The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3578 - ICE Raid Falls Flat; Big Union Victory in CA; Israel's West Bank Annex w/ Simeon Benit, Leila Espinosa & Jasper Nathaniel

Episode Date: September 10, 2025

It's Hump Day on the Majority Report On today's show: Trump teases another National Guard Deployment to an American city, promises to make announcement tomorrow. In Rochester, New York, ICE Agents swarm two roofers working at a private residence and within minutes 200 protestors assemble and successfully deflect the Feds. Unrelated, one of the ICE SUV's needs a tow after all four tires go flat. Simeon Benit and Leila Espinosa of the newly founded Research Professionals & Public Service Union join the show to discuss backstory of the new union and what is next for RPSP-UAW. Publisher of the Infinite Jaz Substack, Jasper Nathaniel joins us to discuss Israel's ongoing annexation of the West Bank. In the Fun Half: A Texas A&M student films her objection to a Professor allegedly teaching "gender identity". As a result of the complaint the Professor and Dean have been relieved of their positions. Pam Bondi throws a fit about Chicago not wanting the National Guard to be deployed in their city so she is taking her ball and going to Charlotte. Code Pink protestors disrupt Donald Trump's night out a steakhouse with JD Vance, Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio All that and more. The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: CURRENT AFFAIRS: for 30% off for a year on any subscription of your choice, go to currentaffairs.org/subscribe and enter the code MAJORITYREPORT at checkout. The offer expires October 31st.   SUNSET LAKE:  Head to SunsetLakeCBD.com and through September 14th, you can save 30% on all Sunset Lake CBD’s Tinctures when you use the coupon code FallTincture Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech Check out Matt’s show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon’s show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza’s music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/

You are listening to a free version of The Majority Report. Support this show at join the Majority Report.com and get an extra hour of content daily. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Wednesday, September 10, 2025. My name is Sam Cedar. 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,

Simeon Bennett, research data analyst at the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and Lila Espinosa, project management professional at UCLA, on the newly formed research professionals and public service union RPSP UAW. Also on the program today, Jasper Nathaniel, journalists covering Israel's occupation of the West Bank and other political culture fairs on Infinite Jazzsubstack.com. meanwhile Russian drone incursion into Poland has NATO on alert and elite government memo shows that France's health ministry is instructing hospitals to prepare for major military engagement by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the U.S. seems mildly upset about Israel's attack on Qatar, where the U.S. has a base, and where U.S. asked Qatar to house Hamas negotiators. This, as Israel's peace plan, is basically announced to kill the negotiators. House Democrats worried

Chuck Schumer will shit the bed again that's a quote over the government shutdown fight leaked documents shows a worker detained in the Hyundai raid had a valid visa federal judge blocks Trump from firing

the federal board governor. We'll see if the Supreme Court has an emergency docket to reverse. Democrats add a congressman in a Virginia special election for that candidate outperformed

Harris and Biden by double digits. And as Democrat governors build a vaccine firewall against Robert F. Kennedy ousted CDC director to testify on the hill.

Texas A&M fires a dean and a professor over a student complaint that they were teaching gender in class. Georgia judge tosses the racketeering charges against the Atlanta cop city protesters. Still other charges remain, but that RICO charge thrown out. And lastly, Alex Jones asked the Supreme Court to hear his defamation appeal. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. It is hump day. It is hump day.

Of course, Sam of England coined that phrase almost three or four years ago. And it has spread like wildfire. It's catching on, folks. So congrats, and sorry you didn't cash in copyrighted or whatever you did now. Well, we're in principle against the overuse of intellectual property here at the majority report. So I took one for the team. You took it creative commons on that. People can go wild with it.

Feel free to use Hump Day at work today with any of your coworkers. And when they ask, where'd you hear that? You say the majority report. That's the way it works. It's not how we do our advertising. Thank you. We've got a lot to get to today. Donald Trump has announced that he is going to announce within a day where the U.S. is going to invade. I should say which city in the U.S. will invade. This is coming on the heels of a breaking report in the New York Times that that Venezuelan boat full of 11 people, about whom we know really nothing else, was actually turning back to Venezuela because they were afraid that they were, they were being trailed by some type of drone, I guess.

And turns out they were. And then they were summarily executed by the Trump administration. And supposedly, because they had drugs, every other indication is also that they weren't coming to the United States in the first place, but regardless. Meanwhile, Trump is about to announce where he's going to invade in this country tomorrow. Chicago has been basically getting ready for this invasion, although now I'm hearing some rumors, essentially, that people are hearing in Chicago that the National Guard is not going to be coming to town, in part, I think, because they're nervous about how. Pritzker is going to respond. I mean, they have a unified front there.

We'll play this later in the show. But Pam Bondi was sort of walking it back last night on Sean Hannity and being like, they should want us, which means maybe they're a little bit afraid of the resistance. And this is a blueprint for Democratic cities in the future because Trump's going to keep trying this. I would be intimidated to go into Chicago if I was a guardsman. Well, and particularly, I mean, both be, I think probably it's less that they're, that the Trump people are afraid that guardsmen are going to be met with actual resistance. I think they would like that.

I think what they're also afraid of, though, is enhancing Pritzker's political status. That was probably something that is more on their mind when J.D. Vance goes or Trump goes, like, I don't want to run against a Pritzker who has become sort of the leader of the resistance. So I would imagine they're going to find another city in another state that doesn't necessarily have the opportunity to be politically emboldening to someone. But we'll find out. In the meantime, in Rochester, New York yesterday, some patriots and citizens decided to protect their community against ICE. And there's several people in here that if I was able to hand out medals, I would. Here is a report. This is a report from

ABC 13, Rochester. ABC 13 Rochester in Rochester, New York. Wait for a response from immigration officials. A chaotic scene on Westminster Road Tuesday morning in Rochester as federal agents were carrying out

an ICE enforcement and removal operation. They're here putting on a roof trying to make a dollar and paying taxes on that dollar. and ICE was here bothering them. So I came to bother ice. Roof Rees was among dozens who came to the scene. State Assembly member Jen Longsert claims the agents were after people working on a roof.

I showed up today at a call from the New York Integration Coalition as an attorney out of concern that there needed to be official warrants. This is a private residence. So we just want to make sure that everything is happening within the bounds of the law. Details from federal authorities are limited, but our cameras captured a border patrol vehicle at the scene with flat tires. And city by city, state by state, we have to stand up and we have to fight and we have to tell him. We're not standing for this anymore. The incident on Westminster comes as the

Trump administration ramps up immigration enforcement across the country. And months after the Department of Justice sued the city of Rochester for his sanctuary city policies. Today, borders are Tom Homan, commentant on the nationwide issue. President Trump's been clear. It was on fire, twice public safety to trust the national security trust and data shows it's exactly what we're going. Someone's garbage is supposed to around? You want to see here and bless someone being here early? I'm not going to do that because they cheated the system. In response to the large crowd, agents left Westminster and the SUV was towed a few blocks away.

Amazing. Please freeze that. Hold on. Go back just a little bit. This is like literally, someone should, I want to see paintings of this and hung in museums. Border Patrol should have filled. their tires before they showed up at the scene. I mean, that's their bad, right? You got to check the tire pressure. It's important to note in this, uh, in this video too. Um, these roofers were working on a private home. And once they're in on private property, that is when a warrant is necessary. So, uh, this is just people need to make sure that they understand, uh,

their rights and the rights of, of the people that they see ice targeting. And remember, you cannot in any way physically impede what ICE is doing, although, you know, some folks are, you know, maybe lying down in front of cars or walking in front of cars. I mean, if you accidentally are standing in front of the car and maybe have your headphones on, you can't hear, I don't know. But it's really important that you remind these ice feds and these brown shirts that either they have kids or someday they will have kids or they will have grandkids who are going to have maybe even change their last names because they're so embarrassed about what their father or mother or grandparents did. like they're going to shame their descendants for generations. During Monday night football on Monday, there were at least two ads from like the administration about trying to get people to recruit to come and serve their country for ICE. And they advertised student debt forgiveness.

They advertised the 50,000 bonus basically. if you sign up, although I know there's some stipulations, you have to stay on for a longer period of time. But, like, this is fully borrowing from some of the darkest, furthest right movements in history, including the Nazis, where, like, giving young fascist men kind of employment when the economy wasn't doing so well to collaborate with the regime. And especially as we see the economy starting to tank, this is increasingly what I think the administration is going to try to rely on, escalating into authoritarianism because his popularity will continue to slip as the economy gets worse and primarily doing that through immigration. And there was also, like, there was a local reporter there that was basically going through the timeline of it. so there were these two roofers they were on the roof then the crowd started to gather and people were yelling at them saying like stay strong and all that kind of stuff and collectively they just basically created a barrier around the guy the the the roofers that were working at at the very top and eventually they had to leave so for all this darkness like community connection here is basically where I think you can find some semblance of perseverance and um and resistance and that was a great example of that um yeah kudos to that people and um and again

that woman deserves ruth she deserves the medal of honor she's so good i'm concerned i saw some video of her you know also chanting and and holding up a sign getting a nicest face so incredible stuff heroes um uh there's going to be a lot more of this all over but uh be aware they're in Rochester, obviously. And I would imagine they're going to be going all around New York at different points. So, all right. In a moment, we're going to be talking to Simian Bennett and Lela Espinoza. They have, they are two folks who have helped forming the newly formed Research Professionals and Public Service Union, RPSP, UAW, and I don't know if this is exclusively through the University of California system.

That's how I understand. But we'll be talking to them. There's something like 7,000 people in this new union. And we'll be talking to them both on how they ended up forming this union and why, but also the idea of forming a union in this context where we have basically no labor protections is a challenge. And so important to highlight those stories where we see it happening. Then we'll be talking to Jasper Nathaniel, who has been writing a lot on the occupation and now sort of like rolling annex of the West Bank. it is happening.

And of course, he writes at Infinite Jazz Substack, which you should all be reading on a regular basis. It is one of my daily reads. And another of my daily reads is current affairs. Talk about great work over there. Just in terms of Israel, Palestine. Remember, I've been obsessing about this, the undercounted death.

to hold. Current Affairs has had the best piece on that aggregating all of the data indicating that it's hundreds of thousands dead in Gaza. So that's another, you know, you should be reading current affairs daily for sure. Yeah. Nathan Robinson and their whole crew over there do a great job. And if you like deep, thoughtful, progressive analysis. And I mean, I imagine you do if you're listening to the program. You're going to love the print or the digital or both, frankly, of Current Affairs Magazine. Current Affairs combines intelligent commentary, biting political satire, and really beautiful artwork. You don't really see that as much as you used to in, you know, magazines in general, frankly, but you should just head over to current affairs, just at the very least, just

even look at some of the artwork that they feature and produce. It's a fantastic compliment to the majority report's work. They deliver hard-hitting, totally independent, and entertaining coverage of the most important political, social, and economic issues of our time. Use the Code Majority Report for 30% off a year on any subscription of your charge. choice. Go to currentaffairs.org slash subscribe and enter the code majority report at checkout. The offer expires October 31st. That's current affairs.org slash subscribe. Enter the code majority report at checkout. We'll put a link in the podcast and YouTube subscription.

Also, I want to remind you, we have a discord that has, I think, like you right now, over 15 thousand people involved and growing. It's a great resource if you want to go just to chat with people, but if you're looking for stuff like, how do I run for office or where do I get materials on labor organizing or in organizing against ICE or even just talking about films? Majority Discord.com. Check that out. And also three times. times a week. You can get the AM Quickie.

It's about five-minute read every morning at 9 a.m. Five days a week for two bucks a month, but it's free three days a week amquicky.com. Whitney and Corey do an amazing job. I source it every morning for us.

It's great. Of course. And I've recommended it to people who say like, canceled their New York Times subscription because of their genocide propaganda. You can still get your daily fix of news if you get the AM Quickey. Yeah, check it out. AMQuicky.com.

All right, we're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we're going to be talking to Lila Espinoza and Simian Bennett, both of whom are involved in the forming of the new union, research involving research professionals and Public Service. We'll be right back. We are back, Sam Cedar We are back, Sam Cedar, Emma Viglin, the majority report, it is a pleasure to welcome to the program, Simeon Bennett and Lila Espinoza.

Simeon is Research Data Analyst at UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography and Lila Espinoza project management professional at UCLA and both now members of the newly formed research professionals and public service union, RPSP, under the auspices of the UAW, Lila, let's start with you. Welcome both of you to the show. Lila, let's start with you. Tell us what the genesis of this new union was.

Well, many of our union members or many of the workers, we just started watching and witnessing all of the great wins that many of our colleagues who are already represented, particularly those with UAW won in recent years and particularly during their 22 historic wins on their contract. And many of us look to each other, and I have been at the university for over 20 years now and thought, why not us?

Why not us as well? And so we began talking with one another, started to build a network of individuals who just thought the same thing, and we continue to reach out to coworkers and grow that network and eventually got to that point where we felt, wow, we could really actually put this to a vote to our colleagues and win our union. And so a lot of it was a lot of one-on-one outreach, a lot of listening, a lot of just hearing what it is that people care about, particularly things like stagnant wages, seeing that our colleagues who are represented were outpacing us in terms of their

salary wage increases, seeing the rising costs of health care that we were having to contribute to, seeing opportunities where our career advancements were really very stale. I personally had only received one promotion in the first like 15 plus years that I would as at the university. And it was very common knowledge that we all had heard in the, you know, the water cooler chatter the only way to really advance in your career is to jump departments. And that really does a disservice to the department that you're in and to the people that you're working with. So eventually we were able to do a lot of town halls

and actually just reach out and eventually triggered or, you know, decided to collect cards, which is basically collecting signatures that would allow us to trigger an election that, As we noted in about two weeks' time, we were able to assemble 83% of the majority of our workforce to vote yes to unionizing. So over 3,000 of the 7,200 workers who are in, who are research and public service professionals across the UC voted yes to unionizing. Wow. That's impressive numbers. And Simeon, what, from your perspective, one of the things I'm curious about is the relationship between folks who you work at universities, some of whom are research like yourself, analysts, and the UAW, right? I mean, it's like this, you know, we've seen this and it's growing, but, but what is, that connection there and what does it mean to both the sort of those who work directly for automakers but then those who are in academia like where what are what are the challenges

and advantages to that type of coalition uh i think uaW members or uaW itself has made a concerted effort to organize university workers. And you can see that, and that over 100,000 academic workers are organized under UAW. So that's a really important point. How it relates to workers as far as like the actual auto workers and things, I think it really speaks to a shared class consciousness of like we, even though we're working, universities. We are workers, just like you are, and we have the same concerns. We have families.

We have careers that we care about. We have parents that need our support, and we have people that in our lives that have need medical coverage and things like that. And I think we, just like if you hear anybody talk about class, we share more than we differ. Just because we are at a university doesn't mean that, you know, we don't share 90% of the same interests. And can you talk a little bit about the challenges that, you know, say, graduate student researchers face as well? Because I know that here in New York I spoke to somebody who was organizing at Fordham and how essentially these universities provide little to zero support for these folks who are doing pretty essential work for the functions of the university that they say they value?

Yeah, we work quite intimately with UAW 4811, who has 48,000 members at UC, and they organized in the past several years. They're actually in bargaining right now with the university. I can't really speak to much of their situation just because I'm not in the union, but I think our interests are sometimes diverged, but mostly align in that we want to be taken care of by the university. And some of the treatment that Lila explained a second ago really speaks to the neglect that many of us feel. And graduate student researchers definitely feel it. And sometimes to a greater degree because their salaries, especially in San Diego and places like San Francisco, it's just egregious, truly. Lila, I'm always fascinated about the unionizing process in its most nascent stage.

Like, when you start to approach people, because in particularly, you know, I mean, in general, you have management that is hostile to unionizing. I don't know if that's the case in the UC system as much as it is like, you know, sort of like in the Morse or private sector, but nevertheless. And you've got to be careful about who you talk to in those early stages because there's an opportunity for the employers to fire people who are talking about the unions unless it's like, you know, sort of like a move down the road, as it were. So in those early stages, like, how do you determine who you're going to reach out to? Is it, are there sort of phases like, okay, I'm going to talk to, I know my best friend is not, you know, they're not interested in this or we've been talking about it anyways. But when you start to move out outside of your friend's circle into sort of like, well, you know, I always run into them at the coffee machine type of person or whatnot, like how do you start to make those assessments as you. approach people? Well, you find out what it is that they care about. You ask them, have they ever thought about how do they think about unions in general? And that really just does give

you a good sense of what people are thinking. And generally, the principle is that we've found that there's a very few, there's a very small percentage of our co-workers who are just completely not interested in unionizing. The majority of the majority of, there's a very small percentage of our coworkers who are just completely not interested in unionizing. The majority of our coworkers are curious. They just don't understand or know what are the potential benefits or have watched it and have been on the fence. And so much of it, as we've mentioned, is just simply about listening and then really talking and addressing their fears and their concerns. And that is what helps build the movement and feeling and people feeling more confident about this is a good thing. This can help us. This can

protect me. And this is something safe to do because once we have more and more of us who feel the same way, there's obviously power in the numbers. And we've been able to do that. And I think the strength of our organizing has really demonstrated that by being able to convince the majority of our coworkers, that we can allay their fears, that we can move them through it, that by collectively organizing together, we're going to be stronger than trying to do any of these things alone and trying to combat the challenges that we have individually. And Simeon, did this kind of effort and the way that so many of your colleagues were interested in unionizing, would you say that the Trump administration sort of,

attack on UCLA's research funding was a benefit to you in terms of speaking to your colleagues about forming a union because that's a real threat to your work. Yeah, I'm actually not sure. I think it is in the sense that people are more activated and aware, but it also has had a chilling effect. a lot, a quite diverse group of people in our union. And they will express to us as, you know, as we speak to our colleagues, we don't want to stick our heads out. We're afraid. We have people that are immigrants. And I've been on a phone call with a person, a colleague who is just like, look, I'm an immigrant and I just don't, I can't do this right now. I'm scared. So it's had a chilling effect, but I think people are upset and also want to do something.

They feel, and I don't think this is just our union, but people feel like the walls are closing in around them, and they need to do something. And people are doing something. And we can see in our vote just shows that we do have a mandate in our union. Our union has given all of us a mandate to fight. So, Lila, what are the next steps? I mean, and, and, and, and also, what are the specific challenges that exist in this context that may not have when there was an administration whose relationship with labor was better? I mean, it was a stronger national labor relations board. I don't even know if there is actually a national, not a national labor relations board, as far as I know right now, is basically inoperable because it doesn't have a quota.

it sounds like the is it the administration of the school i guess or is except you know is is willing to accept and sign off on the existence of the union uh but that's what it sounds like you know i don't know it's one thing to read we're very we welcome this uh and it's another thing in practice but so what are the what are the next steps and what are the particular challenges in in this environment. Well, our next steps are really to really hear from our members about what it is that they want us to, that they want to bargain for and to ensure that every voice is heard. So we're currently just serving our members and we're going to be holding the same things

that we did during our campaign is just like listening and holding town halls and speaking to one another and making sure that our network is strong enough to hear. what it is that people are prioritizing. And then, as you said, with respect to the challenges, we can anticipate, but we can't predict exactly what's on their hand, what they're going to do. But we're going to be prepared as much as possible,

and that means that's why it's so important for us to continue to engage with everyone and ensure that our power is strong enough and maintain our momentum. so that our collective voice continues to be strong during these next couple of months and during these next steps as we push for the things that we all want to see happen with respect to, you know, people's jobs or positions and making sure that we have a way to enforce and to make sure that, you know, on a sideline that the university isn't doing things that really undercut our power and undercut the things that are being. to our members. And by continuing to do that, to engage our folks across the universities and our network, we can ensure that we're protecting everyone from the kinds of things that might be happening. So it's hard to say exactly what those challenges will be. We know the

university is under a lot of pressure, but, you know, from external forces. But we also want to note that we are in collective collaboration with respect to that, right? We are going to our legislators. By having a voice together, we also have a way to support, you know, the university in its fight against the administrative cuts and all of those things. So, you know, UAW has been doing that four years, and we've been doing that recently, and we're continuing to join in that effort. So, Simeon, how many people are in the, I guess, is it a bargaining unit or is it broader are there multiple units within this new union and and across how many different campuses because I guess that that also you know sort of like

is one of the challenges is organizing across multiple sort of geographical locations yeah I think one thing in particular that we haven't talked about yet is that we're a 93% remote slash hybrid union, which is, I don't know if it's unprecedented completely, but it's not, doesn't happen often. So that's been a real challenge. And the, and part of that is because of the housing crisis, people can't afford to live in the cities that they work. Could you repeat the question more more times?

Well, okay. So, I mean, well, that adds, I guess, to the sort of the complexity. I mean, how many campuses, I mean, and maybe in some ways it's irrelevant, how many campuses. there are. If everybody's remote, it's almost like you're, it sort of creates a separate challenge, but sort of flattens that distance, because it doesn't matter if you work in six hours north of San Diego, if you're at home anyways. But how many, I guess how many campuses are represented by that, again, that has less relevance. That's amazing that it's that much of a remote thing because my whole analogy of, you know, the, the person at the coffee machine

sort of goes out the window there. Yeah, I was going to say something there. And I was just like, yeah, I mean, it's important. I mean, tell us about that challenge because that makes it much harder. It's one thing like when you have people that you're dealing with on a regular basis. But when you start to cross that divide into sort of like the concentric circles that go out, then you have to cross that next divide. You're not meeting these people by chance.

You're not overhearing. You're not getting a sense of like, well, they came and wearing a union shirt the other day. You know, the, so there's, there's less cues, I guess, as to, you know, how you approach people. But I'm also asking, in addition to addressing that unique challenge, is everybody in the same bargaining unit? Yes. Okay. And so, uh, I imagine they are.

Is everybody's contract coming up at the same time? If so, when is that happening? Like those type of details. Yeah. So we just finished our vote August 29th, and we got the result September 2nd. So now we've moved into a phase of starting to think about what the bargaining team looks like and what exactly should be in our bargaining priorities.

So we've shifted our focus towards that. We're, I think it's 12 or 13 campuses. It's every UC campus. I can't remember the exact number. We're organizing across all of them. And I think some of the challenges, like you said, you don't run into the, there is no commissary. There is no water cooler. So there's a lot of emailing and a lot of cold emailing.

But what we really try to do is talk to people and say, can you talk to your colleagues? Can you look at this list that we have of people that work in your department? Because people are more likely to respond to someone that either works in their department, work at their same university, and so on. So there's like this kind of proximity levels that you try to hit. like people are the least likely to respond to somebody that's not in their department, not at their university, and so on. So we try to encourage people that are within a department to organize their people.

So we've organized organizers into areas and super areas and things like that. So we have people placed at these different nodes to talk to people in those areas so that they're more likely to respond. And then it really is just a lot of one-on-one, a lot of trying to schedule and talk to people and listen. And while we're organizing, we have kind of a rule of, I think it's 70% listen, 30% talk. So whenever you have a one-on-one conversation and you're the organizer, you really are just asking kind of open-ended questions and listening to what they have to say. And then you, you know, after you've done that a bunch, you bring it. to an organizing committee and you share what you're hearing from the ground and go on.

And I think it's important to talk about like third partying. That's a real thing that I have been doing as we speak, but I don't mean to, which is that you speak of like Lila and I as different from the rest of the union. And it's just not the case. Like there is no hierarchical relationship here. Lila and I are not in any elected position and are not doing anything that anybody else can do. We are just like everybody else, and we are just organizers that have said yes to do it. It's got to be a somewhat of an advantage to have a union full of data researchers and project researchers.

I would imagine, now as you're talking about nodes and of communication. Well, is there anything else that you think we should know? I mean, you know, if people want, do you guys, are there anything that we should know and are there, you know, messages that you want to sort of suggest to other people? Because I think the hunger to organize is still out there and people are, you know, there's a lot more challenges at this moment. And if you're remote, right? I mean, this, like, maybe to add to Sam's question, like, specifically for folks that are remote, they may have a lot of lessons that they can learn from you on how to organize their workplace, because that's increasingly, you know, the case.

Yeah, I think one of the things that people can take away from this is do not be dissuaded and do not be discouraged that you think you're the only one thinking this, because clearly even within our remote hybrid workforce, we were collectively thinking many of the same things and many of our remote workforce just appreciated being reached out and being validated and affirmed that the things that they were experiencing were being experienced by others.

And so I think it's a real lesson to those who are thinking about unionization with a largely dispersed workforce that it is possible and that it just simply takes that one-to-one conversation, willingness to reach out, to connect, to build that community, to see that and affirm each other that we're doing this together and that by doing it together, we can build that power and that, you know, this can happen. And to your question about what can your listeners do and what can your, you know, viewers do, I think to consider supporting the union efforts, you know, support your local union. If you are part of a union, participate.

And secondly, for those of us who are, you know, in the UC system, support your institutions of higher education because they really are under attack. And we provide such critical research and innovations that contribute to the health and well-being of lives everywhere, not just within our institutions, but across America. So there are things that we do that contribute to cancer treatments that support the new innovations that allow us to work in pollutant-free environments that are providing the research that helps cities design themselves better for the health and well-being of young children and our educators.

And all of this matters to the day. daily lives. So I encourage everyone to reach out to the legislators and show their strong support for their local institutions of higher education and especially if you're in California. Please call them and encourage also your local legislators to fight back against these cuts to all this research and to the attacks on higher ed. Does it mean anything to add? Yeah, Sam, I think about a week and a half ago on the 29th, our union election ended.

It was the last day. And that's a particularly important date for me. I'm from the New Orleans area, and I specifically St. Bernard Parish, and that was the 20th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. And when I was reflecting on that day for me, I was thinking about when I was 14 years old, how out of control everything around me felt, out of my control, everything around me felt. It was a pretty awful feeling

at the whims of everything around you. And I think if I could go back 20 years and tell my 14 year old self that 20 years from now, you'll be fighting and you'll be winning more control over your life. I think I could have made myself smile when it

was hard to smile. And I think the lesson there is that this is what you should be doing. It is morally right to be be fighting for your freedom in the workplace and democracy in the workplace, and you should be proud of it and you should do it. Really well said.

Simeon Bennett, Lila Espinoza, the new union is research professionals and public service union, RPSP, UAW. Do you guys have a website that we can link to or if people want more information or, you know, tips on organizing their place or, you know, maybe somehow they hadn't heard about union and wanted to join? Yes. Go ahead. No, go ahead.

Well, you can find more information for those who are also listeners and might not even have heard about our union election to find us at RPSP dot, I mean, RPSP-U-A-W-U.org. Okay, we will put a link to that in our podcast and YouTube description. Thank you both for coming on. Really appreciate it and congratulations and good luck. Thank you. Thanks so much. Thank you, Sam.

Thank you so much for doing this. It's really incredible that you do this for unions. Thank you. All right. Well, thanks for coming on, guys. All right, folks, we've got to take a quick break. And when we come back, we'll be talking to Jasper Nathaniel. He is a journalist who has been...

both writing about the West Bank, having had visited there and dispatches from there, and now specifically about the annexation that is ongoing and gaining steam. We'll be right back in just a moment. Thank you. We are back, Sam Cedar, Emma Viglin on The Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome back to the program, Jasper Nathaniel, journalist covering Israel's occupation of the West Bank, other political culture affairs, on one of my daily reads, Infinite Jazz. as a substack, you can find it at infinite jazz.substack.com. Folks, honestly, it is a one-stop shop for me to find out the horrors that are going on,

particularly in the West Bank, because we have a lot of coverage, obviously, on what's happening in Gaza. And, but to understand what's happening in the West Bank, what has been happening and the the historical sort of like broad strokes and sometimes more narrow strokes of what's going on there very important because

you know we were saying this in the run up to the election Donald Trump was sort of floating or the there was there seemed to be some like you know sort of opening from Miriam Adelson

oh yeah and we read reporting that um uh um uh um Trump was looking for money from Miriam Adelson, anywhere from $100 to $120 million that is, that we know of. And he ended up getting that money.

And the reporting was that she wanted U.S. recognition of Israel's annexation of the West Bank. And I learned from your reporting, Jasper, that she just got a medal from Israel. Interesting timing. she got the presidential medal of i think it's the medal of honor not the medal of freedom she got it the exact same week that uh rubio and huckabee signaled that trump was okay with them annexing the west bank so um yeah you guys have been on that for a long time and i remember sam i've been saying to you just so you know you know she's denied that quid pro quo um i just wanted to be careful about it but it does, in fact, seem like that may have been the case.

All right. So let's go back and, you know, you have a great piece that you wrote, I guess it was about a week ago now, that really both speaks to the history to some extent, but also sort of like the various options as to where we, where are we today? Because even in that past week, things have moved rather quickly. Yeah. Well, I can tell you where we were like 10 minutes ago, but it may have changed since then. Okay, so basically, you know, last time I was on the show, I talked about this sort of quiet annexation of the West Bank. And just to quickly refresh your audience, the West Bank is legally and technically under a military occupation. It has been since 1967. And because of that, it ostensibly has to adhere to international law around military. occupation. And what those laws amount to are that, number one, it's temporary. The occupation is temporary. And so what that means is that the occupying state, Israel, cannot do anything to put

roots down. For example, building a home there or building a village or a whole city or infrastructure or roads. And so for that reason, the settlement enterprise is fundamentally illegal, not just like the building itself, but the whole thing is fundamentally against international law. And then the other part of the international law basically says like anything else that Israel does has to be for security purposes. So they can't just do things because they want to do it. It has to be either for the well-being of the occupied people or for security purposes. In early 2023, Smotrich, who just became finance minister, he's, you know, this extremist settler. He works out a deal where he basically gets inserted into the defense ministry.

And inside of the defense ministry, he builds what is effectively a shadow government called the settlement administration that takes over all governing bureaucratic responsibilities from the people who are actually in the defense department. And so what that means is the people who had been working in the defense ministry and the military, you know, they certainly were not, never had the interests of the Palestinian people in mind, but they didn't necessarily have the same ideological commitments as the settlers, right? Like they were not just hell-bent on annexing the whole territory. Now the new people in charge who are making all the decisions are hand-picked by Smotrich.

They're almost all settlers. And so every decision that has to be made about whether or not to greet, light a settlement or to green light demolishing a Palestinian village. It doesn't have to go through these, like, annoying military lawyers who have to at least pretend to it here to international law. It just immediately gets signed off. So that's been happening for two and a half years, basically, is... And I just want to just so the people understand, you know, exactly, or not exactly, but it have a decent sense of where, of who Smotrick is. This is a guy who was found to have committed essentially a terrorist attack. I mean, and this is coming from the Israelis.

And that was, I guess, 20 some odd years ago, maybe 15 years ago, somewhere, I think it was in 2008. I can't remember exactly. And so that's how far we moved just in the past two decades. where a guy who was a, a settler terrorist, essentially, and this is Israel's determination, is now essentially overseeing this. And this dynamic, it's almost impossible to have someone perceived that way in Israel today as a settler terrorist because of where the government has moved. Yeah, words fail me.

trying to explain how insane it is that a guy like Smotrich gets to have so much, I mean, he's arguably, I would say almost certainly the second most powerful man in Israel after Nanyahu. You could even make the case that he's more powerful than Nanyahu in some instances because he has this sort of veto power over everything. He can collapse the government at any minute that he wants. And so basically, like, he's the finance minister, which means, you know, he's got his, he's got the purse strings, basically.

And he's now essentially the governor of the West Bank. And so he's simultaneously signing off on every settlement building project that any settler has ever dreamed of. And then he's funneling money in from the state budget to pay for it. And I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but a hugely disproportionate amount of Israel's state budget is now going into building settlements, building illegal outposts, which means it's a settlement that has not even gotten the, formal blessing from Israel, building infrastructure. There's all these new subsidies to build in the West Bank. And so the idea of this annexation project is basically what they're trying to do, and this has been the idea of it since the beginning, basically, is from inside the West Bank, chip away at the power of the military occupation and the power of the Palestinian

authority. And those are the two sort of governing institutions inside the West Bank, as the Israeli military and the Palestinian Authority. The PA has long been sort of considered a collaborator with Israel. And so Smotrich's government is chipping away at those powers and bringing them into the hands of the settlers. And then simultaneously, what they're doing is they are trying to basically take all of Israeli civil law and just move it east over to the West Bank and apply it across the settlements and applied across the entire West Bank. And the idea there is that they don't want the West Bank to be considered, you know, the red-headed stepchild. Like, this should be just part of Israel. And what's sort of ironic about it is that the settlers, they love

to say, well, look, if Israel was founded on the basis of, you know, its historical, biblical connection to the land, then the Jewish people's connection in the West Bank or in Jerusalem's much stronger than it is in Tel Aviv or in, you know, Haifa or any other place. And they're right. They're absolutely right about that. So there's much more biblical history in the West Bank. You know, that as it turns out is not actually what gives Israel the right to the state. That was, you know, a UN ruling. But anyway, so they're trying to just take all of the Israeli civil law and replace that with Israeli military law and anything the PA does. So that's sort of the backdrop before we get to this new moment.

And I also, I want to just circle back to that, too, because it's not, they want to apply the civil law to the Jewish Israelis there and it's sort of like put the existing Palestinians into a separate box that they're not protected by the military occupation, if, you know, if people can wrap their heads around that. And so they're in sort of like a nether world of having absolutely no rights, under like as as being occupied. But we should say this this point about the argument by the settlers that if you can justify the existence of Israel, it double justifies the existence of Israel annexing Judea and Samaria. This is a fundamentalist. You know, the idea that

this is about security has been, you know, sort of a, a, a, a fundamentalist. fig leave for decades. But this is a fundamentalist project. And you can see that. Just explain the difference between the way that these people perceive the West Bank versus Gaza. Yeah. So in the Old Testament, Gaza is, you know, it's the home of the Philistines, which is like the eternal enemy of the Jewish people and the Israelites. And there's various stories in the Old Testament of the Jews or the Israelites, you know, conquering Gaza and, you know, raising it basically, but it never became like a Jewish civilization there. Judea and Samaria is, it's the cradle of ancient Jewish civilization. And, you know, it should be said that the archaeological record there does in fact

show that some of the earliest civilizations there were Jewish. Now, it was not actually the earliest civilization. There were people there before the Israelites were there. And there, you know, there have certainly been lots and lots of civilizations after. So, you know, just back to this sort of idea that they get to take the land because of, you know, their connection to it. That's actually just not how it works. If, you know, if that is how it works, then obviously, you know, we couldn't be here in America and the whole world. And also, Jasper, like many of the descendants of those folks are still in that region, right? Like, it's not. the as Palestinians, it's not necessarily like the Ashkenazi Jewish settlers who say it's their

land. Yeah. Not that this should matter at all. No, I mean, look, like there's, you could twist yourself into pretzels like trying to figure out who are, you know, who has the right to be here based on, you know, their bloodline or whatever. And like, I know some Palestinians in the West Bank who say, we believe that we're the direct descendants of the Jews that were here. So like, they are not denying that there were Jews there, but they're basically saying that like, yeah, We, you know, that's us now, or we're the descendants of them. So the point being, like, that's why we have rules, right? That's why, like, we have, you know, governing bodies to settle these questions so that

a bunch of religious fanatics can't just say, hey, look what we just found, a pottery shard from, you know, King David. And so based on that, we're going to, like, drive these Palestinians off the land. So that's sort of, like, the fundamental attitude behind it. I just wanted to reiterate, though, that, like, if it was about security, it would not be defined by where Judea and Samaria is. Right. It would not be, it would not say, like, oh, we don't, you know, Gaza is just a place for us to destroy. We don't need to occupy it.

This is a fundamentalist project, and it has the zeal of religious fundamentalism as well. before we move on, can I just ask you to back up just for a second, Jasper, about the 1967, because the other piece that's not really being talked about here is East Jerusalem and how that's been under occupation also since 1967. The big story about the West Bank, it appears to me over the past two months, has been this E1 settlement, which is in the middle of an already existing Israeli illegal settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. And can you explain the significance of that?

I've done so a little crudely on the show, but with your expertise, I appreciate more context. Because E1 has been the red line, basically, for every president over the past 30 years and saying the Israelis, you can't do this until Donald Trump. Yeah. That's a great segue, actually. Because, I mean, in my mind, the sort of rhetorical, you know, trick of talking. about a two-state solution or self-determination for the Palestinian people, which, you know, every democratic politician does, even some Republican politicians do. That is a way to sort of check the box that, you know, you support Palestinian people's right to self-determination,

you support, you know, their, their right to, you know, live and just have basic human rights. But it is completely detached from what's actually happening on the ground. And that detachment is what Smotritch has exploited for the last several years. So basically, like, if you read Smotritch's words closely, and this guy's been talking and writing for a very long time, and he said a lot of things, you know, his fundamental belief is that whatever the law says, whatever international law says, whatever Israeli law says, whatever our, you know, the diplomatic situation, however, the UN chooses to recognize Palestine or not recognize Palestine, what ultimately is going to matter is the facts on the ground.

And what that means is that if we have cities here, who's going to come get us out? Who's going to come get 750,000 settlers out of the West Bank? Who's going to tear down our villages? And, you know, there was this disengagement 20 years ago in Gaza and in parts of the West Bank. I think there were like 8,000 settlers that were removed. And it was like an enormous crisis. They had to bring in tanks. Yeah, they were dragged out kicking, screaming.

I mean, they had a, they put. put little orange stars on their shirts to, you know, act like they were Holocaust victims. And so, like, and so Smokert understands, you can say whatever you want, but hey, look, I built a whole city here. You're going to come tear down my city? Is that what you're going to do? And, you know, not for nothing, but they also have all these weapons and stuff. So, so that's been his, and it's, you know, in addition to the facts on the ground, it's

what he calls changing the DNA of the system, which is that sort of change in governance, where all the power now is in the hands of the settlers. And so I happen to think that Smotridge doesn't really give a shit what the UN says about Palestine or any of these things. In fact, it might even be a good distraction for him because, again, he's concerned with like, what are the things that I can do to make these changes irreversible? And so to your question, Emma, E1 has been the sort of red line for decades, specifically because, and I'll explain why. in a second, but it really does, to use Smotritch's words, it's the final nail on the coffin for a Palestinian state. And so presidents like Biden and Obama and Bush and Bush Sr. And going back for a long time, have basically, you know, greenlit Israel to do, I don't

want to say whatever it wants, but like a lot, especially in the West Bank. But E1 has been like the line you can't cross because once that line is crossed, they lose their talking point, right? they can no longer say two-state solution or Palestinian state because it doesn't exist anymore. Because Jasper, like, of the geography, right? Yeah, so that's what I'm going to explain now. So basically like, so in 1967, Israel occupied, I mean, a whole bunch of places, Gaza, you know, Sinai, but over here it occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. In 1980, I think, it formally annexed East Jerusalem, which means it just like unilaterally

declared this is now part of Israel. But the rest of the West Bank remained occupied land, so not technically part of Israel. And so there are settlements in East Jerusalem. And then there's settlements all across the West Bank, which basically like cut Palestinian land up into these little isolated enclaves. But what the E1 is, is it's basically a line of settlements that goes directly from the settlements in East Jerusalem all the way across the West Bank to the settlements on like the east side of the West Bank. So it's basically cutting the West Bank in half. So now you have the North and the South and it's cutting East Jerusalem off from the West Bank too. So you've gone from what already was this, you know, this like patchwork of Palestinian control

territory in the Sea of Israeli land to now the same thing except literally cut into. to three impenetrable or uncross-overable, you know, I can't think of the word, places. And so you now go from like the idea of a Palestinian state to it's like, well, now you have three states over here. Gothel makes another state. And so it's just like it is the idea of a Palestinian state in anything other than name just becomes like increasingly undermined by this settle this e1 settlement project and you know they basically they finally got the green light for it um a couple months ago in part because you know

trump has doesn't care what they do but also because israel has realized like oh wait a minute i think we can do whatever we want and nobody's going to stop us so they just bombed katah uh cutter and um and um apparently there were people in the even in the trump administration going like wait a second um and it'll die down in in in in a day or two and by the way i want to i want to get to this in a bit but they did some incredible uh gymnastics to connect what's happening in the west bank to justify the bombing in katar because they really are going sort of all in on trying to make west bank like gaza you know full of enemies and so we'll get to that but it was sort of remarkable to watch well why don't we we talk about that and then and then because then i want to get to

the um the i guess the options yeah and how they you know if they're if these options are sort of like either oars or more of like a sequence i think we should probably go there first and then get to guitar um so so basically like point of everything i said is that uh you know smote church probably doesn't care all that much about a sort of formal annexation. However, what's changed now is there's this big push by all these different countries to recognize Palestine as a state at the UN. I think the vote is going to be like next week or in the next week or two. And, you know, one of Nanyahu's projects for his entire life, basically, has been to prevent that.

He just does not want Palestine to have any sort of legitimacy on the international stage. And so that is why Nanyahu and Smokurch and all these characters have been, you know, basically propping up Hamas for all these years. Because Hamas, I mean, they've said this. Hamas is an asset to them in that, you know, it's considered a terror group. They have no legitimacy on the international stage, whereas the Palestinian authority can go to the General Assembly and they can talk. And, you know, Mahmoud Abbas for, you know, he's generally considered to be sort of useless and corrupt and weak. But, like, he can get an audience.

I mean, Macron just met with him the other day. And so that's, you know, that's the worst nightmare for Nanyahu who wants to just sort of, like, bury the Palestinians as an idea, as a people, certainly as a state. And so, but now that they, there's this big push to get a Palestinian state, which I think is, like, really sick because some of these countries are saying, like, I forget if it was France or the UK, but they were like, Israel, you have two choices. stop starving Gaza or we give the Palestinians a state. The U.K. Of the pure stormer being, you know, the weakest guy ever, yep. It's like, okay, so we're talking to them like a toddler, like, you know, stop giving them a wedgy or like, you know, I think the Palestinians should deserve basic rights

regardless. But anyway, so Israel has said they will retaliate by annexing the West Bank, or that is basically what they have been threatening to do. And annexation, to be clear, it actually just means, again, saying this is now, you know, part of our country. It's what Russia did with Crimea and with a, you know, a couple other territories in Ukraine in the last couple years. And it would mean, you know, bringing Israeli law over across those territories. So the latest push now is as sort of retaliation for Palestinian statehood push, the options that are being discussed, The things to keep in mind are that what has stopped Israel from doing this in the past is, number one, the citizenship problem.

If you just annex the entire West Bank, if you say the West Bank is now part of Israel, that's three million Palestinians who become part of Israel. The Jewish majority is very, very, very, very slim at that point. If they annex the West Bank and Gaza, there is no Jewish majority. And so they can't just annex it because, you know, that's the end of the Jewish state, which, of course, points to, like, the whole hypocrisy of, you know, the Jewish state, which is that it requires subjugating these people in order to exist as a Jewish state. So the sort of thinking behind the annexation plans is maximize land, minimize population. So they want to take as much land as they possibly can without also inheriting the Palestinians who are there. So just to quickly sort of fly through the options, and then I'll get to like what I think they're really considering.

Option one would just be full West Bank annexation, which, you know, presents that citizenship problem and also would create just enormous diplomatic backlash. I don't think they're really considering it, honestly. Another option would be just formally annexing the settlements, which basically does nothing. That would be just, you know, purely symbolic. They've also talked about annexing just Area C, which is like 60% of the West Bank. But the two options that they're considering right now, my understanding, at least, is one of them would be annexing the Jordan Valley. The Jordan Valley is basically like the entire sort of east coast, I guess, of the West Bank up against the Jordan River.

So it goes from the Dead Sea, up the Jordan River, up all the way up to the top of the West Bank. And what that would do, if they annex the Jordan Valley, it's about 30% of the West Bank land-wise. It's by far the most fertile land in the West Bank, and I'm sure your audience already knows about sort of the water wars or the water apartheid, I should say. But the other thing that it does is it fully encircles Palestine, Palestinian territories within Israel. Because if you think about it right now, there is, in fact, a border between the occupied Palestinian West Bank and Jordan. There's a crossing from Jordan into the West Bank. I mean, you do have to go through Israeli military to do it, but there is a border. there. If they annexed the Jordan Valley, now they've just drawn a circle basically around,

they've encircled, you know, any remaining Palestinian territory. And that is pretty popular among even like just the general population in Israel who doesn't always support the settlers. And it's because a lot of people, especially after October 7, think of the West Bank and the settlement project as what they call it their bulletproof vest. And, you know, they are protecting the Israelis from the barbarians east of the green line. And the settlers love to say, well, October 7th never would have come from here because, you know, we would have like, you know, stopped them, blah, blah, blah, blah. And so the idea of annexing the Jordan Valley is pretty popular among Israelis who just care about security more than anything else. And then the

final option, which seemed, at least as of about a week ago, seemed to be the leading one, was, this is Smotrich actually came out and like proposed this plan. And it is basically the, it's the principle I said before of maximize land, minimize population. And so what it would do is it would annex the entire West Bank, except for the six biggest cities in the West Bank, which is Janine, Tulcrum, Jericho, Ramallah, Hebron, and the one that I'm forgetting, Nablus. And so those are like the major population centers. And so the idea would be they annexed the entire West Bank. I think that Smetrich said like less than 100,000, maybe 80,000 Palestinians would actually like be within the territory that they annex.

It's 82%. Not sure if I said that yet. And then there's still these little pockets of, you know, Palestine, which I basically think they will continue to bomb out like they have Janine and Tulkaram, displaced people, ethnically cleanse, and then once they get the people out, again, they can now annex that land, too, with the, you know, same idea of maximize land and minimize population. So essentially, like, make five, like, little Warsaw ghettos, essentially, six, yeah, six. And at any given time, starve them, bomb them, inhibit the, I mean. Kind of like Gaza. blockade them, but surrounded on all sides.

Exactly. Yeah, Bandistan's match is set off, Mike, and that's a pretty good way to describe it, yeah. I think it is like Gaza, yeah. I mean, six little gaza's basically. And, you know, two of those six cities, Janine and Tulkarm, have already been completely decimated by the Israeli military in the last year. And they're already now starting to, I mean, the raids across Ramallah and Jericho and. and Nablus are picking up, I mean, just maybe two weeks ago, they literally robbed a bank in Ramallah. They, you know, sent in special forces, robbed a bank. And then they claimed, and by the way,

Ramallah is where the PA is based. They said, we're seizing Hamas terror funds. And so what they're doing is they are, you know, making that connection between Hamas and the PA to then justify their further military action in Ramallah, which is always the strategy. It's like, Hamas is here, Hamas is there. Hamas has funds in this bank. So that's how they're going to go on attacking all these places. Is there any, like, I think in your piece, you mentioned, like, the UAE may be like the only sort of, you know, potential breaks on this. I mean, I don't know that it's actually a fully break, but, but, you know, we were just

talking the other day, like the, there's no, you never hear the Arab street anymore. in conversations about what Israel is doing or the United States is doing. There seems to be not the same, at least, you know, I don't see it written about if it's happening because obviously, you know, and I'm relying on, you know, U.S. sources, for the most part, British sources. But there does not seem to be any type of massive dissent on the Arab street that would be pressuring any of these Arab governments to pressure the U.S. or Israel, for that matter. Now, maybe it's just that these governments aren't as sensitive to the pressure, or maybe it's happening. And we just don't read about it as much because it,

might cause people in this country to say, hey, wait a second, Israel's creating real a mess there. I mean, aside from where people are now. But so from your perspective, like, is there any sense that whether it's the UAE or any other country is, you know, going to inhibit this or that Israel pay some type of price if they do this? Yeah, a very real chance. I think that the UAE may, in fact, if anybody stopped it, it'll be the UAE.

And so basically, like, what happened is in 2020, Nanyahu was considering some sort of an annexation. That was when Trump was in office, obviously. This was when Trump was, you know, putting together the Abraham Accords, which were, of course, like, you know, one of his, you know, the crown jewel of his, one of his, like, key diplomatic achievements. So he's in the process of putting together the Abraham Accords, and Nanyahu's threatening to annexed the West Bank. And then I think it was a foreign secretary. Some diplomat with the UAE pulls an incredible move. She writes an op-ed in a huge Israeli paper. Honestly, I don't know how she got it published.

It was like a big mainstream paper. I forget which one. And she basically says it's in Hebrew. And she says to the Israeli people, you have a choice in front of you, annex the West Bank or normalized relations with the Arab world. And, you know, for those who don't know, normalization basically means like allowing trade and just normalizing economic and diplomatic relationships, which, you know, Israel needs if it's going to survive as, you know, this sort of isolated country in the Middle East. And so she writes that op-ed, and apparently the Israeli public very definitively were like, We want normalization. She also went straight to Trump and was like,

are you going to let Nanyahu kill your big, special, fancy deal? And so, you know, played directly to his ego. And Trump then immediately was like, you can't annex the West Bank. That's how the story goes, at least. The exact same thing is playing out now, actually. The only difference is we don't know if Nanyahu won't listen. But the UAE, I think it was the date. Or if Trump isn't like, I'm sorry.

This time around, I sold off the annex rights to Miriam Adelson. Yeah, well, I mean, you know, he's not typically known for being good on, you know, paying off his debts is the thing. And like the, you know, he reminded Miriam Adelson that like he gave her the Golan Heights and she didn't even ask for that the first time around. That is true. I will just say that the UAE, the day after Smotech put out this plan, I, I, I, I, I, I can't remember if it was who exactly it was, but, you know, somebody high up in government appealed directly to Trump in a paper and, again, said it would be a real shame if Israel destroyed, you know, one of the most important achievements in your legacy, Mr. Trump.

And to be clear, they said annexation would be a red line. She didn't explicitly say it would kill the Abraham Accords, but I think she hinted at it, and she basically said, like, you know, the dreams of including Saudi Arabia and these other countries in it would go to shit. And so I honestly think it's a coin toss. It's really hard to say what's going to happen. I mean, that is a very real material consequence that Israel does not want to face. The question is, is that enough to, you know, stop them from doing this as retaliation for a Palestinian state? I just don't know, honestly. Well, I mean, one, I think we should always have mentioned that many of these undemocratic leaders in the region are basically in cahoots

with the United States and with some of the Western powers and have been complicit in the genocide of the Palestinian people in part because that benefits our interests in the region to kind of have these defanged undemocratic leaders, I should say. But what I am perplexed by is normalization is, like, what is, from the Israeli perspective, what is the benefit there? Because they already have some of these informal relationships that's been reported on. They likely have arms deals with Saudi Arabia. It's all but in, like, name at this point. I guess there's like these two stories, one of Netanyahu using just brute force to create facts on the ground, committing genesis.

side, not caring what the United Nations or the international community thinks. And then there's this other piece where he's immensely threatened by Palestinian statehood recognition by Western powers and also wants a formal deal of normalization. I don't, how does, how do those two things interact with one another? Well, they can't have all those things. And again, it's like, this is the contradiction with Israel. You want to be a Jewish state in an Arab region, but you want to all. also be a democracy, well, those things alone don't work. You want to have, you know,

free trade across the Arab world, but you also want to annex, you know, an Arab country. Like, none of these things can coexist, which is why they exist in a state of tension and, you know, being in violation of international law and sort of perpetual war. In terms of like this current sort of dilemma, I mean, maybe I'll just give you a specific example of one way this is playing out right now. This is not with relation to the Abraham Accords, but it's about where money talks, basically. So

there's this law, matriculating through the Knesset, and I'm sure I talked about it on this show last year when we talked about archaeology. But it's this law that would basically take the governance of heritage sites in the West Bank, which to be clear is like a

huge part of the West Bank, which is all archaeological ruins everywhere you look. It would take those responsibilities away from this archaeology unit in the Israeli military and handed over to the Israeli Antiquities Authority, which is who oversees archaeology sites in Israel. So it sounds like this sort of like, okay, you're switching governance or responsibilities from one party to another. What's the big deal? But the big deal is that the archaeology academy inside of Israel who have essentially stayed silent through decades of illegal occupation archaeology

and using archaeology as a weapon to try to erase Palestinian history and kick them off the land. They've come out in force against this because what they're saying is if you give Israel, Israel's government, control over these archaeology sites in the West Bank, it incriminates all of us. We are now all complicit in illegal archaeology and they're worried they're going to basically face boycotts from, you know, archaeological conferences, from scientific journals, people are not going to work with them anymore because they are now all part of this illegal enterprise. And so that is like a perfect example of, you know, this very sort of, I don't want to say very small group, but like a narrow group of people who recognize if we annex the West Bank,

and that would be effectively a form of annexation, we're going to get blacklisted from the international community. And so they've come out against it, not because they give a shit about, you know, who the Palestinians there or the sites there, they just don't want to, you know, they want to be allowed to go to conferences and write in journals and stuff. And so those sorts of things are going to play out all across Israeli society. If people, you know, facing this, um, this sort of question of like, is it worth being potentially blacklisted by, you know, our international industry or whatever it is? That really ultimately becomes the question is like how much of a pariah state will Israel become in the event that they do take, you know, any one of the options that

you've talked about because it makes it completely intellectually bankrupt, um, and all pretense of any soundness to say two state solution. Like, you know, there's no such like what, what, what could that even possibly look like, like this sort of arc, you know, like this arch, you know, like this archipelago of, of little islands within Israel. And it seems to me that it's also a test as to like just how far gone down this fundamentalist, nationalist, fascistic wormhole, the entire Israeli society has gone, right? I mean, obviously, there's hashtag not every Israeli. But the point being that, like, look, you know, people can make an assessment of the United States based upon things that we have done historically and, like, people can make an assessment like Donald Trump has won two elections out of three.

Like, you know, your notions of what's important to Americans may be a little bit, you know, that's a reasonable assessment to me. In the event that Israel goes through with this, they're going to become a, it seems to me, a one-way ticket to Pariah State. And I mean, God knows what happens after that. I mean, obviously, it's like a series of South Africa could have gone a different way. Let's put it that way. Well, the South Africa example is apt because given the amount of countries that Israel, Israel is bombing right now. I mean, that is one of the better historical examples, because in the final throes of the

apartheid in South Africa, I mean, they were bombing the hell out of Rhodesia, I think of Angola, a bunch of other countries in Africa, and that was their last gasp. Well, the difference is South Africa was not, there was not the fundamentalist sort of like spice to the whole thing. I think, though, that that is a good reminder of why security is always, like, the best pretext for Israel to do any of these things. And so, like, right after Smutarch makes that announcement about, you know, the potential 82% annexation, the story comes out in an Israeli paper who is not printed in English. And basically it is the defense minister, Israel Katz, saying that they think September is a sensitive month in the West Bank, both because of the statehood drive. They say potential political developments, which is a clear allusion to potential annexation, and because the PA is nearing financial collapse, which is entirely the doing of, you know, Israel.

And so what he says is basically, we are anticipating that there could be attacks. And if there are, he actually said we will pause military operations in Gaza and bring our forces over to the West Bank to fight a decisive war. And he basically says, like, if they want to do a third intifada, like, you know, bring it. We'll come over there in full force. And, you know, so much to say about that. But, like, for starters, the settlers want nothing more than a third intifada. Yes. And, and, you know, the extremist in the government, too, actually, the IDF, the, you know, to the extent that there are, like, reasonable people left at the higher echelons of the IDF and in Shibet and in Mossad, they have all said these moves that Israel has taken to dismantle the PA's economy, the Palestinian economy, is just, making, you know, what they call terrorism more likely. And that has, you know, that has not stopped them at all. And in fact, like, after this shooting the other day, um, Israel Katz immediately

says, okay, we're freezing all work permits in, you know, these like three villages near where the settlers come from. Shin Betz comes back and says, you're going to push more people to militancy. If you take them out of jobs. And he basically says, I don't give a shit. Good. Yeah, good. And so like, they really are just itching for. you know, a provocation that's going to lead to another, um, a third intifada to give them justification for, you know, bringing the war over there. Now, the shooting happens in Jerusalem the other day on Monday. And say six, six people, uh, dead, uh, about that same, uh, injured. Yeah, six people were killed, um, at a bus stop in Jerusalem. Um,

you know, it's a tragedy, and I think 67 people were killed in Gaza on the same day. It should be said. Two children were killed in the West Bank on the same day. It should be said. But, you know, nonetheless, we don't like loss of innocent civilian lives, obviously. So that shooting happens. And it's kind of an interesting thing happens. First of all, you know, all the leaders of Israel immediately start demanding that they go and, you know, raise the West Bank to the ground, basically.

Nenjahu and Katz both sort of allude to, we're going to do to these villages, which are these villages right next to Ramallah, which is, again, the capital of where the PA is based, we're going to turn them into Janine and Tokoram, which basically is, you know, we're going to do airstrikes. We're going to destroy them. And they immediately send troops in. They start, you know, circling these places. The thing is, I don't think they have the manpower, frankly. to launch an all-out war in the West Bank, unless they actually do pause operations in Gaza. I mean, they're supposed to be calling up 60,000 reservists. We know there's a refusal crisis. They have not put out the numbers around how many people have refused.

But my point is, like, they have stepped up raids, and it's gotten much uglier, and people are dying, and people are being arrested, and villages are being cut off. But they have not brought an all-out war over there yet. And I think it's because, yeah, I think they actually would need to pause the operations in Gaza.

a city which it doesn't seem like they're going to do um well can i can i there's so much there i know we've kept you for so long but we need to talk about Qatar really quickly before we uh we go also okay okay um i i guess well well one i wanted to ask you more about that reservist crisis because um there's a lot of covering up of uh israel some of the weaknesses of israel right now including uh why did the iran why did uh iran and Israel's exchange of fire cease. Now, a lot of people are speculating that's because Iran actually was able to get through the Iron Dome and cause more damage than is being reported in the Western press. That's obviously very covered up in Israel. The other thing that's being

covered up is this reservist crisis where there's, these are people that like, you know, compulsory military service. They want to do a few tours and commit genocide and go home or whatever. They're not signing up for a multi-year-long situation in Gaza. And then the third dynamic is that they're just bombing rubble at this point. I know they want this. They want to annex the North. That's what this ground invasion of

Gaza City is designed to do. But if they create a pretext in the West Bank, there's also this face-saving element that potentially benefits Netanyahu and protects him from the two dynamics

that are looming that I just described. where you can move on from the hornet's nest that is Gaza, basically, to their project of greater land annexation. I think it needs to be, like, people need to remember that Nanyahu, the thing that he's best at is kicking the can down the road. Like, he is famous for finding a way out of having to make, like, big decisions. And everything is sort of like in, you know, a couple month increments. And so, you know, I don't think that there is a plan for.

for those things, Emma. Like, I'm not convinced that they actually think they can occupy Gaza City. I mean, there's a million people there. I think they say they've gotten 100,000 people out. That's another 900,000 people there. And it's the same thing with the West Bank. I mean, frankly, after I heard about the shooting, I mean, I woke up and saw the news, and I was like, holy shit, I think that this is it.

Like, they're about to bring the war over there. And I'm not saying it's, you know, it's not getting worse or it's not still going to happen, but it hasn't fully happened yet. And again, I think it's because they're stretched too thin at this point. And I just, I don't think they have an answer to those things. I think they're like opportunistic doing what they can to, you know, obviously Nanyahu needs the same power. So he doesn't have to face the corruption trial.

I think that's part of it. On the Iran thing, I mean, you know, that was like for him a legacy moment. I think he probably thought, okay, I did all I could here anymore and they're going to kill more Israeli civilians and maybe we can't do any more damage. So like, I think that they are sort of flying by the C. of their pants on some level. Yeah. All right, so, Cutter.

Yeah, just one quick point I want to make about it. So right after the shooting, Hamas comes out and basically praises it. It says it was like, you know, a natural reaction to occupation or something like that. But they don't take credit for it. In fact, they, like, specifically don't take credit for it. the next day Hamas comes out and says this was actually a Hamas operation. You know, there are like splinter cells of Hamas in the West Bank, of course, but it could be just like two guys got in touch with them on Twitter or something, and like, you know,

they helped them with training. Like, I don't know exactly what it means, but the reason I bring this up is because like an hour after that or, you know, some tiny amount of time after that, Israel then bombs the, you know, at Hamas negotiating headquarters in Doha, and Nanyahu comes out and says the shooting in Jerusalem was the impetus for it, was the trigger. You know, Hamas thinks that they can keep killing us while they're negotiating peace. Well, then we're going to go and kill them. And so it's like, okay, first of all, obviously they've been planning this for more than an hour

to be able to, like, bomb a sovereign country. So it's just bullshit on that level. But again, it's once again another example of them connecting the dots between what's happening in the West Bank and, you know, Hamas and, you know, the genocide or for them the war in Gaza because they just wanted to be sort of one, you know, evil Palestinian enemy that they have justification to, you know, just keep killing and keep bombing wherever they are, whether it's in Qatar or, you know, Gaza or the West Bank. something I was just thinking the other day is like the Hamas guys also like to hang out in Turkey Turkey is in the UN do we think Israel would bomb Turkey and then like would the UN have to respond

so like you know they're just totally in NATO I mean NATO yeah yeah yeah I mean I mean it's unclear where at least the United States draws line for Israel so far it's I haven't seen it um Trump's had some tough talk but it's literally

exactly what Biden did I'm very mad at BB Netanyahu and then nothing changes if you haven't already you should play the um Caroline and leave it the press director you should play her what she said about Trump's response to the attack it's it's honestly like I want to I want to study it. The way they both condemn it, but approve of it, I'd say this, but that it's like, it's honestly, they're also, obviously Trump is winging it on these things too. But, you know, Israel's bombed six countries this year.

I think maybe all six of them in the last month. It's a rogue state. You know, they're trying to ethnically cleanse greater Israel, which includes southern Lebanon, southern Syria, all the land from the river to the sea. It's a fucking catastrophe. And, yeah, the world is just sort of sleepwalking into it. Yep.

Well, Jasper Nathaniel, the substack is infinite jazz. Dot substack.com. We'll put a link at Majority.fm and our podcast and YouTube. And it is very difficult to find any type of coverage, period, of what's going on with the West Bank. Your substack is a huge resource for people. Really appreciate you're coming on talking about these things and can't encourage people enough to go and read about this stuff because, again, it is, I mean, for obvious reasons and less obvious reasons,

what's happening in the West Bank does not get the coverage that it should be in this country. And so I really appreciate the work you're doing, Jasper, thanks for coming on. Yeah. Thanks, Sam and Emma. Take care. I'll see you guys next time.

Yep. All right, folks. That's the free hour of the show that lasted an hour and 45 minutes. Well, when we have Jasper, I feel like we have to pick his brain. I know. I know. But as it were, that we're going to head into the fun half. I mean, we're back to the original proposition of the fun half, which was an extra 45 minutes.

It's just that originally we also thought the first part of the show would be 45 minutes. I mean, the amount of countries, sovereign countries that Israel has bombed, they are earning their reputation as 21st century Nazis. And if this was Europe and these were white people, the coverage of the belligerence against sovereign nations in this way would be very, very different. Yeah, we're treating them as if they were like how we treated it. Americans when we exterminated them and the world should figure out like in that area that it should unite against this and the sort of lack of response is kind of crazy um but obviously we'll be following this over the coming days weeks months um it's your support that makes this show possible you can become a member at join the majority report dot com when you do you

know i get the free show free of commercials but you also get the fun half join the Majority Report.com, you can help this show survive and thrive. Also, justcoffee.coop, fair trade coffee, hot chocolate, also, I think. Use the coupon code majority, get 10% off. They're great co-op. They got great politics. They got great care for their suppliers, the way they treat their suppliers, farms from Chiapas to the African continent is really special.

And great coffee, just coffee dot co-op. Matt, left reckoning. Yeah, left reckoning last night. We had Neela Tiberzi on talking about protests in Iran for women. And also we talked about James Hilariko and how we both support him over Connor Allred and are also a little bit wary of, say, Miriam Adelson. I was going to say, what are you doing about the Miriam Adelson problem? Well, we're going to hope that it's just about gambling.

But, yeah, I mean, the thing is, is I don't trust the politicians. So, you know, Tala Rico is nice, but he should say something about Gaza and Palestine if he doesn't want this Miriam Adelson. I hope he doesn't. Pretty tough, James. We kind of receive you, buddy. I hope he doesn't. I've got a job to do. All right.

We'll see you in the fun of it. Three months from now, six months from now, nine months from now. And I don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six months from now. And I don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now. But I think around 18 months out, we're going to look back and go like, wow. What? What is that going on? It's nuts.

wait a second hold on for hold on for a second Emma welcome to the program hey what is up everyone fun hack no me keen you did it let's go Brandon let's go Brandon let's go Brandon

Bradley you want to say hello sorry to disappoint everyone I'm just a random guy it's all the boys today Fundamentally false. No, I'm sorry. Stop talking for a second. Let me finish. Where is this coming from, dude?

But dude, you want to smoke this? Seven, eight. Yes. Hi, me. Is this name? Yes. Is it me? It is me?

It is you. It is me? I think it is you. Who is you? No sound Every single Fricking day What's on your mind?

We can discuss free markets And we can discuss Capitalism I'm gonna just know what Libertarians They're so stupid though Common sense says of course Gobbled euk

We fucking nailed him So what's 79 plus 21 Challenge met I'm positively clovery I believe 96 I want to say 857 210 35501

1⁄3 8 911 for instance 3,000 $1,900, $6, $4, $3 trillion sold. It's a zero-sum game. Actually, you're making a think less. But let me say this. Hoop.

You can call satire, Sam goes to satire. On top of it all, my favorite part about you is just like every day, all day, like everything you do. Without a doubt. Hey, buddy, we see you. All right, folks, folks, folks. It's just the week being weeded out, obviously. Yeah, sundown guns out. I don't know.

But you should know. People just don't like to entertain ideas anymore. I have a question. Who cares? Our chat is enabled. Wow. I love it. I do love that.

Got to jump. I got to be quick. I get a jump. I'm losing it, bro. 12 o'clock, we're already late, and the guy's being a dick. So screw him. Sent to a gulaw? Outrage.

Like, what is wrong with you? Love you, bye. Love you. Bye-bye.