The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 2728 - Trump's Desperate Midterms Ploy; The Architects Of Israel's Genocide w/ Norman Finkelstein

Episode Date: September 10, 2026

Emma Vigeland welcomes Norman Finkelstein, political scientist and author of Gaza Gravediggers: An Inquiry Into Corruption in High Places: https://orbooks.com/catalog/gazas-gravediggers/ Today's Sponsors: • JUST COFFEE: Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code MAJORITY for 10% off your purchase! • ZOCDOC: Find and book the right doctor https://Zocdoc.com/MAJORITY • TRUST AND WILL: Get 20% off https://trustandwill.com/MAJORITY Get tickets to see Emma join Francesca Fiorentini's LIVE Bitchuation Room on Sunday, Oct 4 in LA: https://www.lodgeroomhlp.com/shows/francesca-fiorentini-the-bitchuation-room-live/

It is Thursday. September 10th, 2026. My name is Emma Vigeland, in for Sam Cedar, and this is the five-time award-winning majority report. We are broadcasting live steps. From the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, USA. On the program today, Norman Finkelstein,

political scientists and author, whose new book is entitled Gaza Gravediggers an inquiry into corruption in high places. Also on the program, breaking good news, the Supreme Court just

again blocked Missouri's gerrymandered maps, meaning there will be two Democratic-leaning districts instead of one. Rhode Island incumbents toppled in last night's primary, Governor Dan McKee

losing handily, and D. DSA member David Morales, who we had on this program, wins in Providence. Trump promises a $5,000 payment for every American if Republicans retain Congress. Adding to his running list of checks, he touts that never seem to materialize. He also says the Iran war is going to end right after the midterms, trust me, bro. Meanwhile, global oil prices hit their highest marks. since July.

Brent crude is over $100 a barrel again. The Saudis are feeling the pain in their shipping routes as the Iran-aligned Houthis disrupt them. Saudi oil experts have plummeted in recent days. August just tied July, 2023, as the hottest month on record. Ocean temperatures also hit record highs. Yep.

Trump wants to overhaul the 2030 census to exclude immigrants from population totals. Nothing about the, you know, prisoners incarcerated for life, felons who can't vote in those ruby red districts, though. That's an incentive for Republicans to keep up mass incarceration. House Democrats are considering starting a select committee on AI if they take back the majority. Meanwhile, in another ominous sign for the economy, the Treasury does. Department says it's tripling its U.S. debt buybacks to $6 billion. A coalition of rights groups is suing the Trump administration to stop the deployment of ICE at polling places this midterm cycle. And lastly, Israel killed a family of four, including two little girls in Gaza yesterday. All this and more

on today's majority report. Welcome to the show, everybody. It's an majority Report Thursday, Brian is out today, which is a rarity. Brian works hard. I wouldn't say that to his face, but he does. So it's just myself and Matt today. Hello, Matt. Hello, Emma. We will get right into it. I'm excited to have Norm on. Obviously, Norm is a bit of a legend as a scholar, but also as a media personality. And so I'm very much looking. forward to our discussion. But let's start here. Trump had a surprise for the rest of the Republican party yesterday. A surprise midterm promise. And by promise, I mean lie. He at this non-convention last night, the Republicans threw a fake convention in Dallas. Also a sort of Hasanabe

Instagram picture viewing party. Oh, yes. The totally not gay Republican. Decide to put one of Hassan's thirst traps on the Jumbotron. I cannot wait to get to that story. I did blur out his underwear. Right, right. Well, you know, I mean, you got to leave a little bit to the imagination. Exactly, exactly. Can you imagine?

Imagine whatever you want down there. Right. Well, and everybody on their iPhone, all of those straight Republican men, just Googling more thirst traps from Hassan out of Dallas. I'm sure it was just like red hot down there. We should check on that grinder activity as well. But. People already have.

it's been blowing up. Oh, no way. It's only like that happens every time. But this is not a real convention that they held. Conventions usually have like distinct set purposes to discuss party business, make rule changes. But this was essentially a rally. And it's a rally that a lot of Republicans in Congress don't want to be associated with because Trump's brand right now is toxic.

Like he is losing his grip. You have front-line Republicans, we said this the other day, taking down mentions to Trump and his movement from their website, de-emphasizing it as well. And so what can Trump do here to try to salvage what is increasingly looking like a devastating midterm cycle for the Republican Party? Well, I'm going to promise checks for every American. Here he is yesterday. But the only condition on the payment of this dividend that we're going to be making, so it's $5,000 to every adult. The only caveat I have is that the dividend that we're making must be spent in the United States of America. We don't want you.

We don't want you going to Canada to spend the money. We don't want you going to China, to Germany. China. You got to spend the money in the United States of America. In other words, if the Republicans win, if you win, we might not win. The reason the Democrats can't do that is because they don't do tariffs, they don't take in money. All they know is poverty and how to ruin our country. But we're making a fortune.

So if the Republicans win, you win with us and you get $5,000. It will be called the Trump dividend. We'll call it the Trump dividend. Okay. So I love when he says Democrats don't do it. that he's lost control of the narrative because the Republicans are supposed to claim that the first Trump stimulus check under COVID with his name on it was good. But the Biden ones were inflationary. So both parties apparently do do these dividends and cash payments, but Biden did

it wrong and he's about to do it right. Um, Republican, with strings attached? Like how do these conditions work? Exactly. Exactly. I want to take a vacation with that because I'm a hard work in America and that doesn't get the opportunity to do that. But all of a sudden I got $5,000 in my bank count time to go to someplace? Like, I have to go to America? What are you going to use, like, AI to make sure I don't spend it on, like, I don't know, some import. Like, that's, that's, I mean, off to, off to, off to, get Mo you go, Matt. Koo-land. I mean, I love, I would just like the practicalities of that, how they're going to make sure we spend it in America. I, and that's my favorite thing is that Trump says Democrats don't do tariffs, so they don't know essentially how to take care of you. All

they care about is poverty. Now, you might be getting into this, but the tariffs aren't going to be able to pay for a trillion dollar spending thing like giving every American $5,000. No, no, no. Um, like the, first of all, let's just be clear. Trump has now lied, I think, four or five times about payments that are never coming at least three times, because we'll see if Republicans retain the Senate and the House on these razor thin margins, perhaps he'll follow through on this. it's not happening. But he promised $5,000 stimulus checks via the Doge dividend that never materialized, of course. He promised $1,000 stimulus checks, or checks rather, because of ACA subsidies expiring. Those never came. And then he was also promising $2,000 stimulus checks for the

tariff dividend. And when you speak about those tariffs, like speaking of them, before the Liberation Day tariffs were overturned by the Supreme Court, the Yale Budget Lab estimated that that cost the average U.S. household between $3,800 and $4,700 annually. So $3,800 to $4,700. And now that he, those, most of them were deemed unconstitutional, it's a mere average of $1,300 to $1,400. But still, the CBO looked at it and it showed, that the consumers are paying 95% of the domestic cost of these tariffs. So the idea here that Trump is in some way generating revenue from other countries to give back via these $5,000 is that will never come. It's just not the truth. He's already taken the money from the Americans. And the Supreme Court said that the money taken under the Liberation Day tariffs was supposed to be refunded. And that's not going to the American public. those are going to the corporations and that's what we're seeing right now and so even fox news

had to point out that trump might be lying once again here they are and this is interesting given what we've the jeanine piero news or not jane perro i'm sorry to get them confused the maria barteromo news where she leaked something to trump and that they weren't going to cover one of his speeches. Yes, and Murdoch was like, got caught wind of this and is like, okay, we love Trump because he makes us rich. But if we're... I'm the boss

around. I'm the boss. Like... Rupert Murdoch. Exactly. I mean, Rupert Murdoch sees himself as more important than Donald Trump. And more impactful. Yeah. And so I do think that this is something notable that Fox News is even fact

checking Trump on this. Here is one of their anchors Jackie Heinrich, who by the way, is married to a Republican congressman, Brian Fitzpatrick. Also, he was a former FBI agent. But I believe she's an objective journalist. Here she is. Republicans hold on to both chambers. $5,000.

He characterized it as a dividends, and the only caveat is that it has to be spent in America. We should note, though, it is not the first time he has promised a cash payment like this. He promised Americans $2,000 rebates during his tariff policy, that was enacted, but after court challenges to the tariffs themselves, those $2,000 checks so far have not materialized. Trace. So far, they haven't. You know, the fact that she's married to a Republican who, I think he's a more moderate

and he might be in danger with this kind of thing is interesting that she's the one delivering this fact check on Fox News. At least when Democrats promise $2,000 checks, you get like 70% of it. Right. Well, no, they would say that as uncouth. Oh, we're bribing people. We're bribing people. But remember, like, the Georgia Senate races were won based on that. Yes. $2,000 checks that they later said, well, we'll give you $1,400. That's a top-up of your previous six. And I'm seeing some people, even on the left, characterize this as a bribe. And I don't like that framework because promising material gains for people should be Politics 101. The point is that he's just lying.

Exactly. That's the thing. This is a desperate attempt, but it is notionally in the right direction of, we have a an, like a crisis of capitalism and inequality in this country. Yeah. And it does the, and people are like, well, what if you give the people checks, then it'll cause inflation. That means that those prices for those goods and the production for those goods was artificially low because people couldn't afford them. That is no way to have an economy. There should be, there might be a little bit of inflation in things like that everyone needs. And then guess what? There'll be deflation in luxury goods because we'll tax rich people and they won't have money to afford to drive prices up on that stuff. It'll all

balance out. Exactly right. And so here Foxx, news is asking Martha McCollum, sorry, asking J.D. Vance about this. This is Martha McCollum asking about the dividend. And if this is an acknowledgement that the Iran war is not going that well and that this gas price crisis that we're seeing, as I mentioned, global oil prices hit their highest mark in six weeks. Brent Crud is over $100 a barrel and the Houthis are disrupting Saudi oil flows, which is going to only further impact the price of gas. So this is contributing, obviously, to the affordability crisis. And here is McCallum asking Vance about that. You know, is the rebate that's being discussed in some ways an acknowledgement that the war is not going to be over for a while. Gas prices are likely to be

elevated for some time. And this is a sort of a way to alleviate some of that pain for Americans. I think it's what the president said exactly, that we've created. a lot of prosperity. If the American people give Republicans another chance to govern, we're going to create more prosperity. And we want the American people to share in that prosperity. Again, we have for 40 years, mind...

If there's so much prosperity, why aren't they sharing it? Yeah. Life. The basic bipartisan economic policy consensus is that it didn't matter if we shipped American jobs overseas. What the president has done is say that if you want to undercut the wages of American workers, if you want to ship American factories overseas,

you have to pay a big, fat, tariff to bring that stuff back into our country. That's done two things. One, it's generated some revenue for the federal government, but more importantly, it's cost $20 trillion of new investment to come into our country. I don't think the dividend really is about Iran at all. I think it's about the American people and a recognition that when you create wealth and prosperity, we want all Americans to be able to participate in it. Mr. Vice President, thank you. Oh, thank you. Thank you so much. As I just laid out, though, the tariffs are not generating the revenue that he says. And it is generating revenue as being born disproportionately by the American consumer,

something like 95% says the CBO of prices that are born by the American consumer from these tariffs. But yes, the economy is doing incredibly poorly, even though we're going to, we have this AI bubble and, yeah, the stock market might still be roaring. There is this submerged labor issue. We talked about it. Last week, I believe, there was this report that the CBS streamer actually covered showing that something like 25% of Americans are functionally unemployed or 24 to 25% under employed, working gig jobs, not having a level of full employment, etc. Here is Sahil Kapur of NBC. it is now the least rewarding time

to be a worker in the U.S. economy since the government started keeping track when we look at there, the labor share. So business is taking home a disproportionate amount of returns and workers are getting less and less and Trump is trying to bribe people by lying. I mean, it's only a bribe because he's lying about it.

About what what he can actually provide for people. One final point. Then we get to Norm. But like Rokane and Bernie Sanders have a bill to tax billionaires and give a family of $4,000, like $12,000. A party, the party should be foregrounding voices like those instead of Hemming and Hein about how

we're going to just undo everything that Trump is doing. Exactly right. In a moment, we'll be talking to Norm Finkelstein. But first, a word from our sponsors here. Trust and Will is one of our favorite sponsors. Sam swears by Trust and Will. because he's got kids, he had to start thinking about this kind of thing. And even if you don't have kids, you've got dependents and other loved ones that might have to deal with something,

a situation that people don't want to think about, but we're all going to pass on. And it's such a relief to have peace of mind when you use trust and will. It's easy and convenient. Trust and will offers affordable attorney design, state-specific estate plans online that you can create in as little as 30 minutes. Trust and will is the most trusted name in online estate planning. And if you need expert input, attorney support is available as an add-on to your plan. The website is just super, the interface is super easy to use and functional. Trust and Will's platform makes it easy to create a will or a trust.

It's fast. And you can do it in as little as 30 minutes. And it lets you document your wishes for guardians, asset distribution, health care. planning and more. You can also update your plan in the future, if anything changes, at different life stages. Trust and will's platform keeps everything organized, updated, and ready, and you can share access with trusted contacts to ensure that your will is carried out. Trust and will also has bank level encryption and secure sharing features, so the most important

documents that you have up there, stay protected and accessible. And according to Trust Pilot, trust and will is the most trusted name and an online estate planning. Trust and will. Affordable estate plans, priceless piece of mind. Go to trust and will.com slash majority and get 20% off. That's trust and will.

dot com slash majority to get your 20% off. Trust and will.com slash majority. We'll put a link down below in the video and episode descriptions and at majority. com. And lastly, I'd like to thank Zocdoc for sponsoring today's episode. Zokdoch is a godsend. if you're trying to book an appointment or find a new doctor.

It's just a great platform and interface where you can see the calendar all laid out for the doctors that are featured, and you can find great doctors and read reviews about them on the site as well. I can't stand the phone tag that you have to engage you in with some doctor's offices. Zoc Doc eliminates that, and it allows you to book an appointment, seeing a calendar laid out for you about the doctor's availability, So you don't have to say, you know, deal with in this AI on the phone or something like that. No, ZocDoc lays it out for you. It solves the most frustrating parts of booking a doctor and I found my dentist through Zock doc doc.

Sam needed an emergency dental procedure when he was away and easily was able to find somebody on Zoc Doc right away. They have more than 150,000 providers within 200 plus specialties across all 50,000. states. ZockDoc. Let's you search and compare local in-network doctors. And Zoc-Doc is free to use. So you can just use the website. But make sure that you use the website with our URL. Your health matters and taking care of yourself shouldn't be complicated.

Find and book the right doctor with Zocdoc. Head to Zocdoch.com slash majority to get started and check that appointment off your to-do list. That's Z-C-D-O-C.com slash majority Z OCDOC.com slash majority. Find and book the right doctor at Z OCDOC.com slash majority. Link down below in the video and episode descriptions

and at majority.fm. Quick break and when we come back, we'll be joined by Norm Finkelstein. We are back and we are joined now by Norman Finkelstein, political scientist, author whose new book is entitled Gaza Gravediggers and Inquiry into Corruption in High Places. Norm, thanks so much for coming on the show today.

And I appreciate you sticking with us through some of the technical difficulties, but we have you on audio. I just wanted to start really at the beginning of your book. You open with quotes from as far back as the 1950s, one from a UN official describing Gaza as a concentration camp. And then you move on to the story of Nat Turner's slave rebellion here in the U.S., which resulted in the deaths of over-resolved. 50 white people. And I was struck by how you write about how Turner was characterized by white people in

this country in the aftermath as a kind of crazed religious fanatic. It reminds me of the characterization of Hamas and their motivations, of course, on October 7th. These are ways that oppressors can, you know, try to defang the legitimate claims of the oppressed by saying they're motivated by this irrational zealotry. If you could describe that dynamic more broadly as it relates to Israel's genocide. The first thing to say is Nat Turner was a religious fanatic. So was John Brown a religious fanatic. That doesn't, in my opinion, disqualify the legitimacy of their grievances and grievances,

obviously is a euphemism when you're enslaved or you're immured in the concentration camp. That's the idiom that he used. That's the idiom that came naturally to Nat Turner. And it's the idiom that came naturally to the Hamas organization for expressing its indignation at the situation in which they found themselves. So that's one side. The other side is, as you've already mentioned, of course, that's used as a pretext for dismissing the legitimate grievances, namely that they're religious zealots, their fanatics. But nobody takes that very seriously in situations where your interests aren't at stake.

everybody, any rational person, reasonable person would understand from whence sprang Turner's, not Turner's indignation, or from whence sprang his actions, wasn't some irrational to use current language, religious fundamentalism. It was the situation in which she was born into, in which she was languishing in, and in which she was faded to die. That's anyone looking for the truth, rather than trying to disguise the truth or distract from the truth, immediately understands that. It's not complicated. Matt Turner's one of his biographers, he wrote that, at its essence,

what motivated Nat Turner was this. Matt Turner, by everybody's reckoning, black people, white people. He was a very smart guy. That's not in dispute. And his biographer, writes, at core, what motivated Matt Turner was the huge chasm that separated who he aspired to be in this, his only earthly existence, and what he was fated to be, namely, a slave. and I don't believe that, or I do believe, that those words apply with comparable force to the militants who burst the gates of Gaza on October 7th.

This huge chasm between what each and all of them aspired to be and the fate. that was bequeathed to them to be born into, to languish in and to die a slave. Or in the case of the militants born into a concentration camp, languishing in a concentration camp, and fated to die in it. And focusing on the character of the rebellion is a way to obscure the power dynamics that are inherent to the situation and, you know, say, demonize, of course, those involved. I found also your emphasis here to be so applicable when, you know, we're skipping forward a little bit. bit, but when we're looking at your book's investigation of the claims of Hamas using a mass rape as a weapon of war on October 7th, and your book looks particularly at the two UN inquiries,

but it's hard not to think about how southern papers in this country characterize black people as, you know, inherently violent and threats. to white women as well. And that same framework of racism really was applied to these inquiries and this, the whole claim of mass rape on October 7th. So I guess let's skip to that part. What made those inquiries unique and what makes the nature of their conclusions so unusual? First of all, there's an oddity in this whole

Rape Fem. The Hamas rape hoax. Israel already had a strong case on October 7th for a grievance, namely around 1,200 people were killed, roughly. Of those about 850 were civilians, 350 were combatants. Israel didn't need the wrong. rape hoax in order

to prosecute its case. In many ways, it was gratuitous. But Israel's propaganda is never directed at its own population. Its own population is ready, willing, and able to commit

genocide at the on the moment, at the bat of a nine. They aimed propaganda at the United States. And they knew that the rape propaganda would quickly gain traction here, which it did,

and would quickly resonate for historical reasons here. So they decided to make the rape allegation, the red line, the litmus test. If you don't believe this allegation, then you are akin to a Holocaust denier. So in many ways, it was a kind of self-inflicted wound because the claim was false. And now, unfortunately, I believe, the fact that this claim has proven false will end up

making everybody doubt that anything happened on October 7. But it did happen. my view, and I said this to a member of Hamas, a senior member, who I was occasionally in correspondence with over the years, not recently. I don't even know where he is or whether he's even still alive. But I said to him, don't go down the denial path, because nobody's going to believe you. What you should do is try to explain what happened and why it happened.

But now I think many people are going to conclude from the fact that Israel made the rape hoax its litmus test and it proved to be false. I believe many people are going to erroneously conclude that the whole thing was made up. The whole October 7th was made up, or Israel, as it's now acclaimed by marginal people, that it was Israel implemented the Hannibal directive, and it was Israel that was responsible for overwhelmingly the deaths. Now, there's no evidence for that. They implemented the Hannibal directive. Yes, that's correct.

But one has to be clear, I believe. 1,200 people is a large number. It's a large number. Yes. And the idea that Israel killed all those people, I find that implausible. Yes. So it was a hoax, it is a hoax. And the more Israel tries to prove it wasn't a hoax,

as in its latest report put out by this body called the civil Israeli Civil Commission, the more it tries to prove that it happened, the more it ends up proving it didn't happen. this rape and other forms of sexual violence instrumentalized as a weapon of war never happened and and it is um i think also uh striking how you saw different institutions here in the west pick up these claims quite uh aggressively the new york Times was instrumental in furthering this narrative with their screams without word article that, like the UN commission inquiry did not include direct victim testimony. And then the subsequent

Cheryl Samberg screams before silence produced documentary, which also used, I think, the filmmaker from the original New York Times reporting in the production of that documentary. What do you make of how quickly, you know, Western media institutions backed up this claim and ran with it for propaganda purposes? I think that you have to understand, in my opinion, it's a combination of factors. Number one, there's the woke element that in the era of Me Too believe women, if you don't, you must be some sort of demonic individual. It's very hard to fight back against those sorts of allegations

without seeming to be somehow in the quote-unquote Trump camp and being somehow indifferent to the allegations of rape and sexual violence. So that just kind of comes with the turf. But I don't believe that's the whole explanation. Most of the human rights organizations and UN organizations, most of them are headed by liberal secularist individuals. And they harbor a deep animus towards Islamic movements and so forth because of their practices and also their ideology

when it comes to women, gay rights and so forth. So there's already inherently a kind of animus towards organizations like Hamas because they assume, I'm not saying, saying wrongly, but they assume that these organizations consist of spouse, wife beaters, people who treat women in a oppressive manner. So they don't like them. You know, I follow this stuff for longer than you care to know.

And there's always been a different standard when it came. to violations of human rights in the West Bank and in Gaza. When you go to West Bank, you go to Ramallah. That's where all the NGOs go. It's very modern. It's very secular. It could be any Western city. Women are very, quote-unquote, liberate, emancipated, secular, and so forth.

The human rights organizations immediately resonate. with the Ramallah reality. But they've always been, in my opinion, they've always been unduly condemnatory of Hamas where the facts just don't support it. I've written a lot about it. I go through the record.

What they're saying is just not true. So there's that secular liberal bias that comes into play. There is the woke element that comes into play. There are other things, but those I believe are the principal reasons. Look, you could say Hamas is not enlightened when it comes to the rights of women and the rights of women and the rights of sexual minorities. of course you could say that it's factually correct.

My credo in life is you don't quarrel with facts. You don't quarrel with any facts. You can say they have benighted views and the question of women and sexual minorities, but you also could say what was touted by Israel didn't happen. They didn't have the courage to do that because, as I said, you immediately get discredited as being benighted yourself if you make the claim that it just didn't happen.

Certainly. And I would... I should have meant that to say, there's no evidence that happened. And it could not have happened as they said it did. They claimed that Hamas and other Milton groups had instrumentalized rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war. They repeatedly said that these acts of rape and sexual violence were widespread. That couldn't have happened.

About that, we could say with certainty, because they themselves say, we have 10,000, that's the current number, we have 10,000 photographs and digital segments from October. over 7. That includes CCTV, traffic cameras, body cams, dash cams, from Hamas militants, go-pros, iPhones. 10,000 segments and photographs, digital segments and photographs, is not a small number.

They say it would take 1,800 hours to view all of that digital photographic evidence. You know what 1,800 hours is? If you were to sit down eight hours a day, seven days a week, you know how long it would take you to look at all of that digital photographic evidence? It would take you more than seven months. Now they claim that the rape and sexual violence was instrumentalized and widespread. But one basic fact, irrefutable fact, there is not one single image, not one, not one single photograph, not one single digital segment of Hamas committing rape or sexual violence. not one what do you conclude from that there's no forensic evidence or the first person testimony yes

exactly okay we so then we get to person we get to personal testimony if survivor testimony if we take october seventh itself there's only one person a male who stepped forward and said he was raped one the israeli's discounted He's seen there is a grifter because he's suing the state for negligence for several tens of millions of Dallas, along with others. So he's not taken seriously in Israel. So we don't have a single survivor of rape who has stepped forward. Now, you know, the arguments are of the sort. They're traumatized and this and that.

Well, Israel is a very, it's self-described as a libertine, sexually frank country. You would have to ask yourself the obvious question. Why did Palestinian men and women find it in them to testify that they were objects of sexual violence and rape, but allegedly Israelis couldn't find it in themselves to do it. that. That's very strange. Now, Hamas, excuse me, Gaza is sexually very repressed. Nobody disputes that. You could say it's repressed. You could say it's conservative, however you want to put it. But we have many testimonies from Hamas men and women about rape and sexual violence. We have many tests, but not one from a civil, and his very survivor of October 7th. And then we turn to the hostages. Only one person has stepped forward.

Her name is Anats Susanna, who was touted, presented, paraded as the poster girl of Hamas rape. But when you read her actual testimony, she does not say she was. She said I experienced extreme sexual violence. Okay, fine. What is it? What happened? She doesn't say. So I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows. But the bottom line is very clear. Only one survivor testimony claiming rape. But he has been dismissed by the Israelis. And only one survivor testimony claiming rape. But he has been dismissed by the Israelis. and only one survivor testimony from among the hostages and when you read her testimony she does not say she was raped

yes and the male part of it I think is important when you're talking about the audience for this being Americans I mean this is you bringing up Nat Turner's Rebellion and writing about that at the beginning of your book is just a great frame framework to view this where there is, you know, Israeli women are considered, you know, Western and white, and there is a concerted effort to portray Palestinians as savages motivated by an irrational religiosity. And you see the same framework as applied to Iran, even from our, you know, members of the administration here about how they can't negotiate with the Iranians because they're, they're, they're,

too irrational. And this, to me, at the very least, when you compare it to the Israeli sexual violence, the level of rape and sexual violence in Israeli prisons towards Palestinians, which has been extensively corroborated, you have to ask questions about the methodology, and you do so in your book. One part that stood out to me was when you were looking at the UN Commission and how they designated this kind of. violence. There was one part in your book where these Hamas militants on October 7th,

they were getting, holding onto hostages on motorbikes. And that's described as coerced intimacy and gender-based violence. And you have to wonder, like, what is the assumption there? Is that being touched by, you know, this is obviously a war crime, these kidnappings. It's horrendous. It's, it's traumatizing. But the idea that that constitutes sexual violence, I think gives away the game as to what they're trying to portray here. I think they're doing two things. Number one, it's an instinctive racism. I mean, I don't use the word racism very often.

I find it's cheapened by overuse. But this was just, it was just maybe it was conscious or maybe it was unconscious, conjuring up this image of being touched in physical proximity to this dark-hued Arab and Muslim. And secondly, so there's that, as I said, could be conscious, could be unconscious, I can't tell you. I'm not inside Navi Palais' head. She was the head of commission of inquiry. She is of Indian descent from South Africa. but the other thing is look the whole claim was completely ridiculous

the claim was when the Amos militants were leaving Gaza with the hostages they seated a woman between two men and just the mere fact of being in physical proximity with a man constitutes sexual violence so I write in the book we all know I write in the book a hostage taking is a war crime there's no argument about that

but that being said if you're going to take hostages is it a new rule of international law that if you're taking a woman hostage you have to hire a Uber I mean it's just laughable but the other thing is

what happened was the commission was grasping at straws. Yes. Because it felt intimidated by this litmus test, either you acknowledge Hamas committed sexual violence, or else you're one of those who don't believe women, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So they knew there was no forensic evidence of sexual violence and race. They knew there was no digital or photographic evidence of Hamas having committed sexual violence or rape. So how do you make the charge stick because you feel intimidated?

You don't want to fail that litmus test without evidence. So they had to conjure up evidence. So there happens to be digital evidence of women between two Hamas militants leaving on a motor scooter. Ah, we have our digital evidence. So let's call that sexual violence or gender-based sexual and gender-based items. So they were just grasping at straws because they wanted to pass out litmus test. And so they came up with just completely ridiculous examples. If you're a combatant, you don't get a special dispensation because you're a woman.

So if you get roughed up as a combatant, okay, that may constitute some sort of war crime if you get roughed up. Well, you don't get to call that sexual violence. Like women don't get to be physically touched in a war. No. Short people don't get a special dispensation. No, I'm serious.

No, I know. If you're an Asian, Is there something in the Geneva Conventions that says Asians get a special dispensation because they're short? Is there a special dispensation for older people? No. Once you've enlisted, you have to be bound by the Geneva Conventions. But that doesn't mean special dispensations. Now, it is true.

It is true. Under international law, there are special protections for women. but not in combat. If you're a woman taken prisoner, that you have special hygienic, bodily needs, that those incarcerating you have to take into account. But you don't get not to be touched because you're a woman. You don't get not to be handcuffed because you're a woman.

This is just, as I said, it's the grasping at straws because they know there's no case. Yes. And also it's the racism. You know, you see it. It's like suing the MTA, the Mass Metropolitan Transit Association, which runs mass transit in New York City, suing the MTA for sexual and gender-based violence. Because women have to stand in propinquity in the presence of African Americans at rush hour. I mean, that's what you're saying.

Yeah. If you're forced, now they say, well, you're not really forced. Of course you're forced. It's rush hour. You want to get to work. So it's coerced intimacy, isn't it? Let's say you're in a train and there are a subway car. and you're surrounded by three African-American men.

Do you get to sue the MTA for coerced intimacy? It's idiotic. And Nabi Pallay knows better. She was the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. They were desperate. And I called them out. Because it was an abdication of responsibility. Certainly.

your book also goes to on to also critique the ICJ dissent to South Africa's case talk a little bit about that and the one of the 17 judges that presented this dissent, this

Ugandan judge speak a little bit about this judge's disagreement with essentially everything submitted by the South African legal team and how this judge seemingly came to that determination? Well, first of all, we have to set the context.

Very surprisingly to me, when I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I didn't think there was a snowballed chance in hell that the ICJ would find that Israel was plausibly committing genocide. I dismissed the ideas. completely ridiculous, a squandering of time, a waste of energy. Don't go there. I mean, we're talking about governments which would never, ever find Israel plausibly committing genocide. And on top of that, the president of the court, Joan Dunahue, was an American.

So how could it come to pass that this court, which was already in Israel's pocket, a large number of them. Not all, obviously, but a large number. The French judge, the British judge, the German judge, the American judge, didn't look good. And, you know, once they start applying the pressure, saying to other judges, you better vote a long way, with us or you know there's going to be retaliation by our government, blah, blah, blah, blah. You figure the jury is rigged. I was very surprised. I was wrong.

And I have to always acknowledge what I'm wrong. The vote was not even close. And the American judge went along with it. There was only one dissent about whether Israel is plausibly committing genocide, and that's this character named Julia Sabatindi from Uganda. I don't want to overburden your listeners now. I devote a hundred pages of the book, not a small number, in order to demonstrate that she was either bribed or blackmailed by Israel or she's a crazed fanatic.

or one of those three, and it could easily obviously be a combination of the three. Now, in answer to your question, here's the problem. You can't discuss her jurisprudence. You can't, I should point out, there were many cases before the ICJ pertaining to the Israeli genocide, just to go through them quickly for you,

there was a case in January, March, and May on the genocide claim. Then there was a case before the court of whether Israel's occupation of the West Bank in Gaza had become illegal under international law. For your listeners' sake, I will point out that the court did decide that the occupation was illegal and it was quite a stunning verbal fact I don't want to speak now about its practical consequences a stunning verbal fact

that the UK's foreign secretary, Ed Miliband he stated a couple of days ago we concur, we agree with the ICJ advisory opinion that the occupation is illegal. That was a momentous verbal step. I'm not saying practical consequences. In any event, there was that case, and then there was a more esoteric case, whether Israel was bound to cooperate, legally bound to cooperate with UNRWA.

the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in its operations in Gaza. The court ruled that it was bound to cooperate with UNRWA. So as you could see, the genocide case in January, it then continued to march, then continued to May, the legality of the occupation, case, the UNRWA case, you cannot characterize what Judge Sabatendi wrote. You cannot characterize it as jurisprudence. It was just completely crackpot. It was the equivalent of a Holocaust denier or a flat earther.

Or somebody who's arguing now in 2020. that slavery is still legal in the United States. It was that out to lunch. But as Raul Hilberg once said, the great historian of the Nazi Holocaust, the greatest historian of the Nazi Holocaust, a great scholar on a Nazi Holocaust, he once said,

the Holocaust did happen. however trying to prove it is not easy the Holocaust did happen but trying to prove it is not easy in the same he wrote the classic three-volume study of the Nazi holocaust a breathtaking breathtaking piece of scholarship in the same case with Judge Sabatindi

she is a crackpot or a crook one or the other a crackpot or a crook and probably both a crackpot and a crook but trying to prove it is not easy and it took me about a hundred pages in order to leave her no wiggle room I want her ousted from the court I mean

or I should say I believe she should be ousted from the court and I believe that if I force it as a public issue and that depends on me getting cooperation, she will be ousted because I didn't leave any wiggle room. I didn't. It took 100 pages, but I left no wiggle room. And it's not an irrelevant issue at this point

because the court has not yet ruled on what's called the merits of the genocide allegation by South Africa. what it ruled so far in January, March, and May is that it's plausible that Israel is perpetrating genocide. And therefore, we have to take some measures before we come to the merits phase and this phase and decide whether it's genocide. because the merits phase is going to take place many years later, now we need the technical term is indicate provisional measures, which is just like the equivalent, you know, in the United States, of a preliminary injunction.

You haven't yet proven your case, but there seems to be enough evidence that we have to worry that it's true. So the woman has to be, the man has to be separated from the woman. you know, a preliminary injunction in a spousal battery case. We haven't looked at the evidence closely, but there's enough evidence to indicate this charge may be true. And it's the same thing. We've gone through the stage of indicating provisional measures,

like a preliminary injunction, but we now have to go to the merits phase, whether or not on scrupulous analysis of all the evidence, we can conclude that Israel committed a genocide. And I would like to see Judge Sebertindi removed from the court before we get to that face, because I think that she is an Israeli agent. It seems like the evidence is overwhelming,

and you do make that case very thoroughly and compellingly in your book. We have a viewer writing in Kentucky Leftist says that they, he just got your book two days ago and has only read the prologue thus far, but it's already blown away by the comparison between Hamas and the Nat Turner Rebellion. So Norm, there's some audience members already enjoying your book, and hopefully more as they listen to this interview. I just have a question or two for you, one or two more questions. I want to just go back a little bit because you touch on the campus protests here in the United States

at the beginning of your book. You take the time to herald them and compare them to the Vietnam War protesters, But you lay out how this current group of students protesting the Gaza genocide are more likely to be deeply indebted with student loans facing a very precarious economic situation. And they have been facing doxing by groups of private individuals, billionaires like Robert Kraft and Bill Ackman. These are mafia intimidation tactics. But would, and so would it be fair to describe this level of coordination by, some of these wealthy Zionists as an act of organized but legitimized criminality against some of these students.

I said it over and over again. They resorted the blackmail weapon. Yeah. Now, you added some other elements, but overall, there are other elements, but overall, it was blackmail. They told the universities in no uncertain terms. Either you crush the encampments or withdrawing our alumni contributions. Or we're not continuing.

with our alumni contributions. And there was a lot of money. In the case of Harvard, one alumni, one alumni gave Harvard $200 million. Another alumni gave Harvard $300 million. Bill Atman gave Harvard $50 million. So we're talking about significant sums of money that were being,

the withholding of which was threatened by these Jewish supremacist billionaires. And then there was the other element which you alluded to, which was the sorts of threats and realized threats, realized threats against the students. Everything ranging from suspension, or I should say everything ranging from not being able to prevent it from attending graduation to suspension, to expulsion, to kidnapping.

I mean, there are foreign students who were kidnapped. And then there was, those were the extreme, though not trivial, extreme forms of repression. But then there was just, and then there were things like, they didn't just, let's say, if you take Harvard, they didn't just have a truck going around with pictures of the students who were participating in the encampments and calling them terrorists and giving them information how to contact them. You know what they did? I mean, you're going to find just unbelievable. They had trucks go to the homes of the parents of the students 500 miles away.

and go through the neighborhoods with the pictures of the students. Now, you know, my parents were on the far left of the political spectrum. They were off the spectrum. They were, you know, their politics. But if they had pictures of me going through the neighborhood, they would have killed me. Yeah. They would have killed me.

Yeah. So, and there were all sorts. And then there were just the basic financial considerations, parents telling their children, hey, we're not giving you $80,000, we're not paying $80,000 in tuition for you to get expelled. That's not going to happen. So you have to decide, is it Gaza or is it Goddard College? It's going to be one or the other, but it's not going to be both. Yep, exactly.

And so that's why in the end, we have to be. honest about the total picture. What they did was deeply heroic and moving, but the fact is they caved in very fast. The encampments disappeared and do you know what else? Gaza disappeared for the next two years. The last two years in the college campus, nobody others were about Gaza. We have to also say during the Vietnam War era, there was nowhere near that level of repression when it came to campus protests, nothing near it. I did know some students who were expelled. I haven't been honest about that.

But no, in general, we were able to fight for our right to protest. That right was lost in the spring of 2024. They lost the right to protest. It was a huge setback. Under the Democratic administration at that time, you should point out. No, it's true that Trump, weaponized it to go after DEI and all sorts of other things. But the core, the point of the spear was Biden.

Absolutely. The Biden administration. Lastly, Professor, I just wanted to get your perspective on how, you know, this is, this genocide has been so extensively documented, live streamed. I mean, in the day after October 7th, we were in tears here, just understanding what was about to happen and the hell that was going to be unleashed and how clear Israeli officials were being in their intentions. And still somehow the level of sadism and destruction took me by surprise even with that understanding. There's a lack of plausible deniability here that is so striking. And for Israeli society, I wonder how you can. describe the uniqueness of that lack of plausible deniability and what Israeli society is doing with

that very dynamic? There are two things to be said. Number one, it's not historically unprecedented. Look at our own country. The extermination of the Native Americans, which was in broad daylight, the exposes. the expulsion and extermination. You would be very surprised, I believe, how little sympathy it evoked among white people.

I'm talking about the best of white people. When you read Frederick Douglass on Native Americans, it's not a pretty picture. When you read the great abolitionist Charles Sumner when it comes to Native Americans, not a pretty picture. The number of Americans who in the face of, or I should say to use their expression,

without any plausible deniability, who went along with the expulsion and extermination of the native population, in the absence, with the exception of a handful of people is nearly everybody. Do you know virtually every American president then from George Washington up to Abraham Lincoln.

No, no, up to, it ends around 1911, 1912, who was ever president? The Cherokee Indians were expelled in steps. It starts from the East Coast, and then they end up, by the end after going to North Carolina, Mississippi. They end up in Arkansas, and then out of Arkansas is carved out Oklahoma. It was a protracted expulsion highlighted, or I should say, the high or low point of which was the Trail of Tears. Virtually every American president, I think every American president, my memory is right, participated in that. So, and as you would guess, the images of the Native Americans as savages, and so forth, not unlike the Israeli depiction of the Palestinians,

and not unlike obviously the Nazi depiction of the Jews. So it's not without precedent. On the other hand, it is also true to say that, as genocides go, this one was pretty shameless. It was broadcast by the Israelis themselves, by the Israelis themselves, by the perpetrators of genocide themselves. It was posted under social media. They were proud of it.

Now somebody will make say, well, it's not all of them. Well, actually, it is all of them. You see, that's the problem. The problem is they wouldn't have posted it if they were confident, they would only have posted it. If they were confident,

they would suffer no social retribution. How many people, how many cases have you heard of Israeli stepping forward and saying these social media postings of blowing up homes, blowing up hospitals? They're outrageous. Why are they posted? Nobody protested it. They're bragging. They're bragging, but it's not just that they're bragging. They're bragging to an audience that they know will be receptive. They're bragging to an audience.

which they know will resonate to those images. They're bragging to themselves, because Israel is a citizen army, it's representative of a cross-section of Israeli Jewish society. It's not as if there is a demarcated contingent of people called soldiers, who have been quote-unquote brainwashed

versus civilians who are a broad range from good people to bad people and all that's not true. Israel, when you say Israel undertook a genocide it was Israeli

society as a whole that undertook it. It's a citizen army. So they had, I guess it's fair to say, they had fewer alibis than in preceding genocides. It's an indictment of Israeli society as a whole. It's not an indictment of Mr. Netanyahu. if Mr. Netanyahu

is the longest running Prime Minister in Israeli history there's a reason for it because he's an obnoxious self-righteous Jewish supremacist and Israelis keep voting for him

for one basic reason they see themselves that's why they keep voting they're voting because he is them and they are him and the only seemingly crack in that armor for him is security issues and Israelis thinking that he isn't protecting them and I'm not convinced

that that is going to undo him in this upcoming election it appears like it might be a better bet as he's clearly calculated to give the settlers whatever they want and to allow them to expand into the West Bank to shore up his coalition. On the basic facts, look, the settlement enterprise began in 1967 when they went into East Jerusalem and started to annex it. Everybody supports the settlement enterprise. Every Israeli prime minister, there are no exceptions.

It's true that, look, we have to be. clear. What's happened since October 7th has a large number of antecedents. It didn't just come out of nowhere. But it's also true that the society has become crazier. That's true also. It's become more brazen, more lunatic, not just pockets. This society, a bit large. I think a critical mass has been reached and it's now completely lunatic society. So we have to balance two facts, both of which are true. One,

everything Israel has done since October 7, 2023, there are ample precedence for it. On the other hand, it's at a qualitatively different level now. And the same thing with the lunacy. the dementia in Israeli society. Every war, Israel, every time Israel launched a high-tech killing spree in Gaza,

be it Operation Castled in 2008, 9, Operation Protective Edge 2014, all of which are really horrible. Every single post showed in every single event, 90 to 95% of Israeli Jews supported it. So mass support. support for these high-tech killing sprees is not new. It's always been the case. But it's also true to say this is a protracted genocide and the all the polls show that 95% of Israelis during a genocide, 95% of Israelis believed Israel was using too little or just enough force. Only 5%

and thought Israel was using too much for us. So, I won't say the picture is complicated. I would just say it has many aspects to it. As I start off the new book, my first words were the very first words.

Well, I have a PDF right here, if you would like. Their very first words. here in the prologue you would like. The 7th of October 2023 didn't change everything. It did, however, change a lot. Yeah.

As historians like to say, there's continuity and there's change. It didn't change everything, but it changed a lot. I think we should leave it there because I'm way over time. Absolutely. You read my mind. I apologies for the follow-ups,

but I love getting to talk to you and really appreciate your time today. Professor Norman Finkelstein, you can check out the book, and we'll put a link down below. It's called Gaza Grave Diggers and Inquiry Into Corruption. Gaza's Grave Diggers and Inquiry Into Corruption in High Places. Thanks so much, Professor. Really appreciate your time today.

Thank you. With that, folks, we're going to wrap up the free part of this program and head into the fun half, where we will take, maybe we'll take. your calls we shall see we will certainly read your i.m.'s. Kentucky leftist apologies. You had a question for Norm and I wasn't able to get to it. No Sleep Till says, what if say Yao Ming were a victim of violence with a tall Asian fine recourse? You know, he communicates in his own very specific way.

He likes to drive a point home. He does. He does. Examples. And has no compunction about, you know, being as frank as possible. So I maybe wouldn't have described it that way, but I'm also non-norm. And his work speaks for itself, even when we have certain disagreements about things. I mean, I'm... Norm's a treasure. A treasure. I mean, there are disagreements among, you know, people who do this sort of work on certain

discrete questions. But in terms of, like, the body of work that Norm has put out on Israel and Palestine, he's unmatched. Exactly right. Matt, what is happening in the Matt Lechian media universe? Yeah, we have a Jacobin show talking about some tech oligarchy stuff tomorrow. Actually, I'm going to be out of here. So I'm going to North Dakota for a little bit this weekend.

So there won't be a Left Reckoning next week, Tuesday, but you can check out David and I's from this week. And also, there will be a Sunday show for patrons, patreon.com slash left reckoning. Also, October 4th, have a link down below. Bituation Room Live. I will be at the lodge room in L.A. It's a matinee, me and Francesca, and likely some other special guests to be announced. Perhaps we'll have more on that tomorrow

because I think Francesca is going to be joining us. And I should say, it is her birthday. So I had to make sure to get the plug in. Francesca Furentini, my friend, happy, happy birthday, friend of the show. If you'd like to celebrate her birthday, I'm sure she'd be thrilled if you headed over to the lodge room on the 4th of October.

We will be there. Say hi to you after the show, that kind of deal. So check it out, folks, if you are in Southern California. Do we have Brandon? I'm here. Hey, Brandon. How are you? Hello.

I'm doing it. How are you doing? I am doing. well, what is happening over on the discourse? Well, we actually hit 27,000 over on the YouTube channel. I'm very proud of us. I'm very proud of you, the listener, who has not subscribed, because you get to be the next person to subscribe to the discourse with Brandon on YouTube.

And if you happen to have a Twitch account, I would recommend going over to the Twitch and subscribing there too because we are almost at 10,000, 10,000 followers. I know. it's a big number, you know, not as big as some numbers, like 11,000,

but it is quite a big number. So definitely think about giving the show a try. We've been keeping up with the Russell Brand saga. We've been keeping up with the Nigel Farage saga. A lot of British sagas we've been keeping up with. So, I mean, also like erotic Bigfoot, you know,

a lot of great stuff going on at the discourse. All right. In the news. Check it out, folks. And hello, Matt, Binder, what's happening over on your shows? Oh, you're muted. Hello, how are you?

There we go. I could tell that I was muted as I was talking. Yeah, YouTube.com slash Matt Binder. Subscribe to the channel if you haven't already, because tonight, 8.30 p.m. Eastern time, we will be live for leftist mafia. So tune in then.

All right. Tune in then, folks. See you in the fun half. Okay, Emma, please. Well, I just, I feel that my voice is sorely lacking in the majority report. Wait, look, look, Sam is unpopular. I do deserve a vacation at Disney World. So, ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome Emma to the show.

It is Thursday. Yeah, I think you need to take a program for Sam. That's police. Sir, I'm gonna, I'm gonna pause you right there. Wait, what? You can't encourage Emma to live like this. And I'll tell you why. So it's offered a twerk, sushi, and poker.

with the boys. Boys. Who was offered a twer? Yeah. Sushi and poker with the boys. What? Twere. Sushi and poker.

Sushi and poker with the boys. It was offered a twer. Sushi and... Ah, that's what we call the biz. Dwar. Sushi and poker with the boys. Right. Tour.

Sushi and Mok. We're going to get demonetized. I just think that what you did to Tim Poole was mean. Free speech. That's not what we're about here. Look at how sad he's become now. You shouldn't even talk about him. I think you're responsible.

I probably am in a certain way, but let's get to the meltdown here. Twirp. Oh, boy. Oh, my God. Twerk? Wow. Sushi. I'm sorry.

I'm losing my fucking mind. Someone's offered with twirp. Yeah. Sushi and poker with the boys. Logic. Twerp. Sushi and poker with the boys. Boy, boy, boy, twir.

I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. A debate seven thousand times. A little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. A little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. Just don't understand.

So I'm not trying to be a dip right now, but like, I absolutely think the U.S. should be providing me with a wife and kids. That's not what we're talking about here. It's not a fun job. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. That's a real thing.

Offered it to work. It's offered it to work. Sam has like the weight of the world on the shoulders. Sam doesn't want to do this show anymore. It was so much easier. When the majority report was just you, If you're happy, let's change the subject. Right.

Rangers and Nick are going to great. Now, shut up. Don't want people saying reckless things on your program. That's one of the most difficult parts about this show. This is a pro-killing podcast. I'm thinking maybe it's kind of we bury the hatchet. Left is best. Trump.

Violet twerk. You are to the right of the outside policy. We already fund Israel. Incredible theme song. Eye bumbler. Emma Viglin, absolutely one of my favorite people. Actually, not just in the game, like, period.