
That's enteraskincare.com, promo code problem for 10% off.
All right, let's get back on the show.
Proportion Wise Immigration00:04:09
And look, when it comes to the prehistory, I really do recommend that people listen to Daryl Cooper's history of it because, you know, he's, it's not a polemic.
It's just a history and he's really a great historian of it.
And, you know, he talks about how, you know, even for quite a while with pretty massive Jewish immigration, the Arabs were like trying to be cool about it.
And then it just became more and more.
And in fact, he talks about how secret it was that, you know, that the plan always was we're going to create a state at their expense, but everybody shut up about that.
That was at least under Ben-Gurion's leadership.
There were, you know, Jabotinsky and others thought otherwise, but that was like basically the deal from the beginning was, hey, keep it on the down low that we're slowly building up to a place where we're going to be able to seize all this land at their expense was always the plan.
And so it's not a matter of just, oh my God, those people were such jerks that they just wouldn't let the Jews live there that kind of thing.
It was, you know, from the very beginning, it was at their expense and quite clearly so.
And then, and it was a complicated mess because, of course, the area had belonged to the Ottoman Turks, quote unquote, belonged, right?
It was a part of an empire.
And so with, and of course, as you mentioned, you know, the Balfour Declaration, that was a letter to Lord Rothschild.
At that time, this was the most powerful family, you know, the wealthiest family in the world.
And so they were behind this thing from the beginning.
And so they were able to buy up titles of land from absentee landlords in Beirut or Ankara or wherever, who supposedly, you know, had been gifted tracts of land by the sultan back whenever, but had no legitimate claim to the land at all.
Yeah, I was talking about this on the last episode.
And like one of the important, and this I got from Daryl Cooper as well, is that one of the really important distinctions there is that, look, the Ottoman Empire had been ruling over these guys for 400 years or whatever.
And that was the way of their world.
But they're so, but it would more be like the Ottoman Empire would buy off, you know, tribal leaders or people like that to kind of like, you know, don't rock the boat here and let us keep doing what we're doing.
And so they, now, of course, from like a Lockean or Rothbardian property rights perspective, this is all bullshit, but they'd show up to someone's house and be like, hey, you know, this house that your dad built and you know this farm, you've been farming your entire land.
Well, I actually own it.
But their claim would be, give me 10% of your yearly income and then you can keep it and work on it.
So, okay, they're just extorting them for money.
But when the Zionist settlers came, it wasn't like, hey, no, it's actually mine.
Now you give me 10%.
It was get out of here.
You have to leave.
You can't work the land.
You can't live here.
That's it.
This house that your dad built, your grandfather built is now my house.
And that's so even within like a kind of feudalistic type of injustice, this was just a whole nother level of injustice.
This wasn't you just getting shaken down.
This isn't like us, the way we get taxed or something like that.
This was your life being ruined, your home being taken away from you.
And look, I mean, this is an ironic analogy because obviously the way Texas was stolen from Mexico in the first place and all of that, but still, Daryl, that is Martyr Made podcast there.
He makes the comparison and he's talking about, I believe, just the years 32 through 35.
He says, if you look at his, you know, proportion-wise, I trust him and his fractions.
Okay.
Proportion-wise, he says, we are literally, he says, we have approximately the Hispanic immigrant population in America increases by about a million a year every year.
And he goes, so proportionally, when you look at in the years between 33 and 35 there, you're talking about proportionally having like 37 million Mexicans move to the United States in two years, 37 million of them, and all along doing parades up and down your street talking about this is northern Mexico again, and all you Anglos have to go.
Yeah.
King Crane Commission00:04:50
Now you understand what was happening to the Palestinians due to the immigration from Europe, you know, during the, that was before World War II.
That was what was already happening to them before World War II.
And then it's aftermath where many, I don't know how many, couple of million Jewish survivors of the Holocaust then went on top of that.
Yes.
And that's, and so I talked about this on the, by the way, I just want to say it's, I know I'm covering stuff that we just, by the way, for people, the war ended in 45 for people who need to put a thumbtack on that.
Right.
So the, right.
So the, the, just to keep this all in your head, the, the UN partition plan is less than two years after the end of the war.
So it's like, you know, um, no, but I mentioned this on the last episode.
And I'm just curious, I don't think we've actually ever talked about this because I always, so I knew the King Crane Commission.
I'm going back now.
This is the end of World War I.
But so I always had this footnote in my head from Tom Woods, who I learned it from, because I always thought this was a really fascinating little like piece of history.
But that, so the King Crane Commission, the one, what I knew about from Tom Woods was that, so this was this commission that the Americans set up.
And I think they wanted the British and the French on board, but then they both like pulled out of it, which is really a shame because it would have really maybe had some weight if they were on board with it too.
But so they, anyway, they go to do this commission in what was the former Ottoman Empire territory after World War I to be like, what the hell do we do with these people, you know?
And so it's really just a fact-finding mission.
They go there and they just interview and survey tons and tons of people.
And then they come back and they present their recommendations to Woodrow Wilson, who very soon after had his stroke and is like basically out of commission after that.
The best thing Woodrow Wilson did in his administration.
But bad timing, though.
But for this, at least, bad timing.
But so the King Crane Commission.
Now, this was the nugget of information about it that I always loved that Tom Woods taught me was that Syria overwhelmingly voted or not voted, but surveying thousands of people.
They said, who do you want to rule you under a League of Nations mandate?
And it was like United States of America was the total, which I always thought that was very interesting because you're like, oh, this, they hate us for our freedom thing is actually like when we had more freedom and when we were intervening less in their part of the world, they actually liked us for that.
And they totally, so that was just like an interesting little nugget.
But I had never read what they said about the Balfour Declaration and what they said.
And so they basically go, they were like, Mr. President, in fact, I'm just going to, I'm going to pull it up because I think I have it screen grabbed here.
But do you know while you pull that up?
I'm going to go back to your last point about how they liked us.
So this is, I learned this from the great Eric Margulies, the great independent journalist.
And his mother was like this Lois Lane character, brave single woman reporter out there after World War II, running around interviewing all the sultans and potentates and the king of Saudi Arabia and all of these people and what have you.
And so he knows this firsthand from her, from her complete run of the Middle East in the post-war era there.
And that they loved us.
They loved America because first and foremost, we proved that you can overthrow the British.
We were the first to overthrow the hated British.
So they didn't say, ooh, you're Anglos and Christians.
They said, you guys killed the Redcoats.
And we love that about you, you know, because those guys stabbed us in the back and this and that.
So they had, there was no reason for them to be prejudiced against us.
This whole thing, as you say, which it is important because there's a whole they hate us for our freedom.
But, you know, like I was in that debate recently and it was, they're going to hate us no matter what anyway, like from now on into the future too.
And it's like, yeah, no, because if that's not how it was before our government did all the things to them that they did, then there's no reason to think it would have to be like that going on into the future.
Even just in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan was arming the very most right-wing kooks of these guys at war, they called us people of the book.
Thank you very much for your help.
So, and again, not again, but people should know this is all in Treacherous Alliance, the great book, that in the 1980s, when the Ayatollah, Khomeini, the mean old Ayatollah, was saying, we're going to kill you, Jews, blah, blah, blah.
That was the day that they were receiving a giant shipment of missiles from Israel.
And they were just, it was all for show.
They maintained that special relationship, that covert relationship after the revolution and all the way until 1993.
And that was when the worst anti-Israel rhetoric was coming out of the mouth of that Ayatollah.
His guys and the Israelis were working together while Reagan and America's back in Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Our allies, the Israelis, are back in Iraq.
And this was a brutal war.
Declaring Independence State00:14:43
I saw something.
Half a million dead on each side.
And chemical weapons.
Yeah, just like Ukraine now, kind of horrible.
Okay, so anyway, so I got this quote.
So this is what the King Crane Commission.
And again, you do get the vibe that this is not like a political commission at all.
They're just like, we don't know what's going on in this part of the world and we're trying to get information so we can figure out what the hell to do with them.
And the King Crane Commission said that, okay, so here's a direct quote.
And when they're talking about the whole, you know, Zionist project, they say, nor can the erection of such a Jewish state be accomplished without the gravest trespass upon the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.
And basically what they're talking about is that the Belfour Declaration basically said, you know, it pleases the king that there's a Jewish homeland here with respect to the rights of them.
And they're just like, that is from talking to all the Zionists on the ground and talking to all the Arabs on the ground.
This is, there is no possibility of a Jewish state being created that doesn't end up violating the rights of the Arabs there.
But this is the really interesting part is the commission says not only you as president, but the American people as a whole should realize that if the American government decided to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, they are committing the American people to the use of force in that area, since only by force can a Jewish state in Palestine be established or maintained.
And that word or maintained is a really big one.
They're like, you should know that your commitment is force forever as long as you support this project.
Yeah, I'm not so sure about that, honestly.
Like, I mean, obviously they were picking a hell of a fight with what they did there.
But the way I look at it, and we're skipping ahead here, I guess, in a Ben Shapiro way, but just on this particular point, we can go back.
I'm happy to go back.
But on this particular point, I really believe that like 90% of the controversy here is because of the occupations of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.
If they just let them have their measly, stinking 22% of what's left of Palestine, that would be totally unfair and totally suck.
But the refugees would have a decent, free, prosperous state to return to and much less to resent compared to try living in a refugee camp in Syria as a Palestinian or in Jordan right now, you know, where they're not allowed.
They can never be citizens, can never, you know, really participate in the economy, own property, any of these things.
They're refugees for decades and decades and decades, these people, generations and generations.
It's just, it's crazy.
So I think, you know, that's what, and I, and, you know, it's almost like, uh, oh, they, they've been fighting for thousands of years or whatever.
And even honestly, they've been fighting since 48 is to me almost a cop out in the same way because it makes it sound like as long as there's a Jewish state there, all they can ever do is fight.
And oh, well, then that's just the way it is then.
And we better help them fight then if everybody's going to be determined to destroy them forever.
When actually the reality is they've had a peace treaty with Egypt for 40 years.
They've had a peace treaty with Jordan for 30 years.
They bombed Syria every other week for the last decade and counting 12 years and counting with no response whatsoever from Syria other than a thank you from Al-Qaeda there.
Right.
And they are somewhat deterred from invading southern Lebanon, but they don't face an offensive threat from Hezbollah other then I guess they're deterred from building new cities in northern Israel that are within heavy, you know, range of heavy response from Hezbollah.
But, you know, even then, there's no reason to think that.
Well, it should, well, just a couple of things to point out there, because I think it's an important point is that number one, if the if the claim is that like, well, Israel can't, you know, They can't grant statehood or grant freedom to the Palestinians, which already even that phrasing is like, who the fuck are you to grant anybody else's like right to?
If, the if, the if?
The narrative is like they can't do that because, as i've heard many people like, as Laura Loomer said to me when debating them, because they're just such radical Islamists and they're committed to death.
It's like well okay, but they've, since the 70s, had peace with Egypt, who certainly has a problem with radical Islam.
They're the home of the Muslim Brotherhood and stuff like that and they've had peace with Saudi Arabia.
Is anyone going to tell me they don't have a problem with radical Islam and Saudi Arabia and so that kind and the other thing that should be mentioned there?
And look to be fair about this, I I don't want to like paint an an inaccurate picture, but you hear oftentimes what's in the Hamas Charter, what's the most radical thing that Hamas has ever said.
You heard this too about you know Uh Arafat, before he rejected terrorism and was kind of like what was on.
A lot of them talking about how we want to wipe Israel off the face of the map and kind of saying, almost saying 48 is the problem, but then, at the same time, all those people, Hamas included, and certainly Arafat, after he rejected uh terrorism.
Um, they all agreed to 60 to 68.
right i'm sorry uh 67.
Yeah, they all agreed to, to the 67 port.
They were just like, how about that?
Like let's just just give us our 22 right, and they all at different points, like i'm not saying, they said other fucked up things at other different points.
And obviously look, right now it's not gonna be, because every everything is taken five steps backwards.
Right but yes, it's true and and you know, like I didn't, I actually only learned this recently.
I need to look more into this.
But um, there's a debate between Norman Finkelstein and oh, i'm so sorry his name is on the tip of my tongue, it's one of Ehud Barack's negotiators from 2000.
Um, and they debated on democracy now years ago and and it's really good and um uh anyway uh, he says, look, when they invaded Lebanon in 1982, what was that about?
That was in reaction to Camp David.
Because what happened at Camp David?
They succeeded not just in doing the peace treaty with Egypt, but Carter and Brzeynski made them hammer out this thing that they were going to commit to a process for the formation of an independent Palestinian state, and Arafat was on what Finkelstein calls like quote, the peace offensive.
And this was Arafat saying, those days are over, now i'm trying to make nice.
So then, what do they do?
Invade Lebanon and attack them, and this was, of course, where Hezbollah was created, because not only did they attack the Palestinians, but they attacked the Shiites, the poor Sheites of of southern Lebanon, who I guess they thought that they could just treat Completely like crap and get away with.
And then the party of God was created in response to that.
It's the only reason they're dealing with Hezbollah at all right now.
And what was it?
It was in order to thwart Arafat trying to live up to the deal that everybody had agreed to.
And then look at the assassination of Sheikh Yassin in 2004.
I think we've talked about this before.
This is what led to the riot in Fallujah, that led to the lynching of the Blackwater Guards, that led to James Mattis going in there and killing all those people that led to the really touched off the Sunni-based insurgency in America's Iraq War II that killed 4,000 of our guys in that war.
And why do they kill Sheikh Yassin?
Because he said, I'm old.
I'm tired of fighting.
Let's make a deal and recognize them under 67 borders.
Boom.
And they kill him.
Look, we have no partner for peace, Dave.
What do you expect us to do?
Yeah.
And look, and you can, I swear to God, people can look this up.
I, you know, got the red banner in my head.
It's the Independent.
January 2004, Sheikh Yassin says, what the hell?
Let's figure out a way to get along.
March 2004, they kill him dead.
Yeah.
And so at some point, and again, I'm not trying to whitewash over the reality of the situation, right?
Because there was a time where Arafat did like support terrorism.
Same for Yassin.
No question about that.
Including suicide bombing, little kids, and everything else.
So they did a lot of.
And obviously, Hamas too.
It's just the point is that all of these leaders have at least at some point been like, okay, let's do the 67 borders.
And to get just like, so people understand this, because this part of the history I didn't go through, although I've said this on other podcasts, but just it, it bears worth repeating.
That it's like, look, you have in 1947, where I believe it's somewhere in the ballpark of like 10% of the land is owned by the Jews.
So even after all this prehistory of how they got it kind of fucked up and all this other stuff we've been talking about, they're only up to like 10% of the land.
And then the UN partition recommendation is like, we say the Jews should get 56% of the land and the Palestinian Arabs can have the other 44% of the land.
And so, of course, immediately the Jews accept it and the Arabs go, no, we're not doing this.
And so then the immediately.
Well, and it's all the best land, all the coastline and all the farmland, and you're going to have to get up and move out.
Yes.
Right?
It's not like Jews are going to have to get out of the way of the Palestinians to make way for their state.
It's all one-sided cleansing has to take place to make this happen.
And by the way, like small parentheses, first of all, it is, as you said, a recommendation because who in the world thinks the United Nations has the right to take a country away from somebody and give it to somebody else?
The UN has the right to declare the San Jacinto, the new southern border of Texas.
No.
Of course not.
Yeah.
End of argument.
Simple as that.
And a General Assembly.
And at the time, it was made up of only America and Western Europe and also in America.
As Daryl Cooper has said, there wasn't one nation within a thousand miles of Palestine that had been seated yet at the United Nations in 1947 General Assembly.
So then they pushed this like, oh, the democracy of the whole planet Earth voted, Dave, and thought it was the only fair thing to do when, like, no, a couple of sock puppets made a little recommendation that then becomes a pretext to steal.
Yeah, that's right.
And it should be, it's worth pointing out also, because at this point, when you talk about this in 2023, as much as all we're all people who don't particularly like the UN, but the UN is a thing.
It's just kind of known.
This is kind of a global governing body.
The UN's like a year old at this point.
The UN is brand new.
It's some new organization that was just created.
So it's senators and its allies.
Who the hell are you to even?
Although the Soviet Union was for this too, there was real consensus there.
And then, and of course, China was represented by, I don't know, anybody at that time.
Right, right.
Okay.
But so, and this is another thing that Sheldon gets at in his book that, and this is like, this is, again, because this is an ancient history.
It's not like there are things that we know about this.
But immediately after the partition plan, these Zionist militias start going around people.
Yes.
Just forcing people out of their villages.
And so right away, and this word gets around.
And by forcing, we're talking about massacres.
Yes.
Killing men, women, and children, rapes and looting and arson.
And so this is running riot.
So, but when, again, now, when, because it's like when Israel declares independence the following year in 1948, and the Ben Shapiro story is, they just declared their independence.
And then these Arab countries attacked.
It's like, okay, but look, there's a reason why they attacked.
Again, it's, you know, you're allowed to explain the reasoning of all these.
And it's not just that.
So in this process.
Well, and even then, the reason was they were crossing beyond the mandate, beyond the recommendations into what was supposed to be the Palestinian state at that time.
That was the trigger for their reaction.
And this is so important too.
And anybody can look this up.
It's at the Jewish Virtual Library and everywhere that Goldamair did all this secret shuttle diplomacy with King Hussein of Jordan, who wanted to rule all the Palestinian territory and all of Arab land.
And she made a deal with him that he would be able to keep the West Bank.
You know, and the mythology of the story is Israel fought Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, but nah, not so much Jordan.
They had this secret deal.
Jordan gets to keep the West Bank.
Why?
Just so the Palestinians cannot have the state as recommendation in this, oh, so holy recommendation plan that counts so much.
Now, no other resolution that the UN has ever passed in any way has any bearing on Israel whatsoever.
But boy, one half of this one recommendation is everything.
And actually a lot more than just that half of the recommendation.
Yeah.
So it's all.
But so now I know the number or the estimate is in total between 1947 and 1948, around 750,000 Arabs are kind of driven out of their land.
Now, I don't know exactly what number we were up to when the war with surrounding Arab nations starts because I think a lot of them.
You know, a lot of them are forced out.
A lot of them flee a lot of all of this.
But at least if you understand that we're up, this starts immediately.
And so when Israel declares their independence, it's more than just declaring that you're an independent.
It's not the United States of America saying, hey, Britain over there across the pond, you're no longer ruling us.
We're our own thing now.
This isn't just declaring it.
What they were saying is that all of these Palestinians who at this point were still hoping to return back home, it was telling all of them, you can never come back here.
Like there's no coming back from this.
So again, it's just, it's which is totally against the law that they all were just passing in the aftermath of World War II that says you can't do that anymore.
Corresponding all of that into the Geneva Conventions and the UN Charter and the rest.
Which I'm not a one world government guy, but they signed the charter.
It's the law that they signed up for in, I mean, if there's, you know, we don't believe in popular sovereignty like on the individual level and their relation with the state.
But these states agreed to this UN charter in a way that we never got to vote on the constitution.
It's like Alexander Spooner, who basically made the argument.
He was like, oh, the Constitution doesn't apply to us, but it does apply to every politician because they swear, you know, an allegiance to it.
So right.
Winning The War Narrative00:07:02
So then, so you have the war in 1948 here and the Jews end up winning this war, Which also lets you know something.
You know, it's kind of like funny how the way I was always told the history, right, was like, oh, you know, they just declared their independence and then seven Muslims, seven of these Arab countries attacked them, but we fought them all off and we won.
And it's, I almost look back at that and I go, how did I not like even raise my eyebrow at that?
A little bit like, but then how does that happen?
Exactly.
And you're like, oh, well, part of it is because, um, first off, they had serious international financing backing them.
And second, they had been fucking training these hardcore militia groups for decades at this point.
These dudes were tough fucking dudes who were ready to fight and they just and they and they win.
And so after winning.
And in fact, when you look at the history of those militias, it's amazing the way they, as they split off, they're only splitting off to the right and they're just getting worse and worse and worse terrorists, you know, from the original Ben-Gurion gang, which is Haganah.
And then it goes Irgun and the Stern gang and whatever.
And it's like, boy, these guys are like killing little kids and just going nuts.
Yeah.
And it's to the point where like this would have been, even in the original Zionist circles, this would have been like crazy to the right wing of where those guys were.
Like they never wrote about anything like this going on.
So, okay, so then after Israel wins the war, they don't even claim the 56% of the land that the UN partition recommendation suggested.
They take like 80% of the whole land.
Yeah, 78%.
Right.
Okay.
So now, so they have which means, which means they took, they went all the way took the entire western half of Jerusalem.
Right.
And then they took, if you just picture the map of Israel in your head right now, everything you see there with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip carved out.
With East Jerusalem at this point.
With East Jerusalem still belonging to the West Bank.
Right, right.
So, which is geographically where it is, but they always count it as a separate thing.
Right, right, right.
Yes, yes.
Okay.
So, so then this is, at least in terms of territory, this is the status quo from 1948 to 1967.
So, Israel with the Sinai Peninsula.
Right, which is like, that's not the Palestinians anyway.
That's a fight with Egypt that comes and goes at American insistence.
People, oh, Israel gave up the Sinai.
Yeah, because America told them that was in the 70s.
Yeah, I think they won it in the 56 war.
Oh, right.
They might have been in the 56 war.
By the way, another little quote, actually.
I know.
Yeah, I'd have to double check that.
But so there's, I think they gave it up after 73.
I don't know.
Yeah, I think that's when they gave it up.
I believe it was in the 70s that they gave it up.
But so there's one of the interesting little details.
And I love this because I get a lot of this from your work, like little nuggets and little quotes and little things where you're like, oh, that really hangs them by their own words.
But I was telling you this one on the phone the other day, but I got this from Darrell Cooper's series.
But where, so there's Moisha Dayan, who was the defense minister during the 67 war.
But in 56, I think it was, he was at this, like one of some Israeli lieutenant got killed by some Arabs and he gave his eulogy at his funeral.
And in the eulogy, it's really, it's pretty amazing.
I know you had some other quotes that are kind of similar in vain, but he literally said, like, he, he was basically like, look, let us not blame the murderers for this.
For who are we to say they can't be angry?
We drove them off this land where them and their fathers and grandfathers dwelt.
And they've got to watch us from these refugee camps over the last eight years, building up on their land.
And so it is funny where they go like, yeah, forget this.
They hate us for their freedom or they hate us because they're radical Islamists.
It's like, here's the guy himself telling you.
We know exactly why they hate us.
And Ehud Barack said too, if I was in their position, I would have joined a terrorist group when I was a young man.
Yeah.
You know, it's interesting about that quote about the fathers and the grandfathers is I read a book on the history of Austin a couple of years ago.
And I can't remember the source anymore, but there was a great quote in there of one of the original city fathers of Austin, Texas, talking about, you can't blame these Apache for what they're doing.
You know, this is where their fathers and their grandfathers are buried.
And he's talking about this land right here where we are right now.
That like, hey, we stole it from them, dude.
And even it's funny, even if you're not, forget if you weren't prescribing what your political solution or your ideological bent on this situation is, if nothing else other than to just understand the situation.
Like, can we just start with that starting point?
Because, you know, people jump to these things like, so what are you saying?
Like, we should give all the land back to the Native Americans.
I'd be like, no, more like in this part, what I'm just saying is that if we were being attacked by Native Americans right now to this day, understand that's what they're pissed off about.
Like, just start with that.
Or start with starting.
I want to pretend they hate us because we're free.
I go, oh, no, they hate us because we took all of their land away from them.
Well, yeah, we should make sure at the very least that the Indians that are left are free here.
You know what I mean?
So as so that they ain't got nothing to scalp us over anymore because on the margin, at least they're doing okay.
Well, and I would also.
I mean, it sucks the position that they're in.
And by the way, in Texas, there are the only Indians I've ever met in Texas are just one at a time people I know from the neighborhood and stuff like that.
But they ain't Indians in Texas the way there are in Oklahoma and the way they are out West.
Yeah.
Because the Rangers killed all of them or cleansed them all the way out of here.
And so just like what you're saying, we're going to give Texas back.
No.
But we can at least acknowledge the wrong there and do everything we can to make sure that our state that obviously is the Anglo-run state of Texas does everything they can to protect the rights of the Indians who are left now.
Yeah.
Yeah.
The obligation is on you double for that.
And let me just, let me just say almost like to argue with our other flank here, who I could maybe see, I hear in my mind, like giving pushback to, is that I'm sure there might be some people who go like, well, look, I mean, if you're saying they took all of this land illegitimately, then why shouldn't they just have to give all of it back?
But I would just say that there is, you know, I remember getting this pushback because I did a bunch of debates on Ukraine and stuff over the last couple of years.
And one of the things people would say is, you know, you'd talk about, if I talked about, say, like, you know, the last 10 years and the tensions between the ethnic Russians and the ethnic Ukrainians or something, people would often, people who are supporting the war, would often say, but you know, the only reason why these tensions exist is because the commies flooded Ukraine with ethnic Russians to kind of break up their national sovereignty, which is totally true.
Switching To Fume Habits00:02:23
It's totally true.
It's like, but the response is like, yeah, but they're there now.
Yeah, that was a long time ago.
Like the generations go by.
And that is the difference.
I don't know what to say.
It's that you do at a certain point have to go like, okay, but there's still generations of Israelis now who have been living there for generations now.
And at some point, there is kind of a reasonable statute of limitations where you just have to go, it's the only answer here is that you all try to get along and live together.
The answer isn't that they're not moving back to Eastern Europe.
And that's what the PA, look, again, you know, Arafat and all those guys, and this came out in the Palestinian papers relate to The Guardian and Al Jazeera that show that, I think even, of course, during Arafat, but especially since Abbas has taken over the thing, that they have completely essentially given up on the right of return in anything but name.
And the deal was you admit that what you did was wrong and that you're sorry and that Palestinians have a right of return.
And then you let a couple of 10,000 of them come home.
Like essentially like a ceremonial amount of them come.
Kind of let us save face almost and say that.
The rest of the right of return is you get to come home to the West Bank in Gaza, but at least it's a free country and you get to settle for that, but it's not too bad to settle for.
But instead, they don't get that.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, who we love, our longtime sponsor, of course, Fume.
Cold turkey may be great on sandwiches, but there's a better way to break your bad habits.
We're not talking about some weird mind voodoo from your crazy neighbor here.
We're talking about fume, spelled F-U-M, but pronounced Fume.
They look at the problem in a different way.
Not everything in a bad habit is wrong.
So instead of drastic, uncomfortable change, why not just remove the bad from your habit?
Fume is an innovative, award-nominated device that does just that.
Instead of electronics, fume is completely natural.
Instead of vapor, fume uses flavored air.
And instead of harmful chemicals, fume uses all natural, delicious flavors.
You get it?
Instead of bad, fume is good.
It's a habit that you're free to enjoy, and it makes replacing your bad habits easy.
Your fume comes with an adjustable airflow dial and is designed with movable parts and magnets for fidgeting, giving your fingers a lot to do, which can be helpful during the de-stressing and anxiety while breaking your habits.
We've all struggled with bad habits.
I myself have really benefited from fume and I know a lot of people at Gas Digital have as well.
Olmert Propaganda Claims00:15:32
So go check them out.
Stopping is something we all put off because it's hard, but switching to fume is easy, enjoyable, and even fun.
Fume has served over 100,000 customers.
They have thousands of success stories.
There's no reason you can't be one of them.
Join fume in accelerating humanity's breakup from destructive habits by picking up the journey pack today.
Get it at tryfume.com.
That's T-R-Y-F-U-M.com.
Make sure to use the promo code problem, and you're going to get 10% off the journey pack today.
Tryfume.com, promo code problem for 10% off your order today.
All right, let's get back on the show.
I don't know.
I saw one time, a guy on Twitter said, has anyone ever been convinced by an analogy?
Like about anything?
And the first answer was, yes, Scott Horton convinced me with an analogy when he said that the Palestinians are not the Mexicans.
They're Indians on a reservation.
And here I let, I guess, you know, essentially I'm putting words in his mouth now, but like Shapiro convinced me that they're the Mexicans across the Rio Grande.
Now I understand that they're the Indians on the res and how unfair the fight is and how surrounded they are and this and that.
And that was like the key, the light bulb.
I've been convinced by lots of analogies.
All right, is it Peter Schiff always had great analogies?
Tom Woods had great ones.
Here's a good one.
Here's a good one.
I think it take Jim Crow segregation against blacks in the South up through the 60s or mid 60s anyway.
And so what if Mississippi had said that the Supreme Court and Lyndon Johnson, all them can go to hell?
They are absolutely not going to integrate.
They're not going to end Jim Crow segregation and their two-tiered rule of law.
They're just never going to do that.
But you know what we will do, though?
We'll let northern Mississippi go and be an independent black state and they can have their own rights and take care within the union, whatever.
Right, right.
It'll be all their problem, not ours anymore.
And I pick on Mississippi especially because they were the worst.
And also, I'm pretty sure I got a map in my head of all the best land is near the coast.
And that's where all the whites lived anyway.
And all the blacks lived in the woods in the north because that's how it already was.
So fine, we'll let them have northern Mississippi.
But then they never did that.
And now here we are decades later and it's still Jim Crow.
And the Supreme Court and the Congress said you can't do that way back then, but Mississippi just somehow were able to thumb their noses and keep this going the whole time under some charade of a two-state solution where someday we're going to do this.
And that's essentially to me, you know, this is why they use the word apartheid.
And see, anyone could have told you it was de facto apartheid a long time ago.
But in 2020, Netanyahu said essentially, like almost exact words, there will only be one security force between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea forever, period.
And that's me and us and not them.
And so at that point, this is when you might remember he said he was going to annex.
He was going to officially annex the Jordan River Valley and much of the rest of the West Bank.
And then I guess Trump's people told him to back off a little bit there and he decided not to.
But it was at that point that Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Beth Salem, the Israeli group, all decided, okay, fine.
We're not going to, enough is enough.
And they all three put out their big reports saying this is apartheid.
And I urge people to read those reports.
I mean, they're fantastically, you know, very well done.
And yes, a lot of times Amnesty is trying to get you into a war, but that's not this case.
It's actually a well-done study.
And what's going on there is the illusion's over.
We were lying and now we're like not even bothering to lie anymore, which means what do we got?
We have essentially half the population that rules the other half.
And just like our founders would have said, they got no representation.
So what the hell is that?
And you can, it's been since 1967.
Yeah.
I mean, like, how long can you go on where you're just like, look, if I'm describing the situation here, it is a one-state solution right now.
It's not a good one-state solution.
That's what it's, it's been since 1967.
We're not like in a transition period here, which is how they'll kind of talk about it sometimes.
Like, well, the process of doing all, it's like, no, this is the ruling government of all of these areas.
Anyway, just to let's just go through a little bit of the history and case.
By the way, we got to get back to, because this is always the Palestinians' fault that they never accepted the state.
So ask me that in five minutes.
We'll get back to that.
But just to the big ones, which I think most people listening probably know this already.
But then, so in 1967, there's another big war.
This war is they, they, the Israeli perspective, they'll tell you they preemptively launched a war because they had no other option.
That's also been admitted by several people.
You have some great quotes on this where they're like, who was it who said that was a war of choice?
Yeah, Begin, who was Begin admitted, you know, the founder of Likud.
And in other words, the right-wingers, right?
Not the hippies at all.
And then Yasak Rabin, who was, you know, definitely a war hero and all of that from their point of view, even though he ended up later becoming what you would call a liberal, but certainly a hard ass and no dove up until the very end anyway.
And even that was sort of an illusion.
But and then also, I can't, I, the guy's got a nickname, I think, is Mickey, but his son is Miko Pelet, who wrote the general's son.
And, but the general himself, I have a quote from the general himself saying there was no threat.
And in fact, he says, if you say that there was a threat that Egypt was going to take us out, that's an insult to the army.
I demand you take it back because you trying to say we couldn't handle them?
Hell, we chose to start that fight because we wanted to, et cetera, et cetera, like that.
They all say that.
They all agreed on that.
And they had won a war against him 20 years earlier.
And by the way, you can read the begging quote in the New York Times has the full quote so that you don't have to go to some underground site or whatever to find that.
It's right there in the Times.
So they, so now if you picture, so they had driven all of the, well, I say not all of the Palestinians.
I should, that's a misstatement.
It was about 20% of the Israel proper was Arab, Christian, or Muslim, but and still is to this day.
But they had driven the vast majority of the Palestinians into half of Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.
But now in 1967.
And other countries, right?
Refugee camps in Kuwait, Jordan, Syria, and everywhere else.
But now in 1967, Israel launches this war.
They win again.
And now they just take control of all of it.
The Palestinians are still there, but Israel takes full control of all of it.
And I'm sorry, did you say Egypt controlled Gaza until then?
Yes.
That's simple.
Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan controlled the West Bank and half of Jerusalem.
And Golan still belonged to Syria because it's Syrian.
Right.
So they win this war and it's all under Israeli control.
And we usually leave it.
And it has been ever since.
Yeah, we usually leave out Golan because it's not the Palestinians who are occupied there.
And it's not the Palestinian Authority and Hamas and these politics.
It's mostly Syrian Druze who are occupied on the Golan Heights, but they are just as stolen, really, as the poor Palestinians are in this.
And so basically now you have since, and if you think this through, I mean, it's like 19, you know, we're getting, me and you are getting a little bit older now because like it's like our like our grandpas were like, you know, kids, you know, they were maybe kids in the 30s or 40s or something like that.
But like we're getting older now.
But like for a lot of people probably listening to the show, your grandpa maybe was in the 60s or something like that.
So this is, if you could just think about that ever since then, it's been, you know, generations now who have just grown up in this, who know nothing else other than.
Look at the white in my beard.
This was 11 years before I was born.
Right.
Right.
That's really right.
Like not that long.
Right.
Or anyway, like, but the point still is that it's like, there are a lot of people now who literally this has just been their entire life, right?
So right.
So your point, like, even like for us, like, it's like, this would have been our entire lives.
And even for people a little bit older than us.
Hey, there are grown adults who were born in this millennium.
Yeah.
Right.
Dude, I swear by the way.
I was 25 years old.
Dude, I was at a liquor store and the guy, the kid in front of me was young and he got carded.
And I just heard the guy just picks it up and he goes, he goes, all right.
I don't remember the exact date, but he goes like November 13th, 2001.
Okay, you're good for.
And there was just something about hearing the year 2001 and that you are good.
You can buy alcohol.
You were born in 2001 and you can drink.
What type of fucking future am I living in?
Anyway.
But so this is now the, you know, this, this goes on for obviously since 1967.
There are waves of terrorism.
There's, there are, you know, these kind of like the anti-fadas, which is essentially violent uprisings that happen over and over.
And then there's this kind of like just kind of an endless cycle of terrorism, Israeli violent military responses to the terrorism.
But this is something you, you've talked about a bunch.
And I think this is something that's that's important for people to understand that up until Netanyahu, not, of course, like waving away any of the brutality of Israel's occupations, but they didn't go on these kind of like bombing campaigns the same way they do now.
It was much more special opsy and much more like targeting like the terrorists themselves.
Innocent people died.
More innocent Palestinians were always dying than innocent Israelis by very clear difference.
But it wasn't the way it's been.
Well, I remember in 2005, our dear leader at antiwar.com, Eric Garris, told me, oh man, now that Sharon is pulling the last of the Jewish settlers out of Gaza, those poor people are doomed.
You want to talk about human shields?
They were actually shielding the local population, those settlers.
And without them there, it's been bloody murder.
I forget if Olmert, I think, you know, you know, I think Olmert started a pretty massive campaign in 08, really in 06 to before Netanyahu came.
And, you know, Olmert was, that's Ehud Olmert.
He had been Sharon's right-hand man.
And Sharon and Netanyahu had been in Lakud together.
And then Sharon had split off from Netanyahu and formed Kadima.
But he was basically, they're a hair apart on this stuff.
Or, you know, differences, severe differences in choices, I guess, but ideologically very close, right?
So I think it might be fair to say that it was Barack who, I mean, pardon me, Olmert who really started it with these massive campaigns like this.
And then Netanyahu has done, they call, and Netanyahu came in Siri was, was it early 09, like in the middle of the campaign, I think, of 08, 09, right before Obama was inaugurated.
And they finally turned it off two days before he was inaugurated.
But it went through that winter.
And it was Israel that broke that ceasefire, of course.
Well, not, of course, but it was.
And then they did it again in 14, which is the horrible Operation Cass-led, which, you know, there's this wonderful book by Max Blumenthal called The 51-Day War about that.
And they broke that ceasefire too.
Oh, it was horrible.
Do you know this story?
So this is how cynical Benjamin Netanyahu is, dude.
Okay.
You thought you already knew.
And I'm going to say November of 14.
Forgive me if I get my month wrong.
I believe, or was it in the summer?
No, no, no.
It was in November of 14.
On the West Bank, some, I think it was a couple, three Hamas guys had broken out of their pen, crawled over the wall or something how got out.
And then they picked up three Israeli Jewish hitchhikers.
Hey, how are you guys doing?
Hop in.
Gotcha.
And then they killed him.
But the thing is this, Dave, one of the hitchhikers called 911, whatever the number is.
And so they had it recorded.
Help us.
We've been kidnapped by these Hamas guys.
And then pow, Okay.
Netanyahu knows this.
These three people are not missing.
Their bodies are missing.
They're dead.
They know they're dead.
And they know who killed them.
They can't find the guys right now, but they know their names.
They are three individual human men who killed these other three individual human men, right?
Maybe it was two killed the three.
Anyway, Netanyahu leads the people of Israel to believe for more than two weeks that these three are still missing and presumed alive.
And so, and we have no idea who did it.
It was one of them dirty Palestinian terrorists.
You know how they are.
And then sent the cops and the soldiers to run riot throughout the West Bank, killing people, demolishing homes, you know, beating people up and raiding homes in the middle of the night and pure chaos, pretending to scour the area for these people.
And this goes on for more than two weeks.
And then I think it was some hikers or somebody stumbles upon the shallow grave and finds the bodies.
And then Netanyahu goes, oh my God, everybody, they're dead.
After, and I left out.
He'd been demagoguing this like crazy for two weeks.
And then at the end, he goes, oh, they killed him.
They killed him.
And he starts a massive bombing campaign against the Gaza Strip.
Like, this is evil, man.
Imagine Barack Obama saying, there are three blacks missing in America somewhere.
We're sending the cops to roused up white hideouts where white folks congregate, where they, you know how these right-wingers are, where they might do something like this.
And anybody in the tri-state area, we got an object of reasonable belief that you're a suspect and we're coming for your rat.
I mean, it's impossible to imagine.
Or Donald Trump, if you're a left-winger, imagine Donald Trump doing that to blacks.
Three whites are missing, everyone.
And he knows good and well that they're dead from the first day.
Three white people are missing, everyone.
Oh, my God.
Oh, my God.
Demagoguing against American blacks.
It's unimaginable.
It is unimaginable that even like your worst, the worst leftist, worst paranoid, schizophrenic demagoguing against Trump.
Ariel Sharon Eminent Domain00:09:28
He would never do that.
He would never do that.
That is insane.
That's how they started the 2014 war.
And I'm sorry for the tangent.
No, no, no.
I didn't.
That's who we're getting with that story.
That's really interesting.
Ruthless.
And that's in Blumenthal's book, The 51-Day War.
So I want to just rewind back a little bit more from there, because I think this is a really important one to kind of knock down to, which is that the kind of what the propaganda is from the pro-Israeli point of view, there's propaganda on all sides, of course.
But that they say, because you touched on 2005 there.
And so their big thing is, and this is how they try to make it sound, is like they're like, well, I don't know what you guys are talking about.
We already tried that.
We ended the occupation.
Just to be clear, so previously to that in Gaza and in the West Bank currently, this is under, like martial law isn't even an accurate description.
Foreign military occupation law.
It's not even martial law by your own government.
It's martial law by, you know, if it is your own government, I guess you could say in a sense.
But in other words, it's martial law only even more lawless than that.
Yes.
And this is, I mean, so this is like, and if you ever go read about details of this, there's like IDF soldiers who have defected and stuff like that who tell their story.
Breaking the silence is what it's called.
Yeah.
Like, and we'll tell you that like, dude, it's just insane.
You know, you're running around there screaming curfew at these people.
So they have to get inside their home.
If you don't, if they don't get inside there quick enough, they're pushing grandmas down on the ground and stuff.
And I mean, you could just try to, you know, put yourself in that situation if you're like a seven-year-old kid and you're seeing some foreign occupying soldier pushing your grandma down on the ground.
Like, and then, you know, and then some terrorist group comes along and goes, hey, you want to join?
You could totally see them being like, you know, yes, I would like to.
But so in 2005 in Gaza, and this is what you were referring to when you said, so they did, they, they, there were some Israeli settlements that were there and they, they forced them out.
They, they kind of.
Yeah, the army basically rooted them out of it.
Well, but they paid off.
They paid a lot of them too.
Like it was kind of like if they wouldn't take the money, they would for it's kind of a, what's the, um, you know, what's the term that I'm looking for?
Uh, when they take your house and give you money.
Foreclosure.
No, no, no, no.
Eminent domain.
It's kind of like an eminent domain.
Thank you.
Look, what they did was they forcefully closed these illegal settlements and withdrew the people.
So they got those people out of there.
And yeah, like eminent domain, but even that is by force, you know, choice admitting the matter.
So they get clear them out and they end when they say they end the occupation, they pulled the IDF out of Gaza.
So they make it sound like, yeah, well, look, okay, it was an occupation, but we ended the occupation.
And then look what they did, you know, in return to thank us for giving them exactly what they wanted.
They elect Hamas.
And okay, so there's like a lot of issues with that.
I did love Sheldon's, the way he put it was he said it'd be like if all the prison guards left the prison, but they still kept all the doors locked and surrounded the perimeter.
And you were like, look, they're free.
And you're like, no, that's not, that's not what freedom is.
That's what, you know, and then it's like, yeah, that's not at all.
Like, what is that even, how is this even being spun?
And that's why.
I was using that same analogy where I was saying, you know, if the West Bank is a minimum security prison where the Palestinian Authority are the trustees in the prison, subcontracting for the warden and his men, then in Gaza, Hamas is the strongest gang that took over the prison when the warden and his men withdrew to the perimeter, which is right like the same thing Sheldon was saying there.
So there's the strongest way to look at Hasa.
I think the best way to look at Hamas is the toughest thing.
And now, so let's talk real quick about why did Sharon pull him out of there?
Because it wasn't because he's such a nice guy.
This is Ariel Sharon we're talking about here, the butcher of Beirut.
The reason he did that was to put the peace process in formaldehyde.
And if anybody just goes at anti-war.com slash scott, it's my most recent article.
It's called Netanyahu's Support for Hamas backfired.
We can talk a little bit more about that's like the next chapter.
But in there, you just, in fact, anyone, just type in Ariel Sharon formaldehyde.
Okay.
Like it'll come up.
What do you, where else is that going to be in context, right?
And then what you'll find is Dove Weissglass.
It's D-O-V with no E, Dove Weissglass.
And he tells Haaretz in an interview, he says, listen, the whole reason for the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is to put the peace process in formaldehyde because we're dividing, you know, obviously Gaza and the West Bank are already physically divided from each other, but now we're dividing them politically as well.
And essentially saying we're putting people in power in the Gaza Strip who won't have standing to negotiate so that then we can say, as he puts it, once the Gaza Strip becomes Norway, then we'll have to negotiate with you.
See you then.
And shalom.
Right.
Right.
So in other words, as, in fact, this was a debate with the guy I debated, Will Chamberlain on Tim Poole's show.
He and Daryl were going back and forth, Martyr Maid.
And, oh, hell, I forgot what I was going to say.
I'm sorry.
I lost my train.
Was Sharon pulling out of Gaza to put the peace process in formaldehyde?
No, I still missed it.
Anyway, okay, well, if it comes to you, go ahead.
But anyway, the point being was they're sabotaging the possibility that the Palestinians, even on the West Bank, will have standing to negotiate.
Oh, I know what it was.
It was that what Will Chamberlain said was peace has to come first for a Palestinian state rather than a Palestinian state in order to have peace.
And then Daryl was quibbling with that.
And that was what they were discussing.
And then this is actually directly out of the global language dictionary, propaganda.
And everybody, please look that up.
It's Frank Luntz did a ton of polling and a ton of focus group and specialized surveys and polling for all these Israeli talking points.
And that's one of them is, of course, we want to give them a Palestinian state.
As soon as they become Norway, right?
As soon as they are completely compliant and you can guarantee that no fighting aged Palestinian will ever swing a punch again, then we'll have peace.
And this is the way that they set it up, but it was deliberate sabotage.
And it's in his own words.
And I'm only like quoting a very small portion of that rant of his, but it's, I have the whole quote in just again, antiwar.com slash scott.
And it has the whole entire context.
And again, formaldehyde is the key.
We're freezing the peace protest.
This entire push by all of our allies in the West, the United States, and Europe, and the Israeli left, the Labor Party, they all want us to deal with the Palestinians.
Well, we figured out how to sabotage that.
We signed the Oslo deal.
We said at Camp Dave, we're going to try.
We told George W. Bush, we'll do everything we can, George W. Bush.
But now, in fact, he says in there, he says, We told the world, he says, We instructed the world.
We have no partner to talk to.
And we have, we got and received from the Congress and the American president a no one to talk to certificate.
And that no one to talk to certificate says, hey, as long as the status quo is the status quo, then we can keep doing whatever we want and we don't have to do anything.
And that's the Norway bit at the end.
As soon as they become saints, then we'll have to deal with them.
Until then, and what's the game?
What's the game?
They don't really care about Gaza, Dave.
They want the West Bank.
And if they got to give up a Palestinian state on the West Bank, then they're screwed.
But as long as they can keep good little pet terrorists or at least just divided and conquered, but especially with Hamas in charge in the Gaza Strip, then it suits their interests perfectly.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Crossed Sabres Coffee.
Man, do I love a good cup of coffee?
And a lot of times, if we're being honest with ourselves, we're making B-level and C-level cups of coffee.
You don't have to do that anymore.
Now you can get Crossed Sabers coffee.
It's roasted on demand, packaged and shipped within 48 hours.
Stop drinking burnt moldy coffee.
Get the freshly roasted specialty-grade farm direct coffee available at Cross Sabres.
If you're into K-Cup roasting, they've got you covered on that too.
It's a veteran-owned and operated company.
A portion of the proceeds from each purchase are donated to veterans serving organizations.
Go check them out.
Fueling Bravery one sip at a time.
Crossedsabercoffee.com slash discount.
Dave is the website that will get you 15% off each order.
That's crossedsaberscoffee.com slash discount slash Dave for 15% off.
All right, let's get back on the show.
Election And Hamas Coup00:15:34
Okay, so before we do the support for Hamas, we got to do the election.
Well, I just want to say, but before even before that, I do just think it's important that there's a reason why these some of these international human rights groups that you mentioned, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International.
And Bet Slim.
Yes.
Well, there's a reason why, even before what you were talking about, when they called that the apartheid, but in 2005 and in the following years, they all basically said, like, they're like, no, this occupation isn't over.
Oh, so do the international institutions.
The courts ruled that as well.
Like the International Court of Justice and whatever.
And the reason why is because we mentioned that they, you know, you pull the prison guards outside, but keep your eye.
But so during this period of time, it's not as if in any meaningful sense that Israel ever gave any, like, I mean, they were controlling, they're still controlling the water space, the land, the at least whatever it is.
Egypt has that their strip, but all the rest of the land into Gaza.
They're controlling the medicine and the supplies and everything.
And so, and so it's under this still kind of like brutally restricted state, which just the point is that guarantees that they could never become Norway.
Like this is impossible.
And that is that.
So, like, the economic pressure on them is still just like devastating throughout this whole time.
Right.
So, then in 2006, Congolese Rice insists that as part of the global democratic revolution, it just makes no sense that Israel should have to deal with a Palestinian authority that wasn't elected by the people of Palestine to represent them.
Don't you believe in democracy, Dave?
And so, they held this election.
Now, look, it's obvious that it could be that some jerk, whether an Israeli strategist or an American one or someone or a group of them decided that this would be really clever to do on purpose.
I don't have any evidence of that or any real indication of that, other than if you look at the way it worked out.
Right.
Right.
But they, I think unwittingly, best I can tell, they just completely screwed it up.
And they essentially held an election in a situation where the Palestinian Authority had been routinely and completely humiliated over and over again with their inability to deliver to the Palestinian people at all.
And of course, they're insanely corrupt.
And the Palestinian Authority itself was created by the U.S. and Israel after Oslo, right?
This thing is not the constitution written by we, the people of Palestine.
Okay.
I mean, this is the thing that America focused on them in the first place.
Of course, Arafat and his men ran it.
The Fatah party ran it, but it was, you know, the whole thing was completely corrupt.
And, and, and that people of, and I'm sorry, I forget like all exactly the, you know, what all was going on right at that time.
Well, it was after it was, uh, no, no, no, it was at the beginning of 2006.
But anyway, so Hamas won, but they just won a plurality.
Oh, and oh, well, this is after a year of the withdrawal and the formaldehyde plan and the continuing of the siege and all that.
So, um, and, and in other words, and the Palestinians' inability to make something useful out of with out of the withdrawal, right?
And the name, you know, it was done with all this propaganda about how great it was supposed to be, right?
And then so they're still living in squalor.
So Hamas wins a plurality.
All this stuff about, oh, all the people of Gaza deserve to die because their mom and dad voted wrong 17 years ago.
Who says their mom and dad voted wrong?
You know, at the time, Dave, in 2006, the Gaza Strip was a majority minor population.
They say it's about 50-50 now.
Typically, the reason they're called minors is because people under 18 are usually the minority in any country, right?
Nope, not in Gaza in 06.
They weren't.
Most people were under 18.
They had no representation whatsoever.
The majority of the goddamn place.
And that was 17 years ago.
And Hamas only won a plurality.
They won a majority of seats in the parliament, but that's different.
And in fact, the Washington Post had a link to Lara Friedman is this great critic of Israel on Twitter, kind of center left lady, I think, not too radical, but a great critic.
And she had the stats and showed in the graph that they didn't win more than a plurality in any single district that voted either.
They never won a majority in a single district in that election.
And yet, under the curse of popular sovereignty, somehow, they all have to die over that.
It's nuts.
What a completely bogus argument.
It's just crazy.
Like even if voting wrong meant a death sentence, you still can't hang that on these people.
And voting wrong, that's like, let's be real clear about that.
You can have stupid wrong opinions and vote wrong.
If you vote for a Democrat and that Democrat murders somebody, that's on that Democrat.
That's not on you.
You don't lose your right to live because you're a civilian who voted for a guy who committed a sin with his state power.
That's completely crazy.
As you point out, it's Osama bin Laden's logic.
That's right.
It's directly out of the letter to America.
So controversial.
Look at it.
It says right there, you pay your taxes, you vote.
And especially you Americans brag about how in control of your own government you are.
You deserve it more than anybody.
He said, that's completely nuts.
I'm responsible for Bill Clinton's sins.
Now, that can't possibly be right.
I know that ain't right.
Okay.
So it's same thing here.
The collective guilt of the people of Gaza.
It's just insane the way people turn that on them in that way.
Well, it's just, listen, it's just the really the truth of that is it's it's working backward.
It's like we need to dehumanize these people and justify this.
And here's the excuse for that.
It's just so ridiculous.
And then so what happened then?
As soon as this story is unbelievable.
As soon as Hamas wins a plurality and they're, they don't have any power in the West Bank.
Okay.
They're they have some people in the West Bank, but Fatah and the PA rule the West Bank.
And they're only in Gaza and the PA is in Gaza as well at that time.
And what does Israel and America do?
Well, the wrong guy won the election.
And so then what do they do?
They punish the PA that rules the Gaza, pardon me, that rules the West Bank.
And they cut off all because, of course, again, they're under occupation.
The PA is their trustees.
So Israel collects all the tax revenue and they won't give them any of the tax revenue.
So they're just steadily losing support this, like in the entire time after the vote.
Then Hamas has no choice but to form a coalition government with Fatah in Gaza.
And instead of saying, okay, well, at least this is a chance.
And by the way, John McCain even said, yeah, what the hell?
They won the election.
Let's talk to him.
I don't know.
I was at the WEF forum thing on C-SPAN.
He's sitting in the snow in the chair.
If anybody's looking for the video, you could find it.
They're like outside and it's snowing.
And he's saying, ah, we can talk to Hamas.
Because after all, like, John McCain's a tough guy.
What is he scared of Hamas?
Yeah, we can, we can figure out how to, we can talk to Khrushchev and we can talk to him.
Right.
Well, I never talked to Kim.
But anyway, talk to these guys.
So instead of doing that and saying, okay, look, let's see what we can do to groom the least worst of these guys to take the most powerful political positions and rein in their military branch, et cetera.
They said, absolutely not.
And so this is called, the article is called The Gaza Bomb Shell by David Rose.
It's in Vanity Fair, but it's a good piece on whatever, dude.
They publish journalism once upon a time for some reason.
But it's in there and it's a solid piece.
And in fact, I just reread it and I curse my memory that I did not remember this fact that in that piece, he quotes David Wormser himself, Dick Cheney's foreign policy advisor, the man who wrote the clean break doctrine for Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996, the guy who had was a leash on Colin Powell and the State Department in 2002, preventing him from preventing the war.
That guy wrote, told David Rose, curse Elliott Abrams and his stupid, horrible plan to do a coup d'etat and overthrow Hamas in Gaza because it backfired and was a disaster.
And they worked with Israel and the Egyptians to funnel a bunch of weapons into the Fatah faction in Gaza to use to attack Hamas.
And Hamas kicked their ass because they were disorganized and whatever.
And by the way, just a quick note on that is one of the things that's so amazing about this is that so they're sending weapons into Gaza.
And just so you know, the entire justification for the blockade on Gaza is that, well, we can't let them put in water supplies because these could be turned into weapons or these could, and everything has to be in spade.
Entire justification for keeping these people in backbreaking poverty is that weapons could end up getting in.
And who got the weapons?
But when it suits their interests, they have no problem sending them in.
And just like, you know, a scene out of, you know, Western Iraq in 2014 or Afghanistan in 2021, who got all the guns?
Hamas got all the guns and drove Fatah right out of there.
And then, but look.
And if you're playing chess and you're real smart and you're a real jerk.
And again, like after the fact, looking at it hindsight, you could see someone would be reasonable to conspiracy theorize that this whole thing was a setup.
The election was a setup.
The withdrawal, the election, and the maybe not the failed coup.
I don't know.
See, I don't mind that.
It was a coup that fell apart.
But then look at the situation since then.
And this is the meat of that article.
Again, for people who only listen to a part of this or something.
It's anti-war.com slash Scott has the piece.
It's called Netanyahu's Support for Hamas backfired.
And it's about how quite, and I got, I don't know, maybe 10 quotes, maybe a dozen quotes of Netanyahu and his men explaining quite explicitly and deliberately why they prefer that Hamas rule the Gaza Strip.
That's for one reason and one reason only.
So they do not have to negotiate in good faith over a Palestinian state, primarily based, obviously, on the West Bank.
And they say over and over again, if Hamas was out of Gaza, then that would mean the PA would take over Gaza.
And then the labor, the left, the EU, the US, the UN, the planet Earth would say, what's your excuse now, pal?
And we got to keep that excuse, see?
And the excuse is we don't have a partner for peace.
And so I have a couple of, well, I mean, anyone can read the article, but Netanyahu said to a meeting of his Likud party members in the Knesset that anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state must support the bolstering of Hamas in Gaza.
He says, they'll never negotiate, but we control the height of the flames, right?
This is just like, remember in the book, in the 1990s, Bill Clinton's men, well, I don't know if they were Clinton's men, but at the Pentagon, the joint staff would say, terrorism is a small price to pay for being a superpower.
And that's in the weekly standard if people want that footnote.
The weekly standard is gone now, but their entire archive is at the Washington Examiner website.
So you can find any guilty thing.
If you want to find where they say, yeah, we should kick in the Serb skulls from 1995.
It's all right there for you.
Bill Crystal and his men is, it's at the Washington Examiner.
But anyway, that's where that comes from.
It's a very well-sourced piece where he has that quote.
And you could put yourself in their shoes.
They're the Pentagon.
They're the world empire.
They can do anything.
And every once in a while, somebody sets off a truck bomb at an embassy overseas and mostly Africans are killed.
Or they set off a bomb on a dinghy that puts a big hole in our boat, but doesn't sink it.
Yeah.
Terrorism's a small price to pay for being a superpower.
And they're not thinking, at least those men talking that smack, were not thinking kamikaze with a 757 in a tower full of thousands of people because they weren't thinking along those particular men at least were not thinking along those lines when they're talking that arrogant smack, right?
And same thing here.
We control the height of the flames.
What's Hamas going to do?
And you know, Daryl Cooper, again, the great martyr made, he was in the Navy and then was a consultant.
His speciality is shooting down missiles with missiles.
Okay.
So he was a consultant over there working with the Israelis for a very long time.
And he told me in an interview right after this happened that they took Hezbollah very seriously.
They did not take Hamas seriously.
Hezbollah, hell, they might as well be a military.
Those guys can fight.
We got a bloody nose taking them on in 2006.
Hamas, that's like asking us if we could take on the Crips.
We could take on the Crips.
Right.
And it's like, yeah, well, you know what?
Don't be so arrogant.
You'd be surprised.
They've been building up and they've been practicing and they've been getting, you know, planning.
And so in other words, look what happened.
They don't control the height of the flame.
They were able, you know, through that arrogance, I think that plays into how it was allowed to happen in the first place.
I think it was not deliberate.
I think it was total negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of the IDF and Netanyahu because they were so sure that they had tamed Hamas with this Qatari money and this status quo deal.
People are allowed to leave and do some jobs in Israel.
And what's the deal with the Qatari money?
Like how is that that flows into Hamas at Benjamin Netanyahu's kind of insistence?
Yes.
And in fact, the headlines read that the Qataris and the Turks were getting sick and tired of, and the Turks are very in tight with the Muslim Brotherhood and so are the Qataris.
They're getting sick and tired of Hamas's antics and want to turn the spout off.
And Netanyahu sent he go himself or he sent one of his men to Qatar in the words of his sometimes rival and then defense minister Avigdor Lieberman to beg the Qataris to turn the money back on to start paying Hamas.
Tens of millions of dollars at a time is being paid off.
You may have even seen this came up on the show with Tim the other day where there's videos of pretty nice pieces of property in the Gaza Strip.
And it's a little Potemkin village tour where you're supposed to be led to believe the whole place is one nice golf course.
Well, that's almost certainly, I don't know this, but that's virtually certainly.
This Qatari money is coming into those, of course, you know, Cotillion effects or whatever.
It's going to those connected to Hamas first or I'm sure I'm pronouncing that wrong.
So, you know, yes, they are able to have a nice shopping mall and a nice little mansion or two for themselves somewhere.
So they're the ones getting bribed.
But meanwhile, Hamas was letting the Israelis believe that, yep, you got us good and tamed, even though they're still a lion.
And they're actually secretly just biding their time.
Yeah.
Well, and for all those people who died on October 7th, that doesn't seem like they were too tamed to them.
October 7th Planning Secrets00:05:01
It reminds me of the quotes that you bring up a lot about the weapon shipments into Ukraine during the civil war there before Russia invaded.
And they're like, oh, no, we're calibrating between provocation and deterrence or whatever.
By the way, I should just mention, I mentioned this when I was debating Laura Loomer too.
It's not, I know this stuff, when you talk about it sounds like conspiracy theory shit, because it is, just happens to be a true one that actually happened.
But this was, and as is often the case in a very strange dynamic, there's actually there's much, there's a much wider acceptable discussion about This in Israel than there is in the United States of America.
But this was on the front pages of Horetz and the Times of Jerusalem since October 7th, where they're talking about this kind of Netanyahu.
Look at you, your plan totally backfired.
Tyl Schneider is one that wrote in the Times of Israel about it and others.
And I mean, the conspiracy theory, if you want to be like kooky about it, is that Netanyahu wanted this to happen so that he would, and I just don't think there's no indication.
No, but no, no, no.
It seems much more likely that the case is just, look, if you're just following what everyone said and what everyone did, it just seems like, look, this was his excuse to never have to grant them statehood and to divide the West Bank from Gaza and to go, look, look, obviously, as long as Hamas is the leader, there's just no chance of ever getting international recognition.
And look, in reality, they are nothing but a militia and the IDF is a first world military.
Mossad and Shin Bet, these guys know their business if they're being allowed to do their business.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of politics at play in Israel that was preventing them from doing their job as far as that goes.
And I do, there's a quote in the Jerusalem Post where the young lady in the IDF says, she saw them training.
She saw them looking at maps and like run and shoot and then jump on your stomach and then get up and shoot and run again and whatever training.
And she was telling her superiors, something's happening.
They're preparing.
And she was told, Hamas are a bunch of punks.
They're not going to do anything.
And I think that that is all you need, right?
We control the height of the flame.
That arrogance is the explanation for why we don't have to worry.
And it's also true that because, see, Netanyahu, go back a couple of steps on just this question of how it was allowed to happen.
Netanyahu should be in prison right now.
And in order to stay out of prison, he aligned with some right-wing kook parties that he never would have done business with before, who are way, way, way to the right.
And he, he, you know, for all of his faults, the guy is not a religious kook, right?
And he's not, you know, he, there are some things sober.
A lot of his base, a lot of his base is, but he's not.
Yeah.
In other words, like he's a, he's a sociopath, but not a psychopath, right?
Like he knows what he's doing and he knows when to draw the line and cool it if he has to and stuff.
Where these guys, some of these guys are real wing nuts trying to force the Messiah to come back and stuff.
Well, and he's lining up with them.
And part of this was there's this festival, the Sukkot Harvest Festival in the West Bank that they hadn't been allowed to do before.
Well, they're allowed to do it now because he's got to appease his right-wing nut cases.
And so then he's got to pull hundreds of soldiers away from Gaza to go and protect the kooks on the West Bank.
And then meanwhile, the Hamas guys are saying to each other on the phone, geez, it's too bad the commanders won't ever let us fight Israel ever again.
You know what I mean?
And this kind of stuff where like they're just placating.
In fact, if you might remember a few months ago, let's say late spring, maybe early summer, Islamic Jihad, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, was firing some rockets back and forth and Hamas stayed out.
Remember that?
Yeah.
So this is like part of their psychological warfare against Israel that you got us right where you want us.
Don't worry about us.
Meanwhile, they're clearly planning all this.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Yo Delta, the official Delta 8 sponsor of the Gas Digital Network.
If you're not familiar with Delta 8, it's naturally found in hemp and it gets you high.
And it can be, it's legal in many states.
So if you're in one of those states, if you're over 21 years old and you want to get high on Yo Delta gummies and vapes, go on over to yo delta.com.
Use the promo code gas to get 25% off your entire order.
That's yo Delta.com, promo code gas for 25% off your entire order.
All right, let's get back on the show.
And then the Israelis are doing like it's a government program.
It's all contracting and corrupting and corruption.
So they built this high-tech fence that's full of sensors and cameras and square, like straight out of idiocracy, automatic machine guns.
Yeah, yeah.
Right.
And then, so at least according to the Times version, maybe this, if you want to just believe otherwise, it's a modified limited hangout.
But the Times version was, boy, were they over-reliant on this tech like McNamara in Vietnam.
Neocons Multiple Wars00:13:28
Like, oh, the Gizmos are going to solve this problem for us.
No, they're not.
This is not a Gizmo solved problem.
And so what did Hamas do?
The first thing they did was send drones to attack the cell phone towers.
And that essentially cut the Israelis completely off for of their eyes and their ears and their communications with the home base and all that.
And so they were able to run riot for a little while there without being stopped.
It should be also like pointed out just to say that, and it's much like with the 9-11 like stuff, like even if you reject the conspiracy theory, the like, oh, this was an inside job type deal, or even if you're saying with this, that it's like, look, there just isn't any evidence suggesting that they actually wanted this attack to happen or something like that.
Again, you can speculate about it, but we just don't really have any evidence to any reason to believe that.
But that doesn't mean that then it's not used as an excuse once it does happen to go, oh, like, like, and it's also true that Bill Clinton backed al-Qaeda in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya and is guilty of the highest treason and had somehow convinced himself that he had bought these guys off when in fact he had not.
But it's also true, certainly, that after 9-11 happens, you know, that every single neocon in America's eyes got wide and they went, now it's Project for a New American Century time.
We're going to do all this stuff that we want to do.
I agree.
I think it's fair to say they might as well have done it.
But I'm just saying that middle part isn't necessary to still be like at the end that it's like, well, look, now we can implement our plan because they do literally say, and this is one of the things the 9-11 truthers always hold on to is that they actually say in one of those papers they produced for the Project for a New American Century.
Rebuilding America's defenses.
Yes, but they say that like short of like a big attack or something like that.
We're at Pearl Harbor, we're not going to be able to do this.
But that doesn't actually prove the 9-11 truthers case.
It could just as much be true that after it happened, they went, we got it.
We got our Pearl Harbor attack and now we're going to go do this, which certainly that happened.
And in fact, like Brzezinski said the same thing in the Grand Chessboard, I'm pretty sure that phrase is in there.
It was a kind of a common phrase then that because put yourself in their position, it's the 90s.
It's pseudo peacetime as far as Americans are concerned.
We don't have a great power threat from Germany, Russia, or Japan.
So what are we doing really with this, all this power that we have?
We're essentially doing regime changes in small countries, police actions and these kinds of deals.
And so there was always a question of, you know, I remember reading the Wall Street Journal in probably 98 or 99, they had a huge special on transformation of the military.
There are three major schools of thought for how we're going to completely redo America's military departments and what are they going to be.
In fact, Donald Rumsfeld's deal was he wanted to emasculate big army to benefit special operations forces and the air force at their expense.
He's a big lockheed guy, you know.
And so that was part of his motive for the Iraq war was he wanted to show we can do this kind of light and fast, a few guys on the ground and overwhelming power in the air and then move on to the next one, which is not how they fought that war, but that wasn't up to him.
That was essentially what he was up to with that.
But so anyway, it made perfect sense for them to use a Pearl Harbor attack.
Sure, you know, something crazy happened.
Then we could move about our plan, which right now Congress is just sitting there and they don't want to fund whatever our great idea is.
I know it's part of like the bias of my age or something like that to my worldview, but it is really part of how much like what fuels my hatred of neocons is just like, cause really they won, at least to some degree.
Like they got, it's pretty amazing if you go back and read the project for a new American century, how much of it like all the letters to Clinton and Bush.
Yeah, like and you got it.
All this stuff you got.
I mean, down to like Ukraine was even like mentioned in there that we're going to bring them into the alliance and all this shit.
Saddam Hussein's gone.
We're going to fight multiple wars on different fronts.
I was one of the last, I can't remember if it was the last time or one of the two last times I was on Rogan, I actually got, I like we read a bunch of shit from it because it's like, you just can't overstate how insane it is.
But they actually go, like they actually sit there and they say and they go, okay, look, now that the Soviet Union has collapsed, we are the sole superpower in the world.
This is a unipolar world now.
America has no great threat.
There's nothing that like rivals us.
And so now we have complete control.
Like now, and now that we don't have a threat, what we need to do is fight wars on multiple fronts.
And like, it's just so insane.
Like you just, the idea that this was written and that everyone didn't react to this, like, this is the most insane.
You're not saying we have a threat and therefore we need to, you're saying because we don't have a threat, we need to start fighting multiple wars, not just one, but like, but we just have to fight wars that like with no threat there.
And this literally is their plan.
This is in their own writing and they get it.
And it's just like, I mean, I'm sure there's still like some nostalgia in this too, because I just look back at the 90s, like things were just so much better in this country.
But it's just like, you guys fucking ruined everything.
Like, God damn.
Well, look, and if people want to really study this, you know, the some key words are before PNAC was ever even founded, when these men still worked for Bush Sr., it was Scooter Libby, Zalmay Khalilzad, and Paul Wolfowitz.
And I always forget who was the fourth one who they wrote what was called the defense planning guidance for fiscal year 94, but it was written in 92, if people want to look at that.
And there are two different versions of it.
And they were forced to rewrite it after it was leaked to the New York Times.
But really, all they changed was, oh, yeah, no, we'll bring our allies like the British and the French along to help us too.
We'll have, you know, they like throw in some sops to multilateralism.
Right, right.
But whatever, man, this is a pure doctrine of American imperialism.
And we will be the dominant political and military force on every continent, on every region on this planet.
We will never allow a near-peer competitor of any kind.
We will never allow a regional grouping of other powers to rival us in power.
Never mind to even challenge us.
We won't let them get anywhere near powerful enough to think about challenging us.
We'll invade them first.
We'll do everything we can to disrupt that and prevent that from happening.
And which, of course, you know, they fail.
There's so much of the world, just like Leia said, Princess Leia in Star Wars, that the more you tighten your grip, the more systems, in this case, states slip through your fingers.
And people reject American authority because of look at how illegitimately they wield it.
Yeah, well, this is something crazy.
There's something kind of Freudian about that too.
Like the idea of like suppressing something and then it like re-emerges in much darker ways.
You know what I mean?
Like, it's like, yeah, there's there is something about it.
Look at a globe, dude.
This is the middle.
Remember, like in school, you learn about how this is the new world.
I mean, spin the thing.
Eurasia is this giant thing over there.
Like, how could it possibly be the middle part of North America is to be the steward, like really the rulers of all of the old world.
It makes no sense.
Well, and this is, you know, because you mentioned at the very beginning of the show that Ted Carpenter got run out of the Cato Institute and he's over with you guys now.
He's really fantastic, by the way.
I think I read a bunch of books about this all over.
Yeah, yeah, he's just great.
But he gave like a talk.
I'm sure you saw that where he gave a talk about the problems at the Cato Institute and within kind of like some of these libertarian organizations.
And it really was like the central point is that, you know, it's like the idea of anything, if you value any degree of liberty in America, it's just totally incompatible with us ruling over the world.
Like it just doesn't work together.
You can't have both.
Nothing makes less sense ever.
And some people who I will say I have a lot of respect for certain people who had like very good contributions in economics, but kind of endorsed the American empire tacitly.
And I'm thinking of Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams and people like that.
And it's just like, it's such a nutty view to think that any of these things you're talking about are ever going to happen where we're going to have a minarchist state that rules the world.
Does that sound right to you?
Is that what a limited government does?
That's going to be the government with the least limits of any government.
And look at this.
And look at the U.S. government right now.
The fourth branch, the executive departments of the U.S. national government.
This is the biggest government could have ever been imagined in the history of all of humanity.
It's far beyond, you know, anything.
And of course, it always leads throughout history.
War always leads to more economic controls, to more crackdowns on privacy and things of this nature.
And bankruptcy.
And suicide.
And ultimately, disillusion.
You know, the book, Tragedy and Hope by Carol Quigley, which is, you know, for many great reasons, especially, I guess, page 950 is sort of like a Bible to a lot of conspiracy guys.
The whole purpose, even the title, what he's referring to, he makes it very clear in the beginning, I think in the introduction to the book, is that the tragedy is that civilizations always blow their brains out, like the most successful ones.
And the way that they do it is through imperial overextension.
And he says, you know, Western civilization is so lucky that it's been able to reinvent itself over and over again from like ancient Greece through ancient Rome and the Holy Roman Empire and then the Renaissance and the Enlightenment and the, you know, the foundations of America and into the new century and all of this stuff.
He's writing this in the 60s.
And how even though the West had changed over and over and over again, we never lost.
We never stopped being the West.
It never died.
It just adapted and kind of evolved.
But he says, you know, the tragedy is that we're doing too well right now.
We got too much power.
Like Gareth Porter says, the perils of dominance.
And then the danger is that we overextend ourselves and die.
And so if you want to save your republic, you got to abandon your empire.
You have to be, as George H.W. Bush would have said and never meant, be prudent and conservative.
And instead, what do you do?
He actually said it wouldn't be prudent to ever lift the sanctions against Iraq, right?
That was what he was saying.
We're going to keep this war going forever is what he was saying.
But like, and this, I cite this in my book in enough already, where Jean Kirkpatrick, who had been a legit neoconservative, some of them are Catholics, and she had been a former commie from the Social Democrats USA and then had moved right with the rest of the neocons and become Reagan's ambassador to the UN.
And this is then in the Bush years.
I love this.
This is in the fall of 1990.
So the USSR still exists.
It's not all the way gone for another year and a month.
It's in November of 1990.
But the Cold War is dead and gone.
And Jean Kirkpatrick wrote this article and I have it in my archives at scotthorton.org.
It's called A Normal Country in a Normal Time.
And she goes, oh, great.
Now we can eschew the burdens of superpower status and come home and be a normal country, a successful commercial republic in a world at peace.
Yeah, well, listen, we do, we got to wrap because we have a time crunch here with studio booking, but I will say that, you know, there are some people, I bring this up a lot, but that this was the old William F. Buckley line.
Right.
That we essentially he was saying that like, yeah, no, we agree, basically us conservatives agree in theory with libertarians.
They were like, yeah, the great enemy is the state and it's liberty versus tyranny and it's all that.
But you see, there's this Soviet Union.
And so everything you're saying is nice under normal times, but this is the exception.
And so we have to build up a totalitarian bureaucracy at home, but only because of the Soviet Unions.
And then when the Soviet Union is...
He's the reins of it all.
Yes.
And then when the Soviet Union collapsed, there were at least some people who like still had that in mind and go, oh, neat.
We get to do liberty again.
And then who was it that stopped it?
It was the neocons.
I mean, Bush Sr., the waspiest wasp in America.
He was the leader.
Okay.
But it was the neocons, man.
And to tie this all right back again.
And I got this quote in my book too from Norman Podhoritz, one of the major godfathers of the neoconservative movement, as he wrote in the 1970s.
They have to support neocons and Israel supporters have to support an American empire, an activist American empire anywhere and everywhere in the world at all times to prevent.
And he's writing this in the aftermath of Vietnam and the rise of the new left, right?
And he's saying, in order to prevent any kind of reversion to inter-war, meaning between the world wars, to inter-war isolationism to protect Israel.
America must stay an empire for Israel.
Or we get nothing out of them whatsoever.
You talk about everything goes out and nothing comes back, as Garrett Gorett said about the empire.
Boy, in the case of Israel, times 100,000.
That's true.
All right.
We're going to end there.
Scott Horton Show Wrap00:00:50
Of course, the incredible Scott Horton.
Look, I've learned more from you than anybody else about all this stuff and all these foreign wars.
And I highly recommend people go read Scott's books.
Of course, Enough Already is the one that covers the entire history of the terror wars, Fool's Errand is about Afghanistan, anti-war.com, the Libertarian Institute.org, and the Scott Horton Show, of course.
I have almost 6,000 interviews going back to 2003.
I actually checked today.
It's 5,964.
We got to do something for 6,000.
You got to do a party or something.
So that's it.
YouTube.com slash Scott Horton show and every video site slash Scott Horton show if people want to sign up for that.