The Tucker Carlson Show - Norman Finkelstein Cuts Through Israel’s Propaganda: Gaza Genocide, Oct. 7 & Netanyahu’s Corruption

Episode Date: September 14, 2026

(00:00) The Gaza Concentration Camp (11:37) The Military and Intel Operations Focused on Destroying Gaza (14:05) Evidence of Israel's Genocide in Gaza (27:58) The Attacks Against Anyone Who Criticizes Israel (1:11:34) Why They Kicked Finkelstein Out of Hunter College Norman Finkelstein received his doctorate from the Department of Politics at Princeton University. His books have been translated into some sixty foreign editions. They include The Holocaust Industry, What Gandhi Says, and I’ll Burn That Bridge When I Get to It. A 2020 study ranked Finkelstein the fifth most influential political scientist in the world. Norman Finkelstein’s new book is Gaza’s Gravediggers: https://orbooks.com/catalog/gazas-gravediggers  Paid partnerships with: Hallow prayer app: Get 3 months free at https://Hallow.com/TuckerStopBox USA: Get firearm security redesigned and save 10% off @StopBoxUSA with code TUCKER at https://stopboxusa.com/TUCKER American Financing: NMLS 182334, nmlsconsumeraccess.org. APR for rates in the 5s start at 6.327% for well qualified borrowers. Call 800-685-5696 for details about credit costs and terms. Visit http://www.AmericanFinancing.net/Tucker. Joi + Blokes: Use code TUCKER for 65% off your labs and 20% off all peptides and supplements at https://joiandblokes.com/tucker Alp Pouch: Shop the new Frontier collection at https://AlpPouch.com/Tucker Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Visit BetMGM casino and check out the newest exclusive. The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2,600 to speak to an advisor,

free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming Ontario. I want to ask you about. about the the October 7th attacks or in the aftermath. So the October 7th attacks happen. And for those of us who are not really following Gaza, I was definitely in that category. It seems to kind of come out of nowhere.

Correct. And the main question that I had was, well, how could Israel not have seen this coming? But what I didn't think enough about is why did the attack happen? What was the context for that, which is not to excuse it? I just want to be clear I'm not excusing that or any killing.

innocence, but what was happening in Gaza right before that? Well, it's not just right before that. Gaza becomes Gaza in 1948, after Israel expels roughly 750,000 Palestinian Arabs from the area that becomes Israel. Of those 750,000, 300,000 are expelled to Gaza, and they become roughly 80% percent. of Gaza's population, obviously swamping the original Gassan population. Now there are all these Gassans from Israel. Who hold Egyptian citizenship at that point?

In 1948, Gaza is simply part of mandated Palestine. Okay. A British mandated Palestine. So about 80% of the population are now refugees. If you go back and look at the literature, it's quite interesting that already in the 1950s, UN officials who are stationed in Gaza. Now, this is when Gaza is under Egyptian control, okay, because Egypt gains administrative control over Gaza after the 1948 war. already it's being described as a concentration camp.

Now, this is under Egyptian control. If we fast forward to 1967, in July 1967, Al Gore, Sr., the father of the person. Senator from Tennessee. Correct. Al Gore Sr., he goes to visit Gaza. That's correct. And then he comes back and he testifies before Congress on what he observed.

And he describes Gaza as, quote, a concentration camp on the send, if you will. So already, beginning in 1948, outside observers coming to Gaza, that's their reference. Now, in 2004, the head of the Israel's National Security Council, his name is Giora Island. Giora Island is not a peacnik. He's still among the living, still very active advising, right as we speak, the Israeli government. He was the one who said around 2024, he said, if epidemics... break out in southern Gaza, that's a good thing. It's a good thing for the epidemics.

Epidemic of disease? Yes. Now, in 2004, he's having a conversation with senior U.S. officials, and he describes Gaza as, quote, a huge concentration camp. Now, bear in mind, the first individuals I mentioned, that's 50s, early mid-60s, concentration camp had a very definite resonance. And yet, those are the words that leapt to mind, or those are the descriptives that leapt to mind. Giro Island is Israeli, he's Jewish, he's the chief of Israel's, the head of Israel's National Security Council,

As a Jew and as an Israeli, surely he knew the resonance of describing a parcel of land as a concentration camp. That's the descriptive he used. Now, here's the not footnote, but here's the big qualifier. That was Gaza in its best days. That's a fact. That was Gaza in its best days. In 2006, our president, George Bush, he embarked in what he called democracy promotion. You might remember that phase.

And part of democracy promotion was he told the Palestinians they had to hold elections. they had to hold elections. Hamas did not want to participate in the elections because they saw it as part of what was called the Oslo process, namely when Clinton, President Clinton, Yasser Arafat, and Izhakrabin signed an agreement in 1993, which Hamas felt was a sellout. So they didn't want to participate in the elections

because they thought it was part of what was. called the Oslo process. Pressures put on them, pressures put on them. They finally agreed to participate. Well, they run on a reform platform because the Palestinian authority is hopelessly corrupt, and they win the election. Well, the wrong side won. Hillary Clinton later said, we made a big mistake. we should have made sure that Hamas didn't win, which is her concept of a democratic election. So the moment Hamas gets elected, in what Jimmy Carter, who observed the election,

he called it, quote, free and completely free and fair elections. That's how he described it. It was actually the first free and fair democratic elections in the Arab world. The first time, some people say Tunisia before, but I think it's credible to say these are the first fully free and fair elections. Israel at that moment, it imposes, and then followed by the U.S. and the EU, imposes this medieval blockade on Gaza. It draws up this long list of things that you can't allow into Gaza.

You can't allow in chocolate. You can't allow in baby chicks. You can't allow in potato chips. You can't allow in any condiments. You can't allow in musical instruments. You can't allow in notebooks. And they said they were very open. Well, I shouldn't say they were very open about it,

but the documents were eventually released. they were going to put the people of Gaza on a, quote, humanitarian minimum diet, which is another way of, is the euphemistic way of saying a starvation plus diet. And they said they were very open about their goal. We're going to keep the Gaza economy on the precipice of collapse. so the people will ultimately remove Hamas from office. What was called, if you remember, and you don't go back that far, but when the popular unity government came into power in Chile in 1971,

and the U.S. was very upset about that, and they said that we're going to turn the screws on Chile until the economy screams. And that's what Israel attempted to do in Gaza. And by 2008, the UN humanitarian chief, Mary Robinson, she visited Gaza, and she said, quote, a whole civilization is being destroyed. I'm not exaggerating. a whole civilization is being destroyed.

By October 6th, I think it was the Economist magazine, described Gaza as a sinking ship. A UN official described it as a toxic slum. It was a disaster, a disaster zone, a human-made disaster zone, that illegal inhuman blockade of Gaza. And then every few years, Israel launched what it called an operation in Gaza. They used the term, we're going to mow the lawn in Gaza,

which is a kind of humorous metaphor until you factor in, that one half of Gaza's population are children. And then if we connect the metaphor with the reality, that means the blades of the mowers are cracking the skulls of the children of Gaza. So how do you pray? Well, for a lot of people, the answer is complicated. Our friends at the Hallow app are ready to help make it much simpler. If you're uncertain about where to start your prayer journey or what to say when you talk to God,

then Hallow's newest prayer challenge is perfect for you. It's 21 days of prayer designed to help you intentionally make time for faith. Probably the most important thing. It will change your life. 21 days of prayer, you will hear from people from totally different backgrounds on how they pray. pastors, nurses, athletes like Dionne Sanders, all answering the same critical question of how they communicate with Jesus. It's not an abstract theological exercise. It's a comprehensive experience that brings you closer to God. That's the point. So if you're not sure where to begin in your

relationship with God, if it seems kind of intimidating, answer this invitation. Give God 21 days with Hallow and see what happens. Download Hallow for three months for free at hallow.com slash Talker, HALO-L-O-W. Imagine if every time Inverse Kramer or another top investor bought a stock, you bought it too. In your own brokerage account, automatically. Well, that now exists and it's called Autopilot. Build by the team behind the Viral Pelosi Stock Tracker, autopilot lets you browse their marketplace of strategies run by proven investors or AI-driven models.

Just find one with a high return, connect your personal brokerage account like a Schwab or Robin Hood, and every trade they make, you make automatically. Your money never leaves your own account. Autopilot just mirrors the moves. So now no more guessing, no more staring at charts, and no more checking the market between meetings. Also, over $1.3 billion is already invested. So if you wanted to check it out,

search autopilot in the app store, or go to join autopilot.com. That's join autopilot.com. Investing has risks like the loss of principle. Visit BetMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive. The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. 19 plus to wager.

Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2,600 to speak to an advisor. Free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming Ontario. dot com slash tucker so you had operation cast lead in 2008 nine operation pillar of defense in 2012 operation protective edge 2014 these high-tech killing sprees when operation

protective edge ended in 2014. It was 51 days. I believe it began July 7th and ended August 26th, I'm pretty sure. When it ended the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross, his name was Peter Moorer. He went to Gaza. Now bear in mind the job description of the head of the ICRC, the International Committee on Red Cross, is basically to tour war zones. He walked out of Gaza and he said, never in my life have I seen the level of destruction that I saw in Gaza. Now, just to give your listeners a juxtaposition, that means placing side by side. In Operation, Protective Edge, 18,000 homes were destroyed or severely damaged. Morris said, I've never seen levels of destruction like that.

In Gaza now, 325,000 homes were destroyed since October 7th. In Protective Edge, there was left behind roughly 2.5 million tons of rubble. in Gaza now, 61 million tons of rubble. Back then, it was unparalleled in conflict zones in 2014. Now, it's not even a blip on the screen compared to what Israel has done. What do we, do we have a reliable estimate of the number of people, all aggregate number of people killed in Gaza since October 7th? No. I mean, there are all sorts of projections on the number of persons killed, everything from the numbers that the Gaza Ministry of Health give to, as I said, there's so many different projections that's hard to know which are credible, which are not credible. And also how do you calculate it?

Right. You know, are they deaths from bombing artillery shells? But then what about all the deaths from people who, because of hunger, their immune system, the children, their immune systems are significantly compromised and they die technically not from direct fire. They die from medical. medical reasons. So I don't think there is a good number. One number which I found interesting, I've not made the comment publicly. I only recently started to think about it. There are all sorts of denials that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, and I'm happy to engage with you on that question. But on a strictly statistical level, the most recent,

UN report on Gaza deals with the targeting of children in Gaza, and also the West Bank, or the targeting of children in particular in Gaza. Now, if you take the case of the Nazis, and they also say that's a key indicator of whether or not we're dealing with a genocide or we're dealing with a war. If large numbers of children are, being targeted, then the argument that this is a war begins to, questions are raised about whether it's a war or whether it's a genocide. The percentage of the current statistics we have, the Gaza Ministry of Health, the percentage of children killed is put at 30%, roughly 30%. In the Nazi Holocaust, the estimates are 6 million Jews were killed, of whom 1.5 million were children.

So roughly 25% of those killed were children. Now, if it's correct, and I believe there's certainly a plausible argument, that the number of children killed a percentage is an indicator of whether we're dealing with a war. or whether we're dealing with a genocide, I would say if we're all agreed what happened during the Nazi Holocaust was a genocide, and 25% of the victims were children, then certainly by analogy, a plausible case is in Gaza, if 30% are children, that's a strong argument that it's a genocide. I should warn you that the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism includes comparing the actions of the Israeli government to those of the Nazis.

So you've just committed anti-Semitism. Well, the problem is with the IHRA definition is Israelis are all the time comparing their enemies to Nazis. That's a great point. Why do they get to do it? Why do they get to make the comparison? But nobody can compare them to Nazis. That's just totally inconsistent. You go back into history, they said Nasser in Egypt,

the first president of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser. They said he was Hitler. They said Saddam Hussein, you might recall, head of state in Iraq. They said Saddam Hitler. They all the time saying, they're actually saying the Mullahs in Iran are worse. than Hitler, Netanyahu said, Prime Minister Netanyahu said,

the Hitler only wanted to conquer Europe, but the Mullahs and Iran want to conquer the world. They're worse than Hitler. Hamas is Hitler. Everybody is Hitler. But the moment you say they carry on like Nazis, it suddenly becomes a taboo, a red line. But that doesn't make a...

any sense to me. Imagine it's 3 a.m. You're dead asleep. You wake up to a weird noise. It sounds like it's coming from inside your house. Well, that's terrifying. Is it a home invasion? How do you react? By panicking? Well, not if you have Stopbox Pro. Stopbox Pro is probably the best way to store your firearms. It's built for actual people who want real protection without giving up speed or control. There are no keys and there are no batteries. And that means you'll always be able to get the Stopbox open. There's a five-button interface that gives you, and just you, immediate access when you really need it. That means your firearms are going to be 100% secure, but always right

within reach. Stopbox Pro is made proudly in the United States by Americans. Real jobs. No child labor in some weird country. It's totally American. For a limited time, this shows listeners can get 10% off at Stopbox when using the code Tucker at checkout. Visit stopboxusa.com. Visit stopbox.com. and use the Code Tucker for 10% off the whole order. After you purchase, feel free to say that you heard about it right here on this show. So you think it is fair to say that Israel's committing genocide in Gaza? I would say the following. If you take the accumulation, the cumulative effect of what Israel has done,

you don't look at it discreetly, this action, this action, this action, this action. you take the total picture. So, the density and the rate of Israel's bombing in Gaza, unprecedented in modern conflict, in some cases, even as far back as World War II, if you take the worst cases in World War II,

like Dresden, the intensity and rate of destruction is higher in Gaza. Then Dresden? That's correct. That's correct. Not just Dresden, there's Dresden and a couple of other major cities, but they've slipped my mind. Number of children killed.

Oh, that's shocking what you just said. Yeah. Number of children killed. If you take all combat zones in the world combined for the years, say, uh, 2020, 2020, 2021, uh, 2020, 2020, 21 and combine them, all the combat zones, more children killed in Gaza. Amputees, child amputees. I'm not sure if it's child or maybe it's all amputees.

It's now the densest concentration of amputees anywhere in the world. Schools, 97% of Gaza schools have. have been destroyed or severely damaged. Targeting of hospitals, targeting of medical personnel, targeting of UN workers, targeting of journalists. They're all in a totally different category. They're in a totally different universe than the closest second, closest third, closest fourth.

So then what do you conclude? when you add up, as I said, you take the cumulative picture. I don't see how you can possibly reach any other conclusion. The one qualification I would make is, it's not so much of qualification, it's a clarification. I don't believe Israel's goal is genocide. its goal is empty out Gaza. They were very clear about that.

They want to ethnically cleanse Gaza. But the means they are using their modus operandi is the destruction of the Gaza population until they leave. Now, you could say, but they can't leave because the border is sealed and nobody wants them. And that's true. So they will continue killing until they achieve their goal. And if it's to kill everybody, they will kill everybody. They are dead set on for once and for all solving the Gaza question. They want to solve the Gaza question.

And for them, solving the Gaza question means the expulsion of the population and the only way they can persuade the population to leave and persuade neighboring countries in the world at large to take them in, is to commit a genocide. So I have spent quite a lot of time going through the human rights supports and various other documents. And when you see the cumulative effect of what's been done, I don't see how you can reach any other conclusion, which is why, as I'm sure you know,

not only many, if not most, leading authorities in international law, not a few of them, Jewish, even Israel's major human rights organization for the occupied territories, that sell them, Persons like, I believe, Arianeir, who founded a Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth. Aryaneyer is a refugee from the Nazi Holocaust. Kenneth Roth, who was the former head of Human Rights Watch, in various venues. They have all concluded that it's a genocide. but there's another factor. Now, I'm not saying it's authoritative,

but I would certainly say it's indicative. The estimates are 30 to 40% of American Jews believe it's a genocide. That's a kind of astonishing fact. bombarded as they are from youth to love Israel, attending synagogues where support for Israel is a key, a tenet of belonging, and yet, and to their absolutely eternal credit. It's genuinely a site. to behold.

And maybe I should, but I kind of, I rebel against it, take pride in as a Jew. 30 to 40 percent believe Israel is committing a genocide. It's a credit to that community. And I would add, as I'm sure you're aware, because you told me before the interview that you have been in, so to speak, a Jewish milieu, a large part of your life, very educated. These are not people who are easily bamboozled or duped or tricked, and yet they have reached that conclusion.

So here again, I say, if you look at the cumulative picture, experts, human rights, organization, International Court of Justice, which reached the preliminary conclusion that Israel was plausibly committing genocide. That was back in January 26, 2024. So it's long before the horror that unfolded since January 26th. I think it's the other side that has to make a case the broad consensus is there now. It's a horrible consensus. Instead of making the case, what I see happening is attacks,

not just verbal attacks, but attacks on people's employment. Against anybody who says, wait, this is cruel and awful. Those people, the Trump administration stripped them of their green cards in a bunch of cases. So I don't see anybody trying to make the case for Israel.

I see supporters of Israel attacking anyone who questions Israel. I guess that's what I'm saying. That's absolutely correct. What was new after October 7th was that before October 7th, was that before October 20th, October 7th, when there would be events in God. I won't call them flare-ups because, you know, it's high-tech killings. It's not much more than a flare-up. When there were before, usually Jewish organizations, Jewish supremacists, billionaires,

they operate behind the scenes. They would call the university president, I don't think you should give that guy tenure. Oh, do that happen to you? Yes. Just kidding, no, famous, famously. But I think it happened with a certain amount of frequency. but it was behind the scenes. What changed after 2007,

for the reasons that you just suggested, it was very hard anymore to make a case in public. Too much was known, too much was seen on the social media, and too much of it Israel carried on in such a flagrant and brazen fashion with its own citizens in their citizen army posting on the social media

the horrors they were committing. It had become so flagrant and brazen, it was impossible to conceal. Well, the big difference, I think, was... I just allow me. Yeah. And I want to give you a chance. And so they starred in a very brazen and flagrant way to play the blackmail weapon.

People like Bill Ackman, and there were many others, but he sort of was the public face. They would call up, they would say publicly, there would be petitions that were publicized saying, if you don't crush the encampments, the students who were supporting Gaza, were withholding alumni contributions. We're not going to give you money. Now, it's true places like Harvard have large endowments, very large endowments. However, it's also true to say that the alumni money was not small change. People like Bill Ackman, he gave Harvard, I believe, $50 million.

dollars, two Jewish alumni of Harvard gave it respectively. One gave 200 million. One gave 300 million. That was big money. Though, as I say, still next to the endowment,

it's not so big, but still absolutely it's money, okay? And then they went from school to school by the end of the end of 2024. the encampments were in the spring of 2024. They had succeeded in ousting Claudine Gaye at Harvard, Elizabeth McGill at UFP,

Shafique at Columbia, and then there were many, many, many others. I'm just giving you the Ivy League, the big names. When McGill was ousted from UFP, I happen to be friends with somebody who knows her well from business connections and he met her and he conveyed to her his sympathies and two words came forth from her mouth

quote, money talks. Cost of living is already making it hard to live here and it's not getting any better. Unfortunately it's likely to get worse and a lot of Americans fill the gap with credit cards, not just for fancy dinners, but to cover things like groceries and bills. That is a disaster. It's understandable, but don't go down that road because there is a tax, in effect, a survival tax of 20% interest or more. Why would you do that? Why would you hand money to the big banks when you can keep it for your family? Our friends in American financing have a better way. If you're looking to buy your first home or refinance your current one,

they're helping Americans achieve the dream of home ownership with monthly mortgage rates currently in the five. lives. American financing saves its customers an average of 800 bucks per month. That's nearly 10 grand every year back to you. This isn't just a loan. It's a total financial reset. So debt is tough, but there's a smart way to do it and a reckless, self-destructive way to do it, credit cards. And so we recommend American financing. They're salary-based, not commission-based, which means they actually work for you, not the banks. They're called America's Home for Home Loans for a reason. call 800685-5696-96-8005-56 or visit American Financing.net slash Tucker. It wasn't just universities, by the way. I have friends who work in hospitals.

Everybody was terrified, terrified, terrorized to take down anything on their social media in support of Gaza. I have friends at Lincoln Center. The good side of the Jewish tradition is they give generously to cultural institutions, libraries, arts institutions, universities, and so forth. You can walk into a library in New York City. They list the main donors, 95% Jewish. And I'm a library. And I'm a it's true across the board. Hospitals, obviously, but the bad side is, it's a lot of cultural power. It's a lot of cultural power.

And it was then used for, in my opinion, nasty, sinister purposes. You mentioned, and it's true, of course, the Trump administration went after people threatening deportation, disappearing them, throwing them into places of confinement

which were not accessible. But here's the thing. That was all spearheaded by the Jewish supremacist billionaire class. And here's another thing. Did they ever protest it? Did they ever say what was done to Mahmuth Khalil from Colombia

was wrong? Did they register a single word of dissent? This was the most audacious and stupendous assault on academic freedom. I am ready to argue with anybody. I've studied academic freedom in our country, have written a large amount on it, there's been nothing like it in the modern history of the United States. The concept of academic freedom begins at the beginning of the 20th century, the early 1900s. And there have been waves of assault on freedom in general and academic freedom.

the Red Scare in the early part of the 20th century, obviously the McCarthy era where alleged communists were persecuted and lost their jobs. But there's never been anything. I know people are going to say I'm engaging in hyperbole. But I ask you the question, and I ask the listeners. three Ivy League presidents were ousted. They were all women. Two of the

three were women of color. So they had all the so-called, you can call ideological protections of a woke culture. It didn't protect them. You're right. They had all the protections. Do you know how the New York Times would have screamed to high heaven at three women, two women of color, being ousted, not a peep.

And that reign of terror, it is a reign of terror. That continues to this day. I can tell you factually, since that spring of 2024, I've only been invited to speak at two colleges in the United States. That's a fact. Two. What's your normal rotation like? There was a period.

Mine is, it's gone up and down for various reasons which are not worth going into. But there were periods where I spoke at 40 schools a year. That's true. Wow. We're about 40 schools a year. And now I'm talking about collectively, I spoke at University of Massachusetts. that was last year. I actually was nicely greeted at Cornell University, and the president of the university showed up, and he introduced me, which was, I thought, courageous on his part. He was

actually friendly to me. I was very tough. I was very tough. But he seemed to believe in the principle of free speech, the John Stuart Mill principles, and he had me there, but that's it. Now, remember, I've not been invited anywhere in New York. I live there. I live there. There's a terror that has. Where does it come from, I wonder. I think it's perfectly rational.

I mean, I have to be honest with you. Look, let me give you a couple of examples. At Harvard University, okay? as you probably know, the Israel supporters, they rented trucks, put students' pictures on the trucks and went through Boston, Cambridge, calling them terrorists, okay? Students who were mad at the Israeli government. Students who were active in the encampments. Now, let me tell you something.

They also went to the neighborhoods 500 miles away where the kids' families lived. Do you get that? Yeah. If that truck came to my parents' house, my parents would kill me. Now, my parents were in the far left. I'm serious. My parents were in the far left. I told you, they were Stalinist diehards till their last breath. But could you imagine a truck going up and down the Jewish neighborhood saying Norman Finkelstein terrorist with my picture there?

No. So when you ask me, why did they capitulate? It's amazing. Remember, these schools cost $80,000 a year. And the kids are being threatened with suspension, expulsion, and even deportation. So what do you think is going to happen? Now, on that point,

or is there any grounds for it, these claims about these students being supporters of terrorism or terrorists or anti-Semites, let me give you one example, an exemplary case, and that's Harvard. Harvard produces a report. 312 pages on anti-Semitism on Harvard campus in the wake of the crushing of the encampments. I sit down, I read it, I'm curious, I'm ready to believe maybe an incident here, maybe an incident there.

I go through the report, there's nothing there. It's a nothing burger. there's nothing there. So I said, no, I must have gone in with a prejudiced eye. I mean, I said, I must have gone in with a prejudice eye. Let me reread it. I reread it. They said, at the encampment,

somebody had a picture of Alan Garber, the president of Harvard, as a devil. As a devil. Somebody had a poster in the encampment. They said, that's obviously anti-Semitic. Well, I'm not sure where that came from. Yeah. Yeah.

They said another person had a map of Palestine where Israel wasn't there. So I think to myself, well, Mr. Netanyahu holds up maps of Palestine in the U.N. And there's no Palestine there. And there's just Israel there. So that can be really anti-Semitic. So what is the anti-Semitism?

What is it? And here I'm going to, I'll tell you what it is. it's that they said that Israeli Jewish students, in particular, Israeli Jewish students don't feel wanted at Harvard. They feel shunned. They feel like they're pariahs. And they said, Harvard has to be pluralistic. Harvard has to be inclusive.

So in order to correct for anti-Semitism at Harvard, we have to embrace diversity, embrace everyone. I'm thinking to myself, well, I'm all for being inclusive. I'm all for being pluralistic. I'm all for a big tent. But you know what? my big tent does not include child killers. I'm not going there. You lose me. Lots of people are using peptides to get in shape.

Not all peptides are the same. If you take them, do you really know what you're ingesting? Probably not. Joy and Blocks makes it very simple. You start with an easy online health assessment. Then, if necessary, your licensed clinician will order comprehensive lab work to understand exactly what prescription is best for you. Not everybody just for you.

It's a complete review to ensure the best results. Your peptide protocol is built specifically around you, so there's no guesswork. There's not a one-size-fits-all plan. It's totally customized. Prescriptions are filled by American-based pharmacies using ingredients source from FDA-registered facilities. Tons of quality testing, no stone unturned. You're getting the best. You don't have to guess about what's going in your body.

Starting now, this show's listeners can get 65% off labs plus 20% off peptides and supplement. by going to joy and blokes.com slash Tucker and using the code Tucker at checkout. This is one of the biggest discounts any of our partners have ever offered. That's joy and blokes.com slash Tucker. Hey, it's Tucker Carl's. We launched Alp about a year and a half ago

and people are voracious for it. They can't get enough. Everywhere you go, you get the same question. When are you making more flavors? We are not in the business of disappointing people instead of the business of satisfying them. So we have made at least three more flavors. Introducing the Alp Frontier Collection.

They are. Camp Fire Cinnamon. Sunset Mango and Cowboy Coffee, available in 4 milligram and 8 milligram, because if you're going to use nicotine, you ought to have some options. Get the new Frontier Collection now at outpouch.com slash Tucker. Visit BetMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive.

The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMDM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly, 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, Peace contact connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2,600 to speak to an advisor, free of charge.

That MGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming, Ontario. After World War II, for all I know, this or that guard in a Nazi concentration camp, went back to school to get a degree. You want me be inclusive of the people that are. exterminate my family, I'm not going there. And it's the same thing. You're going to have to bear that burden. I'm not going to be inclusive of child killers. Israel has become a nation of child killers. They killed children for play. For play. And there's ample at this point, ample documentation of that of snipers killing children. of drones killing children.

Even in March 2018, during the Great March of Return when the people of Gaza attempted non-violently to end that medieval siege, the UN report found that Israel was targeting children, journalists, medics, brace yourself, targeting double amputees who were 300 meters away from the perimeter fence.

That's 2018 before the horror that was unleashed after October 7th. And now you're telling me that I have to be inclusive and pluralistic with these child killers, a nation of child killers. To its credit, Israel has a citizen army. And that's how it should be, because everybody, I noticed two of your producers or tech people, they were in the Marines, they mentioned to me, everybody should have to bear the burden of the ultimate sacrifice. to keep their country free of foreign occupation. So in my opinion, that's a correct principle. Unlike in my day during the war in Vietnam,

where students got that deferment, college deferment, and so it was overwhelmingly a poor army. And then it became an even overwhelmingly more poor army because it was a volunteer army and who volunteers overwhelmingly, those who don't see a future otherwise. So that's to its credit. But then it becomes to its discredit

if the army is committing genocide. Because that army is a cross-section of Israeli society. You can't, as I did when I was a young man, think of those who are carrying out the murder and mayhem in Vietnam as having nothing to do with me. You know, we were anti-war. But this is not the Israeli army. The Israeli army is representative of the Israeli Jewish population, with one tiny exception,

representative of the Israeli Jewish population. And so they are a nation. of child killers. And even Garber admitted, it was about six months ago or a little more, he said a large part, I mean, that's his phrase, a large part of what was called anti-Semitism,

he said, it was just criticism of Israel. He acknowledged it. Now, you might say, what about slogans like, from the river to the sea, okay? We're Americans. We're Americans. In the United States, the Supreme Court has ruled it's legal to advocate the violent overthrow of your government. That's our jurisprudence. In our country, it's legal to burn the American flag. That's our jurisprudence. In our country, I was a lot of I was going to give a couple of other examples, but...

You can criticize the United States all you want. You can criticize, you know, listen, you can not only criticize it, you can call for its violent overthrow, and you're completely protected by the law. So the slogan from the river to the sea is so pale by comparison. I mean, even in our country, there was a case,

a fellow walked into a local courthouse with a t-shirt emblazoned on it, fucked the draft. It went to the Supreme Court. They said it's protected speech. So next to our jurisprudence from the river to the sea is so pale by comparison.

How could it possibly be illegal to shout that slogan in the United States? So there was no basis for these claims. The problem is, as I'm sure you understand, the other side doesn't care because by the time these cases make their way through the court, it's all over. They succeeded in their goal. They silenced all dissent on our college campuses, in our cultural institutions, in our hospitals, they succeeded in their goal. It won't be upheld. I'm confident of that. There have been several rulings,

as you know, supporting the dissenters. It won't be upheld, but it already did the damage. It'll be too late once it's undone. So you said the president of Harvard later conceded that. A large part. A large part. Yeah. Of what some said was anti-Semitism, was merely criticized that's what he said. Criticism of foreign government. Yeah. That's obviously true. Why would, it seems very short-sighted, in fact, self-destructive to equate criticism of a foreign government, a foreign politician, Netanyahu, specifically, who's not even that popular within Israel, to say that's criticizing him as the same as hating all Jews. Why would anybody make that case? That seems crazy. Well, on the one hand, it's to delegitimize all criticism. Well, of course. Obviously.

The other thing is, I mean, I think we have to be honest about these things. things, Netanyahu is the longest sitting crime minister in Israeli history. Okay? Every few years, or even every few months you hear, he's going to be out-vote, he's going to be voted out of office. This is the end, the end, the end. And it never happens. And the reason why, in my opinion, it never happens, because Netanyahu is the perfect reflection of Israeli society. He's an obnoxious, self-righteous, Jewish supremacist. That's Israeli society, obnoxious, self-righteous Jewish supremacists. So when they see him, they see themselves. And that's why he keeps winning, despite all of these corruption allegations and despite all these

other attacks on his person, Israelis don't really care. Do you go to Israel? I went there en route to the occupied Palestinian territories at the time. I was denied entry in 1989, and then I did get in. and then in 2004, I was denied entry again and I never returned because they don't tell you. I was denied for 10 years, but the governments moved progressively to the right. So I decided it was pointless to fly. How could you be denied entry into Israel?

I thought that all Jews had a right to return. In fact, I thought it was called the right of return. I'm not sure on what particular law I was denied entry. There must have been some security exception to the right of return. I never really investigated it. It wasn't important enough to me. I just accepted acquiesced. Huh.

It seems a little strange, though, no? Like you're not Jewish? more because the government doesn't like you or something? Why do they get to decide? I recognize that they would be displeased with the things I said, so I wasn't altogether shocked. Gradually, I start to deny entry to a lot of Jews. I may have been at the head of the Q.

Is that true? Yeah. There were a large number of Jews who were active in one way or another, opposing the occupation, who were denied entry. My recollection is a couple of years later, Professor Chomsky was denied entry, and there were many other, you know, people I know personally were denied entry.

I never considered it particularly significant. What is it done to your life here in the United States to take the positions you have? I would say, first of all, I'm not Edith Pia, I never regret, Riena. Fair, good.

You know? Good. I have my regrets, but the overall trajectory, this is what I resolved to do as a young man, probably around the age of 16, not having to do with Israel, Palestine, but fighting for a more just world. And the people who were important in my life as, to use the corny expression, role models, they had committed themselves to the cause. Many of them passed or were killed early in life because of their commitment,

and those are the ones who inspired me. And so I recognized that I would pay a price, and I was prepared to pay it. And in a great scheme of things, I'm now 72 years old. I still have a roof over my head. I'm not wanting for the basics in life. And I lived most of my life of sound body,

and I like to believe also of sound mind. So I can say it's caused me by comparison to the people I admired and the suffering of others. I can't say I've paid a big price. I would say the only frustration, if I can put it that way, is I happen to like to teach. I like the interaction with young people who are old enough to think for themselves, which comes with roughly college age, 18 to 22. And also, they are not yet jaded.

or cynical about the real world. They still have ideals. So it's a wonderful age to interact with and also to teach the excitement of the life of the mind. Ideas, thinking through problems, not tweets. A tweet is not an argument.

Oh, it's not. No. An argument is quite complex. Yes. It has major premises, minor premises. It's very complicated to work out. And it requires a classroom to do that. And it requires a text to go over together.

And so it's really a wondrous experience to be a college professor. It's a responsibility, but it's also an experience. and I was significantly denied that opportunity. I don't take it so much personally as I think I could have inspired many more young minds, not propagandized them. I'm totally against propaganda in the classroom. I'm pretty much a stickler about that.

Not propagandized them, but trying to convey to them the joys of the life of the mind. And I think I was deprived of that right because of political considerations. Why are you against propaganda in the classroom? Because a lectern is not a soapbox. there is a place if you have political convictions when you're trying to persuade others of your beliefs but I don't believe that's the place of a classroom

you're not trying to persuade you're trying to get people to think for themselves and getting people to think for themselves in my opinion is making the best arguments on both sites if the student is decidedly of one political end of the spectrum, to make the best arguments from the other end of the spectrum, and force them to work through an argument and reach a conclusion based on the evidence.

I think Bertrand Russell, the great British philosopher, he once said, there are always good arguments to be made on both sites. There are always good arguments to be made in both sites. It's rurally the case that in a major issue of contention, let's say it's abortion or affirmative action. it's rarely the case that all the arguments are on one side and there are no arguments on the other side. There are always arguments on both sides. And then you have to make the best case and let each student decide for him or herself,

not who is right and who is wrong. No. What the student has to do is way. the arguments on both sides and decide on which side is the preponderance of better arguments. It's never like this, the scale. The scale is usually like this. There's always arguments on both sides. You have to weigh the arguments and then decide who has the better case.

That's your view. Yes, it's my view based on, you know, I read the Supreme Court decisions. I thought, I know this will sound like sacrilege, I thought Plessy versus Ferguson, which legalized separate but equal in our country, was a much better argument than Brown, the 54 decision that ended separate but equal. Brown wasn't even really a court decision. It was in the administrative decree. It was so poorly done.

And they call it, liberals like to call it, the Mona Lisa of Supreme Court decisions. No, it was very poorly done. The abortion, the Role case, is, in my opinion, it's a complete disaster. It's a disaster for a very obvious reason for anybody who reads it. The Roe says a woman has a right to do with her body as she pleases until another life enters the picture, or what they call potential life. So they say, of course, a woman has a right to do with her body as she pleases. that's protected by the 14th Amendment,

the due process clause of our Constitution, liberty, the liberty, they sometimes call it the liberty clause. And this is a personal right, that falls under the liberty clause of the Constitution. But it says you have to take into account when a potential life enters the picture. So, obviously the question is, when does the potential life enter the picture? Is it at conception?

Is it at birth? Vibability. Right. When does it enter the picture? The court says physicians disagree, theologians disagree, doctors disagree, philosophers disagree. The court says, we can't take a position.

We don't know when it did. Because nobody knows when life begins. Well, we have a problem here. If nobody knows when life begins, but if it's a potential life or a real life, then you lose your right to abortion, how do you decide? How do you decide when a woman has the right

you know, to her body, and when the state has the right to interfere. You said you don't know when life begins. So they say, we'll decide its viability when the fetus can survive on its own outside the mother's body. But that's a technical question. It just means when machines can keep the fetus alive. It doesn't tell you when life begins. No.

So the whole row case was so poorly argued. And you could see, you know, I go over it with the class, and by the end, there's probably a large amount of agreement that it should be viability, but there's a recognition that as a legal issue, it's a disaster. And so it was pretty easily overturned. And I would say the Baki case, the affirmative action case, I thought that was pretty well argued. I grant that.

But it also was a very complicated case. I'm not going to go into now how it was finally decided. But in general, as a general principle, I believe that one of my important responsibilities as a professor, to the extent I was able to practice my profession, is to show students that there are always arguments to be made on the other side. So I think we have different politics or I thought we did, but I would be thrilled to have you teach my children if the attitudes you just explained or your attitudes in the classroom.

I think it is. Now, I will tell you something, except I believe for two classes when I was at the Poole University, which eventually denied me tenure, I was never allowed to teach the Israel-Palestine conflict. What? Yeah, I was never allowed to teach it. Why? I think that's pretty obvious.

I was at Brooklyn College, Hunter College. Those are City University of New York. The pool, I recall, there were two senior seminars where I taught the Israel-Palestine conflict. Then I was unemployed from 2007 to about 2020. I had no work, a long period of my life. You were totally unemployed? Totally unemployed. 13 years?

Yes. It was a dark period for me because most people, their structure in life is determined externally. Yes. I have a job, have to get up, I have to go to work, blah, blah. And I had to every morning wake up and try to rationalize a purpose. to my existence. And it was not easy. How did you not go crazy?

You want to know the truth? I've forgotten those years. Yeah. I've forgotten those years. But I will say they were a dark period. And then I was doing some adjuncting that's a substitute teacher for those of you who aren't in the academic world.

and at Hunter College again, they let me go, and then recently at Brooklyn College. So it was scattered. It was very demeaning. Yeah. You know, you know what? An adjunct allow me to explain to your viewers is usually graduate students who they hire at the last minute to fill a class because a professor got a grant, this had a family tragedy, so you're higher, and it's usually a graduate student. And I am very far from a graduate student in just physical years. And to be an adjunct and to

be treated. I know I shouldn't say this, but I don't much care. At Brooklyn College, this last semester, I hadn't been paid. I get paid pittance. Pittance. They didn't pay me for six weeks. I was so incensed, so enraged, treated like garbage. So it was a very humanly demeaning position for a person. Let's leave aside my quote-unquote academic achievements, just my age to be an adjunct. No. We're also not to be vulgar about it, but the most famous person in Brooklyn College by a lot.

I rather not say that. It's for others to say. Well, that's my characterization. You're certainly, I don't know if anyone else at Brooklyn College is more famous than you are. How did that happen? I mean, can you get specific? The DePaul case about 20 years ago was relatively well covered, not as much as it should have been, but basically the department and then the college voted to give you tenure pretty overwhelmingly

and then a bunch of outside forces, including donors and Alan Jershowitz, intervened and the university, the president, if I'm remembering this correctly, denied you tenure. Is that correct? I think the final decision was made by the president, Father Holt Schneider, I believe. I'm not sure in the allocation. of responsibility who makes that last decision, that too is kind of a blur in my life. It was not, the last year was really pretty terrible.

Do you have any idea in specific terms how you were prevented from being a college professor? Remember, we're living in very different times now. Israel is on the defensive. and those who are supporting the rights of Palestinians and opposing the various Israeli aggressions, they are on the offensive. When I first got involved in the conflict,

which was in June 1982, when Israel invaded Lebanon, we're talking about a handful of, I think it's fair to say. You know the Yiddish expression of Mashuga? Yeah. Crazy people. A handful of,

of Jewish Michigah post-Israel's actions. The only notable exception was Professor Chomsky, who sort of gave stature to our cause, but it was just a handful of people. And early on, I had written my doctoral dissertation on the theory of Zionism. And while writing the doctoral dissertation, There was a book that came out way before your time. It was called From Time in Memorial. And the major thesis of the book was that Palestine was empty. The Jews came, made it flourish. And then all these Arabs from neighboring states infiltrated into Palestine and pretended to be indigenous to it.

The book became an instant national best. seller. It was endorsed by the who's who of the American intelligentsia, which largely consisted of Jews at that period. We're talking about 1984, 83. And the book was a sensation, it was a national sensation because now we've proven that this whole thing about Palestine has been contrived by anti-Semites in order to discredit the Jews and so forth. I sat down and I read the book. I should also say the book was certified for its accuracy by a fellow named Philip Hauser, who was the head of population studies at the University of Chicago, which is an imposing title. Definitely.

Yes. I sat down. I worked at that point, a part-time job. I was reading my doctoral dissertation. I came home every night. A lot of it was demographics, numbers, tables, numbers, tables. I would sit at home and take out my pad and paper. I didn't use calculators. And I'm flipping the pages.

The tables are in the back. The text is in the middle, going back and fall. back and forth. I'm going to figure this out. I'm going to figure this out. And then one night, I discover one key number, one key number in the tables was fake. It was a fake. It was a eureka moment. A eureka moment chills down my spine. I live. in this tiny studio apartment like Raskolnikov and crime and punishment. And I'm pacing the apartment back and forth, back and forth. I'm saying, I did it. I did it. I did it. I was just overwhelmed. It was like 1 o'clock in the morning. Who can I cool? Who can I call? Who can I? I tell, well, I'm Jewish. I called my mother. I said, mom, I did it. I did it. It was one in the morning,

and she said, Norm, I'm so happy for you. What did you do? Now, there was no way I can explain to her how I proved that this is a demographic fraud. In any case, then it became a real battle. because I had the goods. As they say nowadays, I had their receipts. And that was going to mean, I was just a graduate student. And all of these experts had lent their name to the book. All of these authorities, these soul bellow, Ely Weasel, Barbara Tuckman, Lucy Dewittowich,

They don't mean anything to yours. They do. Well, they were very big names. And so I remember I sent out my findings to several, around 20 prominent people who support the rights of Palestinians. You know, it was a different era. You type it up. You have to Xerox it. You send it in the mail.

Most of these people are not going to give the time of date. to a graduate student. They get too many other pieces of correspondence from important people. And one Saturday morning, I got a call. And the call was,

hello? Is this Norman Finkelstein? I said yes. And the person then said, this is Noam Chomsky. I have read what you wrote. and I found it convincing. And that was the beginning of a whole new chapter in my life. He became a friend, a close friend, and most importantly a mentor.

But he warned me on the very first correspondence. He said, be aware that if you continue on this path, there will be many brickbats coming your way. Honestly, I am not a saint. I am very far from a saint. As Gandhi would often say, I have 10,000 faults. And I do.

And I will never pretend otherwise. But of one thing, I can say with a certain amount of conviction, I cannot be bought. And I attach a lot to truth. I attach a lot to justice. And I don't, I'm not open to compromising those values. So with all due regard to my mentor,

The great Noam Chomsky, it was not a tough decision at all to pursue it. His wife, Carol, his first wife, who I was close to, we were family friends. She would occasionally say that she was, and she liked me, you know, she sympathized with my situation. she would occasionally say, I'm angry at Noem that he didn't discourage you because I paid, you know, relatives, I paid some price, okay?

And I would say, no, Carol, you're wrong. He did warn me. But there was no way I wouldn't persist. At the beginning, I was called up by Robert Silvers. I'm not sure of that name means anything to you. He was the editor of the New York Review of Books. And the New York Review of Books was by a wide margin,

the most influential journal among the intelligentsia. Yes. Okay? And he called me down to his office. A door was opening. a big door, you know. I was so excited. My heart was palpitating.

And he said to come down in like two hours. It wasn't an appointment in the future. I had to calm down. So I went out for a run. Okay? It was in Washington Heights, the bodegas with the aluminum awnings. If you remember what they look like. Yeah.

And I ran under one and I cut a gash in my skull from here to here. Oh, come on. I swear. I cut a gash, a long gash. And it started to bleed. I'm not going to miss this appointment. I'm not going to miss it. This is it.

my chance in life, you know? Like they say in Britain's Got Talent, Simon Powell says, these three minutes might change your life. So I stopped the bleeding. I went, and he told me to meet his friend a fellow named Arthur Berger, no, Rabbi Hertzberg, Arthur Hertzberg,

who was a rabbi, and an academic at Columbia. I go down to meet Hertzberg, and he says, we Zionists, I'm thinking like, so, where did that we come from? We, like me and him.

And then he said, he'll be my dissertation advisor. I said, no, I'm at Princeton. You're at Columbia. He said, I'll take care of that. And then he asked me a question. He said, I'm quoting now, long time ago, 1984, but I remember. He said, are you in Chomsky's stable?

I didn't know what that expression meant, but I self got the idea. And I know, you know, it's what you call the do-or-die moment. I knew if I said, yes, the door was going to shut in my face. But there was no way on God's earth that I was going to say no, that's not going to happen. And I said, I consider him my mentor and a friend. It was the last time I ever heard from the New York Review of Books. So, to answer your question, to answer your question, everybody knows those moments where you know the door may open or it may shut in your face. Oh, yes.

And everybody faces those moments in life. It's called life. and the doors kept shutting. And I tell you, I was bitter because I liked to teach. I was bitter because it was so demeaning. I remember once at Harper at Hunter College, I was mimeographing some papers for the class at that time, long before, to your viewers,

long before electronic, you know, send a syllabus and everything through electronic technology. Through electronic technology. And one of the professors came into the offices at night, said, what are you doing here? I said, well, I'm an adjunct. I'm just Xeroxing some stuff for the class. She called security on me. I was already in my 50s. No.

And just to establish for viewers who may not know, you were at Princeton. Where were you educated? Undergrad, I went to Binghamton University, then Princeton, and then I studied at the Ecopate d'Azolitude in Paris. That was my three periods of education. Otherwise, I've basically been home.

Um, so that's the story. And, uh, are you bitter about it now? Uh, now I laugh. You wouldn't know I laugh now. I know it's, it's not a bitter laugh. But let's say, I wrote the only scholarly book, the only scholarly book in Gaza's political history, the only one. Sarah Roy of Harvard University. She wrote the only scholarly economic history of that.

Gaza, excellent book. Okay? I wrote the only political history. I came out in 2018. Okay? It's still the only one. Not reviewed anywhere. Nowhere. Never mentioned.

You know how sometimes newspapers like the New York Times, when an event becomes from page news, they'll have a little list of books you should read. You know, background books. Never mentioned. Never mentioned. You know, so now I left.

So Gaza's grave diggers, which you've written, how do you expect that to be received? No, it's a question mark. Because of the social media, it's very hard to pretend I don't exist. Yes. It's a challenge. Places like New Yorker magazine, no possibility. Atlantic magazine, no possibility.

Maybe the Times will do a hit job. It's possible. But in general, I'm pessimistic. But on the other hand, there is the, I think what they call the alternative

media has now sort of become the mainstream media, and the mainstream media has become the alternative media. So, I think there are there are prospects. It's a, I think it's a good book. It's not an easy book.

Well, I believe it's a good book. And I do think, I do a kind of research that nobody does. You know, the philosopher, John Stuart Mill, he once said, the more valuable you become to yourself, the more valuable you become to others.

which is another way of saying, the more you home your God-given gift, and I believe I'm old-fashioned, I believe everybody has a God-given gift. Yes. Most people, they go through life, it's latent. Yes, I strongly agree. They don't have the opportunity to discover.

They never find out what it is. They never find out what it is. and some who do find out never find a time or resources. They can't apply it. To apply it. So I have a skill. It's a small skill. It's an attention to detail.

It's checking every footnote. It's applying my mind where I think something is implausible to finding the errors. the argument. The great advantage that truth has over falsehood is this. Truth holds together. Because it's true. Falsehood, if you apply your eye in a conscientious, almost maniacal way, and it requires a certain amount of fanaticism. You can prove it's false because at the end of the day,

it doesn't hold together. And that's been kind of my life's... I won't say vocation. It's my gift. It's not a big gift, but what I like to say is what I do is not much. I acknowledge that, but what I do, I do well. I can take any text which is implausible at first glance, promofasy, implausible, I can put my eye to it, page by page, sentence by sentence, and I can demonstrate this is not true.

And that's what I largely do in this book. For example, one example that will be familiar to your listeners. there's no question that atrocities of a significant magnitude were committed by Hamas and other militant groups on October 7th. Yes. And I am not a denier of any sort of atrocity so far as the evidence shows as of now. It happened.

But then there were claims, made, as all of your listeners know, that Hamas had weaponized rape and sexual violence. I found that, for reasons not worth going into right now, I found that implausible. And then I started to go through the evidence. And there is no material evidence to support that claim. I devote the first chapter of the new book, Gossus Gravediggers. The chapter is called Rape Fantasies. I go through all the alleged evidence, and I find it not only non-persuasive, I find the evidence non-existent.

So... It's just totally made up? Yes. Yes. I have to be careful about my... words. You asked me the question, is it totally made up? I would say the evidence, based on the evidence that's been adduced, it's totally made up. So let's give you one example. And then you judge for yourself, assuming what I'm telling you now, it was true, is accurate, okay? After my book

came out, this very... I should start you know, the claim has been widespread. I mean, widespread. You hear it everywhere. Right. And I'll get to that. Just remind me as I continue, remind me of the name Cheryl Sandberg, which I'll get to if you remind me. I know Cheryl Sandberg. Okay, good. So let's take, after my book came out, this new Israeli report was published by what they call a civil commission. And the main author of the report is somebody named Dr. Kochov. I forgot, Levi, her last name. I'll come back to me. So here's what she says, okay?

She says Hamas committed widespread rape on October 7th, widespread systematic sexual violence on October 7th. You're familiar with those claims, of course, as is your viewers. And then she said the Hamas had weaponized. this sexual violence, including rape and gang rape, in order to shatter the Israeli national espree spirit. So it posted all of these acts of rape and sexual violence on the social media, even contacted the families of the victims using the people. their own cell phones, the family cell phones, which they seized and so forth, iPhones.

And disseminate all this evidence. Okay, that's an interesting claim. So what do you discover? I hope your viewers are all ears. They say that they have 10,000, 10,000 photographs. and digital segments of what happened on October 7th, 10,000. They also say that if you were to view it, it would take 1,800 hours to view all of their photographic and digital evidence.

It would take 1,800 hours. That means if you're a single researcher and you go through this evidence, it would take you, and you did eight hours a day, eight hours a day every day of the week. It would take you more than seven months to go through all of the photographic and digital evidence of October 7th. Now here is the kicker. There isn't one single image, one single frame of Hamas committing rape or sexual violence on October 7th. How can that be? How is that possible? Not one image.

They say Hamas was posting the images of sexual violence. in order to demoralize, shatter the national spirit. They said, we have Hamas, excuse me, we have Hamas dash cams, we have Hamas body cams, we have Hamas go-pros, we have it.

They said we have extensive images from Hamas, but none of those images show sexual violence or rape. There has not been one image, not one, put forth by Israel, and Amos de International said, nobody even claims they have such an image. How is that possible? I should also add, they have CCTV imagery, digital evidence, they have traffic camera evidence,

they have iPhone evidence from October 7th. There's no evidence, there's no image. How can that be? How is that possible? So the only, they have no physical evidence. Now, part of it seemed plausible to me. They said we have no forensic evidence because they weren't prepared for a massacre

of the magnitude of October 7th. So they processed the bodies very quickly to prepare them for Jewish burial, no, the ritual, and they didn't preserve any, or they didn't preserve significant forensic evidence. That seemed plausible to me. But no digital evidence? That didn't sound right. That didn't even sound, not only didn't sound plausible, it didn't sound possible. The only thing they have is witnesses.

So they have this witness. She says, I was sitting in a little room. I was hidden. The room was sealed. They called a caravan. A caravan. The room was sealed.

A vehicular hiding place. She said, sitting in the room, I heard, this is her words, I'm calling it. I heard a gang rape here. I heard a rape here and I heard another rape there. Then she starts giving more details of these rapes. How is that possible?

She heard in the loo. A rape here, a rape. She said, here, here, and here. There, there, and there. That's their best evidence. Did she identify the victims of these rapes? She was sealed in the room. There were no windows.

There was no windows. You know, you have to ask her, did she hear the Vienna Boys Choir here and Boston Pops here and the Beatles reunion there? It was like completely, and that was their star witness. If you look at in the current report, I mentioned to you, the 300-page report, she's listed first. of the survivors, there are two alleged survivors, one of October 7th, one a hostage survivor. But if you look at the report, neither of them said they were raped. They did not. Read what they said.

The woman hostage survivor, she became quite prominent, Anatsusana, She said, something terrible was done to me. Maybe, I'm not going to dispute that. Something awful was done to me. But she never said she was raped. She does not. There's a claim by a nail that he was raped on October 7. When if you read his testimony to the so-called Civil Commission,

there's no, he doesn't say he was raped. So we're stuck with the following problem. No forensic evidence, no digital evidence, no photographic evidence, no photographic evidence, and of the survivor testimony, the one survivor from October 7th, who's touted as a victim of rape, he doesn't say he was raped. The one survivor of hostages and not Susanna, she doesn't say she was raped.

I tell you, you know, my age, the memory can slip. The name, the author of the report is Dr. Kochav El-Keyam Levy. She's the author. And I want to say, look, your program has breach, obviously. It's not BGT. Neither three minutes

nor three hours are going to change my life because my life is over. It's in the past. But it has reach. So I say, you disagree with me, Dr. Al-Qaim Levy?

Let's debate it. Let's go to a public venue and debate it. I say the same thing to Cheryl Sandberg. Now... Of Facebook?

Cheryl Sandberg was the Maito, C-O-O-Chief Operator officer. And she's a bright woman. No question about it. I never deny people, I can loat them, but I never deny people

their achievements. She attended Harvard. She was, was an economics major, she was the top student in her economics class for her year. That's a significant achievement. Now, she makes a film, a documentary, she calls it. It's called Screens Before Silence. And it's claims that there was mass systematic rape and sexual violence on October 7th, committed by Hamas, systematic widespread sexual violence. And she stars in the film and she emotes,

and she's in tears, and she's going, oh, my God, she's looking at these images of sexual violence and rape on an iPhone. But Cheryl, I hope you're listening. You're a bright woman. but excuse my English you're full of shit there were no images there was one image

but the independent where they quote forensic specialist whatever they're called they said you couldn't tell anything from those images screams before silence should be called shalak before shice. Your listeners can go to their, can go Google.

Get a dictionary to find out, yeah. Yes. You know, schlach before sheise. These are Jewish supremacists who have no regard whatever for facts. Because for them, it's the cause. And the cause is more important than any passing fact. She attended Harvard. She was in the economics department.

She knows what evidences. She knows what evidentiary standards are. It's the cause. Israel must live. So last question pertains to what you just said. Outside the United States, I think it's very, there's a consensus globally, pretty much, that what Israel is doing is totally indefensible.

These are crimes. But the question is, will there ever be a reckoning? So your parents were polls and were both put in Nazi camps, including Auschwitz, and your family was murdered. But there was a reckoning. a reckoning. I mean, some of the people who committed those crimes were held to account. Will that happen in this case? Well, let's start from basics. When the whole society is implicated in a genocide, apart from a few senior figures, it's impossible for there to be a reckoning. That's why places

like South Africa pioneered the idea of a truth and reconciliation commission, because if you're going to prosecute everybody implicating an apartheid, it's a large portion of society. So as a general rule, even in the best of cases, it's only a handful of people who are going to be held accountable. In the case of Israel, nobody will ever be held accountable. accountable. That to me is pretty transparent. Why? Well, because, first of all, the United States won't allow it to happen. Part of it, as you know, is the domino effect. If they're held accountable, Trump is in a very, first of all, Biden and Blinking are in a very difficult situation. because they enabled the genocide.

If it weren't for Joe Biden and Tony Blinken, there couldn't have been a genocide in Gaza. It was funny. The New Yorker magazine wrote this article, I believe it was the New Yorker in which it, this is very recent, in which it claimed that it was written by a fellow Fitzpatrick,

his name just, I think it was David, Patrick, a former Times reporter. And he said, oh, they tried so hard. They tried so hard. They couldn't do anything, you know, meaning Biden, Blinking and the others, Jake Sullivan, to prevent the genocide.

And then in the course of the article, they have a line that reads, 70% of the weapons for the Gaza genocide came from the United States. you certainly had one option. Yeah. Don't supply the weapons.

So there's always the fear of the domino effect. Right. If Israelis are indicted, where does that leave the Biden administration? So that makes it improbable that's going to happen. Same thing with Donald Trump. because the attack on Iran was the most brazen, flagrant, aggression in the modern history. There's not been, to my knowledge, no, my knowledge is not unlimited. To my knowledge, there's never been a case in the modern world of a state attacking without a pre-pretence,

of a pretext, a pretense. Even Hitler in 1939 when he attacked Poland, he fabricated a border incident. Of course. You always have to claim self-defense. You got a gulf tonk in it. I was just going to say, you beat me to the draw. In 1964, the U.S. had to essentially fabricate,

or LBJ, Lyndon Johnson, the president, fabricate the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in order to for those of you who won't go back that far and luckily for you if you don't for

in I believe it was August 1964 the claim was made that a North Vietnamese vessel attacked an American vessel and that was then there were only

two senators who voted against it was Ernst Gruing, groaning, and I forgot the second. And that became the piece of legislation that enabled the ground war in Vietnam. The U.S. was already heavily involved during the Kennedy years, but it enabled the ground war in Vietnam. In the case of Israel and the U.S., there wasn't a pretense. There wasn't the pretense of pretext.

It was the most brazen, flagrant breach of the UN charter in modern history. In the middle of a negotiation. In the middle of a negotiations. I was listening to your interview with Darrell Cooper, and that was emphasized in the middle of a negotiation. What's so dishonorable. It was outrageous. But you know what's also dishonorable and outrageous? There was no reaction by the UN Security Council.

Nothing. Nothing. You could hear a pin drop in the silence. You know what else was dishonorable? On November 17, 2025, the UN Security Council passed resolution 2803. And do you know what that resolution did? amidst all the horror that the Godforsaken people of Gaza have endured since back in 1948, the concentration camp in which they have been immured for 80 years after the genocide over the past three years,

the UN Security Council, I know this will sound like a lot of the United States. hyperbole, exaggeration, the UN Security Council handed the deed of Gaza to Donald J. Trump. He got the deed to Gaza. He was designated the head of the Board of Peace. He was subsequently given total veto power over any decision made. by the Board of Peace, and the UN Security Council only put one condition. One, every six months, the Board of Peace should, not has to, should report to the Security Council on the situation in Gaza. He owns Gaza. He owns Gaza. He owns Gaza. So there have been many episodes. And in fact, that's what the purpose of my new book is, to preserve for future generations,

assuming there will be future generations. And as you discussed with Darrow Cooper, there are all sorts of apocalyptic scenarios that are plausible in the case of the current aggression against Iran. But assuming, and those, by the way, they are plausible. I've written about them. Oh, it's definitely possible. There are two crazy people with the helm. Yes. One in Tel Aviv and one in the Oval Office.

That's correct. And it's absolutely impossible. to predict what they might do. But assuming the worst doesn't come to the worst, what I've written is to preserve the record of that infamy of what has been done to the people of Gaza, but with the recognition that unlikely anyone is going to be held legally accountable

for what was done to those Godforsaken people. Sad. Well, in the absence of that, I'm glad you wrote this, and I'm grateful that you took the time for this conversation. Well, thank you so much. And I hope that you are vindicated. I don't need... Broadly.

Well, I hope so. You don't seem to care. No. Too late in the day. Thank you. Roman Fingleston. Thank you.