Piers Morgan Uncensored - 'YOU Are Making Jews Less Safe!' Americans Jews Debate Israel-Gaza | With Peter Beinart

Episode Date: August 8, 2025

Far away from the bullets and the outrage over 'total occupation', Jews in America find themselves accountable for the actions of a country over which they have no say. Israel’s war on Hamas has unquestionably opened a spigot of antisemitism. And, as we’ve sometimes seen on Uncensored, the hatred flows in the other direction too. But American Jews are far from unanimous in their support for Israel or for Israel’s war, as demonstrated in the recent exchange between Peter Beinart and Jon Stewart on the Daily Show. He joins Piers Morgan to discuss the reaction the interview’s had, before being joined by fellow American Jews Shabbos Kestenbaum, Benyamin Moalem and Katie Halper. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Oxford Natural: To watch their full stories, scan the QR code on your screen or visit https://oxfordnatural.com/piers/ to get 70% off your first order when you use code PIERS. Birch Gold: Visit https://birchgold.com/piers to get your free info kit on gold. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our safety, the safety of Israeli Jews, is intertwined with the safety of Palestinians. Most of the Palestinians who live in Gaza are only in Gaza because their parents or grandparents or great-grandparents were ethnically cleansed from Israel. This, for Jews, for us, this should be horrifying. He's not entitled to his own facts. You can be as Jewish as you would like. Unfortunately, if you look at the Hebrew Bible, we have seen throughout history that there are Jews who have acted against the interests of the Jewish people.

Israel consistently lies, and Israel's defamation. consistently lie. The irony is that for all the people like you who talk about Jewish safety, the irony is that you are making Jews less safe. Israel is making Jews less safe. Well, far away from the bullets and the outrage over total occupation, Jews in America find themselves accountable for the actions of a country over which they have no say. Israel's war on Hamas has unquestionably opened a spigot of anti-Semitism. And as we've sometimes seen on this show, the hatred flows in the other direction. But American Jews are far from unanimous in their support for Israel or for Israel's war

or what the government's doing in their name has demonstrated in the recent exchange between Peter Bynhardt and John Stewart on the Daily Show. How is the world not stepping in and stopping this atrocity? I don't understand this in any way, shape or form. It's boggling my mind. It's worse than just not stepping in. It's our weapons that are enforcing this siege, that is enforcing this mass. starvation. Well, what makes this conversation all the more important, of course, is that how Jewish America responds to this war could ultimately determine the future of the region, hopes for a

two-state solution, and even Israel itself. When a moment, we'll debate all this with a special all-Jewish, all-American panel. But first, I'm joined by Peter Beinart, author of being Jewish after destruction of Gaza, and the By-Not notebook on Substep. Peter, thank you very much indeed for joining me on Uncensored. Your interview with John Stewart, two Jewish men talking about this situation. It was very powerful. It went viral. First of, what reaction have you had to it? I mean, I think American Jews and Jews around the world are very profoundly divided.

There is a kind of a real crisis among, in many Jewish families, where people are profoundly divided about this. And often along generational lines, often people, younger people versus older people. And the point I was trying to make many of my closest friends, people, I've done. I love. People in my own extended family have a profoundly different view on this than me. I still love them. I still care about them. But what I try to say is our safety, the safety of Israeli Jews, is intertwined with the safety of Palestinians. This starvation and slaughter, beyond being immoral, beyond being, to me, an offense against God who sees all human beings as created equal in God's image, it's also profoundly dangerous for Israeli Jews who will have to live

alongside the next generation of Palestinians in Gaza who have grown up seeing their parents and their families starved and slaughtered. Yeah, you know, it's interesting. We've been covering this from October the 7th onwards on Uncensored, and for a long time, I vigorously defended Israel's right to defend itself. I felt they had a moral duty to defend its citizens after what happened on that hideous day. But certainly this year, from the start of the United States, this year leading to the block A, leading to the daily horrific scenes that these lines of people,

thousands of them, desperate for food, clearly very, very hungry, and getting gunned down as they line up desperate for food. To me, this crosses every line of self-defense. And when you add in the rhetoric from people like Smodrich and Bengavir, these hard right guys on the cabinet, when they talk so openly about a desire to cleanse Gaza of all Palestinians, you begin to think, is there a bigger thing going on here, which many feared might be the case, which is actually a form of ethnic cleansing of removing all Palestinians from Gaza, from the West Bank? Yes, I mean, it pains me to say this, but I think that's correct.

It's important to remember the context. Most of the Palestinians who live in Gaza are only in Gaza, because their parents or grandparents or great-grandparents were ethnically cleansed from Israel in 1948. And I think that what happened on October 7th with that horrifying massacre, those war crimes that were committed by October 7th, is that Israel didn't know anymore

how to live alongside Palestinians in Gaza, and it was not fundamentally willing Israeli leaders to face the underlying issue, the underlying core grievance, which is that Palestinians lack freedom, And if you don't give people, just because people are oppressed doesn't make them saints, right? People who are oppressed can do horrifying things, as Hamas did on October 7th. But they are subject to a structure of violence when you deny them their human rights.

And because Israel wasn't willing to think about solving that core problem, it is moved towards the answer of solving the problem by mass expulsion of Gazans, which with an assist from Donald Trump. And this, for Jews, for us, this should be horrifying for us to see playing out in front of our eyes. Yeah, I completely agree. And I think that people have tried to deliberately and disingenuously conflate genuine criticism of what Israel's government is now doing. And I've become increasingly critical of what they're doing this year and very vocal about it. And immediately, all the people are on the pro-Israeli side, who at the start of the war were cheering me from the rooftops for, you know, supporting Israel's right to defend itself.

Suddenly, I'm anti-Semitic. I'm a Jew-hater. And it's been relentless bombardment on X and other social media platforms. And yet there's been a real disconnect. That's why it's interesting about your reaction that you've been getting. A real disconnect with people I meet in the street. I've been in New York for a week. I've been in Los Angeles now.

And I've only had Jewish people come up to me and some Israelis who've been thankful. for holding the government to account for what they're doing in their name. And for understanding what you have understood so clearly is that a lot of what is going on now will actually make lives less safe for Israelis and for Jews around the world, not safer. And for that reason, I've been so critical. And I also think if you treat the Palestinians in Gaza, the innocent Palestinians, not Hamas, but the fact that 20,000 children have been killed,

the fact that they're obvious, there's now obvious, severe hunger, possibly the start of a famine, obvious starvation in many cases. The fact that there's this constant denial by people on the pro-Israeli side, I think it does all Israelis such a disservice. Absolutely. And I have to say it's when I see people trying to defend the indefensible, the starvation and slaughter of an entire people, by invoking anti-Semitism, it really sickens me, to be honest.

We as Jews, we are the, we have inherited a kind of a sacred legacy of the oppression and slaughter and genocide of our ancestors. And we need to treat it with grave care. That is a sacred legacy in which we, if you call someone an anti-Semite, you are associating them with some of the worst crimes in human history. You should not use that phrase lightly. And you should certainly not use. use it because you don't have any good arguments to use to defend the starvation and slaughter

of children. Yeah, I completely agree. I think it's such a lazy trope to throw around. And I try and argue with the people that accuse me of this. And I say, look, I can't be, as people tried to accuse me of being at the start of the war, a pro-Zionist and so on, and then I'm also apparently a Jew-hater, an anti-Semite. I'm none of those things. I'm someone who's tried to look at this war as dispassionately as possible, as fairly as possible, and try to work out what is happening here. Today's show is brought to you by Oxford Natural, makers of the optimum day and optimum night,

all natural supplements. Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results. Optimum day is designed to boost your energy and support weight loss throughout the day. Optimum night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep. And don't just take their...

word for it. Here are just a few of their success stories. England football legend, Michael Owen, lost 40 pounds. Robbie, the face of AFTV, dropped over £100. Linda, a top Laurel firm executive, lost £50. And Anita, an immigration lawyer, shed £60. To watch their full stories and found out more, scan the QR code on your screen, or visit Oxfordnatural.com slash peers. And here's the best part. Use the code peers, P-I-E-R-S, and get 70% off your first order. Get 70% off with the promo code, Peers. I mean, one of the problems is the Israeli government's refusal to allow international journalists

into Gaza now since the start of the war. A, it makes me think, well, what are they hiding? B, it makes it almost impossible to independently verify the atrocities that happen, and it makes it very, very easy, which may explain why they're doing it. for the IDF and for Netanyahu to deny any culpability for anything. Absolutely. It's such an important point, right?

If Israel were really confident in the claims that it's making, that it never target civilians, that it does everything it can to avoid targeting civilians and only hurting Hamas, that it's only Hamas's fault that people are starving because it's stealing aid, all of these claims we hear again and again and again. If you're confident in those claims, let the international media in, let them verify those claims. It doesn't suggest a lot of confidence in their own talking points that they won't allow the international media to check.

No, I completely agree. There's some very interesting stuff in your book, but I wanted to pick out a couple of things to start off with. One, you say here, the Jews who suffered programs in the Russian Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and the Jews who faced genocide in Europe in the 40s were members of a vulnerable minority living in countries that had long restricted their rights.

The terror they experienced was inextricably bound up with the oppression they endured. In Israel, by contrast, Jews enjoy legal supremacy and is Palestinians who lack basic freedoms. Comparing October the 7th to the Holocaust or a program ignores that fundamental difference.

I thought that was so well articulated because often I get thrown back at me when I try and criticize what Israel's doing now in Gaza with, well, what about the British and what? World War II? You know, what about what happened there? What about the wholesale slaughter of civilians in this war and that war and that war? But I thought you articulated there the intrinsic difference between what has happened historically to what is happening now from a Jewish

point of view. Yes, again, this doesn't make the horror of October 7th any less for the people who were killed and people who were taken captive, not at all. But if we want to solve it, if we want to make sure we never experienced another October 7th again, We have to understand the context, not to justify, but to understand to make sure that everybody is safe. The violence of October 7th is by a people who are under occupation, under oppression. It's not like America's fight with the Nazis, or certainly not like the Shoah, the Holocaust of Jews in Europe. It's much more like the Mao-Mao-Mow rebellion in Kenya or the Algerian violence against the French, which was brutal, or Native Americans who attacked American settlers.

people who have been forced off their land were being oppressed and responded in really, really brutal ways. And unless you deal with that underlying structure of oppression and violence, you can't make everybody safe. Right. And the whole point of the aftermath of World War II, the Geneva Convention and other things that were introduced, was to prevent some of the worst successes of World War II on the Allied side, right? The carpet bombing of Dresden, for example. You know, most people agree that that was completely. completely unnecessary. And so they brought in the Geneva Convention

to stop and stop happening again. So I think the parallel, again, when they try and throw that back at me to silence criticism of the government, it says, well, it's not an accurate comparison to be making. You made another very good point, I thought, which is, and only you could make this.

I mean, I think only a Jewish person could say this, actually. You say in the book, we're not history's permanent, virtuous victims. We are not hardwired to forever endure evil but never committed. That false innocence which pervades contemporary Jewish life camouflages domination of self-defense. It exempts Jews from external judgment. It offers infinite license to fallible human beings. Again, such an important point to make because nobody is trying

to look, nobody with a rational mind is trying to deny what Jewish people have endured historically, not least in the Holocaust. Or what happened on October the 7th. I mean, the scale of it was mind-blowingly horrific. The 1,200 people murdered, 250-plus kidnapped, 7,000 more wounded. I mean, it was just on an unimaginable scale. But that doesn't mean that the Israeli government isn't now also perpetrating things, which many people believe constitute war crimes.

Yes, and look, we as Jews are fully human, and being fully human means nothing is alien to us, is that we can be victims and we can be victimizers just like every other group of human beings. And you know, actually, our own sacred text, the Hebrew Bible, Talmud, they actually make this point again and again and again. And in fact, there's nothing about having historically suffered abuse and violence and even genocide that means that you can't do it to other people, right? That happens, tragically, that happens throughout all the time in families, in human history. So we have to recognize about ourselves for so we can actually guard against these tendencies, rather than always saying that every circumstance, even when the people of Gaza are suffering,

what's now widely being called a genocide, that we need to make this a story of Jewish victimhood. It's not. You write in the book, this book is about the story Jews tell ourselves to block out the screens. It's about the story that enables our leaders, our families, and our friends to watch the destruction of the Gaza Strip. the flattening of universities, the people forced to make bread from hay, the children freezing to death under buildings turn to rubble by a state that speaks in our name and shrug if not applaud. And in relation to that, Peter, what do you say to many people who disagree with you,

disagree with me, who say that because of the way that Hamas conducts this war, because they embed themselves in civilian territories, in closely, you know, tightly, tight areas, It's a small area of land, Gaza, compared to many wars. They embed themselves among civilians. They embed themselves in schools and hospitals and so on. And that the only way to take out Hamas is to do it the way that the Israeli government

is doing it through the IDF. And that if you have a lot of civilian casualties as a consequence of that, then that is on Hamas because they have shown such a willful disregard for the lives of their own civilians, which is indisputable. They have.

build a tunnel system where Hamas hid safely and they expose their civilians to mass slaughter. What do you say to that? Well, first of all, this logic has failed on its own terms. Hamas is still there. Israel has destroyed most of the schools, the bakeries, the agriculture, the universities, the churches, the mosque. But you know who is there still Hamas? And although Israel keeps talking about how many Hamas people they've killed and how many weapons

they've destroyed, just like the Americans in Vietnam kept talking about how many Viet Cong they had killed, What they don't tell you is that Hamas has lots of new fighters. Because when you kill dozens of people of someone's family and starve their parents to death, they're going to want to fight you. So they join Hamas, right? Yes, Hamas is an insurgency. It fights from within the civilian population and put Palestinians at risk. You know what? So did the Viet Cong in Vietnam.

They built a vast tunnel network as well. This is the way all guerrillas fight. And it means that when you're fighting an insurgency, you are still bound by international law. If you want to succeed, you have to deal with the underlying grievance of the population. Otherwise, you will just kill masses of civilians and you'll never actually solve the problem. There's a lot going on with the global economy. It's entirely reasonable to wonder what the effect will be on your savings and investments. Consider diversifying with gold through Birch Gold Group.

For decades, gold has been viewed as a safe haven in times of uncertainty, stagnation, and high inflation. Birch gold makes it extremely easy for you to diversify some of your savings into gold. If you have an IRA or an old 401k, you can convert that into a tax-sheltered IRA in physical gold. Or you can buy gold to keep in your safe. First, get educated. Birch Gold will send you a free info kit on gold. Just text my name, Peers, P-I-E-R-S, to the number 9-8-9-898-8. Again, text peers to 98989.

Consider diversifying a portion of your savings into gold. That way, if the fake can't stay ahead of the curve, at least you can stay ahead for yourself. Peter, you're going to stay with me. We're going to bring in the rest of the panel now. It's a panel of Jewish-Americans, as I said, all with different perspectives. The political commentator for Prager-U and pro-Israel activist Shabos Kirsteimbaum, the writer, filmmaker and host of the Kady Halper show,

Katie Halper, and Benjamin Moellum, who formerly worked as a law clerk for the Supreme Court of Israel, and now curates, explains and analyzes verified news from coverage from Israel on Instagram. Well, welcome to all of you. Shabos, let me start with you. What is your reaction to what Peter said? And just to remind viewers, I think, about Peter's credential to speak about this. You know, A, he's Jewish. He's a professor of journalism and political science at the City University of New York.

is a contributing opinion editor in New York Times, an MSNBC political commentator, editor at large of Jewish currents, a non-resident fellow at the foundation of the Middle East Peace. In his personal life, he attends an Orthodox synagogue, keeps kosher and has sent his kids to a Jewish day school. I would say that's a pretty good checklist of credentials to entitle him to his opinions about this.

You know, I do accept, honestly, when I'm on X and arguing with Jewish people about this, I do accept the argument. I'm not Jewish. You can't have that argument with someone like Peter Bynar. So Shab, your reaction to what you've just heard? Certainly Peter's entitled to his own opinions.

He's not entitled to his own facts. The American Jewish Committee had a survey in June and it found that 85% of all American Jews felt a stronger attachment to Israel post-October 7th. Look, Peter has been gone on national media for decades now talking about how American Jews are continuously non-Zionist or anti-Zionist, but the data and the facts just don't back it up.

I was a student at Harvard where Peter was paraded around the university. He spoke at Harvard Divinity School. He spoke at Harvard Kennedy School. He spoke at Harvard Law School. He spoke at the Harvard College. And he's repeating the same talking points. But at the end of the day,

the overwhelming majority of American Jews feel a strong attachment to Israel and feel an even stronger attachment to their Judaism in spite of what Peter is trying to portray. The second point I would like to make is you can be as Jewish as you would like. Unfortunately, if you look at the Hebrew Bible, we have seen throughout history that there are Jews.

I'm not necessarily saying this is Peter, but simply saying, I am Jewish, and therefore I can't be anti-Semitic. or I am Jewish, and therefore, the things I'm saying have legitimacy. If you look at the Hebrew Bible, we've always had Jews who have acted against the interests of the Jewish people. In fact, just yesterday was the holiday of the commemoration of Tishaba of, which is when we commemorate the destruction of the first and second temple in 586 BC and 70 CE.

The destruction brought by the Babylonians and then the Romans, and a lot of that destruction was brought upon Jews who tried going to foreign enemies and told them that they should, in their own interest, destroy our temple. So I'm not convinced by anyone who says, I am Jewish, and therefore my arguments aren't inherently anti-Semitic or aren't inaccurate. I will judge Peter and any argument based on the arguments being made and not based on their Jewish identity. And out of interest, do you think I'm anti-Semitic? No, not at all. And in fact, I've routinely defended you, Pierre, when I do media interviews, when I am on podcast.

I think one of the reasons that pro-Israel Jews stop going on your show is not because of, you know, they're not able to defend the war. it's simply because you don't really treat them well. Natasha Hosdorf is a friend of mine. And let's call a spade a spade. I believe you acted pretty inappropriately towards her, and people aren't willing to engage in an environment whereby there's not a lot of good faith argument. You know, last time I was here, you allowed Anacus Barry to call me.

You know what? It's interesting. You know what's interesting about Natasha? Well, it's interesting about Natasha, because I was laboring under the massive misapprehension that she was indeed a senior international lawyer. Most international lawyers I've met are perfectly able to deal with the rough and tumble of a media interview,

however contentious it may be, however much they get interrupted. It turned out that she was not able to deal with that, played the victim afterwards, and had a lot of people playing the victim on her behalf, which I thought was actually pretty pathetic. You know, I got annoyed with her because she was trying to cast doubt over things like nine children being killed in an airstrike, which nobody else was raising any doubt about whatsoever,

not least because the parents who were both, medics had given interviews talking about losing nine of a ten children. I thought that was pretty inhuman, actually. But let's not make it this about Natasha Hustle, but I did find the massive overreaction to what was, you know, I'll accept, I'll probably interrupt her a bit too much. She's a lawyer. You know, I mean, for God's sake,

if you can't rough up a lawyer in a media interview a bit and interrupt a bit too much when you don't like what you're hearing, I'm not sure what the world's coming to. I accept that you, Shaboss, have always, when you've come on, uncensored, acted in a very respectful manner. And I think that brings up probably the best in interviews when you do that. I may not agree with you, but you don't react the way that she did in that interview. So I don't think it was all completely blameless. Let me bring in Katie Halber.

I could see you reacting facially quite a lot there to what Shabas was saying. So explain what was annoying you. Well, I think that, you know, there are a couple things that bear in mind. is that what Shabbas is doing is kind of typical talking points. So a couple of things to remember is that Israel consistently lies and Israel's defenders consistently lie because they don't have the facts on the ground and they certainly don't have the moral argument. And I think it's really rich, really rich for Shabas to suggest

that someone like Peter Beinart is perhaps an anti-Semite or a self-loathing Jew. And that's also a trick. Yes, you did. You said that you take them as what they say. And just because they're Jewish, you're not going to say. they're not anti-Semitic or self-loat. And I specifically said, I am not using Peter as an example. I'm saying, in general, I am not going to assume that because someone's Jewish identity

deflects criticism. So don't say that I call him an anti-Semitism. I literally did it. No, but you basically suggested that just because he's Jewish, he doesn't get a get-out-jail-free card, which is a fair enough argument. But the truth is that Jews like Peter Beinart are much less anti-Semitic than Jews who defend Israel, because when you are live streaming a genocide and saying that this is for the sake, of Jewish people, you are putting all Jews at risk.

I mean, let's pause the fact, let's table the fact that this is a very inhumane and unjust and immoral and illegal genocide. And that's not just me saying that. That's countless genocide experts. That's, you know, Zionists who have been saying that. That's Betzelam, the Israeli human rights organization, the Israeli Jewish human rights organization, Betselm says it's a genocide. Physicians for Human Rights says it's a genocide.

All of these Israeli organizations say it's a genocide. But what we have to remember is that there's also a trick. In fact, there is a minister of Israel who said that this is the trick we play. When we talk to people, we bring up the Holocaust and we bring up anti-Semitism. And we do that whenever someone criticizes Israel. And this woman, Shalomi, Aloni, was a minister of education in Israel. And so what we're going to see throughout this panel, I assume, and I predict from watching past panels, is we're going to see a lot of lying, a lot of obfuscation, and a lot of claims that people are anti-Semitic or picking on Israel unfairly or self-loaning Jews.

And you should just bear that in mind. And Shabbas, you, I mean, I just watched the panel with you and you lied through your teeth the entire time. You even said fact-checked me on something. You said that Pierce asked you if the proportion of children killed was higher in Gaza than it was in other wars. And you said that it was as high in other words. And you named the Syrian Civil War, Vietnam, and Korea. Unfortunately, the stats don't back you up. And the proportion of children killed in all of those wars was lower.

I can go over the stats with you, but was lower than the proportion of children killed in Gaza. So we have an active genocide going on. It is actually illegal for the United States to support this genocide. It violates the Leahy law. It violates the Foreign Assistance Act. it is a threat to every living person basically. And of course, ironically, now I don't speak out because this has a dangerous effect on Jews. It does have a dangerous effect on Jews.

I speak out because I believe that Palestinians are human beings with human rights. I also speak out because Israel doesn't get to speak for all Jews. But the irony, the irony is that for all the people like you who talk about Jewish safety, the irony is that you are making Jews less safe. Israel is making Jews less safe. APEC is making Jews less safe. The ADL is making Jews less safe. when you're engaging in the anti-Semitic trope of equating Jewishness with Zionism.

Every time that you claim that all Jews have to be Zionist or that it's anti-Semitic to be anti-Zionist, you are leaning into that dual loyalty trope, which claims that all Jews are a monolith and we all support Israel. And again, when you're live streaming a genocide that the entire world sees, and you're saying that this is for the sake of Jews, I don't know how that's good for the Jews. Okay. Benjamin Molan, let me bring you in here. You know, it's actually very interesting to me to have four Jews debating this because I think that's the way it should be actually at this day because I'm aware that in the Jewish community globally,

there is, as Peter said, a lot of debate and argument and massive difference of opinion between families and friends. It's dividing a lot of people around the world in the Jewish community. My issue of what is happening in Gaza is it doesn't seem to be showing any evidence of Israel's original stated war aims being achieved. The hostages are not being released and haven't been since February, pre the blockade. Hamas have clearly not been defeated by any stretch of the imagination at all and continue to taunt Israel with horrific videos of these hostages being treated in the most disgusting manner, although I raised a point yesterday on X. And I wasn't trying to be, you know,

political about it. I wasn't trying to be anti-Semitic or anything else. I simply said, it was interesting to me that Hamas put out footage that is accepted immediately as 100% credible, and everybody on the pro-Israeli side rightly, because I think they are genuine videos, was raging about this, and they were horrific and disgusting, and Hamas are horrific and disgusting. But there's a completely different attitude towards the Gaza health minister, figures which are released about casualties. Even though, as Peter points out in his book, the Gaza Health Ministry actually includes names,

whereas if you ask any senior Israeli that I've interviewed, the Israeli ambassadors to the UK, she knew exactly how many Hamas terrorists have been killed, but she had no idea and couldn't tell me how many civilians have been killed. They don't keep a record. And so, you know, again, I was just curious. I was curious why the utter credulous,

reaction to awful videos, but utter incredulity to casualty numbers when it would appear historically that the Gaza health ministry numbers tend generally to be pretty accurate and accepted by Israel after the event. Only now since October the 7th, as everybody on the pro-Israeli side that I've had arguments with about this said, actually none of it's true. You can't believe any of it. We know we've killed 30,000 terrorists. We've no idea how many civilians have died. None of that is credible to me. So sorry for the little rant there, but it's something that comes at me a lot on X, and I just found that an interesting thing to watch in the last couple of days.

But what is your reaction generally to the point Peter made about the increased threat he believes is now happening to Israelis and to Jewish people around the world as a result of the current war strategy of Netanyahu's government? So let me to begin by addressing your point about the difference between the video of Vyatar David and Rome Braslovsky and the numbers that come out from the Gaza Health Ministry. The video that was released, it was released by the Israeli government after they show the family and analyzed it. And obviously there's not this difference between video evidence and numbers that come out from a Hamas health ministry that nobody really knows how it operates.

and it's clear that there have a deliberate policy of starving the hostages is something that they've said something that's been assessed something that you can see there's no deliberate policy of starvation

when it comes to Israel's policy vis-aid into Gaza we can argue about well there was a blockade for three months I mean that's a deliberate that's a deliberate policy of starvation

there wasn't and they said they were going to let in no food they said it out loud that's why genocide scholars literally the epitome yeah yeah

right but what happened for the 75 days prior to that blockade. 600 trucks, loads of aid were allowed into Gaza on a daily basis. Israel had assessed that there was enough food in Gaza for every person there to have 3,000 calories for a period of two months, which is how long the blockade actually lasted. Israel was trying to apply pressure ante Hamas, which obviously... By starving the civilian population? It's a war crime.

It's a war crime. It's a war crime. It's a terrorism. Okay. Okay. There was enough food in Gaza. for everybody to be fed for two months, and that was the length of the actual blockade. Hamas stole all the aid, or not I shouldn't say all the aid, much of the aid,

and used that to fuel their war effort against Israel. And we know that to be a fact. Now, when Israel reopened the aid, they had set up the GHF, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation system in order to prevent Hamas from receiving that aid or stealing that aid. And we know that it was successful because one of Hamas's key demands in the negotiations overseas fire was that GHF be dismantled. Why would they want GHF to be dismantled? It's another method for bringing aid into Gaza.

If they really care about aid in Gaza, why do they want one of the methods? How many people have been killed trying to get food from GHF? How many people have been shot? I don't know. How many people have been? And how do you know how many people have been killed? Hundreds? We know that from the Green Beret.

Hang on. Let me ask a question. We know that over 1,000 people have been killed as they are in these big lines trying to get food, right? My question for you is, how many of Israel killed of the thousand-plus who've died? I don't know. I don't know how many were killed by Israel. I don't know how many were killed by Hamas. But there is documented evidence of Palestinians in Gaza saying that Hamas was shooting at them. And Israel has acknowledged shooting to keep people away. I don't know if you've seen some of these videos, but you've got groups of a handful of soldiers and you've got thousands of people coming at them

that puts them in danger, and they're shooting warning shots, they're shooting at their legs. How many were killed by these other sources? Maybe they should have more than four distribution sites. Maybe they should have more than four distribution sites. You don't think that's a trap for a distribution site. I don't know how easy it is for you sitting in the chair, wherever you're sitting in the United States,

to set up a distribution site. Well, then maybe they should have used established distribution instead of an organization. That is no experience. And why did the person resign before it start? and why did the guy who is supposed to do. You're just throwing out questions that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Israel has continued to aid into Gaza,

not just through GHF, but through the UN and through other aid organizations since it reopened the aid in May. So there has multiple organizations distributing aid in Gaza. Hamas is stealing from the UN, is stealing from the other international aid groups, but not from GHF, which is why Hamas

wants GHF dismantled. No, two Israeli officials have been and there's no evidence of Hamas. doing that, by the way. And 170 NGOs and eight organizations have said the GHF needs to be dismantled. What's their ulterior motive? I think it's been a complete shambor. I think it's been a complete shambles. But Benjamin, do you believe that any Palestinian children are severely hungry? It would appear to be the case, yes. I see the same image as you do, and it's heartbreaking. But we have to ask ourselves, who's at fault for that?

Israel. Oh, really? So when if on October 6th, I'm going back in history. I know there are going to be a lot of questions going on, but let me finish what I have to say. On October 6th, there was a ceasefire. There were no hungry children in Gaza because there was plenty of aid going into Gaza, much of which is being stolen by Hamas from the get-go. Hamas spent here. You guys said openly, the Israeli government said, we're putting the people of Gaza on a diet. You calculated the exact number of calories required to survive. That's not exactly letting in enough food or aid. That's called a siege. Well, let me bring Peter in now. Let me get Peter to respond to this. If you guys have 3,000 calories a day, let me ask Peter about this. Okay, sorry, Peter, yeah.

All right, let me ask Peter about this. Peter, this is the problem, though. This is why I feel so incensed about the refusal to allow international journalists into Gaza because everything can be denied. You know, we know a thousand plus people have been killed in these food lines. We know from all the

independent reports that have come out of this, that it's highly likely the majority have been killed by the IDF, right? And the IDF's excuses for it get ever more ridiculous. They're always launching an inquiry, launching an inquiry, launching an investigation, firing in the air, firing warning shots, and then you see a lot of footage which contradicts that. But the bottom line is if you had independent media there, they could verify these things quite quickly, as they do in other war zones. So it's become a real problem here. But what do you make of what the two gentlemen who disagree with you quite fundamentally here? What do you make of what they've been saying?

I mean, I think Chavez and Ben are completely sincere in their beliefs, and I think they believe that what they're arguing for is in the best interests of our people, and I think they care passionately about the Jewish people. I really believe that. Their views are very familiar to me. They're the views of people who I care about and love. I just disagree with them, because the reason I disagree with them is that I don't think they take into account. to the interconnectedness of our safety as Jews

and the safety of Palestinians. In the long run, I believe it is very, very dangerous for Israeli Jews to create conditions of starvation and slaughter for Palestinians, even if, because that produces a new generation of people who will join groups like Hamas or groups even more radical than Hamas. I believe that the safest thing for Israeli Jews

is to live alongside Palestinians who have basic freedom, who have basic human rights, that that is a condition that will be safer for everyone. And I will say, in my experience, and again, I'm very, very fallible, and I've been wrong about lots of things, in my experience, the Jews who spend more time with Palestinians as human beings, the Jews who have had more deeper relationships with Palestinians as human beings, the Jews who have spent more time actually seeing with their own eyes

what Palestinian life is like under Israeli control, are more able to understand that. Shabos, your body language has not been particularly positive listening to a lot of this the last few minutes. Do I detect your not entirely in agreement? Well, first of all, we just finished a 25-hour fast for Tishabab, so go easy on me. What I'll say is this.

Me too, by the way. What is in the best interest of the safety of the people of Israel is what is in their best interest. They should not be lectured by American Jews like me and Peter. I think the biggest threat to Israeli Jews right now is the fact that Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel, is the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of Muslim and Christian and Jews and Drew citizens who can't return to their homes in the north, is the fact that while it is true, the Iranian nuclear facilities have been delayed quite substantially still. Iran has not let up with their goal of developing nuclear weapons.

So Israel should not take into account what Peter and I say. Israel is a strong Western country that should do what is in their best interest. of Israel in the same way the United States should do what is in the best interest of the United States. What I will say on a broader lens is when it comes to the data, when it comes to the facts, the overwhelming majority of American Jews continuously state that a strong attachment to Israel is central to their Jewish identity and that has nothing to do with political Zionism. It has nothing to do with Bibi Netanyahu. It has to do with the fact that as I mentioned yesterday, the entirety of the Jewish experience rests on the fact that we have as a central

physical location, a land in which we base our Jewish identity. We can only do roughly two-thirds of all the 613 commandments because we do not have a temple in the land of Israel. Almost the entirety of the Jewish calendar revolves around things that happened in the land of Israel. In fact, there is a positive command right now for Jews to be living in the land of Israel. When we pray, we pray three times a day in the thrice daily prayers. We talk about the return to Zion, dozens and dozens and dozens of times. And this is not a new thing. We've been praying for the return to Zion for 2,000 years. When we pray, we face Jerusalem. So to negate the core attachment that Jews have to the land of Israel is to negate Judaism. You cannot separate Jews from Zion.

And why do all these Orthodox Jews oppose Zionism? Can I just, can I? Yeah. Can I? Hang on. Let me finish the point. Sorry. I mean, a lot of what, Chavez. Hang on. No, no, no, no. Peter, that's not how it works. You have to let me finish the point. And then you can tell me why I'm wrong. But you can't tell me I'm wrong before I finish the point. Oh, I thought you had. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Katie, you can't say I'm wrong. No, no, go ahead, Chavez. Go ahead. Times a day, which I assume you don't. If you would pray three times a day, you would notice that in our prayer books, we mentioned Zion dozens and dozens and dozens and dozens of pounds. You know what the Torah mentions? You know what the Torah mentions 12 times is the orphan and the widow, protecting the orphans and widows,

but for people like you, you think the Torah says it's creating orphans and widows, apparently. So spare me the lecture on morality based on the text. Great. Can I, can I say? Can I say the chab as I hear? And then you can tell me why I'm wrong. Let Peter respond. No, you got to let me finish the point and then you respond. Here's the point. Political Zionism, I agree with you, is different than Judaism and the ethereal return to Zion. People can criticize the state of Israel. In fact, I'm very proud of the fact that I walked, excuse me, I drove four hours from New York to D.C. Two years ago to protest, but Sal Smotrich, if you've ever been to Israel, it is a national pastime to criticize the Israeli. government. I'm involved in Jewish activism and have been my entire life. I do not know of a single

Jew on planet Earth who will tell you that it is anti-Semitic to criticize the Israeli government. So we are not conflating the return to Zion with the political state of Israel. What we are saying is what happens in the land of Israel matters. Almost the majority of the Jewish people live in Israel. So obviously the Jewish diaspora will care about what happened to Israel because our brethren all live there. And when they are under assault, we want to protect them. Okay, Peter. There's a lot in what Shaba says that I that I agree with him. I do

agree that a connection to what we call the land of Israel is an essential part of Judaism. I do agree that a sense of solidarity, that Jews are responsible for one another, very much including the Jews who live in the state of Israel, is central to what it means to be a Jew. I entirely agree. But the text that Shavis and I both read and study

and revere, were mostly written before the creation of the state of Israel. There's a distinction between a connection to the land and a connection to the people and the connection to a state that was built in 1948. And we have the right to question whether the political system of that state, the political system of that state is not ordained by God, right? And I believe that my Judaism starts with the understanding that Torah doesn't start with the Jewish story.

It starts with universal human beings created equal in the image of God. And so when I think about the political system that I favor, whether in Israel, Palestine or the United States or anywhere else, my foundational belief is that it should treat people equally under the law because that is the political expression of the theological principle in Judaism that all human beings are created equal in the image of God. Okay. Benjamin, final word with you, and then I'll ask Katie as well, what should Donald Trump be doing now? Because many people believe that the Arab League intervention several days ago in which they were calling for Hamas to be dismantled was significant. Should Trump be doing more to bring this war to an end? Well, it depends what you consider to be more. Now, in Israel, there is a healthy debate over where Israel should go from here in terms of should it prioritize the return of the hostages or should it prioritize the destruction of Hamas. both are legitimate perspectives, in my opinion,

and that's pretty much the perspective you would get in Israel as well. The question is, and there are questions for both sides, how could you leave aside the issue of the hostages versus leaving aside the issue of the future danger of allowing Hamas to remain intact? Now, one thing you don't hear from the international critics of Israel when it comes to the continuation of the war is, well, what about Hamas?

Hamas is sitting pretty, it's benefiting from its weaponization of the citizens in Gaza, the Palestinian people in Gaza, and the world is handing it rewards. One of the members of the Hamas Politburo last week, Ghazi Hamid, who was speaking to Al-Jazeera, he said that if it wasn't for the October 7th attacks, we would be, nobody would be paying attention to us,

and now we're getting recognition from Western countries. We've been able to manipulate the world and to believing that Israel is a pariah, or turning Israel to a pariah, as a matter of fact, because of our actions in Gaza. And this has not been good for Israel, but nobody is paying attention to what do you do with Hamas. Kyr Starmerer, Prime Minister, probably made the most boneheaded announcement where he said that he would have recognized a Palestinian state in September on the condition that Israel ends the war, which incentivizes Hamas to sit back, do absolutely nothing,

not agree to a hostage deal, because they're going to get recognition from the United Kingdom come September. the world needs to stop rewarding Hamas for what it is doing to Gaza not just to the people of Israel but what is doing to Gaza as well Israel has a very difficult task it's not difficult okay let me give Katie the last

Katie the last word to respond Katie well it's really not difficult Israel is obliged to follow international law and international humanitarian law it violates it literally every day It doesn't respect rules of proportionality, rules of distinction. I think it's really dangerous for Shabas to try to say that the genocide in Israel is somehow related to Judaism. That's certainly not good for the Jews.

I think that what you're describing is an ethno-state and ethno-supremacy. I don't want a state to be given rights because of what is said in the Torah. I don't think that's fair. I don't think you'd accept that if any other leader did it. And the truth is, this is a distraction. The important thing to know is that Israel is an apartheid state. It is committing genocide as we speak. It is starving people.

What the United States needs to do for its own self-interest, for its own self-interest is cut off all funding because it violates the Leahy law, the Foreign Assistance Act. Also, you kept talking Shabbas about how popular and how supported Israel is. Actually, support for Israel is at a historic all-time low, lower than it's ever been since modern polling. and that's because they see what Israel's doing. Everyone sees it.

They see the children with their arms blown off. They see the children who are getting amputations without anesthetic. And they see that Israel is also not just doing this, but celebrating. I mean, why are the IDF wearing the lingerie of the women who they ethnically cleanse? Why are they taking selfies of themselves in front of exploded universities and mosques? That is sick. And why do the majority of Israeli people actually support, ethnic cleansing, not getting rid of Hamas. And also, no one mentioned the fact that Hamas has already

agreed to give up political power. So if that's what this was about, then you would be negotiating. Israel has freed way, far more hostages through negotiation than they have through military actions. I believe it's eight, the ratio is around eight to 140. But Israel has decided that the priority is not saving hostages. It's also not defeating Hamas because everyone knows that Hamas has grown since October 7th, not decreased. Their priority is. ethnically cleansing, creating a greater Israel, and killing Palestinians. That's their priority. And we know this because Netanyahu also said,

Netanyahu said that if, let me just finish one sentence. Netanyahu said that if the hostages were released, he still would keep launching the war. So all the talking points about how Hamas could end this tomorrow if they just released the hostage, is it a lie? Okay, I was going to leave it there, but given Shabos, you've been putting your finger up to speak in a very plaintive way for,

last few minutes. I'll give you 20 seconds to respond. Well, I could have just done the Anika Sparin and just yell, but I thought this was more respectful. First of all, it's astounding that I can make reasoned argument and the responses, apartheid, genocide, settler colonialism. There's a theological... Wait, those are facts. That's not a hysterical, emotional thing. It's been documented. No, don't make... What is this? Are you talking about an Italianism? No, no, no, no, no. You're lying. You're lying. Apartite is not... Oh, you're not going to do the Anacusperian. Shut up.

Shut up. Apartite is not an emotion. Apartite has been proven by every credible human rights organization. Why does Bethelam say there's apartheid? What's their ulterior motive? Are they a cabal of self-loathing Jews? Why do they say there's apartheid? If there's not.

Why is settler colonialism? It's remarkable that I can make. What did Jabotinsky say about Israel? He said, natives always resist, natives always resist colonizers. And he was talking about Israel. It is a settler colonial project. It is a genocidal project. And that's why you can listen to.

former heads of Mossade who say it's genocide. Okay, let Shabos finish his point, and then we're going to wrap it up. Shavos, you can quickly finish a point, but please be quick. Yelling is not an effective argument. You just told me to shut up and you yelled yourself. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Keep interrupting. Keep pivoting.

Okay, so please explain why it's not genocide. Why is it not genocide? There's a theological claim that Jews have as it pertains to their attachment to the land of Israel. That does not mean that they have a right to the world. They have a right to self-determination the same way the Palestinians have a right. to self-determination. I believe that there should be a Jewish state, in the same way there should be a Palestinian state. The problem is...

Oh, Shabos has been trapped in mid-flow, and I'm going to take that opportunity to bring this to an end. It seems an appropriately strange way for the debate to end with Shabos, frozen in mid-sentence. We're going to leave it there, but it was a really interesting debate. He's back, you're back. Shabos, you were frozen in mid-flow, which I felt was an appropriate way to bring things to an end.

No, I'm going to leave it there. We've run out of time. Pierce, you're invited. You're coming to Israel. Me and Peter will take you. We'll try to investigate. You said that you don't want Pierce let in. You tweeted out that Pierce shouldn't be let in.

I saw your tweet. I've been to Israel. I actually went to Israel in 2012 to interview Netanyahu in Jerusalem. I loved it and would very happily like to go back. But I've got to leave it there. Thank you. It was a really interesting panel to get you all debating like that. I appreciate it very much.

Thank you. Thank you, Pierce. Piers Morgan Unsensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Unsensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain. And we'll do it all for free.

Independent Uncensored Media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.