01:00 WSJ: The ICC Betrays the Legacy of Nuremberg, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-icc-betrays-the-legacy-of-nuremberg-c44d850f
02:00 How the Gaza genocide will lead to Israel’s collapse, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ly7qO9fGYZA
03:00 A Short History of International Humanitarian Law, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=155471
09:00 Revolutions in International Law: The Legacies of 1917, https://www.amazon.com/Revolutions-International-Law-Legacies-1917/dp/1108495036
24:00 Dooovid joins
24:15 Detroit News: Samantha Woll’s ex-boyfriend: ‘I began to believe that I was responsible for her death’, https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2024/06/17/prosecution-defense-question-samantha-wolls-friend-on-dating-life/74125818007/
26:10 Samantha Woll’s promiscuity included an affair with a married man
45:00 JPost: David Duke, antisemites, Israel-haters find common cause at failed Detroit rally, https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-806611
56:20 The Nuremberg Trials, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vywGZzb9O4M
58:00 Revolutions in International Law: The Legacies of 1917, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=155559
1:01:00 Christian nationalism as niche construction, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=155459
1:10:00 Who determines the winning narrative? https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=155583
1:30:00 The “Good War”: Preparations for a War against Civilians, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=155491
1:36:00 The Genesis of the Civilian, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=155545
Speaker 0: Good I mate? 40 here. Looking at the Wall Street Journal today, an essay from a professor of Tal in New York. And the headline is the Icc, the international Criminal Corp portrays the legacy of N. Afterward world war 2, Jurors understood the law must serve morality today that premise is inverted.
Some lofty concepts here, the author is X z Feldman. Teaches Tal ethics and public policy at Toshiba University. Well, what what exactly is the legacy of N, that’s when Nazis were put on trial after World war 2. And to the extent that the trial was legitimate, then you would see the prosecutors not getting their way in in everything. So is that accurate?
Did the did the prosecutors really fail to get their way in absolutely everything they wanted, including death Penalty for Julius Str, publisher of Discover who didn’t kill anyone. He just wrote some nasty things about jews. Okay. Laura must serve morality. So what is a morality?
It’s our understanding of right wrong. It’s something that we feel even if we broke claim, belief in the the relativity of Moral Stand is we all instinctively feel that some things are right and some things are wrong. And so here’s the example what I find wrong. Right? This is the electronic into father presenting very opposite perspective and what’s happening in Gaza to my own opinion?
Speaker 1: Maybe not this might be the best contribution that I can make to this conversation. But, I I do think that there is a generational thing because Zion means different things with different people and it’s especially when we’re talking about the generation of my parents. Let’s say, the generation, that remembers the war of 19 73, which started on 10/06/1973, 50 years in 1 day before the October seventh attack, which was a trauma for Israeli society, and it created a crisis about 3000 Israelis were killed in that war, And so so, , this is something that has shaped this israeli society very deeply. And their understanding of what Zion means. Is that if you believe in a future.
And if you think about it plans of how to recover from a crisis, then it is possible to to salvage the cellular colony, lean to salvage system. And to rebuild it even from a deep crisis. At now…
Speaker 0: Okay. That has absolutely nothing to do with zion is, zion is just Jewish nationalism. With a particular meaning that Jews will return to the land of their homeland. So talking about Israel as a set locality that’s just imposing some ideological lens on top of reality, I don’t say why it’s helpful, but what the heck?
Speaker 1: Now we are saying seeing the same people of that generation. Which are saying, well, there… Without a strategy about a plan, there is not going to be any rebuilding of a set economy. Then it’s it’s over. But they’re not the generation, which is calling the shots anymore.
So most of these people are are pension. And and by the way, these are also the people that we see in demonstrations. So when when Western media likes to say, look at the vibrant democratic forces in Israel, which are posing Netanyahu and going to the.
Speaker 0: Soldiers. So want to live, including Jews in Israel and zion is just 1 ideological expression of this human desire. I wanna live, I want to engage in niche construction. Right? Just like every other living thing.
Right? All all forms of life act on the environment. They don’t just passively accept the environment, but they start acting on it to shift the environment to shift that niche into a space that’s more conducive to their own thriving. And Christians do this. Jews do this.
Black people do this. Palestinians do this, like we we all have a desire to shift the environment around us to make it more conducive for around thriving. So why would Christians? Why would Jews, where would arrows, Where would Palestinians not act like other forms of life. At Way Christians or or Jews be more passive than earth worms, laminate, beaver and the cocoa.
Right? These are all organisms who act on the environment to make it more conducive to their own thriving. So why would Jews not do this, 1 expression of Jews acting on their environment, gets the ideological name, zion, but that’s just a fancy ideological term, for a desire to live. And I I would assume that Palestinians have a desire to live and to thrive, and they they can call call that… I don’t know the ideology for for the the Palestinian dream of thriving.
But I’m sure it’s got some fancy name
Speaker 1: iterations. These are people in their mid seventies. So the the younger generation, this is third generation of cell colonists, which have been raised to believe that, they have all these privileges because they were destined to have them. And they
Speaker 0: So strong ideological left wing sla here it assumes that that people should naturally just emerge out of the ground, but Nobody emerges out of the ground. Right? Every people that has control of a particular land and has been enough to e a state has done it by conquering other people. Right? Everybody comes from somewhere.
Nobody comes straight out of the ground. So the Palestinians came from somewhere, the the Jews came from somewhere. I I don’t believe that any people has an inherent right to any particular land. You get the land that you’re able to defend and protect and you’re able to arm yourself so that you’re stronger than your adversaries you want to overthrow you. So I don’t care about anyone ce to Israel’s right to exist or pallet right to exist or America’s right to exist.
The ad has absolutely no meaning to me. I don’t think it in terms of rights. That which you’re able to establish and defend that is yours, until someone much stronger, more effective comes along.
Speaker 1: Don’t have to fight for them anymore, and this is just something that, they’re entitled to. And that mindset is completely incompatible with a crisis. And Netanyahu has always kept…
Speaker 0: Well, most people feel entitled to a great deal of things in life. Right? If If employees could get away with it, they would feel entitled to do a lot less work or a lot more money. And to do more of what they want less of what they don’t want. If employers were able to get away with it, they would get their employees to do a lot more work for a lot less money.
If men were able to get their desire satisfied. Right? They would feel entitled to a lot more sex that they’re having currently. If women were able to have their, desire satisfied. Right?
They would be provided for and protected without having to provide sex unless they were happen to be in the mood for it.
Speaker 1: Cap on that kind of on this generational thinking by saying, why should we make sacrifices it So why should we pay high taxes or or tighten the belt in times of prices. We should just take whatever we can. We should just get whatever we want. And this… So also means that now, the soldiers are acting without any discipline.
Soldiers are just running them mock. But also that that nobody believes that the government has any plan, and and that certainly contributes to the sense of of the despair.
Speaker 2: Sure, we’re going to shift now to the economic front, which is your expertise, but your inside yourself…
Speaker 0: So the foundation for me playing access from this… Show is that you often you get much more clarity from your enemy than from your friends. And so what will determine israel’s jail ability to thrive. It will be substantially because its economy thrive, and it will be substantially because it’s military thrive and the military can’t thrive without the economy thriving in Israel’s in trouble. Right?
So the electronic into father here, the voice of the the Palestinian people has the headline how the gaza genocide will lead to Israel’s collapsed. 500000 Israelis have left Israel’s since October 7, Israel’s economy is under great strain. Morale in Israel has plunged over the past few months. That that doesn’t seem to be… Competent political leadership in Israel.
So israel going through a tough time, and understandably, as enemies are re.
Speaker 2: Fascinating. So I want to just put 1 more thing to you, it seems to me that when you talk about that spirit of sacrifice, , for Palestinians, of course, every Israeli leader from the beginning of Zion ism is is a war criminal by the virtue of the the acts they’ve committed. So whether you take Ben or a Y or Shi perez, these were.
Speaker 0: Alright. This is key. Alright. That every Israeli leader is a a war criminal. Alright?
Just shows you how the term war criminal and crimes against humanity has almost no objective meaning. Right. The the the leaders of Israel want Jews to be off to live in a land in which there’s been no other independent state, but a jewish state in the last 2500 years.
Speaker 2: The the founding generation of Israel, the prime ministers, even if we say these were war criminals and committed ethnic cleansing had genocidal intent towards the Palestinians. You can say…
Speaker 0: So how many states began without ethnic cleansing? And if the only 1 that upsets you is the Jewish state, then then why? Right? Most states begin with ethnic cleansing. You cannot have a civilization.
Without creating barriers. Because otherwise, you start creating something good and free loader will come along and suck off your tent And so Pakistan was created by ethnic cleansing. India was created by ethnic cleansing. Bangladesh was created by ethnic cleansing. United States of America was created by ethnic cleansing.
Right? The the pro England settlers largely moved out of the… Founding states of the United States of America. They were cleansed.
Speaker 2: Hey. I mean, e even take a monster like Ariel Sharon, who who…
Speaker 0: Right. And so 1 person’s monster is another person’s hero. Right? Aria Shah, fought for the Jewish people deeply flawed individual? Often and wrong, often right if you’re looking at him from a pro Israel perspective.
He’s caught a monster because he was so effective. Or the Jewish people against their enemies?
Speaker 2: Per the the invasion of Lebanon in 19 80 to the Sa M because do you think it’s true to say that
Speaker 0: Alright. This idea that Aria Wrote per the subreddit and Shit, Mask… These were massacres by Nun jewish Christian Phil in Lebanon, against muslims. Right, No Jews participated in these massacres, but this this electronic in into nevada wants to to push completely actually false line that Aria Sharon was responsible for what non Jews did to non jews.
Speaker 2: Those that generation were committed to something bigger than themselves in a way that the current generation and not. I mean, they had a they had a spirit that created this this this state. Is that a distinction that’s worth making? And is it significant?
Speaker 0: It’s not easy to perpetuate a people that sacrifices? To to the degree that the founders of the modern state of Israel sacrificed. Right? Soon, these relationships between the individual and the state will become more transactional. Right?
So it it’s not unusual. That many of the founders of the Jewish state were more willing to sacrifice on behalf of something greater than themselves than their grandchildren.
Speaker 2: Thick in terms of the future of this this, this entity.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, first of all, it’s not just Palestinians that consider these people to be work criminals. They are work criminals those This is a fact. They they have committed work right.
Speaker 0: Right. The it’s it’s not not a fact. It’s highly dubious because the hulk, realm of international humanitarian law or the laws of war or international criminal law, it’s frequently contested. It’s it’s quite young. Right?
It’s only become popular since the late 19 nineties, and If you have to say, this is absolutely a fact. It’s not contested, you’re only saying that because in fact, it is contested and you’re w against reality.
Speaker 1: But I do agree with you that there is a difference between the Ben Sharon Serbian palaces of of the past. And the ben views and smart is, or a gall of of the present.
Speaker 0: And, yeah. 1 difference between them is that they… Are operating in a different context. And so you change the situation. Right, you’re gonna change how people operate.
Right change the situation, you’ll change people. Right. Back to the subject topic about the international criminal court betray N. There’s a dangerous Irony in the international criminal courts efforts to prosecutors israeli leaders regarding the Gaza wall with potentially far reaching ramifications. Courts mandate is the continuation of the N trials.
President Harry Truman accredited the N trials with the ab blazing of new trail in international justice. There will be long remembered if for serving faithfully and well the cause of civilization, and world peace. The actions of today’s Icc, the exact opposite and threatened to undo N legacy really? So the actions of today’s international criminal court are the actions of certain interested actors, pursuing an agenda. And arguing for their own righteousness and for the wicked of their enemies, which sounds to me very similar to how N operated.
Right? N was essentially a show trial for liberal. You heard of Stalin’s show trials where stalin’s enemies will will put on trial or found guilty, but these trials were made public. Right? Stalin wanted to show the world what happened if he he didn’t like you.
And so Stalin was able to orchestrate a whole series of trials just for the purpose of making certain people look bad. Well, There wasn’t much legal precedent for what the N trials did. And as the prosecutor at N got everything they wanted, Right, these were essentially sure trials. So Amanda Alexander, who’s my my new favorite scholar. She is a…
Senior lecturer at Australian Catholic University at the Thomas Moore law school And she’s just got some great work here on the N trials and on international humanitarian and law in general, the development of the whole category of the civilian, big fan of of hers. So she contributes the to a book that came out recently. Revolutions in international law, the legacies of 19 17. So the N book trials Oh, a great deal more to the thought of Lennon, and his anti colonialism, anti imperial agenda. Than they really do to liberal and to western ideals.
So wasn’t just the Soviet leaders of the N burke trials who pushed Lennon agenda, But also, the western is carrying out the N trials, they were pushing forward the communist agenda of of Vladimir, Lennon. That that’s why the N trials are so weird. So the N trial stand as a pivotal moment in any history of international law. Humanitarian law, international criminal law and international human rights. So human rights only became widely known in the 19 seventies as something that exists outside of the nation’s state, when all sorts of disillusioned marxist, but looking for a Utopian cause that enabled them to feel amazingly righteous and it didn’t matter to them if it made any different in the real world.
So international humanitarian law, really only got going in the 19 seventies became popular in the late 19 nineties. So it’s 1 key reason why Israel’s War in Gaza is attracting so much legal attention and there’s so much discussion of war crimes. And violations of international law, violation of international humanitarian and law violation of human rights, is because we have an explosion of experts in these fields, and they need a way to distinguish themselves. They need a way to stand out They need a way to make the case for funding them for giving them status in prestige and power and money, and they need jobs. And so there’s no better way to make the case for experts in genocide, experts in human rights, then to say, hey, there’s a genocide hot new genocide going on right now, going on in gaza, It’s the Jewish state, which is formed out of the holocaust and now they’re carrying out a a homicide and genocide against the the Palestinians.
And therefore, implicitly, you need to fund us, you need to give a status and prestige. And what what marks someone as an expert in general. Right? An expert is someone who other experts in that field say is an expert. Right?
If you got real expertise, then you got something that ordinary people don’t have. On people have no ability to judge whether or not you’re an expert, but the mainstream media and the way the world works in the courts, work is that if other experts in your field say your an expert, then you’re an expert. And so all these experts in these different areas They are strongly incentivized to scratch each other’s back and to form a common cause to make the case for their status for their prestige for their jobs. A way they should be published in the New York times in way they they deserve money. And so you have all these human rights text experts fighting right now to stand out with regard to Gaza because this is the hot new opportunity to make the case that they are important.
So you’ve got crimes against humanity. This is the first time that crimes against humanity was brought into international law. So the the Nazis at N will put on trial for things for which there was no preceding legal framework. Right? The the laws were invented to convict and execute the nazis.
And Rabbi Feldman, here in the Wall Street Journal says this is this is awesome. Right? Because we we’re using law now to prosecute morality. Now, many of the defendants insisted, well, how come the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of billions of innocent people who are killed by allied bombs Right? How come none of the allies get prosecutor.
Right? The nerve trials, any but the nazis and their acc on trial. None of the vectors were put on trial. So if the Nazis had put on the equivalent of the N trials, then many of the Americans and the British who organized the the mass bombing of Japan and Germany would have been put on trial for the equivalent of crimes against humanity. Now, the people putting on the N book trials had had an answer, and they said, well, The allies were bombing dresden for tactical purposes.
And it’s inevitable that non military people get killed, just unavoidable part of of of a battle, but there wasn’t a strong tactical reason to Bomb Dresden. So if if the organizers of the the dresden bombing were were put on trial. Alright? They would very likely have been found absolutely guilty because they weren’t strong tactical reasons for this mass slaughter of German and Japanese civilians. So the the pro allies argument is…
Well, the Nazis committed their ax so that millions would die. The allies killed millions so that millions more wouldn’t die. So the rabbi says war must be judged consequential, meaning the ant have to be allowed to justify the means. There there are many ways to to judge a war. In the pile analysis oral all stuck in an I cage together.
Nobody is coming to rescue us. So the N trials contain another lesson. Some thought it violated the rule of law to try defenders f that weren’t crimes when they were committed. Yeah. In any ordinary sense of law that is a violation of the rule of law to try defenders for crimes that weren’t crimes when they were committed.
But because people were outraged and they were winning and a won, then they decide what law must serve morality, our morality is being violated. And so now we must punish the greatest atrocity you with the twentieth century. Now, there’s no inherent reason that the holocaust, for example, was the greatest atrocity of the 20 century. You can make the case of many other atrocities. And according to the rabbi, the alternatives were leaving the greatest atrocity of the twentieth century un unpublished.
No. That wasn’t an alternative. You can still punish, but N was done in a way that gave it the appearance of the working out of the legal process. Or you could punish people without regard to fairness and process? Well, were the defendants in the N book trials really afforded fairness and process?
And so Rabbi Feldman be whales the current efforts in the international criminal court to prosecute Israel. But both the N trials and what’s going on now with the international Criminal corps to prosecute Israel are both examples of the same thing. You’ve got interested actors pursuing a particular agenda and appealing for world of of being on the side of the angels of being on the side of the good and advancing their own particular interests using global rhetoric. Okay. I will send I will send an invite to David here.
Let’s get a little more.
Speaker 1: Because those of the past they they in Na. Ethnic cleansing. They they hoped that this would be a sustainable ethnic cleansing. I’m sure, , the the famous quote by Ben About the, the the old will die and the angle forget. But the which which is not realistic, but it was a planet at.
It was a hope for for him and and for his generation. And also for the generation of of Robin who orchestrate orchestrated the whole Oslo agreements as a way to create a sustainable ongoing
Speaker 0: The Jewish state of Israel was created in part through ethnic cleansing just like almost every other state in the world today. Okay. Let’s get David back on the show. Du, what’s going on? The Samantha Wall.
Trial. She was a synagogue president, attractive young woman, influential in politics who was murdered at her home, what what… What’s going on with that trial into Detroit, David.
Speaker 3: Bombshell today like, bombshell, like, , straight to Hollywood, and your question the narrative of the prosecution. Like, what the hell is the prosecution doing bringing these witnesses, because the evidence against the the African American Blond is extremely ci substantial. Just that he was seen in the neighborhood, and cell phone data that only puts them in a, like, a tenth of a mile for apartment but eventually, they got a subpoena and they checked his jacket and bag and had a tiny bit of blood. But I’m obviously blood on his jacket is a pretty good, evidence, but, , so it’s turned out that they released the evidence of the first person who was arrested. Who happens to be your ex boyfriend and and god forbid happens to be someone knew.
And and he was on the stand today, for the prosecution, of, which is just, like mind boggling. What does this guy have to do if the prosecution, and finish this so quickly to get to the bombshell. But, maybe mean, presumably, the defense is saying, like, it’s not my client. Like, maybe he saw her body on this… Street and touched in that explains the blood.
There’s absolutely no evidence that he was ever in our apartment. There’s no motive for murder, nothing was stolen, it’s a crime of passion stabbing, that’s clearly probably something from a romantic and entangled. And, her ex boyfriend had confessed to the murder before, so that got released like, last week an opening statement in the last week’s testimony was kinda like boring… Bureaucratic stuff and the prosecution just said they were gonna go in order of, like, , the crime scene, the blood, the alarm company, so on and so on. , so today, they called 3 3 ex boyfriends of hers, and god forbid, like, she has this, like, friend for 20 years male who might get…
Like, he sounded gay. And, like, he was, like, her girlfriend type like, boyfriend. I guess, like, you, sometimes girls have a very close who’s, like, a gay male. That they talk girl type stuff. And he went into explicit detail, and it turns out God forbid God forbid Samantha What was, like, prom, and she was, like, having a affair with a married man.
She was having, sexual relations with, like, multiple people at the same time. And had, like, multiple ex boyfriends. And so that was, like, the bombshell, , you, like, understand today that… I mean, it’s not necessarily surprising although, you, like, I didn’t necessarily know, Like she led services. She seemed kind of conservative and, like, , maybe relatively for, like, Detroit.
It’s not that prom. And suddenly the 2 things like, what the hell is the prosecution thinking, calling this witness up on the understand? How did this possibly benefit their case? Against the random black guy who they say was robbing in the neighborhood and killed her. And and then you’re just airing this dirty laundry to, like, , the whole world on public Tv core trial where where, like, , her friend is just talking about all their ex boyfriends.
And, like, just publicly admitting that she was, like, , God forbid having sex with, like, multiple people. And then, like, it turns out like, Gap because, like, I knew some of these names. Like, there they there was the guy who was supposed to meet her that night who was supposed to come to her apartment that night And, like, God forbid I knew that guy very well. I’m not, like, friendly with them, but I I sat next to his dad in young israel. , like, I sat next to unsure a hundred times.
And and and, like, supposedly, he was, like, 1 of her ex boyfriends, and he was actually supposed to be there in the apartment that night, there’s text messages. And, , so it’s was really seeming, like, you, they’re… And and then, like, her 1 ex boyfriend had this nervous breakdown called the police and turned himself in, telling them that he thinks he murdered Samantha Wall. And then they played the video tape today. I mean, the the sound recording, the police call where he’s, like, having some serious panic attack like it.
I mean, like, I knew the guy, Like, besides for the fact that, , maybe he killed samantha wall. I felt bad for the guy, especially like, it’s public Tv and everyone is hearing his embarrassment. But he’s having the severe panic attack and, like, he can’t breathe. He’s pant, and he’s like, , got, , calling the police He’s like, he needs help. He needs to be…
And and, , maybe we’ll hear more tomorrow, but it appears that now they’re claiming like he was on some anti depress and I could look up the name if you care, but he had, like, a hall agent. And afterwards, he’s absolutely didn’t come kill samantha wall, and he, , had some bad, on his new anti depress, and he got a lawyer in a psychiatrist. And now he’s claiming, like, no way he did it. However, he has no ali by. Like, , he says he just went home that night at 08:00.
And woke up the next morning. And so he actually has no ali by, and then, , the guy before who was testifying was, like, what we was, like, she was, , like, her gay friend, was, like, telling, , the the whole world that he’s, like, he never liked this guy. He was trying to convince Sam to dump them. And, like, she he her her gay friend was, like, telling Samantha to have sexual relationship with a married man in order to forget this… Ex boyfriend who used to lead services of the Downtown Synagogue o’clock.
So, like, the defense attorney tomorrow morning 09:00 is gonna cross examine of, the boyfriend and the cross examination of, , her gay friend was, like… I mean, it was, like, a, you, like, a daytime soap rapper, because he was, like, for half an hour, asking her friend about man sexual habits. And this guy was… Like, it was funny because, like, I mean, funny is not the right word. God forbid, god for forbid God for forbid.
You Samantha will family and parents and everyone sitting there. And they probably never heard this stuff and and he’s just, like, casually talking about, , samantha sexual habits.
Speaker 0: Right. 1 of the things that makes crime stories so compelling is that they rip aside the polite facade that we present to the world And so we get to see people perhaps as as they really were in in all their complexity without the… The public presentation. Is there anything special or unique about the detroit Jewish community. Is there anything different about it compared to other Jewish communities?
Speaker 3: Well, in in in in certain ways, it’s very similar to Baltimore, Chicago, that there isn’t really a detroit Jewish community because there were, , Riots, and the former Jewish community, completely can’t cleared out and move to the suburbs, and then even the majority of the non ortho community move further into the suburbs. So the orthodox community is basically completely in a African American neighborhood. You, like, a you like, 75 percent of the non Jewish people who live in the Jewish area today are black in in the orthodox area, and where the Orthodox jews live 30, 40 years ago, let alone a hundred years ago, that is a hundred percent black now. So you’re the downtown Synagogue and this is also not necessarily unique to detroit. There’s some similarities across the nation is you’re part, like, the new organization, a gen occasion where you have the kids of Jews.
I mean, there’s also the Detroit Jewish community a dying aging community where, most of you, because the Orthodox represent only, like, 05:10 percent of the larger Jewish community, and the reform community, a lot of inner marriage are not having many children, and the children that they did have, you’re due to lack of economic opportunity or, , living in African American neighborhoods have chosen to try their luck someplace else. But of some of the element of the people who stayed in Detroit, like including me, was an attempt, to go back into Detroit Proper, not just like the Jewish suburbs that we grew up in, but after going back to University to try to live in Detroit So Samantha Will, , if you talk about her is you, like, someone who grew up in Detroit went to tap the suburban schools that went to a Jewish day school. Had even, like Orthodox family, but became, like a liberal feminist and then decided and instead of , having a more traditional Jewish life, getting married and building up a family in the suburb that she would you you’ll, try to make her way in the city.
And , so she became a leader of people who did that, and there’s only hundreds of people who did that. And there’s probably even somewhat parallels in La of that. However, it’s not the same, like, it it’d be more comparable to something like Baltimore because, , it’s not like, there’s no Hispanics really it’s basic the just blacks?
Speaker 0: So she deliberately moved to a overwhelmingly black neighborhood. The
Speaker 3: it appears that she found, like, an apartment condominium that was probably half. So she found, like a tiny gen packet that, you, maybe in that area, there’s a few thousand white people who live and is only, like, 40 per… In is, like, 40 50 percent black. , so just a tiny gen pocket.
Speaker 0: But it’s for, like, 10 blocks around, the population would be 90 percent black.
Speaker 3: Yes. Mean, going, like… A quarter mile away be 90 percent black. So it’s just like a small gen fight pocket. And it was actually relatively nice.
Although they didn’t have nice security. There’s no , that’s why it’s been so difficult to catch the person because they didn’t have any, like, cameras, they had, like some, like, patrol security, but not much. And you basically… It would appear the early investigation, especially because, like, now you’re, like, I’m just finding this information out now 8 months later. But it would appear that you’ll…
The police spoke to this, her friend the day after, and her friend gave her, like, your whole list of ex boyfriends. And, like, in saying, like, well is there anyone that might want might have wanted to harm Samantha Wool, and especially the nature of being a stabbing crime that, , they went into the details, they didn’t show the pictures, but they went into the details of , exactly how she was killed. And so her friends, like, we’ll well, like and gave her god forbid, like a list of, like, at least, like, I think 5 ex boyfriends, and he was explicit, like, who she was having sex with. And then and then, he… The, , the defense attorney was even, like, you, he had the video.
So he was, like, , he he he started to ask questions that, , about, like, , sexual relations, and then he was, like, and and they called another ex boyfriend of hers who had, like, a Yam. He was like, a orthodox jew dentist who was divorced, modern orthodox bradley, and has, like, 4 children. And you god forbid, , because, you, Per and they had the police tape, you, like, the defense attorneys like, asking about his sexual relationship with Samantha Wolff and, like, he didn’t wanna answer, but he’s under oath, and then, like, , he gave an answer. That was a little bit different. In the defense attorney, like, played the video of him saying something, , like, the exact…
, god forbid. So it was like a soap opera today, which I I guess it’s not surprising, but, , I just thought there was 1 ex boyfriend that, , like, that came out the beginning of the case. And, he had a nervous breakdown and confessed, but the police, you decide to give him some sort of immunity and not press charges, although a lot of people thinks it’s him. But, like, now it turns out that she has, like, 5 ex boyfriends that all had access to the apartment and could’ve have, , reasonably been the 1 who killed her.
Speaker 0: And honestly understand. Go.
Speaker 3: I don’t think the black guy I did it. Like, I I’m just looking at the evidence because, like, the stop of the type frame you, just, like so many ips, like, , the the the prosecution case, it’s just, like, this is why you lock your doors. And, , just a random guy breaking into cars, who was on the street and, like, , saying well, you, so now they’re claiming, like, she left her door unlocked. And and so just, like kinda random. This guy got lucky, he was testing doors and hers was open, and then he came in.
And then, like, there’s, like, , apparently, a a multi room struggle. And there’s not really a clear narrative. Like, how does the guy breaking in lead to stabbing her a bunch of times. , so really the only evidence they have, is that he was in the area, and, , tiny bit of blood. So the blood have a good question.
In the defense, , the the possibility that he… The defendant, , might claim that he saw her body on the street and touched it but then also, there’s the question the time frame. So it appears that they change the time frame, the initial, you, that initially they thought that she died like, about 01:30. And now they’re claiming she died at 04:00 because that corresponds when the random, black, , guy breaking into cars was in the neighborhood. So, I mean, it’s very difficult to think that it’s really this black guy who who did it, even though he’s the 1 being tried and who’s been in prison for 6 months now.
And, like, now it’s just turning out that, , she was prom and was having multiple, sexual relationships with different people, including a married man who all had access to our apartment.
Speaker 0: So the the the defendant does he have a history of violent crime?
Speaker 3: I’m not sure. He was in prison for, like, 5 years. Oh, okay.
Speaker 0: But sounds pretty.
Speaker 3: Not if it was for something violent, though. And and they’re claiming, like, he’s just a low level car thief. So he’s saying, like, a low level Car thief. Maybe he’s also breaking into apartments, and then somehow, he ends up stabbing her to death. I mean, it’s possible.
But I’m not sure that’s, like, , if you look at it, there’s in in Metro detroit, there’s not that many black on white crimes, and there’s not that many stabbing deaths. So you’re just in that, you like, you were think, there’s a lot of black crime. There’s a lot of black theft. There’s a lot of black on black crime. But there’s not necessarily that much black on white cream, and there’s not that many stabbing deaths.
Speaker 0: Now. She would leave her door open. They’re unlocked. She’d leave her her door unlocked.
Speaker 3: That’s on here. So the the defense… I mean, the prosecution, so I mean, 1 question is, like, why the hell of the prosecution even call these witnesses? Why is the prosecution calling her ex boyfriends? And so the diff…
, if the… If the only reason they’re doing it is to try to preemptively stop the defense from claiming that maybe was 1 of the boyfriends or to establish that she used to leave the door unlocked. And that was 1 of the things where the dentist who , , said that she left… Used to leave the door unlocked and then, , the defense will, did she leave the door on Lac or she left it on unlocked for you because she knew you were coming? And if Samantha had the door on unlocked?
Friday night. It wasn’t because she typically leaves the door door unlocked. It’s because 1 of her male friends was planning on coming over, and he actually gave a name. The defense attorney actually said that there’s a text message and plans. And I’m…
, god forbid. This is the guy. I know pretty well. Like I sat next to him in sure. Like, you like, like God forbid.
And you, so I don’t know I don’t know if the defense has the ability to… Prosecute other people, like, if the defense could call her ex boyfriend to the stand or if the prosecution is gonna call her ex boyfriend to the stand, And, like, to me and the legal observers, it would just seem nonsensical, how does it help the prosecution case to call our ex boyfriends to the stand? So it was just completely mind boggling to, , to a lot of people watching it, what’s going on of, the revelation of the information. , even thinking, like, everybody thought it was anti semitic. And now you’re thinking, like, okay, she’s in some sort of love triangle and go, and she’s having relations with multiple men at the same time, and it’s possible that 1 of these jealous boyfriends killed her.
Of that, , the defense is gonna try to argue. And if that’s the case, why is the prosecution opening the door by calling her boyfriends to the stand in the first place?
Speaker 0: So she was a Synagogue president and she was politically active So Synagogue president is not not a powerful position. It’s it’s a position of fairly hu service. But what was her wider role in the community? I assumed that she she pushed a, a liberal, inclusive civil rights friendly brand of politics.
Speaker 3: Yeah. So I mean, she was a smart woman. She graduated from University of Michigan. I’m not sure what program. I know she had worked in, like, management at a dental surgery company.
So, mean, she’d been able to find relatively decent employment and just you the type of employment that’s available in detroit. And then she got into Democratic political activist. Although she was kinda like a Biden mainstream Democrat. Like, of, the other type liberal Jews in the area that tend to be progressive. She was not a full progressive.
She was more , call, like, a corporate Biden Democrat. And she was, , actually, I think the highest ranking person in the Democratic party in Michigan, she had been, like, the training person for Hillary Clinton where she would give the seminars like, how to knock on doors or campaign, She had overseeing the campaign of this Indian woman, and then she had overseeing the campaign of Eliza Sla who won Congress woman. And now was running for a state senator, and Slack even hired her to be chief and staff, and she’d lived in lansing for a year or 2, she’d had work for Dana and Nestle, the Lesbian , attorney general of Michigan. So I mean, she’s very, like, Pro choice. But I’m not…
I wouldn’t call her quite progressive, Like, she was a little bit more conservative democrat than the other Liberal Jews in the city. , hence she was moving up the rank. And and I think she had just got employment with some democratic organization. They mentioned it during the trial. But I’d never heard of, During that…
And that was a paid position.
Speaker 0: Okay. And was there something else… With, what, A pac America first convention that was in town recently.
Speaker 3: Yeah. It’s… Like, I… I just… , I saw you streaming and I I just wanted to get it off my chest because, like, I was just mind blown that, like, I mean, 1 thing because, like, under normal circumstance, like, I would be not be privy to , the sexual relations of, like, a prime Jewish woman, But you, just the nature of this case that for whatever reason, like, her friend was on the stand, and, like, for an hour just talking about her sexual relations.
Know, I was just kinda mind blowing by that. So I appreciate you that he letting me, , share that. But… Yeah, the big news. So And and I’m surprised that the Samantha wool case, , like Gl saying of the chad.
It’s not really been national news. Even in Metro Detroit, there’s only a few articles about it, , I guess, the national news was because they thought it was anti semitism, So if it’s just a random black guy or even if it was 1 of her Jealous boyfriends, that’s not that big of a story. But, yeah, F packed, your, turning point, Tpu usa, Trump was in Detroit this weekend. But So, , like, the Charlie Kirk, I think they called the People’s convention or people’s forum was Friday through Sunday. Opening up with candace zones ironically, know, with all the , a ben shapiro stuff.
But Charlie Kurt still. , she… After him, she was the opening speech, Trump came, and, , he was the keynote. Saturday night, and he also visited, like, a black church in Detroit, and, you, he gave kind of, like, a little bit of his own speech, but also did, like, a listening session. So for, like, 30 minutes, Trump just sat there and listen to, your, black Detroit talk about their concerns.
But, you, the major news from, , that you might be interested in was that, your, f pat 4 Nicholas fu has decided to hold his f pack in Detroit. And so you, I guess they always do it counter to Cpa pack or the turning point, So on Friday, fu shows up, , with his entourage that, you, actually, like he’s got a pretty interesting entourage. So like, this guy Jake Shields, I’m not sure if you heard him, like a Usc fighter, who has been making controversial statements, but most notably being anti Israel. You, was like, in his entourage in, like Sn and and Lucas Gauge and But so he goes to turning point, you you on Friday and, eventually, they asking him for his Id and then security escort amount. And he gives a little speech outside, and it’s, like, , viral on, , the wing of, like, the alt outright Twitter spear.
And then Saturday supposed to be A pack. And I’d almost thought of going down there. But you have to pay, like, 200 bucks. It’s like, I, you, like, there’s a few people, like, I wouldn’t mind meeting. You’re, like, a few streamers that, like, even, like Keith woods, even Lucas Gauge.
Like, I, like, I didn’t go down in, like, meet Lucas Gauge, but, you, it was 200 dollars and you… Because they can’t get regular payment. You had to do some sort of, like, pay an either crypto or do, like, a ec check, which mean you had to give, like, your banking information? And it’s just a little skeptical Like, do I really wanna give Like my bank routing number? And so I I didn’t do it.
And then Saturday about 05:00, an email goes out, A pack is canceled. And so it turns out that it was at this place called the Russell industrial Center, which happens to be like, a former , Detroit abandoned city. So like, a former industrial center that was changed over to different venues, I guess, including, banquet hall. And it turns out they already knew Friday, but they didn’t announce it till Saturday at 05:00 because they were, you’re trying to res send it or find a new venue, but 05:00 they announced it’s canceled in Russell Industrial Center, backed out, and they couldn’t find a new venue and it’s canceled. And so you’ll think out I didn’t register because it’s unclear people are even gonna get a refund.
, because Fu said he’s gotta sue them, first to get a refund. And so Fu, with, like, 200 G, marches in front of the main convention center where turning point was, and actually this Saturday, about 06:00 and Trump speaks about 08:00. So, know, right about the time Trump is there at the height of it. And they’re chanting America first, they’re doing the rosa. A few people give small speeches, and then Nicholas Fu gives, like, a 40 minute speech outside with amplification outside of huntington places is called the main convention center, we’re turning points is with, like, 500 people watching, maybe 250 of them were g.
And then a few hours later, they had… , you start seeing on Twitter, they have a venue, like, a a rooftop bar in Detroit. And they’re having their Vip gathering, and, you, you I could see on Twitter His speech was posted. Jared Taylor speech. Jared Taylor spoke.
And he… Like, I’m not sure. Did you see any of this stuff on Twitter? No.
Speaker 0: No. I I didn’t follow it.
Speaker 3: Jared Taylor got like, a stand ovation, huge welcome. And you said, the 1 good… He opened up the 1 good thing about, getting gold. I guess, the, , they had such a warm welcome. And and 1 guy from Vid, I’m not sure if I heard his name, but if am I assuming we know, like, V derrick derek is that is that the Brim low?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Peter Brim low. Yeah.
Speaker 3: But what it wasn’t in him. It was someone else from V derrick? Maybe you would hurt… I have to look it up to who it was. And then the venue, I guess, either they heard the speeches and dis disappeared or they got back.
And so they they they turned off the sound system and started pumping up music and and then there was a little bit of a sc, , trying to, , like, get the music turned off, so they could give more speeches. And then there was like, a fight, like nico ends up, like, getting in a fight with 1 of the security guards. So they got for forbid, like… , the black security guard ends up getting in a fight with, like, 1 of the only black guys at A back, and then they get kicked out of the venue, And and that’s it. That’s the end of backpack pack.
Some of the people like they’re hanging out a Casino is going to venues, doing live streams, it turns out that David Duke was there. So if you look at A, they had, like, their speakers that included, like Jared Taylor, and Keith Woods, in other names, you probably know most of them. And then they had 2 mystery speakers, So 1 of the mystery speakers was gonna be David Duke. And , there’s pictures, people having selfies outside with David Duke. So that’s basically it.
I didn’t go down. Like, if it was going down, like, if they hadn’t got kicked out of the bar, I would’ve have thought maybe, like, after sabbath. Which doesn’t end here to till, like, 10:00 till, like go down, , to the bar, , I don’t, like, try to meet, like, Keith woods or Lucas Gauge. God forbid. I decided against it.
But then, it ended ended up getting shut down anyways. There were a few protesters and I’m not sure if the protesters also came from out of town. 1 of the biggest things on Twitter. Did you see, like, that… New e girl, like, Lilly, who you said the broadcast en bomb comment?
No. That went viral. No. It it just happened this week. I’m like random e girl, Lily, and and she had, like, a little clip or she’s saying, I guess she’s a single mom and she was defending single motherhood.
And she said, most of her friends are married, but they’re married to broke ass, and bombs. Or with the a not not the hard r. And that was all over social media, like, , this clip of this, you, blue eyed girl, your dropping in bomb, and she ended up losing her job, ended up like dax her, and then, , they… She lost her job, but then all of a sudden, she showed up at A pack. So that really…
Yeah. I mean, so, like, this all happened this week. So , like, in, like, I mean, there was a little rant. I guess she… I mean, she kinda like an attractive woman, but she had a a semi larger nose.
And so there’s a lot of people thought she was Jewish. And although she claimed she’s not, although it appears now she has, like, a mixed race kid as a single mother, But she was the biggest thing in the news this week, , just randomly, , pretty white girl saying the and and word, But she decided to pull into a pack in so that was, like, , the Twitter So I I would say, like, she was probably the most… Mention, , next to, like, fu, she was probably, like, the most mentioned thing on Twitter, although, , that’s kinda just minor, , whatever reason, Like, , she’s just gaining east lab from doing it or or maybe she… Now she’s coming out as an vowed racist, you so that’s basically the breakdown of… A pack in Detroit.
You mentioned 1 other thing. So I didn’t see much protest, But I had the, you, a lot of jews… Even… I didn’t even hear that much from the Jewish community, but some of the Jews who knew wanted to protest a, like, the liberal progressive that con conceivable would have protested A pack, they wanted to protest, , charlie the Kirk and Tpu usa, But, and I was looking at, like, the Sp c, , as opposed to the Ad. I’m not sure if you filed the story, like the Sp had, like, some mass layoffs this week.
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. I saw that.
Speaker 3: But, , what… You, so the 20 23 report came out. And according to Sp, like, antisemitism is, like, only the fourth biggest kind of hate. Like, , the majority of hate is being directed towards Lgbt or other minorities, and the Sp c lit list Charlie Kirk and T as a hate group. And so, like, the level, it’s, like, well, why should we protest Fu like, , Charlie Kirk and Tpu usa is just as much as a hate group.
As fu. And if you did, I watched a few of the speeches, and I’m saying, like, , they they really hit the trans issue. , like, from candace owens to every speaker, , they’re just , hitting the trans issue. So from the turning point… From the Sb sp level, t usa is the most dangerous hate group in America, even though they’re not anti semitic.
But because the anti transport is, you, 1 of the key platforms of their agenda. So from, like, the news media, there wasn’t that much focus on back And even, like, there’s a look… I’ve actually met him a few times the major paper and Detroit the Detroit free press, 1 of the arab journalists who wrote a paper, gave kinda like, a mild fair criticism of A pac, and he mentioned that, , Apa pac is anti zion or anti Israel. So he didn’t even go that they’re necessarily anti semitic and because, , he’s also been critical of Israel or sympathetic to the Palestinian protesters. So even the Detroit free press well, , kinda was, like, well, there were 2 hate rallies in Michigan this week A pack and , Trump and T usa.
And and he was even probably more sympathetic to apa because they’re anti zion as opposed to, , Kirk and T Usa that’s Pro Zion so that, , the the article in the Detroit paper, you, , ironically was not that hard on of fu and.
Speaker 0: Okay, David, thanks for stopping by. Thanks for all that reporting and information on a couple stories it… I did not know much about. So thanks Man.
Speaker 3: Yeah Yep. I appreciate just to mention, Samantha W, the defense attorney will be cross examining Samantha boyfriend. Tomorrow, And it could be they’re gonna call more of her boyfriends. So, , there’s something interesting, maybe I’ll let , I appreciate you. You’ll letting me share that.
So God bless take care.
Speaker 0: Okay. Take care, David. Alright. Talking about the N bug trial. The
Speaker 4: N trial so the end of a regime that caused a holocaust. And it was the first time in history where an international court sentenced people to prison and to death. It would later set the stage for an international court of justice, the universal declaration of human rights and 2 Geneva conventions. Germany started the second world war when it invaded Poland, and eventually attacked over half a dozen countries throughout the continent. But by 19 43, the tide of war had turned, The Soviet Union was beginning to push back at Leningrad grant, Moscow and Stalin grant.
While the British meanwhile, had beaten back to German air raids and pushed the access powers out of Africa. So the leaders of the major Ally powers came together to discuss the state of the world after World war 2 had ended.
Speaker 0: Right. And there’s this interesting essay by Amanda Alexander’s called Lennon at N anti imperial. And the justification of crimes against humanity, meaning running it through a particular legal framework. So the N trials created this whole new category of crimes against humanity. There’s no preceding legal category of foot try crimes against humanity.
So that N trials are supposed to have created this brand new moral order. Right? Aimed at protecting vulnerable humanity. And the n bag trials prosecuted the bad guys. They prosecuted all these awful war crimes and the n trial are presented to us as an example of the rationality in the calm procedure of international law, overcoming violence was and power and the base instincts of revenge.
And so the the book trials are often presented as a liberal or enlightenment narrative of international law. It’s a liberal show trial. Rub This was the opportunity for the the West to put on display its particular… Pe. Alright?
It… It’s way of instructing the word about right and wrong. But the n trials did not exactly turn out that way. Right? They were supposed to give us an accurate impartial history, are supposed to demonstrate enlightened values through the civilized institutional drama of a trial at law.
Right. We’re supposed to have a liberal show trial here, and they have an important place at any account of human rights, humanitarian national law, liberal values and international law. But when you hold out the N trial against these expectations, it falls short, both as a legal proceeding to and as history. Right? The N book trials bear at the state of Victor Justice, they stir up doubts about the legal proceedings, the trials were uni inspiring, they rely on documentary evidence.
They listened virtually not at all to the voices of the victims, and the crimes against humanity were oddly limited. Right? They will link to crimes against peace or war crimes. So the the N trials, were quite weird. Right?
They did not tell the expected enlightenment narrative, and they did not prosecute crimes against humanity in the way We understand that now because there’s was something else at work. There was an anti imperialist narrative. That drew on Marxist theory on communist theory and was given a practical impetus by the Bo revolution and its spread in a diluted form to advanced opinion in the west, which during the 19 forties was left wing as it is today. Spread So is this marxist communist lenin approach of describing war even European wars as the resort and expression of imperial. Imperial was the great evil.
Imperial was an economic system. And so its crimes were depicted primarily in economic terms. So this aggressive imperialist war was a crime in service of economic ends. Alright. So it was not at all what we would expect from a liberal enlightenment show trial.
Speaker 4: Stalin of the Soviet Union, Roosevelt of the Usa and Churchill of the United Kingdom, discussed creating the United Nations, the day invasions, and dividing Germany up.
Speaker 0: The once we understand that what happened at N was a driven by a communist lenin narrative. Then what happens starts to make sense without that understanding, the choices made at N are absolutely incomprehensible. So the narrative and the theories that influence this particular development of international law and the whole concept of crimes against humanity. Goes back to Lennon who built on the foundation from Marx. So either way, we’re talking about a communist theory that was embraced by these leading minds of the west.
So this communist narrative was quite critical of liberal values Right. So 1 of the central stories of international law is this institutional centralization of humanitarian principles? And supposedly, it was the the realization of liberal values at N that was a crucial milestone. Right? This was international law.
Representing civilization standing against dictatorship and oppression, mel of passionate mil and law, and the trials were going to showcase forensic fairness and human decency, N bug, trials introduce crimes against humanity into international law, established a new ethic of humanitarian, and the trial set out to create an authentic record of nazi crimes and criminality. But the trials at N or way short of this. They were highly impartial. They were strictly Victor justice. They completely ignored allied 4 crimes.
Right, the trials were primarily example of power rather than reason. They’re considerable doubts about the legality of their proceedings. You saw the invention of crimes that people were then found guilty for. They were found guilty for crimes that weren’t crimes. Right?
Crimes against peace and crimes against humanity. Those were the 2 primary crimes. Those were the 2 crimes at N. Crimes against peace crimes against humanity, and both black. Any establishment in international law.
Right? They would they looked obviously, like Victor justice. And the only reason the crimes against humanity were included. Alright? It was it was kind.
Pushed in there as a secondary crime connected to the principal crime of imperial. During on the communist Marxist lenin perspective aren’t imperial. So as for the for the trial vin humanity, no. The the trial probably was vin indicated marxism and lenin more than it vin humanity.
Speaker 4: Into 4 occupation zones. Because Germany will be divided. But that was not all. Over the course of World war 2, it became apparent that Germany committed atrocities on a massive scale, the night raids, the forced deportation, the mass genocide, There was only 1 question on everybody’s mind. How do you punish acts that are dis evil.
This…
Speaker 0: Well, how do you punish acts? For which there is no precedent. Right. Had the complete exclusion of allied crimes and then you had the link of crimes against humanity to crimes against peace. And then you had the odd focus on aggressive war.
So the prosecution had to distort the history for the persecution of German Jews before the war, they had to make it appear as though it was part of preparations for an imperial aggressive war. So prior to the N trials, there’d be no such law against aggressive war. Right? Is not every war aggressive. Right?
So the N trials did not relate the history of crimes that we now associate with the second world war. It was not primarily a history of the Jewish Holocaust, is not a record of the victims of the war. Victim’s voices were seldom heard. Right. The the choices of the N crowd undermined the ability of the West to write a history that emphasized the value of humanity made for a boring trial.
If they to produce a compelling liberal narrative that it was expected to develop And so n trial in orthodox histories of international law is is a key part of liberal history of law. Right? This is supposed to be the story of international law but the N book trials fell way short of liberal expectations. So why? What why do we have more critical narrative about what happened at N?
Because we see the the Western liberal values and the enlightenment narratives, they are portrayed at Her offered as oppressive and exclusionary due to communist influence. Right? So the whole idea of W crime trials was was animated by exclusion and by notions of white sup supremacy and imperial.
Speaker 4: This question, there were basically only 3 answers. The first was to do nothing to let all the atrocities, all the death, all the destruction go un unnoticed. But how could any country consent to such a course of action? How could off Usa, the invaded Soviet Union? Or he occupy Czech consent to such a cause of action.
The second option was to put all the perpetrators to death through executive actions to simply…
Speaker 0: So in the normal understanding of the N trials… This is supposed to be the the creation of the great power states such as the United States and England, with with help from the Soviet Union. But instead, you had the peripheral states who were incredibly influential. Right? And they used N trials to put on a critique of western imperial.
And the particular form this critique developed came from Lennon. So in 19 16, Lennon had written his book imperial, the highest form of capitalism. So according to Lennon, Imperial was an economic institution that embodied the monopoly stage of capitalism, Capitalist states seek colonies to gain a monopoly on resources. And the Great war, which left tens of millions of people dead World war 1. That was a men first station of this monopoly capitalism according to Lennon.
And this same sort of narrative first pushes forward through the N book trials. This Marxist communist narrative of anti imperial and self determination. Had a great deal of support among the leading thinkers of the west. Alright, President Woodrow Wilson, but shed, the Bo dis for imperial. Right, the the leading Western intellectual, shed the Bo dis for western imperial.
There’s a great deal of similarity between the enlightened liberal left intelligence that dominated the west. And the thinking of the leading communist intellectual. And so the N trials prosecuted Nazi Germany, in large part for conducting a capitalist monopoly war of aggression.
Speaker 4: He gives a command to kill thousands of people, regardless of whether they committed any war crimes or not. But this action was disliked by both Roosevelt and Churchill at the time, as and so eventually, by the end of the war, a third option was chosen. Justice through persecution. It was decided that a perpetrators of the second world war and of the holocaust would be dealt a fairness and justice that they’d themselves destroyed in
Speaker 0: So the left wing critique in the west and and also coming out of the Soviet Union was that the Nazis carried on like colonize. Right? They carried on a program of deport native populations to facilitate German colonize colonization. And that’s where you get the introduction of the term genocide. Right?
It comes right along with the colonization and genocide, 2 thirds to describe the same process, the imposition of a German national pattern on the colonized areas, and you see the same sort of critique dominating the electronic into nevada. Right? When when they go after Israel is because Israel is an example of western imperial in our midst,
Speaker 1: occupation and apartheid system with the fa facade of the of Jewish majority in part of the country.
Speaker 0: This is essentially Lenin critique. This is the same sort of communist critique that animated the n trials.
Speaker 1: While the other part is indirectly controlled rather than directly controlled. Right This this was a complex strategy, a multi layered strategy. That is the difference because they understood there need to be some compromises. And, therefore, they also shi away from committing genocide. And you’re saying genocidal intent.
Of course, there’s a famous called by Where he said that, he wish the gas triple sick sink to the sea. So his his dreams.
Speaker 0: So the headline for this electronic fire videos how the gaza genocide will lead to Israel’s collapse and the focus is on economics because marxism, it’s fundamentally an economics doctrine. Videos And the the critique of the Germans here and the critique that these people at electronic father are setting forth against Israel is a critique of colonialism. And our dominant intellectual, right, in the west, And and in the the rest of the world, right, there is this tremendous anger that imperial is driven by economic motives. It wants to increase the wealth, and this is what leads to war and aggression in Europe as well as the colonized war. Their imperial leads to suffering among the colonized.
And, the London charter. Which was the precursor to the N trials ins described 2 new categories of crimes into international law. Crimes against humanity and crimes against peace, and there was absolutely no no substantial precedent for either of these crimes. But they caught the imagination of international lawyers, and it was exciting to set down all these new novel principles of law. But they the accomplished a revolution in international criminal law, but in an innovation comp largely inconsistent with the precedence of international law.
And so the United Kingdom, the French allegations that London conference clearly stated they did not wanna consider aggressive war crimes against peace to be part of international law. That 1 criticism in later years are punishing something that was not criminal such as launching a war of aggression. So the the people driving forward, the London conference and the N trials knew that they were innovating that they were creating crimes that they would then. Prosecute and put people to death for. And so they had to come up with all these novel arguments way an aggressive, war in service of imperial is is the very worst thing, and must be now made illegal.
And crimes against peace then become the principal crime and crimes against humanity for the secondary crime had to be linked to crimes against peace or aggressive war. So there was no principle distinction between war crimes and crimes against humanity. That there’s little documentation or even a record of discussion to explain the introduction or the limitation of crimes against humanity. Right The the crime against peace was incomprehensible since the initial initiation of a war was not deemed an international crime at the time. That N trial had to come out with all these novel legal reasoning
Speaker 1: were genocidal dreams. But, he had the military power to kill, thousands or tens of thousands of palestinians if he wanted to. But he also understood that any country that commits genocide or any state that commits general genocide, collapses. There in fact, in recent history, I’m not talking now about the, genocide of of North America or the or or Australia. But but in in modern time, starting from the middle of the twentieth century with the Nazi regime, every regime that committed gen genocide came to an end very, very shortly afterwards, very shortly afterwards.
So there is no, to regime wand anymore
Speaker 0: Well, is that accurate? There there many definitions of Genocide that would include things that England is on France has done. Germany’s done, United States has done? Right? All all these nations have committed genocide by the definitions of many scholars of of genocide and they haven’t fall on a pot.
So you had people who wanted to draft the motor of jews into this new anti colonialism agenda. Right? And this this 1 activist says, I… I’ve been approached by various Jewish organizations, I wanna satisfy them if possible, have in mind a general treatment of the Jews as just part of the general German plan of aggression. Jewish Right?
So the way Germany treats its inhabitants or any other country treats its is inhabitants. It’s not our affair. Right? That was the traditional legal approach. But now this program of examination of Jews and destruction of the rights of minorities become an international concern why?
Because it was part of a plan for any legal war. For the first time an aggressive war is regarded as illegal. And unless we have a war connection as a basis for reaching. These crimes against humanity, we have no basis for dealing with the atrocities. So the connection between crimes against German Jews and crimes against peace.
May may seem legally incomprehensible if you’re looking for solid precedent, but it was obvious to the people at N and at the London conference. Right? They were ready to change international law to prosecute crimes, But they had to do it with a basis, to something called an aggressive war. They felt they had to change the law concerning aggression just like you you’re seeing a lot of innovative theo about genocide and humanitarian law. With regard to the war gaza,
Speaker 1: or the of was regime, Serbia is has come to an end. And and And this is something that Israelis note. Of course. So so they thought about what kind of war crimes they can get away with in a sustainable way. And
Speaker 0: So for the Soviets, right, they they were concerned that international law had not developed a system of rules for protecting the Liberty independence and sovereignty of nations. Because of the aggression aggression of imperial and colonialism that essentially capitalism leads to imperial and colonialism that capitalism is essentially a constant threat to peace. It’s a pass a policy that encourages the use of force, in international relations. And the Soviet Union comes along as the protector of the sovereignty and rights of small and great nations wants to develop international relations for all deputy loving nations, and they wanted to defend them on the basis of we must have put a up to aggressive war to colonialism essentially to capitalism. It was this capitalist aggression aggression that undermine the peaceful relationship between nations.
And why were the Nazis soc cruel because they were greedy Right? They were determined to seize foreign territories? They want to conquer the eastern provinces and make them German economic territory. Or land or livestock or people must be considered property of the German reich. So it’s the imperialist in the economic aspects of German aggression, that gain the focus of the Soviets and essentially they’re enabler in the west and this approach gained considerable influence in the west.
Right? It was a gods send, but the left wing elite intellectual of the day. But finally, they had they had a framework, a narrative, a a basis for these innovations, of creating concepts such as genocide and crimes against peace and crimes of aggressive war And so it was the communist who influenced the west far more than the West influenced the communists.
Speaker 1: And once the red line has been crossed. There’s no going back from it.
Speaker 5: Well, let’s talk a little bit about what that collapse looks like right now. You are… , a researcher in the political economy of Israel, as someone who reads Hebrew language business sections of the newspaper. What metric are you using to assess the viability of Israel’s internal economic structure paint us a picture of what of what the state looks.
Speaker 0: So they knew that what they were doing had virtually no precedent. Right? The idea that unjust unlawful aggressive war. Was a crime. Meant that you needed to completely change international law, but they thought it was completely just because they had to leave behind the imperial era.
Imperial and colonialism driven by a capitalism, but they have to turn aside from this era where colonization was acceptable. And if different people have different gifts, obviously, the strong would tend to rule over the week. So the sentiment was that we must change the international order from an unethical order to an unethical order. And it came from this widespread sen found in marxism, lenin, communism, western anti imperial literature, that informed the way that the second world war was described understood and condemned at N. Right?
The second world War became the story of an aggressive capitalist imperialist war. Once the trial began. Right? Both the Soviets, the English and the Us, s any doubts about crimes against peace. Right.
They said absolutely aggressive war completely illegal, trying to develop colonies completely illegal. And so the age of imperialist expansion during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Right, That age is over. Because in the in the battle old days, the eighteenth and nineteenth century, these kind of imperialist colonizing aggressive wars were regarded as completely legitimate. But now the central crime is something that was regarded as completely legitimate in the eighteenth and nineteenth century.
So what was done redeeming the eighteenth and nineteenth century stronger nations swallowing weaker nations, this is now a war crime. Now the idea is that aggression constitutes the graves en encouragement on the peaceful relations between peoples. And from this perspective, everything else was…
Speaker 5: Like right now.
Speaker 1: Right. So, I I think what… When we’re shifting gear right now in in the conversation, maybe it’s it’s worthwhile to acknowledge that, this conversation about about the collapse of Israeli economy when we’re talking about, an economic structure, which is an exploit in in…
Speaker 0: Right? It’s the same Marxist lenin perspective. Right? Dominating this discussion here on the electronic in nevada coming from Marx and Lennon and push forward by the elite Western intellectual who conducted the N trials. At this is what.
The american prosecution sought to put forward at N, this narrative, that the aggressive war by the Nazis is the heart of the case. Right? They they bought into the communist Marxist Lenin perspective. Everything else, However sorted, however, shocking, however, revolt is incidental or subordinate to the fact of aggressive war. Right.
So everything else is subordinate to the communist line. Everything else is subordinate to the perspective of Lennon and marx, and the perspective of the Soviet Union. Right the dramatic story, what happened in Germany in the early phases of the conspiracy. The ideologies use the terror used suppression of human freedom, the concentration camps, the crimes against humanity the. Nazi persecution, torture and murders committed.
Alright. All these things have the little international significance, except that they were preparation for the commission of aggression against peaceful neighboring people. Little Right? So everything that Nazis did pale significance for them carrying out colonization. The the greatest evil is imperial.
So that which was perfectly normal in the eighteenth and nineteenth century now is rode out as the height of evil. It’s the source of war crime and crimes against humanity. Right, could men expect to get neighboring lands free from the claims of the people who live there without committing these mass crimes against humanity. Right. Horrible things occur when men embark on War is an instrument of policy for aggressive ends, but war has always been an instrument of policy for aggressive ends.
But now what has been completely normal throughout history has been criminal.
Speaker 1: Equal structure of apartheid. When this is falling a part, this is a good thing for us. And we’re celebrating that. But it’s very difficult to celebrate in time with Genocide. Yeah.
So let me just take you a little bit back to when we started to talk about this because it didn’t start
Speaker 0: it’s it’s difficult to celebrate in a time of genocide, when in human history has it been a time where you don’t have genocide. So the persecution of Jews in Germany, it it was it was quite hard for N to enlist this crime. But they insisted that there was a a link. Right? The persecution of the Jews was just part of the preparation for this aggressive imperial colonial war.
Right the Nazis believed that Germans had lost the first World War because of the collapse of the home front, they hope to avoid this by removing the groups they believed to responsible for the clap the the Jews and the labor movement that the treatment of Jews within Germany in the 19 thirties was just a part of the plant for Germany’s, desire for an aggressive imperialist. Expansion is war, which is the height of Evils from the communist Marxist Lenin perspective. Now judges at N found this connection quite un. But it was the way that crimes against humanity were introduced into the N trials. So you had these abs truths difficult legal maneuvers, that form form the basis for prose people for crimes against humanity.
And the whole overarching narrative for the N trials was to fit Nazi plans into this overarching communist theory of the evils of aggressive imperialist colonial war. Right? This was not just an aggressive war. It was an aggressive colonial war. And the crimes that are produced for the result of imperial, there a consequence essentially of capitalism.
And you see the same type of thinking here with the electronic nevada.
Speaker 1: , October it started in January 23, about a a year and a half ago, with the new Israeli government coming into power this far right, messi government without a plan. In already at that moment, a lot of Israelis realized that the economic collapses is imminent and unavoidable with the government that is not willing to make…
Speaker 0: So just as with the electronic into father, so to at the N book trials, they share is similar rhetoric. Right the language of imperial, the critique of colonialism, essentially a a communist perspective dominates both, the N trials and the pal liberation movement to this day. So you have predatory German imperial going up against freedom loving nations in the N trial narrative and today in the electronic into nevada, you have the freedom the western imperialist Jewish imperialist capitalist going up against freedom loving native Palestinians. So and it’s not just Soviets who used this language. At the N book trials, the French also used it.
The Americans also used it, the English also used it Right? That we live in this period of economic empires, we live in this period of colonization. So for Japan and Italy and Germany, they were driven primarily by economic basis, they had a will to expand. And they had a capitalist economic need to drive them towards aggressive war. So the Roman empire British empire have proved that every space expansion can only be affected by breaking resistance and taking risks.
So the prosecution of N described the imperial ambition of the Nazis as… A manifestation of colonialism. And so what the Germans did throughout Europe, that was aimed at German urbanization, the destruction of the national character of the lands that they took over. Right? The the Nazis plan to, , run an economic, regime that was imperialist and colonial, and that’s why they did such awful things.
Right. Nazis aimed, Jan me German urbanization, In the imposition of German cultural patterns upon other people, they wanted to ex expel non Germans from the soil they acquired and make everything Germany. So the nazis were back because they tried to treat other nations as colonies. It’s was just amazing that the the west also bought in into this communist perspective and made it. The basis for the N, narrative and prosecution.
Speaker 1: It can compromises strategies, plans for the futures, Ben, Smart, they’re hoping for divine intervention. So at that moment, the Bd movement came up with this Slogan, from shut… From startup nation to shutdown nation, and we started to list facts numbers. To show what’s happening to the israeli debt? What’s happening?
Speaker 0: So the crime of World War 2 was not just that it was an aggressive war. The crime was that it was part of a colonial undertaking it was part of an imperial aggression. Right? Germany wanted to obtain space But they also wanted to obtain economic benefits. Alright?
Marxism is underlying by an economic perspective. So Germany tried to carry at a 3 threefold war, a war for the destruction of communism war for the destruction for the Russian empire and a war for the acquisition of Colonial york territory for cl colonizing purposes an economic exploitation. So this was a war for an economic empire. And the trials represented these economic motives, in terms that reflect the the communist ideology that was driving the prosecution. Right?
The the Germans aim to spoil the economies for neighboring nations plan to p a public and private property and exploit the people and the natural resources of occupied countries. Alright? This is the same type of rhetoric that the electronic interface it uses with regard to Israel. Right. It was the acquisition of raw material and resources that was driving Germany.
The It was these material considerations that were driving Germany. In slave labor that the Germans used. Right? That was just part of this overall colonization and imperialist platform Right? The the crimes of slavery served Germany’s colonial aims by helping it to destroy and weaken other people
Speaker 1: listening to the, international investment in the Israeli high tech sector in other sectors as well, what is happening to, young educated Israelis while leaving the country, there’s a famous picture of Israelis lining up through a very, very long street. It was a line of almost a kilometer long, lining up to…
Speaker 0: And this is significant. Right? Israel is in trouble. Israel’s is having a very difficult time. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis have have left.
So the trials were intended to tell us a history about the dangers of aggressive imperialist colonial. War, but by using this communist narrative. Right? They wanted to present the dangers of imperial in a certain way. This was Nazis were primarily an economic regime, and it was there economic policies that led to war and war crimes.
And so N, Narratives are essentially the narratives of the left with regard to imperial. Right, Highlighting the economic effects of imperial, as far more important than the suffering of victims. Though nowadays the neuro trials are criticized for failing to represent the crimes against humanity properly for failing to hear the voices of the victims, but not being exe of enlightened law and truth. But the failures at N are incomprehensible, you don’t understand that they were primarily carrying out a communist agenda. That was signed on for by the leading Western elite intellectual
Speaker 1: to the minister of the interior because they were trying to get their passports. So they can leave the country. That’s a picture that is from March. So 23. Right?
So before they war. And they were already seniors israeli economist predicting a serious collapse. Some israeli trust funds and and and high tech, startups, those kinds of companies we’re already making plans about of leaving the judicial of of
Speaker 0: so well war 2, is usually described as the Good war. This is Meant Alexander Traffic 20 16 essay that she wrote. The Good war preparations for a war against civilians, And this an essay that I I found incredibly inspiring because it just, like, popped my mind open in all sorts of directions. Right? So there’s World war 1 is often called the great war, but World war 2 is more often called the good war because the cause was just and sure the Allied did some, , nasty things.
They ind inappropriately bombed civilians, Alright. Think about Dresden Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Right. The allies were were brutal. But overall, the the war is regarded as Morally clear. Now, why were Britain in the United States so ready to bomb civilians.
Right? To a modern international lawyer for someone interested in human rights by allied Bombing of civilians during World War 2 with crimes against the laws of war? Like, why did the law break down at this time? In Why was there no prosecution of these war crimes? Right.
Why was there a lack of attention given to aerial bombardment? Of civilians. So does not the lack of prosecution of allied war crimes undermine the legitimacy of the N tribe simply exposing them as Victor justice and a mock of international justice at its very inception. So Amanda Alexander has fascinating argument here. She says, Aerial bombardment was accepted so readily because it was not universally seen in the inter war period the 19 twenties and thirties as a def defer of the idea of a good war, Nor was it seen as illegal.
It was not illegal at the time. Right there were some arguments that bombardment of civilians were immoral or illegal. But there was also a very strong cultural narrative that said a war against civilians is an appropriate way of waging war. And why do we have this narrative? Because the narrative of the poets became the dominant narrative world war 1, which all other narratives must be.
So what is it that determines the winning narrative to which all other narratives must bow, not just in World war Worm, but with regard to all the great events of our time. So the story of the great War, World war 1 was that was established at the end of 19 twenties was set be the narrative of the poets, and it was strongly antagonist towards civilians and towards women. Right? The poets blamed non combat for sending young men to be sacrificed, while they, the civilians remained unfairly safe from the horrors of war. And you see this same narrative in the work of the leading military strategist and the leading international lawyers of the time.
But the international lawyers of the time unable to develop any strong legal or moral prohibition on the bombardment of civilians. So the dominant narratives of the Great war of World war 1 came about from those written by the trench poets. Right? The great war introduced for the first time, large number of educated Scholar men, who had the benefits of a classical education and they came to battle, people like Si fried Sas, Robert Graves, Wi Owen Isaac Rosenberg, Eric Maria Remark, best known of these war writers. Right, their work is established as an absolute canon of War literature.
Their poetry, their memoirs, Have place traditional tales about honorable and patriotic war, the whole new story of dis and betrayal, are and pointless. Right? They they give us a war where young men are sacrificed by the old men in their patriotic fathers and mothers, wives and sweetheart. Right? This is the narrative of the great poets.
That the biting young men are essentially being sacrificed by their fathers and mothers, their wives and sweetheart by women. Right. And this is obviously not the only possible description of the great war. Right? The trench poets were not the only people who are writing about the war.
Right? They produce only a small part of literature that emerged from the war. Right? A much larger body of work was produced by civilian writers and female writers that questioned and challenged the trench poet depiction of the front is the understanding of the great war. And the work of the trench powers was not immediately acclaimed.
But it is only towards the end of World war 1, and then with a sudden flood of boxer around 19 27 that the particular narrative of the trench poets became established. So the disillusioned trench soldier was regarded as the authentic voice of the great war. Whenever people start talking about authenticity, become aware an alert that some Con game is going on. So because once you say the trench poets are the authentic voice of the great war is saying that everyone else, right? They’re not nearly as authentic.
Okay. I want to take a quick Break here, give you a burst of hate porn.
Speaker 6: And the problem, it’s not going away. Take a look at this earlier today. Fox own bill Collusion sharing a video of the border in Southern California showing a group of alleged Chinese nationals crossing illegally. This fiscal year which started in October of last year. It’s estimated over 30000 Chinese nationals have entered our country illegally.
On top of the 26000 just from China alone last year. And according to a new report. Biden is expected to announce a policy tomorrow waving penalties for illegal immigrants spouses of Us citizens. And meanwhile, California governor Gavin News, He’s under fire for posting this video on x. The platform formerly known as Twitter, touting the work that he’s done on the border.
He not see bill illusions report, and he has 1 after another. Anyway, he’s blaming Republicans for Biden crisis take a look.
Speaker 7: For back down here at the border, Tijuana right behind me, San Diego sector, and we’re just down here with a National guard, meeting with customs, agents as well as border patrol talking about our partnerships 390, a national guards men and women that been working, particularly as relates to fentanyl here in the State of California Look at the bottom of the end of the day. They need more resources. Everybody needs more resources, and the Republican party has been consistently standing in the way of providing the resources to support for the men and women working hard, not only here at the border, but out throughout the state of California in this country to address the issues to the border. It’s time for them to stop playing politics.
Speaker 6: Maybe if it wasn’t in a sanctuary state, maybe if you weren’t paying for free health care and housing. Related and and food and healthcare care for all these illegal immigrants, maybe you didn’t offer all of that. Maybe you’d have more money. Who video was met with widespread backlash tonight. And after 8 illegal with suspected ties to Isis were arrested in a multi city operations thing last week, Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Rand Paul.
They are pressing the D dhs secretary Mayor For answers. Sting Here with reaction South Carolina Senator, Lindsey Graham, and Hartford County Sheriff, Jeffrey Gel. Jeffrey, I did notice that your, your governor is blaming the broken immigration policy on Donald Trump for the death of this mother of 5 and the rape and death of this mother of 5. This guy came here in 20 23, And I’d like to know how do you get to that point when the border was never more secure than when Donald Trump was present.
Speaker 8: Sean you a thousand percent right I mean, I’ve I’ve been in office now 10 years. I’ve… I’ve gone through from a president Obama the president Trump and the border was never more secure, than it was under… President Trump, the flow of drugs and the flow of criminals across the southern border in particular. My chief Deputy and I was down there last the same day the vice President was saying the water was secure.
We were looking at open open gates and in what un constructed wall no lighting, no no security at all here And of course, they’re not getting the resources and we have a president who invited so many people to, , aid who come to this country. And a lot of those are looking for a better life and I get that, but a mixed amongst them are the terrorists and are the person’s, , the sadly, the the murder of Rachel Moore here in our county, and, 1, we had another incident last year with an eli Immigrant who killed a young lady in this county, but in the same way, Rachel was killed, just unacceptable 1.
Speaker 6: Yeah. And senator, yeah, look, I’m sorry, But… Joe Biden that has blood on his hands here. Yeah. Joe Biden does.
These are His policies. , And he’s been Lying to the country for 3 years. Now they decided to switch gears blame Republican, which is not true because his idiotic idea would have allowed 5000 illegal in before they even enforce the border laws. But the question is, you look at 30000 Chinese nationals, say in this fiscal year…
Speaker 0: So when you look at the narratives of the trench poets, Alright? When They are all about the the goodness of themselves, they’re pity and love for their fellow soldiers and tremendous ant towards civilians towards the non combat combative. And this became the dominant narrative. Right? The the rest of the world didn’t care for the suffering of the soldiers.
So the trench poets felt that civilians non combat were indifferent to their suffering, and they hated them foreign. Right? So the trench poets did not only blame non combat for their… Ind. They also condemned them sending the young men out to be murdered.
So the willingness. Of old man and fathers to sacrifice their sons, and to see them dead rather than in disgrace is a common thread in this pent trench poet literature. And the women who encourage men to go to war, those who handed out white feathers and wrote patriotic literature were especially single out for rep. The trench poets are just filled with discuss and loading for women. Right?
They display a general hostility towards women. The Trench poets felt that the civilians were incapable of understanding the reality of war When the poets returned home, they could not communicate where they’ll feel comfortable with their families. They felt a great distance between themselves and civilians. And so these soldiers, these poets expressed a desire to bring the war home to make the sm Based crowds, the civilians of non combat to understand and take responsibility for their sort of the war. For their support of the war.
Right? They they wanted the older men to face brutality of war. Right? For the trench poets, There was justice in bringing the war home. That was the fair thing to do.
So soldiers had suffered too much, the home fronted had had it too good. And this began with the trench poets, but then transplant itself to the popular middle brow, literature the 19 twenties, and they became not just a possible story about the Great war, it became the dominant interpretation of the late 19 twenties. Right? And you can see it as a deeply moral account about the horrors of the war, powerful expression of anti war ideology. It’s also a narrative that anticipates and justifies the extension of the war to the entire population.
And what about the military strategist of the inter war period. But Right? They were also telling a narrative. That said, it was a good thing to take the war to civilians. Right?
So the strategist were focused in large part on aerial warfare, and their underlying narrative is that it’s a good thing. That the civilians could get bombed. Right. The the great war just dragged on and on and on until the soldiers were exhausted that Right? But this new way of war, right?
Where you can go up against civilians. Right? That might force a quicker end to a war. So the great military strategist along with the poets, wanted to replace this foolish cannon fodder way of war the Claus. Insistence on destroying the enemy’s forces by throwing as many soldiers against each other as possible.
They wanted to move on from that for both strategic moral reasons. Right? They said, look, the purpose of war is to enforce a policy to subdue the enemy’s will to resist, but the least. Possible human and economic loss to 1 side, so the destruction of the opposing armed forces, that’s just 1 means of winning a war, not necessarily the best 1. So if winning a war could be achieved more effectively such as by bringing the war to the people, then that was the method that should be used, now we have weapons to do this aerial warfare.
So the strategist of the 19 twenties, they felt aerial warfare would be a more effective method of waging war because they thought civilians would crumble quickly and that would bring the war to an end. So the great military strategist in 19 20 said, look, we need to shop quick, aerial war, very distressing, but more humane than the last 1. Right? It’s a way to conclude a war with as little bloodshed as possible if that’s cheap by killing a few thousand german women and children, well, that’s still the more humane way to go. So they didn’t think that there was something ethically problematic about killing non combat rather than combat.
Right? Very different attitude to what dominates conversations about Gaza now. People weep to hear of a few women and children killed in airway, air, but they are moved to hear about thousands of soldiers killed in action or human lives are equally valuable. Right? But a soldier, a robust young man, his life should be considered to have the maximum individual value in the general economy of humanity.
So for the leading military strategist, they thought as the people behind the lines who sent the soldiers out to their fate and so to the civilians who did this should be made vulnerable to the consequences of war, this might make them less ready to sacrifice. Their men. And the normal thing throughout history has been for civilians to share the fate of their state. So in Modern Warfare, the strategist said it’s just sop Street to attempt to draw a line between those who fight and those who assist the fighter since entire nations go to war. Right?
War is the policy of a nation? It is maintained and enforced by her soldiers and sailors does not created by them. It’s created by the civilian population. So a few civilians get killed in the struggle, they have nothing to complain of. And if they were not accept this risk and then they sacrifice their governments should together of staying from war.
So war is total and national. The worker becomes the soldier, the border alliance between industrial society and the army become more more fluid until they disappear. The factories become the barracks in the same discipline and devotion are demanded in both. This is total war. There how did international lawyers respond to this?
Well, the international lawyers in in the 19 twenties? Went terribly bothered by it. Right? They were very little attempts to create protection for civilians non combat. Alright.
Very little effort directed towards the protection of civilians in Warfare. So these ideal international lawyers, had a great interest in the rules of war that they focus their energy on maintaining the peace rather than the regulation of war. They consider that their job was to prevent war. They thought the function of international law should be the regulation and promotion of Pacific relationships between states. So the international lawyers focused on the pursuit of peace and they produce very little literature on the actual regulation of war.
J m, spat was a leading authority on air, Warfare in the 19 twenties. And he thought it would be a good thing if civilians would have to pay the price for war. So the great international lawyers of the 19 twenties into the thirties, they accepted the narrative of the Trench poets, that the great War, world war 1 was a disaster because it resulted in unacceptable losses among young soldiers. The new theory of war is direct air action. And even after the end of World War 2, J Spade.
Stated at least nothing had happened in World war 2 that was as bad as the loss of the flower of the generation in World war 1. So the sorrow over the death of young men in World war 1 combined with the work of lawyers with the work of writers, with the dominant conventional understanding of the Great war as a war where everyone was involved and imp, the lawyers accepted a vision of a totalitarian terri war. They can complain to the people the nation in the state. Sure. There’s some Judicial legal distinction between combat combative and non combat, but this distinction was rapidly becoming ana in the modern age.
So the idea there are combat and non combat is, but 3 reasons. 1, the enlargement at the scope of war with air war, resulting difficulty of determining what constitutes military objective, and Third, the technical difficulty with regard to aerial bombardment of con combining the bombardment to just the combat of the enemy. And so you had the depiction of workers in war as active enemies and absolutely legitimate targets. James Spade says the entire economic life of a nation should be considered a legitimate target. Who can say what a distinctive military supplies in war when so much of the output of almost every factory, producing anything from jammed to steel goes to assist the conduct of the war.
So the lawyers accepted the liability and vulnerability of large swath of the civilian population, and they subscribe to the strategist apocalyptic vision of the next war a war of bombardment against civilians behind lines. So international lawyers between the wars agreed on a certain story about the laws of war. He knew that there was little protection for non combat. Little could be expected nations would not sacrifice military utility for humanitarian reasons. So now Israel is expected to sacrifice military utility for humanitarian reasons.
So that’s not how always.
Speaker 6: Here’s what happened when. Even Cnn reviewed some recent polls live on air. Take a look.
Speaker 9: 21 percent. And again, John, I keep looking for signs that this is gonna go back to normal, and I don’t see it yet in the polling of anything. Right now, we’re cor towards a historic performance for republican president presidential can at the likes of which we have not seen in 6 decades. Home. III just never seen anything like this.
I’m like speechless because you always look at history and you go, okay, this is historic moment. If this polling is anywhere near correct, we are looking at a historic moment right now or black voters under the age of get 50, which have historically been such a big part of the democratic coalition are leaving it in drove. 50
Speaker 6: Charlemagne and the God calling out Biden and the Democrats over their poor outreach and Now Barack Obama, He’s trying to step in and help out Joe telling Internet influences at a fundraiser over the weekend that he needs them to come out in favor of
Speaker 0: Okay. Back to this terrific article by Amanda Alexander. Talking about the great international lawyers, in 19 twenties and thirties at a deeply pessimistic disciplinary history about the limitations of international law. They they knew that international law could do little to protect civilians. Right?
The laws of war unequivocally allow the starvation of non combat, the bombardment of non combat in defended places, and the use of rep prizes against non combat. So all the things that Israel’s is doing now in Gaza. Right, This was considered perfectly appropriate really until the 19 seventies, and then there was there was a growing human rights, international humanitarian movement among experts in international law citing in the late 19 nineties, that essentially wants to ci the waging of war and have put considerations of civilian welfare ahead of military objectives. But in the 19 twenties, lawyers saw no basis for hope of improvement for the treatment of civilians. Right?
That they felt any law is going to be disregard in a war, which it will be. Since there’s nothing except the fear of rep prizes that might stop military bent on winning a war. Our lawyers understood the general weakness of their discipline. They realized that they will very much on the margins as international lawyers that they did not have much standing. Right?
There are said to be laws of war between bell states. But these were for the most part of the conditional restrictions regarded lightly, and evade entirely in times of emergency. Ruthless measures of suppression were applied to the population of an invaded country. New instruments of war appeared in the form of poisonous gas, New methods of combat were resorted to in submarine attacks upon merchant vessels. More rigid application was made with regard to blockade, these and other practices reduced the supposed legal code of warfare to an empty formula.
By un un see, the rule of the strongest appeared with with few limitations to prevail. Right? This was the understanding of international lawyers with regard to the rules of law and with protecting civilian lives. And as the 19 thirties progressed, international events did little to change lawyers beliefs, about the ina and un enforce of the law. Right?
The slightest consideration given to the protection of women and children in war has led to a spirit of despair and defeat. In the matter of enforcement of the laws of war. Right? There are presently no binding rules of law by which aerial attack or bombardment can be regulated. There’s no lack a suggested rules by which this might be regulated, but there’s no reason to believe, that, these rules will have any bid.
Alright. So there’s essentially nothing available to lawyers in their history or in their discipline or in theoretical options available to them to protect civilians in a time of war by the state, A perennial debate between cod qualification, legal positive is as opposed to natural law custom and need to confirm and led to confirm this cy. So unlike today, the the great international lawyers of the time saw little basis to protect civilians. And why was this because there was a strong cultural narrative, that civilians should pay just as much as soldiers. Because of the writing of the trench poets, which became the dominant narrative.
And it was under underlined by the outlook of the military strategist, and then the international lawyers, just felt completely pessimistic and hopeless about their discipline. Okay. You’re probably wondering what the heck does Nuke Gin has to say.
Speaker 10: You’ll notice… Well, well, Trump is at 21 and people saying, boy that’s good. Biden has collapsed. The number of democrats of black democrats and for that matter Latino Democrats who are now undecided and potentially could switch to Trump. Are breathtaking.
And that’s why you’ll be to see places like Minneapolis, , Mean, Minnesota, the last poll, Trump’s up 4. Well, if if he carries Minnesota…
Speaker 0: Okay. Back to Amanda Alexander. She notes there was no… Legal international principal, right? Protecting civilians, and there was hardly even a taboo, concerning aerial bombardment as an expectation.
Right The taboo, The extent there was a taboo in matters of war in the inter war period of the 19 twenties and thirties was against a repeat of world war 1 style of warfare where soldiers. Ones who are killed as opposed to combat. So why is it at times the protection of civilians is considered the legal and ethical imperative? And other times the protection of civilians is considered indispensable. Because of what’s going on in a culture, and what goes on in a culture largely driven by narratives.
So in the 19 twenties and thirties, it was thought the bombardment a civilians. It’s was a legitimate way to conduct war. Now the elites in this of international humanitarian laws it’s absolutely outrageous. But from the respective of the 19 twenties and thirties elites, a war that targeted civilians was a legitimate even a good war. Good war today is a war that prioritizes the safety of civilians.
But there are other ways of imagining a good war. Right the period between World war 1 and 2 show a different perspective. You had a completely different ethical outlook. Yet had an acceptance of the totalitarian philosophy or war associates a civilian population with the state. Have a military belief in the possibility of a short sharp, offensive, or supported by narratives, about conflict where civilians legitimate targets.
And so that international lawyers in this interval period subscribed to the narrative of the Trench poets and military strategist. Tells you about the nature of international law. It changes dramatically. Right? It is fragile, and it is time bound.
Right? Is not a long eternal profound distinction that all good people understand between civilian and military. Right? The whole concept of the civilian, and started develop the lab part of the nineteenth century. So from the objective of 19 twenties and thirties, civilians were more comp than innocent.
You can hope that some civilians women and children might be protected, but you understood that any such protection was severely limited. And there was little reason this limited protection would be respected. So there was a great deal of optimism about the renovation of international law during the nineties and twenties and thirties, but no optimism about the protection of civilians. And lawyers did not even try to develop such protections. Right?
Even the most liberal lawyers at this time accepted the narrative that civilians must bear the fate of their state. And we must accept that war is now total and civilians will legitimately be targeted. And the lawyers understood that law could do, virtually nothing to stop the d degradation of a war once begun. So during many decades, just Hundred years ago, the aerial bombardment a civilians. It’s not a violation of the laws of war is a realization of the prevailing moral order.
It’s a realization. Of the stories that boy and poets and novel and the great military strategist of the time, we’re telling about law.
Speaker 10: When the bow when the debate done next week. Whether Biden does well or Biden does badly, the following day people go to the grocery store, and his support collapses again. I don’t care how many million dollars Biden raises. His advertising can’t overcome the…
Speaker 0: Okay. And that’s the end of my lofty lecture for this evening. Take care. Bye bye.