Norman Finkelstein

You don't know what's the correct international law.

You don't know what's the correct international law.

to what was probably the most moving speech at the UN General Assembly proceedings by the Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko. I was very tempted to quote it at length, but I recognized that would be taking too much time. So I asked a young friend, Jamie Stern Weiner, to edit it and just get the essence of what Foreign Minister Gromyko had to say.

to what was probably the most moving speech at the UN General Assembly proceedings by the Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko. I was very tempted to quote it at length, but I recognized that would be taking too much time. So I asked a young friend, Jamie Stern Weiner, to edit it and just get the essence of what Foreign Minister Gromyko had to say.

I'm sure they believe it. I'm sure they believe it. And if the Hamas is hiding behind civilians, civilians die. Every time they target a kid, I'm sure they believe it's Hamas. When they killed the four kids. They believe it. I know they believe it. Even though they were diminutive size. Even though they were diminutive size. From that angle, you don't see the size. You don't see the size.

I'm sure they believe it. I'm sure they believe it. And if the Hamas is hiding behind civilians, civilians die. Every time they target a kid, I'm sure they believe it's Hamas. When they killed the four kids. They believe it. I know they believe it. Even though they were diminutive size. Even though they were diminutive size. From that angle, you don't see the size. You don't see the size.

Let's leave it aside.

Let's leave it aside.

They literally did. Mr. Borelli, with all due respect, you're such a fantastic moron. It's terrifying. That wharf was filled with journalists. There were tens scores of journalists. That was an old fisherman's shack. What are you talking about? It's so painful. It's so painful to listen to this idiocy.

They literally did. Mr. Borelli, with all due respect, you're such a fantastic moron. It's terrifying. That wharf was filled with journalists. There were tens scores of journalists. That was an old fisherman's shack. What are you talking about? It's so painful. It's so painful to listen to this idiocy.

Okay, answer. In 2018, there was the Great March of Return in Gaza. By all reckonings of human rights organizations and journalists who were there, it was overwhelmingly nonviolent. It was organized by the Hamas. Whoever organized it. It was organized by Satan. Let's start with that.

Okay, answer. In 2018, there was the Great March of Return in Gaza. By all reckonings of human rights organizations and journalists who were there, it was overwhelmingly nonviolent. It was organized by the Hamas. Whoever organized it. It was organized by Satan. Let's start with that.

Okay, Satan. I agree. Let's go for the big one, the big magilla. It's Satan, okay? Overwhelmingly nonviolent. resembled at the beginning the first intifada. They threw bombs here and there. Okay, not bombs. They tried to make holes in the fence, obviously. Let's continue.

Okay, Satan. I agree. Let's go for the big one, the big magilla. It's Satan, okay? Overwhelmingly nonviolent. resembled at the beginning the first intifada. They threw bombs here and there. Okay, not bombs. They tried to make holes in the fence, obviously. Let's continue.

Okay, so... As you know, along the Gaza perimeter, there was Israel's best-trained snipers. Correct? I don't know best-trained. They were snipers. Fine. Sniper. Okay. All right. Because, hey, laugh. It's hilarious. The story is so funny.

Okay, so... As you know, along the Gaza perimeter, there was Israel's best-trained snipers. Correct? I don't know best-trained. They were snipers. Fine. Sniper. Okay. All right. Because, hey, laugh. It's hilarious. The story is so funny.

During the last war, Gromyko said, the Jewish people underwent exceptional sorrow and suffering without any exaggeration, This sorrow and suffering are indescribable. Hundreds of thousands of Jews are wandering about in various countries of Europe in search of means of existence and in search of shelter. The United Nations cannot and must not regard this situation with indifference.

During the last war, Gromyko said, the Jewish people underwent exceptional sorrow and suffering without any exaggeration, This sorrow and suffering are indescribable. Hundreds of thousands of Jews are wandering about in various countries of Europe in search of means of existence and in search of shelter. The United Nations cannot and must not regard this situation with indifference.

Even the UN says it themselves.

Even the UN says it themselves.

But you only collect what the UN says that you like. You see, the problem, Mr. Morelli, is you don't know the English language.

But you only collect what the UN says that you like. You see, the problem, Mr. Morelli, is you don't know the English language.

Talk fast. People think that you're coherent.

Talk fast. People think that you're coherent.

Yeah, but you see... I know you like them sometimes. Only when they agree with you, though. You got the months wrong. You got the months wrong. We're talking about the beginning in March 30th, 2018. You just described that March as mostly peaceful. Okay, allow me to finish. So there were the snipers, okay? Now, you find it so far-fetched Israelis... Purposely, deliberately targeting civilians?

Yeah, but you see... I know you like them sometimes. Only when they agree with you, though. You got the months wrong. You got the months wrong. We're talking about the beginning in March 30th, 2018. You just described that March as mostly peaceful. Okay, allow me to finish. So there were the snipers, okay? Now, you find it so far-fetched Israelis... Purposely, deliberately targeting civilians?

That's such a far-fetched idea. An overwhelmingly non-violent march. What did the international investigation... It was a campaign. Whatever you want to call it. For months. Whatever you want to call it. For months. Yeah. What did the UN investigation find? Well, he just read it to you. I read the report. I don't read things off of those machines. I read the report. What did it find?

That's such a far-fetched idea. An overwhelmingly non-violent march. What did the international investigation... It was a campaign. Whatever you want to call it. For months. Whatever you want to call it. For months. Yeah. What did the UN investigation find? Well, he just read it to you. I read the report. I don't read things off of those machines. I read the report. What did it find?

Brace yourself. You thought it was so funny, the idea of IDF targeting civilians. It found, go look this up on your machine.

Brace yourself. You thought it was so funny, the idea of IDF targeting civilians. It found, go look this up on your machine.

Targeted children, targeted journalists. targeted medics, and here's the funniest one of all. It's so hilarious. They targeted disabled people who were 300 meters away from the fence and just standing by trees. This is true. If what you're saying is true.

Targeted children, targeted journalists. targeted medics, and here's the funniest one of all. It's so hilarious. They targeted disabled people who were 300 meters away from the fence and just standing by trees. This is true. If what you're saying is true.

That it's impossible at the command level. It's impossible at the command level. But you said that they couldn't have done it at the bottom if it weren't also at the top.

That it's impossible at the command level. It's impossible at the command level. But you said that they couldn't have done it at the bottom if it weren't also at the top.

It's true. It's true. I don't spend my nights on Wikipedia. I read books. I admit that as a signal. I know books are a waste of time with all due regard. There are two or three quotes that you use. I completely respect the fact And I'll say it on the air, as much as I find totally disgusting what's come of your politics, a lot of the books are excellent.

It's true. It's true. I don't spend my nights on Wikipedia. I read books. I admit that as a signal. I know books are a waste of time with all due regard. There are two or three quotes that you use. I completely respect the fact And I'll say it on the air, as much as I find totally disgusting what's come of your politics, a lot of the books are excellent.

And I'll even tell you, because I'm not afraid of saying it, whenever I have to check on a basic fact, the equivalent of going to the Britannica, I go to your books. I know you got a lot of the facts right.

And I'll even tell you, because I'm not afraid of saying it, whenever I have to check on a basic fact, the equivalent of going to the Britannica, I go to your books. I know you got a lot of the facts right.

I would never say books are a waste of time. And it's regrettable to you that you got strapped with a partner who thinks that all the wisdom, all the wisdom.

I would never say books are a waste of time. And it's regrettable to you that you got strapped with a partner who thinks that all the wisdom, all the wisdom.

Past experience, particularly during the Second World War, shows that no Western European state was able to provide adequate assistance for the Jewish people in defending its rights and its very existence from the violence of the Hitlerites and their allies. This is an unpleasant fact. But unfortunately, like all other facts, it must be admitted." Gromyko went on to say,

Past experience, particularly during the Second World War, shows that no Western European state was able to provide adequate assistance for the Jewish people in defending its rights and its very existence from the violence of the Hitlerites and their allies. This is an unpleasant fact. But unfortunately, like all other facts, it must be admitted." Gromyko went on to say,

And if that's the case, why is it only, only? Professor Morris, here's a question for you. If we take every combat zone in the world for the past three years, every combat zone in the world. In Vietnam, the Americans killed a million people. I'm not talking about Vietnam. Well, they could have killed 40 million. Yeah, I was in the anti-war movement. So don't strap me.

And if that's the case, why is it only, only? Professor Morris, here's a question for you. If we take every combat zone in the world for the past three years, every combat zone in the world. In Vietnam, the Americans killed a million people. I'm not talking about Vietnam. Well, they could have killed 40 million. Yeah, I was in the anti-war movement. So don't strap me.

The Americans killed a million people in Vietnam. Fine, fine. And 30 million Russians were killed during World War II, so everything else is irrelevant. Okay.

The Americans killed a million people in Vietnam. Fine, fine. And 30 million Russians were killed during World War II, so everything else is irrelevant. Okay.

Professor Mars, here's a question. It's very perplexing. If you take every combat zone in the world for the past three years and you multiply the number of children killed by four, every combat zone in the world, you get gossip. Okay? What is that supposed to prove? Okay, I'm going to tell you. Just shut up. You're relying on Hamas numbers. No, I'm not relying.

Professor Mars, here's a question. It's very perplexing. If you take every combat zone in the world for the past three years and you multiply the number of children killed by four, every combat zone in the world, you get gossip. Okay? What is that supposed to prove? Okay, I'm going to tell you. Just shut up. You're relying on Hamas numbers. No, I'm not relying.

I'm relying on the numbers that everybody else. I'm relying on the numbers.

I'm relying on the numbers that everybody else. I'm relying on the numbers.

Okay.

Okay.

They could invent anything because you know that they are a mendacious organization. I know mendacious. Believe me. Mendacious as in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Okay. So here's the thing. You say they could have killed 500,000, but they only killed 30,000.

They could invent anything because you know that they are a mendacious organization. I know mendacious. Believe me. Mendacious as in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Okay. So here's the thing. You say they could have killed 500,000, but they only killed 30,000.

Professor Morris. For a historian, I don't want to understand Israeli society. You want to know the truth. I don't want to. I don't want to get inside their heads. That's the problem.

Professor Morris. For a historian, I don't want to understand Israeli society. You want to know the truth. I don't want to. I don't want to get inside their heads. That's the problem.

There's a limit. When 90% of Israelis think that Israel is using enough or too little force in Gaza, I don't want to get inside that head. 40% think that Israel is using insufficient force in Gaza. I don't want to get inside that head. I don't want to get inside the head of people who think They're using insufficient force against the population, against the population, half of which is children.

There's a limit. When 90% of Israelis think that Israel is using enough or too little force in Gaza, I don't want to get inside that head. 40% think that Israel is using insufficient force in Gaza. I don't want to get inside that head. I don't want to get inside the head of people who think They're using insufficient force against the population, against the population, half of which is children.

I don't want to get inside that head. But here is the point, because your partner wants to know the point. You don't understand political constraints. One of your ministers said, let's drop an atomic bomb on Gaza. You think he really meant that? No, no, no.

I don't want to get inside that head. But here is the point, because your partner wants to know the point. You don't understand political constraints. One of your ministers said, let's drop an atomic bomb on Gaza. You think he really meant that? No, no, no.

I'm not supporting him. He's an idiot. This minister is a messianic idiot. He didn't say drop an atomic bomb. None other than Israel's chief historian. The famed, justifiably famed, Benny Morris thinks we should be dropping nuclear weapons on Iran.

I'm not supporting him. He's an idiot. This minister is a messianic idiot. He didn't say drop an atomic bomb. None other than Israel's chief historian. The famed, justifiably famed, Benny Morris thinks we should be dropping nuclear weapons on Iran.

In principle, he supports one state, or the Soviet Union supports one state. But he said, if relations between the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine proved to be so bad that it would be impossible to reconcile them and to ensure the peaceful coexistence of the Arabs and the Jews, the Soviet Union would support. two states.

In principle, he supports one state, or the Soviet Union supports one state. But he said, if relations between the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine proved to be so bad that it would be impossible to reconcile them and to ensure the peaceful coexistence of the Arabs and the Jews, the Soviet Union would support. two states.

I would say Iranian leaders have sent mixed messages.

I would say Iranian leaders have sent mixed messages.

It's complicated. To the extent that the Houthis are trying to stop the genocide in Gaza. There is no genocide. There is no genocide. They have the right to attack civilian ships.

It's complicated. To the extent that the Houthis are trying to stop the genocide in Gaza. There is no genocide. There is no genocide. They have the right to attack civilian ships.

It's committing genocide. But if I could just... Allow me... That's correct. I don't run away. So Norman, you did say Israel is committing genocide.

It's committing genocide. But if I could just... Allow me... That's correct. I don't run away. So Norman, you did say Israel is committing genocide.

I personally am not convinced that the two states would have been unsustainable in the long term if, and this is a big if, the Zionist movement had been faithful to the position it proclaimed during the UNSCOP public hearings. At the time, Ben-Gurion testified Quote, I want to express what we mean by a Jewish state.

I personally am not convinced that the two states would have been unsustainable in the long term if, and this is a big if, the Zionist movement had been faithful to the position it proclaimed during the UNSCOP public hearings. At the time, Ben-Gurion testified Quote, I want to express what we mean by a Jewish state.

Which is the PLO line. Yeah, with the program. The PLO is long past. As you were saying, genocide is not a body count.

Which is the PLO line. Yeah, with the program. The PLO is long past. As you were saying, genocide is not a body count.

According to Asa Kasher, the philosopher of IDF, he said that Netanyahu was avowing genocide. Now, he's an idiot? He didn't say he's an idiot, but he passed it.

According to Asa Kasher, the philosopher of IDF, he said that Netanyahu was avowing genocide. Now, he's an idiot? He didn't say he's an idiot, but he passed it.

They must be awfully incompetent.

They must be awfully incompetent.

Even the American judge, she must have been awful incompetent if she was unable to see the misrepresentations that Mr. Bunnell, based on his Wikipedia entry, was able to find.

Even the American judge, she must have been awful incompetent if she was unable to see the misrepresentations that Mr. Bunnell, based on his Wikipedia entry, was able to find.

Actually, brace yourself for this, and Muin could confirm it. Yaniv Kogan, an Israeli, and Jamie Sternweiner, half Israeli, they checked every single quote in the Hebrew original, and Yaniv Kogan, love the guy, he has terrifying powers of concentration, he checked every single quote. Is that correct, Muin? And Jamie checked every single quote in the English

Actually, brace yourself for this, and Muin could confirm it. Yaniv Kogan, an Israeli, and Jamie Sternweiner, half Israeli, they checked every single quote in the Hebrew original, and Yaniv Kogan, love the guy, he has terrifying powers of concentration, he checked every single quote. Is that correct, Muin? And Jamie checked every single quote in the English

in the context, and where there were any contextual questions, they told us.

in the context, and where there were any contextual questions, they told us.

Yeah, I think they found one. So I do not believe that those 15 judges, it was 15 to two. 16 to two, I think. They're 15 in the court plus two, so it's 17, so it's 15 to two. I don't think those 15 judges were incompetent And I certainly don't believe the president of the court, an American, would allow herself to be duped. Because you might recall, Mr. Burrell, Mr. Burrell. All right.

Yeah, I think they found one. So I do not believe that those 15 judges, it was 15 to two. 16 to two, I think. They're 15 in the court plus two, so it's 17, so it's 15 to two. I don't think those 15 judges were incompetent And I certainly don't believe the president of the court, an American, would allow herself to be duped. Because you might recall, Mr. Burrell, Mr. Burrell. All right.

We mean by a Jewish state simply a state where the majority of the people are Jews, not a state where a Jew has in any way any privilege more than anyone else. A Jewish state means a state based on absolute equality of all her citizens and on democracy. Alas, this was not to be. As Professor Morris has written, quote, Zionist ideology and practice were necessarily and elementally expansionist.

We mean by a Jewish state simply a state where the majority of the people are Jews, not a state where a Jew has in any way any privilege more than anyone else. A Jewish state means a state based on absolute equality of all her citizens and on democracy. Alas, this was not to be. As Professor Morris has written, quote, Zionist ideology and practice were necessarily and elementally expansionist.

Okay. It is correct, as Muin put it, that it'll be several years before the court makes a determination. And my guess is it will determine there was no genocide. That's my guess. Yes, no, I'm just giving you my guess. I can't predict. I got it all wrong, actually, as Muin will attest. I got it all wrong the first time. I never thought the American judge would vote in favor of plausibility.

Okay. It is correct, as Muin put it, that it'll be several years before the court makes a determination. And my guess is it will determine there was no genocide. That's my guess. Yes, no, I'm just giving you my guess. I can't predict. I got it all wrong, actually, as Muin will attest. I got it all wrong the first time. I never thought the American judge would vote in favor of plausibility.

So you admit that you were wrong? Yeah, of course. I think I tell Muin twice a day I was wrong about this and I was wrong about that. I'm not wrong about the facts, I try not to be, but my speculations, they can be wrong. Okay, leaving that aside. First of all, as Muin pointed out, there's a difference between the legal decision by the ruling and an independent judgment.

So you admit that you were wrong? Yeah, of course. I think I tell Muin twice a day I was wrong about this and I was wrong about that. I'm not wrong about the facts, I try not to be, but my speculations, they can be wrong. Okay, leaving that aside. First of all, as Muin pointed out, there's a difference between the legal decision by the ruling and an independent judgment.

Now, South Africa was not filing a frivolous case. That was 84 pages. It was single. Even 84 pages can be pretty frivolous. It takes an hour and a half to read.

Now, South Africa was not filing a frivolous case. That was 84 pages. It was single. Even 84 pages can be pretty frivolous. It takes an hour and a half to read.

It was single spaced and had literally hundreds of footnotes. It can still be frivolous. It's possible. Of course, but this one wasn't. Yeah, I read the report. To tell you the truth, I followed very closely everything that's been happening to October 7th. I was mesmerized. I couldn't believe the comprehensiveness of that particular report.

It was single spaced and had literally hundreds of footnotes. It can still be frivolous. It's possible. Of course, but this one wasn't. Yeah, I read the report. To tell you the truth, I followed very closely everything that's been happening to October 7th. I was mesmerized. I couldn't believe the comprehensiveness of that particular report.

Number two, there were two quite respected experts of international law sitting on the South African panel, John Dugard and Vaughan Lowe. Vaughan Lowe, as you might know, he argued the Wall case in 2004 before the International Court of Justice. Now, they were not

Number two, there were two quite respected experts of international law sitting on the South African panel, John Dugard and Vaughan Lowe. Vaughan Lowe, as you might know, he argued the Wall case in 2004 before the International Court of Justice. Now, they were not

They were alleging genocide, which in their view means the evidence in their minds, we're not yet at the court, the evidence in their minds compels the conclusion that genocide is being committed. I am willing, because I happen to know Mr. Dugard personally and I've corresponded with Vaughn Lowe, I've heard their claim, I've read the report, I would say they make a very strong case.

They were alleging genocide, which in their view means the evidence in their minds, we're not yet at the court, the evidence in their minds compels the conclusion that genocide is being committed. I am willing, because I happen to know Mr. Dugard personally and I've corresponded with Vaughn Lowe, I've heard their claim, I've read the report, I would say they make a very strong case.

But let's agree, plausible. Now, here's a question. If somebody qualifies for an Olympic team, let's say a regional person qualifies for an Olympic team, it doesn't mean they're going to be on the Olympic team. It doesn't mean they're going to win a gold medal, a silver medal, or a bronze medal. But they can swim.

But let's agree, plausible. Now, here's a question. If somebody qualifies for an Olympic team, let's say a regional person qualifies for an Olympic team, it doesn't mean they're going to be on the Olympic team. It doesn't mean they're going to win a gold medal, a silver medal, or a bronze medal. But they can swim.

No, I would say that's a very high bar. You're saying they can swim. To even qualify.

No, I would say that's a very high bar. You're saying they can swim. To even qualify.

So to even make it to plausible. That is not true.

So to even make it to plausible. That is not true.

Mr. Borelli, please don't teach me about the English language. So the declaration, I said, I said, it's the same concept as qualifying.

Mr. Borelli, please don't teach me about the English language. So the declaration, I said, I said, it's the same concept as qualifying.

Please stop displaying your imbecility. Okay, I'm sorry if you think the declaration of the challenge is imbecility. Don't put on public display that you're a moron. At least have the self-possession to shut up. Did I read the case? I'm comfortable putting my display on camera if you're comfortable putting yours in books, okay? I read the case around four times.

Please stop displaying your imbecility. Okay, I'm sorry if you think the declaration of the challenge is imbecility. Don't put on public display that you're a moron. At least have the self-possession to shut up. Did I read the case? I'm comfortable putting my display on camera if you're comfortable putting yours in books, okay? I read the case around four times.

I read all of the majority opinion, the declarations. I read Ahron Barak's declaration. Then why are you lying and saying plausible is a high standard? Because I said... Even reaching the benchmark of plausibility is a very high standard in the world. It's the equivalent of a regional player qualifying for an Olympics. It's still two steps removed. You may not be on the team.

I read all of the majority opinion, the declarations. I read Ahron Barak's declaration. Then why are you lying and saying plausible is a high standard? Because I said... Even reaching the benchmark of plausibility is a very high standard in the world. It's the equivalent of a regional player qualifying for an Olympics. It's still two steps removed. You may not be on the team.

and you may not get a medal, but to get qualified, which in this context is the equivalent of plausible, you must be doing something pretty horrible. And as it happens, Professor Morris... There was no genocide. That's what the court will rule. Remember what I just told you. I don't expect to be even around when the court reaches its final decision. Why? It'll take a long, long time. Two years.

and you may not get a medal, but to get qualified, which in this context is the equivalent of plausible, you must be doing something pretty horrible. And as it happens, Professor Morris... There was no genocide. That's what the court will rule. Remember what I just told you. I don't expect to be even around when the court reaches its final decision. Why? It'll take a long, long time. Two years.

And then he wrote in another book, transfer, the euphemism for expulsion, transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism because it sought to transform a land which was Arab into a Jewish state. and a Jewish state could not have arisen without a major displacement of Arab population.

And then he wrote in another book, transfer, the euphemism for expulsion, transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism because it sought to transform a land which was Arab into a Jewish state. and a Jewish state could not have arisen without a major displacement of Arab population.

No, I don't think it'll take two or three years.

No, I don't think it'll take two or three years.

But the point you're making... I'm saying that something horrible must be happening to even achieve... It is horrible. It's a war. It's true. They weren't rendering a ruling on a war. They were rendering a ruling on a genocide.

But the point you're making... I'm saying that something horrible must be happening to even achieve... It is horrible. It's a war. It's true. They weren't rendering a ruling on a war. They were rendering a ruling on a genocide.

Professor Morris, here's another one. When the defense... Ridiculous. Yes, ridiculous. The American judge... He also doesn't determine policy. The American judge... You are holding the American judge to... Well, he was the president.

Professor Morris, here's another one. When the defense... Ridiculous. Yes, ridiculous. The American judge... He also doesn't determine policy. The American judge... You are holding the American judge to... Well, he was the president.

The American judge read several of the quotes. Look at the American Supreme Court today. They may support Trump. It shows you how worthy American judges are. Professor Mars, without going too far afield, if you heard a statement by the defense minister, the defense minister said... we are going to prevent any food, water, fuel, or electricity from entering Gaza. Did Israel do that?

The American judge read several of the quotes. Look at the American Supreme Court today. They may support Trump. It shows you how worthy American judges are. Professor Mars, without going too far afield, if you heard a statement by the defense minister, the defense minister said... we are going to prevent any food, water, fuel, or electricity from entering Gaza. Did Israel do that?

No, I'm wondering. What he said isn't Israeli government policy. But we're talking about statements now, intent. How would you interpret that?

No, I'm wondering. What he said isn't Israeli government policy. But we're talking about statements now, intent. How would you interpret that?

Take down Gaza is not a genocide.

Take down Gaza is not a genocide.

Wait, you do know how to pronounce my name. Are you mispronouncing it intentionally?

Wait, you do know how to pronounce my name. Are you mispronouncing it intentionally?

I'm so touched by your solicitude for international law.

I'm so touched by your solicitude for international law.

Unfortunately, 15 judges disagree.

Unfortunately, 15 judges disagree.

And because this aim automatically produced resistance among the Arabs, which in turn persuaded the yeshuv's leaders, the yeshuv being the Jewish community, the yeshuv's leaders that a hostile Arab majority or a large minority could not remain in place if a Jewish state was to arise or safely endure. Or as Professor Morris retrospectively put it, quote, a removing of a population was needed.

And because this aim automatically produced resistance among the Arabs, which in turn persuaded the yeshuv's leaders, the yeshuv being the Jewish community, the yeshuv's leaders that a hostile Arab majority or a large minority could not remain in place if a Jewish state was to arise or safely endure. Or as Professor Morris retrospectively put it, quote, a removing of a population was needed.

Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established, unquote. The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. I won't play games with that. I know a lot of people tried to prove it's not true. It clearly, in my view, is true. The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. While Israeli leaders, acting under compulsions, inevitable and inbuilt

Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established, unquote. The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. I won't play games with that. I know a lot of people tried to prove it's not true. It clearly, in my view, is true. The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. While Israeli leaders, acting under compulsions, inevitable and inbuilt

into Zionism found the pretext in the course of the first Arab-Israeli war to expel the indigenous population and expand its borders. I therefore conclude that neither side was committed to the letter of the partition resolution and both sides aborted it.

into Zionism found the pretext in the course of the first Arab-Israeli war to expel the indigenous population and expand its borders. I therefore conclude that neither side was committed to the letter of the partition resolution and both sides aborted it.

Even though I agree, I've thought about it a lot, and I agree with Muin's analysis. I'm not really in the business of punditry. I'd rather look at the historical record where I feel more comfortable, and I feel on terra firma. So I'd like to just go through that. I agree and I disagree with Muin on the 1973 issue.

Even though I agree, I've thought about it a lot, and I agree with Muin's analysis. I'm not really in the business of punditry. I'd rather look at the historical record where I feel more comfortable, and I feel on terra firma. So I'd like to just go through that. I agree and I disagree with Muin on the 1973 issue.

After the 1973 war, it was clear that Israel was surprised by what happened during the war. It took a big hit. The estimates are, I don't know what numbers you use, but I hear between 2,000 and 3,000 Israeli soldiers were killed during the 1970s. It was 2,500? Yeah, 27 number. Okay, so I got it right. I read different numbers. That's, you know, it's a very large number of Israelis who were killed.

After the 1973 war, it was clear that Israel was surprised by what happened during the war. It took a big hit. The estimates are, I don't know what numbers you use, but I hear between 2,000 and 3,000 Israeli soldiers were killed during the 1970s. It was 2,500? Yeah, 27 number. Okay, so I got it right. I read different numbers. That's, you know, it's a very large number of Israelis who were killed.

There were moments at the beginning of the war where there was a fear that this might be it. No, no, there wasn't, there wasn't, there wasn't. This is nonsense.

There were moments at the beginning of the war where there was a fear that this might be it. No, no, there wasn't, there wasn't, there wasn't. This is nonsense.

I can't tell you if he was hysterical or not. No, he was. I wasn't in the same room with him. But I'm just saying, let's not bog down on that. The war is over, and when President Carter comes into power, Carter was an extremely smart guy, Jimmy Carter, extremely smart guy, and he was very fixed on details.

I can't tell you if he was hysterical or not. No, he was. I wasn't in the same room with him. But I'm just saying, let's not bog down on that. The war is over, and when President Carter comes into power, Carter was an extremely smart guy, Jimmy Carter, extremely smart guy, and he was very fixed on details.

He was probably the most impressive of modern American presidents, in my opinion, by a wide margin. And he was determined to resolve the conflict. On the big scale, on the Arab-Israeli scale, on the Palestinian issue, he wouldn't go past what he called a Palestinian homeland.

He was probably the most impressive of modern American presidents, in my opinion, by a wide margin. And he was determined to resolve the conflict. On the big scale, on the Arab-Israeli scale, on the Palestinian issue, he wouldn't go past what he called a Palestinian homeland.

On the Palestinian national home, he wouldn't go as far as a Palestinian state. I'm not going to go into the details of that. I don't think realistically, given the political balance of forces, that was going to happen, but that's a separate issue. Okay. Let's get to the issue at hand, namely what is the obstacle or what has been the obstacle since the early 1970s.

On the Palestinian national home, he wouldn't go as far as a Palestinian state. I'm not going to go into the details of that. I don't think realistically, given the political balance of forces, that was going to happen, but that's a separate issue. Okay. Let's get to the issue at hand, namely what is the obstacle or what has been the obstacle since the early 1970s.

Since roughly 1974, the Palestinians have accepted the two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. Now,

Since roughly 1974, the Palestinians have accepted the two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. Now,

As more pressure was exerted on Israel because the Palestinians seemed reasonable, the Israelis, to quote the Israeli political scientist Avner Yaniv, he since passed from the scene, Yaniv in his book Dilemmas of Security, he said that the big Israeli fear was what he called the Palestinian peace offensive. That was their worry, that the Palestinians were becoming too moderate.

As more pressure was exerted on Israel because the Palestinians seemed reasonable, the Israelis, to quote the Israeli political scientist Avner Yaniv, he since passed from the scene, Yaniv in his book Dilemmas of Security, he said that the big Israeli fear was what he called the Palestinian peace offensive. That was their worry, that the Palestinians were becoming too moderate.

And unless you understand that, you can't understand the June 1982 Lebanon War. The purpose of the June 1982 Lebanon War was to liquidate the PLO in southern Lebanon because they were too moderate, the Palestinian peace offensive. I'm going to have to fast forward. There are many events.

And unless you understand that, you can't understand the June 1982 Lebanon War. The purpose of the June 1982 Lebanon War was to liquidate the PLO in southern Lebanon because they were too moderate, the Palestinian peace offensive. I'm going to have to fast forward. There are many events.

There's the First Intifada, then there's the Oslo Accord, and let's now go to the heart of the issue, namely the 2000-2001 negotiations. The negotiations are divided into three parts for the sake of listeners. There's Camp David in July 2000, there are the Clinton parameters in December 2000, and then there are negotiations in Taba in Egypt in 2001. Those are the three phases.

There's the First Intifada, then there's the Oslo Accord, and let's now go to the heart of the issue, namely the 2000-2001 negotiations. The negotiations are divided into three parts for the sake of listeners. There's Camp David in July 2000, there are the Clinton parameters in December 2000, and then there are negotiations in Taba in Egypt in 2001. Those are the three phases.

Now, I have studied the record probably to the point of insanity, because there are so many details you have to master. I'll vouch for that, the insanity part. Actually, I will vouch for it. I will personally vouch for it.

Now, I have studied the record probably to the point of insanity, because there are so many details you have to master. I'll vouch for that, the insanity part. Actually, I will vouch for it. I will personally vouch for it.

There is one extensive record from that whole period from 2000 to, you could say, 2007, and that is what came to be called the Palestine Papers, which are about 15,000 pages of all the records of the negotiations. I have read through all of them, every single page. And this is what I find. If you look at Shlomo Ben-Ami's book, which I have with me, Prophets Without Honor, it's his last book.

There is one extensive record from that whole period from 2000 to, you could say, 2007, and that is what came to be called the Palestine Papers, which are about 15,000 pages of all the records of the negotiations. I have read through all of them, every single page. And this is what I find. If you look at Shlomo Ben-Ami's book, which I have with me, Prophets Without Honor, it's his last book.

He says, going into Camp David, that means July, going into Camp David, July 2000, he said the Israelis were willing to return about, not return, but will withdraw from, relinquish, 92% of the West Bank.

He says, going into Camp David, that means July, going into Camp David, July 2000, he said the Israelis were willing to return about, not return, but will withdraw from, relinquish, 92% of the West Bank.

Yeah. He was at Taba. Oh, yeah, he was also at Camp David. Yeah. They wanted, Israel wanted to keep all the major settlement blocks. It wanted to keep roughly 8% of the West Bank. They were allowing for, you put it at 84 to 90% in your books. They put it at roughly 92%. Israel was willing to give up.

Yeah. He was at Taba. Oh, yeah, he was also at Camp David. Yeah. They wanted, Israel wanted to keep all the major settlement blocks. It wanted to keep roughly 8% of the West Bank. They were allowing for, you put it at 84 to 90% in your books. They put it at roughly 92%. Israel was willing to give up.

It also depends what stage Camp David, because there were two weeks. I'll get to that.

It also depends what stage Camp David, because there were two weeks. I'll get to that.

Israel wants to keep all the major settlement blocks. It means the border area of the West Bank. Well, not the border. We have Ariel. We have Male Adumim. We have a Condoleezza Rice called Ariel. She said it was a dagger into the heart of the West Bank. They want to keep 8% of the land. They want to keep the settlement blocks. They want to keep 80% of the settlers.

Israel wants to keep all the major settlement blocks. It means the border area of the West Bank. Well, not the border. We have Ariel. We have Male Adumim. We have a Condoleezza Rice called Ariel. She said it was a dagger into the heart of the West Bank. They want to keep 8% of the land. They want to keep the settlement blocks. They want to keep 80% of the settlers.

They will not budge an inch on the question of refugees. To quote Ehud Barak in the article he co-authored with you in the New York Review of Books, we will accept, and I think the quote's accurate, no moral, legal, or historical responsibility for what happened to the refugees. So forget about even allowing refugees to return.

They will not budge an inch on the question of refugees. To quote Ehud Barak in the article he co-authored with you in the New York Review of Books, we will accept, and I think the quote's accurate, no moral, legal, or historical responsibility for what happened to the refugees. So forget about even allowing refugees to return.

We accept no moral, legal, or historical responsibility for the refugees. And on Jerusalem, they wanted to keep large parts of Jerusalem. Now, how do we judge who is reasonable and who is not? Then Ami says, I think the Israeli offer was reasonable. That's how he sees it. But what is the standard of reasonable? My standard is, what does international law say?

We accept no moral, legal, or historical responsibility for the refugees. And on Jerusalem, they wanted to keep large parts of Jerusalem. Now, how do we judge who is reasonable and who is not? Then Ami says, I think the Israeli offer was reasonable. That's how he sees it. But what is the standard of reasonable? My standard is, what does international law say?

International law says the settlements are illegal. Israel wants to keep all the settlement blocks. 15 judges, all 15, in the war decision in 2004, in July 2004, all 15 judges, including the American Judge Bergenthal, ruled the settlements are illegal under international law. They want to keep 80% of the settlers. Under international law, all the settlers are illegal in the West Bank.

International law says the settlements are illegal. Israel wants to keep all the settlement blocks. 15 judges, all 15, in the war decision in 2004, in July 2004, all 15 judges, including the American Judge Bergenthal, ruled the settlements are illegal under international law. They want to keep 80% of the settlers. Under international law, all the settlers are illegal in the West Bank.

They want to keep large parts of East Jerusalem. But under international law, East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. That's what the international... No, not Palestinian, because there was no Palestine.

They want to keep large parts of East Jerusalem. But under international law, East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. That's what the international... No, not Palestinian, because there was no Palestine.

How could it be Palestinian? I listen patiently to you.

How could it be Palestinian? I listen patiently to you.

Under international law, if you read the decision... All territory, the 2004 wall decision, all territory beyond the Green Line, which includes East Jerusalem, is occupied Palestinian territory.

Under international law, if you read the decision... All territory, the 2004 wall decision, all territory beyond the Green Line, which includes East Jerusalem, is occupied Palestinian territory.

The designated unit, according to the International Court of Justice, the designated unit for Palestinian self-determination. And they deny any right whatsoever on the right of return. The maximum, I don't want to go into the details now, the maximum formal offer was by Ehud Omar in 2008. He offered 5,000 refugees could return under what was called family reunification, 5,000

The designated unit, according to the International Court of Justice, the designated unit for Palestinian self-determination. And they deny any right whatsoever on the right of return. The maximum, I don't want to go into the details now, the maximum formal offer was by Ehud Omar in 2008. He offered 5,000 refugees could return under what was called family reunification, 5,000

in the course of five years and no recognition of any Israeli responsibility. So if you use as the baseline what the UN General Assembly has said and what the International Court of Justice has said, if you use that baseline international law, by that baseline, all the concessions came from the Palestinian side. Every single concession came from the Palestinian side.

in the course of five years and no recognition of any Israeli responsibility. So if you use as the baseline what the UN General Assembly has said and what the International Court of Justice has said, if you use that baseline international law, by that baseline, all the concessions came from the Palestinian side. Every single concession came from the Palestinian side.

None came from the Israeli side. They may have accepted less than what they wanted, but it was still beyond what international law allocated to them.

None came from the Israeli side. They may have accepted less than what they wanted, but it was still beyond what international law allocated to them.

Allocated to the Palestinians, yes. Thank you for the clarification. Now, about Arafat. Liked the mufti, never liked the guy. I think that was one of the only disagreements Muin and I had when Arafat passed. You were a little sentimental, I was not. Never liked the guy. But politics, you don't have to like the guy.

Allocated to the Palestinians, yes. Thank you for the clarification. Now, about Arafat. Liked the mufti, never liked the guy. I think that was one of the only disagreements Muin and I had when Arafat passed. You were a little sentimental, I was not. Never liked the guy. But politics, you don't have to like the guy.

There was no question, nobody argues it, that whenever the negotiations started up, the Palestinians just kept saying the same things. No. No. They kept saying no. No. Professor Morris, with due respect, incorrect. They kept saying international legitimacy, international law, UN resolutions. They said, we already gave you what the law required.

There was no question, nobody argues it, that whenever the negotiations started up, the Palestinians just kept saying the same things. No. No. They kept saying no. No. Professor Morris, with due respect, incorrect. They kept saying international legitimacy, international law, UN resolutions. They said, we already gave you what the law required.

We gave that in 1988, November 1988, and then ratified again at Oslo in 1993. And they said, now we want what was promised us under international law. And that was the one point where everybody on the other side agreed. Clinton, don't talk to me about international law. Livni during the Omar administration. She said, I studied international law. I don't believe in international law.

We gave that in 1988, November 1988, and then ratified again at Oslo in 1993. And they said, now we want what was promised us under international law. And that was the one point where everybody on the other side agreed. Clinton, don't talk to me about international law. Livni during the Omar administration. She said, I studied international law. I don't believe in international law.

Every single member on the other side, they didn't want to hear from international law. And to my thinking, that that is the only reasonable baseline for trying to resolve the conflict.

Every single member on the other side, they didn't want to hear from international law. And to my thinking, that that is the only reasonable baseline for trying to resolve the conflict.

That's why the Palestinians have to recognize Israel, because that's international law. But international law is meaningless. That was UN Resolution 242.

That's why the Palestinians have to recognize Israel, because that's international law. But international law is meaningless. That was UN Resolution 242.

Professor Morris, for argument's sake—let's agree on that, strictly for argument's sake—what's the alternative? Dennis Ross said, we're going to decide who gets what on the basis of needs. So he says, Israel needs this, Israel needs that, Israel needs that. Dennis Ross decided to be the philosopher king. He's going to decide on the basis of needs.

Professor Morris, for argument's sake—let's agree on that, strictly for argument's sake—what's the alternative? Dennis Ross said, we're going to decide who gets what on the basis of needs. So he says, Israel needs this, Israel needs that, Israel needs that. Dennis Ross decided to be the philosopher king. He's going to decide on the basis of needs.

Well, if you asked me, since Gaza is one of the densest places on earth, it needs a good chunk.

Well, if you asked me, since Gaza is one of the densest places on earth, it needs a good chunk.

It needs a nice big chunk. Of Sinai. That's what it actually needs. Okay, I don't even want to go there. It needs a nice big chunk, but I have to accept international law says no. International law is irrelevant. Now, Benjamin says, I think the Israeli offer was reasonable. And he's a reasonable guy. You know that. Okay, I know I'm going to go there. I've debated him, and partly I agree with you.

It needs a nice big chunk. Of Sinai. That's what it actually needs. Okay, I don't even want to go there. It needs a nice big chunk, but I have to accept international law says no. International law is irrelevant. Now, Benjamin says, I think the Israeli offer was reasonable. And he's a reasonable guy. You know that. Okay, I know I'm going to go there. I've debated him, and partly I agree with you.

But who decides what's reasonable? I think the international community in its political incarnation, the General Assembly, the Security Council, all those UN Security Council resolutions saying the settlements are illegal, annexation of East Jerusalem is null and void. and the International Court of Justice. That to me is a reasonable standard.

But who decides what's reasonable? I think the international community in its political incarnation, the General Assembly, the Security Council, all those UN Security Council resolutions saying the settlements are illegal, annexation of East Jerusalem is null and void. and the International Court of Justice. That to me is a reasonable standard.

And by that standard, the Palestinians were asked to make concessions, which I consider unreasonable, or the international community considers unreasonable.

And by that standard, the Palestinians were asked to make concessions, which I consider unreasonable, or the international community considers unreasonable.

Half a million people are- Jerusalem, not settlements. I know that, but that's not what the law. The law calls it null and void.

Half a million people are- Jerusalem, not settlements. I know that, but that's not what the law. The law calls it null and void.

Muin has an interesting point. I know you want to forget it, just like you want to forget the genocide charge. I know you want to forget that.

Muin has an interesting point. I know you want to forget it, just like you want to forget the genocide charge. I know you want to forget that.

But here's the problem, and it's exactly the problem that Muin just brought up. Now, I read carefully your book, One State, Two States. With all due respect, absolutely a disgrace. Coming from you, coming from you. Most reviewers didn't agree with you. Yeah. Coming from you was like you wrote it in your sleep. It's nothing compared to what you wrote before. I don't know why you did it.

But here's the problem, and it's exactly the problem that Muin just brought up. Now, I read carefully your book, One State, Two States. With all due respect, absolutely a disgrace. Coming from you, coming from you. Most reviewers didn't agree with you. Yeah. Coming from you was like you wrote it in your sleep. It's nothing compared to what you wrote before. I don't know why you did it.

In my opinion, you ruined your reputation. Not totally, but you undermined it with that book. But let's get to the issue that Muin wrote. Here's what you said. You said formally, you said, yes, it's true. The Palestinians recognize Israel. But then you said viscerally in their hearts, they didn't really recognize Israel.

In my opinion, you ruined your reputation. Not totally, but you undermined it with that book. But let's get to the issue that Muin wrote. Here's what you said. You said formally, you said, yes, it's true. The Palestinians recognize Israel. But then you said viscerally in their hearts, they didn't really recognize Israel.

So I thought to myself, how does Professor Morrison know what's in the hearts of Palestinians? I don't know. I was surprised as a historian you would be talking about what's lurking in the hearts of Palestinians. But then you said something which was really interesting.

So I thought to myself, how does Professor Morrison know what's in the hearts of Palestinians? I don't know. I was surprised as a historian you would be talking about what's lurking in the hearts of Palestinians. But then you said something which was really interesting.

You said, even if in their hearts they accepted Israel, you said, quote, rationally, they could never accept Israel because they got nothing. They had this beautiful Palestine, and now they're reduced to just a few pieces, a few parcels of land. So they will never accept it. Yes. This is true. There's no way they can accept it.

You said, even if in their hearts they accepted Israel, you said, quote, rationally, they could never accept Israel because they got nothing. They had this beautiful Palestine, and now they're reduced to just a few pieces, a few parcels of land. So they will never accept it. Yes. This is true. There's no way they can accept it.

The two-state solution, as proposed, doesn't make any sense. Exactly as Muin said, you keep moving the goalposts until we reach the point where we realize, according to Benny Morris, there can't be a solution. So why don't you just say that outright? Why don't you say it outright? According to you, the Palestinians can never be reasonable. Because according to you... They want all of Palestine.

The two-state solution, as proposed, doesn't make any sense. Exactly as Muin said, you keep moving the goalposts until we reach the point where we realize, according to Benny Morris, there can't be a solution. So why don't you just say that outright? Why don't you say it outright? According to you, the Palestinians can never be reasonable. Because according to you... They want all of Palestine.

According to you, they couldn't possibly agree to a two-state settlement because it's such a lousy settlement. Because they want all of Palestine. But you said rationally they couldn't accept it. Not their feelings. It's voting. You said rational. You went from formally, viscerally, rationally. So now we're reaching the point where, according to Benny Morris...

According to you, they couldn't possibly agree to a two-state settlement because it's such a lousy settlement. Because they want all of Palestine. But you said rationally they couldn't accept it. Not their feelings. It's voting. You said rational. You went from formally, viscerally, rationally. So now we're reaching the point where, according to Benny Morris...

The Palestinians can't be reasonable because reasonably they have to reject two states. They want all of Palestine. Nui is absolutely correct. There's no way to resolve the problem according to your logic.

The Palestinians can't be reasonable because reasonably they have to reject two states. They want all of Palestine. Nui is absolutely correct. There's no way to resolve the problem according to your logic.

That's what he's saying.

That's what he's saying.

I'm glad you didn't deny it.

I'm glad you didn't deny it.

I think it was nine to five.

I think it was nine to five.

He should have done that. International law would put a real constraint on him. Once he accepted, it was over.

He should have done that. International law would put a real constraint on him. Once he accepted, it was over.

Just as a factual matter, he wasn't such a stickler. when they asked him how many refugees, the numbers... It was the principle rather than the numbers. The principle. He said I would be pragmatic about it. Yes, and the numbers that were used at Annapolis... were between 100 and 250,000 refugees over 10 years. That was the number.

Just as a factual matter, he wasn't such a stickler. when they asked him how many refugees, the numbers... It was the principle rather than the numbers. The principle. He said I would be pragmatic about it. Yes, and the numbers that were used at Annapolis... were between 100 and 250,000 refugees over 10 years. That was the number.

Arafat, when he was asked at Camp David, he kept saying, I care about the Lebanese, the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, which came to about 300,000.

Arafat, when he was asked at Camp David, he kept saying, I care about the Lebanese, the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, which came to about 300,000.

which was a large concession from, whether you accept the number or not, that he wasn't talking about 6 million. He was talking about between 100 and 250,000 over 10 years. Now, the best offer that came from the Palestinians, excuse me, the best offer that came from Israel was the Olmert offer.

which was a large concession from, whether you accept the number or not, that he wasn't talking about 6 million. He was talking about between 100 and 250,000 over 10 years. Now, the best offer that came from the Palestinians, excuse me, the best offer that came from Israel was the Olmert offer.

What is binding? Do you know anything about how the UN system works?

What is binding? Do you know anything about how the UN system works?

You just throw out words. You hear binding. Does 242 mention a Palestinian state? No, of course not. That's part of the problem. That was the reason why the Palestinians didn't want to recognize 242, because they're only referred at the very end.

You just throw out words. You hear binding. Does 242 mention a Palestinian state? No, of course not. That's part of the problem. That was the reason why the Palestinians didn't want to recognize 242, because they're only referred at the very end.

Allow me points of information. The first principle in UN Resolution 242 is that the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force.

Allow me points of information. The first principle in UN Resolution 242 is that the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force.

It may be meaningless to you, Mr. Brunel. It was meaningless to everyone in the region. Mr. Brunel, That principle was adopted by the Friendly Nations Resolution, the UN General Assembly in 1970. That resolution was then reiterated in the International Court of Justice ruling advisory opinion in 2004.

It may be meaningless to you, Mr. Brunel. It was meaningless to everyone in the region. Mr. Brunel, That principle was adopted by the Friendly Nations Resolution, the UN General Assembly in 1970. That resolution was then reiterated in the International Court of Justice ruling advisory opinion in 2004.

That was the basis of the coalition against Iraq when it acquired Kuwait and then declared it a province of Kuwait, which supported. That's what's cool. That's what I did. I'm not going to go there. I'm not going to go there. It's not accurate that Arafat endorsed. OK, I'm not going to go there. OK.

That was the basis of the coalition against Iraq when it acquired Kuwait and then declared it a province of Kuwait, which supported. That's what's cool. That's what I did. I'm not going to go there. I'm not going to go there. It's not accurate that Arafat endorsed. OK, I'm not going to go there. OK.

It's called under international law, use Kogan's or peremptory norms of international law, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. That is not controversial. It's not vague. You couldn't put it more succinctly. You cannot acquire territory by force under international law. On the West Bank before 67. Who opened the Gaza Strip before 67?

It's called under international law, use Kogan's or peremptory norms of international law, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. That is not controversial. It's not vague. You couldn't put it more succinctly. You cannot acquire territory by force under international law. On the West Bank before 67. Who opened the Gaza Strip before 67?

But now, don't change the subject. If you don't know what you're talking about, at least have the humility. You talk about Chapter 6. You don't know Chapter 6 from Tweet 5. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's just so embarrassing. At least have some humility.

But now, don't change the subject. If you don't know what you're talking about, at least have the humility. You talk about Chapter 6. You don't know Chapter 6 from Tweet 5. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's just so embarrassing. At least have some humility.

Between us, we've read maybe 10,000 books on the topic and you've read two Wikipedia entries and you start talking about chapter six. Do you know what chapter seven is? You know what chapter seven is?

Between us, we've read maybe 10,000 books on the topic and you've read two Wikipedia entries and you start talking about chapter six. Do you know what chapter seven is? You know what chapter seven is?

Because they haven't been enforced because of the U.S. veto.

Because they haven't been enforced because of the U.S. veto.

Wait, wait, wait. Okay. If I may. You know what, Professor Morris? Professor Morris, because of your logic, and I'm not disputing it, That's why October 7th happened. Oh, my God. Because there was no options left for those people. Exactly what Muin said.

Wait, wait, wait. Okay. If I may. You know what, Professor Morris? Professor Morris, because of your logic, and I'm not disputing it, That's why October 7th happened. Oh, my God. Because there was no options left for those people. Exactly what Muin said.

What's the option for? Oh, listen to this. Mr. Cornell is now an expert on Palestinian mentality. You're contradicting yourself. I only deal with the facts. I only deal with the facts. Egypt did not.

What's the option for? Oh, listen to this. Mr. Cornell is now an expert on Palestinian mentality. You're contradicting yourself. I only deal with the facts. I only deal with the facts. Egypt did not.

They accepted two states in 1975.

They accepted two states in 1975.

With all due respect.

With all due respect.

I just said there are 15,000 pages on Annapolis.

I just said there are 15,000 pages on Annapolis.

That's great. At least I had a quote to cherry-pick.

That's great. At least I had a quote to cherry-pick.

No, all of Palestine?

No, all of Palestine?

Could you show me Professor Morris? In all the negotiations, all the negotiations and all the accounts that have been written, can you show me one? where the Palestinians in the negotiations, because that's what we were talking about, wanted all of Israel. The maximum- They can't say that because the international community won't accept it.

Could you show me Professor Morris? In all the negotiations, all the negotiations and all the accounts that have been written, can you show me one? where the Palestinians in the negotiations, because that's what we were talking about, wanted all of Israel. The maximum- They can't say that because the international community won't accept it.

No, I know, but they represent a lot of the Palestinian people, you will agree. The only place I saw pieces of Israel were the land swaps. And the land swaps accounted for about two to five percent of Israel. Nobody asked for all of Israel.

No, I know, but they represent a lot of the Palestinian people, you will agree. The only place I saw pieces of Israel were the land swaps. And the land swaps accounted for about two to five percent of Israel. Nobody asked for all of Israel.

OK, Mr. Bonnell. We were talking about the diplomatic negotiations. beginning with 2000, 2001.

OK, Mr. Bonnell. We were talking about the diplomatic negotiations. beginning with 2000, 2001.

What was the terms of that Egypt-Israel peace treaty? International law. Egypt demanded every... Nobody cared about international law. Allow me to finish. Every single inch of Egyptian... Nobody talked about international law. Begin and Carter and Sadat talked about the reality of Israel occupying territory. Professor Morris, I know the record.

What was the terms of that Egypt-Israel peace treaty? International law. Egypt demanded every... Nobody cared about international law. Allow me to finish. Every single inch of Egyptian... Nobody talked about international law. Begin and Carter and Sadat talked about the reality of Israel occupying territory. Professor Morris, I know the record.

They demanded, as you know, because you've written about it, they demanded every square inch. As you know, they demanded the oil fields be dismantled. No, that's in the... The air fields be dismantled. No, not dismantled. They wanted the oil fields. And they wanted the settlements dismantled. They wanted the settlements dismantled. The settlements, the oil fields, and the air field.

They demanded, as you know, because you've written about it, they demanded every square inch. As you know, they demanded the oil fields be dismantled. No, that's in the... The air fields be dismantled. No, not dismantled. They wanted the oil fields. And they wanted the settlements dismantled. They wanted the settlements dismantled. The settlements, the oil fields, and the air field.

They demanded all three back. You can't have... What do you mean back? The air fields weren't there. Okay, that's incorrect. You're incorrect. They built an airfield. The Israelis built an airfield in the occupied Sinai. And they wanted it back. They didn't want it back. It wasn't theirs. They wanted the territory in which Israel had built back.

They demanded all three back. You can't have... What do you mean back? The air fields weren't there. Okay, that's incorrect. You're incorrect. They built an airfield. The Israelis built an airfield in the occupied Sinai. And they wanted it back. They didn't want it back. It wasn't theirs. They wanted the territory in which Israel had built back.

The oil fields, the airfields, the settlements have to be dismantled. Yes. Begin said, I don't want to be the first prime minister to dismantle a settlement. But he did. Why? Because of the law. No. No. It's because of. The law had nothing to do with anything.

The oil fields, the airfields, the settlements have to be dismantled. Yes. Begin said, I don't want to be the first prime minister to dismantle a settlement. But he did. Why? Because of the law. No. No. It's because of. The law had nothing to do with anything.

The law had nothing to do with anything. You're not listening. I've read the negotiations. There are two foreign relations of U.S. volumes on it. Nobody cares about the law. Forget the Palestinians. They weren't there. Allow me to finish. The Palestinians kept saying, we want what Egypt got. We want what Egypt got. Egypt got everything back. But nothing to do with the law. Okay.

The law had nothing to do with anything. You're not listening. I've read the negotiations. There are two foreign relations of U.S. volumes on it. Nobody cares about the law. Forget the Palestinians. They weren't there. Allow me to finish. The Palestinians kept saying, we want what Egypt got. We want what Egypt got. Egypt got everything back. But nothing to do with the law. Okay.

And number two, I'm not saying it's the whole picture, but as Foreign Minister Moishe Dayan said at the time, he said, if a car has four wheels... and you remove one wheel, the car can't move. And for them, removing Egypt from the Arab front would then remove any Arab military threat to Israel. No, the first part did. And that's what the Palestinians kept saying.

And number two, I'm not saying it's the whole picture, but as Foreign Minister Moishe Dayan said at the time, he said, if a car has four wheels... and you remove one wheel, the car can't move. And for them, removing Egypt from the Arab front would then remove any Arab military threat to Israel. No, the first part did. And that's what the Palestinians kept saying.

We want what Egypt got from the settlement.

We want what Egypt got from the settlement.

And by the way, one last thing, one last, on a personal note. The quote about Sharm el-Sheikh without peace, okay. That's the only thing you ever cited from a book of mine. I cited from your book? Yes. I was absolutely shocked at your betrayal of your people. That was pure treason. I apologize for that. I apologize. I accept.

And by the way, one last thing, one last, on a personal note. The quote about Sharm el-Sheikh without peace, okay. That's the only thing you ever cited from a book of mine. I cited from your book? Yes. I was absolutely shocked at your betrayal of your people. That was pure treason. I apologize for that. I apologize. I accept.

Yes, I think so.

Yes, I think so.

There is no hope, no. It's an extreme... No, I'm... Hey! I'm not happy to say that. Of course you are. It's a... It's a very bleak moment right now. Because... That I agree with. I agree with that. Israel believes... It has to restore what it calls its deterrence capability. I think you've written about it, actually. I just realized. Israel has to restore its deterrence capability.

There is no hope, no. It's an extreme... No, I'm... Hey! I'm not happy to say that. Of course you are. It's a... It's a very bleak moment right now. Because... That I agree with. I agree with that. Israel believes... It has to restore what it calls its deterrence capability. I think you've written about it, actually. I just realized. Israel has to restore its deterrence capability.

And after the catastrophe of October 7th, restoring its deterrence capacity means this part you didn't write about, the annihilation of Gaza and then moving on to the Hezbollah. So the Israelis are... dead set on restoring that deterrence capability.

And after the catastrophe of October 7th, restoring its deterrence capacity means this part you didn't write about, the annihilation of Gaza and then moving on to the Hezbollah. So the Israelis are... dead set on restoring that deterrence capability.

On the Arab side, and I know Muin and I have disagreed on it, and we're allowed to disagree, I think the Arab side, the lesson they learned from October 7th is Israelis aren't as strong as we thought they were. That would be an unfortunate message if that's really what the Arabs come to believe. And they think that there is a military option now.

On the Arab side, and I know Muin and I have disagreed on it, and we're allowed to disagree, I think the Arab side, the lesson they learned from October 7th is Israelis aren't as strong as we thought they were. That would be an unfortunate message if that's really what the Arabs come to believe. And they think that there is a military option now.

And I think that it's a zero-sum game at this point. And it's very, very bleak. And I'm not going to lie about that. Now, I will admit my... predictive capacities are not perfect, are limited. But for the moment, it's a very bleak situation. And I don't see right now a way out. However, at the very minimum, Permanent ceasefire and the inhuman and illegal blockade of Gaza. Why is it illegal?

And I think that it's a zero-sum game at this point. And it's very, very bleak. And I'm not going to lie about that. Now, I will admit my... predictive capacities are not perfect, are limited. But for the moment, it's a very bleak situation. And I don't see right now a way out. However, at the very minimum, Permanent ceasefire and the inhuman and illegal blockade of Gaza. Why is it illegal?

Why is it illegal? I'll tell you why. You don't rocket your neighbor. You rocket your neighbor. Expect consequences. I'll tell you why. Expect consequences. But that works both ways. I know. Professor Morris, I'll tell you why.

Why is it illegal? I'll tell you why. You don't rocket your neighbor. You rocket your neighbor. Expect consequences. I'll tell you why. Expect consequences. But that works both ways. I know. Professor Morris, I'll tell you why.

Because every human rights humanitarian and UN organization in the world has said that the blockade is a form of collective punishment which is illegal under international law. You think a blockade... You don't understand the way the world works. These things are irrelevant. And you think confining... Because that's the blockade. Confining a million children. That's the choice of Hamas.

Because every human rights humanitarian and UN organization in the world has said that the blockade is a form of collective punishment which is illegal under international law. You think a blockade... You don't understand the way the world works. These things are irrelevant. And you think confining... Because that's the blockade. Confining a million children. That's the choice of Hamas.

Confining a million children in what the economists called a human rubbish sheep.

Confining a million children in what the economists called a human rubbish sheep.

What International Committee of the Red Cross called a sinking ship what the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called a toxic slum. You think- It is a slum, of course it's a slum. You think- But it's caused by the commas. Under international law, you think it's legitimate- Forget the law. Hey. I know you want to forget the law. What about morality? It's what every Israeli fears the most.

What International Committee of the Red Cross called a sinking ship what the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called a toxic slum. You think- It is a slum, of course it's a slum. You think- But it's caused by the commas. Under international law, you think it's legitimate- Forget the law. Hey. I know you want to forget the law. What about morality? It's what every Israeli fears the most.

What? The law. No, no, no. As Sippy Litney said, I studied international law. I oppose international law. Of course you don't want to hear about the law. Then it's got nothing to do with anything. Okay, so here's the thing.

What? The law. No, no, no. As Sippy Litney said, I studied international law. I oppose international law. Of course you don't want to hear about the law. Then it's got nothing to do with anything. Okay, so here's the thing.

Then don't complain about October 7th. If you want to say, forget about the law, then there is no international humanitarian law. There's no distinction between civilians and combatants. There should be. Now you're doing what Muin said. You're becoming very selective about the law. If you want to forget about the law, Hamas had every right to do what it did.

Then don't complain about October 7th. If you want to say, forget about the law, then there is no international humanitarian law. There's no distinction between civilians and combatants. There should be. Now you're doing what Muin said. You're becoming very selective about the law. If you want to forget about the law, Hamas had every right to do what it did.

It had every right to do what it did, according to you, not to me, because you want to forget the law.

It had every right to do what it did, according to you, not to me, because you want to forget the law.

Absolutely. And were there a power during World War II who had the courage of the Houthis, were there a power... to have that kind of courage.

Absolutely. And were there a power during World War II who had the courage of the Houthis, were there a power... to have that kind of courage.

I'm very happy they're helping out the Palestinians. It's at the expense of the Yemenis. They'll pay for it. Anybody who comes to the aid of those suffering the genocide, half of whom are children, according to the most current UN reports as of today, One quarter of the population of Gaza is starving. That means 500,000 children are starving, are on the verge of famine.

I'm very happy they're helping out the Palestinians. It's at the expense of the Yemenis. They'll pay for it. Anybody who comes to the aid of those suffering the genocide, half of whom are children, according to the most current UN reports as of today, One quarter of the population of Gaza is starving. That means 500,000 children are starving, are on the verge of famine.

They keep saying on the verge.

They keep saying on the verge.

I think, excuse me, Human Rights Watch called it using starvation as a weapon. That's called engineering.

I think, excuse me, Human Rights Watch called it using starvation as a weapon. That's called engineering.

I'm happy to answer it. I just called you from the humanitarian organizations. They said one quarter of the population of Gaza is now verging on famine. Before October 7th. I'm not going before October 7th.

I'm happy to answer it. I just called you from the humanitarian organizations. They said one quarter of the population of Gaza is now verging on famine. Before October 7th. I'm not going before October 7th.

There were about five, six, or seven reports... issued by UNCTAD, issued by the World Bank, issued by the International Monetary Fund. And they all said, that's why. That's why. Why did they say why? Why did they say that? That's why The Economist, not a radical periodical, described Gaza as a human rubbish. So tell me by what metrics?

There were about five, six, or seven reports... issued by UNCTAD, issued by the World Bank, issued by the International Monetary Fund. And they all said, that's why. That's why. Why did they say why? Why did they say that? That's why The Economist, not a radical periodical, described Gaza as a human rubbish. So tell me by what metrics?

I don't think I've avoided any of your questions, except when they breached the threshold of complete imbecility. You're about to tell me by what metric the Gaza Strip is a humanitarian crisis. You remember what I said a moment ago? I said to Professor Morris, I defer to expertise. I look at what the organizations say.

I don't think I've avoided any of your questions, except when they breached the threshold of complete imbecility. You're about to tell me by what metric the Gaza Strip is a humanitarian crisis. You remember what I said a moment ago? I said to Professor Morris, I defer to expertise. I look at what the organizations say.

I look at what the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights- The same one word that you don't know.

I look at what the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights- The same one word that you don't know.

You know how complicated, have you ever investigated how complicated is the metric for hunger, starvation, and famine? It is such a complicated metric they figured out. If you asked me to repeat it now, I couldn't do it.

You know how complicated, have you ever investigated how complicated is the metric for hunger, starvation, and famine? It is such a complicated metric they figured out. If you asked me to repeat it now, I couldn't do it.

They start complete ignorance because we don't know. Professor Morris doesn't know. Muin Rabbani doesn't know.

They start complete ignorance because we don't know. Professor Morris doesn't know. Muin Rabbani doesn't know.

It was a rhetorical question. Obviously you don't. You know why? Because I looked at the UN report. The Goldstone report? No, the UN report on the Great March of Return in 2018. And they said that the snipers were targeting children, medics, journalists and disabled people.

It was a rhetorical question. Obviously you don't. You know why? Because I looked at the UN report. The Goldstone report? No, the UN report on the Great March of Return in 2018. And they said that the snipers were targeting children, medics, journalists and disabled people.

It's so boring. Virtue signaling. It is virtue signaling. When you say children over and over again, that's virtue signaling. You have this habit of mocking the dead. That's not virtue signaling because that's human life.

It's so boring. Virtue signaling. It is virtue signaling. When you say children over and over again, that's virtue signaling. You have this habit of mocking the dead. That's not virtue signaling because that's human life.

I don't care if a hundred are killed or a thousand are killed. I'm curious who you're assigning blame to. I'm curious who you're assigning the question. That's not the number. That's the responsibility norm. Muin mentions that more journalists were killed in Gaza than in all of World War II. That doesn't get it. That doesn't further any part of the conversation.

I don't care if a hundred are killed or a thousand are killed. I'm curious who you're assigning blame to. I'm curious who you're assigning the question. That's not the number. That's the responsibility norm. Muin mentions that more journalists were killed in Gaza than in all of World War II. That doesn't get it. That doesn't further any part of the conversation.

And more medics were killed in Gaza. No, no, that's silly. And then he says it's virtue signaling. But when Israelis get killed, that's serious. I never said it's serious on both sides.

And more medics were killed in Gaza. No, no, that's silly. And then he says it's virtue signaling. But when Israelis get killed, that's serious. I never said it's serious on both sides.

I think it's a reasonable assumption. Perhaps it is. You're not the best person to be asking that question. You know, I read when you described Operation Defensive Shield. And you said a few dozen homes were destroyed. You're talking about what happened in the Jenin refugee camp.

I think it's a reasonable assumption. Perhaps it is. You're not the best person to be asking that question. You know, I read when you described Operation Defensive Shield. And you said a few dozen homes were destroyed. You're talking about what happened in the Jenin refugee camp.

How many were killed? You described it, no, I'm talking about homes destroyed. So you're not the best person to be criticizing what Muin says when he says clear majority, but he can't say more. You know why he can't say more? He doesn't know. He doesn't know. Yeah, yeah, I understand that.

How many were killed? You described it, no, I'm talking about homes destroyed. So you're not the best person to be criticizing what Muin says when he says clear majority, but he can't say more. You know why he can't say more? He doesn't know. He doesn't know. Yeah, yeah, I understand that.

I think there's a value to preserving the record. I'm not optimistic about where things are going to end up. There was a very nice book written by a woman named Helen Hunt Jackson at the end of the 19th century describing what was done to the Native Americans. She called it a century of dishonor, and she described in vivid, poignant detail what was done to the Native Americans. Did it save them?

I think there's a value to preserving the record. I'm not optimistic about where things are going to end up. There was a very nice book written by a woman named Helen Hunt Jackson at the end of the 19th century describing what was done to the Native Americans. She called it a century of dishonor, and she described in vivid, poignant detail what was done to the Native Americans. Did it save them?

No. Did it help them? Probably not. Did it preserve their memory? Yes, and I think there's a value to that. There was a famous film by Sergei Eisenstein. It was either Battleship Potemkin or Mother. I can't remember which one. The last scene was... The Tsar's troops mowing down all the Russian people. He pans the scene. Not all the Russian people. He pans the massacre. He pans the massacre.

No. Did it help them? Probably not. Did it preserve their memory? Yes, and I think there's a value to that. There was a famous film by Sergei Eisenstein. It was either Battleship Potemkin or Mother. I can't remember which one. The last scene was... The Tsar's troops mowing down all the Russian people. He pans the scene. Not all the Russian people. He pans the massacre. He pans the massacre.

And the last words of the movie were, proletarians, exclamation point, remember, exclamation point. And I've seen it as my life's work to preserve the memory and to remember. I didn't expect that anyone would read my book on Gaza. It's very dense. It gives me even a bit of a headache to read at least one of the chapters. You wrote a book on Gaza.

And the last words of the movie were, proletarians, exclamation point, remember, exclamation point. And I've seen it as my life's work to preserve the memory and to remember. I didn't expect that anyone would read my book on Gaza. It's very dense. It gives me even a bit of a headache to read at least one of the chapters. You wrote a book on Gaza.

But I thought that the memory deserves to be preserved. Amen.

But I thought that the memory deserves to be preserved. Amen.

I would like to engage Professor Morris. If you don't mind, I'm not with the first name. It's just not my way of relating. You can just call me Morris. You don't need the professor. Okay. There's a real problem here, and it's been a problem I've had over many years of reading your work, apart perhaps from as grandchild, I suspect nobody knows your work better than I do.

I would like to engage Professor Morris. If you don't mind, I'm not with the first name. It's just not my way of relating. You can just call me Morris. You don't need the professor. Okay. There's a real problem here, and it's been a problem I've had over many years of reading your work, apart perhaps from as grandchild, I suspect nobody knows your work better than I do.

I've read it many times, not once, not twice, at least three times, everything you've written. And the problem is it's a kind of quicksilver. It's very hard to grasp a point and hold you to it. So we're going to try here to see whether we can hold you to a point. And then you argue with me the point. I have no problem with that. Your name, please?

I've read it many times, not once, not twice, at least three times, everything you've written. And the problem is it's a kind of quicksilver. It's very hard to grasp a point and hold you to it. So we're going to try here to see whether we can hold you to a point. And then you argue with me the point. I have no problem with that. Your name, please?

Okay. Mr. Bonnell referred to cherry-picking and handful of quotes. Now, it's true that when you wrote your first book on the Palestinian refugee question, You only had a few lines on this issue of transfer. Four pages. In the first book. In the first book, four pages. Maybe four. You know, I'm not going to quarrel. My memory is not clear. We're talking about 40 years ago.

Okay. Mr. Bonnell referred to cherry-picking and handful of quotes. Now, it's true that when you wrote your first book on the Palestinian refugee question, You only had a few lines on this issue of transfer. Four pages. In the first book. In the first book, four pages. Maybe four. You know, I'm not going to quarrel. My memory is not clear. We're talking about 40 years ago.

I read it, I read it, but then I read other things by you. Okay. And you were taken to task, if my memory is correct, that you hadn't adequately documented the claims of transfer. Allow me to finish.

I read it, I read it, but then I read other things by you. Okay. And you were taken to task, if my memory is correct, that you hadn't adequately documented the claims of transfer. Allow me to finish.

And I thought that was a reasonable challenge because it was an unusual claim for a mainstream Israeli historian to say, as you did in that first book, that from the very beginning, transfer figured prominently in Zionist thinking. That was an unusual, if you read Anita Shapiro, you read Shabtai Tevit, that was an unusual acknowledgement by you. And then,

And I thought that was a reasonable challenge because it was an unusual claim for a mainstream Israeli historian to say, as you did in that first book, that from the very beginning, transfer figured prominently in Zionist thinking. That was an unusual, if you read Anita Shapiro, you read Shabtai Tevit, that was an unusual acknowledgement by you. And then,

I found it very impressive that in that revised version of your first book, you devoted 25 pages to copiously documenting the salience of transfer in Zionist thinking. And in fact, you used a very provocative and resonant phrase. You said that transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. We're not talking about circumstantial factors, a war, Arab hostility.

I found it very impressive that in that revised version of your first book, you devoted 25 pages to copiously documenting the salience of transfer in Zionist thinking. And in fact, you used a very provocative and resonant phrase. You said that transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. We're not talking about circumstantial factors, a war, Arab hostility.

You said it's inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. Now, as I said, so we won't be accused of cherry picking, those were 25 very densely argued pages. And then in an interview, and I could cite several quotes, but I'll choose one, you said, removing a population was needed. Let's look at the words. Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established.

You said it's inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. Now, as I said, so we won't be accused of cherry picking, those were 25 very densely argued pages. And then in an interview, and I could cite several quotes, but I'll choose one, you said, removing a population was needed. Let's look at the words. Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established.

Now, you're the one, again, I was very surprised when I read your book. Here I'm referring to righteous victims. I was very surprised when I came to that page 37. where you wrote that territorial displacement and dispossession was the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. Territorial displacement and dispossession were the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. So you then went on to say

Now, you're the one, again, I was very surprised when I read your book. Here I'm referring to righteous victims. I was very surprised when I came to that page 37. where you wrote that territorial displacement and dispossession was the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. Territorial displacement and dispossession were the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. So you then went on to say

because the Arab population rationally feared territorial displacement and dispossession, it of course opposed Zionism. That's as normal as Native Americans opposing the Euro-American manifest destiny in the history of our own country, because they understood it would be at their expense It was inbuilt and inevitable.

because the Arab population rationally feared territorial displacement and dispossession, it of course opposed Zionism. That's as normal as Native Americans opposing the Euro-American manifest destiny in the history of our own country, because they understood it would be at their expense It was inbuilt and inevitable.

And so now for you to come along and say that it all happened just because of the war, that otherwise the Zionists made all these plans for a happy minority to live there, That simply does not gel. It does not cohere. It is not reconcilable with what you yourself have written. It was inevitable and inbuilt. Now, in other situations you've said, that's true, but I think it was a greater good.

And so now for you to come along and say that it all happened just because of the war, that otherwise the Zionists made all these plans for a happy minority to live there, That simply does not gel. It does not cohere. It is not reconcilable with what you yourself have written. It was inevitable and inbuilt. Now, in other situations you've said, that's true, but I think it was a greater good.

to establish a Jewish state at the expense of the indigenous population. That's another kind of argument. That was Theodore Roosevelt's argument in our own country. He said, we don't want the whole of North America to remain a squalid refuge for these wigwams and teepees. We have to get rid of them and make this a great country. But he didn't deny it. that it was inbuilt and inevitable.

to establish a Jewish state at the expense of the indigenous population. That's another kind of argument. That was Theodore Roosevelt's argument in our own country. He said, we don't want the whole of North America to remain a squalid refuge for these wigwams and teepees. We have to get rid of them and make this a great country. But he didn't deny it. that it was inbuilt and inevitable.

There's some misunderstandings here. So let's try to clarify that. Number one, it was the old historians who would point to the fact, in Professor Morris's terminology, the old historians, what he called not real historians, he called them chroniclers, not real historians. It was the old Israeli historians who denied the centrality of transfer in Zionist thinking.

There's some misunderstandings here. So let's try to clarify that. Number one, it was the old historians who would point to the fact, in Professor Morris's terminology, the old historians, what he called not real historians, he called them chroniclers, not real historians. It was the old Israeli historians who denied the centrality of transfer in Zionist thinking.

It was then Professor Morris who, contrary to Israel's historian establishment, who said, now you remind me it's four pages, but it came at the end of the book. It was- No, no, it's at the beginning of the book. Transfer. Yes, transfer is dealt with in four pages at the beginning of my first book on the Palestinian refugee problem. It's a fault of my memory, but the point still stands.

It was then Professor Morris who, contrary to Israel's historian establishment, who said, now you remind me it's four pages, but it came at the end of the book. It was- No, no, it's at the beginning of the book. Transfer. Yes, transfer is dealt with in four pages at the beginning of my first book on the Palestinian refugee problem. It's a fault of my memory, but the point still stands.

It was Professor Morris who introduced this idea in what you might call a big way.

It was Professor Morris who introduced this idea in what you might call a big way.

I'm not quoting a part, I'm quoting 25 pages where Professor Morris was at great pains to document the claim that appeared in those early four pages of his book. You say it never became part of the official Zionist platform. It never became part of policy.

I'm not quoting a part, I'm quoting 25 pages where Professor Morris was at great pains to document the claim that appeared in those early four pages of his book. You say it never became part of the official Zionist platform. It never became part of policy.

We're also asked, well, if this is true, why did that happen? Why did that happen? It's because it's a very simple fact, which everybody understands. Ideology doesn't operate in a vacuum. There are real-world practical problems. You can't just take an ideology and superimpose it on a political reality and turn it into a fact. It was the British mandate.

We're also asked, well, if this is true, why did that happen? Why did that happen? It's because it's a very simple fact, which everybody understands. Ideology doesn't operate in a vacuum. There are real-world practical problems. You can't just take an ideology and superimpose it on a political reality and turn it into a fact. It was the British mandate.

There was significant Arab resistance to Zionism. and that resistance was based on the fact, as you said, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession. So you couldn't very well expect the Zionist movement to come out in neon lights and announce, hey, We're going to be expelling you the first chance we get. That's not realistic.

There was significant Arab resistance to Zionism. and that resistance was based on the fact, as you said, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession. So you couldn't very well expect the Zionist movement to come out in neon lights and announce, hey, We're going to be expelling you the first chance we get. That's not realistic.

Later it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is true because the Arabs attacked the Jews. I read through your stuff. Even yesterday, I was looking through Righteous Victim. You should read other things. You're wasting your time. No, no. Actually, no. I do read other things, but I don't consider it a waste of time to read you. Not at all. You say that this wasn't inherent in Zionism.

Later it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is true because the Arabs attacked the Jews. I read through your stuff. Even yesterday, I was looking through Righteous Victim. You should read other things. You're wasting your time. No, no. Actually, no. I do read other things, but I don't consider it a waste of time to read you. Not at all. You say that this wasn't inherent in Zionism.

Now, would you agree that David Ben-Gurion was a Zionist?

Now, would you agree that David Ben-Gurion was a Zionist?

Right. Would you agree Chaim Weizmann was a Zionist? Yeah. Okay. I believe they were. I believe they took their ideology seriously. It was the first generation. Just like with the Bolsheviks, the first generation was committed to an idea. By the 1930s, it was just pure realpolitik. The ideology went out the window. The first generation, I have no doubt about their convictions. Okay?

Right. Would you agree Chaim Weizmann was a Zionist? Yeah. Okay. I believe they were. I believe they took their ideology seriously. It was the first generation. Just like with the Bolsheviks, the first generation was committed to an idea. By the 1930s, it was just pure realpolitik. The ideology went out the window. The first generation, I have no doubt about their convictions. Okay?

They were Zionists. transfer was inevitable and inbuilt in Zionism. You keep repeating the same thing. As I said then, Mr. Morris, I have a problem reconciling what you're saying. It either was incidental or it was deeply entrenched. Here I read, it's deeply entrenched. Two very resonant words. Inevitable and inbuilt.

They were Zionists. transfer was inevitable and inbuilt in Zionism. You keep repeating the same thing. As I said then, Mr. Morris, I have a problem reconciling what you're saying. It either was incidental or it was deeply entrenched. Here I read, it's deeply entrenched. Two very resonant words. Inevitable and inbuilt.

According to your 25 pages, everybody talked about it.

According to your 25 pages, everybody talked about it.

In the 1944 resolution of the Labor Party, And at the time, even Bertrand Russell was a member of the Labor Party. It endorsed transfer of Arabs out of Palestine. As Muinz pointed out, that was a deeply entrenched idea in Western thinking that there was nothing, it doesn't in any way contradict or violate or breach any moral values to displace the Palestinian population.

In the 1944 resolution of the Labor Party, And at the time, even Bertrand Russell was a member of the Labor Party. It endorsed transfer of Arabs out of Palestine. As Muinz pointed out, that was a deeply entrenched idea in Western thinking that there was nothing, it doesn't in any way contradict or violate or breach any moral values to displace the Palestinian population.

Now, I do believe there's a legitimate question Had it been the case, as you said, Professor Morris, that the Zionists wanted to create a happy state with a Jewish majority, but a large Jewish minority. And if by virtue of immigration, like in our own country, in our own country, given the current trajectories, non-whites will become the majority population in the United States quite soon.

Now, I do believe there's a legitimate question Had it been the case, as you said, Professor Morris, that the Zionists wanted to create a happy state with a Jewish majority, but a large Jewish minority. And if by virtue of immigration, like in our own country, in our own country, given the current trajectories, non-whites will become the majority population in the United States quite soon.

And according to democratic principles, we have to accept that. So if that were the case, I would say maybe there's an argument that had there been mass Jewish immigration, changed the demographic balance in Palestine, and therefore,

And according to democratic principles, we have to accept that. So if that were the case, I would say maybe there's an argument that had there been mass Jewish immigration, changed the demographic balance in Palestine, and therefore,

Jews became the majority, it can make an argument in the abstract that the indigenous Arab population should have been accepting of that, just as whites in the United States, quote unquote whites, have to be accepting of the fact that the demographic majority is shifting to non-whites in our own country. But that's not what Zionism was about. I did write my doctoral dissertation on Zionism.

Jews became the majority, it can make an argument in the abstract that the indigenous Arab population should have been accepting of that, just as whites in the United States, quote unquote whites, have to be accepting of the fact that the demographic majority is shifting to non-whites in our own country. But that's not what Zionism was about. I did write my doctoral dissertation on Zionism.

And I don't want to get now bogged down in abstract ideas. But as I suspect you know, most theorists of nationalism say there are two kinds of nationalism. One is a nationalism based on citizenship. You become a citizen, you're integral to the country. That's sometimes called political nationalism.

And I don't want to get now bogged down in abstract ideas. But as I suspect you know, most theorists of nationalism say there are two kinds of nationalism. One is a nationalism based on citizenship. You become a citizen, you're integral to the country. That's sometimes called political nationalism.

And then there's another kind of nationalism, and that says the state should not belong to its citizens, it should belong to an ethnic group. Each ethnic group should have its own state. It's usually called the German Romantic idea of nationalism. Zionism is squarely in the German Romantic idea. That was the whole point of Zionism.

And then there's another kind of nationalism, and that says the state should not belong to its citizens, it should belong to an ethnic group. Each ethnic group should have its own state. It's usually called the German Romantic idea of nationalism. Zionism is squarely in the German Romantic idea. That was the whole point of Zionism.

We don't want to be Bundists and be one more ethnic minority in Russia. We don't want to become citizens and just become a Jewish people in England or France. We want our own state. Like the Arabs in the 23 states. No, wait, before we get to the Arabs, let's stick to the Jews for a moment, or the Zionists. We want our own state. And in that concept...

We don't want to be Bundists and be one more ethnic minority in Russia. We don't want to become citizens and just become a Jewish people in England or France. We want our own state. Like the Arabs in the 23 states. No, wait, before we get to the Arabs, let's stick to the Jews for a moment, or the Zionists. We want our own state. And in that concept...

of wanting your own state, the minority at best lives on sufferance and at worst gets expelled. That's the logic of the German Romantic Zionist idea of a state. That's why they're Zionists. Now, I personally have shied away from using the word Zionism ever since I finished my doctoral dissertation, because as I said, I don't believe it's the operative ideology today.

of wanting your own state, the minority at best lives on sufferance and at worst gets expelled. That's the logic of the German Romantic Zionist idea of a state. That's why they're Zionists. Now, I personally have shied away from using the word Zionism ever since I finished my doctoral dissertation, because as I said, I don't believe it's the operative ideology today.

It's like talking about Bolshevism and referring to Khrushchev. I doubt Khrushchev could have spelled Bolshevik. But for the period we're talking about, they were Zionists. They were committed to their exclusive state with a minority living on sufferance or, at worst, expelled. That was their ideology. And I really feel

It's like talking about Bolshevism and referring to Khrushchev. I doubt Khrushchev could have spelled Bolshevik. But for the period we're talking about, they were Zionists. They were committed to their exclusive state with a minority living on sufferance or, at worst, expelled. That was their ideology. And I really feel

There's a problem with your happy vision of these Western Democrats like Weizmann, and they wanted to live peacefully with the Arabs. Weizmann described the explosion in 1948 as, quote, the miraculous clearing of the land. That doesn't sound like somebody shedding too many tears at the loss of the indigenous population. Let me just respond to the word unsufferance.

There's a problem with your happy vision of these Western Democrats like Weizmann, and they wanted to live peacefully with the Arabs. Weizmann described the explosion in 1948 as, quote, the miraculous clearing of the land. That doesn't sound like somebody shedding too many tears at the loss of the indigenous population. Let me just respond to the word unsufferance.

Then why did you say... Professor Morris, then why did you say without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established?

Then why did you say... Professor Morris, then why did you say without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established?

I don't think you understand politics. Did I just say that there is a chasm that separates your ideology from the limits and constraints imposed by politics and reality? Professor Morris, I suspect would agree that the Zionist movement from fairly early on was committed to the idea of a Jewish state.

I don't think you understand politics. Did I just say that there is a chasm that separates your ideology from the limits and constraints imposed by politics and reality? Professor Morris, I suspect would agree that the Zionist movement from fairly early on was committed to the idea of a Jewish state.

I am aware of only one major study, probably written 40 years ago, the binational idea in mandatory Palestine by a woman, I forgot her name now, you remember her, I'm trying to. Yeah. OK. Would you know the book? I think so. Yeah. She is the only one who tried to persuasively argue that the Zionist movement was actually, not formally, actually committed to the binational idea.

I am aware of only one major study, probably written 40 years ago, the binational idea in mandatory Palestine by a woman, I forgot her name now, you remember her, I'm trying to. Yeah. OK. Would you know the book? I think so. Yeah. She is the only one who tried to persuasively argue that the Zionist movement was actually, not formally, actually committed to the binational idea.

But most historians of the subject agree the Zionist movement was committed to the idea of a Jewish state. having written my doctoral dissertation on the topic, I was confirmed in that idea because Professor Chomsky, who was my closest friend for about 40 years, was very committed to the idea that binationalism was the dominant trend in Zionism.

But most historians of the subject agree the Zionist movement was committed to the idea of a Jewish state. having written my doctoral dissertation on the topic, I was confirmed in that idea because Professor Chomsky, who was my closest friend for about 40 years, was very committed to the idea that binationalism was the dominant trend in Zionism.

I could not agree with, I couldn't go with him there. But Professor Morris, you are aware that until the Biltmore Resolution in 1942, the Zionist movement never declared it was for a Jewish state. Why? Because it was politically impossible at the moment until 1942. There is your ideology. There are your convictions. There are your operative plans.

I could not agree with, I couldn't go with him there. But Professor Morris, you are aware that until the Biltmore Resolution in 1942, the Zionist movement never declared it was for a Jewish state. Why? Because it was politically impossible at the moment until 1942. There is your ideology. There are your convictions. There are your operative plans.

And there's also separately what you say in public. The Zionist movement couldn't say in public, we're expelling all the Arabs. They can't say that. And they couldn't even say we support a Jewish state until 1942. You're conflating two things.

And there's also separately what you say in public. The Zionist movement couldn't say in public, we're expelling all the Arabs. They can't say that. And they couldn't even say we support a Jewish state until 1942. You're conflating two things.

20% of the population in 49 was Arab. They ended up for about five minutes before they were expelled. They agreed to it until 47, and then they were gone by March 1949.

20% of the population in 49 was Arab. They ended up for about five minutes before they were expelled. They agreed to it until 47, and then they were gone by March 1949.

The Arabs launched the war.

The Arabs launched the war.

Like there is a potential that it wasn't random. There was totally agree with that. It was by design.

Like there is a potential that it wasn't random. There was totally agree with that. It was by design.

Anything could have been. That's not what history is about.

Anything could have been. That's not what history is about.

As I said, when the war was thrown into the court of the United Nations, they were faced with a practical problem. And I, for one, am not going to try to adjudicate the rights and wrongs from the beginning. I do not believe... that if territorial displacement and dispossession was inherent in the Zionist project, I do not believe it can be a legitimate political enterprise.

As I said, when the war was thrown into the court of the United Nations, they were faced with a practical problem. And I, for one, am not going to try to adjudicate the rights and wrongs from the beginning. I do not believe... that if territorial displacement and dispossession was inherent in the Zionist project, I do not believe it can be a legitimate political enterprise.

Now, you might say, that's speaking from 2022, or 2024. But we have to recognize that from nearly the beginning, for perfectly obvious reasons, having nothing to do with antisemitism, anti-Westernism, anti-Europeanism, but because no people that I am aware of would voluntarily cede its country. You can perfectly understand Native American resistance to Euro colonialism.

Now, you might say, that's speaking from 2022, or 2024. But we have to recognize that from nearly the beginning, for perfectly obvious reasons, having nothing to do with antisemitism, anti-Westernism, anti-Europeanism, but because no people that I am aware of would voluntarily cede its country. You can perfectly understand Native American resistance to Euro colonialism.

You can perfectly well understand it without any anti-Europeanism, anti-whitism, anti-Christianism. They didn't want to cede their country. to invaders. That's completely understandable.

You can perfectly well understand it without any anti-Europeanism, anti-whitism, anti-Christianism. They didn't want to cede their country. to invaders. That's completely understandable.

You minimize it.

You minimize it.

Professor, why is it that if you read your book, Righteous Victims, you can read it and read it and read it and read it, as I have, you will find barely a word about the Arabs being motivated by anti-Semitism. It exists, though. I didn't say it doesn't exist.

Professor, why is it that if you read your book, Righteous Victims, you can read it and read it and read it and read it, as I have, you will find barely a word about the Arabs being motivated by anti-Semitism. It exists, though. I didn't say it doesn't exist.

Hey, I don't know a single non-Jew who doesn't harbor anti-Semitic sentiment. We're talking about Arabs now. But I don't know anybody that's just part of the human condition.

Hey, I don't know a single non-Jew who doesn't harbor anti-Semitic sentiment. We're talking about Arabs now. But I don't know anybody that's just part of the human condition.

Yes, I do. And among the Arabs. So, Professor Mars, here's my problem. I didn't see that in your righteous victims. Even when you talked about the first intifada, and you talked about the second intifada, and you talked about how there was a lot of influence by Hamas, the Islamic movement. You even stated that there was a lot of anti-Semitism in those movements.

Yes, I do. And among the Arabs. So, Professor Mars, here's my problem. I didn't see that in your righteous victims. Even when you talked about the first intifada, and you talked about the second intifada, and you talked about how there was a lot of influence by Hamas, the Islamic movement. You even stated that there was a lot of anti-Semitism in those movements.

But then you went on to say, but of course, at bottom, it was about the occupation. It wasn't about... I've read it.

But then you went on to say, but of course, at bottom, it was about the occupation. It wasn't about... I've read it.

No, I'm not moving. I'm talking about your whole book. Your whole book. The occupation began in 67, the one you're talking about. I looked and looked and looked for evidence of this anti-Semitism as being a chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. I didn't see it. Did he make that claim? I don't remember the word chief.

No, I'm not moving. I'm talking about your whole book. Your whole book. The occupation began in 67, the one you're talking about. I looked and looked and looked for evidence of this anti-Semitism as being a chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. I didn't see it. Did he make that claim? I don't remember the word chief.

Please don't give me this post-modernism binary. You're the one.

Please don't give me this post-modernism binary. You're the one.

You're the one that said the chief motor.

You're the one that said the chief motor.

Page 137.

Page 137.

He did say that. I'm not going to deny it. It's true. I can understand the sentiment, but I think it's wrong.

He did say that. I'm not going to deny it. It's true. I can understand the sentiment, but I think it's wrong.

Okay, I'll just comment on that. I was rereading Shlomo Ben-Ami's last book, and he does at the end discuss at some length the whole issue of the refugee question bearing on the so-called peace process. And on the question of 48 and the Arab emigration, if you'll allow me, let me just quote him.

Okay, I'll just comment on that. I was rereading Shlomo Ben-Ami's last book, and he does at the end discuss at some length the whole issue of the refugee question bearing on the so-called peace process. And on the question of 48 and the Arab emigration, if you'll allow me, let me just quote him.

Israel is particularly fond of the awkwardly false symmetry she makes between the Palestinian refugee crisis and the forced emigration of 600,000 Jews from Arab countries following the creation of the state of Israel, as if it were, quote, an unplanned exchange of populations, unquote.

Israel is particularly fond of the awkwardly false symmetry she makes between the Palestinian refugee crisis and the forced emigration of 600,000 Jews from Arab countries following the creation of the state of Israel, as if it were, quote, an unplanned exchange of populations, unquote.

And then Mr. Ben-Ami, for those of you who are listening, he was Israel's former foreign minister, and he's an influential historian in his own right. He says, in fact, envoys from the Mossad and the Jewish agency worked underground in Arab countries and Iran to encourage Jews to go to Israel.

And then Mr. Ben-Ami, for those of you who are listening, he was Israel's former foreign minister, and he's an influential historian in his own right. He says, in fact, envoys from the Mossad and the Jewish agency worked underground in Arab countries and Iran to encourage Jews to go to Israel.

More importantly, for many Jews in Arab states, the very possibility of emigrating to Israel was the culmination of millennial aspirations. It represented the consummation of a dream to take part in Israel's resurgence as a nation. So this idea that they were all expelled after 1948, That's one area, Professor Morris, I defer to expertise. That's one of my credos in life.

More importantly, for many Jews in Arab states, the very possibility of emigrating to Israel was the culmination of millennial aspirations. It represented the consummation of a dream to take part in Israel's resurgence as a nation. So this idea that they were all expelled after 1948, That's one area, Professor Morris, I defer to expertise. That's one of my credos in life.

I don't know the Israeli literature, but as it's been translated in English, there is very little solid scholarship on what happened in 1948 in the Arab countries and which caused the Jews to leave. The Arab Jews. The Arab Jews, right. But Shlomo Ben-Ami knows the literature, he knows the scholarship, he also has stories. He also comes from the Tangiers.

I don't know the Israeli literature, but as it's been translated in English, there is very little solid scholarship on what happened in 1948 in the Arab countries and which caused the Jews to leave. The Arab Jews. The Arab Jews, right. But Shlomo Ben-Ami knows the literature, he knows the scholarship, he also has stories. He also comes from the Tangiers.

And Avishlaim, when he was interviewed by Merrin Rappaport on this question, he said, you simply cannot say that the Iraqi Jews were expelled. It's just not true. And he was speaking as an Iraqi Jew who left with his father and family in 1948. They were pushed out. They weren't expelled.

And Avishlaim, when he was interviewed by Merrin Rappaport on this question, he said, you simply cannot say that the Iraqi Jews were expelled. It's just not true. And he was speaking as an Iraqi Jew who left with his father and family in 1948. They were pushed out. They weren't expelled.

No, you're not interrupting me, because I only know what's been translated into English, and the English literature on the subject is very small and not scholarly. Now, there may be an... Hebrew literature? I don't know. But I was surprised that even Shlomo ben Ami, a steward of his state, fair enough, on this particular point, he called it false symmetry.

No, you're not interrupting me, because I only know what's been translated into English, and the English literature on the subject is very small and not scholarly. Now, there may be an... Hebrew literature? I don't know. But I was surprised that even Shlomo ben Ami, a steward of his state, fair enough, on this particular point, he called it false symmetry.

On the question of the responsibility of the Palestinian Arabs for the Nazi Holocaust, direct or indirect, I consider that an absurd claim. As Gromyko said, and I quoted him, the entire Western world turned its back on the Jews to somehow focus on the Palestinians strikes me as completely ridiculous. Number two, as Muin said,

On the question of the responsibility of the Palestinian Arabs for the Nazi Holocaust, direct or indirect, I consider that an absurd claim. As Gromyko said, and I quoted him, the entire Western world turned its back on the Jews to somehow focus on the Palestinians strikes me as completely ridiculous. Number two, as Muin said,

There's a perfectly understandable reason why Palestinian Arabs wouldn't want Jews, because in their minds, and not irrationally, these Jews intended to create a Jewish state, which would quite likely have resulted in their expulsion. I'm a very generous person. I've actually taken in a homeless person for two and a half years.

There's a perfectly understandable reason why Palestinian Arabs wouldn't want Jews, because in their minds, and not irrationally, these Jews intended to create a Jewish state, which would quite likely have resulted in their expulsion. I'm a very generous person. I've actually taken in a homeless person for two and a half years.

But if I knew in advance that that homeless person was going to try to turn me out of my apartment, I would think 10,000 times before I took him in. Okay? As far as the actual complicity of the Palestinian Arabs... If you look at Raoul Hilberg's three-volume classic work, The Destruction of the European Jury, he has in those thousand-plus pages one sentence on the role of the Mufti of Jerusalem.

But if I knew in advance that that homeless person was going to try to turn me out of my apartment, I would think 10,000 times before I took him in. Okay? As far as the actual complicity of the Palestinian Arabs... If you look at Raoul Hilberg's three-volume classic work, The Destruction of the European Jury, he has in those thousand-plus pages one sentence on the role of the Mufti of Jerusalem.

And that, I think, is probably an overstatement, but we'll leave it aside. The only two points I would make aside from the Holocaust point is, number one, I do think the transfer discussion is useful because it indicates that there was a rational reason behind the Arab resistance to Jewish or Zionist immigration to Palestine, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession.

And that, I think, is probably an overstatement, but we'll leave it aside. The only two points I would make aside from the Holocaust point is, number one, I do think the transfer discussion is useful because it indicates that there was a rational reason behind the Arab resistance to Jewish or Zionist immigration to Palestine, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession.

And number two, there are two issues. One is the history. And the second is being responsible for your words. Now, some people accuse me of speaking very slowly, and they're advised on YouTube to turn up the speed twice to three times whenever I'm on. One of the reasons I speak slowly is because I attach value to every word I say.

And number two, there are two issues. One is the history. And the second is being responsible for your words. Now, some people accuse me of speaking very slowly, and they're advised on YouTube to turn up the speed twice to three times whenever I'm on. One of the reasons I speak slowly is because I attach value to every word I say.

And it is discomforting, disorienting, where you have a person who's produced a voluminous corpus, rich in insights and rich in archival sources. who seems to disown each and every word that you pluck from that corpus by claiming that it's either out of context or it's cherry picking. Words count. And I agree with Lex. Everybody has the right to rescind what they've said in the past.

And it is discomforting, disorienting, where you have a person who's produced a voluminous corpus, rich in insights and rich in archival sources. who seems to disown each and every word that you pluck from that corpus by claiming that it's either out of context or it's cherry picking. Words count. And I agree with Lex. Everybody has the right to rescind what they've said in the past.

But what you cannot claim is that you didn't say what you said.

But what you cannot claim is that you didn't say what you said.

Maybe you should give his name.

Maybe you should give his name.

Of course they said it. You know what the statement said on the basis of a shared ideology. Why do you say no? Wait, the Lehi people were Nazis. Is that what you're saying?

Of course they said it. You know what the statement said on the basis of a shared ideology. Why do you say no? Wait, the Lehi people were Nazis. Is that what you're saying?

Some of them supported Stalin, incidentally. Did he say that the basis of the pact was their agreement on ideology? There wasn't any pact. They suggested. They proposed an agreement.

Some of them supported Stalin, incidentally. Did he say that the basis of the pact was their agreement on ideology? There wasn't any pact. They suggested. They proposed an agreement.

I think we can agree. Not every anti-Semite is a Hitlerite. He literally worked with the Nazis to recruit people. He wasn't just a guy posting... And he was an absolutely revolting, disgusting human being. There's something I have to hear.

I think we can agree. Not every anti-Semite is a Hitlerite. He literally worked with the Nazis to recruit people. He wasn't just a guy posting... And he was an absolutely revolting, disgusting human being. There's something I have to hear.

I don't even understand of all the crimes you want to ascribe to the Palestinian people, trying to blame them directly, indirectly, indirectly or indirectly three times the move for the Nazi Holocaust is completely lunatic.

I don't even understand of all the crimes you want to ascribe to the Palestinian people, trying to blame them directly, indirectly, indirectly or indirectly three times the move for the Nazi Holocaust is completely lunatic.

You've not read him. I've read him.

You've not read him. I've read him.

Believe me, I'm a lot more literate than you, Mr. Borelli. the guy that wrote the stuff. You read what Wikipedia said.

Believe me, I'm a lot more literate than you, Mr. Borelli. the guy that wrote the stuff. You read what Wikipedia said.

Why is, why is, why is relevant is bringing up the Mufti of Jerusalem and trying to blame the Holocaust.

Why is, why is, why is relevant is bringing up the Mufti of Jerusalem and trying to blame the Holocaust.

After World War II, the British decided that they didn't want to deal with the Palestine question anymore, and the ball was thrown into the court of the United Nations. Now, as I read the record, the UN was not attempting to arbitrate or adjudicate rights and wrongs. It was confronting a very practical problem.

After World War II, the British decided that they didn't want to deal with the Palestine question anymore, and the ball was thrown into the court of the United Nations. Now, as I read the record, the UN was not attempting to arbitrate or adjudicate rights and wrongs. It was confronting a very practical problem.

The Leahy was 300 people. And he had as much to do with the Nazi Holocaust as I did. No, he recruited people for the SS. How can you get away from that? No, he recruited people. people for their assists. He recruited soldiers in the Balkans, mostly Kosovars, which was disgusting. I have no doubt about that.

The Leahy was 300 people. And he had as much to do with the Nazi Holocaust as I did. No, he recruited people for the SS. How can you get away from that? No, he recruited people. people for their assists. He recruited soldiers in the Balkans, mostly Kosovars, which was disgusting. I have no doubt about that.

But he had one... He also wrote letters to foreign ministers saying, don't let the Jews out. I knew Rahul Hill.

But he had one... He also wrote letters to foreign ministers saying, don't let the Jews out. I knew Rahul Hill.

He wasn't even minor.

He wasn't even minor.

They were helping to close the only safe haven for Jews. Oh, really? The United States wasn't a potential safe haven. The only one was Palestine. The United States had no room No, it did have room. From the Atlantic to the Pacific for Jews.

They were helping to close the only safe haven for Jews. Oh, really? The United States wasn't a potential safe haven. The only one was Palestine. The United States had no room No, it did have room. From the Atlantic to the Pacific for Jews.

They are blamed, but nobody blames them for the Holocaust. Well, indirectly. No, I've never heard it said that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was indirectly responsible for the Holocaust. I never heard that. Now, maybe it's in Israeli literature because the Israelis have gone mad. Yes, your prime minister said the whole idea of the gas chambers came from the Mufti of Jerusalem. That's nonsense.

They are blamed, but nobody blames them for the Holocaust. Well, indirectly. No, I've never heard it said that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was indirectly responsible for the Holocaust. I never heard that. Now, maybe it's in Israeli literature because the Israelis have gone mad. Yes, your prime minister said the whole idea of the gas chambers came from the Mufti of Jerusalem. That's nonsense.

There were two national communities in Palestine, and there were irreconcilable differences on fundamental questions, most importantly looking at the historic record on the question of immigration and associated with the question of immigration, the question of land. The UN Special Committee on Palestine

There were two national communities in Palestine, and there were irreconcilable differences on fundamental questions, most importantly looking at the historic record on the question of immigration and associated with the question of immigration, the question of land. The UN Special Committee on Palestine

We all know that's nonsense. But we also know that Netanyahu said it, correct?

We all know that's nonsense. But we also know that Netanyahu said it, correct?

which came into being before the UN 181 Partition Resolution, the UN Special Committee recommended two states in Palestine. There was a minority position represented by Iran, India, Yugoslavia. They supported one state, but they believed that if forced to, the two communities would figure out some sort of modus vivendi and live together.

which came into being before the UN 181 Partition Resolution, the UN Special Committee recommended two states in Palestine. There was a minority position represented by Iran, India, Yugoslavia. They supported one state, but they believed that if forced to, the two communities would figure out some sort of modus vivendi and live together.

The Israelis didn't even claim that in the document they submitted before the ICJ. Go read what your government submitted. It never mentioned beheadings.

The Israelis didn't even claim that in the document they submitted before the ICJ. Go read what your government submitted. It never mentioned beheadings.

You also denied that there were rapes there. I didn't deny. I said I've not seen convincing evidence that confirms it. I've said that from day one, and I'll say it today, four and a half months later. Do you know that they killed 800 or 900 civilians? Absolutely. That seems to me indisputable. Oh, okay. Well, I'm glad that you're considering something. I've said that from day one.

You also denied that there were rapes there. I didn't deny. I said I've not seen convincing evidence that confirms it. I've said that from day one, and I'll say it today, four and a half months later. Do you know that they killed 800 or 900 civilians? Absolutely. That seems to me indisputable. Oh, okay. Well, I'm glad that you're considering something. I've said that from day one.

850, fine. So I never said that, but then I said, no, we don't know exactly how they were killed, but 800 civilians killed, 850, no question there. And I also said, on repeated occasions, there cannot be any doubt, in my opinion, as of now, with the available evidence, that Hamas was responsible for significant atrocities. And I made sure to include the plural.

850, fine. So I never said that, but then I said, no, we don't know exactly how they were killed, but 800 civilians killed, 850, no question there. And I also said, on repeated occasions, there cannot be any doubt, in my opinion, as of now, with the available evidence, that Hamas was responsible for significant atrocities. And I made sure to include the plural.

It's called attaching value to words and not talking like a motor mouth. I am very careful about qualifying because that's what language is about.

It's called attaching value to words and not talking like a motor mouth. I am very careful about qualifying because that's what language is about.

My view is even if it were half, 400 is a huge number by any reckoning.

My view is even if it were half, 400 is a huge number by any reckoning.

Muin Rabbani. I'm not sure if he concedes the 400. I'll say... Why 400?

Muin Rabbani. I'm not sure if he concedes the 400. I'll say... Why 400?

United Nations General Assembly supported partition between what it called a Jewish state and an Arab state. In my reading of the record, and I understand there's new scholarship on the subject, which I've not read, but so far as I've read the record, there's no clarity on what the United Nations General Assembly meant by a Jewish state and an Arab state

United Nations General Assembly supported partition between what it called a Jewish state and an Arab state. In my reading of the record, and I understand there's new scholarship on the subject, which I've not read, but so far as I've read the record, there's no clarity on what the United Nations General Assembly meant by a Jewish state and an Arab state

I don't know. You're saying from day one you believe this particular thing and you clearly don't. You clearly don't believe this thing.

I don't know. You're saying from day one you believe this particular thing and you clearly don't. You clearly don't believe this thing.

Wait, hold on. That's not controversial. Mr. Bunnell, I attach value to words. Yes, you do. When I was, Mr. Brunel, please slow down the speech and attempt to listen. When I was explicitly asked by Piers Morgan, I said there can be no question that Hamas committed atrocities on October 7th. If you want me to pin down a number, I can't do that. I'm going to ask you to pin down a number.

Wait, hold on. That's not controversial. Mr. Bunnell, I attach value to words. Yes, you do. When I was, Mr. Brunel, please slow down the speech and attempt to listen. When I was explicitly asked by Piers Morgan, I said there can be no question that Hamas committed atrocities on October 7th. If you want me to pin down a number, I can't do that. I'm going to ask you to pin down a number.

except for the fact that the Jewish state would be demographically Jewish, and the Arab state demographically would be Arab. The UNSCOP, the UN Special Committee on Palestine, it was very clear, and it was reiterated many times, that in recommending two states

except for the fact that the Jewish state would be demographically Jewish, and the Arab state demographically would be Arab. The UNSCOP, the UN Special Committee on Palestine, it was very clear, and it was reiterated many times, that in recommending two states

I'm telling you about a personal experience lasting decades. You said, quote,

I'm telling you about a personal experience lasting decades. You said, quote,

I'm trying to quote what you just said. I shouldn't have said anything at any point. You should say, Professor Morris, you just said, I would condemn any time Israel deliberately attacks civilians, okay? The problem, Professor Morris, is over and over again, you claim in the face of overwhelming evidence... that they didn't attack civilians. That's not true.

I'm trying to quote what you just said. I shouldn't have said anything at any point. You should say, Professor Morris, you just said, I would condemn any time Israel deliberately attacks civilians, okay? The problem, Professor Morris, is over and over again, you claim in the face of overwhelming evidence... that they didn't attack civilians. That's not true.

I've said Israel has attacked civilians. In Kibia, Israel attacked civilians.

I've said Israel has attacked civilians. In Kibia, Israel attacked civilians.

You cherry pick. Let's fast forward when you were an adult. What did you say about the 1982 Lebanon war? What did I say? You don't remember? Okay. Allow me. Uh-oh. Okay. So, it happens that I was not at all by any... I had no interest in the Israel-Palestine conflict as a young man until the 1982 Lebanon War. Yeah. You lost the passage. I'll find

You cherry pick. Let's fast forward when you were an adult. What did you say about the 1982 Lebanon war? What did I say? You don't remember? Okay. Allow me. Uh-oh. Okay. So, it happens that I was not at all by any... I had no interest in the Israel-Palestine conflict as a young man until the 1982 Lebanon War. Yeah. You lost the passage. I'll find

Each state, the Arab state and the Jewish state, would have to guarantee full equality of all citizens with regard to political, civil, and religious matters.

Each state, the Arab state and the Jewish state, would have to guarantee full equality of all citizens with regard to political, civil, and religious matters.

All right.

All right.

Okay. First of all, on this issue of double standards, which is the one that irks or irritates Muin, you said that you are not a person of double standards, unlike people like Muin. you hold high a single standard and you condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on civilians. And I would say that's true for the period up till 1967, and I think it's accurate, your account of the First Intifada.

Okay. First of all, on this issue of double standards, which is the one that irks or irritates Muin, you said that you are not a person of double standards, unlike people like Muin. you hold high a single standard and you condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on civilians. And I would say that's true for the period up till 1967, and I think it's accurate, your account of the First Intifada.

Now that does raise the question, if there is absolute full equality of all citizens, both in the Jewish state and the Arab state, with regard to political rights, civil rights, and religious rights, apart from the demographic majority, it's very unclear what it meant to call a state Jewish or call the state Arab. In my view, the partition resolution was the correct decision.

Now that does raise the question, if there is absolute full equality of all citizens, both in the Jewish state and the Arab state, with regard to political rights, civil rights, and religious rights, apart from the demographic majority, it's very unclear what it meant to call a state Jewish or call the state Arab. In my view, the partition resolution was the correct decision.

There it seems to me you were in conformity with most mainstream accounts, and the case of the First Intifada You also used, surprisingly, you used Arab human rights sources like al-Haqq, which I think Muin worked for during the First Intifada. That's true. But then something very strange happens. So let's illustrate it.

There it seems to me you were in conformity with most mainstream accounts, and the case of the First Intifada You also used, surprisingly, you used Arab human rights sources like al-Haqq, which I think Muin worked for during the First Intifada. That's true. But then something very strange happens. So let's illustrate it.

That's what happened.

That's what happened.

If we have time... I know the record very well. I'd be very happy to go through it with you. But let's get to those double standards. So, this is what you have to say about Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982. You said, "...Israel was reluctant to harm civilians, sought to avoid casualties on both sides, and took care..." not to harm Lebanese and Palestinian civilians.

If we have time... I know the record very well. I'd be very happy to go through it with you. But let's get to those double standards. So, this is what you have to say about Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982. You said, "...Israel was reluctant to harm civilians, sought to avoid casualties on both sides, and took care..." not to harm Lebanese and Palestinian civilians.

You then went on to acknowledge the massive use of IDF firepower against civilians during the siege of Beirut, which traumatized Israeli society. Morris quickly enters the caveat that Israel, quote, tried to pinpoint military targets, but inevitably many civilians were hit. That's your description of the Lebanon War. As I say, that's when I first got involved in the conflict.

You then went on to acknowledge the massive use of IDF firepower against civilians during the siege of Beirut, which traumatized Israeli society. Morris quickly enters the caveat that Israel, quote, tried to pinpoint military targets, but inevitably many civilians were hit. That's your description of the Lebanon War. As I say, that's when I first got involved in the conflict.

I am a voracious reader. I read everything on the Lebanon War. I would say there's not a single account of the Lebanon War in which the estimates are between 15,000 and 20,000 Palestinian Lebanese were killed, overwhelmingly civilians. genocide, biggest bloodletting, I would say I can't think of a single mainstream account that remotely approximates what you just said.

I am a voracious reader. I read everything on the Lebanon War. I would say there's not a single account of the Lebanon War in which the estimates are between 15,000 and 20,000 Palestinian Lebanese were killed, overwhelmingly civilians. genocide, biggest bloodletting, I would say I can't think of a single mainstream account that remotely approximates what you just said.

So, leaving aside, I can name the books, voluminous, huge volumes. I'll just take one example. Now, you will remember, because I think you served in Lebanon in 82, am I correct on that?

So, leaving aside, I can name the books, voluminous, huge volumes. I'll just take one example. Now, you will remember, because I think you served in Lebanon in 82, am I correct on that?

Yeah. So you will remember that Dov Yarmia kept a war diary. So with your permission, allow me to describe what he wrote during his diary. So, he writes, the war machine of the IDF is galloping and trampling over the conquered territory, demonstrating a total insensitivity to the fate of the Arabs who are found in its path. A PLO-run hospital suffered a direct hit.

Yeah. So you will remember that Dov Yarmia kept a war diary. So with your permission, allow me to describe what he wrote during his diary. So, he writes, the war machine of the IDF is galloping and trampling over the conquered territory, demonstrating a total insensitivity to the fate of the Arabs who are found in its path. A PLO-run hospital suffered a direct hit.

Thousands of refugees are returning to the city. When they arrive at their homes, many of which have been destroyed or damaged, you hear their cries of pain and their howls over the deaths of their loved ones. The air is permeated with the smell of corpses. Destruction and death are continuing. Does that sound like your description of the Lebanon?

Thousands of refugees are returning to the city. When they arrive at their homes, many of which have been destroyed or damaged, you hear their cries of pain and their howls over the deaths of their loved ones. The air is permeated with the smell of corpses. Destruction and death are continuing. Does that sound like your description of the Lebanon?

We can't just forget them.

We can't just forget them.

I'm talking about you. You don't find that. Mr. Morris, I'm not talking about Dev Yarmulke. I'm talking about you, the historian. How did you depict the Lebanon war?

I'm talking about you. You don't find that. Mr. Morris, I'm not talking about Dev Yarmulke. I'm talking about you, the historian. How did you depict the Lebanon war?

All the accounts by Robert Fisk in Pity the Nation. Robert Fisk is an anti-Zionist I know. Journalists. I know. Has always been. So that's why you can say with such confidence that you don't condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on civilians. There weren't any. Because there weren't any. No, I didn't say there weren't any. Yeah, you didn't.

All the accounts by Robert Fisk in Pity the Nation. Robert Fisk is an anti-Zionist I know. Journalists. I know. Has always been. So that's why you can say with such confidence that you don't condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on civilians. There weren't any. Because there weren't any. No, I didn't say there weren't any. Yeah, you didn't.

You agreed that I have condemned Israeli attacks on civilians. Yes, there are. I never quarrel with facts. Your description of the 1982 war is so shocking, it makes my innards writhe. And then your description of the Second Intifada? Your description of defensive shield? They are worse than apologetics. That's like the Stalinist rule of falsification.

You agreed that I have condemned Israeli attacks on civilians. Yes, there are. I never quarrel with facts. Your description of the 1982 war is so shocking, it makes my innards writhe. And then your description of the Second Intifada? Your description of defensive shield? They are worse than apologetics. That's like the Stalinist rule of falsification.

Do you remember that?

Do you remember that?

I am completely aware of that. But if you forgot the numbers, it was three to one. They killed mostly armed Palestinian government. That's what you say in your book, but that's not what Amnesty International said. That's not what Human Rights Watch said. I don't remember what they said. I do. I don't know whether their figures are right. My figures are right.

I am completely aware of that. But if you forgot the numbers, it was three to one. They killed mostly armed Palestinian government. That's what you say in your book, but that's not what Amnesty International said. That's not what Human Rights Watch said. I don't remember what they said. I do. I don't know whether their figures are right. My figures are right.

I do not believe that the Arab and Jewish communities could at that point be made to live together. I disagree with the minority position of India, Iran, and Yugoslavia, and that not being a practical option, two states was the only other option. In this regard, I would want to pay tribute

I do not believe that the Arab and Jewish communities could at that point be made to live together. I disagree with the minority position of India, Iran, and Yugoslavia, and that not being a practical option, two states was the only other option. In this regard, I would want to pay tribute

Professor Morris, fantasy, but I'm not going to argue with here. Here's a simple challenge. You said not to look at the camera. It scares the people. I'll make the open challenge. You are going to scare them. No. Professor Morris.

Professor Morris, fantasy, but I'm not going to argue with here. Here's a simple challenge. You said not to look at the camera. It scares the people. I'll make the open challenge. You are going to scare them. No. Professor Morris.

Words are in print. I wrote 50 pages analyzing all of your work. I quote, some will say cherry pick, but I think accurately quote you. Here's a simple challenge. Answer me in print. Answer what I wrote and show where I'm making things up. Answer me a print. I'm not familiar. I'm sorry. I'm not familiar with what you wrote. That's no problem. You're a busy man. You're an important historian.

Words are in print. I wrote 50 pages analyzing all of your work. I quote, some will say cherry pick, but I think accurately quote you. Here's a simple challenge. Answer me in print. Answer what I wrote and show where I'm making things up. Answer me a print. I'm not familiar. I'm sorry. I'm not familiar with what you wrote. That's no problem. You're a busy man. You're an important historian.

You don't have to know everything that's in print, especially by modest publishers. But now you know. And so here's the public challenge. You answer and show where I cherry picked, where I misrepresented. Send me the article. And then we can have a civil scholarly discussion. I'm not sure we will agree.

You don't have to know everything that's in print, especially by modest publishers. But now you know. And so here's the public challenge. You answer and show where I cherry picked, where I misrepresented. Send me the article. And then we can have a civil scholarly discussion. I'm not sure we will agree.

It's for the reader. to decide, looking at both sides, where this truth stands.

It's for the reader. to decide, looking at both sides, where this truth stands.

No, there are two aspects. There's a public debate, but there's also... within words.

No, there are two aspects. There's a public debate, but there's also... within words.

But in this context, just for the educational purpose of teaching people... The educational purpose is, why would people commit what I have to acknowledge because I am faithful to the facts... massive atrocities on October 7. Why did that happen? I think that's the problem. The past is erased, and we suddenly went from 1948 to October 7, 2023. There is a problem there.

But in this context, just for the educational purpose of teaching people... The educational purpose is, why would people commit what I have to acknowledge because I am faithful to the facts... massive atrocities on October 7. Why did that happen? I think that's the problem. The past is erased, and we suddenly went from 1948 to October 7, 2023. There is a problem there.

You don't know what's the correct international law.

to what was probably the most moving speech at the UN General Assembly proceedings by the Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko. I was very tempted to quote it at length, but I recognized that would be taking too much time. So I asked a young friend, Jamie Stern Weiner, to edit it and just get the essence of what Foreign Minister Gromyko had to say.

I'm sure they believe it. I'm sure they believe it. And if the Hamas is hiding behind civilians, civilians die. Every time they target a kid, I'm sure they believe it's Hamas. When they killed the four kids. They believe it. I know they believe it. Even though they were diminutive size. Even though they were diminutive size. From that angle, you don't see the size. You don't see the size.

Let's leave it aside.

They literally did. Mr. Borelli, with all due respect, you're such a fantastic moron. It's terrifying. That wharf was filled with journalists. There were tens scores of journalists. That was an old fisherman's shack. What are you talking about? It's so painful. It's so painful to listen to this idiocy.

Okay, answer. In 2018, there was the Great March of Return in Gaza. By all reckonings of human rights organizations and journalists who were there, it was overwhelmingly nonviolent. It was organized by the Hamas. Whoever organized it. It was organized by Satan. Let's start with that.

Okay, Satan. I agree. Let's go for the big one, the big magilla. It's Satan, okay? Overwhelmingly nonviolent. resembled at the beginning the first intifada. They threw bombs here and there. Okay, not bombs. They tried to make holes in the fence, obviously. Let's continue.

Okay, so... As you know, along the Gaza perimeter, there was Israel's best-trained snipers. Correct? I don't know best-trained. They were snipers. Fine. Sniper. Okay. All right. Because, hey, laugh. It's hilarious. The story is so funny.

During the last war, Gromyko said, the Jewish people underwent exceptional sorrow and suffering without any exaggeration, This sorrow and suffering are indescribable. Hundreds of thousands of Jews are wandering about in various countries of Europe in search of means of existence and in search of shelter. The United Nations cannot and must not regard this situation with indifference.

Even the UN says it themselves.

But you only collect what the UN says that you like. You see, the problem, Mr. Morelli, is you don't know the English language.

Talk fast. People think that you're coherent.

Yeah, but you see... I know you like them sometimes. Only when they agree with you, though. You got the months wrong. You got the months wrong. We're talking about the beginning in March 30th, 2018. You just described that March as mostly peaceful. Okay, allow me to finish. So there were the snipers, okay? Now, you find it so far-fetched Israelis... Purposely, deliberately targeting civilians?

That's such a far-fetched idea. An overwhelmingly non-violent march. What did the international investigation... It was a campaign. Whatever you want to call it. For months. Whatever you want to call it. For months. Yeah. What did the UN investigation find? Well, he just read it to you. I read the report. I don't read things off of those machines. I read the report. What did it find?

Brace yourself. You thought it was so funny, the idea of IDF targeting civilians. It found, go look this up on your machine.

Targeted children, targeted journalists. targeted medics, and here's the funniest one of all. It's so hilarious. They targeted disabled people who were 300 meters away from the fence and just standing by trees. This is true. If what you're saying is true.

That it's impossible at the command level. It's impossible at the command level. But you said that they couldn't have done it at the bottom if it weren't also at the top.

It's true. It's true. I don't spend my nights on Wikipedia. I read books. I admit that as a signal. I know books are a waste of time with all due regard. There are two or three quotes that you use. I completely respect the fact And I'll say it on the air, as much as I find totally disgusting what's come of your politics, a lot of the books are excellent.

And I'll even tell you, because I'm not afraid of saying it, whenever I have to check on a basic fact, the equivalent of going to the Britannica, I go to your books. I know you got a lot of the facts right.

I would never say books are a waste of time. And it's regrettable to you that you got strapped with a partner who thinks that all the wisdom, all the wisdom.

Past experience, particularly during the Second World War, shows that no Western European state was able to provide adequate assistance for the Jewish people in defending its rights and its very existence from the violence of the Hitlerites and their allies. This is an unpleasant fact. But unfortunately, like all other facts, it must be admitted." Gromyko went on to say,

And if that's the case, why is it only, only? Professor Morris, here's a question for you. If we take every combat zone in the world for the past three years, every combat zone in the world. In Vietnam, the Americans killed a million people. I'm not talking about Vietnam. Well, they could have killed 40 million. Yeah, I was in the anti-war movement. So don't strap me.

The Americans killed a million people in Vietnam. Fine, fine. And 30 million Russians were killed during World War II, so everything else is irrelevant. Okay.

Professor Mars, here's a question. It's very perplexing. If you take every combat zone in the world for the past three years and you multiply the number of children killed by four, every combat zone in the world, you get gossip. Okay? What is that supposed to prove? Okay, I'm going to tell you. Just shut up. You're relying on Hamas numbers. No, I'm not relying.

I'm relying on the numbers that everybody else. I'm relying on the numbers.

Okay.

They could invent anything because you know that they are a mendacious organization. I know mendacious. Believe me. Mendacious as in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Okay. So here's the thing. You say they could have killed 500,000, but they only killed 30,000.

Professor Morris. For a historian, I don't want to understand Israeli society. You want to know the truth. I don't want to. I don't want to get inside their heads. That's the problem.

There's a limit. When 90% of Israelis think that Israel is using enough or too little force in Gaza, I don't want to get inside that head. 40% think that Israel is using insufficient force in Gaza. I don't want to get inside that head. I don't want to get inside the head of people who think They're using insufficient force against the population, against the population, half of which is children.

I don't want to get inside that head. But here is the point, because your partner wants to know the point. You don't understand political constraints. One of your ministers said, let's drop an atomic bomb on Gaza. You think he really meant that? No, no, no.

I'm not supporting him. He's an idiot. This minister is a messianic idiot. He didn't say drop an atomic bomb. None other than Israel's chief historian. The famed, justifiably famed, Benny Morris thinks we should be dropping nuclear weapons on Iran.

In principle, he supports one state, or the Soviet Union supports one state. But he said, if relations between the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine proved to be so bad that it would be impossible to reconcile them and to ensure the peaceful coexistence of the Arabs and the Jews, the Soviet Union would support. two states.

I would say Iranian leaders have sent mixed messages.

It's complicated. To the extent that the Houthis are trying to stop the genocide in Gaza. There is no genocide. There is no genocide. They have the right to attack civilian ships.

It's committing genocide. But if I could just... Allow me... That's correct. I don't run away. So Norman, you did say Israel is committing genocide.

I personally am not convinced that the two states would have been unsustainable in the long term if, and this is a big if, the Zionist movement had been faithful to the position it proclaimed during the UNSCOP public hearings. At the time, Ben-Gurion testified Quote, I want to express what we mean by a Jewish state.

Which is the PLO line. Yeah, with the program. The PLO is long past. As you were saying, genocide is not a body count.

According to Asa Kasher, the philosopher of IDF, he said that Netanyahu was avowing genocide. Now, he's an idiot? He didn't say he's an idiot, but he passed it.

They must be awfully incompetent.

Even the American judge, she must have been awful incompetent if she was unable to see the misrepresentations that Mr. Bunnell, based on his Wikipedia entry, was able to find.

Actually, brace yourself for this, and Muin could confirm it. Yaniv Kogan, an Israeli, and Jamie Sternweiner, half Israeli, they checked every single quote in the Hebrew original, and Yaniv Kogan, love the guy, he has terrifying powers of concentration, he checked every single quote. Is that correct, Muin? And Jamie checked every single quote in the English

in the context, and where there were any contextual questions, they told us.

Yeah, I think they found one. So I do not believe that those 15 judges, it was 15 to two. 16 to two, I think. They're 15 in the court plus two, so it's 17, so it's 15 to two. I don't think those 15 judges were incompetent And I certainly don't believe the president of the court, an American, would allow herself to be duped. Because you might recall, Mr. Burrell, Mr. Burrell. All right.

We mean by a Jewish state simply a state where the majority of the people are Jews, not a state where a Jew has in any way any privilege more than anyone else. A Jewish state means a state based on absolute equality of all her citizens and on democracy. Alas, this was not to be. As Professor Morris has written, quote, Zionist ideology and practice were necessarily and elementally expansionist.

Okay. It is correct, as Muin put it, that it'll be several years before the court makes a determination. And my guess is it will determine there was no genocide. That's my guess. Yes, no, I'm just giving you my guess. I can't predict. I got it all wrong, actually, as Muin will attest. I got it all wrong the first time. I never thought the American judge would vote in favor of plausibility.

So you admit that you were wrong? Yeah, of course. I think I tell Muin twice a day I was wrong about this and I was wrong about that. I'm not wrong about the facts, I try not to be, but my speculations, they can be wrong. Okay, leaving that aside. First of all, as Muin pointed out, there's a difference between the legal decision by the ruling and an independent judgment.

Now, South Africa was not filing a frivolous case. That was 84 pages. It was single. Even 84 pages can be pretty frivolous. It takes an hour and a half to read.

It was single spaced and had literally hundreds of footnotes. It can still be frivolous. It's possible. Of course, but this one wasn't. Yeah, I read the report. To tell you the truth, I followed very closely everything that's been happening to October 7th. I was mesmerized. I couldn't believe the comprehensiveness of that particular report.

Number two, there were two quite respected experts of international law sitting on the South African panel, John Dugard and Vaughan Lowe. Vaughan Lowe, as you might know, he argued the Wall case in 2004 before the International Court of Justice. Now, they were not

They were alleging genocide, which in their view means the evidence in their minds, we're not yet at the court, the evidence in their minds compels the conclusion that genocide is being committed. I am willing, because I happen to know Mr. Dugard personally and I've corresponded with Vaughn Lowe, I've heard their claim, I've read the report, I would say they make a very strong case.

But let's agree, plausible. Now, here's a question. If somebody qualifies for an Olympic team, let's say a regional person qualifies for an Olympic team, it doesn't mean they're going to be on the Olympic team. It doesn't mean they're going to win a gold medal, a silver medal, or a bronze medal. But they can swim.

No, I would say that's a very high bar. You're saying they can swim. To even qualify.

So to even make it to plausible. That is not true.

Mr. Borelli, please don't teach me about the English language. So the declaration, I said, I said, it's the same concept as qualifying.