Judging Freedom - Matt Hoh: Can Israel Legally Own Gaza?

Episode Date: September 17, 2024

Matt Hoh: Can Israel Legally Own Gaza?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Resolve to earn your degree in the new year in the Bay with WGU. With courses available online 24-7 and monthly start dates, WGU offers maximum flexibility so you can focus on your future. Learn more at wgu.edu. so so Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, September 17th, 2024. Matt Ho will be with us in just a moment on Netanyahu's latest claims on Gaza and latest killings in Lebanon. But first this. A divisive presidential election is upon us and the winner is gold. Let me tell you what I mean. Since 2016, our national debt has grown a staggering 70 percent and gold has increased by 60%. Do you own gold? I do. I bought my gold in February 2023, and it has risen 33%.

You've heard me talk about Lear Capital, the company I trust. Let me tell you why. Recently, Kevin DeMeritt, who is the founder and CEO of Lear, assisted the FBI in discovering a nationwide gold theft ring. And because of Kevin's good work, the FBI caught these people before they could steal anymore. That's why I have been saying the people at Lear are good people. They believe in America. They believe in their product and they're honest to the core. So take action right now, my friends. Call 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com.

Protect your savings and retirement before it's too late. 800-511-4620, learjudgenap.com. Remember, hope is not a strategy, but gold is. Matt Ho, welcome to the show, my dear friend. Your time, of course, is always very much appreciated. I would like to spend a fair amount of time discussing the latest in Israel, including the exploding pagers that have apparently injured 2,800 people and killed 10, including two babies. But before we get there, let's do a little bit on your thoughts on Ukraine. It appears as though, notwithstanding the hints given by Secretary Blinken midweek last week in Kiev,

and notwithstanding the hints given by British Prime Minister Starmer, that while the prime minister was over the ocean, Joe Biden changed his mind and very angrily revealed that the United States will not be authorizing and Great Britain will not be authorizing Ukraine to use long range missiles reaching deep into Russia. Gee, do you think this had anything to do with President Putin's statement? I think it might have, although I'm not as encouraged by it as others. Judge, and of course, thank you for having me back on. I think there's a danger here that maybe they're just getting their message synchronized. And so the delay in approving these long range missiles has to do with narrative management in the sense with the remember that Zelensky is coming next week to New York, to the United Nations General Assembly, where he's going to present his victory plan, which I guess, Judge, that means he's going to tell us how things are going to end and we don't have to talk about it anymore, right? I mean,

it's like, you know, it's anyway, that that's certainly the way if you listen to corporate media, mainstream media, that that's the way they're, they're, they're implying the success of this, how this thing's going to go. However, there is this aspect that you said, in the sense that Biden did say no to this, and it comes following very clear, very direct and very serious warnings from the Russians. Now, you have Americans and Brits and French and Germans and others in NATO who are saying you don't have to. And of course, the Ukrainians, you don't have to respect or pay attention to what the Russians are saying. But I think you also have the realization in Washington, D.C., that this game of chicken has to end in some manner. And the way in which the Russians have so clearly said that, you know, the United States for decades has felt in our planning and our policies has believed that Europe is the buffer zone for World War III

with Russia, that if war begins, it's going to take place there, including the beginning phases of nuclear war. And if at any point it gets too serious, then we'll be able to negotiate an end. This is essentially a lot of the escalate to de-escalate policy that informs so much of the American imperial policies abroad with the terms, their aggression towards adversaries. So the fact that the Russians said clearly, look, we're not going to limit this just to Europe. If you think that our first nuclear strikes are only going to be in Europe, or perhaps even our conventional strikes against NATO are only going to be in Europe, you're mistaken. So for Americans who for decades now have said, you know, if it's going to happen,

that means we're going to lose Berlin, or we're going to lose Warsaw, or we're going to lose Bucharest, but we're going to be okay. The Russians clearly said that is not the case. And Joe Biden is under an awful lot of pressure here. He is being portrayed throughout American media and the pressure, particularly in Washington, D.C., of being the man who potentially will lose Ukraine, that he's going to be the one who is tying the hands of the Ukrainians and won't let them win the war. Where have we heard that before, right? In the American narratives about war, they tied our hands in Korea, they tied our hands in Vietnam, they tied our hands in Iraq, like all nonsense, all completely untrue. But it's a great myth.

It's a great warmongering narrative to follow. As well as Joe Biden, your legacy is going to be that you're the one who backed down from the dictator Putin. You didn't stand up for democracy against authoritarianism. That's what he's under attack from. Here is the person that Joe Biden calls the dictator Putin with the warning about which you just spoke so eloquently. Cut number five, Chris. It is not about allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is about making a decision about whether NATO countries are directly involved in the military conflict or not. If the decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States, and European countries in the war in Ukraine.

This is their direct participation, and this, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict. This will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are fighting Russia. And if this is so, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict, we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us. Joe Biden Pretty direct, calm, methodical, rational, and direct. Paul Jay

Right. And obviously, Joe Biden is being presented, or you would like to think he is being presented with what would this look like? You know, I hope to God that the conversations regarding the idea of allowing American missiles to strike into Russia, including the discussion of what happens next. We provide these missiles. How do the Russians respond? How do we then respond? How do the Russians then respond to our responses? You know, Ritter, Scott has said, the missiles are so sophisticated,

we wouldn't train others to use them. Americans would have to use them, and Russian intel knows that. That's correct. The other thing, too, is hopefully, and if the assumption is that the Pentagon are the people who spoke to Joe Biden and said, you can't stop listening to Tony Blinken, stop listening to these pundits in the media, stop listening to the people at the DNC.

I mean, this is the other problem, too, Judge, is that in polling, the war is still very popular among Democrats, particularly among the most ardent, the bluest of the loyalists of the Biden-Harris White House. There's polling that came out, that was done by the Cato Institute a week or so ago, that found that the majority of Democrats were in favor of continuing to support Ukraine, even if that meant war with Russia. You have to remember that that this is this is because they only polled democrats they they pulled everyone this is an interesting poll done by cato uh of of uh voters in wisconsin pennsylvania and michigan so the three

key swing states for this election one of the things that found is that democrats it polled everyone but it broke it out of course course, by Republican and Democrat. But just in the case, I know we're going to get to Israel and Palestine in a moment, but it shows that among Democrats, among independents, and even to a degree among Republicans, ending arms transfers to Israel is a winning campaign issue, that Harris would gain more votes by ending arms transfers or at least conditioning arms transfers to Israel, then she would lose. So you can see, and you go through this poll and you can see it's clear that the Democrats are more concerned about staying in the good graces of the Israel lobby in AIPAC

than they are of actually winning the election in November. But to get back to Ukraine, the poll shows that for many Democratic voters, this is still a very important issue to them. It may not be their top issue. It may be number five or six, but it informs their identity because we have to remember that this war is a culmination of the nearly decade long Russiagate campaign narrative campaign messaging that the Democrats have used for 10 years against Republicans and Donald Trump. That, you know, I mean, so to undo that now, to say in the elections, to say two months before the elections, that it really doesn't matter anymore. We can make peace with Russia, you know, that we can back off from the war in Ukraine. That upends your whole democracy versus authoritarianism, Putin equals Trump type

of rhetoric that you have has dominated the party for almost a decade. Before we get to Israel, I have to see the look on your face and hear your comments after you hear Boris Johnson's latest on Ukraine and take a note of who's sitting next to him, the former director of the CIA and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. We're not going to play Pompeo, but because there's enough. Well, I'll let Johnson speak for himself. Cut number seven. As for the role the Ukrainians could themselves play in stability and security in the Euro-Atlantic area, it's obvious. Thanks to the heroism of the Ukrainian armed forces,

they've been fighting for more than two years, almost three years. They are the most accomplished armed forces in the whole continent. And it's easy to see how they could play a very, very important

role in peace and stability on the European continent. One of the arguments I think we should make to our American friends is if they want to take back some US troops from the European theatre and save a few billion, a lot of billion, Mike, then I'm sure the Ukrainians, having defeated the Russians, and there's nobody more effective at defeating the Russians than the Ukrainians, I'm sure the Ukrainians would be only too happy to backfill in Europe. Anyway, those are some of the things, some of the ways in which I think Ukraine can be

a force for stability. That's about as irrational as you can get. Right. I only want to joke about it because this is an important figure. a force for stability. That's about as irrational as you can get. Right. I only want to joke about it because this is an important figure. I mean, this is the man who kept this war going. This is the man who went to Kiev in April and told Zelensky and the Ukrainian government to stop their negotiations with Russia to back out of the peace deal that would have ended this war two and a half years ago now. I mean, how many hundreds of thousands of people would still be alive, their lives not ruined? How many millions of people would have been able to return home? How we would not be in this game of chicken with Russia at this point if Boris Johnson

had not done that. I mean, but those comments are just completely irrational. He's in a fantasy land. This idea that Ukraine is going to backfill the Americans because Ukraine has won the war. I mean, I don't even know where to begin to try and understand what he's talking about. But one of the things that does kind of bring me back to you asked me a question before, Judge, and I went off on a tangent like I usually do. But, you know, this idea that very informative tangent. I appreciate the vote of confidence there. The this idea, though, of the Pentagon were the ones that told Joe Biden, hey, look, back off. Don't do this. This missile expansion thing. Don't allow our missiles to go into Russia.

One of the arguments might have been it's not going to matter. You know, like it just look, these, these wonder weapons don't exist. There, there is no magical fairy ending some Deus Ex Machina technologically that's going to win this thing for us. All it's going to do is the Russians are just going to pull their forces back. You know, anyone who's telling you that this is going to stop them from dropping glide bombs just simply doesn't know what they're talking about. I'll just give you an example. You know, the idea that we need these missiles to strike the Russian air bases to prevent them from dropping those large glide bombs, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 pound bombs, which are basically unstoppable and wrecking the Ukrainian military. I mean, absolutely wrecking them. Well, I mean, if anyone knows about our operations in Iraq,

in Afghanistan, where did our planes come from? Our planes came from hundreds of miles away. When we were in Afghanistan, we had air cover. We had planes coming from the Persian Gulf and from Diego Garcia, thousands of miles away. When I was in Iraq, I remember in 04, when the Fallujah campaign was going on and I was in Tikrit. I remember hearing the F-15s coming down the Tigris River, you know, to go bomb Fallujah, which was 120 miles away from me, or however far it was. Where were they coming from? They were coming from Turkey. You know, I don't know a lot about the Russian aircraft. You'd have to ask Scott or somebody that knows the equipment better than I do. But I do know they could just simply move their aircraft back.

They can just simply use aerial refueling. I mean, this idea that somehow these weapons, like all the other things, the HIMARS, the ATAKOMs, the M1s, whatever they are. And this is where it sets it up for really dangerous, though, because what comes next? They allow us to use the attack them or the or we give them the jazz and missiles for the F-16s to strike a couple hundred miles into Russia. Russia pulls its forces back. And this is saying we're not going to talk about Russia retaliating or escalating the war. Right. Just leave that aside. Well, OK, now Russian pulls it. They pull their air forces back. Well, then what comes next? Of course, you have to give us Tomahawks. We need tomahawks.

You know, you're stabbing the Ukrainians in the back if you don't give them tomahawks. This war would have been over if we just give them tomahawks, right? I mean, so it never ends. And so I'm hoping that maybe that was the mindset, the cognitive honesty that was occurring in Washington, D.C. this past week when it was said that, no, we're not going to allow these missile strikes with American missiles into Russia. And hopefully it's not, as I was kind of saying cynically before, just an effort to get the message synchronized that we can announce this when Lincoln comes. Because Biden did make that troubling point, or the White House did make the troubling point, and it was Kirby, that we'll talk about this further at the UN. So my fear is that this is just getting it all on all that, get the message tied together. And that this is when that when Volodymyr Zelensky shows up and gives his big

victory plan, this is going to be a component of it. Switching over to Israel, at the same time that Prime Minister Netanyahu is threatening to fire his defense minister and replace him with yet another right-winger, at the same time that Netanyahu has appointed a retired IDF colonel as the governor of Gaza, at the same time that a retired IDF general has said Netanyahu has lost the war, we cannot defeat Hamas, the following happens. Cut number 16. The communication device that is being used by the Lebanese armed group has been penetrated, hacked, and a number, hundreds of Hezbollah, members of Hezbollah have been wounded after those devices, which are known as pagers. That's the way that they are calling them, exploded. So if these are pagers, you know, like we used in the U u.s in the 90s before we had our cell phones and that's the way they communicate with each other and the israelis found a way to penetrate them they've wounded about 2300 and they've killed eight two of whom

uh were babies now the idf hasn't claimed credit for it, but who else could it be? Exactly. I mean, Mossad, you know, I mean, this is the Israelis. I can't imagine it's anyone else or it could be anyone else. You know, the pagers are used, Judge. My understanding, they use pagers because they can't be hacked in the sense of people getting into it and reading information that they might want to get. This is a simple, was supposed to be secure, safe way of alerting Hezbollah members that they're needed, essentially, or to go check their email or whatever it is.

You know, whether or not these attacks, which were, it's massive. I mean, we're talking about hundreds, at least hundreds, maybe thousands of devices, both in Lebanon and in Syria, as you said, close to 3000 wounded, 10 dead, including children. You know, the scale of this and the terror of it, you know, is what's so pressing right now. I will say that Netanyahu did make a big speech last night saying that we are going to finish this issue with Lebanon. We need to get our people back to their homes in northern Israel because they still have 100,000 internally displaced refugees from the cross-border attacks that have been coming there. It's a huge drain on their economy as well as a big political issue.

So we're going to get our people back home and we're going to finish this in Lebanon. This, of course, happens today. Whether this was it, this was the attack, it was punitive, it was meant as a warning, or was this an attempt to decapitate, you know, leadership within Hezbollah for a follow-on attack, a follow-on military operation, right? You take out their mid-level, their junior mid-level, senior level guys, cause disruption within their command and control, that makes them, makes an Israeli attack much more likely to be successful, at least in the opening moments of it. But I mean, the idea that comes to this, and we don't know if this was done by the Israelis implanting explosives into the devices or somehow being able to cause the batteries to explode.

We'll know within a day or so. I mean, it won't be very hard to tell whether or not there's explosive residue, but the idea of the terror behind it, the idea that the way it was done, and I mean, the videos I've seen of this, you know, it's been of people who are in stores, people buying groceries, and it goes off. I mean, so the terror and the fact that thousands have been wounded, children killed, it just shows that this is the Israeli way of war. This is the Israeli way of life. The Israelis exist in what used to be, you know, in our ancestors would call, you know, you had a house of peace and a house of war. And the Israelis have perpetually lived in the house of war. And this is what that this does to them. They think that doing such things, having pages

explode while parents are driving cars with their children in them, pages explode while people are shopping for groceries and don't care who's around them. That's the point. Israel is a country that was founded upon terrorism. You go back to what the Israelis were doing before Israel became a state with the Ergun movement. Most famous, of course, was the King David hotel bombing in 1946. Israel was founded with terrorism. And then, of course, we've talked about this, Judge, not just the genocide in Gaza, but the way it's being carried out, particularly through the artificial intelligence programs, which are meant not to limit civilian casualties, but to increase civilian casualties. The best example being, we know of three Israeli

artificial intelligence programs, Lavender, Gospel, and Where's Daddy? Where's Daddy, of course, being the artificial intelligence program that tells the Israelis when to strike Hamas members when they are located with their families. Right. We see that this willingness, this desire of the Israelis to kill family members, to kill neighbors, to kill friends, it's part and parcel. It is who they are. It's how they were founded. It's how they existed.

It's what they believe in. Then do we care if netanyahu fires galant does it make a difference will his replacement have the same uh brutal genocidal mentality absolutely it doesn't make a difference anything it makes it worse because galant's not genocidal enough he's not murderous enough he's not extreme enough for Netanyahu. Galant, from what I can tell, the big issues between Galant and Netanyahu, a lot of it boils down to Galant representing the IDF and trying to make sure that the IDF isn't overstretched, that the IDF isn't exhausted, doesn't collapse from internal wear and tear, and is able to fight

larger and more important battles for Israel. You know, I mean, so you look at this, you've got a man who is happy to carry out genocide just as long as it's being done effectively and efficiently and doesn't degrade the Israeli army's ability to operate. Well, we're going to praise, he's not, he's not genocidal enough. He's not extreme enough. Right. I mean, so they want to replace him with who then, you know going to praise, he's not genocidal enough. He's not extreme enough, right? I mean, so they want to replace him with who then? I mean, so absolutely, it doesn't really matter in the sense that it's not going to improve any things. It will actually only make things worse, and that's kind of a really scary thing to think is possible.

Do you think that Amos Hochstein and Bill Burns and the other American negotiators have finally recognized that the negotiation was futile from the start? And that Netanyahu's appointment of this retired colonel as the governor, I'm doing air quotes because this is not lawful, the governor of Gaza is yet another manifestation of his intention, as long as he's in office, to eradicate Gaza of the Palestinians, whether by forcing them out alive or dead. I think that the ones who are the most Zionists in that group are dismayed that Israel has not been as receptive to our willingness to provide the cover they needed for their genocide. So even those who are the most Zionist have to be upset at the fact that we have done everything for you over this last year. We have given you everything you needed, everything you

asked for. We have provided cover for you in the media, politically at home in the U.S., as well as internationally., have protected you over and over again. And this is how you're playing this out. You're not willing to give us anything in return. So even the most ardent of the Zionists within the Biden administration have to feel disrespected, have to feel a little bit put out. But at the same time, too, they're going to turn around and look at their political masters and say, this is what's best for them. Staying in the good graces of Israel and its American lobby are the most important things. That is job number one. That is the commander's intent, is to make sure that we win this election in November. And to do that, we have to stay

on the good side of Israel and her lobby. So they have to be frustrated by it, that they have given Israel so much. And this is what they're getting in return. Certainly, I can't imagine they ever thought that I can't imagine that any of them have ever had a moment where they've been going about this in good faith, unless they are as deluded and irrational and psychopathic as Boris Johnson, which may be the case. But you look at a guy like Bill Burns, and you know that is not the case. Burns, I mean, who has been so prescient and honest and cogent, particularly say we most know of what he is, when I say that, mostly referring to his past with regards to his explanation on what's occurring in Russia, what will occur if we expand NATO, those types of

things. But we see Burns now, of course, with that, willing to disregard everything he said in the past about it, disregard his own honest explanations, his own sincere explanations of what's occurring, his own advice to multiple White Houses, to go along with what his political masters need. And, I mean, this is what we're dealing with here. Chris, can you put up the full screen of the retired general? What can you tell us about this major general, a relatively young man? Hamas is winning the war. Our soldiers are winning every

tactical encounter with Hamas, but we're losing the war in a big way. Do you know this fellow, know of this fellow, or why he would have made such a profound statement recently after retiring with the rank of Major General? No, I don't know him, Judge. He was the commander of the Gaza division. So not only was he a retired major general from the Israeli military, he also was there in Gaza running operations for the Israeli military for at least a period of probably 18 months or two years or however long they keep those billets for. I will say that sounds very familiar, this idea we never lost a tactical encounter. That was certainly the case for us in Iraq and Afghanistan. I mean, particularly a period of time, particularly 04 through, say, 12, the best killers in the world were American Marines and American soldiers. No one was going to beat an American squad in a gunfight anywhere

in the world. And we lost those wars. The difference between us losing those wars and the Israelis losing this one is Iraq and Afghanistan are 7, 8, 9,000 miles away from us in the US. Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem are right there on top of Israel. And so when you lose that war, what does that actually mean? And I don't mean this since the Palestinians are going to take over, but like the pressure on Israel, this collapse that we keep seeing,

these warnings that keep coming out of senior Israeli officials. And when you look at it, whether it's their military, whether it's their economy, whether it's their politics, this idea of Israel eating itself alive and that Netanyahu's policies being suicidal. You know, you continue to see more and more evidence for this.

Certainly, you know, you understand why people are not investing in Israel. This is this is terrible investment. This is why it's being, you know, it's credit rating keeps getting diminished. So, you know, it's certainly understanding it in the frustration that these men who are speaking out, former Israeli generals, or say, Roman Bar, the head of the Shin Bet, right, Israel's version of the FBI, the frustration they must have witnessing this, witnessing this suicidal path that Israel is on for something that they cannot even win. It's impossible to win. This occupation, the resistance will go on as long as they're occupied, and they see themselves being further isolated in the world. So tomorrow in the United Nations, the United Nations General Assembly is going to vote on a resolution put forward by the Palestinian delegation. The first resolution the Palestinian delegation has been able to submit since they were seated, which is a great thing to see.

But the resolution, of course, calls for Israel to end its occupation and it's going to the United Nations General Assembly. So not the Security Council. This resolution will go to the General Assembly. It's not a binding resolution, although there are pathways for the UN General Assembly to issue a binding resolution through what's called the Uniting for Peace actions. But tomorrow we should see a vote coming out of the UN General Assembly just one week before all those hundreds of heads of state come, 195 or however many, come to New York for the annual UN General Assembly get together, if you will. And I do believe that Benjamin Netanyahu is planning to come as well. I think that's correct. of the entire United Nations stating Israel must end its occupation, which is in line, of course,

with this year's ruling by the International Court of Justice, the World Court, stating that Israel is conducting an illegal occupation of Palestinian land, Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem. So, I mean, if you're an Israeli who believes in their country and who wants to see their country continue and you see all this going on, the frustration, the despair must be mounting every day. Matt Ho, thank you very much, my dear friend. Excellent, excellent analyses on both Ukraine and Israel. Your time is much appreciated. We look forward to seeing you again next week. Thanks, Judge.

Of course, all the best. Coming up at three o'clock Eastern this afternoon, Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. We'll be you next time. than you think by demonstrating mastery of the material you know. Make 2025 the year you focus on your future. Learn more at wgu.edu.