All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 23, 2025 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
01:19:45
20250623_time-to-finish-the-job-trump-strikes-nuclear-sites
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Iran's Deterrent Strategy 00:09:04
I would be very, very surprised if the Iranians don't attack either with their missiles, their militias, or through direct terrorist activities.
You guys got what you wanted.
You guys got your war.
Are you expecting American troops to fight this war and die on your behalf?
Or are you going to bring the Israelis back, tell them to put their fatigues on and get ready?
I can feel how sad you are.
I can feel how difficult it is for you to see Israel teaching the Iranian regime.
I know that you're sad about the Iranian regime getting targeted because you hate the Jews and you hate Israel.
I don't understand all genocidal prayers.
We should want regime change.
How much we do is a different story.
There are a lot of ways to achieve regime change.
None of them involve boots on the ground.
And you think that it can come and dictate to a country 80 times.
Answer of why your regime is enriching to military grade.
Why you think that's the only thing that's important?
Let me ask you, does Israel have nuclear weapons?
History talks to a lot of your government freedom.
As a person, President Trump kept the whole world guessing over whether the U.S. would strike Iran.
And when it comes to what happens next, he still is.
This cannot continue.
There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days.
Remember, there are many targets left.
Tonight's was the most difficult of them all by far and perhaps the most lethal.
But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed, and skill.
Well, there are many targets left, the president says, and if Iran doesn't play ball, the United States will attack them too.
But the administration took great care yesterday to make clear that the U.S. does not want a long war and that regime change is not the aim.
Is the United States now at war with Iran?
No, Kristen, we're not at war with Iran.
We're at war with Iran's nuclear program.
We don't want a regime change.
We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it's already been built out.
We want to end their nuclear program and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here.
This mission was not and has not been about regime change.
The president authorized a precision operation to neutralize the threats to our national interests posed by the Iranian nuclear program.
The president, though, is not quite so clear.
He posted last night, it's not politically correct to use the term regime change, but if the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why shouldn't there be a regime change?
Well, if the past 10 days show us anything, is that any claim to understand Donald Trump's strategy based on these breadcrumbs is purely speculative.
Only Trump knows his next move, and he likes it that way.
The problem for those who are still soul-searching of whether to back him on striking Iran is that so is the damage the attacks have done.
We don't yet know if Iran's nuclear facilities have been totally obliterated, as President Trump said.
We don't yet know if Iran's massive stockpile of enriched uranium was wiped out in the U.S. attack.
Well, my view of the whole crisis is that too many people are basing their view of it on whether they're instinctively anti-Trump, anti-Israel, or anti-war.
Two things can be true at the same time.
You can support a precision strike on Iran's nuclear facilities without supporting another long conflict in the Middle East.
You can oppose Western involvement without supporting the Ayatollah.
And you can support Israel's position against a nuclear Iran while unequivocally condemning the suffering it's now inflicting on the people of Gaza.
Breaking news, the world is complicated.
And after the events of the past few days, it's not about to get any simpler.
I'd like to welcome my panel now, Anna Kasperin, Executive Producer and host of the Young Turks, Jonathan Konrickus, retired Lieutenant Colonel and IDF spokesman, Dinesh D'Souza, host of the Dinesh D'Souza podcast, and retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett, Assistant Secretary of State under George W. Bush.
Well, General Kimmett, let me start with you.
From a purely military perspective, how successful do you think, first, the Israeli strike on Iran has been?
Because it's ongoing.
And secondly, the intervention by President Trump with American strikes?
I know that there were words being thrown around yesterday, like obliterated, so on and so forth.
But I believe when General Kane says partially destroyed at Fordow, I think that's really the best way to describe it.
We don't have the bomb damage assessment yet.
I think we need to wait for a technical assessment rather than a rhetorical assessment.
So let's give it time.
But I believe that General Kane is right when he says partially destroyed.
There may be some reattacks when the bomb damage assessment comes back and says, this is how much we've taken out.
And to take it out to your standards, to the military standards, we need to reattack this method.
So I think the next time we're going to see planes in the air is either for a reattack or to respond to an Iranian attack on American forces, embassies, or bases in the region.
How likely is it, do you think, that Iran will respond by directly attacking American servicemen and women?
We've seen this before.
When Qasim Sulaimani was targeted, they sent 12 ballistic missiles into al-Assad base.
There were a significant number of casualties.
Thank God there were no deaths.
But it's a prideful nation.
It's in part of the axis of resistance.
It needs to demonstrate that it will resist.
So certainly our force protection elements are in place.
But I don't know, I would be very, very surprised if the Iranians don't attack either with their missiles, their militias, or through direct terrorist activities.
Anna Kasperin, your view of, well, the combined attacks, Israel and United States?
Well, I think Israel has been pushing for regime change in Iran.
The claims that Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon was false.
Not only were they over a year away, according to Netanyahu himself, in being able to develop a nuclear weapon, they didn't even have a mechanism in order to deliver said nuclear weapon.
This has been all about engaging in a regime change war.
That's what this is.
Anyone who's pretending like this is about nuclear weapons is lying to you.
Again, the United States is forced to fight another war on behalf of Israel.
And I just want to ask Honricus a question real quick, because I'm seeing a lot of videos of Israelis leaving Israel to go home to the United States or to Greece or to other European countries.
You guys got what you wanted.
You guys got your war.
Are you expecting American troops to fight this war and die on your behalf?
Or are you going to bring the Israelis back, tell them to put their fatigues on and get ready for a ground invasion?
Because if they want regime change, they're going to need a ground invasion and Americans shouldn't be forced to do it.
I will let Jonathan Konrickis respond.
All I would say, in relation to your super confidence that Iran was not planning to weaponize its enriched uranium, what else could they possibly have been planning, given they took the enrichment process, according to the independent Atomic Energy Authority, they took their enrichment of uranium from the 3.5% required for civilian usage to 60% in the last few years.
There is no other reason you would do that if you weren't at the very least wanting people to believe that you were going to be weaponizing your uranium.
Otherwise, why do it?
Well, I mean, they were not enriching uranium under the Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA, which unfortunately Trump took the pressure from Netanyahu to pull out of in 2018, which essentially cleared the way for Iran to enrich uranium.
Now, yes, they enriched up to 60%.
You need 90% in order to have the material necessary to build a nuclear weapon.
However, I think what Iran was doing, considering the fact that they're in a region of thugs in Israel who clearly have been announcing that they want regime change in Iran, they wanted a deterrent.
I think that's what they were doing.
And as this war in Gaza, this genocide in Gaza continues, I think they wanted some form of a deterrent, much like Israel has with their over 90 nuclear weapons that they don't acknowledge, of course.
They're not part of the non-proliferation treaty, even though Iran was.
Just really interesting comparisons there.
Okay, General Kimmy, I know you have to leave us.
Jonathan Kirukas, I will come to you in one moment, but I just want to ask the general to respond to that.
Is there a naivety by many on the left, you think, about Iran's intentions with this enriched uranium?
Because I oppose the Iraq war as a newspaper editor in the UK very vociferously.
Frustration Over Israel's Wins 00:09:00
It cost me my job in the end, actually.
But I think I was vindicated over time by subsequent events.
But here I just looked at that independent atomic energy report and I thought, well, what else could they possibly be doing?
If you enrich your uranium at that level and you have enough to build potentially 10 atomic bombs, I don't know what else Iran wanted the world to think it was doing.
Enough about nine to five.
What about the most important bit, the five to nine?
It should be the most comfortable part of your day and today's sponsor can help.
Cozy Earth's bamboo sheets are temperature regulating and designed to wick away both heat and moisture so you can sleep several degrees cooler.
They're soft, breathable and guaranteed to give you a more comfortable night's sleep.
They also have high quality breathable clothes for all day luxury.
You can try it all risk-free with Cozy Earth's 100 night sleep trial and a 10-year warranty.
If you don't love their products, you can return them hassle-free, but trust me, you won't want it.
Luxury shouldn't be out of reach.
Go to cozyearth.com and use code PEERS, P-I-E-R-S, for up to 40% off.
Cozy Earth's best-selling temperature regulating sheets, clothes, and more.
You will feel the difference on the very first night.
That's cozyearth.com.
Promo code PEARS.
Stay cool.
Listen, I think we need to recognize that for the past 30 years, Prime Minister Netanyahu has been warning the world about the Iranian nuclear threat.
What is different about today?
Listen, the excuses and the rationale that was used are the same ones that could have been used 20 years ago.
Fact remains, October 7th changed everything.
The axis of resistance and the ring of fire was a deterrent to Israel ever since it was established.
Hundreds of thousands of weapons, hundreds of thousands of missiles and warheads were aimed at Israel and could, as was said at Thermopylae, could blot out the sky and overwhelm any kind of air defense system that the Israelis had put up.
Since October 7th, the Israelis have methodically taken away and torn away and destroyed most of that capability.
Deterrence was off.
This is a once-in-a-lifetime generation for the Israelis to attack.
And every Israeli pilot for the past 30 years has wanted to be the first one in the cockpit to end that nuclear program.
The fact that the ring of fire was destroyed and it was now a manageable threat from Iran, no longer deterrence.
This is the once-in-a-generation opportunity, and Netanyahu took that opportunity.
Final question before I let you go.
But it wasn't Israeli pilots.
It was American pilots.
Let's be clear about that.
American pilots did this incredibly risky mission.
Luckily, none of them got hurt.
But this is going to start a full-blown war with Iran, a war that the United States should not be fighting on behalf of any foreign country, including Israel.
It's unacceptable.
How many liars do American taxpayers and members of our military need to be slaves to the Israeli government?
I need someone to answer that question.
Okay, listen, I know General.
A genocidal regime.
Hang on.
General Kemet does have to go.
I just want to ask you before you go, just one last question.
Would you, as a military commander, have been comfortable about what the IDF has been doing at the behest of the Israeli government in the last three months in Gaza?
Well, I'd rather answer the question directly of Gaspar and look, as somebody who's worn a uniform for 30 years, the conditions that had been set by the Israeli defense and the Israeli air forces and Mossad meant that this was not only the most lethal attack since Hiroshima, but it was also the safest attack.
The fact remains, the IAF had wiped out the air defenses.
Mossad had put a lot of pressure.
This was the safest operation, not to include the great deception plan, where President Trump used Winston Churchill's axiom that the truth is so important, it must be a bodyguard of lies.
And I would tell you right now, there's not an American pilot that was worried about this attack and had anything but pride for this attack.
Okay, and just finally, the answer to my question?
If it was about Gaza, again, I think that when you, I certainly don't commend the killing of innocents and civilians, but you know that when the enemy wraps itself around civilian targets, civilian facilities.
You support genocide.
That facility is now no longer.
It is now a military target.
I don't necessarily see at this point that it's genocide for the simple reason that the Gazans and Hamas have an opportunity to end that, and that's to return the hostages and end this carnage.
In previous actual genocide...
And you know it.
You know it.
They're shooting and killing civilians at humanitarian aid hubs, dozens of them on a daily basis.
Literal children are getting shot in the middle of the fight.
It is a good time.
It's a genocide.
It's a genocide.
You are right.
It is a good time for me to leave.
I thought we were going to have a discussion, not propaganda.
Thank you.
General Kemet, I appreciate you joining us.
Thank you very much.
We're going to be joined on the panel by Kave Afrasiabi, a former advisor to Iran's nuclear negotiating team who was arrested in the U.S. for alleged spying before being pardoned by Joe Biden.
But before we speak to him, I want to talk to Jonathan Kimrickers.
A lot has been said in the last few minutes.
What's your response?
Well, hello, everyone.
You know, I can, even though I've never met the person who is constantly interrupting others, I don't think we've ever even communicated on X.
But I can feel your frustration.
I can, no, don't interrupt me.
I can feel your frustration.
I can feel how sad you are.
I can feel how difficult it is for you to see Israel teaching the Iranian people.
That you're sad about the Iranian regime getting targeted all because you hate the Jews and Iran.
I can understand that you're having a tough time dealing with reality.
You have to actually argue why are IDF soldiers shooting and killing children and humanitarian genocidal pricks?
And frankly, the whole world is not a problem.
I'm not here to answer your questions, Mrs. Interrupter.
I'm not here to answer your question.
Last time I checked, this wasn't your channel.
This wasn't your channel, and you've done nothing but interrupt.
In the world, constantly taking from the American people.
You've only been talking nonsense so far, and I've been sitting here and listening to lives and in the form of American tax nonsense.
And you feel like you're not going to be able to do that.
Sorry, guys, we need to hear it.
Don't talk over each other.
There's no point.
I can't stand these people and their disgusting lies.
And then you started interrupting, and you started to feel impolite.
I can speak over you.
Not even facts, David.
We can't have a debate.
We can't have a debate if you don't let Jonathan stuff.
At least let's say that Jonathan say what he wants to say, then you can respond.
Listen, Pierce, this isn't going to work.
Clearly, you can see that she's here to instigate.
She's here to instigate.
She is here to instigate.
She constantly interrupts.
That is not a way to have a meaningful discussion.
And if I ask you to kindly put her in place so that at least I could say two or three sentences.
Put her in place.
That's the first one.
Now I can understand the frustration of so many people that are Israel haters, disguising as liberals, disguising as humanitarians.
I can see and feel, and I even have compassion for your feelings that you see the great empire that the Iranians built against us.
It is being decimated piece by piece, and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
And it must be frustrating.
It must be frustrating to see Israel.
The U.S. have occupied the American government on a lot of people.
It must be frustrating to see Israel persisting and winning and defeating our enemies despite the efforts of the likes of you and many others who have teamed up against Israel.
And I can understand the frustration, but guess what?
It's not going to help.
Your opinion isn't true.
It is not reality-based.
Just like you just said in the beginning that Israelis are fleeing.
On the contrary, Israelis are leaving.
US Government Occupation 00:02:28
You get aroused every second.
There's actually a national airlift to get home.
There's an Israeli national airlift to get Israelis from all over the world, from Greece and from Cyprus.
Please not everyone speaking to the people.
Israelis need to go back to Israel.
All right, Kinan.
Okay, I'm not going to go.
I'm going to bring in Dinesh here, and I would appreciate if everyone just let each other talk.
Otherwise, the viewers can't hear a damn thing.
Dinesh, thank you for your patience in waiting so long to speak.
First of all, what is your, I mean, look, there's a lot of speculation about what Donald Trump may do next.
I happen to think that he is instinctively anti-war.
I don't think there's any chance he wants to put any boots on the ground here.
I think if he can make it one and done with the strikes that he ordered, I think he would be happy with that as he was with the strikes against Syria, against Soleimani, against Baghdadi.
He's a guy who likes to go in, targeted, and out.
I don't think he wants any kind of prolonged war.
However, once you do something like Trump ordered at the weekend, it can be out of your hands.
It really depends how Iran responds.
What do you think is going to happen here?
I think that we are learning that Trump represents a repudiation of the Bush tradition, but he doesn't represent a repudiation of the Reagan tradition.
Trump is quite willing to use force, but he uses it discriminately.
He uses it quickly and decisively.
And Trump's own rhetoric very much supports this.
I think that a lot of this anxiety is because of the bad lessons that came out of the Iraq war.
But Iran is not Iraq and Trump is not Bush.
And the fictional weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are not the same as functioning nuclear facilities enriching uranium in Iran.
So I think that it's important to look at this situation for what it is.
Now, who can argue that the world is not better off when Iran doesn't have nuclear capacity?
Whether there's a 50% chance that they were going to get there, a 70% chance, a 90% chance, it would be really good to have a 0% chance that they could get there at all.
Stain on American Reputation 00:02:09
This is a fanatical militant regime.
It is different than places like China and Russia in that it has always had an ideology of global involvement, global destruction, global terrorism, death to America.
You don't have to seek for a motive here.
They deliver it to you from the Iranian parliament on a pretty daily basis.
So the United States has very definite interests here.
The interest is not necessarily in regime change, although I, for one, would welcome it.
Who can argue that Iran would not be better off than under the mullahs?
And I think the big losers here are, in fact, Iran, Hamas, but also the global left.
The global left has partnered in a way with these Hamas radicals.
And so they are taking a tremendous beating here.
All their idiotic campus protests are for naught.
So this is why we're getting all this screaming and hysteria from Anna, because she realizes that not only is Iran going down, so is our own economy.
I don't like watching children get slaughtered by a genocidal regime that we're unfortunately funding with our taxpayer dollars and with military weapons.
That's what I don't like.
Look at Conriquez.
Look at how flippant he is when it comes to children getting killed.
That's the kind of person you are, Konriquez.
Disgusting.
Absolutely disgusting.
Hey, I'm Caitlin Becker, the host of the New York Postcast, and I've got exactly what you need to start your weekdays.
Every morning, I'll bring you the stories that matter, plus the news people actually talk about.
The juicy details in the world of politics, business, pop culture, and everything in between.
It's what you want from the New York Post wrapped up in one snappy show.
Ask your smart speaker to play the NY Postcast podcast.
Listen and subscribe on Amazon Music, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
It is a stain.
It is a stain on America's reputation.
Okay, Anna, you made your views about Jonathan clear.
Disgusting terrorists.
All right, can we try and keep things, please, less ad hominem?
It's a bit pointless to screaming abuse at him.
Accusations of Iranian Espionage 00:03:48
Let me bring in, if I may.
What do you call a regime that slaughters children, Willie Miller?
You can have your arguments about it.
And by the way, I share a lot of your arguments, but I think abusing another guest on a panel for as long as you've been doing is a bit pointless and self-defeating.
I don't think viewers like it.
I don't think he deserves a little bit of abuse, considering what he's been in.
You've given it more than a little bit of abuse.
Let me bring in an action on the other side.
Let me bring in our other guests who said disgusting.
Let me bring in Kave Afrasiabi.
I mean, the big question I would have for Iran is, why were you enriching uranium to 60% if you had no intention of building nuclear weapons to a weaponized degree?
It makes no sense.
Mr. Morgan, I'm very unhappy with how you mischaracterized me a minute ago.
I was not charged as a spy for Iran.
I was an international affairs consultant for Iran's mission for 13 years under UN norms and guidelines.
And in the last 24 hours of the first Trump administration, he decided that I'm in violation of U.S. law and brought these phony charges against me.
What I was doing was in line with all the other consultants for other country missions, none of whom have registered as a foreigner.
Okay, but everything I said was accurate.
So let's get look, everything I said was accurate.
No, no, you are not accurate and you're now putting yourself up in Joe Biden.
I'm accused of being a spy and I will bring a major defamation lawsuit on you.
Oh, fine.
Let me ask you two questions.
Let me ask you two questions.
Let me answer your question.
Let me ask you two questions.
Let me ask you, can you stop talking?
I'm in the Supreme Court against Harvard right now.
And I will bring a major lawsuit.
I'm sure you will.
I look forward to receiving it.
Let me answer your question.
Let me ask you two questions first.
Is it true that you were accused of spying?
No, absolutely not.
You were?
No, I was not.
What were you accusing?
And I sued successfully the UPI.
I said, is it true you were accused of spying?
Is it true you're accused of it?
No, absolutely not.
I was accused of violating the Ford Agent Registration Act, FARA, which requires registration, but not for people who work under the UN mandate.
But you were arrested.
I was arrested for 24 hours.
I denied the charges.
I represented myself.
I didn't say you were found guilty.
No, you accused me of being working as a spy for Iran, which is unaware of the...
I didn't accuse you of anything.
No, you said that I've been charged with being a spy.
No, I didn't.
I said you were accused of it.
You're a damn liar.
I did not.
The whole world heard you.
And you come and say you didn't.
And when you watch this back, you will regret your outburst because you misheard it.
No, I will bring a major lawsuit on your head.
Oh, you know what?
Do what you like, mate.
I couldn't give a damn.
You know, I'm a plaintiff against Harvard.
I represented myself for 30 years.
Do you want to do an interview or not?
I mean, the U.S. Supreme Court.
Do you want to do an interview about what's happening or not?
Or do you want to?
I will answer your question.
I will answer your question.
Well, answer it then.
First, what the U.S. did was a violation of the IAEA statute prohibiting armed strikes against nuclear facilities, which should have been immediately condemned by the governing board of the IAEA, just as the EU 10 days ago.
So that wasn't my question, was it?
That wasn't my question.
You said you were going to answer my question.
You're not answering my question.
Misframing the Iranian Population 00:15:33
My question was, why did Iran enrich its uranium stocks to 60%?
That is my question.
Okay, I answer you by first of all pointing out that what you said that IAEA says that there's no other purpose for it.
It's a lie.
There's no such a thing in IAEA report.
The IAE report of March 2025 says, and I quote, since February 2025, Iran has been facilitating the implementation of a strengthened safeguard at its facilities.
Now, is that the profile Another report which said that Iran was obfuscating not allowing access to international supervisors.
Let me answer.
Let's not forget the last standing report of the Board of Government.
60% enrichment has medical uses.
Mrs. Angry Screaming Lady does not represent a violation of the IAEA safeguards.
All the facilities that were bombed were under international safeguards.
And it should have been condemned immediately because it's also a violation of the UN Charter because Iran has not threatened the U.S. U.S. engage in a unilateral act of militarism against your leader.
Your supreme leader has not been able to do it.
Your super-Iranian regime was enriching to military grade uranium.
Are we going to hear why, Mr. Negotiator?
And again, I hold you in high respect because you have done an outstanding job.
A tremendous outstanding job.
For 25 years, you have facilitated for the Iranian regime.
We develop nuclear weapons, and it is through the skill and rhetoric of people like you that this has been on for so long.
Can we get to the answer of why the Iranian regime is enriching the USA?
Can we get to an answer of why your regime is enriching to military grade?
Why it has an Israeli facility underground, 80 meters underground?
You don't do that if your intentions are peaceful.
Mr. Negotiator, you don't do it if your intentions are peaceful.
You have nothing to hide.
You have no reason to build force.
You are such a hypocrite.
You think that Israel is exceptional?
Is a chosen public agency board of governors stated clearly Iran is in violation.
Iran is not allowing international inspectors to come and see.
And Iran has enough fissile material for 10 nuclear bombs.
That was the smoking gun that eventually caused President Trump to understand the severity of the situation.
Yes, and that was what tipped the scales.
You know, you just said that.
People can't.
If you all talk over each other, nobody can hear a word anybody says.
Let me ask you, Mr. Afra CRB, let me ask you this.
Do you deny for the record that Iran has sponsored terrorism through Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah going back several decades?
I've been very critical of Iran's support for Hamas.
I wrote an article right after October 17, USA Today, denouncing Hamas's ISIS-type attack on innocent civilians.
I've been very critical of Iran's obsession with Israel in various books, including Trump and Iran Right Behind Me, which has been highly praised in foreign affairs, as well as many other articles.
I have called on Iran to stop its Israel phobia because it's not in the national interest of Iran to be so obsessed with Israel, which incidentally, in 1984, I've written a book on an Israeli operative, Amiram Nir, who was singularly responsible for shipping out missiles to Iran defending against Saddam Hussein.
Iran should be thankful to Israel for the support that was given to it to safeguard it against the US.
You've now said something.
If you don't mind me being, you know, you've now said something genuinely interesting and surprising and constructive to the debate, right?
Which is you've acknowledged that Iran should not have been sponsoring terrorism with groups that are wedded to eradicating Israel off the face of the earth.
And that's been the problem.
But that has been...
Iran should have never said Israel should be wiped off the map because it's contrary to Iran's national interest.
The Mullahs have done a lot of things wrong, and I'm on record longer.
Well, that's good to hear you say it.
That's good to hear you say that.
No, but I cooperated selectively with Iran for the sake of a nuclear agreement, which was a win-win and a non-proliferation net plus.
And President Trump made a terrible mistake and Netanyahu was pressured to withdraw to set the stage for the United States.
The problem is, the problem is, I've got to jump in if you're running out of time, but the problem is that the last report made it clear that the Iranian regime has been obfuscating and lying and hiding stuff and stopping them from doing their job.
So you have a significantly enriched uranium program going on, going up nearer and nearer to weapons grade, and they're not allowing the inspectors to do their job.
You put the two and two things together and you get four if you add two and two together.
Let me ask Dinesh.
Let me ask Dinesh.
Hang on, hang on.
Hang on.
Dinesh, you wanted to say something quickly.
I wanted to make a point about the issue of who is responsible for what.
Now, when regimes start wars, they are responsible for the fate of their own children.
I mean, if I come and do a home invasion on you, right, and threaten your children and you strike back, and then I go grab my own kids and stick them in front of me and say, don't shoot, don't shoot, because I'm holding my own kids.
The truth of it is I am putting my kids in jeopardy, not you.
You have every right to retaliate against me.
And you better use the women as well.
I am the one who is not a good person.
I am the one who is putting our civilians.
You better use the same standard, but you won't.
You won't use the same standard.
Let me finish.
I want to hold the panel here for two minutes.
I want to just have a quick conversation with Ambassador John Bolton, the National Security Advisor to Donald Trump during his first term.
Mr. Bolton, thank you for joining me.
I realize you only have a few minutes here.
Well, just...
Hey, Mike Baker here, host of the President's Daily Brief podcast.
If you want straight talk on national security, foreign policy, and the biggest global stories going on of the day, this is the show for you.
We publish twice a day, Monday through Friday, once in the morning, again in the afternoon.
And on the weekend, we go longer with the PDB Situation Report with excellent guests, including national security insiders and foreign policy experts.
Check us out on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you get your podcast.
Also on our YouTube channel at President's Daily Brief.
Mr. Bolton, if you could just tell me, what is your assessment of where we are right now?
You have the Israeli strikes now, the America strikes, many people fearing that Iran is going to react in a spectacular fashion by way of retaliation.
Others think their capability to do that has been severely diminished.
People fearing there may have to be a ground invasion and so on.
Where do you think we really are here?
Well, I think we've made a good first start in destroying the Iranian nuclear weapons program and its ballistic missile program.
I wish the U.S. and Israel had gone in together much earlier, but we are where we are.
The president finally made the right decision.
Now's the time to finish the job.
And finishing the job to me means overthrowing the Ayatollahs.
There's not going to be peace and security in the Middle East while this regime is in power.
President, I don't think he's there yet, although he's beginning to signal.
Maybe he is.
Doesn't require boots on the ground.
There are lots of ways to get to regime change.
The population is extraordinarily dissatisfied with the Ayatollahs.
And I think you could see fragmentation at the top.
That kind of instability is what you need to bring the regime down.
But isn't the lesson we've learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, wherever we've tried to effect regime changes, it tends not to work.
And in fact, the most effective way is to allow the people of a country, as we saw with Syria last December, actually doing the regime change themselves.
Isn't that the, I mean, I think actually that's what Donald Trump was indicating in his tweet.
I think that he was indicating a regime change coming from within, from the dissatisfied people of Iran, as you rightly put it.
Not that there should be American interference facilitating any kind of regime change.
Well, there are two aspects of this.
First is the removal of the existing authoritarian regime.
And second is the creation of the substitute.
I think we did the right thing in removing the Taliban and the right thing in removing Saddam Hussein.
And in Syria, the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group didn't prevail over Assad without extraordinary Turkish help.
So that's how it goes.
Now the question is, how do the people of the country affected establish their own regime?
And it clearly is the case that they should be primarily responsible.
I said back at the time of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein that the U.S. role should be to hold the ring around the outside, prevent the Iranians from interfering, and basically say to the people of Iraq, here's a copy of the Federalist Papers.
This may be helpful to you.
Why don't you form your own government?
You don't enhance political maturation by making decisions for other people.
You enhance political maturation by making them make decisions for themselves, including mistakes from which they learn.
Donald Trump is making slightly ambiguous statements at the moment.
Would you want him to be clearer about his intentions?
Or is this all part of him not letting the other side know what he really wants to do?
Well, I don't think he knows what he really wants to do.
I think he's just gone around the circle now to see what he could come up with.
But as others have observed, one very important change that I think he's making is yesterday the vice president said, we do not want regime change in Iran.
That is absolutely wrong.
We should want regime change.
How much we do is a different story.
And I think Trump obviously is not going to contemplate putting troops in.
But I want to say again, there are a lot of ways to achieve regime change.
None of them involve boots on the ground necessarily.
This is a different context.
You have a very educated population in Iraq.
The young people, 60% are under 30.
They know they could have a different life.
They can see it across the Gulf in Dubai and Abu Dhabi and Doha.
I think things would move in a very positive direction without particularly significant U.S. involvement.
Ambassador Bolton, I appreciate you joining me.
Thank you very much.
I know you've got a busy day.
Thank you.
Thanks for having me.
Anna Kasparian, I mean, here's my sort of issue, I guess, with a lot of people on the left in relation to this story, is that you end up sounding like you're siding.
Hang on one second, please.
Please allow me to talk to different members of the panel.
Is it that on the left, you end up sounding like you're shilling for a vile regime?
You know, the Iranian regime oppresses women.
Hang on, hang on, let me clear it.
Hang on.
They oppress the woman.
I know what you're going to say.
I hate the regime in Iran.
Right.
I hate the regime.
So why wouldn't you want it changed?
There are Armenians living in Iran right now who hate the mullahs.
Okay, but regime change should not be spurred by the United States and Israel, which wants to install a puppet government on their behalf.
And by the way, the Iranians know that.
They know that.
Polling indicates the vast majority of them want regime change.
They don't want it to be done by Israel.
You have to be clear about that, because I think there's an intentional misframing or false framing of what's happening in Iran right now and what the population actually wants.
Now, with that out of the way, my issue, Pierce, is that the United States has been expending its resources and has been essentially sending its soldiers to die in wars on behalf of Israel, a country that goaded us into invading Iraq on a false pretense of weapons of mass destruction.
4,000 of our soldiers died in Iraq.
You didn't send a single IDF soldier.
Not one IDF soldier was sent to Iraq.
Our soldiers died on your behalf, Conriquez, on your country's behalf.
Not at all.
I'm sick of it.
I'm sick of it.
You guys are committing a genocide right now.
You can't deal with it.
Yet you're a nuclear power.
That's not in the non-proliferation agreement.
Why?
Why is it Israel is sick?
How come you guys get to play by completely different rules?
You're genocidal.
You're just better size for what you are.
Let him off the people of Israel.
That's him.
Genocidal government.
You guys make him so proud and so deep.
You make me sick.
Let's imagine.
Let's imagine that.
I'm so sick even thinking about it.
We know that he makes you feel that.
So maybe you're let him answer.
For God's sake, we're trying to have a conversation here.
I'm trying to answer what you're saying, but you're not even acknowledging me as a person.
Instead of just screaming at me and looking like a lunatic who just keeps on screaming at other people, could you for a second allow me to say two sentences?
No, you don't speak on behalf of anybody but yourself.
You weren't elected.
You don't represent anybody.
You're a talk show host and you don't represent anybody.
You've never stood for anything.
You've never fought for anything.
You're a talk show host and you don't represent anybody.
And the fact that you think that it's effective to accuse me of all kinds of nonsense and you think that that will rattle me, I'm sorry to disappoint you.
Many and better people before you have tried and they have all failed.
But let me tell you something.
Your hatred of the people.
Let me say it in a way that you'll understand.
Your hatred of Israel is blinding you.
You're not able to distinguish between different situations and you find yourself supporting a genocidal regime.
And I think that is so confusing for people to see.
I hate the government of Israel.
Don't even start talking.
I'm going to literally give up.
I feel bad for the people of Israel.
Let me ask Carve this question.
Carve, in an ideal world, Carvey, do you think it's right, as John Bolton said, that the youngest of the people are going to be a person?
This isn't fair.
She's been screaming over me the entire conversation.
I've said one sentence, and I've been sitting here for 45 minutes.
I agree.
I would really like to say one sentence without her screaming like some crazy person totally consumed by our guys are such victims.
Right, so I would like to say one thing.
You're going to contain yourself for 20 seconds.
Could you contain yourself for 20 seconds, please?
Like, you've been screaming and ranting all over this debate, and it's not meaningful.
People don't hear what you say.
They don't hear me.
Final Word to Iranian Guest 00:06:25
Nobody makes sense of it.
So please do me a favor.
Do me a favor and allow me at least to say two sentences.
The Iranian regime now is struggling, like any dictatorship, with a new and dynamic situation.
They're not used to not being in the driving seat.
They're not used to not dictating in events.
And for the first time in 25 years, Israel is taking the initiative.
And Israel has now peeled back the layers of the ring of fire around Israel.
And Israel is, yes, and I can say this not officially as a spokesperson, but this is what I understand.
Israel definitely is trying to bring about regime change in Iran.
Why?
Because it would be better for the entire region, for the Iranian people, and definitely for Israel.
Many people, but many people.
All right, but Jonathan, many people also, Jonathan, also thinking about it.
For goodness sake, many people, Jonathan, also think there should be regime change in Israel because of what it's been doing in Gaza.
So there's a lot of talk of regime change.
Yeah, well, okay, but yeah, but that's called elections.
And I have many friends, I have friends and family who feel the same way, and I have others who feel differently.
And luckily for Israel, luckily for us who live here, and luckily for the two million Arabs who live in Israel, Israel is a democracy.
We get to vote and we get to vote what we like.
Currently, we have a government who I think is definitely should be criticized for many things and how it has managed those situations since October 7.
But I think the government and the prime minister has done a very brave and good thing for the future of the region in attacking Iran.
Okay, let me give the final word to our Iranian guest.
Over to you, Kavey, for your final word here.
Well, Mr. Morgan, it is abundantly clear that two nuclear-armed states are ganging up on another state, the regional rival, using a lame excuse of proliferation in order to cause regime change, partly because Iran is part of a new multi-colour world, a member of the Shankar Cooperation Organization, part of the BRICS nation.
And the United States has been seeking a rollback of the historic Iranian revolution for 46 years and now are seizing on this opportunity in a very systematic fashion using their mouthpieces such as your guests here in order to provide the state setting for this rollback strategy.
And all these spinners like the warming, who Mr. Trump himself labeled as a warminger who didn't like a war that didn't start in the world, is not cheering Mr. Trump because Mr. Trump is exercising implementing his script for regime change in Iraq.
This is a tragedy of international law, the violation of the UN Charter.
Most of the world leaders have condemned it.
And Iran, by the way, was paralyzed.
Actually, I don't think that's true.
Israel is finally paralyzed.
I don't think it's true.
I don't think it's true that most world leaders have condemned it.
It's under a financial hemorrhage and hundreds of Iranian missiles have landed in Israel and have penetrated the paper dome, which you call iron dome.
And you talk about regime change.
Oh, look at the look at the destructions in Tel Aviv that's making Tel Aviv into another Gaza.
Let's talk again in six months and let's hear what you say.
I've got to leave it there.
Israel is tiny and consequential.
I've got to end it there because honestly, honestly, I am completely and utterly.
I'll tell you what, I'm hallucinating.
I am hallucinating.
I am hallucinating.
The only regime change is the only regime.
Okay, I am hallucinating.
I'm exhausted.
I'm bringing it to an end.
Thank you all very much.
Well, joining me now is former Israeli Prime Minister and former IDF Chief of Staff, Ehu Barak, Israel's former prime minister, defense minister, and IDF chief of staff.
Mr. Barak, thank you very much indeed for joining me again on Uncensored.
We're going to talk about Gaza in a moment.
But first of all, what was your reaction when you heard that Israel had initially launched an attack on Iran?
Because that must have been something that you had contemplated yourself when you were prime minister.
First of all, I was not surprised, of course, of the air for a long time, but the results of the first day and first eight days is extremely impressive.
The far-sighted planning, the accurate preparation, the resolute execution, everything that was lack in October 7 was there.
And it had a very good impact on the deterrence of Israel, on the respect to it among neighbors and in the world, even the self-confidence of the public in the capabilities of its own defense forces and of the leadership.
So it's basically positive as long as we assume, and I believe and hope that the information provided is accurate, namely that there was a compelling need to do it, namely that there was genuine intelligence material proving that Iranians trying or starting the rush toward weaponization of their military nuclear program.
I think that the last 48 hours made the world and the region in even better situations is America intervened in a concrete and focused target.
I think that is an important signal, even to Putin in the Kremlin regarding whatever Moldova or the Latvians, and even Xin Beijing about, say, Kaku Island or Taiwan.
It's a good message that America cannot just talk hectically and in a non-consistent manner, but also order action.
Delaying Nuclear Capability 00:07:50
Yeah, and I think what you touched on there is very significant: that it really comes down, I guess, to whether people believe that Iran was planning to weaponize its enriched uranium.
To which I've said to people, well, if it wasn't, then why would it need to take the enrichment of its uranium stocks from 3.5% to 60%?
There's only one reason that you would need to do that.
And that is if you're preparing to weaponize it, isn't it?
Look, there is no doubt that Iran intends to reach nuclear military capability.
They're trying to walk in the footsteps of North Korea in a way, kind of Pakistan, not to repeat the mistakes of Qaddafi capitulating after Lockerbie or the black,
South Africa capitulating their aspiration during the change of regime and not risking a surgical attack like Israel's kind of launch on Saddam in 1881 or Kiya 81 and later on a generation later on on Assad Jr. in 2007.
So basically they are trying to follow in the footsteps of North Korea and they are doing it very systematically and bypassing the tricking.
But having said that, they were at 2018 when Trump went out of the JCPOA under encouragement from Netanyahu.
They were 18 months afar from a state, a threshold nuclear state.
As a result of America withdrawing from the agreement, there are now 18 days or probably minus 18 days.
They are basically there.
And there is a major problem here.
We are now in the efficiency of the obliteration of whatever of Fordu and Natasha.
That's not accurate.
If you talk tomorrow to professionals, they will tell you that neither Israel, Israel cannot delay their Coming to into nuclear weapon or nuclear demonstration somewhere in the desert of the capacity to have a nuclear reaction, we cannot delay them by more than several weeks.
And the Americans cannot delay them by more than several months because they have the material, they have the know-how, they have the scientists in spite of the elimination of 14 of them.
Iran is a scientific power.
I follow physics for my personal background.
And the amount of publication and physics, including nuclear physics, by Iranian scientists is amazing, much bigger than the Israeli, I hope not more than the UK contributes.
So I don't think that they have any physical obstacle.
I hope that Ford was destroyed more than we can see from the satellite for sure.
Natal suffered the major damage, but that's not the case.
You can enrich the 450 kilograms of enriched uranium to 60% to do it to 90 plus, which is the weapon trade, within two weeks, having several hundred centrifuges in advanced centrifuges in some garage or in some deserted mine somewhere in Iran.
We cannot, we do not pretend to know everything about Iranians.
They are too sophisticated for this.
I accurately, vividly remember the running after the North Korean or the Pakistani, or even those who remember running after Israel in the 60s by the Kennedy administration.
In retrospect, you always find that the country was determined to reach nuclear capability found itself always ahead of the best estimates of foreign intelligence system.
So we have to be careful.
I see four scenarios now.
One, Trump joined hands with Israel with the denied objective of toppling the regime.
It's probably a good wish for Israelis, but I don't believe that is there.
I think that Trump is for the one shot and hopefully not being reattacked by Iran responded in Qatar or in Bahrain.
There are huge American bases there.
The second possibility is that a weakened and in a way more vulnerable, somewhat even humiliated, which is not helpful in this situation, Iran will come to the negotiating table and hopefully an agreement which is somewhat better in certain from the JCPOA might be achieved.
Once again, we have to remember that in the previous one, they were held 18 months from being the threshold.
Now, in order to do this, you have to do them to agree to probably take all these enriched uranium to Russia under commitment that they will not give them back unless certain terms have been achieved or conditions came to materialize.
So that's the other problem.
It's a good possibility for both Israel and the region.
The third one is that we will end up in a trishian war between Israel and Iran.
Our Air Force against their missiles.
Americans might help us with munitions for the jets and probably some help in defense with their anti-missiles.
The risk is that our interceptors, including the Americans, will dilute before the Iranian missile.
They still have 2,000.
There is a shortage of launchers because we hit the launcher, but bearing in mind the new exit study from Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, you might think carefully.
Iran has sent thousands of missiles short range for Russia in order to be using against Kiev.
But it's not inconceivable that Iran will draw missiles from North Korea, probably with launchers, probably with some crews.
They sent soldiers to Lugansk and Donetsk, so they can send the launchers to Tehran or from Pakistan or even from China.
So it's a very bad option for Israel.
I hope also for, I think also for Iran, but I cannot be sure.
The last and the worst possibility is that the Iranian conclusion will be that the only reason that the Israeli air force is flying over Tehran so freely is that they did not make the decision to turn into nuclear, throw the handcuffing of the MPT and turn nuclear several years ago.
And they might reach the conclusion or the argument that they were attacked by Israel, which is according to foreign sources a nuclear power, backed by a well-known nuclear superpower, and they have no choice but to turn power themselves.
But under this scenario, we might find themselves trying falsefully and justifiably to delay the Iranian coming to nuclear capability.
We might end up under certain circumstances advancing or accelerating it.
Anti-Semitism and Gaza Criticism 00:15:27
That's a fascinating summary of all the potential outcomes.
I really appreciate the detail you showed there.
Just before we finish, I want to ask you about...
I was afraid that I won't understand your question, so I tried to answer this.
No, no, I thought you painted the English slower.
Yeah, I will.
I will.
You painted a very good picture of all the potential outcomes, and I appreciate that.
I just want to, before we finish, ask you about Gaza.
You know, it seems to me that Israel has been very strategic and precise and targeted in the way that it went after Hezbollah.
It's been very strategic and precise and targeted in the way it's attacked Iran so far.
And yet in Gaza, it's been completely different.
It's been a strategy of complete destruction, huge civilian deaths, a blockade, which many viewed as criminal starvation, consistent bombardment, and now people like the finance minister Smodrich brazenly talking openly about cleansing Gaza of all Palestinians, which many would see as illegal ethnic cleansing.
Do you believe that Israel's government is now perpetrating war crimes in Gaza?
I hope and believe it doesn't perpetrate kind of crimes against whatever military war crimes and so on.
I hope that's the case.
Only detailed investigation will find it, but I want to clarify the situation.
October 7th created a compelling imperative for Israel to make sure that Hamas will never reign over the Dallas Strip and being capable of threatening Israel from there.
And the war is the result of it.
But having said that, the real challenge was to understand how to do it.
There is a compelling impediment, how to implement it.
And here it says somehow it turned more complicated because Netanyahu ignored the very four maxims that were the foundation for our security perspective from day one from Benguru.
If we have to have a war, have it very short on the enemy's territory, to very aggressive, and in order to end it, as close as possible to beginning, when the international legitimacy is still with us, always do it with a superpower on your side and never lose grip of the moral high grounds.
We are not a superpower.
We are a tiny country isolated, a tough neighborhood.
It's not the Scandinavia who would probably have to prefer to be born in Scandinavia, but we are there.
That's our homeland.
So we have to be attended to all these elements.
Netanyahu in Gaza seemed to forget all these elements and ignore the basic reality that the only way to defeat Hamas and reach this operation is by replacing Hamas by another legitimate power, legitimate in the eyes of international law, international community, the neighboring peaceful or Abrahamic countries, and even the Palestinians themselves.
So it cannot be a Swedish or British entity.
It should be Palestinian entities.
So the plan was on the table from day one.
President Biden even wrote it in an article to Russia proposal where he felt that he is failing to convince Netanyahu.
It means calling upon an inter-Arab force to enter into Gaza, backed by majority resolution of the Arab League, and if necessary, also UN Security Council resolution.
Creating a finance will come from UAE and Saudi Arabia.
It needs a lot of money.
A government of technocrats will be established.
A bureaucracy of Palestinians being built.
It needs some 50,000 people to run 2.2 million.
And gradually a new security force will be built with the training of the inter-Arab force, which be Egyptian, Jordanians, emiratives, and under American supervision.
The only two conditions that Israel should put, number one, not a single individual who was a part of the army branch out branch of Hamas, not just the fighter, the launchers of rockets, the guy in the lab or the spokesman, not a single individual who was part of it or part of the massacre of October 7th can be a member of any organs of these new entities.
Number two, the Israeli military will pull out at first to the perimeter, about half a mile, let's say, all along the strip, and will not pull fully to the border before pre-agreed set of milestones toward the secure and stable situation had been achieved.
That was the plan.
It was very easy a year and a half ago because it would appear as saving Gaza from terrible destruction.
It's much more sensitive right now because now it might appear as saving Israel from sinking in the mud in Gaza.
So it's more complicated, but my observation is that Netanyahu now, based on the achievement in Iran, should immediately turn to Trump and say, let's activate this solution now.
Immediately bring all the hostages, launch this resolution and activation, and let us join the drama vision of a new Middle East normalization we saw the already even participating in the trade corridor from India to the Gauls, to Israel, to Europe.
And this is a great opportunity.
A question which casts some shadow about the consideration of our government with regard to Iran is that, according to Netanyahu himself, it started to plan the oppression immediately after the result.
Balazov, you mentioned even Syrian directly situation made it an opportunity to it.
But to think that our cabinet shut down in November and later on he said the date was in April and for some reason delayed to mid-June.
All along all these machines, it didn't come to their mind that before you open a new war, get Iran out of any other place, you don't end the war in Gaza, which is at your fingertips.
It's crazy.
It's crazy.
I've got to leave it there because I really appreciate it, who Barrett.
Thank you very much indeed for joining me.
Trendy Israel now and Amichai Chikli is Minister for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Anti-Semitism in the Netanyahu government.
We used to describe my criticism of the suffering in Gaza as a troubling descent into overt anti-Semitism.
Well, welcome to you, Minister.
Where have I been anti-Semitic?
Well, I think that during the beginning of the war, you were very clear on the right of Israel to defend itself after the assault of October 7th.
But since then, by the way, your choose to bring people like Kendance Owens, which is a Holocaust denier on your show, to bring Dan Balzerian.
I think that giving the stage for conspiracy theorist Holocaust deniers such as Owens, such as Evans, Balzerian, these kind of people, to give them your platform, I think you have responsibility.
And this is a wrong decision to give these people such a stage.
And therefore, I think, I'm not saying that you're anti-Semitic necessarily.
Well, you did it.
You did say that these are the wrong decision.
You did say that.
No, I didn't say that.
And I'm just curious where you think.
I'm curious.
What's interesting is the allegations that I'm anti-Semitic only began when I decided to start being more strident in my criticism of what your government is doing in Gaza, which, by the way, is a view.
Hang on, I'll finish my question, which is a criticism shared by many of Israel's allies, by at least two of your former prime ministers now.
So I'm not alone in that criticism.
Many people think what you've been doing in Gaza in the last few months constitutes war crimes.
And we've seen from one of your colleagues, the finance minister Smodrich, that the big plan, as far as he's concerned, is not actually getting hostages back or defeating Hamas, but clearing all Palestinians out of Gaza.
Now, I'm just curious why me criticizing your government for things like that and for what people like Smodrich are saying constitutes anti-Semitism.
So let me be very accurate.
As I mentioned before, I never said that you are an anti-Semitic.
Yeah, you did.
I did say it.
You did.
You implied it.
And I was immediately bombarded on X and other social media platforms with thousands of people calling me anti-Semitic and a Jew hate because you decided to fuel that sentiment.
Well, you did.
Look, whether you are or you're not, that's, you know, that's whether I am.
What have I ever been anti-Semitic?
Look, I think when have I been anti-Semitic?
As you know, I've had people on from both sides of this war for the entire time, many of whom have expressed very controversial views.
And when they have, be it Candice Owens, Dan Bilzerian, people on the pro-Palestinian side, people on the pro-Israeli side, on the more extremist side, I've held them all to account.
I've questioned every time I've heard something I don't like.
What I want to know from you is, why do you think as an Israeli minister, you can fuel people on social media viewing me as an anti-Semitic person or somebody who hates Jews?
I'm really curious about that.
Is it because I dare to criticize what the Israeli government is now doing in Gaza?
I think there is no problem.
There is no problem with criticizing the government of Israel.
There is no problem with criticizing what's happening in Gaza.
You can criticize whatever you want.
But the fact is that your platform became recently the main platform for Holocaust deniers.
Absolutely.
The main platform from categorical weapons grade nonsense.
That just means you've never watched it.
Kendance Owens, this week, she said that Mengele never made these experiments, these horrific experiments in Auschwitz, spreading conspiracy theories.
So I think you have responsibility and you can be much more, you know, much more fair and to bring these issues.
So in the last 18 months, you don't think I've been...
Just to be clear, you don't think I've been fair to Israel since this war started?
Look, I said at the beginning, I thought you were fair.
Regarding Iran, I thought you were fair.
Let's take an example, your tweet about the hospitals, okay?
That you shared, the Fox News man, who said that we need to protect hospitals in Gaza and in Israel after a ballistic news sites for me.
One of the best reporters.
Landed at the heart of hospitals.
Yeah.
Okay.
So I'm saying you never mentioned, you never mentioned that these hospitals in Gaza.
And let me give you some examples.
Shifa hospitals were the main headquarters of Hamas.
How many of the hospitals that you've destroyed were Hamas were Hamas run?
How many?
Give me a number.
Give me a number.
I'm giving you a few examples.
No, no, don't give me a few.
Shifa hospitals.
Don't give me a few, because more than half of all the hospitals in Gaza have been destroyed.
Many others are almost irreparably damaged.
How many of those, in your estimation, in order that we can have a fairness?
How many of those were Hamas run?
Give me a number.
I'm giving you a number and I'm giving you a few examples.
Shifa Hospital, which is the main hospital, by the way, is still functioning, despite the fact that it was a terror base.
And when we raided the hospitals, 200 terrorists were arrested in Shifa Hospital.
In Kamila Douan hospitals in Jabalia, 240 terrorists were arrested in the hospital.
So they're all terrorists.
Just to be clear, are they all terrorist camps?
Most of the hospitals in Northern Gaza.
So all the hospitals in Gaza are terrorists.
So where do people go to get treatment?
If they're all terrorists, where do they get treated?
Were used by Hamas.
Israel didn't try to destroy the hospitals.
On the contrary, she sent troops, infantry, to aid these hospitals.
So how did half of the hospitals get destroyed?
during the clashes with the terrorists.
Obviously, and also with the European hospitals, with the European hospitals, we needed to close the entrance to the bunker of Muhammad Sinawa.
Another Hamas who was hiding beneath the fact is, and the fact is, the fact is, okay, you're doing what many of the ministers have been doing in recent months.
You basically cast doubt over everything which reflects negatively on the Israeli government war strategy, to which I say there is one very simple way that you can get independent verification of all the things you're saying.
That all the hospitals were Hamas terror camps.
That every story you read of is IDF making mistakes, killing people when they shouldn't have done, and the rest of it.
All of that, apparently, these are all just terrible mistakes, right?
Why don't you let the international journalists from the outside come in and do their jobs?
Then they can verify everything you're saying.
There's a reason that the Israeli government continues to refuse to let journalists into Gaza.
It's not for their safety.
You don't care about the safety of journalists because nearly 200 Palestinian journalists have been killed.
I know what you're going to say.
They're all Hamas.
Okay, that's fine.
Another of the claims that can't be verified because you won't let that independent journalist interview.
Unfortunately, Piels, many of these journalists were Hamas activists.
Journalists Denied Entry to Gaza 00:02:03
Some of them were so proud of them.
How many?
Many of them, dozens.
How many?
Dozens of them.
So others are nearly 200.
How many were Hamas?
Well, how many were Hamas?
Thousands of them.
Dozens of them were part of Hamas.
Many of them were Hamas.
Many of them were Hamas.
Do you see what you're doing again?
You see what you're doing again?
Abdala al-Jama.
You're implying that these people came.
All the hospitals are Hamas.
All the journalists are Hamas.
Everything's Hamas.
Every death that happens is Hamas's fault.
I forgave you.
Every child that starved is Hamas's fault.
Everyone who is shot in the queues for food that we've seen in the last few weeks, which is shocking to observe, every one of those is Hamas's fault.
Everything is Hamas's fault.
The IDF does nothing wrong.
The Israeli government does nothing wrong.
And there's a reason you can say and say all this.
You don't let journalists in to do their jobs to verify what that's wrong.
So you can say what the hell is going on.
We all just have to accept it.
You see the problem?
Is that a conversation?
Are you just giving something?
No, it's a statement.
Let the journalists in to do their job.
The longer you don't, the more many journalists.
135 journalists went into Gaza from 80 different press organizations.
They're all attached to the idea.
They're embedded with the IDF.
Obviously, you don't want them to go free and be by bombardment.
We are in charge of their safety.
Let me just end by asking you one more time.
Can you think of any anti-Semitic thing that I've ever said?
I'm saying again.
Let's answer my question.
If you want to pour onto my head, it seems that you are very concerned from this tweet.
I thought we're going to speak about Iran.
I thought we're going to speak about the general issue.
Bullying Claims and Personal Attacks 00:05:53
I'd rather talk about you.
I'd rather talk about you calling me anti-Semitic.
I said again, your choice to bring a stage with your millions of viewers to Holocaust denials and conspiracy theories such as Danban Holocaust Give them this.
Because I challenge people on the Israeli side.
You do not interrupt them.
You treat them respectfully.
Oh, what a lot of crap.
You treat them.
You never watch my show, do you?
And you don't think I've ever interrupted pro-Palestinian.
Natasha Hausdorff, amazing Natasha Hausdorff.
You are treating her as a bully.
You're treating her as a bully.
Really?
Harassing her later on in parties.
This is very decision.
Do you think I harassed her at the party?
Is that what you just said?
Is that what you just said?
You went and said I harassed her.
Wow.
I'm saying once again, that's quite a problem.
You were there, were you?
Were you there for that?
Did you watch it?
You said she wouldn't talk to you.
Did you see what happened?
You were mocking her on.
You didn't harass anybody.
You mocked her on her.
I didn't harass anybody.
She didn't talk to you.
Yeah.
And by the way, I've interrupted you as much as I've interrupted her.
So am I bullying you, Minister?
Look, I'm not bullying.
I'm a warrior.
Am I bullying you?
Look, am I bullying you?
I'm hard to talk with you.
Am I bullying you?
You are a bully.
Oh, you're being bullied?
At the moment.
Oh, you poor thing.
I hope you're right.
It's very hard to speak.
You know what?
It's very hard to speak.
I'll let you go.
I'm so sorry for your hurt feelings.
I hope you're okay.
It's amazing how easily bullied you are.
When you're asked difficult questions, you all play the victim card.
You all start saying I'm bullying you.
No, I'm not playing the victim.
Bad enough, you didn't do that when I went after people.
When I went after people that wouldn't condemn Hamas, you all cheered me on, didn't you?
That wasn't bullying.
When I was interrupting them, going after them, that you thought was great interrogating journalism.
But the moment I come after you guys, criticizing indefensible things you're now doing in Gaza, suddenly I'm a bully.
You see how pathetic that sounds?
You finished?
Yeah, you wasn't.
It's very hard to speak.
Yeah, I do.
You know what makes me laugh?
Because I thought you inspire thousands of people.
Can I say something?
You inspire thousands of people.
People on social media.
Can I say something?
They call me a Jew-hating actor.
Can I say something?
And you have the brass neck to say I'm bullying you.
Honestly, grow a pair.
It's pathetic.
Have you listened to this interview?
Have I?
I've conducted it.
Yeah, look, it's very hard to talk.
Not really.
You just have to justify why you call me anti-Semitic.
You failed to do so because I've never been anti-Semitic.
Look, I do take it personally.
I'm running an entire interview speaking about you and your self-esteem and your inability to take any criticism.
Any criticism.
Oh, wow.
Says the guy.
Let's go.
Let's go back to my tweet.
Pierce, let's go back.
Pierce, let's go back to my tweet.
During this tweet, I said that at the beginning of the war, you were relatively fair, but then you became the main stage worldwide of Holocaust deniers who are spreading conspiracy theories against the Jewish people and the state of Israel.
You just made that up.
I do watch.
I do watch.
I had one person.
And when you brought Tripoli.
Just to be clear.
And when you brought Taipan.
I'm sorry.
You said something.
I'm going to count it.
You represent the state of Israel.
Sorry, to be clear.
Don't let them speak.
Just let you letting me speak.
Dan Belton I even attempted to cast doubt over the Holocaust and I chewed him up like I've been doing to you.
So it's complete and utter nonsense, what you've just said.
Complete nonsense.
And I will continue to go after people who say outrageous things which are not true.
Whether it's Balzarian being a complete moron or whether it's you inspiring people to view me as a Jew hater because that is reprehensible.
And just because I'm now more critical of your people, you can use this interview.
You can use this interview to have a serious conversation regarding Iran, regarding Arab.
Yeah, we could do, but you know what?
We are speaking about you.
The only thing this interview is about you and your self-esteem and the fact that you were insulted because of criticism.
When you call me anti-Semitic, I take it personally.
Anyway, I'm going to leave it there.
Thank you very much indeed for joining me.
I didn't even say you're anti-Semitic.
Yeah.
Thank you.
We all read what you wrote.
It's fine.
Thank you very much for joining me.
I appreciate it.
Okay.
Bye-bye.
Good luck.
Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent.
The only boss around here is me.
You enjoy our show.
You can ask for only one simple thing.
Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.
And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain.
And we'll do it all for free.
independent on censor media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it Without you.
Export Selection