6/10/24: Bibi War Cabinet Collapse As Gantz Resigns, Israeli Hostage Rescue Kills Hundreds In Gaza
47:45 Share

Hi, I'm Katie Lowe's and I'm Guillermo Diaz. And we're the hosts of Unpacking the Toolbox, the Scandal Rewatch podcast where we're talking about all the best moments of the show. Mesmerizing. But also we get to hang out with all of our old scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for even more behind the scenes stories with Unpacking the Toolbox podcast.

Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life in marriage. I just filed for divorce. Whoa. I said the words that I've said like in my head for like 16 years.

Listen to Misspelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Angie Martinez, and on my podcast, I like to talk to everyone from Hall of Fame athletes to iconic musicians about getting real on some of the complications and challenges of real life.

I had the best dad and I had the best memories and the greatest experience. And that's all I want for my kids as long as they can have that. Listen to Angie Martinez IRL on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show.

Good morning, everybody. Happy Monday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal? Indeed we do. We got a lot of breaking news with regards to Israel. So first of all, Benny Gantz is out of the government of that war cabinet. He announced that he is pressuring for a ceasefire deal. We've got Tony Blinken, who is there in the region as well. So a lot to get to there and what that could mean. We have four Israeli hostages rescued and roughly 1,000

Palestinians killed or injured in that operation by the IDF and some questions about American involvement. So a lot to get to there. That's very consequential. We have new polls out with some interesting insights into whether or not Trump's convictions are going to matter and then whether or not people really care about them. The answer appears to basically be not so much.

Very interesting things coming out of Europe as well. They had the EU parliamentary elections, and in particular in France and Germany, huge surge for the far right. Macron has announced snap elections, so that is kind of fascinating. Sometimes that can be a canary in the coal mine for our own politics, so we want to take a look at that. And we also have Breonna Joy Gray fired.

By the hill, needless to say, Sagar and I both have some thoughts and potential insights there to share with you. The hill? What's that? Never heard of it. Former hill refugees ourselves. We've got some thoughts about what's going on there. All right. That's right. Okay. Before we get to that, we actually have a major story coming later today. We weren't able to fit it in the show for timing reasons from Ryan Grimm. We're going to be interviewing him. He's going to be breaking some

major Supreme Court related news. So everybody stay tuned on all of our channels. We will be posting that and we'll email it out to premium subscribers as well. But we are expecting this to actually make some news and possibly picked up by the mainstream press. So it's going to be a fun day here at Breaking Points. If you want to support our work, breakingpoints.com. We really appreciate it.

that, let's get to the Benny Gantz news. All right. So Benny Gantz announced a press conference and he made it official that he was leaving the war cabinet. We've got a little bit of the coverage from Sky News, which has the advantage of being in English. So let's take a listen to a little bit of what he had to say.

We can tell you that he is unhappy with the apparent lack of a plan for after the war with Gaza. He has been threatening to resign. He was going to release a statement yesterday, but the news that those four Israeli hostages had been rescued from Gaza meant his statement was delayed until today. But in the last few moments, he has resigned from the Israeli war cabinet. He says...

In Netanyahu's government, political considerations are impeding strategic decisions in the Gaza war. He also says that Benjamin Netanyahu is preventing real victory. We are leaving emergency government, he says. He also calls on Benjamin Netanyahu to set an agreed election date.

And he's been calling on the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, to be brave and do what is right and presumably follow his lead by resigning from the war cabinet. There was also a major military official who just announced his resignation as well, who was in charge of the Gaza area and said, I've basically failed on October 7th to keep Israelis safe.

Benny Gantz, as part of that press conference, he also apologized to the hostage families and asked for their forgiveness, saying, quote, we failed. The responsibility is also mine. So you guys will recall the war cabinet is made up

Netanyahu was Benny Gantz and Yoav Galant. Now, moderate in the Israeli context, always keep in mind, none of these people are against the war. None of them are, quote unquote, moderate. However, there are some differences in terms of how they wanted to approach things. Gantz in particular is more favorable towards the ceasefire deal that has been floated by Joe Biden. Yoav Galant seems to be more in that direction as well. Both of them have been pushing for a plan for the, quote unquote, day after.

And so that's why Sagar is really noteworthy and also not surprising that he points to Netanyahu and says, basically, you're putting politics first. You don't actually care about the war. You don't care about the hostages. You don't care about Israel. You care about your own political survival. And Gantz had previously issued an ultimatum basically saying, listen, you need to call for elections. We need some sort of concrete workable plan for the quote unquote day after in Gaza. Otherwise, I'm leaving the war cabinet. And that, in fact, is what he has done now.

Yeah, it's really interesting. Really what it comes down to is the both domestic political situation, but also Gantz is not an idiot. He basically has the tacit backing of the United States, the Biden government, the European Union. He's not facing any international problems. If Netanyahu goes away, A, he's likely going to face a criminal trial for his own corruption allegations that predate long October 7th. But second, he's actually got a crap

with his political legacy. Just to explain to people, 'cause it's a little bit confusing, this does not actually bring down the Netanyahu government. His old coalition, pre-October 7th coalition, still stands. He has a 64-seat majority in the Israeli parliament. The question then comes to the shakiness

of that, the calling for the election, and really the way I guess people could think about it for historical context is when Clement Attlee left the government of the wartime coalition after Britain won the Second World War. And they called for an election, and actually Churchill ended up being defeated. So possibly there could be some parallels there. The point, though, is just that the shakiness brings effectively domestic politics, as in like capital P politics, back

to the country of Israel, which has been totally united on a domestic front. Interestingly enough, this is the only question, is the timing of the so-called hostage mission because, and we're going to get to this, but it really affected Benny Gantz. He originally had the speech on the books for withdrawing the day of the hostage release. He ended up having to cancel his speech, but

That is probably the single most popular thing that Netanyahu has done since what? Since October 7th. Prior to that, the best thing that he possibly could have done for his political future. So this actually does raise the question of maybe he could survive. It's certainly possible. It's going to be a big question of both international politics, how these really people themselves feel about it. And also, don't forget this. But Gantz could still lose. It's very, very possible.

It could be that some Likud successor to Netanyahu or somebody who is like him actually does end up prevailing in an election. None of the baggage, same hardline policy, very, very possible for the future. So right after October 7th, both Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid, who is like the opposition leader, were approached about joining this temporary war cabinet government. And Gantz demanded that the far right, most far right psychos, Motrich and Ben-Gavir, were removed.

They didn't have to be pushed out of government entirely, but they couldn't be part of the war cabinet. And Lapid had a more hardline position of, these guys can't be involved in all, and that's my condition. And Netanyahu said no. And so Yair Lapid remained outside of the war cabinet government.

I read a Horat's analysis that basically, you know, really said Benny Gantz has sort of propped up Netanyahu here, has really given him a legitimacy that he didn't deserve and gave him a sort of grace with the public that allowed him to persist in this role for this long. Now, the counterside of that would be, well, Gantz pressured for, you know,

the original ceasefire deal that led to, you know, very brief pause in hostilities and the release of a certain number of hostages. And perhaps if Gantz hadn't been in the war cabinet, maybe that wouldn't have happened, perhaps. But there were other pressures on Netanyahu at that point as well. So that's some of the Israeli domestic debate. To the extent,

extent that there is a moderate coalition in Israel, they basically feel that Benny Gantz stayed far too long and perhaps shouldn't have ever taken part in this to begin with. So as I mentioned before, and Sagar, you alluded to, we can put this up on the screen. Tony Blinken, our Secretary of State, will arrive in Israel today and meet with Gantz and Netanyahu. The US is also pushing this

supposedly Israeli ceasefire deal that of course now Israel is not willing to actually back some resolution through the UN Security Council. So the US is sort of, you know, working on pushing that through the UN Security Council. There's a lot of questions over it. It appears that the hostage deal isn't really moving anywhere anyway. So I'm seeing all these headlines that are like Benny Gantz leaving the government complicates the hostage ceasefire negotiations. And

I don't really know that that's the case because it doesn't appear that they're actually moving anyway. So if anything, maybe it shakes it up. Maybe it shakes something loose. I don't know. We can put this up on the screen also about the domestic political reaction from significant Israeli political figures. Netanyahu molds dissolving the war cabinet. Ben-Gavir is demanding a seat at the table. We've got Bibi putting out this story.

strange tweet in my opinion. Cryptic doesn't actually mention Benny Gantz, but that's clearly who this is about.

He says, Israel is in an existential war on several fronts. My son, this is not the time to abandon the campaign. This is the time to join forces. Citizens of Israel, we will continue until victory and the achievement of all the goals of the war, primarily the release of all our hostages and the elimination of Hamas. My door will remain open to any Zionist party that is ready to get under the stretcher. And this is, by the way, the Google Translate. So I don't know. The reason it seems weird might be because of the Google Translate.

Cool translation, but anyway, ready to get under the stretcher and assist in bringing victory over our enemies and ensuring the safety of our citizens. We've got opposition leader Yair Lapid saying, Gantz's and Eisenkot's decision to leave the failed government is important and correct.

So this is the primary opposition leader to Netanyahu. Of course, he's very interested in elections sooner rather than later.

And then you have National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gavir. Put this next one up on the screen. He says, as a minister in the government, chairman of a party, and a senior partner in the coalition, I hereby demand to join this cabinet in order to be a partner in determining Israel's security policy in the current times. It's time to make brave decisions. So one of the most psychotic members of the Netanyahu coalition now asking to be included in

in the war cabinet. At the same time, we can put this up on the screen in terms of, I alluded to this before, where we are with the ceasefire negotiations. Washington Post headlines, despite Biden's urging, ceasefire deal shows no progress. As I alluded to before, they're pushing this UN Security Council resolution, whether that gets through, whether that makes a difference.

I don't know, seems kind of unlikely, but they're reporting here, they say more than a week after President Biden declared a decisive moment in the eight-month Israel-Gaza war and beseeched both sides to quickly approve a U.S.-backed ceasefire deal, there is dwindling evidence that I

Neither has bought what he is selling. Despite Biden's personal and very public urging, his dispatch of senior administration officials to the region, the drafting of a new UN Security Council resolution, and the marshalling of allies to join in a chorus of approval, neither Israel nor Hamas appear to have budged on their wide divergence over the proposed roadmap to permanently end the war in Gaza.

Israel's successful rescue of four hostages early Saturday while welcomed to make further complicated administration efforts bolstering Prime Minister Netanyahu's insistence on a full military victory and release of all remaining Hamas-led held hostages before Israel's guns are silenced. So the big divide

divide in terms of a ceasefire is basically Hamas wants the war to end and Israel, Bibi Netanyahu, does not want the war to end. So that has been a fairly unbridgeable divide for some time now. Biden tried to put pressure on through this big speech that he gave and rhetoric effectively. But Sagar once again appears that he is set up for a massive humiliation here because he's unwilling to actually use the tools and leverage that the US government has outside of his own rhetoric, which clearly has been insufficient.

It reminds me a lot of the Obama administration's handling of Syria. It was very similar. It was very haphazard. It was all over the place. They would try and spike ceasefires. They'd try and spike grand bargains. At the same time, we had our own radical, what were they called? Moderate rebel policy. It was just like a

like a failure. But also Assad can't use chemical weapons, but also if he does maybe, but also maybe he didn't. It's just complete incompetence and that really is a lot of the same characters are involved literally Brett McGurk and others who are the ones jet setting Anthony Blinken was in the State Department at that time and they seem to just be recreating that policy. They're banking everything on this ceasefire agreement which neither side particularly seems

like they want to do. And they also are banking everything on this very bizarre Saudi normalization deal. Arguably, that Saudi deal is going to be the most important thing that could come out of this because they're effectively going to give the Saudis an extension of non-NATO major ally status and security guarantee the entire country, which is insane, just so everybody understands.

and change of our policy to the region almost dramatically escalates US involvement and basically ties us to two countries in the Middle East as opposed to just kind of trying to at least to be above the frame. Traditionally is what we always tried to do. We always usually wanted a balance of power approach. Here we would explicitly align ourselves in legal fashion with a single nation and that almost guarantees some sort of confrontation with Iran.

coming down the table. Of course, that's what a lot of people in this town want, so don't put that past them. But there's a lot of very consequential stuff that's happening here. I do think if Netanyahu is replaced, even with somebody like Gantz, look, you may not like the policy whenever it comes to Gaza, but internationally, I do think there would be a major change. And I think some sort of ceasefire or hostage deal seems a lot more likely. Those guys, Netanyahu is basically dead. His future is very uncertain. For them, it's not

the same. You know, they don't have all the baggage of the past. They want to try and, they can see, they're not stupid for what the future looks like for the nation. They want to dig themselves out of that hole. So in a way, I think that against Lapid-led government, anything like that would be a dramatic improvement, you know, for Israeli policy going forward. The difference is,

Again, neither is opposed to the war. Neither has any issue with the, you know, massacres that have been committed and the fact that Gaza has been effectively annihilated, reduced to rubble, the massive number of deaths and civilians who've been killed. None of them have any issue with that.

Netanyahu, though, faces pressure from the far right. I mean, literal terrorists who are in his government. And so he is constantly trying to split the difference between, you know, maintaining some acceptability to the, you know, what is the Israeli mainstream and these, you know, really hard line, I think very fair to say, fascist individuals that are in his government. And so that's where he is pressured. Right.

which is why, you know, you'll hear him say things that can be directly contradictory depending on the time. Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid are more likely to be influenced by the public that's on the side of, we just got to get the hostages out. Yeah, and more like the traditional secular coalition of Israel. Right, exactly. And so there is, and we've covered the polls here. Again, the Israeli public, Israeli Jews have no issue with the hostages

horrors that have been inflicted by the IDF. You have a number who say, hey, they haven't gone far enough. You only have 4% who say they've gone too far. So that's not where the pressure lies. However, we have also seen polling that says there is a clear majority in favor of prioritizing the release of the hostages over this fantasy of complete elimination of Hamas.

And so if you had a Lapid or a Gantz who had more power, they would be pressured more by that public sentiment and public opinion could lead to a different outcome. But I mean, Netanyahu shows no signs of calling new elections. There's no imminent sign that his government is going to collapse and force his hand there. So he's a wily guy. And, you know, with his political life on the line and also, by the way, facing corruption charges that could literally land him in prison. At this point, he seems to be hanging in there.

And he's thinking, hey, you know, as friendly as Biden's been towards me, if I can hang in there through the November elections, Trump will be an even greater buddy to me and go along with whatever I want to do. So I think that's a calculation for him at this point. I wouldn't bet against him. I also think I'd probably give him a 50% chance of survival, but that's a lot less than it has been in the future. We'll see. I don't know.

I mean, things are definitely shaking up there and it will go in two directions. Either they're gonna lose and the center left/center right will take power or he will remain in power by making common cause with much more of the far Israeli right. I mean, both, and that's the thing, let's not diminish it. It will have still major consequences for foreign policy. That latter case I just described takes it, ceasefires, not only off the table, it just won't care anymore. They won't even pretend.

you know, to look at it in terms of West Bank too. There could be a lot of different changes while against government is going to handle that very, very differently going forward and is going to be a lot more receptive to U.S. pressure and like, I guess, public management of Israeli perception in the future with the European Union, with the U.S. So they have a choice and we'll see which way it goes. Yeah, Bibi hasn't really tried to even like put

a reasonable face on the horrors they're inflicting. Whereas Gantz may go to greater lengths to sort of, you know, provide some sort of cover for what they're doing. He could end the war. It's very possible. I mean, you know, in a lot of ways you could look at it like this. They're like, look, the Rafa thing, it's not going to happen. Our partners are broadly like not really with us. We could just sign this ceasefire deal. We call it when, you know, we just move on and then there'll be some, whatever, some humanitarian, the blaming aid trucks, et cetera. It's,

I wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility. Yeah, but none of that's coming anytime soon. No, I don't think it will. Yeah, that's the bottom line.

Also, we get to hang out with all of our old scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. So many people. Even more shocking assassinations from Papa and Mama Pope. And yes, Katie and I's famous teeth pulling scene that kicks off a romance.

And it was Peak TV. This is new scandal content for your eyes, for your ears, for your hearts, for your minds. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for even more behind the scenes. Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life and marriage. I don't think he knew how big it would be, how big the life I was given and live is.

I think he was like, oh, yeah, things come and go. But with me, it never came and went. Is she Donna Martin or a down-and-out divorcee? Is she living in Beverly Hills or a trailer park? In a town where the lines are blurred, Tori is finally going to clear the air in the podcast Misspelling. When a woman has nothing to lose, she has everything to gain. I just filed for divorce. Whoa, I said the words.

that I've said like in my head for like 16 years. Wild. Listen to Misspelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

I'm Angie Martinez. Check out my podcast where I talk to some of the biggest athletes, musicians, actors in the world. We go beyond the headlines and the soundbites to have real conversations about real life, death, love, and everything in between. This life right here, just finding myself, just relaxation, just not feeling stressed, just not feeling pressed. This is what I'm most proud of. I'm proud of Mary because I've been through hell and some horrible things.

That feeling that I had of inadequacy is gone. You're going to die being you. So you got to constantly work on who you are to make sure that the stars align correctly.

Life ain't easy and it's getting harder and harder. So if you have a story to tell, if you've come through some trials, you need to share it because you're going to inspire someone. You're going to give somebody the motivation to not give up, to not quit. Listen to Angie Martinez IRL on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Okay, let's move on to this hostage rescue/massacre that occurred over the weekend. We can put this up on the screen. One woman, this is Noah Argamani, who was captured at that Nova Music Festival. And she really became quite famous because there was some horrifying video of her being captured and taken away. She's crying out for her boyfriend. This is one of the other male hostages who was released.

But as part of this quote-unquote rescue mission, you had just an absolute massacre. One of the deadliest days that we have had in this entire Gaza war. You can see here the rubble. You can see dead bodies. You can see the injured. And reports are that from the health ministry that 274 Palestinians were killed there.

In this effort to rescue the four hostages, we can put this up on the screen from the Financial Times. They have some more details about what occurred. Their headline here, Israel's raid to free hostages takes horrific toll on central Gaza. Hundreds of Palestinians killed and injured in gun battles and bombardment that accompanied the operation.

I'll read you a little bit of this again so you can get some of the details. The raid, which freed those four hostages, was a boost, they write, for Netanyahu's government, which has spent the last week arguing whether to agree to a U.S.-backed plan to end the fighting. But the devastating firepower used by Israeli forces also made June 8th the deadliest day for Gazans in months.

with the enclave's health ministry saying the raid, which was accompanied by gun battles and a fierce bombardment, had killed 274 Palestinians and injured 698. One medical chief described the horrific scenes in his hospital after the raid. The director of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital said they came with horrific injuries.

I also wanted to note from that article, you had the chief Israeli military spokesman, Daniel Hagari,

Because, you know, this is giving credence to those on the Netanyahu side of the equation who say, hey, we don't need a ceasefire, even though that's the way that obviously the largest number of hostages were released by far. And overall, Israel has still killed far more hostages through their military operations than they have rescued. But it's giving credence to this idea of, oh, no, we don't need a ceasefire deal. We can just, you know, we can just do this again and just, you know, massacre hundreds of Palestinians to rescue the rest of the hostages.

But Daniel Higari, even the Israeli military spokesman, rejects that view, saying, we know that we cannot do operations to rescue all of them because the conditions won't allow it. We saw already that what brought the biggest number of hostages home was a deal. There is no argument about that. And so, Sagar, I mean, you know, it's one more instance where it's just very clear in terms of the U.S. political elite, and certainly the Israeli political elite, but

with our own political elite that Palestinian lives just don't count the same way that Israeli lives do. You know, to celebrate this mission and also I think the hostages should be released. You know, I'm happy for these hostages that they are home with their families.

But at the cost of hundreds of Palestinians, this is celebrated as a victory. And, you know, a thousand dead and injured, more that are trapped under the rubble, and this is considered a victory? I mean, it just shows you how grotesque

the immorality around this has become. Look, I think it's a tragedy, but this is a complicated one because this is one where they actually did achieve militarily what they had sought to. Now, listen, I will say this. The US military does not conduct operations this way. They would never have pulled the trigger. The circumstances are a little bit difficult because what happened is that the vast majority of the deaths

occurred after they had stormed the apartment building. And then apparently the vehicle that the Israelis were in broke down. They were getting fired on by RPGs. So they called in air support, basically clear out the road, take the hostages out, take them to the helicopter. I agree. I mean, it's an absolute tragedy the number of civilians killed here. It also was intentionally placed. I just think militarily, this is a very different operation than let's saying

carpet bombing the crap out of a refugee camp and saying, well, we hit a single terrorist. It was genuinely was in support of a rescue like hostage mission. You could see a Western operation like the US, something like this go down in a similar situation where our guys get bogged down, the hostages are there, the vehicle that they're in, you have to call in air support. At that point, it is a matter of life and death. I just think this one is a little bit different. I don't think so.

No, it is very different than bombing a refugee camp. They bombed a crowded marketplace in the middle of the day. Yeah, I mean, their troops were at risk along with their- Nearly 300 Palestinians murdered to rescue four people. You're right. I mean, on the one hand, our military would not have greenlit this operation. On the other hand, we were actually involved in some capacity. According to the New York Times, there was an American role. A team of U.S. hostage recovery officials stationed in Israel assisted in the Israeli military's effort by providing intelligence and other support.

But going back to your comment, I mean, if you had, imagine Omar Badar, I'm taking this from him, he made this comment yesterday, I think it's so important. If you had Hamas massacre close to 300 Israelis to rescue four of their prisoners, by the way, Israel holds thousands of Palestinian hostages.

No one would accept that. No one would accept that. Them going in and massacring kids, women, civilians in a busy, crowded marketplace, taking out entire multi-story apartment buildings,

to get four people, no one would look at that math and say that that's acceptable. So why is it acceptable when it's Israeli? I would flip it around and say, I think you're making a media point. I don't even disagree with you. I mean, obviously people in the media cut like a lot more slack, but I mean, each, any nation group, et cetera, has the ultimate responsibility to look out for its own troops and for its own people. This, in this particular case, their people are at risk. They have- They also have a responsibility to follow the laws of war.

Well, I mean... Listen, Hamas held these hostages in residential areas. That is a war crime. Yes. That does not alleviate the responsibility of Israel or any other nation to take precautions when it comes to civilians.

The fact that Hamas does something wrong doesn't give you a get out of jail free pass. And that's the way that they've acted. That's the entire justification for this entire genocide. They did bad things. They committed war crimes on October 7th. True. So that gives us a green light to do whatever the hell we want to do and not care one bit about Palestinian civilians.

I mean, this was the deadliest day we've seen in Gaza in months. It's wholly unjustifiable, especially given the context that there is a deal on the table to rescue all of the hostages without killing a single Palestinian civilian. So if Bibi Netanyahu and the rest of the military establishment and these far-right goons actually

actually care about the hostages, then they would agree to the ceasefire deal that they supposedly put forward themselves. So it's, no, it's not, it's not justifiable. And they also, let's put this next piece up on the screen. They also, as part of this, disguise combatants in civilian clothing. Um, this is a picture, by the way, this isn't fully verified, but this is the image that was floating around of this, um,

civilian vehicle, aid truck. This is the helicopter that landed right by the quote unquote humanitarian pier. The US is saying, oh no, we had nothing to do with it. We didn't use the pier, et cetera, et cetera. But that helicopter is literally right next to the pier. So you make of that what you will.

But put this next piece up on the screen. This is from Ken Roth. Disguising combatants in civilian clothing to commit hostilities constitutes perfidy. That is a war crime. And this is not from, you know, Palestinian sources, which nobody seems to believe. This is from Israeli news sources. Israel's rescue team reportedly entered the area in a furniture truck driven by a female soldier in civilian clothes. There's a good reason why this is a war crime.

which is, if you're using civilian trucks, if you're using especially humanitarian aid trucks, think of how much danger aid workers have already been in in this conflict. So now you're basically putting an even greater target on their back

Because there's a suspicion now, if you see an aid truck, that it could be IDF soldiers coming in to commit another massacre. So that's why that's considered a war crime. But this is where I just disagree. It's like, well, then all US special operations are, quote unquote,

a war crime. It's ridiculous. I mean, our people have gone in- What are you talking about? Well, you think we haven't sent CIA agents and Delta Force operatives disguised in civilian garb to go smash and grab or rescue our own hostages or rescue Westerners? Of course we have. We've done it many times. In an aid truck is another level of- Okay, sure. Aid truck, yeah, I agree. I wouldn't do it. Obviously, these Israelis are going to be doing different things. But this is what I'm saying about the whole discourse around, quote unquote, war crime, et cetera. A lot of it is just a farce. It's not the way that people actually operate in a military environment. I

- Well, it's clearly not the way they operate in a military environment, but the reason that we have it is so we have language to talk about why it is wrong and why it should be out of bounds.

And so that there is some way to put pressure and not just, oh, well, I mean, they can murder people. So why not? Let's just look the other. I guess it's fine. They got four people. So, you know, killing 300 and injuring another 700, reducing another entire neighborhood to rubble. I guess it's fine because they can do it. No, it's that. Look, at the end of the day, they were also under like a huge amount of fire. This was a very different environment. They're under RPG. So if you want the hostages back, do the ceasefire deal. I agree. You don't have to murder a single pal.

They don't have to be little kids with their limbs blown off and getting amputations with no anesthetic and no mom and no dad. And by the way, a lot of hatred in their hearts and God knows what they're gonna wanna do when they grow up. I agree that I wouldn't operate this way, but I just think this is very, very substantively different than a lot of the corporate bombing operation that we've seen all throughout Gaza, the intentional withholding of humanitarian aid, etc. But are we really gonna say that operators are not to go into a war environment and not be- In humanitarian aid trucks? Yes.

Look, I'm just not gonna say that because given the fact that any US citizen or others who are, if I ever get abducted, do whatever you need in order to get me back. And I think that's how a lot of people feel. Do a ceasefire deal. Sagar, that's the thing. You're pretending like this is the only option, murdering 300 people and injuring 700 others, that that was the only, no. And by the way, guess what? The reports are from the health ministry that other hostages were killed.

including potentially an American citizen. That's possible. Unconfirmed report. Okay, that's not confirmed. But we do know that we had a quote from Israeli hostages, just one of the ones who just released, who was talking to Haaretz, who said, our greatest fear was the idea of bombing that we heard. So don't talk to me about, you know, this is fine.

fine because it got the hostages back. No, if you care about the hostages, do the ceasefire deal. That's what Betty Gantz, who I'm no fan of, that's what he's saying. That's what the Israeli public is demanding. That's what the protests are all about. That's, by the way, even what the Israeli military spokesperson Daniel Higari is saying, like this is not sustainable. The way to get the hostages back isn't to murder little kids. It's to do a ceasefire deal and end this war. So no, I don't think it's excusable. And if you look at the

Look at past historical examples of successful hostage rescue missions. There was a thread that somebody put out online. I wish I had it in front of me, but you'll see like zero civilians killed, maybe three civilians killed, 270 people.

No, it's not proportionate. It's not acceptable, especially again, when there is a deal on the table that could bring all the hostages home and not require a single death. I don't disagree that they should take the ceasefire deal. I agree the US military never would have done this. We have a much higher level of professionalism. Thank God in terms of the people

that we run. Our substantive disagreement is about the idea that you're not allowed to use like military force in the course of a hostage rescue mission, which- Did I say that? No, but- I didn't say that. No, but that's basically what happened. So then how is that the disagreement? But that's what happened. No, 300 people killed is unacceptable.

In the middle of that operation, their car broke down because they were getting RPGs and machine guns fired at them. And they called in air support. The exact same thing that any Western-style military would do in the exact same situation. They provided cover and bombing on the way in and the way out. They did it during the day when there was a busy marketplace there. And that's how so many civilians were murdered. Not to mention, they took out multiple

residential buildings, not just the two that the hostages were being held in. Not to mention, very possible that they killed their own hostages in this operation. So no, we wouldn't have done it. It's not acceptable. We have also committed war crimes. I'm not like excusing us and pretending like we're angels, but I just don't see how you look at this and say this was fine, this was acceptable. I didn't say it was fine. Well, that seems to be what you're arguing. I think it is substantively different than many of the other things that have been committed. But they say the same thing. They said

oh, well, we've gotten the refugee. Well, you got a Hamas baddie, so it's fine. We accomplished our military goal. Yeah, that's obviously ridiculous. How is this different? Because they were in the middle of a rescue operation. It literally is different whenever you have your own troops and civilians or whatever they are. It's insanely disproportionate. Insanely disproportionate. I mean, it's just, it's outrageous to say that it's acceptable to have 300 dead

to rescue four people when you could get them all of the hostages and protect all of the hostages who are again at risk because of the IDF bombing operation without killing a single person. I just, I mean, I just can't agree with this whatsoever. The reason that I'm pushing back, Crystal, is because of exactly like the Ken Roth rhetoric, this idea that, you know, you're never, like you can't dress in civilian garb. I mean, I just think at a certain point, we all need to stop living in a fantasy land.

where everybody is just going to be abiding by the laws of war. - Oh, we're not living in a fantasy. We're living in a nightmare. People in Gaza are living in hell on earth. And so it's disgusting to me that we have US politicians who claim this as a victory when again, if the shoe was on the other foot and it was four Palestinian hostages

who were rescued in an operation that killed hundreds of Israelis, no one would say that was okay. And it wouldn't be okay. I wouldn't say it was okay. But because Palestinians are so dehumanized and considered so inconsequential,

It's just fine to wave your hand as it's fine for it to be collateral damage. Like I said, I think you're arguing against media personalities, which I don't even necessarily disagree with. What I'm saying, and honestly, though, if I was looking at it from a Hamas perspective, I was Palestinian and four of our guys needed to be rescued. And then people were shooting at the people who are going to go rescue them. And you did whatever it took in order to get them out. I'd be like, yeah, I mean, I'm not saying that's a good thing. But if I was in their position, I'd probably do the exact same thing. Most rational nation states and or military groups would do that.

That's not true. You just said that we wouldn't do it. No. You just said we wouldn't do it, Sagar. We would not plan an operation this way. But if we found ourselves in a situation where- Then point to the example where we did something. It's been a long time. Can we do a single example? No. Caleb Mueller, I think, was our last rescue operation. I'm not saying we're perfect, right? We commit war crimes also. I've been very critical. But you can't say any rational nation state would do it and also say we never would have done it. No, I said we wouldn't plan a military operation this way.

But in a similar circumstance, though, if our people were under fire in the middle of a hostage rescue mission, there was no other way to get out. Absolutely, U.S. military would probably pull the trigger in the same way. But you can't point to an example where it's happened. Well, it's been. I mean, it's been. That's what I said. I don't even know the last time I had a major rescue operation. I want to say it was Kayla Mueller with under ice. It was almost, I think, seven, eight years ago since the last time. Now, we've operated in a very different environment. I can't necessarily say

Same thing, I think again, we have a much higher level of professionalism and conduct than the way that they execute military operations. But the disagreement, as I said, is both about the difference in the way that they're quote unquote killing terrorists and terrorizing the population as opposed to a single thing. And my big disagreement is with a lot of this idea

That we're just supposed to conduct military operations in some sort of world where everybody just abides by the laws of war. It's not like they weren't getting shelled, shot at, and bombed by Hamas on their way out, which is what happened. Yeah, I do think that we should avoid war crimes. I think we should avoid massacring- I agree, it would be nice, but it's not gonna happen.

Okay, and by the way, there's a hostage deal on the table. And by the way, this puts hostages further at risk. And by the way, it fuels the hatred that will lead to more terrorism in the future. This was a political play for Bibi Netanyahu

in order to keep his grip on power at the expense of a thousand Palestinians between the dead and the injured. Okay, there was nothing justifiable about it. And I think it is a disgusting worldview that just dismisses this level of quote unquote collateral damage as being acceptable in any context.

We move on. Okay, but this is what I'm saying. You can't just say it's a disgusting worldview. It is. Then there's no operation ever where the right of self-defense or military hostage rescue can happen under this. It's just not- No, that's not true.

That is not true.

I don't live in that world. But even acknowledging the imperfect world we live in, you also have to admit that our military wouldn't have greenlit this operation, that you can't point to another hostage rescue mission that led to hundreds of deaths. And so to pretend like this is all fine and good and just in the normal course of operations, no, this is outrageously outside of

of what the world has looked like and what quote unquote rational nation state actors, including our own very imperfect country has done in the past. No, what again, like I'm just going to reiterate, like it is, it really does come down to what it was going to look like in the context of an

actual military operation whenever you're literally rescuing hostages, a vehicle breaks down. It's like, what are you supposed to do? You're gonna die or you're gonna get your way out. There actually is a zero-sum game whenever it comes down to that exact situation. You are supposed to protect civilians. You are supposed to, if you are a soldier, guess what?

Part of your responsibility is to risk your life to protect civilians. Yeah, I agree with that. Okay, well, that's not what happened here. Okay, so. No, but also. And again, don't green light such a dangerous operation to start with if it's going to potentially lead to hundreds of deaths. And if you care about the hostages, do the ceasefire deal. So I just, on every level, I find it outrageous that this is considered in any way justifiable or acceptable.

Hi, I'm Katie Lowe's. And I'm Guillermo Diaz. And now we're back with another season of our podcast, Unpacking the Toolbox, where Guillermo and I will be rewatching the show. To officially unpack season three of Scandal. Unpredictable. You don't see it coming. It's a wild, wild ride. The twists and turns in season three. Mesmerizing. But also,

Also, we get to hang out with all of our old scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. So many people. Even more shocking assassinations from Papa and Mama Pope. And yes, Katie and I's famous teeth pulling scene that kicks off a romance.

And it was Peak TV. This is new scandal content for your eyes, for your ears, for your hearts, for your minds. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for even more behind the scenes. Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling, as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life and marriage. I don't think he knew how big it would be, how big the life I was given and live is.

I think he was like, oh, yeah, things come and go. But with me, it never came and went. Is she Donna Martin or a down-and-out divorcee? Is she living in Beverly Hills or a trailer park? In a town where the lines are blurred, Tori is finally going to clear the air in the podcast Misspelling. When a woman has nothing to lose, she has everything to gain. I just filed for divorce. Whoa, I said the words. Yeah.

That I've said like in my head for like 16 years. Wild. Listen to Misspelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Cheaters and Backstabbers. I'm Shadi Diaz. And I'm Kate Robards. And we are New York City stand-up comedians and best friends. And we love a good cheating and backstabbing story. Oops.

So this is a series where our guests reveal their most shocking cheating stories. Join us as we learn how to avoid getting our hearts broken or our backs slashed. Listen to Cheaters and Backstabbers on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

I agree that the ceasefire deal should happen and in some ways I think we're almost took past each other. But I guess where I really my major objection comes down to is a lot of the worldview that is put forward, I would say by a progressive left in the context of this conflict just leaves no room for like a military to operate.

And in a military to operate in a manner which I think is quote unquote justifiable, not necessarily saying in this particular instance. What I mean by that is hostage rescues, the ability to conduct war, this idea that you're not supposed to disguise yourself. How can we at this point? I mean, listen, the official number is close to 40,000 dead. We both know it's probably far more than that. It's probably 100,000. When we know that more

bombs have been dropped on Gaza Strip than World War II. The devastation is more extensive than Dresden, right? When we know you have the largest population of child amputees in the world, when we know that starvation has been used as a tool of war, when we know that our political class and the Israeli political class and the entire Israeli society with very few extremely brave exceptions,

so trivializes Palestinian lives that hundreds of Palestinians being murdered to rescue four people is considered acceptable. When we have seen what's happened over all these months, how are you gonna criticize the progressive left or whatever terminology you use for saying that this is unacceptable? Listen, I was never someone who said that there was absolutely no room for any sort of military operation in the wake of October 7th.

But as we've discussed from the beginning, the way they've gone about it from the jump has been unacceptable from their own national security interests and certainly from the interests of respecting any sort of humanitarian and lives of Palestinians. I mean, you have people who are starving to death. You have a famine. You have humanitarian aid that is completely blocked. You have an entire hospital system that is completely decimated.

And so to say it's been unreasonable to object to the way that this war has been conducted, I find that completely outrageous. That's not what I said. What I said is it's unreasonable to expect that it is unreasonable to apply, let's say, the same level of outrage, logic, etc. that we would on a bombing a military or a refugee camp or leveling a building in order to kill one or two people who allegedly may or may not have been there.

as opposed to an operation where the fire was the vast majority of the death, according to the Washington Post and according to the Financial Times, occurred after the hostages were successfully rescued. And their vehicle broke down as a result of Hamas RPGs machine gun fire. And there basically was a zero sum game where they were really gonna die or live and be able to shoot their way out.

That is a very, very different situation. And one in which collateral damage is genuinely a tragedy, but is very, very different. But it's not different. Than how we would have looked at if you had the option to do. But it's not different because, listen, if you buy that logic, that's the same as accepting like, but the refugee camp, yeah, they killed 200, I think. No, and I'll tell you why. No, hold on, let me finish. Because they say, we got two Hamas, it was a legitimate military target. There were two Hamas bad guys, we got those bad guys, collateral damage, etc.

sad, but guess what? It's war. War is hell. In this particular case, they actually did send special operating troops into the ground. Didn't kill that many people on the way in. Allegedly, at least according to the multiple write-ups and other things that I have seen, and that the vast majority of the casualties were suffered after

they actually did what I have been saying they should have been done from the beginning, which is put their own soldiers at risk and grab their hostages in order to get them out. And or if you want to kill a terrorist in a refugee camp, you should do exactly this. You should drop people down on the ground and you should go and kill them and then you should get yourself out. So I think we also need to acknowledge that those reports are coming from what the IDF is saying to

Sure, I mean, what else are we supposed to do? I mean, we have a limited amount of- Listen to Palestinians who are on the ground, who are talking about what happened. Yeah, and they're saying that the vast majority of the deaths came from the air power that came afterwards. So why did they have to decimate multiple apartment buildings that weren't holding hostages? What about that? What about the people who were buried under the rubble in these apartment buildings that had nothing to do with holding hostages? What about the air cover that they provided, quote unquote, air cover that they provided on the way in, which also included-

and bombing. So, I mean, I just, listen, I think we should just move on because we're obviously not gonna agree on this. And, you know, I just, I think it's wholly unacceptable

to think that four hostages, and by the way, other hostages possibly killed and put at risk in exchange for 300 Palestinian lives and another 700 who have been maimed and seriously injured and more reportedly under the rubble.

To think that that's acceptable or justifiable, we're just not going to agree. Okay, we can move on. All right, there was another thing that was put out by Israel claiming that a New York Post wrote this up. This all comes directly from IDF sources claiming that an Al Jazeera journalist

was holding three hostages in his home. This man's name is Abdallah al-Jamal. No one is disputing that he was in fact killed by the IDF along with his family members when his home in Gaza was stormed. The Israeli military, or the Israeli government rather, put out a statement claiming, number one, that he was an Al Jazeera journalist, and number two, that he was holding hostages. As per usual, no evidence of this was offered whatsoever.

So let's put this next piece up on the screen. First, by the way, Israel had claimed that he was holding the woman, Noah, Noah Argamani hostage in his home. Then when it became clear that wasn't the case, they claimed that he was keeping the three male hostages. So the story was shifting.

And there were a lot of inconsistencies here. For one, Abdullah apparently lived in an apartment that was on the first floor in a multi-story building. Israel claimed those hostages were found on the third floor. And it also, you know, they didn't offer any evidence, so this is very much in dispute. It also comes, and we can put this next piece up on the screen, from Israel.

Al Jazeera. They put out a statement saying the ex-account of the Israeli Ministry of Defense and some Israeli websites quoted the name of a Palestinian journalist from Gaza called Abdullah al-Jamal and claimed that he works with Al Jazeera, that his name was linked to what happened in the Israeli army's liberation of four prisoners in the central Gaza Strip on Saturday. Al Jazeera media network confirms that he never worked with the network. He did contribute to an op

So,

It appears like, and this was verified, by the way, by other news outlets, he contributed to an op-ed in 2019. So to call him like an Al Jazeera journalist is a stretch. And anyway, they don't offer any evidence that he had anything to do with holding the hostages. Yeah, this was going everywhere because Jamal,

works for, and maybe you can tell me more about this, for some organization registered here in the US called Palestinian Chronicles, which is a 501c3 organization. So I guess it was up in the air, the question of whether, and by the way, why does any of this matter? Because of a lot of the claims around journalists. And so we wanted to actually break down and to look at it.

I agree based on the circumstances. It does look like they originally claimed that he was holding a certain hostage. And then based on the floor number that they then changed afterwards, it's possible that he lived in the building. The reason why, again, this matters is that I have seen this blown up all over.

the American right and like the pro-Israel right, because now they're going after Palestinian Chronicles 501 tax tax here in the US. But from what it looks like, he did live in the building. Now, I mean, that's not necessarily a good thing, you know, in terms of whether he knew or not, whether these people were being held in the same apartment building as him. But from what they said, their story has changed twice now so far as to whether he lived or whether he was holding these people

or not. They also said that his father was responsible. And that's the part where I'm very confused about from the initial explanation. Well, because the father was also killed in the raid. So, you know, they're just they're

Israel is should offer some evidence if they have evidence to back up these claims then you know at this point They don't deserve the benefit of the doubt in any respect and so the things that are very suspicious is number one the story shifting Right number two the fact that they really tried a time to Al Jazeera Which I mean it's preposterous like I've contributed to some op-ed at some newspaper or sometime in the past and that doesn't make me part of their journalistic staff, right and

given the fact that they've, I mean, they've banned Al Jazeera in Israel and they have tried to paint them as, quote unquote, Hamas. So they were clearly trying to use this guy to further their own propaganda talking points. And then when you have these questions about like the, you know, the floor number he lived on is not the one they claimed that the hostages were being held on, just, you know,

There's a lot of reasons to be very skeptical, I would say, of the claims that they are ultimately making here. Yeah, I'm waiting to see because this actually could turn into a big thing here in the country in terms of congressional investigation. This could basically become the next 501c3 thing. It's one of the reasons we want to get to the bottom of it here on the show.

Hi, I'm Katie Lowes. And I'm Guillermo Diaz. And we're the hosts of Unpacking the Toolbox, the Scandal Rewatch podcast where we're talking about all the best moments of the show. Mesmerizing. But also, we get to hang out with all of our old Scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for an even more behind-the-scenes Scandal.

stories with Unpacking the Toolbox. Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life in marriage. I just filed for divorce. Whoa. I said the words that I've said like in my head for like 16 years.

Listen to Misspelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Angie Martinez, and on my podcast, I like to talk to everyone from Hall of Fame athletes to iconic musicians about getting real on some of the complications and challenges of real life.

I had the best dad and I had the best memories and the greatest experience. And that's all I want for my kids as long as they can have that. Listen to Angie Martinez IRL on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.