Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 5/9/24: Biden Threatens HALT Israel Weapons, Sen Says Put Protesters On No Fly List, UN Expert Responds To Biden Smear

Episode Date: May 9, 2024

Krystal and Saagar discuss Biden threatening to halt weapons to Israel over Rafah, Senator calls for protesters to be on no fly list, and UN Human Rights lawyer Francesca Albanese joins to discuss Israel and Gaza.   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/   Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. are more than welcome to listen in. I knew nothing about brunch. She was a terrible girlfriend, but she put me on to brunch. To hear this and more, open your free iHeart app, search Good Moms, Bad Choices, and listen now. Over the years of making my true crime podcast,

Hell and Gone, I've learned no town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community. I was calling Townsend. I've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community. I was calling

about the murder of my husband. The murderer is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case. If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever

you get your podcasts. Stay informed, empowered, and ahead of the curve with the BIN News This Hour podcast. Updated hourly to bring you the latest stories shaping the Black community. From breaking headlines to cultural milestones, the Black Information Network delivers the facts, the voices, and the perspectives that matter 24-7 because our stories deserve to be heard. Listen to the BIN News This Hour podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here

and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that. Let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody. Happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal? Indeed, we do. We have some big breaking news to talk to you about this morning. President Biden on CNN last night saying he would halt some arms shipments to Israel if they launch

a, quote, major invasion into Rafah. What exactly does that mean? What are the implications? What are the reactions? A lot to dig into there. We also have some updates for you on the former president, Donald Trump, catching additional legal breaks. So we'll take a look at that. Meanwhile, RFK Jr., it was revealed, suffered a, I guess you would say, rather unique medical condition involving his brain and worms. Yeah. Try not to make, try not to joke. Every joke has already been made.

It's actually true. It's literally true. Break that down for Yoho's response. All of that good stuff. Also, really fascinating report and some new numbers about how there's been a major population shift in the last several years out of cities and into rural America. You know, the question was, after the pandemic, would that shift back? Because we saw that during the pandemic with the remote work boom. It doesn't look like it.

It looks like this trend is kind of here to stay. So obviously that has huge implications. And we are really excited to be joined today by the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. Francesca Albanese is going to join us for an extended interview, obviously incredibly relevant to talk to her today as a potential invasion into Rafaleum. She's been taking a look. Not only she published a report saying that there were reasonable grounds to believe Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, but she's also been taking a close look at the humanitarian situation and the status of aid, what's going in, what's not going in. So really excited to get to talk to her and hear her

perspective on all of these things today. Yeah, it's going to be interesting. But to my knowledge, hasn't done a lot of interviews, especially with a lot of media outlets. And we've been working on this for quite some time. So that's going to be fun. Before we get to that, though, we have an interesting tease that we can give all of you. CounterPoints hosted another one of their debates. It will be dropping for premium subscribers tonight, and it will be publicly available on Friday. But the important thing here is about what it was revealed. So it was Ilya Shapiro versus Glenn Greenwald on the topic of free speech. Those of you who may not know, Ilya Shapiro is a well-known figure here in

Washington, works at the Manhattan Institute, previously at the Cato Institute, a libertarian constitutional lawyer, but recently has taken very much of a turn to try and I'll just say this. He's taken a turn to go against some principles that I think previously would have rubbed up against free speech. I'm gonna put that in the kindest way possible. Glenn Greenwald debated him also on the subject specifically, not only around free speech, but whether the government should be cracking down on organizations that are calling for ceasefires back in campus protests and all that.

So we have a little tease that we can show all of you. Let's take a listen. Glenn asked about Jewish voices for peace. That's a fact question, as lawyers would call it. This is why Attorney General of Virginia Jason Meares, among others, are investigating the various contacts between these organizations. And that doesn't bother you? That Jewish Voices for Peace are being criminally investigated by right-wing attorney generals who love Israel? They're kind of Jewish Voices for activism. That doesn't bother you? Jewish voices for peace seems to me like the Holy Roman Empire in that it's neither a holy

nor Roman or an empire. JVP is neither Jewish nor voices nor for peace. Who cares what you think of their opinions? They have every right to engage in political activism. They're American students. They're American citizens. I'm not saying they should be prosecuted for their speech. I'm saying if investigations reveal that they're part of a terrorist financing network and organizational structure, then they should be thrown off campus as a corporate body.

This is not about the rights of students or what they're saying or whether they should be prosecuted for that. And stop conflating those kinds of issues. No, but Ron, first of all, they have been thrown off many campuses. And the argument is the same theory that Ron DeSantis used. If you accuse student groups that are in favor of the pro-Palestinian cause of being guilty for material support of terrorism, which is what you have to claim in order to justify banning them from campus,

otherwise it's such an obvious violation of the First Amendment free speech if you don't have another pretext. And that's why FIRE.org took such great offense to what DeSantis did and other colleges as well. If you claim they're guilty of material support for terrorism as a grounds for banning them from campus, obviously you're accusing them of felonies. That's what material support, you're not allowed to give material support. Wow. Anyways, let's just say there's a lot more that came from this over an hour. So if you want to watch it and support the work that CounterPoints is doing in our expansion, breakingpoints.com. Thank you to everybody who has been, I think they've just been putting out excellent content. They have the Don Lemon thing. I mean, the Destiny debate was good. This in particular,

so this is just more of what you can expect. And people are starting to take notice, right? They understand it's a place where we can convene things and they're really leaning into that. So congratulations to them and thank you to everybody for supporting them. Yeah. Thank you guys for making this happen. It's also cool now we're Monday through Friday. Yeah. I haven't watched this one yet. I'm very much looking forward to it. I'm less familiar with Ilya. Obviously, Glenn, we know well, and he's never afraid of a fight. No, he's not. And you know, props Ilya too for showing up. A lot of people won't do it. So I'll at least give him this. He at least showed up and he went up against Glenn, who you know who's going to give it to. Exactly. Whether you agree or disagree with Glenn, I think everyone respects his debating abilities. So to show up and rep your position, listen, respect for being willing

to do that. And I'm personally looking forward to having a chance to take a look. So like Sagar said, if you guys want to get that early, it's going to drop tonight for premium subscribers. It'll be available for everyone tomorrow. With that, let's go ahead and get to the news of the day. So the big breaking news this morning, and this is quite significant. President Biden gave an exclusive interview to CNN's Aaron Burnett last night, made some big news. This comes in the wake of the revelation that the US had paused a shipment of 2,000 pound bombs that was slated to go to Israel. That news leaked out. President Biden, in this interview, revealing that he is saying if they launch a major invasion into Rafah, he will block additional weapons shipments. Let's take a listen to exactly what he had to say.

I want to ask you about something happening as we sit here and speak, and that, of course, is Israel is striking Rafah. I know that you have paused, Mr. President, shipments of 2,000-pound U.S. bombs to Israel due to concern that they could be used in any offensive on Rafah. Have those bombs, those powerful two thousand pound bombs, been used to kill civilians in Gaza? Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers. I made it clear that if they go into Rafah, they haven't gone into Rafah yet. If they go into Rafah, I'm not supplying the weapons

that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities, to deal with that problem. We're going to continue to make sure Israel is secure in terms of Iron Dome and their ability to respond to attacks that came out of the Middle East recently. But it's just wrong. We're not going to supply the weapons and the artillery shells used that have been used. Artillery shells as well?

Yeah, artillery shells. So just to understand what they're doing right now in Rafah, is that not going into Rafah as you demanded? No, they haven't gone into the population centers. What they did was right on the border, and it's causing problems right now in terms of Egypt, which I've worked very hard to make sure we have a relationship and help. But I've made it clear to Bibi and the War Cabinet, they're not going to get our support if, in fact, they go in these population centers. So he says here they haven't gone into Rafah, which is a little confusing because they have, but now we're kind

of adjusting where the red line was previously. It was no invasion of Rafah, then it was no invasion that didn't account for humanitarianism. Now it's no incursion into major population centers. So a lot of questions about exactly what this means, Sagar. But obviously, very noteworthy. We'll show you in a minute after I get Sagar's reaction, some of the already freak out from the right, certainly total freak out from the Israeli side. Also very noteworthy that he says these 2,000 pound bombs have been used to kill civilians, which raises the question also of, okay, so if you knew that, why did we move heaven and earth to pass billions of dollars just a couple weeks ago,

more in aid to ship more of these weapons that you are acknowledging have been used to massacre civilians. So what do you make of these comments? It's just sheer incoherence because his State Department just yesterday put on permanent pause any report that would prove exactly what the President of the United States just said. There's no substantive difference between Israeli action in Rafah than there would be in Khan Yunis or in Gaza City. So what change has happened here? If anything, you've empowered the Israeli right, the Israeli military actions. We've reaped the worst rewards, not only of civilian casualties, but of international standing to Israel itself, to the United States and its international community, obviously domestic turmoil here at

home. And now all of a sudden we seem to be changing things up as if they've been going. It makes very little sense, and it actually sticks with Biden to me, which is it's incoherent. It has no basis in actual strategy in terms of where things are going. There's a question, too, as to whether this is just being fed up over a hostage deal, whether this is posturing in terms of negotiation. Now, look, I mean, I want to be clear and I want to say this. I do support withholding or conditioning aid based upon what the U.S. does. That seems like a basic thing. But as we'll show you with some of our Republican neocons here in Washington, that is anathema. Whenever you're an ally, apparently you're owed anything that you could ever want from the U.S. Treasury.

Really only this ally, though, if you're owed anything that you could ever want from the U.S. Treasury. Really only this ally, though, for being honest. Oh, well, we'll get to that. Well, you know, that's Ukraine erasure, Crystal, of course. And that's important, you know, to try and to underscore this. So I would put this in the same way that Biden was on Afghanistan, where, you know, he eventually decides to pull out. He does, frankly, in like one of the worst, most domestically, politically disastrous ways possible. Prior to that, extends US troop levels in Afghanistan, but then backs Ukraine to the hill. He just has no coherence or strategy in what he's being built upon. So I will at least endorse the idea of conditioning aid. I support that 100%. Not just Israel, by the way, all nations

that the United States were to give to. So I don't know, I'm of a mixed bag. I wonder what you think about it. Yeah, I mean, there's a lot to say about this. First of all, we don't even really know what I mean. Right, that's a good point. Because he's out here saying like, well, they haven't gone into, well, they have gone into Rafa. So is this red line any more meaningful than previous ones? We don't know. We don't know. Apparently, the behind the scenes reporting, I was reading Peter Baker this morning, the New York Times, is that the US wanted to quietly pause these shipments as a use of private leverage against Israel. The Israelis leaked the news in advance of Holocaust Remembrance

Day. Apparently, this interview with Biden was, it was intentional that this came after he gives the big Holocaust Remembrance speech, once again, painting all the college protesters, who he apparently agrees with in some respects as anti-Semites. And so he does that, then he comes out and makes this announcement. And I think it just, it's to be determined if it means anything at all, I guess is what I would say. And there's also a lot of reporting, people behind the scenes saying, listen, this doesn't mean that Israel's not gonna get every penny of the whatever $14 billion that was just passed for it. He makes sure to say offensive weapons. So there's a limit to, in terms of how far he's

willing to go in terms of conditioning aid, if that aid even is conditioned. So what is a major invasion? What are we counting as a population center? We don't have a lot of clarity with regards to any of that. So TBD, whether this means anything at all, I think you just have to ask, if you know that our 2,000 pound bombs are being used to massacre civilians, which anyone who's looking at this conflict knows and has known for literally months. I mean, when was it that it got dropped on that refugee camp, killing hundreds of people to possibly maybe get one Hamas fighter?

Wasn't that in November? I want to say that. So we've known this for a long time. So the most obvious question is, what the hell took so long? Most of the Gaza Strip is completely destroyed. Gaza City, Khan Yunis, just rubble. There's more rubble. Gaza is tiny, right? It's like the size of Manhattan, basically.

And there is more rubble in the Gaza Strip than there is in all of Ukraine, okay, in a much shorter period of time and a much, much, much, much smaller landmass. 40,000 Palestinians, we really don't know the total, to be honest with you, dead. All 600,000 kids in Rafah are injured, sick, malnourished. You've got babies starving to death. And so you just look at it, you're like, I'm with you, Sally. Of course, yes, this is the correct position. What the hell took you so long? I think one thing we have to say is the protests seem to be putting pressure on them. They seem to be feeling certainly the political heat from the protest movement across the country,

from the fact that public opinion and especially Democratic opinion is very much against Joe Biden on this. There's a new poll yesterday from Zateo, 57% of Democrats say yes, it's a genocide. Only some 20% say it's not, affirmatively say it's not. So he's dramatically at odds with the Democratic Party. He knows this is a political problem for him. I think that's why this is happening right now. He's very reluctant to make any change in the unconditional support of Israel policy. And so I think you have to say that that political pressure is part of why you're getting at least this rhetorical shift in what appears to have been more than a rhetorical shift, at least in terms of pausing one shipment for now.

I think it's possible. It could be. I'm actually not sure how much it has to do with the domestic political pressure. I'm starting to think a lot of it could also be in terms of international pressure, because what we should remember is that Arafa invasion, crossing, and all of that is a genuine demarcation point,

both for Turkey and for Egypt. And so there is and has been a lot of leaking behind the scenes. I think you might have seen this as well. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia used the term genocide for the very first time actually after the Rafah invasion. So there was the threatening of total international isolation of the U.S. from Saudi Arabia, from Egypt, and from others. And the Egyptians in particular have been putting huge and tremendous pressure behind the scenes because it is a breach of the 1972 agreement. I'm not saying that domestic political pressure didn't have anything.

It's a confluence of events like anything else. I do think though we should remember that the US position in the Middle East has been so degraded now at this point that this really could have been a genuine break to actually see a full on invasion of Rafah. We already saw with the Saudis, which is a key strategic ally for the US. And obviously they've got their finger on the OPEC oil and Biden doesn't want to screw with that. The Egyptians and the NATO. I mean, one of the things that we can't forget either is Turkey after the invasion of Rafah was announced,

pulled all trade with Israel. It was a major, major point in terms of international politics. So I think that that was a significant driver of the fact as well. Maybe. But in my experience, the U.S. response doesn't really care that much about international opinion or like, you know, what's out of like what the Egyptians say. I mean, we fund them significantly, too. We give them a huge amount of aid. And certainly politicians do have a track record of caring about their own re-election prospects. So don't know, like you said, could have been a confluence of factors. But I think the fact that the protests have become so heated, such a divisive issue within the Democratic Party

and that Democratic public sentiment has gone so aggressively against Joe Biden, public sentiment in general has gone so aggressively against Joe Biden, I would say has to be considered as a factor here. Absolutely. In terms of the response, Ryan made this point on Twitter yesterday, which is so true. Joe Biden has been the most pro-Israel president, I think, in American history. I think it's hard to argue otherwise. At every turn, he has given them everything they wanted from diplomatic cover, obviously the weapons and the aid. He's gone out and gone with Bibi Netanyahu's line, smearing college kids as Nazis, like every step of the way it has been the bear hug. And yet the minute that he even threatens to

pause weapon shipments, even, you know, to condition aid at all. Everyone who's pro-Israel, including John Fetterman, all of the Mike Johnson, Mitch McConnell, et cetera, they turn like that. I mean, he doesn't get any credit from them about the fact that he did unconditionally support them. It was the most pro-Israel president that we've literally ever had in history. The minute he changes, man, the knives are out for him. Let's put this up on the screen. You've got Bill Ackman, billionaire. He's been just causing all kinds of trouble and really involved in the whole campus situation, funded those violent counter protesters in UCLA. He says, crazy, this is one of the worst acts against an ally of a sitting president ever. Hopefully, this means he won't be sitting for much longer.

You've got Mitt Romney says we stand by allies. We don't second guess them. Biden's dithering on Israel weapons is bad policy and a terrible message to Israel, our allies and the world. So obviously the vehemently pro-Israel crowd immediately turns on him. And as Ryan pointed out on Twitter, the left's progressives are never

going to forgive him at this point. Like there are so many dead and so much destruction. It really doesn't matter what he does. You can't you can't undo the death and the damage and the trauma that has already been caused. So politically, you know, he's he's made his own bed. And the other thing that I point out, too, is, you know, day before, he was basically painting Israel criticism as anti-Semitic. So if that's your framework, and then the very next day you are yourself criticizing Israel and, you know, voicing some of the concerns that this protest movement is all about, yeah, again, you've made your own bed.

You've set the political framework that being critical of Israel in any way is effectively equivalent to being a Nazi. And then you, you know, guess what happens when you then have to go and criticize Israel? The pro-Israel crowd paints you exactly the way that they do these, you know, student protesters who are on college campuses. Yeah. Let me reiterate what Mitt Romney said. We stand by allies. We don't second guess them. Biden's dithering is bad policy and a terrible message to Israel. That's a crazy way to live foreign policy. Exactly. How many Israeli troops served in Afghanistan? Anyone want to know? Zero. How many Israeli troops served in Iraq, even though they're the ones who asked us to go in there? Zero. How much Israeli dollars

supported the US global war on terror in both of those, zero. I can go on forever. I mean, were there Israeli troops on the ground in Vietnam? No. It's like, what ally are we talking about here? This is so crazy. This is the John Fetterman line. It's like, it doesn't matter what they do. We're gonna support them no matter what. And it's like, that is insane. Even if you're just looking at narrow American interest, it's insane. Obviously, if you're looking at morality, you're literally saying like, no, I don't think they're doing a gem side, but even if they were, I would still support them. Like what? Right. How can, it doesn't matter what they do. You're

going to send them whatever they want, no matter what. That is crazy. It makes no sense. And yet, this is, I mean, really, Israel is very unique. You might put Ukraine in the same category. I think Israel is very unique in people's willingness to just say, nope, don't care. Don't care how many civilians are slaughtered. Don't care that it's against our interests. Don't care that we've turned all of the Middle East against us. Don't care that our troops are being fired on because of Israel's policy, our support of Israel's policy, don't care. It's Israel, no matter what. You didn't swear an oath to Israel when you were sworn in as a United States senator, but that's the way they act. We're gonna put their interest over American interests.

Saying it explicitly, it just, it blows my mind. It honestly blows my mind. I would be remiss if I didn't shout out Jonah Goldberg. This gentleman, one of those never Trumpers out there. He actually, I have a personal beef because he implied I was anti-Semitic whenever I said that the US military should only be used to defend America. That never happens. They never throw that claim around. For what I, worth, I have heard from a lot of reliably anti-Trump people. I mean, really, really anti-Trump people have had it with Biden tonight. Anecdotal, but very telling in my circle. So this is, I mean, I was just thinking about it. It's like

Afghanistan, you know, which they also had dual loyalty to. It's like one of those, oh, that was fine. You know, all these other things they supposedly stand for, conservatives. That's just a tumor. But Israel, that's the one where these other things they supposedly stand for, conservatives. That's just a tumor. But Israel, that's the one where we got to turn. Let's go and put the next one up on the screen. It has some of the details that Crystal was talking about. Militarily, actually, there's some significance here, but because we're specifically talking about the 2,000 and the 500-pound bombs. It was 1,800 2,000-pound bombs and,700 500 pound bombs quote long seen as experts most likely to be Targeted for any potential restrictions because not only how destructive they are in urban settings

But because of Israel's inability to actually manufacture or buy them for themselves That's another thing that is not talked about enough here Israel is a wealthy nation anybody who's ever been there, it's like being in California. I mean, literally, they have universal health care. They have a crazy social welfare state. They have the ability to support a massive chunk of their population, which does not work and is paid by the state to have children and pray all day. And you know, that's their society. They can do what they want. But I personally think that in the wealthy startup nation that they love to brag about, for anybody

who's ever been there, you know what I'm saying, well, they can pay for their own shit. Is that really such a controversial position? But as you said, Crystal, in the United States of America, that is a very controversial position to take. There was also a discourse really a while back. It's kind of a dead discourse now at this point because it's so like patently, obviously false, but of this whole like, you know, well, Israel is their own country and we really don't have any say over what they do. You know, like we don't really have any leverage. All these people who claim that we could just, you know, on a dime, we could do something and they change their behavior. This is crazy. Clearly, we do have leverage. and they change their behavior. This is crazy.

Clearly, we do have leverage. Clearly, it does matter. There's already reports in the Israeli press about how dire it would get for them very quickly if we actually cut off all of these weapons shipments. They would be in a real bind. They'd have to make some real decisions about what they can and can't do. Because remember, they're not just in the Gaza Strip. They're also taking actions in the West Bank. They're also fighting on the northern front versus Hezbollah. They had the back and forth with Iran very recently. That was started, let's never forget, by their provocation of bombing an Iranian embassy building in Damascus. It really is important for people to understand all of this is allowed and enabled by us. It can't happen without us. It really can't. It really can't.

Not just from the weapons, from the diplomatic cover. How integral? We shot down most of the Iranian drones and missiles that were headed to Israel. We shot down a majority of them. And that's why, you know, this, even though there aren't U.S. troops involved, although U.S. troops are coming under fire because of our support for Israeli actions, but even though it's not directly our boots on the ground in Gaza, we are so integral to this. We allow this to happen. And so, yeah, there's a, you know, there's a full freak out about what it could mean, even just the pause of these shipments. Some of that freak out was evidenced even after,

before Biden made these latest comments, after it became public that a weapon shipment had been paused. We have an Israeli member of the Knesset and Likud official, Tali Gottlieb, who had this to say. We can put this up on the screen. I'll read it. She says, the U.S. is threatening not to give us precise missiles. Oh, yeah? Well, I got news for the U.S. We have imprecise missiles, and we have the right to defend ourselves. So maybe instead of using a precise missile and taking down a specific room or a specific building, I'll use my imprecise missiles and I'll just collapse 10 buildings, 10 buildings. That's what I'll do. So just think about this. Because you are withholding 2,000 pound bombs, precise weapons, because out of accountability for

our war crimes and the fact they've been used to bomb civilians, guess what? Our response is to bomb even more civilians. And once again, a lot of discourse about what college students have to say about this conflict. This is a member of the Knesset, a senior party official of Bibi Netanyahu's party. This is a powerful individual. And she talks in a just brazenly, like atrocious manner, and yes, genocidal manner about how she'll take down 10 buildings. She doesn't care. And the gall of these people, after all that Joe Biden has stood by you while you did. And the minute there's even a little bit of a critique, they flip on a dime and they're completely indignant.

Ryan Grimm, our own Ryan Grimm at the State Department briefing yesterday, asked Matthew Miller about these comments and pretty surprisingly, actually got a response. Let's take a listen to that. Likud official, remember the Knesset, she said this. She said, the U.S. is threatening not to give us precise missiles. Oh, yeah, well, I've got news for the U.S. We have imprecise missiles. We'll use it.

We'll just collapse 10 buildings, 10 buildings. That's what we'll do. So she's threatening that if Israel is held accountable for war crimes, they will respond by committing greater war crimes. What kind of effect does that have on U.S. decision making? Those comments are absolutely deplorable. And senior members of the Israeli government should refrain from making them. We will continue to make our policy assessments based on what's in the best interest of the American people, what is in the best interest of the region.

Absolutely deplorable. I was surprised you got a response because usually Miller would just be like, oh, I didn't see it, or we'll look into it, or they shouldn't say bad things, but we support them, et cetera, et cetera. But he got a direct response. Yes, he certainly did. There's also this. This is my personal favorite, Crystal. I'll put this up, please, on the screen, is that the Israeli government is now warning that they they're warning the U.S. that if you pause weapons, that will jeopardize hostage negotiations. So they're basically saying, if you take weapons away from us, then we will pull out of hostage negotiations. And we need those weapons to continue the war so we can free the hostages. Do you understand what I'm saying? Yes. It's a, it's a very interesting circular logic that we all have here. In terms of the end result,

I genuinely don't know. I saw Itvan Ben-Gavir tweet out this morning, quote, Hamas heart Biden, which is pretty insane for a, I mean, a member of the Israeli government. I would not tolerate that from any foreign government who is a recipient of foreign aid if I were Biden. Apparently he's been tolerating things like that now for quite some time. But yeah, it gets me to the point of just like, who do you think you are, man? Again, who do you think you are? You have armed weapons manufacturers in your country? No, you don't. You need us. So how about you shut your mouth and actually show us a little bit of respect? But that's their arrogance. That's who they are. Well, and we know where that arrogance comes from because they've gotten away with everything up to

this point. I mean, everything that Biden has expressed was a problem for him that he's asked to do and had these tough conversations and very tough conversations about. They just did it anyway. I mean, the strike on the Iranian diplomatic building, that wasn't cleared with the U.S. They just did it. And then, you know, have to drag our asses into this thing and shoot down the missiles, make sure that we're protecting Israel, et cetera, et cetera. So Biden has created this climate of, you know, just total brazen arrogance and indifference to what the, you know, American president might think about things. He created that climate. And in terms of the discourse, he fueled that discourse as well. How many times have we heard that, oh, anyone who's out protesting against this war,

against Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip, they love Hamas, they're terrorists, they are Hamas, they say, I am Hamas, et cetera. So when you co-sign that branding of the entire movement as being pro-Hamas, then don't be surprised when that rhetoric is used against you. Yep. I couldn't agree with you more. And the end result of this will all be very interesting. Will Biden stay the course? We'll see. He has been very stubborn sometimes in the past. He is also very willing to cave. Personally, I think he's going to cave. This is the strongest lobby in the history of Washington in terms of his own, the people who are around him, in terms of what, I mean, think too about what the Israelis can mobilize for our own domestic politics. Like you may think these campus protests and all that can make your life miserable. What's even more miserable is when all your donors and all these other people who are so into the cause start pulling money away and start exerting their influence.

I could start, and plus the media whipping this up, you know, into a frenzy. I wouldn't bet so, I would not bet a lot that he stays the course on this, but we'll see. So TBD, what, if anything, these comments actually meant. Over the past six years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received

hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders. I was calling about the murder of my husband at the cold case. They've never found her, and it haunts me to this day. The murderer is still out there. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line, I dig into a new case, bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking. Police really didn't care to even try. She was still somebody's mother. She was still somebody's daughter.

She was still somebody's sister. There's so many questions that we've never gotten any kind of answers for. If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I think everything that might have dropped in 95 has been labeled the golden years of hip hop. It's Black Music Month and We Need To Talk is tapping in.

I'm Nyla Simone breaking down lyrics, amplifying voices, and digging into the culture that shaped the soundtrack of our lives. My favorite line on there was my son and my daughter

gonna be proud when they hear my old tapes. Now I'm curious, do they like rap along now? Yeah, cause I bring him on tour with me and he's getting

older now too. So his friends are starting to understand what that type of music is. And they're starting to be like, yo, your dad's like really the GOAT. Like he's a legend. So he gets it. What does it mean to leave behind a music legacy for your family? It means a lot to me. Just having a good catalog and just being able to make people feel good.

Like that's what's really important, and that's what stands out, is that our music changes people's lives for the better. So the fact that my kids get to benefit off of that, I'm really happy. Or my family in general. Let's talk about the music that moves us. To hear this and more on how music and culture collide, listen to We Need to Talk from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

I know a lot of cops, and they get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them. From Lava for Good and the

team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multi-billion dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad.

Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and three on May 21st and episodes four, five, and six on June 4th. Ad-free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. Meanwhile, there's been an insane legislative response to, in particular, the campus protests. The latest entry into this book is

Marsha Blackburn, who previously said that student protesters should be put on a terrorism no-fly list. She is now actually working to codify that, drafting legislation, along with Senator Roger Marshall that would do exactly that. She talked about her plans on her Instagram. Let's take a listen. Here's what I believe. If they are foreign students and they're here on a visa, we will pull the visa and deport them. They will never come back in this country. If they're American students and they're on student loans that are taxpayer funded, by the way, let's pull those student loans. Anyone who stands and shouts, I am Hamas, then what they should do is to be placed on the terrorist watch list. If they're going to tell us they are a terrorist,

we should believe them. Advocating for the no-fly list there, actually pretty wild. Well, because the thing is, is that in that video, Crystal, she advocates just for foreign students. But actually, if you take a look at the legislation, we can put this up there on the screen, it would actually designate student protesters as terrorists and add them to the no-fly list. So this actually includes U.S. citizens, a genuine breach, in my opinion, of constitutional rights. Absolutely. Yeah, but unfortunately, during the war on terror, as we all discovered, being on the no-fi list actually doesn't technically violate your constitutional rights, according to the Bush administration, the Department of Justice, and some Supreme Court litigation that unfortunately did not go the way that it should have. So this, again, actually

demonstrates the danger of the post-9-11 security state as it is then applied to US citizens. And specifically, actually, in this case, because we are talking about people who are protesting. In that case, I mean, I'm not going to defend the no-fly list of that time, but the justification was, is that they're actively members of a foreign terrorist organization. Right. In this case, like aiding and abetting the enemy, right? Like genuinely treasonous behavior. Again, it was the way it was applied, ridiculous, and hence I don't support it. In this case, though, we're talking about people who are protesting the actions of a foreign government, then being labeled as terrorists and being included on the

no-fly list. Another thing I would point out to many of our right-wing listeners is don't forget how the no-fly list was trotted out after the January 6th prosecutions. And members of the Trump or whatever, pro-Trump MAGA people were also placed on the no-fly list as well, debanked and basically had the power of both the state and the non-institutional parties or institutional non-governmental organizations thrown at you. We're watching the exact same thing happen and play out right here. I mean, it is so clear that why it was so important to oppose things like this at the time during the war on terror, because you could see the way, even though the public was all behind it and it felt good, yeah, we're going to make sure these terrorists can't fly and we got to keep ourselves safe. It was very understandable that the public had that sentiment, but you had to look at the details and say,

well, how else could this be used? How is it being used? There's literally no judicial oversight of this. It's kept secret who's being even put on this list. Those were all massive problems and red flags at the time. And now the way that we see it's being used against American citizens, it would apply to these kids who are camping out on their campuses. They get charged with trespassing, boom, you're a terrorist and you're on a no-fly list. That's crazy. It's absolutely crazy. If you look at that text, that's not the only legislative initiative either. We didn't pull an element for this one, but I was just telling Sagar this morning. There's another bill that was introduced by Andy Ogles of Tennessee and Jeff Duncan of South Carolina and Randy Weber of Texas

that would send college protesters to Gaza for six months if they, I believe, a similar thing, if they were charged with trespassing or some sort of broke a window or whatever, then they would be sent to Gaza for six months. And the thing that Andy Ogle said about this is they wouldn't last a minute there. And it's like, yeah, that's their point, is that Gaza is under massive assault and people are being starved. If you support that, maybe you're the one that should be sent to Gaza. If you think the Israeli military is so humane and everything's all well and good in Gaza, perhaps you're the one who should go and tell us how great it is. Tell us how much aid is going in. Let us know how it's going there. Yeah, that's right.

I mean, just the climate is, I've never seen anything. Even going back to the height of the war on terror, I genuinely have not seen anything quite like what we're experiencing now. I still think the war on terror was worse. Freedom fries and all that. Let's not erase some of the other insanity that happened at that time. The other thing we can point out too, let's put this up there on the screen. And I guess what makes it crazier is that we are displaying significant, similar levels of hysteria on behalf of a country and of a conflict of which we are not even technically the primary actor in. And I think that is what is so galling.

Here we have from Jewish Insider, House bills will ask the U.S. Holocaust Museum to develop curriculum on the October 7th attack, creating resources for secondary schools and elementary schools to teach about October 7th and subsequent anti-Semitic and anti-Israel sentiment. Now, the reason you should all be very afraid of this is because, unlike the Andy Ogles bill, this thing actually has a chance of going somewhere. It probably will pass. Going somewhere?

Well, don't forget, the International Holocaust Remembrance definition of anti-Semitism is the exact definition of anti-Semitism, which was then passed through the U.S. Congress. So this demonstrates very clearly that we will be using definitions, outsourcing them to foreign organizations or non-governmental organizations who have a direct interest in protecting the state of Israel and pushing an agenda and then importing and putting that into U.S. classrooms. Now, if we're talking about science, okay, that's one thing, right? When we're talking about learning about a foreign government, first of all, why should like little kids even be learning about October 7th at all? Like for what purpose? You know, whenever you're

like sub eight years old, to the extent they should learn about October 7th, yeah, I think they should learn about atrocities, I guess, all over the world, and maybe about what happened subsequently and US support and all of that. But we don't even spend enough time on our own history of like Vietnam or World War I. I think we can spend a little bit less time on histories of other places. I mean, listen, you probably hear this and you're like, okay, what's wrong with learning about October 7th? No, you shouldn't have a problem with that. If it was going to be, all right, we're going to take a look at this content. We're going to dig into the origins.

We're going to tell you what happened so you can understand why this continues to persist in the nature of the occupation. No, no, no. That's not what you're going to get from this Josh Gottheimer bill. The bill requests the new curriculum include information about the October 7th attack, how the history of anti-Semitism contributed to the attack, not about the land dispute and the occupation and the blockade, but the history of anti-Semitism, as President Biden said, the ancient hatreds and desires, right? That's the only thing that led to October 7th. Okay, even though there were many non-Jews who were killed on that day, by the way. It's also going to talk about the quote unquote spread of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel rhetoric on

campuses, conflating, of course, anti-Semitism and anti-Israel rhetoric, and the spread of anti-Israel rhetoric on social media. So we've got to also learn how TikTok was, you know, the real villain of October 7th was actually TikTok. So it's not like you're getting an actually factual understanding for our children of what led to October 7th, what happened on October 7th, what happened after October 7th. No, you're getting a, it's like the Israeli government wrote the propaganda piece for our own kids. Which in effect, they basically are, because I guarantee if you look at these two individuals who are sponsoring this bill's contribution history, I would bet very strongly that they've

received some, I know for a fact, Gottheimer has, I don't really know the other dude that much. But that they've received some campaign finance that may have helped to fortify them in their pro-Israel, no matter what sentiment. Just a guess here. That's right. Over the past six years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders. I was calling about the murder of my husband at the country begging for help with unsolved murders.

I was calling about the murder of my husband at the cold case. I've never found her and it haunts me to this day. The murderer is still out there. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line, I dig into a new case, bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking. Police really didn't care to even try. She was still somebody's mother. She was still somebody's daughter. She was still somebody's sister. There's so many questions that we've never gotten any kind of answers for.

If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I think everything that might have dropped in 95 has been labeled the golden years of hip hop. It's Black Music Month and We Need to Talk is tapping in. I'm Nyla Simone, breaking down lyrics, amplifying voices, and digging into the culture that shaped the soundtrack of our lives. My favorite line on there was, my son and my daughter gonna be proud when they hear

my old tapes. Yeah. Now I'm curious, do they like rap along now? Yeah, because I bring him on tour with me and he's getting older now too. So his friends are starting to understand what that type of music is and they're starting to be like, yo, your dad's like really the GOAT. Like he's a legend. So he gets it.

What does it mean to leave behind a music legacy for your family? It means a lot to me. Just having a good catalog and just being able to make people feel good. Like, that's what's really important and that's what stands out is that our music changes people's lives for the better. So the fact that my kids get to benefit off of that, I'm really happy. Or my family in general. Let's talk about the music that moves us. To hear this and more on how music and culture collide, listen to We Need to Talk from the Black Effect Podcast Network

on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I know a lot of cops, and they get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them.

From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multi-billion dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad.

It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Ad-free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. We are extraordinarily fortunate to be joined this morning by Francesca Albanese. She is an international lawyer and also the U.N.'s special rapporteur for human rights in the occupied territories.

Welcome. It's great to have you. Thank you. So to start with, I wanted to get your reaction to some breaking news from yesterday. President Biden saying that he would halt some weapon shipments to Israel if they launch what he described as a major invasion into Rafah. Given what you know about the humanitarian situation on the ground in Gaza and in Rafah specifically, I wonder if you could speak to the significance of his comments. I welcome this decision. I wish it had come earlier because the situation in the Gaza Strip is catastrophic. And of course, all the more in Rafah, where 1.5 million people are amassed, including 600,000 children. The fact that there is no new shipment of weapons sent to Israel, again, is positive, although I understand that Israel's reaction has been that they will use what they

have. So one of the things that we wanted to get from you is just a broader discussion of some of the case that you had brought forward or had argued before, before the ICC. So I'm wondering if you could give our audience, a U.S.-based audience, a view into some of the case, facts of the matter that you were able to discuss, why you think it is important now in this context, even with the war continuing. Well, the ICC has jurisdiction over crimes of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, as well as the crime of aggression. I do not have the detail of how the ICC and the officer of the prosecutor are qualifying the crimes they might have found in the context of their investigation in the situation of Palestine. But I, as you might know from my latest report presented to the Human Rights Council of the

United Nations, I think that the grounds to believe that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza are there. So I'm anxious to see the ICC proceeding with hopefully arrest warrants, of course, both against Israeli leaders and Hamas leaders for what has happened on 7th October. So Francesca, in the context of your report, which found reasonable grounds to believe that Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip been such a high civilian death toll because they operate out of population centers and places allegedly like hospitals. What is your response to that critique of your analysis? Well, this is not what has happened on the ground in Gaza for the past seven months. And again, we are talking of over half a year of casualties and destruction. 70% of Gaza has been destroyed in terms of civilian infrastructure, including livelihood, essential livelihood. There is a total blockade that has been ongoing which prevents unfettered aid, including water, food, medication and fuel entering Gaza. This has been hampered

over and over. And I reject the argument that they have tried to avoid civilian casualties because 70% of the victims, of the reported victims of this conflict have steadily been women and children. And so this has been the situation that should have been addressed from the first weeks of the conflict. There is another element that I collected by many victims and survivors that I've investigated over the past months. They said that since the very beginning they realized that Israel was after something else with this war because

they have seen Israel eating indiscriminately symbols of Palestinian civilian life, like universities, mosques, churches, again, essential livelihoods and hospitals. I also argue in the report that Israel has not rejected the allegations of the conduct that has taken place. They have differently qualified it, justifying it as in compliance with international humanitarian law, which I call humanitarian camouflage. Israel has justified by using international humanitarian law jargon

its military operations, for example, saying, yeah, but we ordered evacuations. The first evacuation was an evacuation order that targeted 1.1 million people. And it was set in an area that, by the way, comprised 22 hospitals. And they said whomever remains behind will be considered a terrorist accomplice. And this is not a way to protect civilians.

All the more, over 42% of the casualties during the first weeks and months of the conflict were in areas that had been identified as safe. This is very dangerous. It's an indication of how little precautions were taken. So the principle of distinctions between civilians and military and the principle of precautions were completely modified. One question I had for you was given that the US and Israel, the two primary, I guess, the participants on this side of the war, are not party to the ICC. Why do you believe that it was

important to bring this case forward for your own participation if there isn't going to be any immediate enforcement on behalf of those two governments? Well, there is a jurisdiction of the ICC over what happens in the occupied Palestinian territory. This is under the jurisdiction of the board, and this falls squarely in also the interest of Israel, because Israel is the occupying power in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. So despite the fact that Israel is not a member,

is not a party to the Rome Statute, it's directly affected by it. Okay. Francesca, I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the current humanitarian situation on the ground. There have been reports Israel is claiming that they've increased the amount of aid that is going into the Gaza Strip.

On the other hand, you have Cindy McCain, the head of the UN World Food Program, saying that northern Gaza is in full-blown famine and that it is rapidly creeping south. What can you say about the current situation, whether there has in fact been an increase in the amount of aid getting into Gaza? Any increase is in the margins. Again, the situation in the Gaza Strip is beyond despair. This is the reality. And I keep on saying, if Israel disputes the figures that are provided by the United Nations,

well, why doesn't Israel allow independent monitors to enter the Gaza Strip? Why Israel doesn't allow journalists to enter the Gaza Strip? This is the only conflict, if you want to call it like that, that has no foreign correspondence and it's astonishing. The reality is dramatic. What I hear not only from the United Nations, the humanitarian operators on the ground, but also from many survivors. It's catastrophic. And I've seen it with my own eyes, visiting hospitals in the region where there are, especially those who have been evacuated from Gaza

in the last weeks and months, they are severely malnourished, especially the children. So there is no question that famine has hit parts of Gaza heavily. And the north, whatever is above the wild Gaza, has been almost off limits to the entry of aid. Whatever has entered from the south has been heavily contingent. And so very, very limited. But also it's impossible to deliver aid. This is something that ANWA has denounced over and over.

I mention ANWA because it's the agency which has the largest capacity to deliver aid in the Gaza Strip and has been hampered by the bombing, the continuous bombing, which has never stopped, the huge destruction to the infrastructure, including roads, and the danger that is present. So especially now with the control that Israel maintains over the Rafah crossing, the United Nations are already saying that there is absolutely not enough aid that enters. There have been attempts to deliver food from the sea and from air, but I find it even a bit cynical, if you allow me to say so, because it does not, this aid has not been delivered according to humanitarian standards, to the no harm principle. And so it has been haphazard and even dangerous, even lethal in a

number of cases because the airdrop has killed people in Gaza. Francesca, as you know, the International Court of Justice is currently considering, courtesy of a case brought by South Africa, whether Israel is committing genocide and violating those conventions in the Gaza Strip. They issued a preliminary finding that was widely reported and understood to be that they found the case to be at least plausible. However, Joan Donahue, who just retired as president of the ICJ, recently spoke with the BBC and indicated this was not the correct way to think about this initial finding. Let's take a listen to what she had to say, and then I want to get your reaction and breakdown on the other side. I'm glad I have a chance to address that because the court's test for deciding whether to impose measures uses the idea of plausibility, but the

test is the plausibility of the rights that are asserted by the applicant, in this case, South Africa. So the court decided that the Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide and that South Africa had the right to present that claim in the court. It then looked at the facts as well, but it did not decide, and this is something where I'm correcting what's often said in the media, it didn't decide that the claim of genocide was plausible. It did emphasize in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there's a plausible case of genocide, isn't what the court decided. Francesca, if you could help us understand what the court did and did not decide in terms of this ICJ potential genocide case.

Yes, I think that, first of all, we need to understand that if there was no case to be heard over alleged genocide in Gaza, the case would have been stopped in its tracks, just as Israel requested. Instead, the ICJ issued a set of preliminary measures on the 26th of January and another on the 28th of March and does not remove either the South Africa versus Israel, not the Nicaragua versus Germany cases that are still pending. Now, the 26th of January order said there is a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. The risk can only exist if someone is plausibly threatening that right. So it seems to me that there is a confusion over semantics.

So the plausible right at risk is the right not to be genocided. So a bigger and more philosophical question. In your report, you wrote about the anatomy of a genocide. Could you define for us what genocide means, I guess, under international law and by the United Nations, and then give us some historical examples other than the Holocaust of what we should look to so that people can wrap their heads around it? I'm glad you asked me this question, Sagar, because especially in the Western world,

I find that there is a huge confusion over what genocide means. And there is, of course, and it should be so. I mean, the Holocaust should remain ingrained in our memory, especially I speak as a European, and the Holocaust should never be forgotten. And what led to the Holocaust should never be forgotten and what led to the Holocaust should not be forgotten. At the same time, what constitutes genocide is not established

necessarily by presidents or personal opinion or personal experiences, painful as they are. What constitutes genocide is established by Article 2 of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Genocide is defined as a set of acts committed with intent to destroy a national, racial, ethnic or religious group in whole or in part as such. And it includes a series of acts like killing members of the group, infliction of severe bodily or mental harm to members of the group, or the creation of conditions of life that would lead to the destruction of the group.

To mention the three cases that I found relevant in the case of John Steyer. Of course, the threshold is very high because one is to prove not only the intent to commit those crimes, but also the intent to destroy the people in whole or in part, the protected group in whole or in part through these acts. So the specific intent cases of genocide.

The very history of colonialism is replenished of genocidal ideology and practices. And this is something that we understand very well if we read the important literature that has been left, including by Raphael Lemkin, the scholar who coined, who gave the world the term genocide. Francesca, why would a finding of genocide matter from the ICJ? Because as has been reported and as always discussed when this case is discussed, the ICJ doesn't really have enforcement powers and as always discussed when this case is discussed, the ICJ doesn't really have enforcement powers. So what does it even matter what they do? What does it even matter if this term actually comes to be applied to Israel's actions with regard to the Palestinian people and specifically in the Gaza Strip? What's your response to that on the

potential impact of this case? Crystal, your question is very important because while the ICJ determination and conclusions is critical to establish state responsibility over the crime of genocide, the Genocide Convention refers to the need and the obligation to prevent genocide. I would like to say that the ICJ conclusions and measures, including provisional measures, are binding. So, while the direct enforcement relies upon states, it's very important that the compass is established by the ICJ. Similarly important is the finding, the investigation and the conclusions of national courts and the ICC, who then have the responsibility

to identify individual criminal liability. But again, the obligation to prevent genocide is triggered by the risk that genocide is being committed. And for me, that moment was reached on the 26th of January when the court concluded that there is a possibility of risk for the rights protected under the Genocide Convention for the Palestinians in Gaza.

Why is it important? It's important because these instruments and these mechanisms are the ones leading to justice. But for me, the very existence of a convention which has in itself the obligation, which is erga omnes, applies to all member states, including those who are not party to the Genocide Convention, to prevent genocide, giving the gravity of this crime is necessary. I mean, we cannot wait for the determination of the court to prevent genocide. Otherwise, a genocide might be committed.

My question is, so the defense here in the United States by the Israelis is that mass civilian death is frankly just, I guess, part and parcel, as they would put it, of an urban military campaign. The Israeli defenders have been pointing to U.S. and Iraqi military actions in the city of Mosul. There have been previous comparisons to the number of civilian casualties who were incurred in the Second World War. How do you think about the difference between those two or three examples? What level of civilian casualty is accepted? How do you parse intent whenever you are writing your report and your thinking, as you said, through the genocide conventions? I think that the arguments that have been offered and that you quoted for me

are a way to divert the attention from what is happening on the ground and the need to have scrutiny over Israel's practices. This is not the case like any other, because Israel is the occupying power in the Gaza Strip, and so should take the utmost precautions in ensuring that the occupied population is protected and is spared from the previous impact of any conflict. Now, and this is not the first conflict that has occurred in Gaza. This is the sixth, of course, the most violent. Again, I go back to the point that I said in the beginning,

the action that Israel has taken have been indiscriminate and have targeted civilians. There is no question about that. But this is something that I reflect from the very first days of this revengeful military operation against the Gaza Strip because the very idea of targeting Hamas, going after Hamas, considering anyone as a terrorist, was very dangerous, was very blurred. Where is the distinction between the civilians and the combatants? We know that who can be targeted under international humanitarian law are active

combatants. So even a soldier, including Israeli soldiers, cannot be targeted unless they are in active combat. And if they have surrendered, they need to be respected. They can be taken prisoners, but they cannot be executed. So there is a respect for the right to life in international humanitarian law, so in situations of conflict, which is minimal. It's not absolute. And at the same time, this is the minimum threshold not to fall into complete brutality, cruelty and lack of humanity. So what has happened in Gaza is, again, Israel has justified its actions like,

okay, we have killed all these many people because they wear human shields. Where is the evidence? We know from the investigations that Israelis themselves, Israeli journalists have carried out, that artificial intelligence has been deployed up to the point that in order to target one Hamas fighter or combatant. And a risk up to 100 people has been calculated. So there have been instances and documented instances, like in Jabaliya camp, where 100 people were killed and 100 people were injured just because there was one military combatant, allegedly there, we don't know if in active combat or not, who was

present. Again, these are not precautions and these are not respectful of the principle of distinction. So even if there was a legitimate reason to start a war against the Gaza Strip, the way it has been

conducted is absolutely against any basic principle of international humanitarian law. We also have a lot of statements from senior Israeli officials, some of which you document in your report, some of which are documented in the South African case at the ICJ that seem to indicate genocidal intent, talking about no uninvolved civilians, describing everyone in Gaza as animals, reference to biblical Amalek, etc. How important are those statements from Israeli officials? Now, what they would say is, oh,

this is just heat of the moment. This is populist rhetoric. It's not actually being translated into policy. So how significant and consequential do you find those statements to be? No, indeed, if we look at international jurisprudence, for example, stemming from the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia or Rwanda, we can definitely see that statements of officials per se do not constitute to the hardcore evidence to prove that there is genocide. In fact, what I claim is that on the one hand, there has been, I look at the legal documents that have animated this or have led to this military campaign, but also what has happened on the ground, because those words that you have, those horrible words that you have mentioned in the beginning have resonated, have reverberated, have been internalized

and acted upon by soldiers on the ground. I mean, it's been really soul consuming, heartbreaking to see the self-incriminatory videos that Israeli soldiers themselves have posted on social media and a significant number of whom I had verified, including the technical experts, where they claim to have hit entire neighborhoods as a revenge against the animals who carried out the 7th of October attack. And they have often quoted this language, the Amalek, they have talked of the full destruction of Gaza. And soldiers have repeated, we came here to destroy, to occupy, and to settle. And this is something that, again, as they go so powerfully across the infantry that has been deployed on the ground, that it is really scary. One of the infantry that has been deployed on the ground, that is really scary.

One of the reasons that we... So this is why when I say... Sorry, go ahead. Let me say, let me say, Sagar, just I think it's important to implement what I said in the beginning. So in order to determine whether there is genocide, we need to find the intent. And intent cannot be determined only on the words and oral statements of policymakers, but can be inferred. And again, when there is such a nature, scale, and patterns of conduct that speak to the same

intent and there is a reality and the capacity to carry out a genocide, well, this is where the intent becomes auspicious and ostentatious. One of the reasons that we reached out to you originally was a response from the U.S. State Department where they appeared to imply that you were anti-Semitic. So we have some of the comments here from the State Department spokesperson, Matt Miller, and we'll get your reaction. Let's take a listen. We have for a longstanding period of time opposed the mandate of this special rapporteur, which we believe is not productive. And when it comes to the individual who holds that position, I can't help but note a history of anti-Semitic comments that she has made that have been reported. She made anti-Semitic comments?

She has. And comments she made in December that appeared to justify the attacks of October 7th. So I think it's important to take that into account. But with respect to the report itself, we have made clear that we believe that allegations of genocide are unfounded. So we wanted to give you a chance to respond to that. Okay. First of all, the U.S. has never considered this, has always contested, like Israel, the value of this mandate. And this is something that precedes me and has little to do with my persona. While the comments of the spokesperson had to do very much with my persona. And I was appalled when I heard that a senior U.S. official could spread these lies, because they are lies. First of all, I've never, ever justified, it's appalling, I've never justified the 7th of October attacks. I've said that these acts were

brutal, were criminal, and I have said that there should be, should be an absolute need to have investigation and prosecution of those crimes. I've said also we need to understand where this hatred comes from. What I have rejected is the qualification of those acts as motivated by antisemitism because first of all there is no evidence of it. The second thing is that there are Israeli scholars themselves who say that it's very responsible to put the burden on what has happened on alleged anti-Semitism of Palestinians, because this deresponsibilizes Israel and decontextualizes the horror that has taken place in occupied Palestinian territory for 56 years, which might have fed that hatred. So again, I push back on this allegation. The allegation of antisemitism is repulsive, as disgusting for me is antisemitism.

As a human rights lawyer, I'm engaged against antisemitism, against Islamophobia, Arabophobia, any form of discriminations, including anti-Palestinian racism. And what I really very much reject is that the allegation of anti-Semitism is used more and more to distract from Israel's responsibility, which is something that also not only betrays what antisemitism is, but creates new dangers for the Jewish people wherever they are. We need to distinguish what is Judaism and what is Israel's conduct. And I've always said, and I'm on record,

I've always said any Jewish person is allowed to have all the feelings and love for Israel they want. What I stand against is the unconscionable stance of governments in sheltering Israel from accountability, which protracts its impunity. Well, Francesca, I guess you can take comfort in the fact that you are far from alone in being labeled as anti-Semitic for your views with regard to what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip. I'm sure you're familiar with the discourse here, including from the

president of the United States about the campus protesters that have, you know, these protests have really taken off across the country. Students who are calling for a ceasefire, calling for the U.S. to end their support for what they see as you do as a genocide. I wanted to get your reaction to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson made some very noteworthy comments on Holocaust Remembrance Day about these protests and the character of these protests. Let's take a listen to that. The very campuses which were once the envy of the International Academy

have succumbed to an anti-Semitic virus. Students who were known for producing academic papers are now known for stabbing their Jewish peers in the eyes with Palestinian flags and with our survivors before us. If you close your eyes in the in the quietness of your own heart you can almost hear the glass of Jewish storefronts shattered by stormtroopers. You could see fathers being executed at point blank in the ghettos. You can feel a brother's hand slipping out of his sister's as men in uniforms separate them into lines and they can only mouth to one another, everything will be okay, hoping that it would be.

So Francesca, first, just to correct the record, there are no documented incidents of anyone being stabbed with the eye by a flag or any other thing. Just wanted to put that out there. But here you see the Speaker of the House labeling American students, equating them to Nazis, very much echoing the rhetoric of Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu. This has been used to justify quite an extensive crackdown and criminalization of these protests. I wonder what your reaction as an international human rights lawyer is, both to this language, but also to the response to these campus protests. Well, let me react on the remarks first.

I find Speaker Johnson's remarks both infelicitous and inaccurate. The comparative illusions of college campus protests against Israel's conduct in Gaza, because this is what we are talking about, to anti-Semitism, to the heinous, awful, revolting anti-Semitism that led to the Holocaust is not only historically inappropriate, but also functions to divert the attention from the substantive issues at hand, namely the growing body of evidence regarding the atrocity crimes committed in Gaza, that clearly this young generation globally across the world cannot stomach anymore. I also found that this rhetorical tactic, exploiting the memory of the Holocaust, instrumentalizing one of the history's greatest atrocities for contemporary purposes, is unacceptable because it undermines the gravity and uniqueness of the Holocaust while simultaneously obscuring the pressing concerns

in the occupied Palestinian territory. And I believe that as we aim to foster a constructive and respectful discourse, it is crucial that historical comparisons are made with careful considerations of their accuracy and their implications. And going to the protests in U.S. campuses, I can tell as a European, this is spreading across the world. Anyone, including, I mean, I live in an Arab country and everyone is looking at these young people as the most courageous. And I do share this theme. So I keep on saying, I hope that they stay peaceful and respectful and isolate any element that might represent a threat to anyone in university. But I also want to say that there are many Jewish students among them.

And again, this is what gives me hope, that the new generation doesn't buy anymore what has been the narrative sold by Israeli leadership nowadays. Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur, thank you so much for taking some time with us this morning. We're extremely grateful. We know you're very busy. Thanks for your time. Thank you. Thank you guys so much for watching. We really appreciate it for supporting us. Make sure you

go and sign up, breakingpoints.com. You can get early access to the counterpoints, debates, and support some of the work there. And help us interview UN officials. That's the first one for me. So thank you all very much. Otherwise, we'll see you all next week. You experienced dad guilt? I hate it. She understands, but she's still being pissed. She's like, dude. Happy Father's Day. The show may be called Good Moms, Bad Choices, but this show isn't just for moms. We keep it real about relationships and everything in between. And yes, men are more than welcome to listen in.

I knew nothing about brunch. She was a terrible girlfriend, but she put me on to to hear this and more open your free iHeart app search good moms bad choices and listen now over the years of making my true crime podcast hell and gone i've learned no town is too small for murder i'm katherine townsend i've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community i was calling about the murder of my husband. The murderer is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case.

If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Stay informed, empowered, and ahead of the curve with the BIN News This Hour podcast. Stay informed, empowered, and ahead of the curve with the BIN News This Hour podcast. Updated hourly to bring you the latest stories shaping the Black community. From breaking headlines to cultural milestones, the Black Information Network delivers the facts, the voices, and the perspectives that matter 24-7 because our stories deserve to be heard. Listen to the BIN News This Hour podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

This is an iHeart Podcast.