Speaker unverified: uncertainty

Transcript context

…t, because I suspect that there are probably large numbers of Palestinian refugees who, once their rights are acknowledged, will find it exceptionally distasteful- To return from [inaudible 04:46:00]. … to have to live among the kind of sentiments that we’ve heard around this table today, to be quite frank. I mean, I was previously unfamiliar with you, and I watched one of your preparation videos. Very disconcerting stuff, I have to say. You were explaining two days ago, in the discussion about apartheid and how absurd it was, that in your view Jim Crow was not apartheid, but Arab states not giving citizenship to Palestinian refugees is apartheid. That’s what I meant with my earlier comments about white supremacy. That’s great, the white supremacy comment. Well, hold on, let me respond. My issue is that I feel like we have jumped on this euphemistic treadmill, and I think that’s part of the reason why this conflict will never get solved, is because on one end you’ve got a people who are now convinced internationally that they’re victims of apartheid, genocide, concentration camp conditions, ethnic cleansing, they’re forced to live in an open air prison, with all of these things that are stacked against them, all of these terms that are highly specific, that refer to very precise things. And then when people like you say that they should- Well, I would expect nothing less from someone who doesn’t think Jim Crow is apartheid, but who does think that Arab states not giving Palestinians- The problem is you’re morally loading. For you apartheid is when racists do bad things. No. There’s a definition of apartheid. That’s great. There is a very clear definition of apartheid. A specific top-down racial domination, enacted through top-down, like federal legislative policies or whatever, means that I don’t know if Jim Crow would have qualified for apartheid. That doesn’t make it any less… Have you ever heard of Plessy versus Ferguson? Excuse me. Finkelstein, I’m talking right now. Excuse me, excuse me Twinklestein, I’m talking to your friend over here. I don’t know if it would have qualified as the crime of apartheid, just like if Israel were to literally nuke the Gaza Strip and kill two million people, I don’t know if that would qualify for the crime of genocide. In your eyes probably not. Well, yeah, but because genocide requires a special intent. I think the issue is, instead of… And I think this conversation actually is emblematic of the entire conversation. Then let me finish answering Benny Morris’s question. Well sure, but you accused me of supporting racism. Well, you did. I didn’t. And you are. Do you think I support Jim Crow laws? Look, when- The fact that you can’t even answer that honestly, right? It doesn’t matter what- You couldn’t say that 800 civilians were killed by Hamas, you said, “Well, maybe 400 were killed by Israel. I don’t know the number, maybe- No, I didn’t say that. You said 400. No, I didn’t say that. You co-signed the opinion. No, I didn’t. No, he didn’t. He said the majority [inaudible 04:48:20]. Well, wait, how many? I think the word was some, that’s what I heard. No, I think your memory- Well, you weren’t listening. ion. No, I didn’t. No, he didn’t. He said the majority [inaudible 04:48:20]. Well, wait, how many? I think the word was some, that’s what I heard. No, I think your memory- Well, you weren’t listening. … you memory’s retarded. How many people do you think approximately, if you had to ballpark it, how many do you think were killed by Hamas on October 7th? I think it’s pretty clear that the majority of civilians that were killed on- That’s what he said. 51%? Or 90%? Don’t ask me to put a number on something I don’t know. I just want a ballpark. Those are two very different intuition. First of all, when you say Hamas, do you mean Palestinians, or do you mean Hamas specifically? I mean the invading Palestinian force? I don’t like to say Palestinians, because I don’t think all Palestinian civilians were involved, so I’ll say Hamas, Islamic Jihad, whatever, Al Quds, whatever other- But that’s how this discussion started. You said Hamas and I began to answer that, and then Benny Morris said, actually he means Hamas in addition to Jihad and the others. So of the invading Palestinian force, how many do you think killed civilians versus the IDF? What do you think the ballpark, the percentage? Well, the figures we have are that about a third of the casualties on October 7th were military, and about two-thirds were- That’s not what I asked at all. What’s your question? He’s asking about the two-thirds. What percentage of civilians do you think were killed by the invading force, a ballpark? I think a clear majority, but I can’t give you a specific figure. If you thought it was closer to 51% or 99% were killed by- Why would he know that? How would he know that? Because it’s interesting to actually stake out a position. Yeah, it’s interesting- If you want to be completely, totally agnostic on it, that’s fine. Based on complete ignorance, because we don’t know. Professor Morris doesn’t know, Mouin Rabbani doesn’t know. And yet you can speak with absolute certainty that the IDF is targeting and murdering Palestinian children intentionally. Well, actually- Do you see the double standard? No, I don’t. You see- I know you don’t. It was a rhetorical question, obviously you don’t. You know why? Because you’re uneducated on the matter. I looked at the UN report. Uh-huh. The Goldstone Report? No. The UN report on the great march of return in 2018, and they said that the snipers were targeting children, medics, journalists, and disabled people. Just as they are now in this conflict. Exactly. More journalists have been killed in the last several months in Gaza, than in any other conflict. And in all of World War II. Do you acknowledge that Hamas… That’s great, the comparison is fun. Hamas is not killing journalists in the Gaza strip. Do you agree that they operate in civilian uniforms, that their goal is to induce that confusion, that that’s the way that they conduct themselves militarily? Let me finish my point. More journalists have been, more UN- I understand, and more children, and the- He doesn’t want to hear it, it’s so boring. No, because it’s virtue signaling. Virtue signaling! Let me finish my point. More journalists have been, more UN- I understand, and more children, and the- He doesn’t want to hear it, it’s so boring. No, because it’s virtue signaling. Virtue signaling! You don’t have a material, a substantial… It is virtue signaling. Yes, like when you say children, over and over again, that’s virtue signaling. You know you have this habit of mocking the dead. But talking about how many Israelis were killed, that’s not virtue signaling, because that’s human life. I don’t care if a hundred are killed or a thousand, I’m curious who you’re assigning blame to. You just interrogated him, 51%, 90%. The question, yes, that’s not the number, that’s the responsibility, Norman. And then Mouin mentions that more journalists were killed in Gaza than in all of World War II. That doesn’t further any part of the conversation. And more medics were killed in Gaza. No, that’s silly. And then he says, it’s virtue signaling. Journalists weren’t in the area. But when Israelis get killed, that’s serious. I never said that. It’s serious on both sides. I didn’t say, respectfully- It’s called [inaudible 04:51:29]. No, you called it virtue signaling. No, I’m not virtue signaling, I’m asking a substantive question of who do you assign blame to, or do you play into Norm Finkelstein’s conspiracies that the ambulances should have known immediately who was dead, that the numbers were changed because they were fake. Mr. Borrell, Mr. Borrell- Or that maybe 51% of the people were killed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, but 29% were killed by IDF helicopters. You asked me a direct question, and you got a direct answer. I didn’t, I got majority, which could be anything from 51 to 99. I said a clear majority. What percent is a clear majority as opposed to a majority? They live in ambiguity. A clear majority, in my view, is well over 50%. Please don’t ask me to be more precise, because I can’t. You could say 80, 90, 95%. If I knew that, I would say it. I think it’s reasonable. It’s a reasonable supposition. Perhaps it is, but I… Mr. Morris, you are not the best person to be asking that question. I read when you described Operation Defensive Shield, and you said a few dozen homes were destroyed. You’re talking about what happened in a Judean refugee camp. Yeah. And you said- No, the Arabs said 500. You said a few died- You guys said 500 Palestinians were killed in a Judean- I never said that. No, but that was the statement from the PLO, the Palestinian Authority. You said a few dozen homes- And that there were massacres there. Yes, a few dozen homes. Yeah. That’s right. Well, it turned 140 buildings were destroyed- That’s a few dozen. … 5,000 people were left homeless. How many people were killed? 5,000. How many were killed? You described it… No, I’m talking about homes destroyed. So you are not the best person to be criticizing what Mouin says when he says clear majority, but he can’t say more. You know why he can’t say more? He doesn’t know. He doesn’t know. Yeah, I understand that. I understood that point. I hope as a historian you understand that.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.