All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
July 9, 2024 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
50:41
20240709_protests-in-israel-9-months-of-war
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Counting the Killed and Wounded 00:14:49
You're whitewashing mass murder, which is the whole point of suppressing the truth about October 7th.
Oh, and I guess you are the bearer of truth.
A Hamas apologist, you will tell viewers around the world about truth.
Why are you talking about the truth?
Can you stop talking now?
I didn't interrupt you.
So Roger Waters was right.
And he answered me, no, no, don't go so far.
Israel for 100 years is denying the catastrophes of the Palestinian people.
Not everyone who criticizes Israel is a BDS supporter or an anti-Semite or a marginal propagandist.
No, there are many people of conscience who cannot see the scenes from Gaza, the scenes that we don't see in Israel.
Thousands of anti-war protesters blocked highways at the weekend as they demanded an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the urgent resignation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
But these weren't radical students on an American campus, nor anti-Semites who believe Israel has no right to exist.
They were Israelis protesting in Israel.
And now exactly nine months into what is starting to feel ominously like a forever war, they represent the views of an increasing and global majority.
Hamas has not yet been defeated.
Scores of hostages remain in their captivity.
Israel could face war on a second front as Hezbollah intensifies his attacks on Lebanon.
So when will enough be enough to debate this?
I'm joined by Jonathan Gomrickus.
He's a former IDF Lieutenant Colonel and international spokesman.
Rabbi Yeshai Fleischer, a former advisor to Itamar Ben-Giveer, the Israeli journalist and author Gideon Levy, and by Grey Zone reporter Aaron Matsey.
Well, welcome to all of you.
Let me start with you, if I may, Jonathan Komrikus.
And it's to do with something that's been reported by the Heratz newspaper that the IDF, and I'm assuming you would have knowledge of this if it's true, ordered the Hannibal Directive on October the 7th to prevent Hamas taking soldiers captive.
And this is something known as the Hannibal Directive Procedure or Protocol, an Israeli military policy that stipulates the use of maximum force in the event of a soldier being kidnapped, the premise being that it's better to kill your own than let them be abducted and taken across the border into Gaza.
Is that true?
Yes, hi Piers.
That report was written by the military correspondent of Haaretz, Yaniv Kubovich, and cited mostly, mostly by BDS supporters and Hamas supporters and others who have a very vested interest in minimizing the damage done and documented,
the carnage done by Hamas murderers on October the 7th and trying to put the blame of the 1,200 victims in Israel on the IDF perversely and not on Hamas.
And the bigger picture here is that it may have happened.
I have heard reports about it and I think that in general reports written by Yaniv Kubovich are credible.
He's a serious journalist and I take it with a lot of respect and it needs to be looked into.
And at face value, I wouldn't immediately rule it out because as you know very well and you have reported about it as well, October 7 was the most chaotic day in Israeli history.
There was absolute mayhem on the ground.
Israeli defense forces were scrambling to get down south to stem the tide of Hamas death squads and Palestinian civilians who were flowing into Israel to murder, to burn, to rape, to execute, to torture buildings and to abduct Israelis.
And it makes sense that someone at military headquarters would have made such or would have given such an order.
And I know that now the IDF is on the next, the coming Thursday and probably after that as well, we're finally going to see the first official and publicly available after-action reviews of the IDF into the events, the horrible events of October the 7th, the massacre and the killing of Israeli civilians and the abduction of Israeli civilians.
And I think we will have to wait until then to understand it, to have a better picture.
But very much happened on that day.
It was, I think, the most challenging military situation Israel has ever faced.
And I think that extreme measures were taken because there were extreme circumstances.
But to be clear, are you familiar with the Hannibal Directive then?
Is this something everyone is aware of in the IDF?
I am.
And what is your understanding of what it actually means?
Yeah, so Israel, I mean, the fact that now, sadly, on the 7th of October, 252 Israelis and foreigners were abducted by Hamas into Gaza is sadly not the first time that any of our enemies tried to abduct Israeli soldiers or civilians.
This is something that Palestinian and other Iran-affiliated terrorist organizations have been doing for tens of years.
And the protocol or this order is something that used to be in place in the IDF, which was designed to prevent such a catastrophe from happening that an Israeli soldier or civilian is taken by terrorists into enemy territory.
And the order isn't, as you said, to use maximum force.
It is to use force that even may endanger the Israelis who are being abducted.
It is not about killing Israelis.
It's not about deliberately doing that.
It's about using force that may even endanger Israeli civilians.
And at this stage, I don't have confirmed reports from the IDF that say that this is actually what happened on the ground.
But based on the reporting of Yaniv Kubovich, I think that's a trustworthy source.
And it makes sense that that may have happened.
I mean, it's a very, the reason I think it's so significant is that many people have been challenging the number of those who died that day and were wounded, challenging the pretext that they were all killed or wounded by Hamas.
And that actually, a number, and no one's put an exact number to this, but a number of people on the Israeli side who died that day and were wounded were actually killed or wounded by Israeli fire.
And so the significance of this development about the Hannibal Directive, and it seems from what you're saying that you think it's highly likely it was deployed, is that it may be a number of Israelis were killed that way.
Yeah, you know, Piers, it may be true.
And it may have been in the chaotic situation on October the 7th when Palestinian death squads were roaming around southern Israel as they were finished raping and burning and pillaging and as Palestinians were coming in.
It may have happened that that order was given.
But let's not go astray from what really happened on that day.
The overwhelming vast majority of Israelis, civilian and military, were executed in cold blood by Hamas murderers.
And no BDS journalists and no self-appointed Israel experts or self-hating Jews that we might hear from afterwards will ever be able to convince anybody that this wasn't Hamas's doing and that a substantial amount of Israelis were killed by friendly fire and not by Hamas death squads.
There is overwhelming evidence, visual evidence to the fact that you must do.
I understand.
I'm going to go to Aaron Martin next, but just to be clear, Jonathan, I mean, the clear reality of what you've said is that if this directive was given, it must be very difficult to work out exactly how many people were killed and wounded by Israeli forces or Hamas.
I mean, how do you know if a directive is given to open fire without constraints in order to prevent abduction?
How do you know?
Well, that is something that they'll have to look into.
And, you know, it took Israel with the world's most advanced after-action review and genetic forensic detailing with dentists, et cetera, and sifting through remains of charred bodies.
It took Israel more than three months to actually establish the amount of Israelis killed.
And up until just a few weeks ago, we were still getting reports of Israelis who were now confirmed dead and actually not taken hostage.
That is the magnitude of the tremendous job here of understanding what happened on October the 7th.
And of course, BDSOs, Hamas apologists, Israel haters and other Iranian propagandists, they will go and they will pounce this with great joy as if to say, oh no, this wasn't a Hamas attack.
This was Israel's doing and Israelis killed themselves.
I think that is utter nonsense.
Utter nonsense because this was a rampage by Hamas terrorists.
That is inarguable.
The question is exactly who was killed by who.
Aaron Marte, you've been listening to this.
You've actually been reporting about this Hannibal directive, I believe, for quite some time.
You know, hearing Jonathan Komukis, who was a former IDF international spokesman and obviously was in the IDF, hearing him concede that this was highly likely to have happened.
What is your reading of this?
It did happen.
That's been known for a very long time.
From Israeli military sources and witnesses who reported seeing Israeli forces fire on them on October 7th.
The difference is that now, finally, an Israeli newspaper, Haaret, has acknowledged this and more Israeli military sources have come forward.
The reporting from Maharet says, according to one source, that the order was to turn the south of Israel, that frontier with Gaza, into a killing zone, which is exactly what happened.
It underscores that Israel has no concern for civilian life, not just inside Gaza, but also its own people, because it did not want to have Hamas take captives that could be used for negotiations to free Palestinian hostages.
And that's been last year.
There are thousands of Palestinian hostages in Israeli dungeons.
And a major goal of Hamas here was to take captives and use them as leverage to free Palestinians who have been in Israeli dungeons for years and years and years.
Excuse me, I didn't interrupt you.
I did not interrupt you.
I did not interrupt you, despite your many followers.
But what you're saying is disgusting.
Excuse me.
Excuse me.
I didn't interrupt Hamas's murder.
And you're whitewashing mass murder, which is the whole point of suppressing the truth about October 7th since it happened.
We have not heard.
Oh, and I guess you are the bearer of truth, a Hamas apologist.
You will tell viewers around the world about truth.
A propagandist, someone who spreads falsehoods and lies about Hamas and apologizes for them and tries to wipe out.
Can you stop talking now?
I didn't interrupt you.
You're a propagandist for the Israeli military, which is a mass murdering entity.
And the whole point of this October 7th propaganda and burying the truth that Israel killed its own people was to manufacture support.
Have you ever been in Israel?
Aaron?
Yes, have you ever seen it?
Have you been in Israel?
Lately, have you seen it?
Yes, I've lived in Israel.
Yes, I've lived in Israel.
Have you been in the kibbutzim after October the 7th?
Have you been here?
Have you seen the families?
Have you met people?
Have you met the survivors?
Have you met the hostages?
Stop reflecting and interrupting.
No, but I understand why you're not.
You speak as if you have any authority on the matter.
Okay, I speak as someone who speaks.
You speak as if you know.
You speak as if you know Israeli civilians, as if you know what Hamas did on October the 7th.
I understand your job as a propagandist.
You haven't been here.
You haven't watched Israeli civilians murdered by Hamas.
I understand you're doing your job, but I'm asking you to shut up now because I didn't interrupt you.
You're a propagandist for mass murder, which is why you're trying to shut me up.
Stop talking.
I didn't interrupt you.
I let you spew on for minutes.
I did not interrupt you.
Now, the reason why you won't interrupt me is because I'm acknowledging the facts, which is that Israel did kill its own people on October 7th and hid that truth to manufacture support for its own mass murder campaign inside of Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of people.
That's the atrocity unfolding before our eyes.
Aaron, let me jump in here because, Aaron, let me ask you.
I mean, it is quite clear from their own admission through the way they were live streaming a lot of the barbaric acts they were committing that Hamas murdered many, many, many people that day.
You presumably accept that.
There certainly were atrocities on October 7th.
Right.
I mean, how many people do you believe Hamas killed and wounded?
Well, the point is there should have been an independent investigation of this from the start, which Israel has.
I'm sure because I'm just speaking.
Excuse me.
You're a journalist.
You'd have seen all the same stuff as me, right?
You'd have seen Hamas terrorists openly boasting about the horrors they were committing.
It seems to me that it is indisputable that the vast majority of people who were killed that day were killed by Hamas.
Now, what is significant to me is the revelation that this Hannibal directive was issued means that there was clearly some people on the Israeli side who were killed by Israeli forces as part of this open fire without constraints, even if it imperils the lives of Israelis.
I don't think we know yet what the split is in terms of numbers, but I think to try and pretend, I mean, you accuse Jonathan Karukiser of deflecting, but to try and pretend that the vast majority of people who were killed or wounded that day were not killed or wounded by Hamas would also be a deflection of the truth, wouldn't it?
It would be a deflection of the truth to insist without evidence that the vast majority of people were killed by Hamas.
We don't know because there has not been a credible independent investigation, which Israel obviously wants to stop.
Now, think of it logically here.
Certainly, yes, Palestinian militants committed atrocities on October 7th.
But think of it logically.
If now you have confirmation from Israeli newspaper and Israeli military sources that a directive was issued to turn that area into a killing zone and to achieve that goal of preventing anyone from processing back into Gaza.
Excuse me.
That's exactly what I've told.
I didn't interrupt you.
I'm going to finish my sentence.
Palestinian Journalists on the Ground 00:15:16
No, that is.
Excuse me.
If that directive...
That's exactly what it says in Haaritz.
Excuse me.
That's what it says.
I'll post it online afterwards.
So in Hawaii, and if you're citing, please be specific.
And it's a real question.
I did.
The directive is not available.
All right.
Well, hang on.
Okay, hang on.
Hang on.
Hang on, please.
When you talk over each other, it's very hard to keep up with it.
Let me bring in Gideon.
Let me bring in Gideon because Gideon.
I'm going to face my senate.
Well, finish your sentence.
I'm going to go to Giddy because he actually has words for Harat.
If one of the most sophisticated militaries in the world is employing a directive to turn the air into a killing zone and using its weapons of war, including Apache helicopters, then it's very plausible to assume that, yes, a large number of people were killed by Israel's own forces.
All right.
Gideon Levy, I mean, Haratz has written this thing.
And it's gone around the world like wildfire, precisely for the reasons we're seeing in this debate, which is that it does, of course, now raise obvious questions of how many people were killed by who on that horrible, infamous day.
What is your understanding?
What is your...
You've seen what this report says.
What is your understanding?
After Yanif Kubovich published his scoop, I SMS'd him.
I sent him a text message asking, so Roger Waters was right.
And he answered me, no, no, don't go so far.
I've been to the south of Israel 48 hours after the 7th, on the 9th, and I saw a slaughterhouse.
I have no idea how many of them were killed by Hamas and how many of them were killed by our own soldiers.
But let's remember one thing.
Whatever happened there, and terrible things happened there.
And I am the first one to object any denial because denial doesn't lead us to anywhere.
But whatever happened there does not justify by any mean what Israel is doing in the last nine months.
And that's the main point.
Was it partly by Hamas and partly by Israeli soldiers?
Or was it only by Hamas?
Nothing, nothing can explain or justify slaughtering 38,000 people, most of them innocent people, most of them women and children.
And I want to tell Yonatan, or Jonathan, as you call him, not everyone who criticizes Israel is a BDS supporter or an anti-Semite or a marginal propagandist.
No, there are many people of conscience who cannot see the scenes from Gaza, the scenes that we don't see in Israel.
There are many people of conscience who blame Israel and rightly so.
And there are few Israelis who cannot see it and are ashamed for being Israelis when those things are happening.
You don't need to label them as anti-Semites.
They are people of conscience.
I wasn't labeling them.
I was referring to our panelists.
I wasn't sure a lot of other people.
Sure you were referring to our panelists because I know he was up next.
You could see his twitter feed.
I have seen your talking with you.
If I may, I'd like to bring in the only panelist who's not so far spoken, Rabbi Fleischer.
Your thoughts about this.
First thing is, I want you to know that I served in Lebanon in 95 and 96 and in the Second Lebanon War as a combat soldier and the paratroopers, Israeli paratroopers.
Yes, we had the Hannibal protocol that could take into effect because we knew what would happen if our people would be taken hostage.
They would not only be used as a card, they would also be tortured and abused and raped and who knows what else.
And we just know the incredible pain that will be inflicted on our people.
And so our military has a protocol to stop that at all costs.
It's one of the worst things that we can allow to happen is the taking of Israeli hostages.
That's what's exactly what has happened.
In fact, the Israeli army didn't do a good enough job at getting the bad guys on October the 7th.
Had they done a better job and smashed the bad guys and really done a better job at smashing them before they ever came, we'd be in much better shape.
So, you know, we have continued to fight this war to rescue our hostages, to bring liberty and freedom to this region.
I mean, I agree with everything that Jonathan says, but the other two panelists, for God's sakes, they, you know, I can't disagree with the characterization that they are Hamas apologists.
They literally are apologizing for Hamas on this program.
At the end, Hamas is not a machine of rights.
It's a machine of suppression.
And Hezbollah is a machine of suppression.
And Iran is a machine of suppression.
Our job is to liberate the people of Gaza from the yoke of Hamas.
Rabbi Fleischer, one of the problems.
One of the problems, Rabbi Freischer, is that Israel continues to refuse to let independent international journalists anywhere near Gaza.
And as long as that continues, there is the ongoing...
There's the ongoing.
Well, it's true.
I know most of my journalist friends who are war correspondents cannot get in there.
And this secrecy which Israel is insisting on having about the warfare it's conducting, I don't think helps Israel.
Because what it does is it leads to a lot of conspiracy theories raging, a lot of stuff that may or may not be true getting out there and being fueled on social media.
But, you know, I've for nine months or so been having debates where a lot of people on the Palestinian side have said to me that on that day, October, on that infamous day, that many Israelis were killed actually by Israeli forces.
And I have to say, I was very surprised when I read this report to see that actually there was a genuine directive issued by Israeli forces to do what appears to have happened.
Now, I don't think that diminishes the horrors of what Hamas perpetrated, but it certainly lends succor to those on the pro-Palestinian side who try to bring some balance to this.
That look, unless you let journalists in to do their jobs, then when a report like this comes out and journalists like Aaron and others have been reporting this for a long time, but had it denied, it is going to lend support to people who think the Israelis have something to hide.
And so my question for you, Rabbi Freisch, would be, why doesn't Israel let the journalists in?
Let them go and do their jobs.
Pierce, you know, Holocaust denial is a famous form of anti-Semitism.
And that's not my question.
No, no, hold on, hold on.
I'll get to it.
I've not heard anyone denying the Holocaust on this conversation.
Well, I'm saying that there is a type of action out there, a type of anti-Semitism that is classic, that comes in the form of denial of atrocities.
And we're having the same thing right now.
Now, you want reporters to go in.
It's a war zone.
It's a war zone.
Reporters slow down the fighting and we're trying to reporters who go into every war zone in the world.
I don't think it's down to Israel to decide whether it's dangerous or not for war correspondence.
I think Jonathan is probably more, he's the person to go to with regards to the purpose of the people.
Well, okay, let me ask Jonathan.
Let me ask Jonathan.
I mean, this is the problem.
I know top, top journalists, you're right.
Incredibly frustrated.
You're journalists that we have.
Jonathan, just one second.
Look at the two journalists that we have.
They use this.
They're so-called journalists.
They use this in order to deny the whole October 7th.
They deny the whole cause and effect.
Well, actually, they turn it upside down.
I haven't heard either of them deny.
I haven't heard either of them deny that Hamas committed atrocities that day.
They want to turn it on its head.
They want to make Israel the bad guy.
They want to blame.
Well, then if Israel is deny what happened inside its mind.
Right, but I've had many people on the pro-Israeli side for many months denying that Israeli forces killed their own.
And now I'm hearing that actually entitled.
It's impossible to deny that.
That's called the fog of war.
Every war has got that.
People, frankly, fire the biggest problems in the world.
difference between a fog of war and a deliberate Israeli policy of this Hannibal directive where you will open fire without constraints even if the lives of Israel there is a difference between the two things let me bring in Jonathan again Jonathan on this issue of journalism journalists why don't you let them in I mean surely it would be now in Israel's interest to make this more open Piers,
you're right and I agree with you and I've said this to the IDF behind closed doors.
I've said allow international journalists in.
The coverage coming out of Gaza is challenging and negative anyhow.
And I think that it would be better for children to be told to have them in the world.
Let me finish, Aaron.
You didn't like him to you.
It would be better to have international journalists inside.
And actually, you know, one of the issues with media coverage in Gaza is that it relies on Palestinian stringers who are all either controlled by Hamas or at least intimidated by Hamas.
And there should be coming from...
That's what Israel gets.
Sorry, but there's a Hamas rule.
I have to say, as a journalist, that Israel has brought that on itself, because if you only allow people inside Palestine to report on this, then you're going to get clearly probably not the most impartial coverage by definition.
So the best way Israel can make it more partial coverage is to let the journalists in.
Let me bring in Aaron again.
I agree with you, Piers.
Let me bring in Aaron again.
I mean, Aaron...
I agree, Piers.
Okay, well, that's good.
We should reach points of agreement on some of these things.
Aaron Martin, do you see at the end of this, and I just hope and pray this ends soon, but there seems to be no end in sight.
But given that there's increasing protest now from within Israel trying to bring this to an end, what happens after this war?
And let's put aside for a moment the second front of Hezbollah and what may be happening there.
Let's focus entirely on what happens in Gaza after this.
Do you think there can be any role for anybody left from Hamas to govern or part govern Gaza going forward?
That's not up to me.
That's up to you.
So what's your opinion?
Well, that's not up to me.
I'm not saying it's up to you.
It's obviously not up to you, but what is your opinion?
Let me finish my sentence.
The point is the people of Gaza have been denied their right to life, not just since October 7th, but for decades now.
Excuse me, living under the longest-running military occupation in the world that is denied Palestinians their basic people.
I understand that.
I understand that.
So it's up to them to decide, and they have the right to live in freedom.
That's the fundamental problem here.
Your previous guest spoke about how we want to bring freedom and liberty to Gaza.
No, Israel doesn't.
Israel is imposing the longest-running military occupation in the world.
And to enforce that now, it's destroying Gaza.
Why are you prepared?
Okay, but why are you prepared?
Aaron, Aaron, it's not to me to say that.
But you say it's not up to you to comment on Hamas, but you're very happy to comment on Israel's government.
And there's an inconsistency there.
If you're prepared to speak on behalf of Israel and criticize the Israeli government, why are you not prepared to criticize Hamas, who are the governing party over in Gaza?
I'm very well prepared to criticize Hamas.
My friends in Gaza are not big fans of Hamas, but my point is it's up to them.
And there's no parody here.
We're not talking about it.
It's up to you for your opinion.
We're not.
Okay, I'm telling you my opinion.
I'm telling it to you.
We're not talking about two equal sides.
We're talking about an Israeli regime.
I'm not saying we are.
Do you think given what they perpetrated on October the 7th, can there be any possibility of any peace going forward so long as any single person from Hamas remains in any kind of government position going forward?
By that standard, no Israeli has the right to govern because they've been perpetrating not just atrocities.
But again, you're defecting.
You're doing the very thing you accused.
I'm not.
You're doing the very thing you accuse Johnson of doing.
I'm going to come to Israel's now.
I'm going to come to the Israeli side.
But right now, I'm asking you about Hamas, who took over in 2005 and who, by their actions on October the 7th, to me, made it absolutely crystal clear they are not able to govern that country anymore or govern Palestine anymore.
And so my question is, I think it's a legitimate one.
As we come out of this going forward, there are some people who think that whoever's left from Hamas should be allowed to continue to have some kind of governmental role.
I say that is for the birds, that you cannot have anyone from Hamas involved in any government in Gaza going forward.
There are legitimate questions, by the way, about a number of people in the Israeli government.
I don't think Netanyahu should stay.
I don't think Ben Gavir should stay.
I don't think Smodrid should stay.
But right now, I don't see any role for anyone from Hamas.
Do you?
Okay, and I'm going to answer your question.
It's up to Palestinians because they're the ones being occupied.
Could I say that Joe Biden has no right to govern because he's fueling?
You have a right to say that.
Of course you do.
Well, it's not up to me.
It's up to you.
You're very judgmental of Israel's Gaza, but you won't be judgmental.
Yes, because they're a military occupier that have been depriving freedom of Palestinians for decades now.
Tell us more.
Let me say one more thing.
Let me say one thing.
It's like it is okay.
Let me say one more thing.
Let me say one thing.
Let's talk good to each other, please.
It doesn't help.
There was some negative talk of Palestinian journalists in Gaza before.
I want to correct that.
These are the bravest journalists in the world.
And that's why they've been slaughtered by the dozens by Israel.
These people are putting their lives on the line to bring people the truth of what's happening to their people.
They deserve to be praised.
By the way, just to be clear, I don't disagree with you, but I think it's absolutely obvious that human nature would dictate that if the only people reporting or allowed to report by Israel are people on the ground who are Palestinian, it is more likely than not, isn't it, that they are not all going to be completely impartial.
And that's my main argument about getting victims of mass murder.
I understand whatever the reasons, they are unlikely to be overly impartial as a group.
And that's when your home is being destroyed, your people are being killed.
And by the way, I don't think many Israeli journalists would be impartial either.
So I'm saying that international journalists who are neither Israeli or Palestinian should be allowed in so that they can offer genuinely impartial coverage.
At the moment, they're not allowed in.
Yes, and along with journalists, let's also stop blocking food, fuel, medicine.
I don't disagree with you.
As it's been the explosive.
I don't disagree with you.
Let me bring in Israel.
Let me bring in.
Hang on.
Let me bring in Gideon Levy.
You've been waiting patiently.
I mean, Gideon, what a joke.
How does this war end?
There are two possibilities right now, and there is no third one.
Either Gaza will continue to be controlled by Hamas, a weaker Hamas, maybe a more moderate one.
Ethnic Minorities Push Back Hard 00:09:01
I don't know.
I'm not sure it's possible.
Or Gaza will turn into Somalia.
There is no third option, unless Israel stays in Gaza forever.
We have to realize that Israel totally failed in crashing Hamas.
I could tell it from the first day because it was an impossible goal to achieve.
And we are now nine months later, and Hamas is the sovereign in Gaza.
And we cannot do anything right now.
And nobody will be able to do anything without the approval of Hamas.
Do I like it?
No, but that's a matter of fact.
If Hamas will fall apart, we'll get a Somalia.
And I'm not sure which one is better for the Palestinians, for the Israelis, or for the world.
But Piers, let me just say one sentence about denial, because the rabbi from the settlement say that the deniers are anti-Semites.
There are no bigger deniers than the anti-Semitic.
That's true.
That's what I said.
Just a second.
Just a second.
Let me finish.
Go ahead.
Israel for 100 years is denying the catastrophes of the Palestinian people.
From the Nakba until what's going on now in Gaza, it's a long history of denying the suffer of the other people.
What a chutzpah is it to come and complain about someone who denies what happens on the 7th of October when we never recognize the nakba, the catastrophe, the national catastrophe of the Palestinian people, the occupation, the apartheid, and now what's going on, the mess killing in Gaza.
It's okay when Israel denies everything because Israel is always the only victim.
Israel is the only one who suffers.
And dare you to think about anyone else who suffers around us.
Okay, let me bring in...
I want to bring in the Rabbi Fashion here on a particular point, which there's been...
Chiers, but can I answer that, please?
You can answer that.
Then I'll ask you a question.
I'll answer that first.
Thank you, sir.
He challenged me directly.
So I want to just answer that.
Right at the end there, he said, can you think of any other people that have been abused around here?
Have you heard of the Kurds?
Have you heard of the Copts?
Have you heard of the Yazidis?
You know what we have in common?
We're all ethnic minorities.
Happens to be that Israel and the Kurds are armed ethnic minorities around here.
And therefore, when the majority and the jihadists come to try to destroy us, as they did in 48 and 56 and 67, 73, and all the terrorism since then, then we have pushed them back.
We are an armed ethnic minority in this region trying to survive.
We're a tiny little people.
So yeah, we push back on the bad guys.
And there are many examples of people around here who push back on the bad guys.
Some successfully, some less successfully.
The Kurds, our Muslim allies, have successfully pushed back on the Iranian jihadists, the Turkish, the Iraqi, all the folks that hate them.
And that's why we're allied.
People like us, ethnic minorities in this region that are armed, survive because we're able to push back on the jihad.
And the fact that you think that there's no other minorities that are like us is just laughable.
We are a small people in a small land.
All right, you're going to push back hard.
You made a point.
Let me ask you this question.
Hang on, please.
I've got a question for the question for the rabbi.
Go ahead.
I have a question.
Thank you, sir.
And it's this.
Why has there been a spike now in new settlements on the West Bank, including retroactively authorizing free outposts?
How can that do anything but massively inflame the already extremely tense atmosphere around the West Bank?
And how is this defensible?
It's not only is it defensible, it's the only way forward.
The only way forward is for the Jewish people to live in their land, to push back on the Palestinian authority and the Hamas and those entities, to assert sovereignty.
Hold on, I'm not American.
I was born in Israel.
My parents were Russian refuseniks.
Read the freaking Wikipedia.
For God's sakes, I served in the army here and I just came back to the reserves.
Please do me a favor.
Do me a favor.
I was born in Shaifa.
I speak Hebrew and English.
You are a Canadian.
I come from nowhere.
You have nothing to do with anything.
You're a Russian settlement.
You're a Russian settler, not American settler.
You're just stealing Palestinian land.
You have a fucking head on TV.
I retracted it.
You have nothing to do with this place.
You keep saying that.
Go back to Canada and your little books behind you.
You have nothing to do with this region.
You don't speak the languages of this region.
You're not from here.
You never served here.
I spoke to you.
You're not from here.
You're not from here.
I was born in Haifa, Israel.
My parents fought to come to this land from the Russian Soviet regime.
You are just a Canadian sitting out there sniping with your little understandings of things.
Go back and read.
We have a lot of people than you do with anybody from that.
Do me a favor.
I am an ethnic Jewish person, which is a Judean from this land.
I have the same DNA as the Arabs, almost the same same language.
Fascinating though it is where you both come from.
Look, fascinating though it is.
Can we get back to the question?
Rabbi Fleischer.
I want you to justify the expansion of the settlements.
How do you justify it?
I'm not talking about the future.
This guy, he's in Kieran.
If you may.
How do you justify Arab at a well at Hebron?
Hang on, please.
Can I talk, please?
Please, let it go.
Yes, sir.
Rabbi Fleischer, how do you justify the expansion of settlements at this particular time all over the world?
I can't justify it.
I laud it.
I'm proud of it.
I can't be prouder about this government.
And finally, we are resettling our land, our small land that pushes back against jihadism.
This is correct in terms of security.
It's correct in terms of pushing back on jihad.
It is also our legal land that we purchased, that we won in wars, that is our ancestral land.
You dig in the dirt, and that's where our history is.
Let me ask the same question.
Wait a minute, Piers, hold on.
Hold on.
This is the important point.
You asked about the future of Gaza.
Future of Gaza is the same.
Israel is going to govern Gaza.
Israel is going to govern it first militarily, then it's going to resettle it.
Decent Arabs who are post-jihad, anti-jihad, who are pro-Israel and want an upward mobility in life, they're going to become residents of this land.
They're going to have a future, not under jihad, but under normalization.
And the Jewish people are going to live in our tiny land, especially in Judea and Samaria, the so-called West Bank.
Okay, Jonathan.
He's saying we can steal Palestinian land because God promised it to us.
Not Palestinian land, it's our land.
You just don't know your history.
I'm actually curious.
I'm curious what Jonathan Konrickus thinks of that, what you've just heard.
Do you agree with him?
Well, I think that, you know, I want to connect what, first of all, I think it's very interesting that we are four men.
I think all of us probably born Jewish, if I read the Wikipedias right, and with quite a diversity of views on topic.
Three of us live here, one doesn't, but we have very strong views on this topic.
And I think it's interesting the day Piers that you will have four Muslim guys, two of them speaking positively about Israel and two of them speaking on behalf of Palestinians.
Then I will know that we have made tremendous strides forward.
Until then, it'll be a lot of infighting here regarding what you asked about the future of Gaza.
And I want to connect with what Guidon said.
Please let him finish speaking.
And I want to connect with what Guidon said and Rabbi Fleischer.
I do not agree with Guidon Levy about the, and I'm not so certain as if I have a crystal ball and I know what will happen in the future of Gaza.
I do not think that the only scenarios are either Hamas or a somalization of Gaza.
I think that there is a chance and it has to be nurtured and it has to be fostered by diplomacy and international leadership and Israeli leadership, which at this time I do not see and I lament the fact that I do not see it.
But there is a third possibility, an option of Israel for a short period of time controlling the Gaza Strip and then with international assistance through a regional Arab peacekeeping or rebuilding Gaza force comes in and starts the long and tedious process of rebuilding Gaza,
of de-radicalizing it, of freeing it from Hamas, which will take a generation to re-educate and re-establish something totally different in Gaza with lots of hard work, with courage, with vision, with bravery from European leaders, American leaders, Arab leaders, and Israeli leaders.
That is possible.
I agree with Gidon that it is difficult and that the chances of things going even worse, Somalization, or perhaps even Hamas still oppressing 2 point something million Palestinians in Gaza in an occupation and a reign of terror, that may happen.
And if it does, that's an Israeli failure.
And what happens?
It's a global failure.
And I really hope it doesn't happen.
Hezbollah Exists Due to Invasion 00:04:23
Okay, and what happens if there's a new front to this war from Hezbollah, who've launched more than 200 rockets and attack drones into northern Israel in response to the killing of one of its commanders?
This is getting very tense, isn't it, Jonathan?
What happens if there's a second front of war with Hezbollah now developing?
So then we will all see and understand the magnitude of Iranian strategy against Israel.
And I think that we would be very close to a regional war and not only a war between Israel and another, the number one Iranian proxy, but something that could possibly engulf the entire region.
And if people around the world are concerned about civilian suffering and casualties and the horrors of war that we see in southern Israel and in Gaza, where people are suffering.
And I acknowledge that, Gidon, and I see and understand the suffering and I do not belittle it.
But the fact that our suffering, Israeli suffering, matters more to me doesn't mean that I am obtuse to their suffering.
But at the end of the day, if war erupts between Israel and Iran's most powerful proxy organization, we are talking about decimation and destruction by an order of magnitude much more severe than what we have seen with Hamas and Gaza and Israel.
They are five times more powerful than what Hamas is.
They have many more rockets with longer range, bigger warheads, with better precision, many more people operatives, and they have better equipment.
They are better trained and deadlier and more fierce and brutal than what Hamas ever was.
And as a consequence, there will be casualties in Israel.
And as a consequence, there will be tremendous casualties in Lebanon.
And we all know how the show goes.
We know that the show goes with terrorists attacking Israel and then Israel defending itself and inflicting damage on the terrorists and those who hide and support them.
Casualties ensue and then Israel gets criticized for defending itself.
I can already write the script.
Hezbollah's Twitter feed.
Please don't talk to everybody.
Let me let Aaron Marte respond to that.
Aaron Marte, your response.
So many falsehoods there.
Hezbollah exists because Israel invaded Lebanon.
Please don't talk about each other.
Yes, I can write your script too.
Hezbollah exists because Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, killed tens of thousands of people.
It's a resistance force.
Hezbollah has said that its goals are very limited.
It wants Israel to agree to a ceasefire.
Get your history straight from afar.
Oh, I don't even know what it is.
Because you don't know what you don't leave.
The invasion of the major invasion was 1982.
You never were in a bombshell from a Hezbollah.
Why is Israelis need to be re-educated and de-radicalized?
Any Israeli who supports mass murder and apologizes for it.
You don't even know the history of Wikipedia.
Get to the numbers.
Israel dated 1982 and killed tens of, and after then is when Hezbollah was formed.
That's fact.
Now, I didn't.
Now, please, I'm going to finish this talk.
If Israel wants genuine peace and security, it can agree to the entire international consensus, which everybody except for Israel and the U.S. supports.
That's a contiguous Palestinian state, which for Palestinians is a major compromise.
Only 22% of their historic homeland is what Palestinians, including Hamas, have previously accepted.
A Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.
Israel, since its founding, has been trying to destroy and crush Palestinian national identity.
That's why Israel had all these wars starting in 1948, when by the time Arab armies invaded, you had Israel already expelling more than half of the Palestinian refugees that were created then.
And you can play that playbook over and over and over.
That's why Hezbollah exists, is to resist Israeli aggression.
Hezbollah has said that it will stop its strikes on Israel if Israel simply agrees to a ceasefire.
Even Israeli generals are now saying that they want to ceasefire.
The main obstacle now is Netanyahu and his extremist coalition, which for its own political survival, in complete disregard for Palestinian civilian life, as they've made clear.
And also, their own captives, they're the ones wanting to continue this war because they're bent on surviving politically and also leaving Gaza in ruins because their ultimate goal is, as these two radical extremist settler apologists have made clear, they want to control Gaza because they do not see Palestinians as equal human beings.
Price Paid for Kidnapped Babies 00:03:53
And that is the fundamental problem.
All right, let me ask you.
Let's deradicalize Israeli politics like these two, and then we can have peace.
Let's try and keep it non-ad hominem.
It makes things so much more civilized.
Let me bring in Gideon again.
The hostage negotiations.
They called me a Hamas apologist.
I'm returning the favor.
I think it doesn't.
It does not.
You know what?
It doesn't matter.
You know something?
It doesn't do any of you.
It doesn't do any of you any favors.
Ad hominem attacks don't do anyone any favors.
Let me bring in Gideon.
Gideon, the hostage negotiations continue.
Netanyahu sent a team of negotiators to discuss the latest phase of these negotiations.
Ultimately, there are still well over 100 Israeli hostages who are believed to be being still held by Hamas.
It was a baby who was kidnapped.
No one knows what's happened to that baby.
Other young children were kidnapped.
I mean, do you believe every one of those hostages should be released immediately?
No doubt, but there is a price for it.
It doesn't go like this.
Look, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.
How can there be a price of us?
No, no.
I'm curious.
I'm genuinely curious.
How can there be a price for this?
That's interesting.
How can you kidnap a baby?
I'll tell you exactly how.
I'll tell you exactly.
Israel holds thousands of Palestinians without trial.
They are hostages.
Any babies?
Israel keep them.
Are there any babies?
Children.
Israel killed enough babies.
Let's not get into it.
Hamas literally kidnapped a one-year-old.
Let's not get into this comparison.
But you said there's a price.
I'm sorry, hang on.
You said there's a price on the kidnapping of a one-year-old baby.
How can that be?
That there is a price for the return of a kidnapped baby.
You cannot put this resolution because there is also a price for a baby who remained alone in the world with all his parents, brothers, and sisters, and grandparents were killed in front of his eyes.
What about his fate?
He doesn't interest you.
You think, really, that we are the only victims here?
You really think that the world can take attention only for one baby who was kidnapped, which is a horrible scene, and not see 17,000 children.
I didn't say that.
I think there are victims on both sides, but I am going to pick you up.
But that's the way that you can.
When you say that in response to me saying a one-year-old baby was kidnapped, has not been returned, you say there's a price to be paid.
That fills me with horror.
And I'm horrified by a lot of what's happening to Palestinian children.
Horrified.
But there should be no price on a kidnapped baby.
Piers.
Piers, this baby shouldn't have been kidnapped.
And it's barbaric to kidnap him.
They should have left him with his parents back, even if they went to a liberation operation or whatever they want to call it.
They should have not touched this baby.
And it's horrible.
Don't get me there because there are no doubts about it.
We are all human beings.
But you ask about the hostages, not about one baby.
And the hostages are the SID that the Palestinians have now.
Like Israel, for example, is keeping, maintaining, robbering hundreds of bodies, if not thousands of bodies, claiming officially that this is for negotiations.
So bodies are okay for negotiations, for bargaining.
And hostages are not okay for bargaining.
I wish everyone will be released.
The Palestinian hostages and the Israeli hostages deserve freedom.
Okay, let me bring in Rabbi Fleischer.
We'll have to wrap it up after this.
Rabbi Fleischer, I don't see how Netanyahu completes his mission.
Israel's Perilous Future Ahead 00:03:17
I do not think Hamas is going to be completely eradicated.
What I do think is in the process of trying to achieve that goal, many, many more innocent Palestinians and some Hamas are going to get killed.
But ultimately, Hamas will still exist at the end of this in some form.
And the ideology which fueled Hamas will, in my estimation, have only been exacerbated by the events of the last nine months, not eliminated.
So I don't see how Israel comes out of this stronger.
I think Israel comes out of this in a more perilous state.
Why am I wrong to think that?
Well, you may not be wrong.
You may be right that we come out a little bit weaker here because we have allowed our enemies to build up a military infrastructure in Gaza and in South Lebanon and then to attack us through a very thought-out plan.
And they had a field day on October the 7th and they had a field day on American campus.
They've prepared for a long time.
I also have my criticism of Prime Minister Netanyahu and the previous governments that they've allowed this terrorism and jihadism to flourish underneath our noses and not only just the physical preparation for war, but the preparation for mental jihadism, right?
The idea of jihadism.
And that's, by the way, one of the things that my co-panelists on the whatever you want to call it, the other side, always seem to fudge.
The thing that they seem to hide is that the jihadists do not claim in Arabic and in their own lingo that this is a liberation movement for equal rights or to get out of occupation or apartheid.
They never say any of that stuff.
What they say is we got to destroy Israel.
And our boss, Iran, wants us to destroy Israel.
In the meantime, they've taken places like Lebanon, destroyed it.
It used to be a beautiful place.
They've taken a place like Gaza, destroyed it, because the jihad is a self-destructive phenomenon as well.
It destroys its own societies because it's filled with hate and rage.
And it directs money instead of into hospitals and building and schools into war machines.
Israel has made a mistake that it has allowed.
Israel has made a mistake.
No, I'm not.
Israel is a light in this region.
Israel is a light of progress and liberty.
Mass murdering Leviathan.
Values.
And okay, that's your skewed view.
What can I do?
Okay, I'm going to have to leave it.
I'll finish up.
Wait, I'll finish up.
I'll finish up.
My point, thank you, Piers.
And thank you for letting me be on your program again.
I want to say that Israel does have a future because it's going to wake up through this.
October 7th is an awakening process.
We're not going to let the bad guys grow again beneath our noses.
We're going to, as Jonathan said, we're going to go through a re-education process.
We're going to get rid of jihadism in this region.
We're going to hold on to our land and we're going to allow new partners, if it's the UAE or Saudi Arabia or Morocco or others around the world who want nationalism, who want family values, who want the Bible, who want patriotism.
A new axis is being formed of anti-jihad, pro-family, pro-values kind of access.
And that access is going to clean the world from the jihadism that has taken place.
I have to leave it there.
But thank you to the panel.
It was an excellent debate.
It got heated at times, but it's bound to.
But I do think when we resist the temptation to go ad hominem, we all learn a lot more.
And I thank you for joining me.
Thank you.
Export Selection