Krystal and Saagar discuss Israel freaks as Egypt joins ICJ genocide case, Blinken admits Israel war crimes says it's okay.
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/
Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
If you like what we're all about, it just means
the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that,
let's get to the show, all.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Right, guys, So we have a lot of big updates
for you with regards to Israel. Let's put this first
extraordinary development up on the screen. So, Egypt now joining
South Africa's case at the ICJ, which alleges that Israel
is committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Senior
Israeli officials are describing this, I would say, probably accurately
(00:47):
as a new low in relations between countries, certainly in
recent history post peace agreement. Egypt's announcement, they say, is
not expected to have a material effect on the ICJ's
legal process, but reflects a new low. Israeli sources fear
the ICJ may issue new orders against Israel as the
operation in Rafa as having a major impact on access
to humanitarian aid. Reportings suggests that Egypt's really quite extraordinary
(01:12):
decision to join South Africa in their case at the ICJ,
has everything to do with the Israeli assault on Rafa,
in the fact that they have already invaded and taken
control of the Rafa crossing on the Palestinian side. We've
been reporting for months how Egypt has been raising red
flag after red flag against about that potential incursion into Rafa,
(01:35):
talking about what a provocation that would be, what a
problem it would be for Egypt, And so in their
letter where they signaled they were joining on with the ICJ,
they said in that statement that the move comes quote
in view of aggravating intensity and scale of Israeli attacks
against civilians Agaza and the quote continued perpetration of systematic
(01:56):
practices against Palestinians, including direct targeting of civilians in destruction
of infrastructure. Egypt also called the Rafa operation a flagrant
violation of international law and called on Israel to commit
to the principles of international law as an occupying power.
In addition, South Africa just on Friday submitted a request
the ICJ to issue new emergency orders against Israel due
(02:18):
to the operation in Rafa. So you've got two things.
You've got South Africa coming back to the ICJ and
saying you've got to issue new injunctions.
Speaker 4 (02:26):
You'll recality.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
First injunctions did not go so far as demanding a ceasefire,
So they're really pushing the envelope, pushing directly for that
that call for a ceasefire from the ICJ. And you
have Egypt joining, which saga I mean is significant for
a lot of reasons, not least of which that I mean.
Egypt is a massive recipient of usaid, considered a great
(02:48):
American ally, So the fact that they're at this point
also saying, hey, Israel, we think you're committing genocide. We're
signing onto this, we're pushing for a direct injunction is
really quite significant.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Well, it's important for several reasons. For basically, let's say
nineteen seventy to let's say the twenty tens, when Iran
became the major driver in the Israel relationship, all of
US foreign policy with respect to Israel was balancing the
two great powers of Israel and Egypt. Where there's a
saying in Arabic which is difficult to translate, but it
(03:17):
roughly translates to, like, where Egypt goes is where the
rest of the Arab world go was. The idea is
that it's like a cultural heart and center that's like.
Speaker 4 (03:26):
The heart of the Arab Yeah, it's like the heart exactly.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Let's put it that way. It's difficult to like put
into English.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
But the point is that with Egypt where it is
right now, we wanted to always balance the two. It's
why the Camp David nineteen seventies agreements were so important
and why both of them are recipients of major military aid.
Iran and Iraq basically took that off the table and
changed everything. We kind of took the Egypt Israel relationship
for granted. Well, what we're all learning here is that
(03:53):
these things can fall apart very very quickly, and that
the Israeli kind of arrogance and with respect to its
operations in Rafa without a lot of consideration of the Egyptians.
And let's not forget I mean we covered it here
at the time. The Egyptians warned them that it was coming.
They called them in early October. They're like, there is
a major terrorist attack that is going to happen, and
you need to listen.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
They didn't listen to the Egyptians. They tried to prevent this.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Now they have their own domestic politics going on, but
clearly their own population is very upset about what's happening,
and their own government sees major fallout from Israeli policy
and especially this operation in Rafa, and so for them
to join on to this is a monumental event in
US foreign policy.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
Yeah, that's absolutely right. And from the Egyptian perspective, first
of all, you have a population which is overwhelmingly sympathetic
to the Palestinian cause, and so you have pressure from
the population. You also have deep concern from the Egyptians,
which to your point, Zager, they've been very clear about
deep concern about a potential mass of refugees fleeing Gaza
Strip because of Gatten. Of course, clustered in Rafa, you
(04:54):
have some probably around a million Palestinians at this point,
because you've had about three hundred thousand who have won
again been forcibly displaced from Raffa, but you still have
an extraordinary concentration of population.
Speaker 4 (05:04):
There with no where to go.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
So there's deep concern about that as well, and they
are arguing quite accurately. I don't think you can really
dispute this that Israel taking control of Palas and the
inside of the border is a direct breach of an
agreement that Egypt had with Israel with regard to that
Rafa crossing and that whole area of the border region
(05:29):
between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. So this is, you know,
this is really no worthy. The other thing that I'll
mention here is the Israeli seem very nervous that the
ICJ is going to actually issue some additional injunctions. Now
is that going to come to pass? What is that
based on? I have no idea, but the fact that
you have South Africa going back, Egypt joining on, and
(05:49):
this invasion now which has already occurred. The US administration
is saying it's not a major invasion, but it's you know,
it's an invasion. They've taken control of the crossing, They've
hit some very significant number of targets in Rafa, They've
displaced already hundreds of thousands forcibly of Palestinians from the areas.
So you clearly have action with regard to Rafa and
(06:10):
BBNT Yaho signaling there's no end in sight with regard
to that. Those things, I think it is plausible could
combine to seeing the ICJ taking some more aggressive and
more full throated action with regard to Israel. So we
have some video we can show you of some of
the things that I was just referring to in terms
(06:31):
of the expansion. This is leafleting in Rafa. So reports
are that some three hundred thousand Palestinians have now been
once again told to move. In addition, you have new
idea of actions in the northern part again of the
Gaza Strip. This is Jibali, a refugee camp that came
under massive attack again and we'll talk more about the
(06:54):
significance of that. Here you see civilians fleeing from Israeli firepower.
Speaker 4 (06:59):
The bombs are falling everywhere. They say.
Speaker 1 (07:02):
You have additional images here from Rafa. And then this
video is Israeli settlers putting rocks in the road and
coming up with new extraordinary tactics to block medicine, food
and fuel from going into the Gaza Strip. This is
an effort that has been on going for months now
(07:23):
that they have escalated. And finally you can see here
a map showing that people are being forced to flee
north from Rafa, and they are also being told to
flee south from that Jibalia area, the Jabalia refugee camp,
and again NPR, New York Times, any number of outlets
(07:45):
that are pretty sympathetic to the Israelis have documented the
fact that there is nowhere safe to go the Alawassi
area that they've touted as this safe stone. First of all,
it has not been a safe stone. Second of all,
there is nowhere near the sort of food, fuel, sanitation, water,
et cetera that you would need to host some million
(08:08):
plus Palestinians. It's already overcrowded there. So this is a
horrifying situation. I wanted to mention Sager, the Jibalia refugee
camp bombing is really significant. You guys might remember this
is one of the places that was attacked aggressively in
the early phases of the war. They killed some hundreds
of Palestinians using two thousand pound bombs to allegedly potentially
(08:29):
get one hamas militant. But this is the area in
the northern Gaza strip which has been utterly decimated. But
since you know, after they left that area, since there
was no alternative to Hamas put in place. Hamas is,
you know, has not been defeated. Hamas is still a
coming back in reconstituting taking control over civilian functions, et cetera.
(08:53):
So it really underscores how much of a failure the
Israeli approach here has been and how much incredible spin
it requires to present what they've done and the horse
they've perpetrated in the Gaza strip as anything approaching a
win quote unquote for the Israeli side.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
It's ridiculous because what it shows also is the ineffectiveness
of their military campaign. It's funny because they haven't been
engaged in a lot of military activity in the last
several months, at least at like a major campaign level,
so we haven't been able to talk about it.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
But this is the ultimate sign of failure.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
If you have to keep going back bombing people in
the North, then your entire mission accomplished. Speech, which happened
already was fake. It's like it's exact, you could roll
the tape it were predicted it here say there's no
way to do this in the way that they are.
All you're doing is just blowing the crap out of
the place, destroying the rubble. You have your cartoonish children military,
(09:47):
you know, rolling in and shooting and everything that they want.
No I even attempt to try and separate the population
to build something for the next day, you will almost
certainly just create an insurgency. Well what happened, and now
immediately they would draw from the area. Rockets are being
fired from there. So now they say that they have
to go back in. There's no plan, there is no
actual effective military strategy. And if that's the case, it's like, well,
(10:08):
what was the entire point of all of this. Let's
put the next one, please up on the screen. You're
also watching here. Now three hundred thousand people quote forced
to evacuate. This is from Rafa saying quote as you said,
there is nowhere to go. The humanitarian zone is quote
neither safe nor equipped to handle all of them.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
According to the United Nations.
Speaker 4 (10:26):
Either safe nor humanitarian.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Runs the zone.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
And so then the question is it's like, well, are
you going to go in Rafa and do the exact
same thing that you did in Conunis and in Gaza,
Because if so, then neither of those works. This is
part of what drives me crazy about The entire thing
is everyone's like, they need to go in and they
need to finish Jamas. I'm like, well, they didn't finish
themas in Gaza today, they didn't finish Jamas in communists
or in Jabali a refugee camp, and so what evidence
(10:50):
do we have that you're going to be able to
do that in Rafa?
Speaker 3 (10:53):
Basically none. You know, from a military point of view.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
There has been basically, you know, no ignor knowowledgement of
the fact that overall, right now, this has been a
strategic and tactical failure. If you are analyzing from the
basis of the outset gain or the outset goals free
the hostages, destroy the terrorists, neither of those have happened.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
You've killed more hostages than you free.
Speaker 4 (11:16):
That's right, That's exactly right.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
And there's a deal on the table right now to
free all of the hostages.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
That baby Nan who doesn't want to take.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
So also has completely exposed the lie you hear all
the time of like, oh well, if they just freed
the hostages, the war could end tomorrow.
Speaker 4 (11:30):
Bullshit.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
They said they would free the hostages, and guess what
has really said, No, we want to continue the war. No,
this hasn't been about getting Hamas. It's been about revenge.
It's been about destruction. It's been about you know, the
same sort of you know, base instincts that were fed
and fueled and that we saw a lot of in
the aftermath of nine to eleven. That's what this has been.
(11:52):
It really, I don't you know, it's it's a force
to imagine otherwise, and it has been from the beginning
because you know, as we cover from the early days,
if your actual goal was we're going to get the
bad guys who play in October seventh, we're going to
make sure this can never happen again. The utter destruction
and devastation, mass targeting of civilians, et cetera. Is completely
inconsistent with anything approaching those goals, and it also exposes
(12:15):
another lie from the Israelis, which is this idea of well,
we've defeated Hamas throughout the rest of the Gaza strip,
now we just got to go into Raffa and finish
the job.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Right.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
That's what you hear all the time from Bbebe and
his defenders and supporters, et cetera. We got to go
into Rafa, we got to finish the job, Well, what
are you talking about? You clearly there's much more Hamas
still remaining than you are portraying. Clearly they're not all
just clustered in Rava. In fact, we got to report
that even Sinwar, who is you know, a major target
(12:46):
of IYRE and high level October seventh plannerar et cetera,
that he is not even in Rafa anymore, that perhaps
he's in Conunis at this point. So the idea that oh,
we're going to finish the job when we go into Rafa,
no you're not. You're just going to slaughter more civilians.
It's going to be more horror, more atrocities, more outrage,
(13:08):
with no plan in sight for any sort of peace
day after.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
I mean, that's just never been a.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
Part of their of their intentions, never been part of
their intentions whatsoever. I also just have to mention that
New York Times headline, we could put D three back
up for one more second. It now says that three
hundred thousand Gozzens are forced to evacuate. This original headline
said three hundred thousand gozzens are on the move. Like
(13:37):
so sanitized and at least they had enough shame after
backlash to change to indicate no, no, they're not just
on the move because they feel like getting up and going.
They're being forced to evacuate many of these I mean,
just try to put yourself in there shoes, right.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
Imagine you're someone who.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Was living in Gaza City and you were told you
got to get out, and you went to Communis and
you were told you got to get out of there,
and you went to You've got no money left your.
Speaker 4 (14:02):
You know, very little food.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
You've been living in a tent for seven months now,
You've been displaced time and time again, and now you're looking.
Speaker 4 (14:11):
Where do you go? Where do you go?
Speaker 1 (14:14):
So there are horrifying decisions that are being made here
by people who just have no or at their absolute
wits end, and have no idea what to do that
is going to help preserve the lives of themselves and
their children and their family members. It's outrageous, it's absolutely outrageous.
And to paint that as some sort of humanitarian gesture
(14:36):
that oh, we you know, we are so moral because
we tell these people to move. No, you forcibly displaced
the entire Goszas shop, basically millions of Palestinines at this point,
and there is nowhere that they can go and feel
like they're going to be Okay, let's put this next
piece up on the screen, because this was also very noteworthy.
The UN General Assembly approved a resolution that would grant
(14:59):
Palestine new rights and would revive its UN membership bid.
This vote in the General Assembly was overwhelming. It called
on the Security Council to reconsider Palestine's request become one
hundred and ninety fourth member of the UN. The vote
was one hundred and forty three in favor, nine against.
(15:22):
You will not be surprised to learn the US was
one of those against, with twenty five abstentions. You had
a lot of US allies, including France, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Australia, Estonia,
Norway who voted in favor of this resolution. It also
demonstrated a growing support for the Palestinian So there was
(15:45):
a similar General Assembly resolution back on October twenty seventh,
that one called for a humanitarian ceasefire in gaz. It
was approved one hundred and twenty to fourteen with forty
five abstentions. So a more overwhelming vote here, and we
can put the next piece up on the screen. Because
doctor Parci laid down why this is noteworthy, Because I
know it's easy to be like, who cares what really happens.
Speaker 4 (16:07):
At the UN fair enough?
Speaker 1 (16:09):
But he says that based on a draft of the
resolution he'd reviewed, he thought this resolution could become a
big deal. It does three important things. Reiterates a Palestine
state must be created based on the sixty seven borders
by that rejects the facts on the ground that Israel's
manufactured through its settlement project. Second, it expresses deep regret
and concern over Biden's veto at the UN Security Council
(16:31):
last month. And third, it appears to grant Palestine full
rights and privileges of a member even if the Security
Council fails to admit Palestine. This would be an unprecedented
decision designed to circumvent Biden's veto at the Security Council.
He goes on to say the draft I've seen points
out that this is done on an exceptional basis and
without setting a precedent. This language is there in order
to alleviate concerns. This could become a new tool that'll
(16:54):
be used on a regular basis to admit states such
as Kosovo or Taiwan. If it passes, it will further
show how isolated the US is on this matter. He
goes on to say, US law requires the US defund
global institutions that admit Palestine as a member. If Biden
chooses to defund the UN as a result, will only
further mind the US is standing.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
It is truly inescapable.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
Biden support for Israel is coming at a massive cost
to the US itself. My understanding is that since this
draft that doctor Parci reviewed, the one that actually passed
was somewhat watered down from this to try to avoid
both China and Russia did have fears about like, oh
this could be used for Taiwan, or this could be
(17:37):
used you know with regard to Russia in ways that
they didn't like either, and it was watered down to
try to avoid the potential implication of the US being
forced to defund the UN. But nevertheless very significant and
shows the isolation of the US with regard to their
position on Palaceae.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I would just put it as a symbolic vote, you know,
like you said, who cares about the UN? I don't
particularly care about the US, and I don't think there's
any enforcement, if anything it is just important just to
be like, Okay, well, how does the rest of the
world feel about this?
Speaker 3 (18:05):
Interesting, Well, America, we're a global power.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
We have to do trade with everybody else, and it's
very clear that our domestic politics is putting us on
a different side than everybody else. Same on the issue
of Ukraine, same on the issue of like basically everything else.
That's important, very important in the long run, and it
also gives a lot of power to people who are
supposedly our enemies, like the Russians, because they can look
(18:28):
at something like this, like you just said, and it
could have serious consequences for them in the future. It's
also an easy way for them to point out hypocrisy
for US foreign policy and to win over African nations
and others which they have consistently been trying to do
business with, on top of the Chinese and on the
Taiwan issue. So when you put all of that together,
I would just say it is further isolation of the
(18:50):
United States of America, putting us away from the rest
of the world.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
I don't care about the UN.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
I care about trade and the prosperity of Americans, which
in our current global system lies on good relations with
the great powers, and we don't have that right.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
It's also important to point out like the hypocrisy. I mean,
supposedly the Biden administration wants there to be a Palestarine state,
but every time there's a chance to say we want
a Palestinine.
Speaker 4 (19:12):
State, they vote against it.
Speaker 1 (19:13):
So you have to also look at this in terms
of okay, so you're not serious when you're saying that
you're not serious about it, because here you have a
chance to vote for it and you're a post. There
was also, I don't know if you saw this was
all over my timeline, the Israeli diplomat to the UN
brought up this tiny shredder and did this whole performative
(19:33):
shredding of the UN Charter because they were so outraged
by this vote, etc.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
Etc.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
It's just like the theatrics are also noteworthy. I would say,
let's move on to some very significant developments with regard
to our State Department. So they were required by Congress
to issue in a report basically to say, hey, you know,
we have this Lady law that says you you can't
(20:00):
be supplying weapons to countries that are committing war crimes
and blocking aid. It sure seems like we are supplying
weapons to a country in Israel that is blocking aid
and committing war crimes. So the State Department was compelled
by Congress to produce this report. First they delayed the report,
then they dropped it Friday evening, classic move right, and
in it they tried to use this diplomatic speak to.
Speaker 4 (20:23):
Be like, well, they're.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Probably maybe doing a little war crimes, but we can't
be sure, so it's all fine, We're just going to
continue to ship the weapons. Here is Tony Blincoln explaining
the findings in this report on a Sunday talk show
over the weekendless Taal List and what he had to say.
Speaker 5 (20:38):
Your National Security memorandum that you signed says Israeli civilian
harm mitigation efforts are quote inconsistent, in effective, and inadequate.
The Prime Minister himself said, Israel assesses the idea of
killed fourteen thousand terrorists and sixteen thousand civilians. Does the
US share the Israeli assessment that war civilians have been
(21:01):
killed than actual terrorists.
Speaker 6 (21:04):
Yes, we do, And I think the report makes clear
that while Israel has processes, procedures, rules, regulations to try
to minimize civilian harm, given the impact that this operation,
this war in gaz has had on the civilian population.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
And yet you're still surging those.
Speaker 6 (21:22):
Those have not been applied consistently and effectively. There's a
gap between the stated intent and some of the result
we've seen. But because it's so complicated in the midst
of a war, and particularly in the midst of a
war where you have an enemy that hides in civilian infrastructure,
hides behind civilians. To make final determinations on these individual incidents,
(21:44):
we're looking at the totality of what's happened. We think
it's reasonable to assess, based on what's happened that there
have been acts that have been inconsistent with Israel's obligations
under internationally matter Shaind law, But we haven't drawn definitive conclusions.
We need to pursue these investigations just as Israel is
doing it.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Yeah, I'm sure we really trust the results of the
Israeli investigations.
Speaker 3 (22:03):
Okay, but here's the best part, Crystal.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
It took them a matter of twenty days to determine
that the Russians were committing war crimes in Ukraine. Afterwards,
how many US observed well I'm sure there's plenty of
CIA people who are on the ground, but in terms
of people that we were trusting, we just take the
Ukrainians word for it and we're like, yep, rubber stamp,
here we go. So it's like, well, what about this?
We have ten times more documentation on this, and our
weapons aren't even the ones that are being involved where
(22:27):
you legally have the obligation to make sure that it's
not happening. That's seven months now at this point, that's
all literally on tape.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
I mean, you know, how many more could you ask for?
Speaker 2 (22:37):
Or this entire law is fake and we just give
weapons to whoever who we want to now, But I'm
actually fine with that. But it's the moral preening about
all of this that drives me nuts. Russian's committing a
genocide against Ukraine. I remember how they reacted to Bucha. Now,
I'm not justifying or saying that it was a good thing,
but that was like the biggest event on the planet.
Speaker 3 (22:56):
That doesn't even equal like a day.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Of combat units or a low level military operation by
the IDF.
Speaker 3 (23:04):
So which is it, folks, which are we going with?
Speaker 4 (23:06):
That's right?
Speaker 3 (23:06):
You know, these people are so full of shit on
this matter.
Speaker 2 (23:10):
Like it drives me absolutely nuts because it is clear
that the more language of the US means nothing. Again,
I'm fine with that because I don't think it should
be there, but if we are going to apply it,
then it should properly and be equally applied to everyone. Instead,
we have selective application, which further isolates the United States
(23:31):
and makes it much more difficult for US to conduct
foreign policy abroad as we are watching with our dwindling
relationship with the entire world over this one issue with
the country that is like number fifty on our trading
list and is not all that important to us at all,
and instead it's like the fifty first state.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
I don't get it.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
It's important to these presidential candidates and they're you know,
fundraising committees.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
It's important to them.
Speaker 1 (23:56):
And Biden in particular has a ideological, like I think
you have to conclude at this point, a hardcore ideological
commitment to Israel's to the extent that he is actually
willing to risk Trump getting reelected and losing his reelection
bid in order to stand solidly by their side. But
(24:16):
it's just so naked, like it's so obvious what they're
doing here.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
They know, we just.
Speaker 1 (24:22):
Had one of our own American aid workers who was
targeted and murdered by the Israelis, and we know lots
about that. We know that they triple tapped that convoy.
We know they went in and drones strike the first one,
and then drone strike the second one when the survivors
crawled to and then drones strike the third car as well.
I mean, we know many things about what's going on here.
(24:44):
And by the way, they're under an obligation in the
development of these reports to also consider independent organizations that
have been on the ground who have routinely assessed that
war crimes are being committed as a matter of core,
you know, the World Central Kitchen Aid Workers just being
one among them. So it's just so clear that they
(25:07):
know that they know that they're not fools. They see
what's going on, but they don't want to stop shipping
the weapons, so they put in this little weasley language
about yeah, maybe something's going on, but you know, this
Israelis are they're investigating it, and they're they're looking into
measures of accountability, and you know, it's fog of war,
like we really can't say this has been what we've
(25:29):
seen from the beginning saga with regard to Russia is
when it was Russia, there was no fog of war.
It was very clear. It was very black and white.
This was a war crime, this was is genocide. We
know what those things mean. We're able to talk about
it from the podium. When it came to Israel, it's like, eh,
what even is a war crime? And who can really say?
And it's going to take months before we even know,
and we'll get back to you. We're going to do
(25:50):
an investigation into that, but we're not really going to
do an investigation. We're going to pretend we're doing and
we'll get back to you probably never.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
So this is the sort of like.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
Written version of that approach of the America of the
Bid administration from the beginning of this war. There was
another piece that was interesting from Tony Blinkn that I
wanted to bring to you, which relates to what we're
talking about before with regard to Raffa and the idea
that oh, this is how we're really finish off Hamas,
et cetera. Even Tony Blinken admits that that is preposterous.
Speaker 4 (26:19):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
They're two things.
Speaker 6 (26:21):
One is that, as the President said, and as we
said in many conversations over the last couple of months,
there has to be a credible plan for the civilians.
Speaker 4 (26:28):
Have you seen a credible plan that's sure.
Speaker 3 (26:30):
We have not.
Speaker 6 (26:31):
Second, there's something else that's important. We also haven't seen
a plan for what happens the day after this war
in Gaza ends. Because right now, the trajectory that Israel
is on is even if it goes in and takes
heavy action in Rafa, there will still be thousands of
armed Hamas left. We've seen in areas that Israel has
(26:52):
cleared in the north, even in conunis Hamas coming back.
So the trajectory right now is that going into Tarafa,
even to deal with these remaining battalions, especially in the
absence of a plan for civilians, risks doing terrible harm
to civilians and not solving the problem, a problem that
both of us want to solve.
Speaker 4 (27:12):
So there you go.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Even the State Department saying, like what the Israelis are
selling is completely preposterous here in terms of their Rafa invasion. Now,
will this administration actually do anything is a very open question.
To be generous, we've already seen similar, like Weasley, bullshit
language from Biden. They have already done an invasion of Rafa.
(27:34):
They've already told three hundred thousand gossms that they have
to move or else they're going to be bombed and killed.
So this is quite a significant military invasion already.
Speaker 4 (27:45):
But Biden and co.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Still leaning on this language of well, it hasn't been
a major invasion, so we're not going to really do anything.
And another thing saga. I'm sure you probably saw this too,
and some of the big New York Times, you know,
propaganda piece.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
About inside the Biden administration blah blah blah.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
In that piece they say, even this, you know, halting
of the one shipment of two thousand pound bombs, it
doesn't really matter. They have sufficient bombs to do whatever
they want to do. They're still fully intending on shipping
the entire fourteen billion dollars in a that was just
passed that is more symbolic than it is actually meaningful
to the Israeli's war efforts.
Speaker 4 (28:22):
So important to keep that in mind as well.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Absolutely no, very important. This entire thing is just a
complete crapshoot. And it's just ridiculous too, because again it's
like the selective application of our own laws and the
Israel exception means that all of it is fake. Let's
put this up there on the screen. As we can see,
the intercept has a great headline, which is why we've
poked it. It says Israel likely used US supplied weapons
(28:46):
in violation of international law. That's okay, though the Stage Department.
Speaker 4 (28:50):
Says very accurate report true.
Speaker 2 (28:53):
It's like, well, so what's the point of the law
and if you can just fudge things and words have meaning.
Like again, if Buka was a massacre where there was
four hundred people who were dead. Now, one of the
reasons I refuse to call it a massacre at the
time is because anybody who knows that U history knows
that in a real war a lot more people actually die.
(29:14):
It was blown up as some genocidal event. As to
why the United States must pour every weapon that's not strapped,
you know, to the ground into Ukraine to stop these
Russian monsters, it turns out it's a pretty run of
the mill, low grade war, even if it is the
largest one in Europe. It's like, well, what does a
massacre actually look like? Well, we're watching it. It all happen.
It's part of the reason why, you know, it's so galling,
(29:36):
the fact that we still continue to both buy into
the Ukraine narrative while we're continuing to support Israel.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
The two don't thick at all. They're completely counter to
each other.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
And the main reason is because of domestic politics in
this country with a powerful Israel lobby. Let's put this
up there on the screen, Crystal, do you want to
read the email?
Speaker 1 (29:56):
Oh my god, Okay, this is a billionaire backer a
major demo product party like super Funder, and has given
tons of money to Biden. And so you know, Biden
does little Weasley like, oh, we may stop weaponship and
so if there's a major invasion of Rafa, he wrote.
And you really have to see this because it looks
like something that would be posted from like an unhinged
(30:17):
comment er in a YouTube. No literally, secually, like the
capitalization and punctuation, everything about it is unhinged.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
Anyway, let me read you this.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
This says, dear President Biden, we all caps the US,
as you staged numerous times, believe Hamas should be defeated.
We the US in this case, you, mister President, have
decided to stop sending munitions to Israel to achieve the
goal that we slash you have set up for Israel
and ourselves even beyond Israel, to sends a terrible message
to our Alice in the region. Beyond that, we can
(30:47):
flip from doing the right thing you meant to say
thing so bending.
Speaker 4 (30:51):
To political pressure.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
Let's not forget that there are more Jewish voters who
care about Israel than Muslim vote that care about Hamas.
Let that one sink in bad three commas bad, three
commas bad, four commas decision comma on all levels, please
pls reconsider. Thank you with respect, Tim Okay. So there's
(31:17):
a lot of elements of this that are important. First
of all, like I said, imagine sending off this like
unhinged screed to the President of the United States is
just extraordinary in and of itself. Number Two, that line
framing like oh, there's more Jewish supporters of Israel than
there are Muslim supporters of Hamas is so gross. It's
(31:41):
so gross on every level because first of all, there
are to conflate like oh, if you're Muslim, you must
support Hamas and there's no other reason why you may
be concerned about this is disgusting. Second of all, Obviously,
as we've seen, it's the problem for Biden with regard
to his policy is vast larger than just Muslim voters,
(32:02):
by the way, so it's not only like racist, but
also completely misunderstands the political calculation. But the most important thing,
Sager is it just shows you, like the level of access,
it shows you the inside game. So even though this
is just one person, his vote theoretically shouldn't matter more
than minor years or any other ordinary person out there,
(32:23):
Like obviously that's just not the case.
Speaker 4 (32:25):
He has so.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
Much direct line, direct connectivity. These are the types of
voices that are in the ears, not just a Joe Biden,
of Trump, of RFK Junior, of every single member of Congress,
House and Senate. These are the type of people and
the type of messaging that they're getting. And so that
very skewed ecosystem in those incredibly skewed political incentives are
(32:48):
how you end up with a policy that is so
dissonant from the country at large and from the Democratic
base in particular. So this guy going to the mat
throwing his weight around as a big Democratic mega downer
to try to curb even the little minimal sort of
like virtue signal change in policy direction that Biden did here.
Speaker 4 (33:08):
It's so naked and it's.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
So incredibly no, it's crazy.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
I mean he also literally was on the national board
member of the Friends of the IDF. He served in
the IDF. I mean'm pretty sure he's an Israeli citizens.
Would you tolerate this from any other duals, like any
other dual citizen group that would be using its influence
and its wealth to guide US foreign policy.
Speaker 3 (33:32):
I've made the comparison before.
Speaker 2 (33:34):
I am Indian, and if I saw a group of
Indians trying to do this with respect to US foreign
policy where it was clearly detrimental, I would call them out,
even if it might theoretically help some of my distant
relatives who are alive in India.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
For some reason, we have an exception here, and it's very.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
Obvious, you know that this is a serious, serious problem
and a very powerful impact on US foreign policy. So
this is where it all comes from. And these people,
I will never understate me their strength. I will never
underestimate their ability to you know, not just push you
a foreign policy. I mean, this is a Hollywood finance here,
multi billionaire you know, it's like, just that's the forces
(34:11):
that we're all up against, right, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
That's right, very very clear, And they can get on
the phone with and by the politician in the country,
possibly the world. And so when you're confused about why,
not just on Israel, but on any number of other issues,
why our political class seems to be so diametrically opposed
to what the people actually want, remember this email because
(34:35):
these are the waters that they're actually swimming in, and
these are the type of people who actually have the
most influence on policy.
Speaker 2 (34:40):
Absolutely all right, thank you guys so much for watching.
We really appreciate you. Like I said, please join up
breakingpoints dot com. You're going to be the first to
hear about our major, major announcement, even bigger than Counterpoints Friday.
Speaker 3 (34:50):
Some people are.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
Saying it is a three year anniversary coming up, which
is crazy.
Speaker 3 (34:54):
So thank you.
Speaker 2 (34:54):
Everybody has been with us since day one and we
will see you all later. People
Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
If you like what we're all about, it just means
the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that,
let's get to the show, all.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Right, guys, So we have a lot of big updates
for you with regards to Israel. Let's put this first
extraordinary development up on the screen. So, Egypt now joining
South Africa's case at the ICJ, which alleges that Israel
is committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Senior
Israeli officials are describing this, I would say, probably accurately
(00:47):
as a new low in relations between countries, certainly in
recent history post peace agreement. Egypt's announcement, they say, is
not expected to have a material effect on the ICJ's
legal process, but reflects a new low. Israeli sources fear
the ICJ may issue new orders against Israel as the
operation in Rafa as having a major impact on access
to humanitarian aid. Reportings suggests that Egypt's really quite extraordinary
(01:12):
decision to join South Africa in their case at the ICJ,
has everything to do with the Israeli assault on Rafa,
in the fact that they have already invaded and taken
control of the Rafa crossing on the Palestinian side. We've
been reporting for months how Egypt has been raising red
flag after red flag against about that potential incursion into Rafa,
(01:35):
talking about what a provocation that would be, what a
problem it would be for Egypt, And so in their
letter where they signaled they were joining on with the ICJ,
they said in that statement that the move comes quote
in view of aggravating intensity and scale of Israeli attacks
against civilians Agaza and the quote continued perpetration of systematic
(01:56):
practices against Palestinians, including direct targeting of civilians in destruction
of infrastructure. Egypt also called the Rafa operation a flagrant
violation of international law and called on Israel to commit
to the principles of international law as an occupying power.
In addition, South Africa just on Friday submitted a request
the ICJ to issue new emergency orders against Israel due
(02:18):
to the operation in Rafa. So you've got two things.
You've got South Africa coming back to the ICJ and
saying you've got to issue new injunctions.
Speaker 4 (02:26):
You'll recality.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
First injunctions did not go so far as demanding a ceasefire,
So they're really pushing the envelope, pushing directly for that
that call for a ceasefire from the ICJ. And you
have Egypt joining, which saga I mean is significant for
a lot of reasons, not least of which that I mean.
Egypt is a massive recipient of usaid, considered a great
(02:48):
American ally, So the fact that they're at this point
also saying, hey, Israel, we think you're committing genocide. We're
signing onto this, we're pushing for a direct injunction is
really quite significant.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Well, it's important for several reasons. For basically, let's say
nineteen seventy to let's say the twenty tens, when Iran
became the major driver in the Israel relationship, all of
US foreign policy with respect to Israel was balancing the
two great powers of Israel and Egypt. Where there's a
saying in Arabic which is difficult to translate, but it
(03:17):
roughly translates to, like, where Egypt goes is where the
rest of the Arab world go was. The idea is
that it's like a cultural heart and center that's like.
Speaker 4 (03:26):
The heart of the Arab Yeah, it's like the heart exactly.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Let's put it that way. It's difficult to like put
into English.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
But the point is that with Egypt where it is
right now, we wanted to always balance the two. It's
why the Camp David nineteen seventies agreements were so important
and why both of them are recipients of major military aid.
Iran and Iraq basically took that off the table and
changed everything. We kind of took the Egypt Israel relationship
for granted. Well, what we're all learning here is that
(03:53):
these things can fall apart very very quickly, and that
the Israeli kind of arrogance and with respect to its
operations in Rafa without a lot of consideration of the Egyptians.
And let's not forget I mean we covered it here
at the time. The Egyptians warned them that it was coming.
They called them in early October. They're like, there is
a major terrorist attack that is going to happen, and
you need to listen.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
They didn't listen to the Egyptians. They tried to prevent this.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Now they have their own domestic politics going on, but
clearly their own population is very upset about what's happening,
and their own government sees major fallout from Israeli policy
and especially this operation in Rafa, and so for them
to join on to this is a monumental event in
US foreign policy.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
Yeah, that's absolutely right. And from the Egyptian perspective, first
of all, you have a population which is overwhelmingly sympathetic
to the Palestinian cause, and so you have pressure from
the population. You also have deep concern from the Egyptians,
which to your point, Zager, they've been very clear about
deep concern about a potential mass of refugees fleeing Gaza
Strip because of Gatten. Of course, clustered in Rafa, you
(04:54):
have some probably around a million Palestinians at this point,
because you've had about three hundred thousand who have won
again been forcibly displaced from Raffa, but you still have
an extraordinary concentration of population.
Speaker 4 (05:04):
There with no where to go.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
So there's deep concern about that as well, and they
are arguing quite accurately. I don't think you can really
dispute this that Israel taking control of Palas and the
inside of the border is a direct breach of an
agreement that Egypt had with Israel with regard to that
Rafa crossing and that whole area of the border region
(05:29):
between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. So this is, you know,
this is really no worthy. The other thing that I'll
mention here is the Israeli seem very nervous that the
ICJ is going to actually issue some additional injunctions. Now
is that going to come to pass? What is that
based on? I have no idea, but the fact that
you have South Africa going back, Egypt joining on, and
(05:49):
this invasion now which has already occurred. The US administration
is saying it's not a major invasion, but it's you know,
it's an invasion. They've taken control of the crossing, They've
hit some very significant number of targets in Rafa, They've
displaced already hundreds of thousands forcibly of Palestinians from the areas.
So you clearly have action with regard to Rafa and
(06:10):
BBNT Yaho signaling there's no end in sight with regard
to that. Those things, I think it is plausible could
combine to seeing the ICJ taking some more aggressive and
more full throated action with regard to Israel. So we
have some video we can show you of some of
the things that I was just referring to in terms
(06:31):
of the expansion. This is leafleting in Rafa. So reports
are that some three hundred thousand Palestinians have now been
once again told to move. In addition, you have new
idea of actions in the northern part again of the
Gaza Strip. This is Jibali, a refugee camp that came
under massive attack again and we'll talk more about the
(06:54):
significance of that. Here you see civilians fleeing from Israeli firepower.
Speaker 4 (06:59):
The bombs are falling everywhere. They say.
Speaker 1 (07:02):
You have additional images here from Rafa. And then this
video is Israeli settlers putting rocks in the road and
coming up with new extraordinary tactics to block medicine, food
and fuel from going into the Gaza Strip. This is
an effort that has been on going for months now
(07:23):
that they have escalated. And finally you can see here
a map showing that people are being forced to flee
north from Rafa, and they are also being told to
flee south from that Jibalia area, the Jabalia refugee camp,
and again NPR, New York Times, any number of outlets
(07:45):
that are pretty sympathetic to the Israelis have documented the
fact that there is nowhere safe to go the Alawassi
area that they've touted as this safe stone. First of all,
it has not been a safe stone. Second of all,
there is nowhere near the sort of food, fuel, sanitation, water,
et cetera that you would need to host some million
(08:08):
plus Palestinians. It's already overcrowded there. So this is a
horrifying situation. I wanted to mention Sager, the Jibalia refugee
camp bombing is really significant. You guys might remember this
is one of the places that was attacked aggressively in
the early phases of the war. They killed some hundreds
of Palestinians using two thousand pound bombs to allegedly potentially
(08:29):
get one hamas militant. But this is the area in
the northern Gaza strip which has been utterly decimated. But
since you know, after they left that area, since there
was no alternative to Hamas put in place. Hamas is,
you know, has not been defeated. Hamas is still a
coming back in reconstituting taking control over civilian functions, et cetera.
(08:53):
So it really underscores how much of a failure the
Israeli approach here has been and how much incredible spin
it requires to present what they've done and the horse
they've perpetrated in the Gaza strip as anything approaching a
win quote unquote for the Israeli side.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
It's ridiculous because what it shows also is the ineffectiveness
of their military campaign. It's funny because they haven't been
engaged in a lot of military activity in the last
several months, at least at like a major campaign level,
so we haven't been able to talk about it.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
But this is the ultimate sign of failure.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
If you have to keep going back bombing people in
the North, then your entire mission accomplished. Speech, which happened
already was fake. It's like it's exact, you could roll
the tape it were predicted it here say there's no
way to do this in the way that they are.
All you're doing is just blowing the crap out of
the place, destroying the rubble. You have your cartoonish children military,
(09:47):
you know, rolling in and shooting and everything that they want.
No I even attempt to try and separate the population
to build something for the next day, you will almost
certainly just create an insurgency. Well what happened, and now
immediately they would draw from the area. Rockets are being
fired from there. So now they say that they have
to go back in. There's no plan, there is no
actual effective military strategy. And if that's the case, it's like, well,
(10:08):
what was the entire point of all of this. Let's
put the next one, please up on the screen. You're
also watching here. Now three hundred thousand people quote forced
to evacuate. This is from Rafa saying quote as you said,
there is nowhere to go. The humanitarian zone is quote
neither safe nor equipped to handle all of them.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
According to the United Nations.
Speaker 4 (10:26):
Either safe nor humanitarian.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Runs the zone.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
And so then the question is it's like, well, are
you going to go in Rafa and do the exact
same thing that you did in Conunis and in Gaza,
Because if so, then neither of those works. This is
part of what drives me crazy about The entire thing
is everyone's like, they need to go in and they
need to finish Jamas. I'm like, well, they didn't finish
themas in Gaza today, they didn't finish Jamas in communists
or in Jabali a refugee camp, and so what evidence
(10:50):
do we have that you're going to be able to
do that in Rafa?
Speaker 3 (10:53):
Basically none. You know, from a military point of view.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
There has been basically, you know, no ignor knowowledgement of
the fact that overall, right now, this has been a
strategic and tactical failure. If you are analyzing from the
basis of the outset gain or the outset goals free
the hostages, destroy the terrorists, neither of those have happened.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
You've killed more hostages than you free.
Speaker 4 (11:16):
That's right, That's exactly right.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
And there's a deal on the table right now to
free all of the hostages.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
That baby Nan who doesn't want to take.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
So also has completely exposed the lie you hear all
the time of like, oh well, if they just freed
the hostages, the war could end tomorrow.
Speaker 4 (11:30):
Bullshit.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
They said they would free the hostages, and guess what
has really said, No, we want to continue the war. No,
this hasn't been about getting Hamas. It's been about revenge.
It's been about destruction. It's been about you know, the
same sort of you know, base instincts that were fed
and fueled and that we saw a lot of in
the aftermath of nine to eleven. That's what this has been.
(11:52):
It really, I don't you know, it's it's a force
to imagine otherwise, and it has been from the beginning
because you know, as we cover from the early days,
if your actual goal was we're going to get the
bad guys who play in October seventh, we're going to
make sure this can never happen again. The utter destruction
and devastation, mass targeting of civilians, et cetera. Is completely
inconsistent with anything approaching those goals, and it also exposes
(12:15):
another lie from the Israelis, which is this idea of well,
we've defeated Hamas throughout the rest of the Gaza strip,
now we just got to go into Raffa and finish
the job.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Right.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
That's what you hear all the time from Bbebe and
his defenders and supporters, et cetera. We got to go
into Rafa, we got to finish the job, Well, what
are you talking about? You clearly there's much more Hamas
still remaining than you are portraying. Clearly they're not all
just clustered in Rava. In fact, we got to report
that even Sinwar, who is you know, a major target
(12:46):
of IYRE and high level October seventh plannerar et cetera,
that he is not even in Rafa anymore, that perhaps
he's in Conunis at this point. So the idea that oh,
we're going to finish the job when we go into Rafa,
no you're not. You're just going to slaughter more civilians.
It's going to be more horror, more atrocities, more outrage,
(13:08):
with no plan in sight for any sort of peace
day after.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
I mean, that's just never been a.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
Part of their of their intentions, never been part of
their intentions whatsoever. I also just have to mention that
New York Times headline, we could put D three back
up for one more second. It now says that three
hundred thousand Gozzens are forced to evacuate. This original headline
said three hundred thousand gozzens are on the move. Like
(13:37):
so sanitized and at least they had enough shame after
backlash to change to indicate no, no, they're not just
on the move because they feel like getting up and going.
They're being forced to evacuate many of these I mean,
just try to put yourself in there shoes, right.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
Imagine you're someone who.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Was living in Gaza City and you were told you
got to get out, and you went to Communis and
you were told you got to get out of there,
and you went to You've got no money left your.
Speaker 4 (14:02):
You know, very little food.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
You've been living in a tent for seven months now,
You've been displaced time and time again, and now you're looking.
Speaker 4 (14:11):
Where do you go? Where do you go?
Speaker 1 (14:14):
So there are horrifying decisions that are being made here
by people who just have no or at their absolute
wits end, and have no idea what to do that
is going to help preserve the lives of themselves and
their children and their family members. It's outrageous, it's absolutely outrageous.
And to paint that as some sort of humanitarian gesture
(14:36):
that oh, we you know, we are so moral because
we tell these people to move. No, you forcibly displaced
the entire Goszas shop, basically millions of Palestinines at this point,
and there is nowhere that they can go and feel
like they're going to be Okay, let's put this next
piece up on the screen, because this was also very noteworthy.
The UN General Assembly approved a resolution that would grant
(14:59):
Palestine new rights and would revive its UN membership bid.
This vote in the General Assembly was overwhelming. It called
on the Security Council to reconsider Palestine's request become one
hundred and ninety fourth member of the UN. The vote
was one hundred and forty three in favor, nine against.
(15:22):
You will not be surprised to learn the US was
one of those against, with twenty five abstentions. You had
a lot of US allies, including France, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Australia, Estonia,
Norway who voted in favor of this resolution. It also
demonstrated a growing support for the Palestinian So there was
(15:45):
a similar General Assembly resolution back on October twenty seventh,
that one called for a humanitarian ceasefire in gaz. It
was approved one hundred and twenty to fourteen with forty
five abstentions. So a more overwhelming vote here, and we
can put the next piece up on the screen. Because
doctor Parci laid down why this is noteworthy, Because I
know it's easy to be like, who cares what really happens.
Speaker 4 (16:07):
At the UN fair enough?
Speaker 1 (16:09):
But he says that based on a draft of the
resolution he'd reviewed, he thought this resolution could become a
big deal. It does three important things. Reiterates a Palestine
state must be created based on the sixty seven borders
by that rejects the facts on the ground that Israel's
manufactured through its settlement project. Second, it expresses deep regret
and concern over Biden's veto at the UN Security Council
(16:31):
last month. And third, it appears to grant Palestine full
rights and privileges of a member even if the Security
Council fails to admit Palestine. This would be an unprecedented
decision designed to circumvent Biden's veto at the Security Council.
He goes on to say the draft I've seen points
out that this is done on an exceptional basis and
without setting a precedent. This language is there in order
to alleviate concerns. This could become a new tool that'll
(16:54):
be used on a regular basis to admit states such
as Kosovo or Taiwan. If it passes, it will further
show how isolated the US is on this matter. He
goes on to say, US law requires the US defund
global institutions that admit Palestine as a member. If Biden
chooses to defund the UN as a result, will only
further mind the US is standing.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
It is truly inescapable.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
Biden support for Israel is coming at a massive cost
to the US itself. My understanding is that since this
draft that doctor Parci reviewed, the one that actually passed
was somewhat watered down from this to try to avoid
both China and Russia did have fears about like, oh
this could be used for Taiwan, or this could be
(17:37):
used you know with regard to Russia in ways that
they didn't like either, and it was watered down to
try to avoid the potential implication of the US being
forced to defund the UN. But nevertheless very significant and
shows the isolation of the US with regard to their
position on Palaceae.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I would just put it as a symbolic vote, you know,
like you said, who cares about the UN? I don't
particularly care about the US, and I don't think there's
any enforcement, if anything it is just important just to
be like, Okay, well, how does the rest of the
world feel about this?
Speaker 3 (18:05):
Interesting, Well, America, we're a global power.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
We have to do trade with everybody else, and it's
very clear that our domestic politics is putting us on
a different side than everybody else. Same on the issue
of Ukraine, same on the issue of like basically everything else.
That's important, very important in the long run, and it
also gives a lot of power to people who are
supposedly our enemies, like the Russians, because they can look
(18:28):
at something like this, like you just said, and it
could have serious consequences for them in the future. It's
also an easy way for them to point out hypocrisy
for US foreign policy and to win over African nations
and others which they have consistently been trying to do
business with, on top of the Chinese and on the
Taiwan issue. So when you put all of that together,
I would just say it is further isolation of the
(18:50):
United States of America, putting us away from the rest
of the world.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
I don't care about the UN.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
I care about trade and the prosperity of Americans, which
in our current global system lies on good relations with
the great powers, and we don't have that right.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
It's also important to point out like the hypocrisy. I mean,
supposedly the Biden administration wants there to be a Palestarine state,
but every time there's a chance to say we want
a Palestinine.
Speaker 4 (19:12):
State, they vote against it.
Speaker 1 (19:13):
So you have to also look at this in terms
of okay, so you're not serious when you're saying that
you're not serious about it, because here you have a
chance to vote for it and you're a post. There
was also, I don't know if you saw this was
all over my timeline, the Israeli diplomat to the UN
brought up this tiny shredder and did this whole performative
(19:33):
shredding of the UN Charter because they were so outraged
by this vote, etc.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
Etc.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
It's just like the theatrics are also noteworthy. I would say,
let's move on to some very significant developments with regard
to our State Department. So they were required by Congress
to issue in a report basically to say, hey, you know,
we have this Lady law that says you you can't
(20:00):
be supplying weapons to countries that are committing war crimes
and blocking aid. It sure seems like we are supplying
weapons to a country in Israel that is blocking aid
and committing war crimes. So the State Department was compelled
by Congress to produce this report. First they delayed the report,
then they dropped it Friday evening, classic move right, and
in it they tried to use this diplomatic speak to.
Speaker 4 (20:23):
Be like, well, they're.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Probably maybe doing a little war crimes, but we can't
be sure, so it's all fine, We're just going to
continue to ship the weapons. Here is Tony Blincoln explaining
the findings in this report on a Sunday talk show
over the weekendless Taal List and what he had to say.
Speaker 5 (20:38):
Your National Security memorandum that you signed says Israeli civilian
harm mitigation efforts are quote inconsistent, in effective, and inadequate.
The Prime Minister himself said, Israel assesses the idea of
killed fourteen thousand terrorists and sixteen thousand civilians. Does the
US share the Israeli assessment that war civilians have been
(21:01):
killed than actual terrorists.
Speaker 6 (21:04):
Yes, we do, And I think the report makes clear
that while Israel has processes, procedures, rules, regulations to try
to minimize civilian harm, given the impact that this operation,
this war in gaz has had on the civilian population.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
And yet you're still surging those.
Speaker 6 (21:22):
Those have not been applied consistently and effectively. There's a
gap between the stated intent and some of the result
we've seen. But because it's so complicated in the midst
of a war, and particularly in the midst of a
war where you have an enemy that hides in civilian infrastructure,
hides behind civilians. To make final determinations on these individual incidents,
(21:44):
we're looking at the totality of what's happened. We think
it's reasonable to assess, based on what's happened that there
have been acts that have been inconsistent with Israel's obligations
under internationally matter Shaind law, But we haven't drawn definitive conclusions.
We need to pursue these investigations just as Israel is
doing it.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Yeah, I'm sure we really trust the results of the
Israeli investigations.
Speaker 3 (22:03):
Okay, but here's the best part, Crystal.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
It took them a matter of twenty days to determine
that the Russians were committing war crimes in Ukraine. Afterwards,
how many US observed well I'm sure there's plenty of
CIA people who are on the ground, but in terms
of people that we were trusting, we just take the
Ukrainians word for it and we're like, yep, rubber stamp,
here we go. So it's like, well, what about this?
We have ten times more documentation on this, and our
weapons aren't even the ones that are being involved where
(22:27):
you legally have the obligation to make sure that it's
not happening. That's seven months now at this point, that's
all literally on tape.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
I mean, you know, how many more could you ask for?
Speaker 2 (22:37):
Or this entire law is fake and we just give
weapons to whoever who we want to now, But I'm
actually fine with that. But it's the moral preening about
all of this that drives me nuts. Russian's committing a
genocide against Ukraine. I remember how they reacted to Bucha. Now,
I'm not justifying or saying that it was a good thing,
but that was like the biggest event on the planet.
Speaker 3 (22:56):
That doesn't even equal like a day.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Of combat units or a low level military operation by
the IDF.
Speaker 3 (23:04):
So which is it, folks, which are we going with?
Speaker 4 (23:06):
That's right?
Speaker 3 (23:06):
You know, these people are so full of shit on
this matter.
Speaker 2 (23:10):
Like it drives me absolutely nuts because it is clear
that the more language of the US means nothing. Again,
I'm fine with that because I don't think it should
be there, but if we are going to apply it,
then it should properly and be equally applied to everyone. Instead,
we have selective application, which further isolates the United States
(23:31):
and makes it much more difficult for US to conduct
foreign policy abroad as we are watching with our dwindling
relationship with the entire world over this one issue with
the country that is like number fifty on our trading
list and is not all that important to us at all,
and instead it's like the fifty first state.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
I don't get it.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
It's important to these presidential candidates and they're you know,
fundraising committees.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
It's important to them.
Speaker 1 (23:56):
And Biden in particular has a ideological, like I think
you have to conclude at this point, a hardcore ideological
commitment to Israel's to the extent that he is actually
willing to risk Trump getting reelected and losing his reelection
bid in order to stand solidly by their side. But
(24:16):
it's just so naked, like it's so obvious what they're
doing here.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
They know, we just.
Speaker 1 (24:22):
Had one of our own American aid workers who was
targeted and murdered by the Israelis, and we know lots
about that. We know that they triple tapped that convoy.
We know they went in and drones strike the first one,
and then drone strike the second one when the survivors
crawled to and then drones strike the third car as well.
I mean, we know many things about what's going on here.
(24:44):
And by the way, they're under an obligation in the
development of these reports to also consider independent organizations that
have been on the ground who have routinely assessed that
war crimes are being committed as a matter of core,
you know, the World Central Kitchen Aid Workers just being
one among them. So it's just so clear that they
(25:07):
know that they know that they're not fools. They see
what's going on, but they don't want to stop shipping
the weapons, so they put in this little weasley language
about yeah, maybe something's going on, but you know, this
Israelis are they're investigating it, and they're they're looking into
measures of accountability, and you know, it's fog of war,
like we really can't say this has been what we've
(25:29):
seen from the beginning saga with regard to Russia is
when it was Russia, there was no fog of war.
It was very clear. It was very black and white.
This was a war crime, this was is genocide. We
know what those things mean. We're able to talk about
it from the podium. When it came to Israel, it's like, eh,
what even is a war crime? And who can really say?
And it's going to take months before we even know,
and we'll get back to you. We're going to do
(25:50):
an investigation into that, but we're not really going to
do an investigation. We're going to pretend we're doing and
we'll get back to you probably never.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
So this is the sort of like.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
Written version of that approach of the America of the
Bid administration from the beginning of this war. There was
another piece that was interesting from Tony Blinkn that I
wanted to bring to you, which relates to what we're
talking about before with regard to Raffa and the idea
that oh, this is how we're really finish off Hamas,
et cetera. Even Tony Blinken admits that that is preposterous.
Speaker 4 (26:19):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
They're two things.
Speaker 6 (26:21):
One is that, as the President said, and as we
said in many conversations over the last couple of months,
there has to be a credible plan for the civilians.
Speaker 4 (26:28):
Have you seen a credible plan that's sure.
Speaker 3 (26:30):
We have not.
Speaker 6 (26:31):
Second, there's something else that's important. We also haven't seen
a plan for what happens the day after this war
in Gaza ends. Because right now, the trajectory that Israel
is on is even if it goes in and takes
heavy action in Rafa, there will still be thousands of
armed Hamas left. We've seen in areas that Israel has
(26:52):
cleared in the north, even in conunis Hamas coming back.
So the trajectory right now is that going into Tarafa,
even to deal with these remaining battalions, especially in the
absence of a plan for civilians, risks doing terrible harm
to civilians and not solving the problem, a problem that
both of us want to solve.
Speaker 4 (27:12):
So there you go.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Even the State Department saying, like what the Israelis are
selling is completely preposterous here in terms of their Rafa invasion. Now,
will this administration actually do anything is a very open question.
To be generous, we've already seen similar, like Weasley, bullshit
language from Biden. They have already done an invasion of Rafa.
(27:34):
They've already told three hundred thousand gossms that they have
to move or else they're going to be bombed and killed.
So this is quite a significant military invasion already.
Speaker 4 (27:45):
But Biden and co.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Still leaning on this language of well, it hasn't been
a major invasion, so we're not going to really do anything.
And another thing saga. I'm sure you probably saw this too,
and some of the big New York Times, you know,
propaganda piece.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
About inside the Biden administration blah blah blah.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
In that piece they say, even this, you know, halting
of the one shipment of two thousand pound bombs, it
doesn't really matter. They have sufficient bombs to do whatever
they want to do. They're still fully intending on shipping
the entire fourteen billion dollars in a that was just
passed that is more symbolic than it is actually meaningful
to the Israeli's war efforts.
Speaker 4 (28:22):
So important to keep that in mind as well.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Absolutely no, very important. This entire thing is just a
complete crapshoot. And it's just ridiculous too, because again it's
like the selective application of our own laws and the
Israel exception means that all of it is fake. Let's
put this up there on the screen. As we can see,
the intercept has a great headline, which is why we've
poked it. It says Israel likely used US supplied weapons
(28:46):
in violation of international law. That's okay, though the Stage Department.
Speaker 4 (28:50):
Says very accurate report true.
Speaker 2 (28:53):
It's like, well, so what's the point of the law
and if you can just fudge things and words have meaning.
Like again, if Buka was a massacre where there was
four hundred people who were dead. Now, one of the
reasons I refuse to call it a massacre at the
time is because anybody who knows that U history knows
that in a real war a lot more people actually die.
(29:14):
It was blown up as some genocidal event. As to
why the United States must pour every weapon that's not strapped,
you know, to the ground into Ukraine to stop these
Russian monsters, it turns out it's a pretty run of
the mill, low grade war, even if it is the
largest one in Europe. It's like, well, what does a
massacre actually look like? Well, we're watching it. It all happen.
It's part of the reason why, you know, it's so galling,
(29:36):
the fact that we still continue to both buy into
the Ukraine narrative while we're continuing to support Israel.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
The two don't thick at all. They're completely counter to
each other.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
And the main reason is because of domestic politics in
this country with a powerful Israel lobby. Let's put this
up there on the screen, Crystal, do you want to
read the email?
Speaker 1 (29:56):
Oh my god, Okay, this is a billionaire backer a
major demo product party like super Funder, and has given
tons of money to Biden. And so you know, Biden
does little Weasley like, oh, we may stop weaponship and
so if there's a major invasion of Rafa, he wrote.
And you really have to see this because it looks
like something that would be posted from like an unhinged
(30:17):
comment er in a YouTube. No literally, secually, like the
capitalization and punctuation, everything about it is unhinged.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
Anyway, let me read you this.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
This says, dear President Biden, we all caps the US,
as you staged numerous times, believe Hamas should be defeated.
We the US in this case, you, mister President, have
decided to stop sending munitions to Israel to achieve the
goal that we slash you have set up for Israel
and ourselves even beyond Israel, to sends a terrible message
to our Alice in the region. Beyond that, we can
(30:47):
flip from doing the right thing you meant to say
thing so bending.
Speaker 4 (30:51):
To political pressure.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
Let's not forget that there are more Jewish voters who
care about Israel than Muslim vote that care about Hamas.
Let that one sink in bad three commas bad, three
commas bad, four commas decision comma on all levels, please
pls reconsider. Thank you with respect, Tim Okay. So there's
(31:17):
a lot of elements of this that are important. First
of all, like I said, imagine sending off this like
unhinged screed to the President of the United States is
just extraordinary in and of itself. Number Two, that line
framing like oh, there's more Jewish supporters of Israel than
there are Muslim supporters of Hamas is so gross. It's
(31:41):
so gross on every level because first of all, there
are to conflate like oh, if you're Muslim, you must
support Hamas and there's no other reason why you may
be concerned about this is disgusting. Second of all, Obviously,
as we've seen, it's the problem for Biden with regard
to his policy is vast larger than just Muslim voters,
(32:02):
by the way, so it's not only like racist, but
also completely misunderstands the political calculation. But the most important thing,
Sager is it just shows you, like the level of access,
it shows you the inside game. So even though this
is just one person, his vote theoretically shouldn't matter more
than minor years or any other ordinary person out there,
(32:23):
Like obviously that's just not the case.
Speaker 4 (32:25):
He has so.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
Much direct line, direct connectivity. These are the types of
voices that are in the ears, not just a Joe Biden,
of Trump, of RFK Junior, of every single member of Congress,
House and Senate. These are the type of people and
the type of messaging that they're getting. And so that
very skewed ecosystem in those incredibly skewed political incentives are
(32:48):
how you end up with a policy that is so
dissonant from the country at large and from the Democratic
base in particular. So this guy going to the mat
throwing his weight around as a big Democratic mega downer
to try to curb even the little minimal sort of
like virtue signal change in policy direction that Biden did here.
Speaker 4 (33:08):
It's so naked and it's.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
So incredibly no, it's crazy.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
I mean he also literally was on the national board
member of the Friends of the IDF. He served in
the IDF. I mean'm pretty sure he's an Israeli citizens.
Would you tolerate this from any other duals, like any
other dual citizen group that would be using its influence
and its wealth to guide US foreign policy.
Speaker 3 (33:32):
I've made the comparison before.
Speaker 2 (33:34):
I am Indian, and if I saw a group of
Indians trying to do this with respect to US foreign
policy where it was clearly detrimental, I would call them out,
even if it might theoretically help some of my distant
relatives who are alive in India.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
For some reason, we have an exception here, and it's very.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
Obvious, you know that this is a serious, serious problem
and a very powerful impact on US foreign policy. So
this is where it all comes from. And these people,
I will never understate me their strength. I will never
underestimate their ability to you know, not just push you
a foreign policy. I mean, this is a Hollywood finance here,
multi billionaire you know, it's like, just that's the forces
(34:11):
that we're all up against, right, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
That's right, very very clear, And they can get on
the phone with and by the politician in the country,
possibly the world. And so when you're confused about why,
not just on Israel, but on any number of other issues,
why our political class seems to be so diametrically opposed
to what the people actually want, remember this email because
(34:35):
these are the waters that they're actually swimming in, and
these are the type of people who actually have the
most influence on policy.
Speaker 2 (34:40):
Absolutely all right, thank you guys so much for watching.
We really appreciate you. Like I said, please join up
breakingpoints dot com. You're going to be the first to
hear about our major, major announcement, even bigger than Counterpoints Friday.
Speaker 3 (34:50):
Some people are.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
Saying it is a three year anniversary coming up, which
is crazy.
Speaker 3 (34:54):
So thank you.
Speaker 2 (34:54):
Everybody has been with us since day one and we
will see you all later. People
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.