In a fiery exchange that shocked even longtime listeners, British author and political commentator Douglas Murray didn’t hold back during his appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience. He directly confronted Joe Rogan over the podcast's increasingly anti-Israel guest lineup—accusing Rogan of platforming conspiracy theorists and self-declared “non-experts” while ignoring credible voices who support Israel’s right to self-defense.
Sitting alongside comedian-turned-political pundit Dave Smith, Murray opened the segment with a loaded question:
“Since the war in Israel began, and since the war in Ukraine began, you’ve had quite a lot of people who are very against both… Do you think you’ve had enough people on who are supportive of the war?”
Caught off guard, Rogan deflected, claiming he doesn’t vet guests based on their politics. But Murray pressed further: “There’s been a tilt. You’ve had wild critics of Israel, but where are the historians? The actual experts?”
The Problem With “I’m Just Raising Questions”
Murray’s takedown escalated when he targeted a particular brand of online influencer Rogan has frequently platformed—people who begin every sentence with “I’m not an expert” and end up presenting opinions as fact.
“If you throw enough sh*t out there, at some point ‘I’m just raising questions’ isn’t a valid excuse. You’re not raising questions—you’re telling people something. And often, it’s wrong.”
Murray didn’t mince words, labeling this pattern as irresponsible and intellectually dishonest. He called out Rogan for giving the microphone to those who lack the credentials, experience, or objectivity to weigh in on serious global conflicts.
“You’ve got comedians talking about Israel like they’re foreign policy analysts. That’s dangerous.”
Exposing Hamas’ Brutal Strategy: "Using Your Humanity Against You"
In one of the most sobering segments of the conversation, Murray broke down what he called the “perverse genius” of Hamas' war strategy—an asymmetric conflict model where one side (Israel) is bound by international law, and the other (Hamas) weaponizes its opponent’s morality.
“Hamas doesn’t just ignore the rules of war—they weaponize your following of them. They hide in schools, launch rockets from homes, and when Israel responds, the civilian casualties become their PR win.”
He described Hamas as a group that thrives on international outrage, not in spite of civilian deaths but because of them. The more gruesome the images in the media, the more pressure is placed on Israel—even when the context is completely distorted.
Murray continued:
“This isn’t sloppy warfighting. It’s a deliberate strategy to make Israel’s restraint look like aggression, and the world falls for it every time.”
Rogan Admits “Tilt” in Guest Lineup
To his credit, Rogan did acknowledge the imbalance in his guest list, admitting that the conversation has skewed against Israel.
“Yeah, probably more tilted towards the idea that perhaps the way [Israel has] done it is barbaric,” Rogan said.
But Murray wasn’t letting it go:
“Why bring on people who openly say, ‘I don’t know what I’m talking about,’ and then let them define the public conversation?”
This moment laid bare a growing frustration with Rogan’s “open forum” style—especially when it comes to global conflicts with real-world stakes. Critics argue that giving conspiracy theorists and ideologically biased commentators the same weight as actual historians and regional experts distorts public understanding and trivializes serious issues.
The Real Question: Does Rogan Have a Responsibility?
This explosive episode pulled back the curtain on a broader issue: Does Joe Rogan, as one of the most influential media figures on the planet, bear responsibility for the narratives his platform promotes?
Douglas Murray clearly thinks so.
“You can’t hide behind ‘I’m just asking questions’ when millions of people are listening, Joe. At some point, it becomes misinformation by omission.”
The discussion ended with a rare moment of reflection. Rogan, clearly unsettled by the confrontation, promised to reconsider the balance of voices on his show.
Whether that will lead to more fact-based, historically grounded discussions—or simply another round of controversy—is yet to be seen.