Norman Finkelstein Cuts Through Israel’s Propaganda: Gaza Genocide, Oct. 7 & Netanyahu’s Corruption

I want to. ask you about the. October 7th attacks, or. in the aftermath. So the October seventh attacks. happen, and for. those of us who are not really. following Gaza, I was. definitely in that category, it. seems to kind of come out of. nowhere. And the main question that I had. was, well, how could Israel not have. seen this coming? But what I didn't. think enough about is why did the. attack happen?

What was the context for that, which. is not to excuse it. I just want to be clear. I'm not. excusing that or any killing of. innocence, but what. was happening in Gaza right before. that? Well It's not. just right before that. Gaza becomes Gaza in 1948, after Israel expels roughly. 750,000. Palestinian Arabs from the area. that becomes Israel. Of those 750,300,000.

are expelled to Gaza, and they become roughly 80%. of Gaza's population, obviously. swamping the. original goddess and population. Now there are all these gossips. from. who hold Egyptian citizenship at. that. UGH In 1948, Gaza is simply part of. mandated Palestine, a British mandated Palestine. So about 80%.

of the population are. now refugees. If you go back and look at the. literature, it's quite interesting. that already. in the. 1950s. UN officials were stationed. in Gaza. Now, this is when Gaza is under. Egyptian control, okay, because Egypt gains. administrative control over. Gaza after the.

1948 war. Already it's. being described as a concentration. camp. Now, THIS is under. EGYPTIAN control. If we fast-forward. to 1967... In July 1967, Al Gore Sr., the father of the person. From Tennessee. Correct. Al Gore Sr., he goes to visit Gaza.

That's correct. And then he comes back and he. testifies before. Congress on what he observed. And he describes Gaza as, quote, a concentration camp. on the send, if. you will. So, already... Beginning in 1948, outside observers coming to. Gaza, that's their.

reference. Now in 2004, the head of. the Israel's National Security. Council, his name is Giora. Eiland. Giore Eilande is not a. peacenik. He's still among. the living, still very active, advising right as we speak. The Israeli government. He was the one who said around. 2024, he said, if epidemics.

break in southern. Gaza, that's a good thing. It's a good thing for the epidemics. Epidemic of disease? Yes. Now, in 2004, he's having a conversation. with senior U.S. Officials, and he describes. Gaza as, quote, a huge concentration camp. Now, bear in mind, the first individuals I mentioned,

that's fifties, early mid-sixties. Concentration camp had a very. definite resonance. And yet, those are. the words that leapt to mind, or those are descriptives that. lept to mind. Giro Ailand is. Israeli, he's Jewish, he is the chief of Israel's.

National Security counsel, as a Jew and as an Israeli, surely he knew. The resonance of. describing a. parcel of land as. a concentration camp. That's the descriptive he used. Now. Here's the, not. footnote, but here's. the big. qualifier. That was Gaza in.

its best days. That's a fact. That was in Gaza in it's best. days, in 2006, our President George Bush, he embarked on what he called. democracy promotion. You might remember that phase. And part of democracy promotion. was he told. the guys that Palestinians, they had to hold elections.

Hamas did not want to participate. in the elections because they. saw it as part of what was. called the Oslo Process, namely when President. Clinton, Yasser Arafat, and 1993. which Hamas felt was a. sellout. So they didn't want to participate. in the elections because they. thought it was part of what was. called the Oslo Process. Pressures put on them, pressures put.

on then. They finally agreed to participate. Well, they run on a reform platform. because the Palestinian. Authority is hopelessly. corrupt, and they win the. election. Well... Wrong side won. Hillary Clinton later said, we made a big mistake. We should have made sure. that Hamas didn't win, which is her concept of a democratic. election.

So, the moment. Hamas gets elected, in what Jimmy Carter, who observed. the election, he called. it, quote, free. And completely free and. fair elections. That's how he described it. It was actually the first free. and fairly democratic elections in. the Arab world. The first time. Some people say Tunisia before, but I think it's. credible to say these were the first.

fully free and fair elections, Israel at that moment, it imposes, and then. followed by the US and the EU, imposes this medieval blockade. on Gaza. It draws up this long. list of things that you can't allow. into Gaza. You can't in chocolate. You can allow in baby. chicks. You can not allow in potato. chips.

You can' t allow in any. condiments. You can t allow musical. instruments. You can't allow in. notebooks. And they said they were very open. about. it, but the documents were. eventually released. They were going to put the. people of Gaza on. a, quote, humanitarian. minimum diet, which is another way, is the.

euphemistic way of saying a. starvation plus diet. And they were saying they were open. about their goal. We're going to. keep the Gaza economy. on the precipice. of collapse so. the people will ultimately. remove Hamas from. office. What was called, if you remember, and you don't go back that far, but in the, when the. Popular Unity government came into.

power in Chile in 1971, and the U.S. Was very upset about. that, and they said that we're. going to turn the screws on. Chile until the. economy screams. And that's what Israel attempted. to do in Gaza. And by 2008, the UN humanitarian chief, Mary Robinson, she visited.

Gaza and she said, Quote, a whole. civilization is. being destroyed. I'm not exaggerating. A whole civilization is. being destroyed. By October 6th, I think it was The Economist. magazine described Gaza. as a sinking ship. A UN official described it as. a toxic slum.

It was a disaster, a. disaster zone. A human-made disaster, so... That illegal inhuman. blockade of Gaza. And then every. few years Israel. launched what. they called an operation. in Gaza. They used the term, we're. going to mow the. lawn in Gaza, which is a kind. of humorous.

metaphor until. you factor in. That one-half. of Gaza's population. are children. And then, if we. connect the metaphor. with the reality, that means the. blades of. the towers are. cracking the skulls.

of the children of. Gaza. So how do you pray? Well for a lot of people the answer. is complicated. Our friends at the Hallow app are. ready to help make it much simpler. If you're uncertain about where to. start your prayer journey or what to. say when you talk to God, then Hallow's newest prayer. challenge is perfect for you. It's 21 days of prayer designed to. help you intentionally make time. for faith. Probably the most important thing. It will change your life. 21 days a prayer, you will hear from.

people from totally different. backgrounds and how they pray. Pastors, nurses, athletes, like Dion Sanders, all answering the. same critical question of how they. communicate with Jesus. It's not an abstract theological. exercise, it's a comprehensive. experience that brings you closer to. God, that's the point. So if you're not sure where to begin. in your relationship with God, if it. seems kind of intimidating, answer this invitation. Give God 21 days with Hallow and. see what happens. Download Hallow for three months for.

free at hallow.com. slash tucker, hallow, H-A-. Double L-O-W dot com. slash Tucker. So, you. had Operation Cast. Lead in 2008-9, Operation Pillar of. Defense in. 2012, Operation Protective Edge. 2014, these high-tech.

killing sprees. When Operation. Protective Edge Ended. In 2014, it was 51 days, I believe it began July 7 and. ended August 26, I'm pretty. sure. When it ended, the. head of the International Committee. of the Red Cross, his name. was Peter Moorer, he went to Gaza. Now bear in mind the job.

description of the head of. the ICRC, the International. Committee on the Red Cross. Is basically to tour war zones. He walked out of Gaza and. he said, never. in my life have. I seen the level of. destruction that I. saw in Gaza. Now just to give your listeners, a juxtaposition. That means placing side by.

side. In Operation Protective. Edge, 18,000 homes were destroyed. or severely damaged. Morris said, I've never seen levels. of destruction like that. In Gaza now, 325,000. homes were destroyed since. October 7th. In protective edge.

There was left behind roughly. 2.5 million tons. of rubble. In Gaza now, 61 million tons. of rubbles. Back then, it was unparalleled. in conflict zones. in 2014. Now, it's not even a blip on the screen.

Compared to what Israel has done. A reliable estimate. of the number of people, all aggregate number. of people killed in Gaza since. October 7th. No, I mean, there are all sorts of. projections on the. number of persons killed, everything from the numbers. that the Gaza Ministry of Health. give, to... As I said, there's so many different. projections that it's hard to know.

which are credible, which are not. credible. And also, how do you calculate. it? Are they deaths from. bombing, artillery shells? But then what about all the deaths. from people who, because of hunger, their immune system, the children, their immune systems are. significantly compromised. and they die, technically. Not from. direct fire, they die.

from. medical. reasons. So I don't think there is a. good number. One number which I found. interesting, I've. not made the comment publicly, I only recently started to think. about it, there are all. sorts of denials that Israel. has made a genocide in Gaza. And I'm happy to engage. with you on that question. But on a strictly statistical.

level, the most. recent UN report on. Gaza deals with the. targeting of children in Gaza, and also the West Bank, or the targeting of children, in. particular, in Gaza. Now, if you take the case. of the Nazi, And they also say, that's a key indicator. Of whether or not we're dealing with. a genocide or. we're dealing with war.

If large numbers of children. are being targeted, then the argument that this. is a war begins. to questions. are raised about whether it's a. war or whether it is a genocide. The percentage... Of the current statistics we have, the Gaza Ministry of Health, the percentage of children killed is.

put at 30%, roughly. 30%. In the Nazi Holocaust, the estimates are 6. million Jews were killed, of whom 1.5 million. were children. So roughly 25%. of those killed children. If it's correct, and I believe. there's certainly a plausible. argument that the number. of children killed, the percentage,

is an indicator of whether we're. dealing with a war or. whether we're deal with a genocide, I would say if we're. all agreed what happened during. the Nazi Holocaust was a genocide, and 25%. of the victims were. children, then. Certainly, by analogy, a plausible case is, in Gaza, if 30%. are children,

that's a strong argument that it's. a genocide. I should warn you that the IHRA. definition of anti-Semitism includes. comparing the actions of the. Israeli government to those of the. Nazis. So you've just committed. anti-semitism. Well, the problem with the. IHRA definition is, Israelis are all the time comparing. their enemies to Nazis. That's a great point. Why do they get to do it? Why do the get to make the. comparison, but nobody can compare.

them to Nazis? That's just totally. inconsistent. And you go back in the. history, they said Nasser in. Egypt, the first president. of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser, they said he was Hitler. They said Saddam Hussein, you might. recall, head of state in. Iraq, they say Saddam Hitler. All the time they're. actually saying the mullahs. in Iran are worse.

than Hitler. Prime Minister Netanyahu said, Hitler only. wanted to conquer Europe. But the Mullahs in Iran, when they. conquer the world, they're worse. than Hitler. A Hamas is Hitler, everybody is Hitler. But the moment you say, they. carry on like Nazis, it suddenly becomes a taboo, a red line.

But that doesn't make any sense to. me. Imagine it's 3 a.m., you're dead. asleep, you wake up to a weird. noise, it sounds like it's coming. from inside your house. Well, that's terrifying. Is it a home invasion? How do you react? By panicking? Well, not if you have StopBox Pro. StopBox pro is probably the best way. to store your firearms. It's built for actual people who. want real protection without giving. up speed or control. There are no keys and there are no. batteries, and that means you'll. always be able to get the StopBox.

open. There's a five button interface. that gives you, and just you, immediate access when you really. need it. That means your firearms will be. 100% secure, but always right within. reach. StopBox Pro is made proudly in. the United States by Americans. Real jobs, no child labor. in some weird country. It's totally American. For a limited time, this show's. listeners can get 10% off at StopBox. when using the code TUCKER at. checkout. Visit StopBoxUSA.com and use the.

code TUCKER for 10% off the whole. order. After you purchase, feel free to say. that you heard about it right here. on this show. So you think it is fair to say. Israel is committing genocide in. Gaza? I would say the following. If you take the accumulation, the cumulative effect of. what Israel has done, you don't look at it. discreetly—this action, this. action, this action, this action. You take the total picture.

Israel's, the density and the rate. of Israel's bombing in. Gaza, unprecedented in. modern conflict. In some cases, even as far back as World War. II, if you take the. worst cases in. World War II like Dresden, the intensity and rate. of destruction is. higher in Gaza. That's a fact. Then Dresdn? That's correct.

That's correct. Not just Dresden, there's Dresde and. a couple of other major cities, but they've slipped my mind. Number of children killed. Oh, that's shocking what you just. said. Number of Children killed. If you take all. combat zones in the world, combine for. the years, say, 2020, 2021, 2020, 2021, and combine them.

All the combat zones, more. children killed in Gaza. Amputees. Child amputees! I'm not sure if it's child or maybe. it's all amputee. It's now the densest. concentration of amputeees. anywhere in the world. Schools. 97%. of Gaza's schools have. been destroyed or.

severely damaged. Targeting of hospitals. Targeting of medical personnel, targeting of UN workers, targeting of journalists. They're all in a totally different. category. They're in a total different. universe. than the closest second, closest third, closest fourth. So then what are you to conclude. when you.

add up, as. I said, you take the cumulative. picture I. don't see how. you can possibly reach. any other conclusion. The one qualification I would. make is, it's not so much a qualification, it is a clarification. I don t believe Israel's. goal is. genocide. Its goal is.

empty out Gaza. They were very clear about that. They want to ethnically. cleanse Gaza. But the means they. are using their modus. operandi is. the destruction of. the Gossack population until. they leave. Now you could say, but they can't. leave because the. border is sealed and nobody wants. them, and that's true. So they will continue killing until.

they achieve their goal. And if it's to kill everybody, they will kill everybody. They are dead set on, for once and for all, solving the Gaza question. They want to solve the Gaza. Question. And for them, solving The Gaza Question means. the expulsion of the population, and the only way they can persuade. the population to leave and. persuade neighboring countries. in the world at large.

to take them in. is to commit a. genocide. So I have. spent quite a lot of time. going through the. human rights supports and. various other documents. When you see the cumulative. effect of. what's been done, I don't see how you can reach any. other conclusion, which is. why, as I'm sure you.

know, not only. many, if not most, leading authorities in. international law, not a few of them Jewish, even Israel's. Major human rights organization. for the occupied territories that. sell them. Persons like, I believe, Arya Nyer, who founded. Human Rights Watch,

Kenneth Roth. Arya is a. refugee from the Nazi Holocaust. Kenneth Roth, who was. the former head of Human Rights. watch in various. venues. They have all concluded. that it's a genocide. But there's another factor. Now, I'm not saying it's. authoritative, but I would. certainly say it's indicative.

The estimates are 30%. to 40%. of American Jews. believe. it's a genocide. That's a kind of astonishing. fact, bombarded as they are. from youth to. love Israel, attending synagogues.

where. support for Israel is. a key, a tenet. of belonging, and yet—and. to their absolutely eternal. credit—it's genuinely. a sight. to behold. And maybe I should, but I kind of. rebel against it, take pride. in as a Jew.

Thirty to forty percent. believe Israel is committing. a genocide. It's a credit to. that community. And I would add, as I'm sure you're aware, because you told me before the. interview that you have been in, so to speak, a Jewish milieu, a large part of your life. Very educated. These are not people who. are easily bamboozled.

or duped. or tricked, and. yet they have reached that. conclusion. So here again. I say if you look at the. cumulative picture, experts, human rights. organization, International Court of Justice, which reached the preliminary. conclusion that Israel was. plausibly committing.

genocide. That was back in January 26th, 2024, so it's long before. the horror that unfolded. since January 26. I. think It's the other. side that has. to make a case. The broad consensus is there. now. It's a horrible consensus. Well, instead of making the case, what I see happening is.

attacks, not just verbal attacks, but attacks. on people's employment against. anybody who says, wait, this is cruel and. awful. Those people, the Trump. administration, stripped them of. their green cards in a bunch of. cases. So I don't see anybody trying. to make the case for. Israel. I see supporters of Israel. attacking anyone who questions. Israel. I guess that's what I'm. saying. That's absolutely correct. What was new after.

October 7th. was that before. October 7, when There would be... I won't call them flare-ups. because, you know, with high-tech. killings, it's not much more than. a flare-up. When they were before, usually Jewish organizations, Jewish supremacists, billionaires,

they operated behind the scenes. They would call the university. president, I don't. think you should give that guy. tenure. Or do that happen to you? Yes, just kidding. No, famous, famously. But I think it happened with a. certain amount of frequency, but. it was behind the scenes. What changed after 2007, for the reasons that you just. suggested, it was. very hard anymore. to make a case in public.

Too much was known, too much was seen on. the social media, and too much of it Israel carried. on in such a flagrant... And brazen fashion, with its own. citizens in. their citizen army, posting on the social media. the horrors. they were committing. It had.

become so flagrant and. brazen, it was impossible. to conceal. Well, the big difference, I think, was... I want to. give you a chance. And so they. started in a very brazen. and flagrant way to. play the blackmail weapon. People like Bill Ackman, and there were many others, but he. sort of was the public face. They would call up, they would say.

publicly, There would. be petitions that were. publicized. Saying, if you don't crush. the encampments the students who. were supporting Gaza were. withholding alumni contributions. We're not going to give you money. Now, it's true places like Harvard. have large endowments, very. large endowment. However, it is also. true to say that that. alumni money was not small change.

People like Bill Ackman, he. gave Harvard, I believe, 50. million dollars. Two Jewish alumni of. Harvard gave it, respectively. One gave $200 million, one gave $300 million. That was big money. Though, as I say, still next to the. endowment, it's not so big, but. still, absolutely, it's money, okay? And then they went from. school to school by.

the end of. 2024. Encampments were in the spring of. 2024. They had succeeded in ousting. Claudine Gay at Harvard, Elizabeth McGill at. U of P, Chafique. at Columbia, and then there were. many, many, many others. I'm just giving you the Ivy League, the big names. When McGill was. ousted from.

U of. I happened to be friends with. somebody who knows her well from. business connections, and he met her, and. he conveyed to her his sympathies, and two words. came forth from her mouth, quote, money. talks. The cost of living is already making. it hard to live here and it's not. getting any better. Unfortunately, it's likely to get. worse and a lot of Americans fill.

the gap with credit cards, not. just for fancy dinners, but to cover. things like groceries and bills. That is a disaster. It's understandable, but don't go. down that road because there is. a tax, in effect a survival tax, of 20% interest or more. Why would you do that? Why would hand money to the big. banks when you can keep it for your. family? Our friends at American. Financing have a better way. If you're looking to buy your first. home or refinance your current one, they're helping Americans achieve. the dream of home ownership with. monthly mortgage rates currently.

in the fives. American financing saves its. customers an average of 800 bucks. per month. That's nearly 10 grand. every year back to you. This isn't just a loan, it's a total. financial reset. So debt is tough, but there's a. smart way to do it and a reckless, self-destructive way to it, credit. cards. And so we recommend American. Financing. They're salary-based, not. commission-based which means they. actually work for you, not the. banks. They're called America's home for. home loans for a reason.

Call 800-685-5696. 800- 685-. 5696 or visit americanfinancing.net. slash Tucker. It wasn't just universities, by. the way. I have friends who work in. hospitals. Everybody was terrified, terrified, terrorized. to take down anything. on their social media. in support of Gaza.

I have friend at. Lincoln Center. The good. side of the Jewish. tradition is, They give generously to cultural. institutions, libraries, arts. institutions, universities, and so forth. You can walk into a library in. New York City, they list the. main donors, 95%. Jewish. And it's true across the.

board. Hospitals, obviously, but the bad side is it's. a lot of cultural power. It's a lot of cultural power. And it was then used. for, in my opinion, nasty, sinister. purposes. You mentioned, and it's true of. course, the Trump administration. went after people. threatening deportation, disappearing them,

throwing them into places. of confinement which were not. accessible. But here's the thing. That was all. spearheaded by the Jewish. supremacist billionaire class. And here's another thing, did they ever protest it? Did they ever say what was done. to Mahmoud Khalil from. Colombia was wrong? Did they register a single.

word of dissent? This was. the. most audacious. and. stupendous assault. on academic freedom. I am I'm. ready to argue with anybody. I've studied academic freedom in. our country. I have written a large. amount on it.

There hasn't been nothing like it. in the modern history of the United. States. The concept of academic freedom. begins at the beginning. of the 20th century, the early 1900s. And there have been waves of. assault on freedom in general, and academic freedom. The Red Scare in. the early part of the 20th century. Obviously, the McCarthy era,

where alleged communists were. persecuted. and lost their jobs. But there's never been anything. I know people are going to say I'm. engaging in hyperbole, but I ask you the question and. I asked the listeners. Three Ivy League. presidents were ousted. They were all women. Two of the three were women.

of color, so. they had all the so-called, you can call it, ideological. protections of woke. culture. It didn't protect them. They had all of the protections. Do you know how the New York Times. would have. Screamed to high. heaven at three. women, two women. of color, being ousted, not a peep.

And that reign of terror, it is a reign of horror, that continues to this day. I can tell you factually, since that spring of 2024, I've only been invited to. speak at two. colleges in the United. States, that's a fact. Too. What's your normal? Oh, there was a period, mine,

it's gone up and down for various. reasons which are not worth going. into, but there were periods where I. spoke at 40 schools a year. That's true, about 40 schools per. year. And I'm talking about. collectively, I spoke. in University of Massachusetts, that was last year. I actually was nicely greeted. at Cornell University and. the president of the university. showed up and he. Introduced me. Which was, I thought, courageous. on his part.

He was actually friendly to me. I was very tough. Iwas very tough. But he seemed. to believe in the principle of. free speech, the John Stuart. Mill principles, and he had. me there. But that's it. Now remember, I've. not been anywhere in New York. I live there. I live there, there's a tower. Where does it come from, I wonder? I think it's perfectly rational.

I mean, I have to be honest with. you. Look, let me give you a couple. of examples. At Harvard University, okay, as you probably know, the Israel. supporters, they. rented trucks. Put students'. pictures on the trucks. And went through Boston, Cambridge, calling them. terrorists. Okay.

Students who are mad at the Israeli. government. Students who were active in the. encampments. Now, let me tell. you something. They also went to the. neighborhoods 500. miles away where. the kids' families lived. Do you get that? Yeah. If. Collective punishment, we call it. If that truck came to my parents'. house, my parents would. kill me. Now my parents were in the far, I'm.

serious. My parents were on the far left. I told you they were Stalinist. diehards till their last breath. But could you imagine. a truck going up. and down the Jewish neighborhood. saying Norman. Finkelstein terrorist with. my picture there? No. So when you ask me why did they. capitulate, it's amazing. Remember, these schools cost $80,000.

a year, and. the kids are being threatened with. suspension, expulsion, and even deportation. So what do you think is going to. happen? No. On that point, was there any grounds for it, these. claims about these students. being supporters of terrorism. or terrorists or anti-Semites? Let me give you one example,

an exemplary case, and that's Harvard. Harvard produces a report, 312 pages, on anti-semitism on Harvard. campus in the. rushing of the encampments. I sit down, I. read it, I'm curious, I am ready to believe, maybe an incident here, maybe an incident there. I go through the report,

there's nothing there. It's a nothing burger. There's nothing here. So I say, no, I must. have gone in with a prejudiced eye. I mean, I say I must've gone in a. prejudice eye. Let me reread it. I reread it. They said, at the encampment, somebody had a picture of Alan. Garber, the president of Harvard, as a devil. As a devil, somebody had.

a poster in the encamptment. They said that's obviously. anti-Semitic. Well. I'm not sure where that came from. They said another person. had a map of Palestine. where Israel wasn't there. So, I think to myself, well, Mr. Netanyahu holds up maps. of Palestine in. the UN, and there's no Palestine. there. There's just Israel there. So, that can't be really. anti-Semitic.

So what is the anti-semitism? What is it? Here I'll tell you what it is. It's that they. said that. Israeli Jewish students, in. particular Israeli Jewish. students, don't feel. wanted at Harvard. They feel shunned. They feel like. they're pariahs. And they said, Harvard. has to be.

pluralistic. Harvard has the be inclusive. So in order. to correct for anti-Semitism. at Harvard, we have. to embrace diversity, embrace everyone. I'm thinking to myself, well, I'm all for being. inclusive. I'm more for being. pluralistic.

I'm all for a big tent, but you know what? My big tent does. not include child killers. I'm not going there. You lose me. Lots of people are using peptides to. get in shape. Not all peptides are. the same. If you take them, do you really know. what you're ingesting? Probably not. Joy in Blokes makes it very simple. You start with an easy online health. assessment. Then, if necessary, your licensed clinician will order.

comprehensive lab work to understand. exactly what prescription is best. for you. Not everybody, just. for you, it's a complete. review to ensure the best results. Your peptide protocol is built. specifically around you, so there's. no guesswork. There's not a one-size-fits-all. plan. It's totally customized. Prescriptions are filled by. American-based pharmacies using. ingredient source from. FDA-registered facilities. Tons of quality testing, no stone unturned. You're getting the best. You don't have to guess about what's.

going in your body. Starting now, this show's listeners. can get 65% off labs. plus 20% off peptides and. supplements by going to. joyandbloakes.com slash Tucker and. using the code Tucker at checkout. This is one of the biggest discounts. any of our partners have ever. offered. That's joinblogs.com slash Tucker. Hey, it's Tucker Carlson. We launched Alp about a year and a. half ago and people are voracious. for it. They can't get enough. Everywhere you go, you get the same. question. When are you making more. flavors? We are not in the business. of disappointing people. Instead, we're in the of satisfying. them. So we have made at least.

Free more flavors. Introducing the Alp Frontier. Collection. They are Campfire Cinnamon, Sunset Mango and. Cowboy Coffee. Available in 4 mg and 8. mg because if you're going to use. nicotine you ought to have some. options. Get the new Frontier collection now. at AlpPouch.com slash Tucker. After World War II, for all I know, this or that guard. in a Nazi concentration.

camp went back to. school to. get a degree. You want me be inclusive of. the people that exterminate my. family? I'm not going there. And it's the same thing. You're going to have to bear that. burden. I'm going to be inclusive to child. killers. Israel has become a nation of child. killers that kill children for play, for play.

And there's ample at this. point, ample. documentation of that. Of snipers. killing children, of drones killing children. Even in March. 2018, during the Great March of Return, when the people of Gaza attempted. nonviolently to. end that medieval siege,

the UN report found that. Israel was targeting children, journalists. Medics, brace yourself, targeting. double amputees. who were 300 meters. away from the. perimeter fence. That's 2018. before. the horror that was unleashed. after October 7th.

And now you're telling me. that I have to be inclusive? And pluralistic. with these child. killers, a nation. of child killers. To its credit, Israel has a citizen army. And that's how it should be, because everybody—I. notice two of your producers are.

tech people, They were in the. Marines, they mentioned to me, everybody. Should have to bear the burden of. the ultimate sacrifice to. keep their country free. of foreign occupation. So, in my opinion, that's a. correct principle, unlike in my day during. the war in Vietnam, where students got that. deferment, college deferment.

and so was overwhelmingly. a poor army. And then it became an even. overwhelmingly more poor. army because it was a volunteer army. who volunteers overwhelmingly—those. who don't see a future otherwise. So that's to its credit. But then it becomes to its. discredit if. the army is committing genocide, because that army. is a cross-section.

of Israeli society. You can. As I did when. I was a young man, think of those who were carrying out. the murder and mayhem in Vietnam. as having nothing to. do with me. We were anti-war. But this is not the Israeli army. The Israeli army is representative. of the Israeli. Jewish population, with one. tiny exception, representative.

of the Israeli-Jewish population. And so, they are a nation of. child killers, and even Garber. admitted, it was about six months ago or. a little more, he said a. large part, that's his phrase, a large of what. was called anti-Semitism, he says, it was just. criticism of Israel.

He acknowledged it. Now, you might say, what about. slogans like, from the river to. the sea, okay? We're Americans, we're Americans. In the United States, the Supreme Court has ruled. it's legal to advocate the. violent overthrow of your. government. That's our jurisprudence. In our country, it's illegal. to burn the American flag.

That's how our juris prudence, In our country, uh, I was going to give a. couple of other examples, but you. can criticize the United States all. you want. You can criticize, you know, listen. You can not only criticize it, you. can call for its violent overthrow. And you're completely protected by. the law. So the slogan from the. river to the sea is.

so pale by. comparison. I mean, even in our country, there. was a case, a fellow walked. into a local. courthouse with a t-shirt emblazoned. on it. Fuck the draft. It went to the Supreme Court. I said, it's protected speech. So next to our. jurisprudence from the river. to the sea is so pale by. comparison. How could it possibly be.

illegal to. shout that slogan in. the United States? So there was no basis. for these claims. The problem is, as I'm sure you. understand, the. other side doesn't care. Because by the time these. cases make their way through. the courts, it's all over. They succeeded in their goal. They silenced all. dissent on our college campuses,

in our cultural institutions, in our hospitals, they. succeeded in there goal. It won't be upheld. I'm confident of that. There have been several rulings, as. you know, supporting the. dissenters. It won't be upheld, but... It already did the. damage. It'll be too late. once it's undone. So you said, um, the president of. Harvard later conceded. that a large, he called it a large. part, a large of what. some said was anti-Semitism is.

merely criticizing criticism of. foreign government. That's obviously. true. Why would it seems very. short-sighted, in fact, self-destructive to, to equate. criticism of a foreign government, a foreign politician, Netanyahu. specifically, who's not even. that popular within Israel. To say criticizing him is. the same as hating all Jews. Why would anybody make that case? That seems crazy. Well, on the one hand, it's to delegitimize all. criticism, obviously.

The other thing is—I mean, I think. we have to be honest. about these things. Netanyahu is the. longest sitting prime minister in. Israeli history, okay? Every few years, or even. every few months, you hear, he's. going to be outvoted out. of office. This is the end, the end. And it never happens. And the reason why, in my opinion,

it never happened is. because Netanyahu is. the perfect reflection of Israeli. society. He's an obnoxious, self-righteous Jewish. supremacist. That's Israeli society—obnoxious, self-righteous Jewish supremacists. So when they see him, they see themselves. And that's why he keeps winning, despite all of these corruption.

allegations and despite all. these other attacks on. his person. Israelis don't really care. Do you go to Israel? I went there. en route to. the occupied Palestinian territories. at the time. I was denied entry. in 1989, and. then I did get in.

And then in 2004, I was the denied entry again, and. I never returned because they I. don't tell you. I was denied for 10 years, but the governments moved. progressively to the right, so I decided it was pointless. to fly. How could you be. denied entry into Israel? I thought that all Jews had. a right to return. In fact, I thought it was called the right. of return. I'm not sure on what.

particular law I. was denied entry. There must have been some security. exception to. the right of return. I never really investigated. it. It wasn't. important enough to me. I just accepted acquiescence. Huh seems a little strange though. No like you're not Jewish anymore. because the government doesn't like. you or something Why do they get to. decide?

I recognized that they. would be displeased with the things. I said, so I wasn't altogether. shocked. Gradually, I started to deny entry. to a lot of Jews. I may have been at the head of the. queue. Is that true? Yeah. There were a large number of Jews. who were active in one way or. another, opposing the occupation, who were denied entry. My recollection is a. couple of years later, Professor.

Chomsky was denied entry. And there were many other people I. know personally who were. denied entry. I never considered it particularly. significant. What has it done to your life here. in the United States to take the. positions you have? Um... I would say, first of all, I'm not Edith. Piaf, je ne regrette rien. Yeah.

I have my regrets, but the overall trajectory, this is what I resolved. to do as a young man, probably. around the age of 16, not having to do with. Israel-Palestine, but fighting for. a more just world and. the people who were important. in my life as, to use the.

They had committed. themselves to the cause. Many of them passed or were. killed early in. life because of their commitment, and those are the ones who inspired. me. And so I recognized that. I would pay a price, and I was prepared. to pay it. And... In a great scheme of things, I'm now 72 years old.

I still have a roof over my. head. I am not wanting for the. basics in life. And I lived most. of my life of sound. body and I like to believe also. of sound mind. So I can say. it's caused. me any by. comparison to. the people I admired. And the suffering of others, I can say I've paid a.

big price. I would say the only frustration, if I can put it that way, is I happen to like to teach. I like it. The interaction with young people. who are. old enough to think for themselves, which comes with roughly. college age, 18 to. 22, and. also they are. not yet jaded or. cynical about the real world. They still have ideals.

So it's. a wonderful age to. interact with. and also. to teach the excitement. of the life of the. mind ideas. Thinking through problems, not tweets. A tweet is not an argument. Oh, it's not? No. An argument is quite complex,

it has major. premises, minor premises, it's very complicated to work out, and it requires a classroom to. do that, and requires a text to go. over together. And so it's really a. wondrous experience to. be a college professor. It's a responsibility, but it's also an experience. And I was. significantly. Denied that opportunity.

I don't take it so much. personally, as. I think I could have. inspired many more young. minds, not propagandized them. I'm totally against propaganda in. the classroom. I'm pretty much. a stickler about that. Not propagandize. them, but trying. to convey to them. The choice. Of the life of the mind,

and I think. I was deprived of. that right because of. political considerations. Why are you against propaganda in. the classroom? Because a lectern. is not a soapbox. There is a place, if you have. political convictions, When you're trying to persuade. others of your beliefs.

But I don't believe that's the place. of a classroom. You're not trying to. persuade. You are trying to, uh... Get people to. think for themselves, and getting people to think for. ourselves, in my opinion, is making the best. arguments on both. sides if the.

student is decidedly of. one political end. of the spectrum, to. make the best argument from. the other end of a spectrum, and force them to. work through an argument. And reach a. conclusion based on. the evidence. I think Bertrand. Russell, the great British. philosopher, he once said, there are always good arguments. to be made on both.

sides. There are always arguments. to be made on all sides. It's rarely the case. that in a major issue. of contention, Let's. say it's abortion. Or affirmative action. It's rarely the case. that all the. arguments are on one side and. there are no arguments on the other. side. There are always arguments on. both sides. And then,

you... Have to make the best case and. let each student decide. for him or herself not. who is right and who. is wrong. No. What the student has to do is. weigh the. arguments on both sides and. decide on. which side is the preponderance. of better arguments. It's never like this,

the scale. The scale is usually like this, there's always arguments on both. sides. You have to weigh. the arguments and. then decide who has. the better case. Uh, so. That's your view. Yes, it's my view. based on, you know, I. read the Supreme Court decisions. I thought, I know this will sound. like sacrilege, I thought Plessy versus Ferguson,

which legalized. separate but equal in our country, was a much better argument. than Brown, the 54. decision that ended separate. but equal. Brown wasn't even really. a court decision. It was an administrative decree. It was so poorly done, and they call it—liberals like. to call it the Mona Lisa.

of Supreme Court decisions. No, it was very. poorly done. The abortion, the Roe case, is, in my opinion, It's. a complete disaster. It's a disaster for a very obvious. reason for anybody who reads it. The Roe says. a woman has a right to. do with her body as she pleases. until another.

life enters the. picture, or what they call. potential life. So they say, of. course a woman had a right with. her life as she please, that's. protected Bye! Duh. 14th Amendment, the due process clause of our. Constitution, liberty, the liberty, they sometimes call it. the liberty clause, and this.

is a personal right, it falls under. the liberty clause of the. Constitution, but it says you. have to. take into account when a potential. life enters the picture. So obviously the question. is, When. does the potential life enter. the picture? Is it at conception? Is it at- Viability, yeah. Right. When does it enter the picture? The court says.

physicians disagree, theologians disagree, doctors disagree, philosophers disagree. The court says we. can't take a position. We don't know when it is. Because nobody knows when life. begins. Well, we have a problem here. If nobody knows. when life beings, but if it's a.

potential life or a real life, then you lose your right to. abortion. How do you decide? How do decide when a. woman has the right, you know, to her body? And when state. has the right to interfere. You said you don't know when life. begins. So they say, we'll decide its. viability when the. fetus can survive. on its own outside the mother's.

body. But that's a technical question. It just means when machines can. keep The fetus of life doesn't. tell you when life begins. No. So. The whole. Roe case was. so poorly argued, and you could see, you know, I go. over it with the class, and by the end, there's probably a. large amount of agreement that it. should be viability,

but there's a. recognition that. as a legal issue, it's a disaster. And so it was. pretty easily overturned. And I would say the Bakke case, the affirmative action case, I. thought that was pretty well argued, I grant that. But it also was a very complicated. case. I'm not gonna go into now how it was. finally decided. But in general, as a general. principle, I believe.

that one of my important. responsibilities. as a professor, to the extent I was able to practice. my profession, is to show students that. there are always arguments to be. made on the other side. So I think we have different. politics or I thought we did, but I. would be thrilled to have you. teach my children if the attitudes. you just explained or your attitudes. in the classroom. I think it is. No, I will tell you something,

except I believe for two classes. when I was at the Poole University, which eventually denied me tenure, I was never allowed to teach the. Israel-Palestine conflict. What? Yeah, I never was allowed to teach. it. Why? I think that's pretty obvious. I was at Brooklyn College, Hunter College, those are City University of New. York. The pool I recall, there were. two senior seminars where. I taught the Israel-Palestine.

conflict. Then I was unemployed from. 2007 to about 2020. I had no work. Long period of my life. You were totally unemployed for. 13 years. Yes. It was a dark period. for me because. most people, their structure in. life is determined externally. I have a job, have to. get up, go to work, blah, blah.

And I had to. every morning wake. up and try to. rationalize a purpose. to my existence. I know it's not easy. How did you not go crazy? You want to know the truth? I've forgotten those years. Yeah. I've forgot those years, but I... Would say they were a dark. period.

And then I was doing some. adjuncting that's. a substitute teacher, for those of. you who aren't in the academic. world. And at Hunter College. again, they let me go. And then recently at. Brooklyn College. So it was. scattered. It was very. demeaning. You know what?

An adjunct, allow me to explain to. your viewers, is usually. graduate students who they hire at. the last minute to fill a class. because a professor got. a grant, had. a family tragedy, and is usually a graduate student. I am very far. from a graduate student. in. just physical years. And to be an.

adjunct and to be treated. I know I shouldn't say this, but. I don't much care. At Brooklyn College this. last semester, I hadn't been paid. I get paid. They didn't. pay me for six weeks. I was so incensed,

so enraged, treated like garbage. So it was a very. humanly demeaning. position for a person. Let's leave aside. my quote unquote. Academic achievements, just. my age to. be an adjunct. No, we're also not to be. vulgar about it, but the most famous. person in Brooklyn College by a lot.

Uh, I'd rather not say that. It's for others to say. Well, that's my characterization. You're certainly, I don't know of. anyone else at Brooklyn College. who's more famous than you are or, um, how did. that happen? I mean, can you get. specific? I won the DePaul case. about 20 years ago was. relatively well covered, not as much. as it should have been, but. basically the department. and then the college voted to give. you tenure pretty overwhelmingly, and then a bunch of outside forces,

including donors and Alan Gershwitz. Intervened and the university, the. president, if I'm remembering this. correctly, denied you tenure, is. that correct? Um, I think. the final decision was. made by the President, Father Holtzschneider, I believe. I'm not sure in. the allocation of responsibility. who makes that last decision. That, too, is kind. of a blur in.

my life. The last year was really pretty. terrible. Do you have any idea in. specific terms how you. were prevented from. being a college professor? Remember, we're living in. very different times now. Israel's on the defensive and. those who are supporting the. rights of Palestinians and opposing. the various Israeli. aggressions, they are on the.

offensive. When I first got involved in the. conflict, which was in. June 1982 when Israel. invaded Lebanon, we're talking about a. handful of I think it's fair. to say. You know the Yiddish expression of. Meshuggah? Yeah. Correct. Crazy people. A handful of Jewish Meshuggahs. opposed Israel's actions. The only notable exception. was Professor Chomsky,

who sort of. gave stature to. our cause, but it was just a handful. of people. And early on, I had written my. doctoral dissertation on. the theory of Zionism. And while writing the doctoral. dissertation, there was a. book that came out way. before your time. It was called From Time Immemorial,

and the major thesis. of the book was that Palestine. was empty. The Jews came, made it flourish, and. then all these Arabs from. neighboring states infiltrated. into Palestine and. pretended to be indigenous to. it. The book became an instant. national bestseller. It was endorsed by. the who's who of. the American intelligentsia, which largely consisted of.

Jews at that period. We're talking about 1984, 1983, and the book was. a sensation, it was a national. sensation, because now we've. proven that this. whole thing about Palestine. has been contrived by. anti-Semites in. order to discredit. the Jews and so. forth. I sat down and.

I read the book. I should also say the book was. certified for its accuracy. by a fellow named. Philip Hauser, who was. the head of population studies. at the University of Chicago, which is an imposing title. Definitely. Yes. I sat down. I worked at that point a part-time. job. I was reading my doctoral. dissertation. I came home every.

night. A lot of it was demographics, numbers, tables, numbers. tables. I would sit at home and. take out my pad and paper. I didn't use calculators. And I'm Flipping the pages, the tables are in the back, the text is in the middle. Going back and forth, back and. forward. I'm gonna figure this out. I'm going to figure this up. And then one.

night. I discover one key number. in the. tables was fake, was a fake. It was a. eureka moment, a eureca moment, chills down my. spine. I. lived in this tiny studio. apartment, like...

Raskolnikov, and crime and. punishment. And I'm pacing. the apartment back. and forth, back and. forth, I'm saying, I did it. I did. Did it. I was just. overwhelmed. It was like one o'clock in the. morning. Who can I call? Who can tell? Well, I'm Jewish. I called my mother.

I said, Mom, I did it! I did It was. one in the morning, and she said, Norm. I'm so happy for you. What did you do? No. Was no way I. can explain to her how I proved. that this is a demographic fraud. In any case, then it became a real. battle, because. I had. the goods.

As they say nowadays, I. had their receipts, and. that was going to mean I was just. a graduate student, and. all of these experts. had lent their name. to the book. All of these authorities, these Saul Bellow, Elie. Wiesel, Barbara Tuchman, Lucy DeWittowich, they don't mean. anything to you. They do mean. something, yeah. Well, they were very. big names.

And so, I remember. I sent out my findings. to several, around 20, prominent. people who support the rights. of Palestinians. You know, it was a different era. You type it up, you have to. Xerox it, you send it in the. mail. Most of these people, they're not. going to give the time of day. to a graduate. student. They get too many. other uh,

pieces of correspondence from. important people. And one Saturday morning. I got a call. and the. call was, hello, is this Norman Finkelstein? I said, yes. And the person then said, this is Noam Chomsky. I have read what you wrote and. I found it convincing. And that was...

Beginning of a whole new chapter in. my life, he became a. friend, a close friend, and most importantly, a. mentor. But he warned me. on the very first. correspondence. He said, Be aware. that if you continue. on this path, there will be many brickbats. coming your way. Honestly, I am not a saint.

I am very. far from. a saint, as Gandhi. would often say, I have 10,000. faults, and. I do, and. will never pretend. otherwise. But of one thing I can. say with a. certain amount of. conviction I. cannot be bought.

And I attach. a lot to. truth. I attach to a lot, to justice. And I don't, I'm not. open to compromising. those values. So with all. due regard to my mentor, the great Noam Chomsky, it was not a tough. decision. At all.

To pursue it. His wife, Carol, his first wife, who I was close to, we were. family friends. She would occasionally. say that she was, and she liked me, you know, she sympathized with situation. She would occasionally say, I'm angry at Noam. that he didn't discourage you.

Because I paid, you know, relatives, I paid some price, okay? And I would say, no, Carol, you're. wrong. He did warn me, but. Was no way. I wouldn't persist. At the beginning, I was called up. by Robert Silvers. I'm not sure if that name means.

anything to you. He was the editor of the. New York Review of Books. The New York review of books was by. a wide margin the. most influential journal. among the intelligentsia, okay? And he called me down to his. office, a door was opening, a big door. You know, I. was so excited. My heart was.

palpitating. And He said to. come down in, like, two hours. It wasn't an appointment in the. future. I had to. calm. down. So I went out for a run. OK. It was in Washington Heights, the bodegas with. the aluminum awnings, if. you remember what they look like.

Yeah. And I ran under one and. I cut a gash in my. skull from here to here. Oh, come on. I swear. I cut the gash, a long gash and it. started to bleed. I'm not going to miss this. appointment. I'm now going to Miss it. This is it, my chance in life, you know? Like they say in Britain's Got. Talent, Simon Cowell says these. three minutes might change your.

life. I stopped the bleeding, I went, and he told me to meet his friend, a fellow named Arthur. Berger, no, Rabbi Hertzberg, Arthur. Hertzberg who was a. rabbi and an academic at Columbia. I. go down to meet. Hertzberg, and he... He says, we Zionists,

I'm thinking to myself, where did that we come from? We Zionists? Like, me and him? And then he said, he'll be my. dissertation advisor. I said, no, I am at Princeton, you're at Columbia. He said, I'll take care of that. And then he. asked me a question. He said, I'm quoting. now, a long time ago,

1984, but I remember. He said are. you in Chomsky's. stable? I didn't know what that expression. meant, but I sort of got the idea. And I know it's. what you call the. do-or-die moment. I knew if I said. yes, the door was going to shut in my. face, but.

there was no. way on God's. earth. That I was going to say, no, that's not going. to happen. And I said, I consider him my mentor. and a. friend. It was the last time. I ever heard from the. New York Review of Books. So to answer your. question, to.

answer you question, everybody knows those. moments where. you know the door. may open or. it may shut in your face. And everybody faces those moments. in life. It's called life. And the doors kept. shutting. I tell you, I was bitter. because I liked.

to teach. I was biter. because it was. so demeaning. I remember once at Hunter. College, I was mimeographing. some papers for the class at. that time, long before to. your viewers. Long before. electronic, you know, send a. syllabus and everything through.

electronic technology. And one of the professors came into. the offices at night, said, what. are you doing here? I said, well, I'm an adjunct. I'm just Xeroxing some stuff for the. class. She called security on me. You know, I was already. in my 50s. And just to establish. for viewers who may not know, you. were at Princeton, where were you.

educated? Undergrad I went to Binghamton. University, then Princeton, and then I studied at the École. Partique de Solitude in Paris. That was my three. periods of education. Otherwise, I've basically been home. So that's the story. And uh. Are you bitter about it now? Now I laugh. You wouldn't know I laugh now. I know it's not a bitter.

laugh, but let's say. I wrote the only scholarly. book in. Gaza's political history. The only one. Sarah Roy of Harvard University, she wrote the Only Scholarly. Economic History of Gaza. Excellent book. Okay? I wrote The Only Political. History. I came out in 2018, okay? It's still the only one. Not reviewed anywhere.

Nowhere. Never mentioned. You know how. sometimes newspapers like the New. York Times, when an event becomes. front page news, they'll. have a little list of books you. should read, you know, background. books? Never mentioned, never mentioned. So now I left. So, Gaz's Grave Diggers, which you've written, how. do you expect that to be received? You know, it's a question mark.

because of. the social media. It's very hard to pretend I. don't exist. Yes. It's a, it, it it's, it a challenge. Uh, places like. New Yorker magazine, no possibility. Atlantic magazine, No. possibility. Maybe the times will. do a hit job. Uh, it is possible, but in general. On pessimistic, but.

on the other hand, there is. the, I. think what they call the alternative. media has now sort of become the. mainstream media and the mainstream. has become the alternative media. So I think there. are prospects. It's a, um... I think it's a good book. It's not an easy book, but I believe. it's good book, and.

I do a. kind of research that nobody. does. The philosopher John Stuart. Mill, he once said, the more valuable you become to. yourself, the more you. become valuable to others. Which is another way of saying, the more you home, your God-given gift. And I believe, I'm old fashioned,

I believe everybody has a. God- given gift. Yes. It's, most people, they go through life, it's latent. Yes, I strongly agree. They don't have the opportunity to. discover. They never find out what it is. They never find out what it is. And some who do find out, never find the time or resources to. apply it. So I have. a skill.

It's a small skill. It's an attention to. detail. It's checking every. footnote. It's applying my mind. where I think something is. implausible to. finding the. hers. In the argument. The great advantage that. truth has over falsehood. is this. Truth holds.

together, because it's true. Falsehood, if. you apply your. eye in. a conscientious, almost maniacal. way. And it requires a certain amount of. fanaticism. You can prove. it's false, because at the end of the day, it doesn't hold.

together. And. That's been kind. of my life's, I won't say vocation. It's my gift. It's not a big gift, but. what I like to say is. what I do is. not much. I acknowledge that, but, what. I do, I. do well. I.

can take any text. Which is implausible. at first glance, Pramafasi, implausable, I. can put. my eye to. it page by page, sentence by sentence, and. I can demonstrate this. is not true. And that's what I largely.

do in book. For example, one example that will be familiar. to your listeners, there. is no question that. atrocities of. a significant magnitude. were committed by. Hamas and other militant. groups on October 7th. Yes. And I. am not a denier. of any sort of. atrocity. So far as the evidence shows,

as of now, Um, it happened. But then there were claims made, as all of your listeners know, that Hamas had weaponized. rape and sexual violence. I found that, for reasons. not worth going into right. now, I found it implausible. And then I started to go through the. evidence, and there is. no material.

evidence to support. that claim. I devote the first chapter. of the new book, God is His Gravediggers, the chapter. is called Rape Fantasies. I go through all the. alleged evidence and. I find it not. only non-persuasive, I find the evidence non-existent. It's just totally made up?

Yes. Yes, I have to be careful about my. words. You asked me the question, is it totally made up? I would say the evidence, based on the evidence that's. been adduced, it's. totally made-up. So let's give you one example. And then you judge for yourself, assuming what I'm telling you now is. true, is accurate. After my book came out, this very. I'm sorry, the claim has been.

widespread. I mean, widespread, you. hear it everywhere. And I'll get to that. Just remind me, as I continue, and remind me of the name Cheryl. Sandberg, which I'll get to if you. remind me. I know Cheryl's number. Okay, good. So let's take, after my. book came out, this New. Israeli Report was published by. what they call a civil commission. And the main. author of the report is. somebody named Dr.

Levy, her last name. Oh, come back to me. So here's what she. says, okay? She says Hamas. committed widespread. rape on. October 7, widespread. systematic sexual. violence on October. seventh. You're familiar with those. claims, of course, as are, as is. your viewers. And then she said that. Hamas had.

weaponized this. sexual violence, including. rape and and grape? In order to. shatter the Israeli. national esprit, spirit. So it. posted all of. these acts of rape and sexual. violence on the social. media, even. contacted the. families of the victims.

using their own cell. phones, the family cell phones which. they seized, and so forth, iPhones. And disseminate all this evidence. Okay, that's an interesting claim. So what do you discover? I hope you are. Viewers are all ears. They say that they have. 10,000. photographs and.

digital segments. of what happened. on October 7th. Ten thousand. They also say. that if you were to view. it, it would take 1800. hours. To view all of their. photographic and. digital evidence. It would take 1,800 hours. That means if. you're a single researcher.

and you go through this evidence, it would take you, and you did eight. hours a day, eight hours. every day of the week. It would you more. than seven months. to go through all of the. photographic and digital evidence. of October 7th. Now here is the kicker. There isn't one single.

image, one single frame. of Hamas. committing rape or sexual violence. on October 7. How can that be? How is that possible? Not one image. They say Hamas. was posting. The images of sexual violence. in order to demoralize,

shatter the national spirit. They said, we. have Hamas dash cams. We have Hamás body. cams, we Hamás. GoPros. We have it. They said we have extensive. Images from Hamas. But none of those images show sexual. violence or rape.

There has not been one. image, not one, put forth by Israel. And Amnesty International said, nobody even claims they have. such an image. How is that possible? By their, I should also. add they have. CCTV imagery, digital evidence. They have traffic camera.

evidence. They have iPhone evidence. from October 7th. There's no evidence. There's not image. How can that be? How is that possible? So... They have no physical. evidence. Now, part of it seemed plausible to. me. They said we have no. forensic evidence because. they weren't prepared for a massacre. of the magnitude of October.

7th, so they processed. the bodies very quickly to prepare. them for Jewish burial, ritual. burial, and they didn't preserve. significant. forensic evidence. That seemed plausible to me. But no digital evidence. That didn't sound right, that didn't even sound, not. only didn't it sound plausible, it didn't seem possible. The only thing they have is. witnesses.

So they have this witness. She says, I was sitting in a. little room. I was hidden. The room was sealed. They call it a caravan, a caravane. The room is sealed. A vehicular. Hiding place. She said, sitting in. the room, I heard, this. is her words, I'm calling her, I.

heard a gang rape here, I hear a rape here. and I heard another rape there. Then she starts giving more. details of these rapes. How is that possible? She heard in a little, a. rape here, a rape there, she said, here, here and here. There, there and there. That's their best evidence. Identify the victims of these rapes?

She was sealed in. the room. There were no windows. There was no windows! You know, you have to ask her, did. she hear the. Vienna Boys Choir here. and Boston Pops. here and the Beatles reunion. there? It was, like, completely—and. that was their star witness. If you look at the current report, I. mentioned to you, the 300 page. report.

She's listed first. Of the survivors, there are two alleged survivors, one of October 7th, one a hostage. survivor. But if you look at the report, neither of them said they were. right. They did not read. what they said. The woman hostage survivor, she. became quite prominent,

Ahnad Susanna. She said, something terrible. was done to me, maybe, I'm not going. to dispute that. Something awful was done me, but she never said she was raped. She does not. There is a claim by a. nail. That he was raped on October 7, but if you read his testimony to. the so-called Civil Commission, there's no...he doesn't say he.

was rape. So we're stuck with. the following problem. No forensic evidence, no digital evidence, no. photographic evidence, and of the. survivor testimony. The one survivor from October. 7th who's. touted as. a victim of rape, he doesn't say he was raped.

The one survivors of. hostages, Anat Susana, she doesn't she was raped. I tell you, at my age, the memory can slip. The author of the report. is Dr. Kochav. Elkayam-Levy. She's the author. And I want to say, look, your. program has reach, obviously.

It's not BGT. Neither three minutes. nor three hours. are going to change my life, because my life is over. It's in the past. But it has reach. So I say, You disagree. with me, Dr. Elkayam Levy? Let's debate it. Let's go to a public. venue and. debate it." I say.

the same thing to. Sheryl Sandberg. I'm not going to tell you how I did it. I'm just going to give you. a few examples. I'm gonna show you a couple of examples. Now, let's. go ahead and get started. Of Facebook. Sheryl Sandberg was the. Chief. Operating Officer, and she's a bright woman. No question about it. I never deny people, I can. loathe them, but I never lie. people their achievements. She attended Harvard. She was an economics major. She was the top student in.

her economics class for her. year. That's how significant. achievement. Now, she makes. a film, a documentary, she calls it. It's called Screams. Before Silence, and it claims. that it was mass, systematic rape and sexual. violence on October. 7, committed by Hamas. Systematic, widespread sexual.

violence. And she stars. in the film and she emotes. and she's in tears. and she is going, oh. my God, she's looking at. these images of. sexual violence and rape. on an iPhone. But Cheryl, I hope you're listening. You're a bright woman.

But excuse my English. You're full of shit. There were no images. There was one image, but the independent, or they called forensic. specialists, whatever they're. called. They said you couldn't tell. anything from those. images. Screams before silence.

should be called. shalaks. Before shice. Your listeners can go to. their, you can go Google. Get his dictionary to find out. You know, schlock before. scheiss. These are Jewish. supremacists. who have no. regard, whatever, for facts. Because for them,

it's the cause. and. the cause is. more important. Than any passing. fact. She attended Harvard. She was in the economics department. She knows what evidence is. She knows with evidentiary standards. are. It's the cause. Israel must live.

So last question pertains to what. you just said. Outside the United States, I think. it's very, there's a consensus. globally, pretty much, that what Israel is doing is. totally indefensible. These are crimes. But the question is, will there ever. be a reckoning? So your parents were Poles. and were both put in Nazi camps, including Auschwitz, and. your family was murdered. But there was a reckening, I. mean, some of the people who.

committed those crimes were. Held to account. Will that happen in this case? Well, let's start from basics. When the whole society is implicated. in a genocide, apart from a few senior. figures. Impossible for there to be a. reckoning. That's why places like South. Africa pioneer. the idea of a Truth and.

Reconciliation Commission, because if. you're going to prosecute. everybody implicated in apartheid, it's a large portion of society. So as a general rule, even. in best of cases. It's only a handful of people. Are going to be held accountable. In the case of Israel, nobody will. ever be held accountable. That, for that to me,

is pretty transparent. Why? Well... Because first. of all, the. United States won't allow it to. happen. Part of it, as you know, is the. domino effect. If they're held accountable, Trump is in a very... First of all Biden and. Blinken are in a very difficult. situation because they. enabled the genocide. If it weren't for.

Joe Biden and Tony Blinken, there couldn't have been a genocide. In Gaza. It was funny, the New Yorker magazine wrote. this article, I believe it was the New Yorker, in which it—this is very recent—in. which it claimed. that it was. written by a fellow, Fitzpatrick, his name just—I think it was David. Fitzpatricks, a former Times reporter. And he said, oh, they tried.

so hard, they I tried so. hard... They couldn't do anything, you know, meaning Biden, Blinken, and the others, Jake Sullivan, to prevent the genocide. And then in the course of the. article, they have a line that. reads, 70%. of the weapons. for the Gaza genocide came from. the United States. You certainly had one. option. Yeah. Don't sell the weapons. I'm supplying the weapons,

so... There's always the fear of the. domino effect. If Israelis are indicted, where does that leave the Biden. administration? So that makes. it. improbable. that's gonna happen. Same thing with Donald Trump, because the attack. on Iran was. the most brazen.

flagrant aggression in. the modern history. There's not been, to my. knowledge, no, my knowledge is not. unlimited. To my knowledge there's. never been a case in the modern. world of a state attacking. without a pretense. of a pretext. Even Hitler in. 1939, when he attacked. Poland.

He fabricated a border incident. Of course. You always have to claim. self-defense. Got it. A golf tonk in it, yeah. I was just going to say, you. beat me to the draw. In 1964, the US had to essentially. fabricate, or LBJ, Lyndon Johnson, the president, fabricate the. Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in. order to, for those. of you who don't. go back that far, and luckily for.

you if you don't, for I. believe it was August 1964, the claim was made that a. North. Vietnamese vessel. attacked an American vessel. And that was then, there were. only two. senators who voted against. it, it was Ernst Groening, and I forgot the second. That became the piece.

of legislation that. enabled the ground war. in Vietnam. The US was already heavily involved. during the Kennedy years, but it. enabled the groundwater in Vietnam. in the case of. Israel and the. US, there wasn't a pretense. There wasn't the pretense of. a pretext. It was the brazen. flagrant breach. of the UN Charter. Uh, in modern history.

We're in the middle of a negotiation. In the middle of a negotiation. See, I was listening to your. interview with Darryl Cooper, and that was emphasized in the. middle of the negotiation. What's so dishonorable? It was outrageous. But you know what's also. dishonorable and outrageous? There was no reaction by the UN. Security Council. Nothing. Nothing! You could hear a pin drop in. silence.

You know what else was dishonorable? On November 17, 2025. UN Security Council passed. Resolution 2803. And do you know what that resolution. did? Amidst all the horror that. the God-forsaken people of Gaza. have endured since. back in 1948. The concentration camp.

in which they have been. immured for. 80 years. After the genocide over. the past three years, the UN Security Council, I know this will. sound like hyperbole, exaggeration, the U.N. Security Council. handed the deed. of casa. To Donald J. Trump.

He got the deed to Gaza. He was designated the. head of the Board of Peace. He subsequently was given. total veto. power over. any decision made by the. Board peace, and the UN Security Council. only put one. condition, one, every six months. The Board of Peace should,

not has to, should. report to the Security Council. on the situation in Gaza. He owns Gaza. He owns Gazza. So there have been. many shameless. episodes, and. in fact that's. what the purpose of. My new book is... To...

Preserve for. future generations, assuming there will be. future generations. And as you discussed with. Darrell Cooper, there. are all sorts of apocalyptic. scenarios that. are plausible in. the case of the current aggression. against Iran. But assuming—and those, by the way, They are plausible. I've written about them.

Oh, it's definitely positive. That's possible. There are two crazy. people with the helm, one. in Tel Aviv and one in. the Oval Office, and. it's absolutely impossible. to predict what. they might do. But assuming. the worst doesn't come to the worst, what I've written is. to preserve the. record of. had infamy.

Of what has been done. to the people of Gaza, but with the recognition that. unlikely anyone. is going to be held. legally accountable. for what was done. to those God-forsaken people. Well, in the absence of that, I'm. glad you wrote this and I'm grateful. you took the time for this.

conversation. But thank you so much. And I hope that-. You are vindicated. I don't need that. Broadly. Well, I hope so. You don't seem to care. No. Too late in the day. Thank you. Roman Finkelstein, thank you. Thank. you.