10-10-25 - 6am - Nobel Peace Prize and Hudna

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good Friday morning, Michael and Dragon. That worked out to
be point zero zero zero zero zero zero zero four.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
Or five percent. That's very good. What time was that
talk about, left Dragon? It was one o'clock this morning? Oh,
yesterday noon? Oh okay, all right, well, nonetheless very good.
I don't know how to break this news to everybody.

Speaker 1 (00:33):
Rip it off like a band aid, do it quick.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
The Nobel Peace Prize for twenty twenty five goes to
a brave and committed champion of peace, to a woman
who keeps the flame of democracy burning and growing and
amid a growing darkness. The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided
to award the Nobel Peace Prize for twenty twenty five too,

(00:57):
Maria Corina Machado. She's receiving the Nobel Prize for her
tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela
and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful
transition from a dictatorship to democracy. You know what, I'm
quite alright with that. I'm quite alright with that. But

(01:21):
let's just go through a little bit about what we've
been hearing for maybe just the past oh, I don't know,
a few days or so. I don't want to go
too far, but let's just enjoy some flashbacks.

Speaker 3 (01:36):
Do you think the President deserves a Nobel Peace Prize?

Speaker 4 (01:40):
Bro I mean, if this sticks, I think the whole
point of having a Nobel piece and prizes for ending
wars and promoting peace. And now I'm going to make
a direct appeal to the president. You know, I hope
he chooses to provide the Tomahawks to the Ukrainians too,
and give them the tools that they need to push
back against the Russia.

Speaker 2 (02:01):
And so John Fetterman wanted him to get it. But
now let's go to you know, Dick Durban, the senator
from Illinois.

Speaker 1 (02:11):
Can you think that Trump deserves credit for this?

Speaker 2 (02:13):
Yes, if it works.

Speaker 3 (02:15):
There are people on the right coin for him to
get the Nobel Peace Prize.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
What do you say to that? Ahead of ourselves? Yeah,
let's not get ahead of ourselves. Ari Fleisher over at
Fox News stunned Fox News.

Speaker 3 (02:31):
I'm sorry to put it so bluntly, but who cares.
The Nobel Peace Prize has been useless for generations ever
since they gave Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize for
doing nothing. It is the Democratic Peace Prize. It is
the Liberal Socialists of Europe Peace Prize. It has nothing
to do with actually solving problems or getting things done

(02:51):
outside the scientific realm, where I think the idea actually
do do good work. But when it comes to peace, no,
it is a totally lopsid I had establishment old school
view of the world and here's the key factor. But
got this agreement done was the fact that Donald Trump
and Steve Woodcoff are outsiders. Anybody who followed the regular

(03:12):
diplomatic playbook would have made no progress in the Middle East.
They have succumbed to the temptation that the only way
to peace is through a Palestinian state. Donald Trump to
the exact opposite and worked around that issue to bring
peace to the Middle East and now Gaza. The Nobel
Peace Prize.

Speaker 1 (03:27):
Who cares?

Speaker 2 (03:28):
Who cares? Who cares? Says are a flesher Stuart Varney.

Speaker 5 (03:34):
There's virtually universal agreement on this program that the president
should get the Nobel Peace Prize.

Speaker 1 (03:40):
After all, if Obama could get one for doing.

Speaker 5 (03:43):
Very little, surely the President Trump would get one for
bringing peace.

Speaker 2 (03:47):
I never thought, I mean I honestly never thought for
a moment that Donald Trump will get the Nobel Peace Prize.
Did you really think that? Do you really think Donald
Trump thought that? I'm sure you know, And he and
Malaney are having dinner and he's having you know, Milanie
is having some really nice you know, she's having some
grill disparagus and you know, a nice little piece of

(04:09):
chicken of some sort. He's having a big mac in
the residence. Of course, Donald Trump has not won the
Nobel Peace Prize. The Scandinavian grandees on the committee would
never dream of honoring him. It was silly to ever
think that they would. But I want you to think
about who it went to. Maria Karina Machado. She's the

(04:32):
opposition figure in Venezuela who's standing up to a communist regime.
And I think she's very well deserving of it. But
it really speaks speaks to the fundamental vanity of our
age that the Nobel is a big story, as if

(04:52):
the one place set it like this, as if the
complexity of world affairs and be boiled down to a
yearly episode of peace has got talent. You know, all
of the Nobel Committee of city in those stupid chairs
on you know, America's got talent or the voice or whatever.
Those different shows are where people come out and perform,

(05:15):
and you know, I saw one the other day. I
just happened to catch a glimpse of one where dragging
you know which one. This is where they they their
chairs face backward.

Speaker 1 (05:24):
The voice is.

Speaker 2 (05:26):
That and then they turn around if they if they
like it.

Speaker 1 (05:28):
Or something exactly that means they want you on their team.

Speaker 2 (05:33):
I found it and Snoop Dogg. I don't know how
I saw this, but Snoop Dogg. It was Snoop Dogg
and Reba McIntyre and something and then twiips. I had
no clue who they were.

Speaker 1 (05:42):
Correct, same here Snoop Dogg.

Speaker 2 (05:45):
And Reba McIntyre and then and then here's why. And
it caught my attention because the contestant was a young
black rapper, and I thought, you know, and apparently they choose,
they get to choose if you get to stay on.
I know nothing about it. Here's what I glimpse from

(06:06):
watching this for like six and a half minutes, which
is a long time for me, six and a.

Speaker 1 (06:11):
Half minutes more than I've watched those shows.

Speaker 2 (06:14):
He is they start to turn around, and you know,
Snoop turned around first, and of course the audience goes wild.
And then apparently if the contestant wins, whatever that means,
then they choose one of those four or five judges
to be their coach, so called coach.

Speaker 1 (06:33):
Yes, that sounds correct.

Speaker 2 (06:34):
And I thought, now, Adam, if I'm a young black
rapper and I've got the choice of Snoop Dogg, Reba
McIntyre and then two people who I have no freaking
clue who they are, who am I going to choose
out of those four people?

Speaker 1 (06:48):
Decisions? Decisions?

Speaker 2 (06:49):
I know, Ah, maybe I choose a black guy. Maybe
I choose a black guy that's a rapper. Maybe I
choose a black guy that's a isn't he.

Speaker 1 (07:00):
A convicted criminal and not convicted, well not convicted he was.
He was on trial for something, yeah.

Speaker 2 (07:08):
Okay, on trial for something but acquitted I found not guilty. Okay,
But do I choose that? Or I choose the redheaded
you know girl from Oklahoma that sings country western.

Speaker 1 (07:21):
But I am a redhead fan.

Speaker 2 (07:22):
Well, I understand, and you know, and Tamer gets really
mad about this. But Tamer and Reeba McIntyre looking off
not an awful lot. They used to look a lot alike,
but not so much anymore, but Reeba McIntyre and and
tamer Brown or a lot of like. Anyway, I'm saying,
thinking this, a yearly episode of Peace has got talent?

(07:43):
Who would we have on that committee for figuring out
And we can't have John Lennon because he's dead, so
you know he can't sing peace or do all of that.

Speaker 1 (07:52):
Paul McCartney, he's here tomorrow.

Speaker 2 (07:53):
Well that's right, Paul McCartney. You know, you know I
might go to Paul McCartney depending on on the raffle
we're having in the building today.

Speaker 1 (08:01):
Like you said, if it's anything close to the raffle
that we had for the Broncos tickets, you're showing.

Speaker 2 (08:09):
So if you go through and I did, this is
how pathetic my life is. I got up this morning
anticipating who or not anticipating that Donald Trump and anticipating
who won the Nobel Peace Prize because I really, in
a perverted way, I wanted Trump to win the Nobel
Prize because I wanted to see how the cabal was

(08:31):
going to deal with that. How does the how does
the cabal deal with the guy that they despise and
says that you know, he's a convicted felon and all
these other you know, pejoritis, he's a Nazi.

Speaker 1 (08:42):
You remember, Well, that's right, in.

Speaker 2 (08:43):
A Nazi saw a convicted felon and a Nazi. What
happens if the Nazi felon gets or the felon Nazi,
which you know, I don't know which way it goes,
actually wins the Nobel Peace Prize, And of course he
did not. And I say congratulations to Marie because she's
living that now.

Speaker 1 (09:03):
Trump.

Speaker 2 (09:03):
Don't get me wrong, Trump's working his butt off to
bring peace around the world. But all of this talk
about the Nobel Peace Prize was driving me crazy. But
doesn't it speak to the fundamental vanity of the age
that we live in that the Nobel is today's big story,
as if the complexity you think about the complexity of

(09:25):
world affairs can be boiled down to something like Peace's
got talent, he failed in his bid is the basic
storyline today. And I'm sure there's no doubt in my
mind that the Commander in Chief would have been thrilled
to be honored, just as he was thrilled by the

(09:48):
royal welcome he got from King Charles and Britain last month.
But don't get me wrong, Trump and his team are
not fools. The Nobel snub fits perfectly within the narrative
that they want to promote Trump's out here busy stopping
conflicts from the Garnald Krabad to Cashmir, Ethiopia, Cambodia. The

(10:14):
Trump administration is on the brink of pulling off the
seemingly impossible but you're going to get to in a minute,
and resolving the conflict in Gaza. But is it really resolved.
We're gonna talk about that in a minute. So as
if by magic or careful orchestration, Israel declared the Trump
broker cees fire done. Now it came into effect moments

(10:38):
after the Nobel Committee had announced the prize winner. You know,
European time, whatever that is. Yet the old liberal world
order still refuses to acknowledge Trump's good work. The stuff
the old global elite is simply too self congratulatory and

(10:59):
I would say prejudiced and biased to recognize that their
time is over. A new world orders being born based
not on international norms, but based on our national interests. Now,
the Trump narrative has the advantage containing within it more
than a kernel of truth. Trump's visit to the Middle

(11:20):
East that he will take this week will show the
contrast between his effective action and all the liberal gobbledegook
about protecting democracy and the fact that the Nobel Committee
chose Maschado. The Venezuelan also looks a lot like appointed
dig at Trump's military assertiveness in the Western Hemisphere, basically

(11:44):
saying you stole an election down in Venezuela, which he did,
and that you've now become the portal for all the
drugs coming in, so we're going to blow the crap
out of your vessels coming across the water. Trump's Defense Department,
the Department of War, excuse me, you know, conducting those
military strikes on the drug cartels in around Venezuela as

(12:05):
they try to make their way across the Caribbean. It's
pretty good, But let's be honest that the Nobel the
Nobel Peace Prize. I think the Nobel Prize in physics
or mathematics, chemistry, or any of the other Nobel prizes
they give out, I'll probably still still worthwhile. But the
Nobel Peace Prize, come on, let's be honest. That's been

(12:27):
a joke. Tom Lair, the late Tom Lair was right
to say that political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger
was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in nineteen seventy three,
after Kissinger had, among other things, told Nixon, Yeah, let's
go bomb Cambodia the Smithereens. And then the Nobel honored

(12:52):
his Majesty Baroque Hussein Obama. And what did he do?
He won a presidential little life. If there's any reason
at all that deep down, if I were a psychiatrist,
I would really want to do a little psychoanalysis of

(13:12):
Donald Trump about the Peace Prize. He doesn't care about
the money, he doesn't care about the medal that you get.
He probably would not, you know, travel to Scandinavia to
collect the award, although he might just to do it,
for the reason that I would like to psychoanalyze him.
I think the only reason that Donald Trump really did

(13:35):
win the Nobel Peace Prize is because he's actually done
some things that are worthy of consideration for the Nobel
Peace Prize. Whereas the guy that made fun of him
at the White House Correspondence dinner, the guy that mocked
him mercilessly at the White House Correspondence dinner Barack Hussain

(13:58):
Obama who. But I think we can actually this morning
say thank you, mister former president, because I think you're
the one that finally pissed off Trump just enough that
he said, really, hold my beer. And here we are today,
and we are well. Some will say we're on the

(14:21):
precipice of a as Trump likes to say, a forever
piece in the Middle East, and I say, nah, I
think we ought to be a little careful about what
we claim that the Middle East is really going to do.
Because now apparently the Israeli Knesset has voted to sign

(14:43):
on to the Piece Accords along with all the other
Middle Eastern countries. Hamas has because the IDF has stopped shooting,
they are beginning there withdrawal from the Gaza strip, and
so everyone is on pins and needles. The living hostages

(15:07):
are supposed to be I think released if you count
seventy two hours. I'm not sure whether it's Sunday night
or Monday morning, but however we're counting it. Sometimes Sunday
night or Monday morning, the living hostages will be turned
over to the International Red Cross, who now is all like, oh,
they all huffed up because look how important we are. Now,

(15:27):
all you're doing is just sending some trucks in and
you're going to pick them up and bring them out.
That's all you're doing. Oh, I know, it's such a
great danger, except many of the people that work for
the International Red Cross and the United Nations are actually
members of a moss So yeah, I don't think the
danger's really there. And then they'll bring them out and
then we'll enter into a period of peace. But there's

(15:51):
a word. I'm going to introduce a new word to
you today, and when we think about that world, I
think that you will begin to recognize that. Don't get
me wrong. What Trump's done by bringing an end to
the fighting in Gaza is a good thing anytime you

(16:13):
can bring about a And I'm not really sure this is.
Are we gonna call this the ceasefire or is this
a piece agreement or is it some sort of melding
or you know, conglomeration of squeezing hum all together in
the one and it's really a ceasefire disguised as a
piece agreement, or it's really a peace agreement, just you know,
kind of disguised as a ceasefire. I'm not really sure

(16:35):
which way to refer to it, but it is one
or the other. And I think Trump, Steve Whitcoff, Jared Kushner,
Marco Rubio, the entire diplomatic team that's been involved in this,
and I quite think, quite frankly, even though they have
a vested interest in it, the Saudi's and the Kataris

(16:56):
and the Kuwaitis and who am I leaving out the Emiradis,
I think they all deserve credit because you know, the
enemy of my what is it, the friend of my
friend of my enemy and Miami, whatever that stupid phrase is.
They don't like Hamas has the law, the who thies.
They don't like the Iranians any more than the rest
of the world does, so they had a self interest

(17:18):
in this also. But coming up next, let's talk about
an Islamic concept that nobody seems to want to talk about.

Speaker 5 (17:29):
For the Nobel Peace Prize ends in January of the
previous year, and the Nobel Peace Prize is kind of
a joke after Obama's award, but Trump could very very
easily win the prize next year given what he's done

(17:53):
done this year.

Speaker 2 (17:57):
Yes, except I think you missed my point about the
Danes don't really want to give it to him. They'll
find anybody else they can. Not to say that he won't.
I'm just saying that, don't hold your breath. I want
to introduce a new word. Maybe it's not new to you,

(18:19):
but I don't hear it used a lot islamis Islam
and Hummas obviously have a concept called huddna. Some say hudina.
I've always pronounced it hudd hud n, a huddna. It's

(18:42):
an Islamic term, and it means a temporary cease fire
or a truce. A temporary ceasefire or a truce, a huddnah. Now,
that concept plays a very central role in how any
Islamist group approaches pauses and hostilities, whether that be with
Israel or you know, the United States, or anybody else,

(19:06):
you know, the Great Satan. Contrary to perceptions of such
agreements as permanent peace deals, huddna is traditionally understood in
the Islamic in the Arab context, as an extended but
yet limited cessation of hostilities so that they have an
opportunity to regroup, re arm, and prepare for their renewed

(19:31):
jihad if conditions that they want which is our complete
capitulation are not met. Hamas's use of Huddana is often
tactical rather than strategy. It's understood by them as more
as a means to gain a military or political objective
rather than a genuine step toward a lasting peace. You

(19:56):
can go online, you can find a lot of different
analyzes and statements from Hama's leader. Huda can serve as
a trial period or arrestite in order to give them
time to rebuild their military capabilities. They can resupply their forces,
they can replenish personnel, and then at some time in
the near or the long term future start resuming attacks.

(20:22):
All of that is consistent not just with is radical
Islamists in general, but specifically with Hamas. It's the Hamas
historical pattern where ceasefires have been punctuated by periods of
acti terrorism and actual warfare. After the Oslo Accords back
in the nineteen nineties, Hamas notably escalated armed resistance rather

(20:47):
than adhering to the negotiated peace terms. Now let's think
about the current peace agreements or the ceasefires. You know,
I don't, I truly don't know which word to use
or which phrase peace agreement cease fire between Israel and Amas.
I want you to to review it. I want you

(21:07):
to view it through the lens of huddn. These accords,
as this one does, kind of lacks finality on core
issues like recognition of Israel or Palestinian refugee claims. So
this is really more of a pause in fighting than

(21:27):
a resolution. Now, I'm not trying to detract it all
from the fact that they cease the conflict, but I'm
simply asking for how long and for a battle that
you can trace back literally fourteen hundred years or more.

(21:50):
Do we really believe that this is the end of
a fourteen hundred year war and that it's going to
end because Jared Kushner and Steve wit Locke talking the
others have reached this agreement. I'm not sure it does
now effectively. These accords do mean that Hamas may use

(22:14):
the ceasefire period to regroup even within the Gaza Strip,
but more importantly, to regroup outside the Gaza Strip. There's
nothing that prevents them from pick any country Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, DASA.

(22:35):
Although I don't think the Saudis or the Kataris, I
really don't think that any of the kind of cohesive
Middle Eastern countries would allow them, although we seem of
the Kataris have done with the Hamas leadership, but there's
nothing that prevents them from regrouping elsewhere in the world

(22:56):
because it it it doesn't prevent Hamas or even little
tiny cells of Hamas terrorists from regrouping and beginning to rebuild.
They're like a virus that you think, you know, okay,

(23:17):
I've taken my antibiot well, you've taken whatever medicine and
you feel better, But that virus still lives, and that virus,
you know, maybe is kind of defunct for a while,
but some of those cells are still there and eventually

(23:40):
they begin to, you know, one by one, grow a
little bit, grow a little bit, they slowly get organized again.
So Hamas might use this ceasefire period to regroup. They
could even do it within Goza, and I don't think
they will, at least in the short term, but they
could in the long term, and they could start rebuilding

(24:00):
their capabilities. And we don't know what, you know, if
this peace board headed by Donald Trump, which I find
that that's going to be a figurehead position, because that's
why I think he's bringing Tony Blair in. He can't
possibly spend enough time on a peace board. Whether they
meet in DC, or they meet in London, or they
meet in or they meet in Tel Aviv, doesn't make

(24:22):
any difference. He doesn't have time to do that. So
you bring in someone like Tony Blair who's retired. And
of course once you get back in the game again,
and so you bring in Tony Blair, why don't you
bring in George W. Bush. Those are two more buddies.
Bring them in and have them, you know, serve on
the peace board. So regardless of how they start trying
to rebuild Gaza and trying to demilitarize Gaza, that doesn't

(24:47):
mean that elsewhere. All you've done. Picture Hamas is a
giant balloon, and Gaza is where you've put You've pushed
your finger on the balloon. Well, when you push your
finger on the balloon of Gaza, it pops up somewhere else.

Speaker 6 (25:03):
Now.

Speaker 2 (25:03):
This Hudda approach also reflects Hamas's political position, where issues
like the right of return for Palestinian refugees kind of
remains unresolved, and that's going to prevent any final piece agreement.
The hudda allows Hamas to postpone the resolution of those
contentious issues while exploding the ceasefire for practical planning and

(25:27):
recuperation huddna. So, despite all these world leaders couting peace
agreements between Israel and Hamas, now in the next segment,
I want to go over to give you a little
perspective from at least for me, from the Israeli perspective.

(25:48):
But right now, despite all these world leaders that you're
going to hear about and started last night and we'll
continue through the weekend, I'm sure counting all these peace
agreements agreements between Israel and Uma, here's the reality. The
reality is that from Hamas is strategic and their fourteen

(26:09):
hundred year ideological perspective, these agreements are often nothing but hudna,
a temporary truce that gives them some breathing room in
order to regroup, resupply, and reposition for future cycles of attacks.
The piece achieved in these periods is fragile, it's contingent,

(26:32):
and Hamas will maintain its overarching goals without conceding any
sort of core demands. This means that any current peace
agreements ought to be viewed skeptically. When you hear that
this is a true or lasting piece. I want you
to think every time you hear a true and lasting piece,

(26:55):
I want you to think huddna. I want you to
think of a tactical pause in an ongoing, centuries old conflict,
because that's what it really is.

Speaker 1 (27:09):
Now.

Speaker 2 (27:10):
Am I being pessimistic? No, I'm being realistic. It's just
like our desire to obliterate al Taida. You know, that's
what we were going to do after nine to eleven.
We were going to obliterate al Tider from the face
of the earth. Well, now we've got They're like they're

(27:30):
like a national bank. They got branches everywhere, and every
little branch has its own name. It's a whole little culture,
but they're all they're all guided by the same overriding desire,
and that is to bring down the great Satan. And
of course side benefit to them the elimination of Judaism, right,

(27:51):
wipe Israel off the map from the river to the sea.
But what if we look at this from the perspective
of Israel.

Speaker 6 (28:00):
In the Arabic script the Hadna, there's a small you
above the ah. So you pronounced it correct, huh put.

Speaker 2 (28:15):
Thank you? We got grammar Nazi's everywhere, including yours. Truly
so glad to be for day. So I want to
focus for the next couple of segments on the agreement itself.
It's the first phase. It's a multi point plan. Obviously,

(28:39):
the purpose is to end the two year conflict in Gaza,
but if you look at it from the perspective of Israel,
they may actually be the loser in this arrangement. I
heard somebody on one of the or I heard I
read somebody in a recent story about this conflict that

(29:00):
you want when you do a peace agreement, when you
do some sort of negotiation like this, you don't want
any one side to feel like they've come out on top,
that everybody's lost and everybody's won, and even more importantly,
that the big guy doesn't want to be seen as
you know, having prevailed over the smaller guy, and the

(29:23):
smaller guy having or the smaller guy having prevailed over
the bigger guy. I took a couple of undergraduate political
science courses in diplomacy, and that's one of the things
that I remember, and all the things the professor has
talked about in terms of how you know diplomatic agreements
come about is that everybody comes away for anybody like

(29:45):
they both won and that they've lost. So I looked
at everything about this agreement, but granted I had a
hard time looking at it from any perspective other than
that Israel might actually be the greater loser in this arrangement.

(30:06):
And I base that on a core contention that Israel
has made disproportionate concessions without achieving what their fundamental goal
was to at the very beginning bub we come on.
You can name what that is. Elimination of Hamas as
a militant threat. That may have been done temporarily, but

(30:31):
that's what I wanted to introduce the concept of Huddna first,
because if you understand radical ism, not even radical Islamist here,
if you just basically understand Islam, the concept of Huddna
fits in perfectly with what they've agreed to here. There
are just several key terms of the agreement. Israel will

(30:53):
partially withdraw the idea from Gaza, but they will retain
some military presence. But I'm not sure how that define yet. Obviously,
because I have not seen the agreement. Hamas will release
all twenty surviving Israeli hostages in exchange for the release
of approximately two thousand Palestinian prisoners from Israeli custody, some

(31:16):
of whom were serving life sentences. Humanitarian Aid will continue
to surge into Gaza, but that's nothing new. Humanitarian Aid
has continued to surge into Gaza. It's just that Hamas
was stealing most of it. Now. The third point or
the fourth point that I came up with, HAMAS must disarm,

(31:41):
But I couldn't really find, at least in publicly available documents,
anything about the implementation mechanisms. So to me, that's unclear.
What does it mean to disarm and to what extent
are you going to do? I mean, if you think
about disarming, just take the word itself, disarmy. You've given
up your arms. But I'm not really sure that that's true,

(32:05):
So that remains to be seen. There is no immediate
transfer of governance away from HAMAS to this new board.
That's that's in a second or third phase. Remember this
is a this is a multi phased agreement, and the
first is really just to cease fire and then exchange
of hostages, which is not Don't get me wrong, I'm

(32:27):
not complaining about that. I'm just trying to give a perspective.
And this was mediated, which I think is very important,
by Egypt, Katar, Turkey and the United States. Saudi's wanted
to keep their hands cleaned. Kuwaitis the same and the
Emis I understand. But let's think about why would Israel

(32:51):
be seen as the clear loser in this. That's not