06/04/12 06/04/12 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] >> from pacifica, this is "democracy now!" >> first the, to punish hosni mubarak to life in prison for what he was accused in the crime of killing protesters and acquisitions association with intentional killing. >> former egyptian dictator hosni mubarak sentenced to life in prison, but protests have erupted over the acquittal of

his sons and six former police chiefs. he was convicted of failing to stop the killing of unarmed dictators, -- demonstrators, no one was charged with the the killings.g of then we go to norman finkelstein. >> the right to the self- determination and the hall of west bank and gaza with east jerusalem as its capital. that is the palestinian right. that is not subject to negotiations. >> norman finkelstein on his two new books, "knowing too much: why the american jewish romance with israel is coming to an end." and also "what gandhi says: about nonviolence, resistance and courage." all of that and more coming up. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman.

protests have erupted across egypt following the sentencing of ousted egyptian president hosni mubarak and other former regime officials. on saturday, in the egyptian court the mubarak and his former interior minister life in prison for failing to stop the killing of unarmed demonstrators during the protest ended mubarak's nearly 30-year rule. the court dismissed corruption charges against mubarak and his sons on technical grounds. the court also acquitted six former police chiefs for their roles during the uprising when 840 protesters were killed and more than 6000 were injured. no one was found guilty ordering the killings of protesters. the verdict sparked demonstrations across the country with tens of thousands in tahrir square and other cities. we will have more on egypt after the headlines. at least 27 people have been killed in three consecutive days of u.s. drone strikes in

pakistan. more than half of the victims -- 15 people -- were killed earlier today when u.s. missiles hit a village in north kyrgyzstan. the attacks bring to at least seven the number of u.s. drone strikes in pakistan over the past two weeks. u.s. and pakistan officials say militants were targeted, but it is unclear if any civilians were killed. an airplane crash in the nigerian city of lagos has killed all 153 people on board as well as at least 10 people on the ground we had the plane crashed into a building in a densely populated neighborhood and exploded into flames. the death toll is expected to rise as more bodies are found in the wreckage. the ailing u.s. economy received more grim news friday with the release of figures showing just 69,000 jobs were added during may -- the fewest total in the year. the official and a plumber rate also increased 8.2%, up from

8.1% in april. in minnesota, president obama called on republican lawmakers to approve funding for public sector jobs. >> the american people expect their leaders to work hard not matter what year it is. the economy still is not where it needs to be. there are steps that could make a difference right now, steps that could also serve as a buffer in case the situation in europe gets any worse. so right now, congress should pass a bill to help states prevent more layoffs so we could put thousands of teachers and police officers and firefighters back on the job. >> wisconsin voters are preparing dead to the polls for tuesday's historic recall election targeting republican governor scott walker. two new polls show walker with a slim lead of between 3% to 6% over his democratic challenger, milwaukee mayor tom barrett. the recall effort was launched over walker's campaign to strip public sector unions of their collective bargaining rights and

reduce their benefits. the election is turning out to be the most expensive in wisconsin's history, with more than $63 million spent. walker has raised more than 65% of his $30.5 million or chest from out-of-state donors. all 67 of florida's election supervisors have suspended a controversial effort to remove thousands of registered voters from the rolls. florida launched the effort last month using an outdated driver's license database to ostensibly identify non-citizens registered to vote. a large numbers of u.s. citizens have been caught up in the purge, primarily latino, democratic, and independent- minded voters. on thursday, the department justice stepped in to demand florida cease its voter purge, saying the process and not included under the voting rights act. although florida gov. rick scott fell to respond, the florida state association of supervisors of elections announced on friday it would halt the effort

in response to the justice department's orders. syrian president bashar al-assad has rejected responsibility for the recent massacre of 108 people in houla and land outside forces for the ongoing violence inside his country. knowing the address sister and lawmakers sunday, al-assad called the killings "abominable" and said not even monsters could have carried them out. he also has the crisis in syria as a foreign conspiracy, calling it "external were carried out by internal elements." his comments come as international envoy kofi annan continues to warn of an all-out civil war in syria amid renewed call for the cease-fire plan. speaking in stockholm, secretary of state hillary clinton said the u.s. wants russia to stop backing the al-assad regime. >> we all have to intensify our efforts to achieve a political transition and russia has to be

at the table helping that to occur. the syrian people want and deserve change. and that should come about through peaceful means, and it must be changed the represents the rights and dignity of all syrians. al-assad's departure does not have to be a precondition, but it should be an outcome so that the people of syria have a chance to express themselves. >> on friday, the u.n. human rights council voted overwhelmingly to condemn the syrian government for the houla massacre and ordered an international probe. russia but it with china and cuba in opposition. in other syria news, the bbc has apologized after mistakenly running a 9-year-old photograph of body bags in iraq next to a story on the recent massacre of over 100 people in the syrian village of houla. the photographer the original picture criticized the bbc for

publishing the photograph without properly checking its veracity. at least 18 people have been killed in a car bombing in the iraqi capital of baghdad. the attack targeted the chiapas for iraq pass -- targeted the key office for iraq's shiite muslims. the pentagon has announced a new phase in its increased militarization of the asia- pacific region. defense secretary panetta said the u.s. will shift the bulk of its naval fleet to the pacific by 2020, including -- speaking at a summit in singapore, leon panetta rejected speculation the move is an effort to intimidate china. >> mainly in the region and across the world are closely watching the united states-china relationship. some of the the increased

emphasis by the united states and the asia-pacific region as some kind of challenge to china. i reject that view entirely. our effort to renew and intensify our involvement in asia is fully compatible with the development and growth of china. >> it is the 23rd anniversary of the tenement massacre. in the u.s., george zimmerman, the shooter of the unarmed black teenager trayvon martin, has returned to a florida jail after the judge overseeing his trial revoked bail. zimmerman was ordered back behind bars on friday when judge kenneth lester ruled zimmerman had misled the court and the state of his finances and of his passport. zimmerman surrendered to police on sunday. benjamin crump, an attorney for trayvon martin's family, said the ruling added new damage to

zimmerman's credibility. >> remember, it is only george zimmerman's testimony that says trayvon martin attacked him. all of the other objective evidence suggests george zimmerman pursuit and confronted trayvon martin. therefore, that is why this is such an important ruling today is the credibility is the issue, and we think it is the most important ruling so far in this entire case. >> harvard university law professor and consumer advocate elizabeth warren has wrapped up the democratic nomination of massachusetts to challenge republican senator scott brown. orin defeated a primary challenger saturday by an overwhelming margin for the chance to face off against brown this november. warren most recently served in the obama administration, where she helped launch the consumer financial protection bureau.

firefighters in mexico say they're beginning to make progress in a record-breaking while far that is nearly three weeks old. the fire hasn't burned over 241,000 acres -- has burned over 241,000 acres. it is 17% contained with gains reported by the hour. the drug-related violence in mexico claimed the lives of least 18 people over the weekend, and the seven killed in the beach town of aqaba co followed by another 11 in a shooting in a drug rehabilitation center the northwestern city of torreon. a massive protests continued in quebec over the weekend following the breakdown of talks between government officials and student leaders. the two sides remain at an impasse over proposed tuition increase that's prompted a major student strike. student leader said the student strike has grown into a movement for social change after the latest from of negotiations

collapsed. >> at this moment, it is not just a student strike, but a public struggle. we see people in the streets in montreal and all over quebec. >> as the strike grows, organizers of the canadian grand prix in montreal have cancelled the auto event's opening day, citing security concerns. and those are some of the headlines. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. crowds continue to fill cairo's's tahrir square to protest the outcome of the trial of ousted egyptian president hosni mubarak and other former regime officials. on saturday, an egyptian court sentenced mubarak in his former interior minister to life in prison for failing to stop the killing of unarmed demonstrators during last year's protests that in the mubarak's sterley 30-year rule. however, the court dismissed corruption charges against mubarak and his sons on technical grounds.

the court also acquitted six former police chiefs of their roles in the uprising last year when 840 protesters were killed and more than 6000 were injured. no one was found guilty of actually ordering the killing of protesters. the verdicts sparked protests across egypt, with several thousand angry demonstrators gathering in tahrir square as low as andrea -- alexandria, suez, and other cities on saturday. one protester explain why he was unsatisfied with the trial's outcome. >> we are not expecting the verdicts that were announced yesterday. for the six interior ministry aides to be acquitted and the sons of mubarak also acquitted, then who committed these crimes? who killed the revolutionaries? did we tell them? did we kill ourselves?

>> demonstrators say they were concerned mubarak's conviction will likely be reversed on appeal. many protesters were frustrated by the presidential elections, which will see mubarak's last prime minister, ahmed shafik, and a runoff against mohamed morsi of the muslim brotherhood. for more, we go to cairo, egypt to speak with heba morayef who closely monitor the mubarak trial. welcome to "democracy now!" first, your reaction to the verdict. >> we did not have high expectations for this trial because we have seen from the beginning the quality of the investigation conducted by the prosecutors, the kind of witnesses they summoned, and the quality of the evidence they presented. but i still think this hour, shocking for two reasons, even those who are following closely.

the inconsistency and applying the failure to prevent violence standard, the judge sentenced mubarak and the former minister of interior on the grounds they knew of violence and failed to prevent it. but it did not apply the same standard to the four ministry of interior assistant ministers. the head of the riot police, in fact, ordering the deployment, the head of the secret police and security investigations. that was shocking. the acquittal of the four ministry chiefs and the fact despite the evidence presented before the judge, there was not any finding that anyone was responsible. this trial looks at the killing of protesters in tahrir square and the other squares around egypt. there are separate police trowels looking at killings only and from of the police stations but no one has been held responsible for hundreds of

protesters in the square. >> talked about the ministry of interior. >> he presided over the ministry of interior and the best represents what mubarak's was all about. he was the one signing thousands of orders under the emergency law. he presided over the ministry of interior, which used torture systematically and also as part of regular criminal investigations. international crimes were taking place while he was minister of interior. instead of just using the same to aof force we're used new mubarak, there was an escalation in the riot police started using live ammunition against protesters on that day. it is absolutely right that he

is ultimately the one responsible for the with the ministry of interior behaved on those six days, was the trial is looking at. but an equal measure, the other ministry of interior ministers were also decision makers. these were the policy or the officials responsible for the policies of the ministry of interior. at the same time, there's been no accountability. >> white the limited scope of when the killings took place? why were they only tried for the end of, was a, january? >> i'm sorry. >> the scope of when the killings took place, what these men were tried for, it was a limited timperiod of time.

>> and i think that is important to remember. this is a decision the prosecution took. has public prosecutor wa remained in place throughout this entire time. this is why when the protests actually happened, one of the first demands of the 18 days in tahrir and other squares and egypt was for accountability, for justice, for a break with the past. get the prosecutors only looked at those six days of mubarak's rule. there is no attempt to have a broader process of traditional justice that would look at these of torture, look at other cases. the torture case from june 2010, the reason it became so iconic was specifically because he represented the kind of police

abuse that was one of the main things that fueled the anger during the protests. egypt has not had the process of transitional justice. the ministry continues to work pretty much as it did under mubarak. in june, we saw excessive use of force and people losing their eyes because the riot police were shooting rubber pellets at people's heads instead of their feet. we've seen the same torture and practices continue. i think this is the real opportunity -- it was a missed opportunity for the protest movement to push for real torture prosecutions, for the prosecution to attempt -- you don't have to prosecute every police officer, but you could use some of the leaders. this could have been a trial to break with abusive practices of

the past. instead, and i think this is what people are so angry, it is reaffirmed the system is still very much in place and the ministry can protect itself. >> presidential hopeful mohamed morsi of the muslim brotherhood promised to put mubarak on trial again. >> i will immediately put in place a team made up of criminal investigations department and from the prosecutor's office and from experts at the highest level to put forward evidence the acquisitions and grow prevents those who kill the revolutionaries and against those who corrupted the state and those who rent the country, and those who smuggled the country's wealth for decades out of egypt. >> that was mohamed morsi of muslim brotherhood who is running for president. your response, heba morayef? >> welcome i think the muslim brotherhood realizes at this point that it has very little

credibility with the protest movement. on many occasions, for strategic choices on their part, they refuse to join certain protests. in the early months, they did not condemn the force by the ministry or the military. this is why there's been so much growing distrust of the brotherhood by revolutionary activists. but i think the response of the muslim brotherhood, they had already started calling for protests in alexandria's main square, to appear, and other cities around egypt just hours after the verdict. i think that was an indication they realize they cannot quite went against ahmed shafik without getting more support from revolutionaries, and in a sense, they can use the kind of anger that exists right now against the trout, against mubarak, against the previous regime and try to tunnel that to campaign against ahmed shafik.

the question that remains unanswered is to what extent the brotherhood feels it needs the votes of revolutionary activists. if it feels morsi cannot win on his son just based on the islamist votes, we might see serious concessions being offered in the next days. but if these protests are just part of campaigning, then it may just be business as usual. >> i want to turn to egyptian president candidates ahmed shafik who served as mubarak's final prime minister, vowing not to take the country back to prove a revolutionary -- crew revolutionary politics pretty quick they say i will reproduce the previous regime. i say whoever claims this, you do not know egypt and are unaware of the amount of change that took place in egypt since the 25th of january. >> that was ahmed shafik. heba morayef, your response?

>> i think ahmed shafik is also right now trying to pitch to different constituencies. we have seen him attack the brotherhood very enthusiastically over the last few days. we have seen him try to distance himself from hosni mubarak early on, but also his main pitch has been the language of stability -- i will bring back the kind of security you enjoy. i will bring back the economic progress we had before. and people are voting for him because of that. he has been strongly campaigning also against the muslim brotherhood and played in fear mongering about the brotherhood, and over the last few days, also pitched himself to the more secular and liberal constituencies in egypt, talking about the position of women and

tried to present himself in that light. i think the reason some revolutionary activists were hearing calls for boycotts -- an impossible to tell how significant that could be -- is because ahmed shafik is still unacceptable because of who he is. he was prime minister when armed thugs on horses and camels went into the square and the protesters. he was prime minister when a lot of the documents, state security investigations and other documents with corruption, were destroyed and sears the disappear. people see him as someone who tried to protect mubarak up until the last moments of the mubarak regime. i think he cannot gain new credibility with those revolutionary forces, but it can speak for the people who are worried about the security situation and economic situation, and fear the brotherhood because of what they represent. and the brotherhood has helped

by running in the first round, pitching itself in the light of the more conservative islamist party, to distance itself from [unintelligible] the came up with a number of conservative statements. >> finally, heba morayef, the sons of mubarak who were acquitted, could they be retried? and the significance of that no one was convicted of corruption? >> i think it is shocking to see the quality of the evidence on which the prosecution based its referral to trial of alaa and gamal. any first-year law student knows what a statute of limitations is. they will remain in prison or rather in detention because

there is a new investigation that is against them that just did a few days before the trial, giving people the impression, the people realize there would be an acquittal for them on these charges there is not in a series corruption investigation, really. -- there has not been as serious corruption of rustication, really. i think part of it is the question of capacity, but more so political will on the part of prosecution. until they started digging into the records of the ministry into the corruption records, we will not see the stability egypt needs to move on. >> heba morayef, thank you for being with us, speaking to us from cairo, egypt. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. we will be back in a moment.

♪ [music break] ♪ [music break]

>> this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. well, over a year after began, the arab spring movement in the middle east and north africa has toppled three autocratic regimes while continuing to challenge those in syria and bahrain. it's also helped inspire the occupy and labor movements here in the u.s. with demonstrators from lower manhattan to wisconsin taking cues from the hundreds of thousands who flooded cairo's's tahrir square. my next guest argues there's a new, albeit quieter awakening, happening here in the u.s., one that could provide a major boost to the winds of change in the middle east. in his new book, the author and

scholar norman finkelstein argues that american jewish support for the israeli government is undergoing a major shift. after decades of staunch backing for israel that began with the 1967 war to the 1982 invasion of lebanon to the repression of two palestinian intifadas -- finkelstein argues a new generation of american jews are no longer adopting reflexive support for the state that speaks in their name. with this shift in american jewish opinion, norman finkelstein says a new opportunity for a just middle east peace is in the making. his book is called, "knowing too much: why the american jewish romance with israel is coming to an end." it is one of a number of books he has authored over the course of three decades of involvement in the israel-palestine conflict, during which he's come to be known worldwide as one of the most prominent academic critics of israel's occupation of the west bank and gaza. norman finkelstein is also coming out with another new book called, "what gandhi says: about

nonviolence, resistance and courage." both books are published by or books. welcome. >> thank you for having me. >> let's talk about the title, "knowing too much." >> it basically means if you go back 20 or 30 years, most of the scholarship on the israel palestine conflict i think could be accurately described as the novel "exit is" with footnotes. basically, propaganda. most american jews felt at ease with their liberal tenets and supporting, you might say bliley, all of israel's conduct and actions." . a lot more is known about the conflict, not least because of the research of israeli

historians and jewish historians but a lot more is known now about the human rights record to the workings of israeli human rights organizations like jesselyn and also amnesty international and human rights .atch it -- that solem jews tend to be highly literate, and they now know a lot more. it is much more difficult, if not impossible, for american jews to reconcile the liberal police, liberal crete's with the weight israel carries on. >> talk about your involvement in the whole conflict and your books that you've written on it. starting back 30 years ago. >> it is an anniversary, if we can use that word, because i first got involved in the israel-palestine conflict on june 6, 1982. it is literally three decades

coming in the next few days. i first became involved when israel invaded lebanon in june 1982. i used to go every day during my lunch hour and jog over from the upper -- not the upper west side, from the west side at 10th avenue and 26 street, dog over to the israeli consulate on second avenue and 42nd street. i was there demonstrating every day. that is how i first got involved. i ended up it was a weird acronym. it was mostly -- only crazy people were involved in the conflict back then. it's true. it did not reach anywhere near mainstream. as a result of being in that group, the arguments start to

rise on the issue of zionism. are you or are you not a zionist? i turn that into my doctoral dissertation. now i have a kind of academic investment. >> at princeton? >> yes. and i had a personal investment because my parents were not the holocaust survivors. -- nazi holocaust survivors. there was a kind of desire to disassociate -- >> both of your parents were in camps. a >> yes. their entire families on both sides were exterminated during the war. they were the only survivors. you could say i had a triple investment. it was a political investment, the academic investment, and the

personal investment. and the conflict did not end. sometimes people ask me, or claim i have an obsession or fixation on israel. if anyone knows anything about my life, and shalit tend to late in life. i was already 29. i have been active in the anti- vietnam war movement. i had been active with many causes. if i have stuck to a for 30 years, it is because there is no resolution. i am not making excuses, just explaining. i think the remarkable thing now is it is 30 years later, actually, i do believe -- and that is the subject matter of the book -- i believe there are grounds now to be optimistic. i think we have a real opportunity of reaching mainstream of american public

opinion and jewish public opinion. people know a lot more now. people know there's something wrong in that part of the world, which we have known for a long time. but the big differences, now they note israel bears a large burden of culpability for what is going wrong there. that is completely new. just to take one example, if you read israeli historians now, whom you've had on your program, their knowledge freely right from the beginning of the israeli occupation right israel was practicing torture palestinian detainees. they just pass by it as if this is common knowledge. but at the time, during the 1970's, 1980's, it was

impossible to make that claim without being accused of being an anti-semite, or in the case of jews, crazy. but what changed was during the first intifada or the first time is really human rights organizations -- israeli human- rights organizations began documenting these facts. it was delaware blogger marginal people making these claims -- it was no longer marginal people making these claims. there were women. >> the israeli human-rights lawyer. a >> yes. felicia was communist party and leya wa -- and then there was the argument chemistry professor it organic chemist.

these were easily dismissed as marginal people, eccentric. after the 1990's, human rights watch, amnesty international are saying israel is systematically practicing torture. they estimate about 85% of palestinian detainees were being tortured by israel. human-rights watch estimated during the first intifada between 20,000 to 30,000 palestinians had been tortured. and so now is a much different picture. people are aware -- not the details, but you do not really need the details, just for the people who are gauging in fact no worse, the general public has a picture that there is a

significant burden of culpability. so now you can reach them. now there is a possibility. you cannot reach them on any goal, it cannot say israel is doing this or that and therefore israel has to be the face from the world's map. nope. you cannot reach them on that goal. i do not think you should reach them on that goal. but you can reach the broad public on we want to enforce the law. we want israel to be held to the same standard as everyone else -- enforce the law. the law is pretty clear. people say it is nebulous, a gray area. no, the law is pretty straightforward. all 15 judges in the international court of justice say israel has no entitlement to east jerusalem, gaza.

and the palestinians have the right of return, or so says amnesty international and human rights watch. so i think we have a rare opportunity now because the americans are conflict agreed on the one hand they can to beat liberal, which they are, at 80% of jews voted for barack obama for president, which is a much higher percentage than latinos, which was about 63%. if you consider most people vote by virtue of their pockets but, american jews should have been voting republican. but 80% voted for democratic candidate for president. they are liberal. exactly why is a separate issue. >> the most liberal group of voters outside african-americans print a >.

>> by far. they have a great difficulty reconciling their liberal beliefs with the way israel carries on. that's take for example the segment egested. mubarak commits horrendous crimes, gets overthrown. but until the last moment, and even afterwards, netanyahu was attacking the government for being too soft on the demonstrators. wanted to let mubarak go? young american jews do not want to hear that. they identify with the twitter and facebook revolutionaries in tahrir square. now you have the head of state of israel saying the u.s. should have been tougher to keep mubarak in. american jews do not want to defend that. >> let's go to president obama was speaking before the american israel public affairs committee

has annual convention in march. he was touting his military and diplomatic support for the israeli government critics my administration's commitment to israel's security has been unprecedented. our military and intelligence cooperation is never been closer. our joint exercises and training has never been more robust. despite a tough budget and are meant to our security assistance has increased every single year. just as we have been there with our security assistance, we have been there through our diplomacy. when the goldstone report unfairly single out israel for criticism, we challenged it. [applause] when israel was isolated in the aftermath of the flotilla incident, we supported them. [applause] when the durbin conference was commemorated, we boycotted it and will always reject the notion that zionism is racism.

[applause] when one-sided resolutions are brought up at the human rights council, we oppose them. when israeli diplomats feared for their lives in cairo, we enteintervene to save them. whenever an effort is made to delegitimize the state of israel by administration has opposed them. [applause] so there should not be a shred of doubt by now. when the chips are down, i have israel's bac. >> president obama addressing aipac. your response? >> i think the obvious response

is president obama clearly does not believe a word he is saying. that is probably the most troubling or disconcerting thing about listening to an. president obama grew up or got his political start in a liberal-jewish area of chicago in hyde park. and his company, his ground, his constituency was liberal american jews significantly. he knows what he is saying is false. he is probably the most -- he is the least political president, at least in modern american history. he does not really believe a word he is saying. for example, if you read the memoirs of dick cheney ordered donald rumsfeld, like them or not, there is deep conviction there. with dick cheney, when the first meets bush, when bush is clinton

nominate him for president, he says -- and i believe it. many members cannot be taken literally. but he says to bush, "i am very conservative. i am morning the." bushes, "that's okay, we can deal with that." obama has nothing. one day he makes death lists of people to kill in the next day is bob dylan and metal. then he talks about how he supports israel blindly. you could easily matched the money. the next day, palestinian rights. if there's no conviction. in recent book, the author gets a rising obama is actually a liberal jew. so he knows everything he is saying is not true. he says we have israel's back.

what it means the rich american jews has me, obama, in my pocket and i have my hands and their pockets. he wants liberal jewish contributions. >> and you say liberal jews in america are changing their views? but there's still question if you look at two kinds of the information, for example, the poll data which shows a serious decline -- but cannot call it precipitous, but a significant decline in american jewish support for israel. then there is what you might call the anecdotal data, what you might call the high-profile defection. so there is a peter by nard who's a former senior editor at the new republic and then there is david redneck in "the new yorker." both are in influential positions. they may have one finger in the error checking which way the

wind is blowing. they have sensitive antenna. they realize the jewish community is moving in a new direction and we better get with the program. i know i am mixing metaphors. the jewish community is changing. it used to be even as early as say six or seven years ago the chief correspondent for "the new yorker" on the israel-palestine conflict was jeffrey goldberg. and now he has become a kind of character, even of himself, as he tries to defend israel blindly and also no longer at "the new yorker" because the kind of coverage, the kind of just hackneyed propaganda simply will not fly any longer with the american-jewish community. they do not believe it. they do not want to hear it.

at least in the case of netanyahu, and lieberman, there's a certain amount of truth in advertising. it is very difficult from a liberal point of view to justify the way they carry on. just to take one other example, i speak a lot on college campuses. liberal american jews, especially young ones, are very idealistic, as i'm sure you know from your own experience in your own family. they tend to be liberal and idealistic. so 2006, israel invades lebanon on. the last 72 hours, the war is over print it is over. the u.n. has passed a resolution, condoleezza rice is blocking it, the war is not over. in the last 72 hours, israel drops 4 million clusters on south lebanon.

human-rights did a great report called "flooding south lebanon." you are young, jewish, in a college campus you do not want to defend that in public. or it is 2008, 2009, israel invades gaza and drops what phosphorus, it is substance there reaches 1500 degrees fahrenheit. you are young, jewish, idealistic. you do not want to defend those sorts of things. it is just impossible for you, especially if you're a young, it is impossible to reconcile your idealistic liberals credo, believes. young people tend to really believe what they say. there's a certain depth of passion, a conviction -- honest

conviction. they cannot reconcile with the way israel carries on. it is impossible. >> an where d.c. that point of view being expressed in this country? dcf in each politics? in the media? >> most importantly, on the internet. it is not yet and "the new york times" but it is definitely a liberal jewish loggers. during the attack on gaza, and during the assault on the mavi marmara, the liberal jewish bloggers were tough on israel. and there were a few areas of disagreement between myself and them rid another example, which i think it's kind of a luster to. if you go back a generation where professor noam chomsky was doing battle intellectually with the liberal jewish community, so

his main adversaries were people like -- the area of agreement, if you were to take a diagram of the two, they could not even touch. there was no agreement on anything. when i sat down and read peter's book, a representative of the same tradition, and now, i would say i agreed with about 80%. i was very positively surprised by that. the men of various suppressing -- separating me -- the amount of space separating me from them is, ok, there is still a significant 20%, but 80% means a

large overlap. i do not think it is because i have gone soft, moving toward the center. no, i'm not. i have the same principles as always. i think because the spectrum has shifted significantly. >> we're talking to offer, scholar, activist norman finkelstein who is just written a book out this week, "knowing too much: why the american jewish romance with israel is coming to an end." when we come back, we will talk about his other book, "what gandhi says: about nonviolence, resistance and courage." what norman finkelstein found might surprise you. stay with us. ♪ [music break] ♪ [music break]

>> this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. our guest is norman finkelstein who has published two books this week. one, "knowing too much: why the american jewish romance with israel is coming to an end." his other is, "what gandhi says: about nonviolence, resistance and courage." before we go to gandhi, your views on a two-day solution and the whole boycott divestment sanctioned movement? >> one of the problems is the question is often incorrectly

pose. the question is not what my personal views are. we're going to return to it in a moment did i agree with gandhi for did you do not start with what your opinion is. you start with where public opinion is at. the purpose of politics is to try to get people to act on the believes they already hold. i think it is often mistaken, do you support one state or two states, as if politics were questioned about what i support? politics to me is about the maximum you can hope for in tried to reach justice, the maximum you can hope for in a given context. you with said the limit of the spectrum, the very end of the spectrum would be human rights organizations. you consider yourself a left of center program, "democracy

now!", and you have on from egypt? a representative from human rights watch. because you recognize that is the limit of the spectrum of progressive thought in the world we live. maybe we wish to went further than human rights watch, but it does not. that is why you have hrw as the person to be interviewed. >> we consider ourselves to be a grassroots global newshour. >> the limits of progress it opinion. that is how i want to reach. i don't want to go beyond it because then i become -- and no longer reaching people. the limit in the world today is what human rights organizations are saying, with the international court of justice is saying, with the u.n. general assembly is saying, an area of a complete consensus apart from the u.s. and israel, apart from

them, the consensus is clear. it is a two-day summit under june 1967 border and a just resolution of the refugee question based on the right of return and compensation. that is the limit of opening in. my personal views go beyond that? yes, they do. but politics is not about personal opinion. it is about tried to reach a public and getting them to act -- trying to reach the public and getting them to act. to me, that is the only place we can go. the problem i see is not the tactic. who could not support a boycott, the investment, and sanctions? course you should. the problem is the goal. the official bds movement, they come to be agnostic, neutral, or whatever term you want to use on the terissue of it is wrong.

israel. the bds movement, they say, we are a rights based organization based in international law. i agree with that. that is react to go. but the international law is clear. you read the last sentence of the 2004 international court of justice opinion on the war israel has been building in the west bank and the raw last sentence says, look for to two states -- and you read the last sentence and is says, look for tuesdays. if you want to look pass that law or ignored the his report, you'll never reach a broad public. then it is pointless, in my opinion.

we're wasting time. it is a strong word, but it becomes his starkly criminal. there was a time whenever we said made no difference. nobody was listening. you could shout would everyone it, who cares? but now we can actually reach people. there is a possibility. i am not saying with certainty or even probability, but we could reach a broad public. we have to be very careful about the words we use and about the political strategy we mapped out. otherwise, we will have squandered a real opportunity. i do not want to squander it. i have been at this for 30 years, and i would like to reach that rendezvous of victory. i know it is a little selfish. >> and what would victory look

like? >> what the law says. when israel accept its bags and leaves from where does not belong. >> and that is determined -- what would those lines be? >> the lines are clear, june 1967 borders. just let me say, i watched last night, "the five broken cameras." i was very struck. it was a new film. at one point, they said, we want the west bank and gaza. that is the words of a turn to a friend of mine, who went to see the film with, i said -- ohil, what you think the appeal of the film would be that they said it they wanted west bank, gaza, and israel? he said, the filmmakers would take it out pretty >> we have to

leave it there. we will post our discussion on gandhi online. norman finkelstein, "knowing too much: why the american jewish romance with israel is coming to an end." his other book, "what gandhi says: about