“Get the F*** Out of Gaza!” Trump Seals Israel-Hamas Peace Deal | With Cenk Uygur & Daniella Weiss
President Donald Trump has announced that both Israel and Hamas have agreed to the first phase of a peace deal. Could this really be the end of the war in Gaza - and will it last? A ceasefire is set to begin immediately, with aid moving in and Israeli troops moving out. And all remaining Israeli hostages will finally be allowed to go home and more than 1,700 Gazans are also expected to be released. To debate the US-backed deal and what happens next, Piers Morgan speaks to leader of the Nahala settlement movement and Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Daniella Weiss before being joined in the Uncensored studios by leader of the British Green Party, Zack Polanski, then Israeli-American journalist Emily Schrader and President of the Australian Palestine Advocacy Network, Nasser Mashni.Piers then speaks to founder and CEO of The Young Turks Cenk Uygur and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Brooklyn Bedding: Enter our show name after checkout so they know we sent you! Visit https://Brooklynbedding.com for 30% off & use promo code PIERS! Oxford Natural: To watch their full stories, scan the QR code on your screen or visit https://oxfordnatural.com/piers/ to get 70% off your first order when you use code PIERS. Birch Gold: Visit https://birchgold.com/piers to get your free info kit on gold. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Israel Must Leave Gaza00:09:30
We're very close to a deal in the Middle East and they're going to need me pretty quickly.
So let's get it clear right now.
Israel should get the fuck out of Gaza.
Well, the United States didn't get the F out of Japan.
Israel has done 70 October 7ths already.
70!
Trump is a real estate guy.
He's looking at Gaza and he's saying, I see a bunch of rubble.
Why don't we have nice buildings and clean streets?
You've been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
This certainly was a surprise to me.
It was a surprise for me too, my husband.
He just wanted to know how much money it is.
Palestinians are an invention.
Just to be clear, you would like all of the land between, from the river to the sea.
I want all the land from the ephritis to the Nile.
What do you mean?
This is one of the more ludicrous pictures for a Nobel Peace Prize I think I've ever heard in my life.
The hostages will come back, they're coming all coming back on Monday.
Was what happened on October the 7th two years ago?
An act of resistance.
Palestinians rose up and resisted the Israeli oppression.
This is my problem.
It wasn't an act of resistance.
It was an act of despicable terrorism.
I'm not going to call it an act of terrorism.
There is nothing pro-Palestinian about Hamas as an organization, and they are an organization that needs to be destroyed for the well-being of Israelis and Palestinians.
For the first time in more than two years, Palestinians in Gaza and the hostage families in Israel are celebrating, albeit cautiously.
The war may finally be over.
U.S. President Donald Trump made the announcement that both Israel and Hamas have agreed to the first phase of a peace deal.
This is how he got the historic news.
Come on up here, Mark.
Anything we should know about the Middle East?
That's what we're hoping to talk to you about here, Mr. President.
Well, they're smart, but they're not smart enough.
They...
Oh, my microphone's broken.
They're smart, but they're not smart enough.
They have been covered by these liberal cities for so many years.
And that's why we're all working with Treasury, with all these different departments, to find the criminal conspiracy.
Okay.
I'm just giving.
Yeah, I was just given a note by the Secretary of State saying that we're very close to a deal in the Middle East and they're going to need me pretty quickly.
An incredible moment.
Of course, there's every reason to be unsure about whether this will last.
Many of the crucial details remain unclear.
But the most important detail is that a ceasefire will begin immediately.
Aid will move in.
Israeli troops will move out.
And all of the remaining Israeli hostages will finally be allowed to go home.
The president spoke to their ecstatic families by phone last night.
President Trump, you have the best crowd in the world.
What do you guys have to say to President Trump?
The hostages will come back.
They're coming all coming back on Monday.
Thank you.
Well, as part of the deal, Israel is expected to release more than 1,700 Gazans detained since October the 7th.
The grim truth is that they will be returning to a decimated land, blighted by unspeakable destruction, grief, and uncertainty.
There are major unanswered questions about the extent of a mass disarmament, about who governs and rebuilds Gaza, and about who makes sure this deal, like others before it, doesn't simply fall apart.
But for now, it's a moment in history to savor and to celebrate.
For the first time in 24 months, tomorrow should be better than today.
To debate the US-backed deal and what happens next, I spoke to Cheng Juger, founder and CEO of the Young Turks and filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza, who's led his releases about the rise of Islamism after October the 7th.
Cheng, I've not talked to you since this peace plan was presented.
You know, I read it in detail and I found myself nodding a lot at a lot of it.
Seems to me to be the most likely framework to get this war over.
Yeah.
So, my sense of it is that Trump is actually trying to get the peace.
Obviously, he's massively biased towards Israel, and this deal is biased towards Israel, but I would take it.
And so, now I'm not Hamas, so it's easy for me to say I want the hostages home.
I wanted the hostages home from day one.
So, in the deal, the hostages get released.
Hamas does not rule Gaza.
I'm happy with both of those things.
But the critical part, Piers, is Israel has to leave Gaza.
So, right now, what they're saying is, yeah, we're going to get what we want.
We're going to get our hostages back, but we're not going to leave.
And they claim they are getting a security perimeter, which is just more land.
And I told you from day one, this was never about self-defense.
This is about land acquisition.
They're trying to build greater Israel.
So then, Netanyahu says yes to the deal because he has no choice because Trump makes him, which I like.
Good job by Trump on that.
Then he goes home and says in Hebrew, not in English, oh, don't worry, we're going to have the IDF deep inside Gaza.
So, in other words, we're not going to do the peace deal.
We're going to get the hostages back and we're going to grab as much of Gaza for Israel as we can.
So, that's the part that I can't stand.
If I was Hamas, I'd sign the deal anyway, take Israel's excuse away from them.
They've been using a hostage.
That's why Net Yahoo didn't want the hostages back because he wanted as an excuse.
But it doesn't really matter because even if you take that excuse away from him, what he's going to do next is Hamas didn't surrender enough.
They didn't turn in enough weapons.
I have to murder more Palestinians.
I have to ethnically cleanse them more.
So, when the hostages are returned, Piers, and we come back on here, will you tell all of your Zionist Israeli zealot guests, okay, you guys betrayed the deal.
You were supposed to leave Gaza and you didn't.
So, Jenk was right, and all of your critics were right.
This was always about stealing Palestinian land.
Okay, so that's what's going to happen.
I guarantee it.
So, I just want to set ahead of time so that people don't try to squirm out of it.
Oh, no, they didn't turn, they turned in 12,000 guns, but we wanted 13,000 guns.
We have to keep murdering.
We have to keep stealing land, right?
So, let's get it clear right now.
Israel should get the fuck out of Gaza and they should end the occupation entirely.
Otherwise, they're in the land-stealing business, which is what they've been in for the last at least 58 years.
Okay, Danesh, your response to that.
Well, the United States didn't get the F out of Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
This was something that the Japanese started, and the United States not only finished it, but after the war, there was denazification, there was a restructuring of Japan.
So, I'm just saying that when you start a war, it's not going to end your way.
Now, I do support the Trump plan.
Through my adult lifetime, I've seen so many bungled peace plans that the fact that this one is kind of close to signature, I think, is itself incredible.
I think Trump is a real estate guy.
He's looking at Gaza and he's saying, I see a bunch of rubble.
Why don't we have nice buildings and clean streets and people in suits going to work and maybe a Trump hotel?
Why don't we have trade and prosperity?
So, he's offering a different path to the path that we've seen so far.
And on the balance, I think it's a good path.
So, even though I think for Israel, it's painful to exchange terrorists for hostages, that's hardly a fair part of the deal.
But I think Israel is right to swallow and take it.
I think also the demilitarization of Gaza and having an international authority mainly made up of Muslims and Muslim countries, I think is a good way to go.
Cheng, the suggestion that Tony Blair might be a leading figure in that has enraged a lot of people.
Others say, look, he got peace in Northern Ireland.
He's been a Middle East peace envoy.
Iraq was a disaster, but everything he's done since has been aimed at trying to forge peace.
What's your view of somebody like him being involved?
So Tony Blair is a toady for the Israelis, and that's super obvious.
And I'll give you a fact that proves it.
Do you know who's funding the Tony Blair Institute to the tune of $350 million?
Larry Ellison, the same Larry Ellison who is the biggest charitable donor to the IDF.
He gave them $16.6 million in the middle of a genocide.
Oh yeah, go murder more Palestinians.
Here's my charity to Israel.
Go steal more land.
So that guy is paying off the guy, Tony Blair, who's supposed to be neutral here.
No, he's got 350 million reasons not to be neutral.
He's going to be biased in favor of Israel in every way, shape, and form.
He has been bought by Israel.
He helped to start the Iraq war.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.
Iraq had nothing to do with America.
At the time, Israeli leaders said that it was Israel's number one enemy.
And Tony Blair said, yes, sir, absolutely, sir.
We'll invade them, sir.
And now we're told that he's neutral when he's obviously and literally and empirically bought by Larry Ellison, who's a massively pro-Israel zealot, near, near lunatic, honestly, on saying, yeah, I'd like to donate charitably to a genocide.
It's unbelievable.
And so, and one more thing about what Dinesh said.
So, look, these guys always say, oh, well, look, there was World War II and we dropped a nuclear bomb.
The Cost of War00:13:08
Like, why?
But what we were supposed to learn from history.
So, yes, the Mongols went into Baghdad and killed 800,000 people, every man, woman, and child, about a thousand years ago.
Does that mean we should all do it?
No, we're supposed to get better as it goes along.
And that's why we passed laws after World War II that we should not do indiscriminate mass murder of civilians.
And the only country that doesn't agree, Israel.
They're like, no, we reserve the right to do mass slaughter of civilians.
That's because they're totally outside of the rule of law.
They're a pariah terrorist state, and we've got to stop funding them.
There's a debate about the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but even the people who say that that was a bad idea think that there should have been instead a land invasion of Japan, which would itself have produced untold casualties.
So there's no real debate in a manner.
Hold on, let me finish.
You keep shouting.
Let me finish.
So the point I'm trying to make here is when Japan starts it, the United States gets to finish it.
And there's no need to have a quote neutral authority that somehow neutralizes the influence of the victor.
Look, if Israel had carpet-bombed Hamas and carpet-bombed Gaza on October 8th, they would have gotten away with it.
The reason that they are getting all the heat now is they dragged it out.
And in fact, they are trying surgically to distinguish between Hamas and civilians, an extremely difficult job to do.
And Hamas grabs its own mothers and daughters and puts them right in front of Hamas and says, we dare you to shoot because that's going to make you a murderer.
There's nothing more important than good sleep, but it's probably time you upgraded yours as I have with our sponsor, Brooklyn Bedding.
Brooklyn mattresses deliver top-tier quality, honest pricing, and true American craftsmanship.
They've won awards and they are one of the very few brands to be endorsed by the American Chiropractic Association.
My Aurora Lux mattress was handcrafted in their Arizona factory and delivered directly to my door.
You can start with their sleep quiz to find your perfect match in just minutes.
And they offer a 120-night comfort trial.
If you don't love it, they'll help you to return it or swap it hassle-free.
Go to brooklynbedding.com and use my promo code PEARS.
That's P-I-E-R-S, for up to 30% off site-wide.
This offer is not available anywhere else.
Go to brooklynbedding.com and use promo code PEERS for 30% off.
Make sure you mention Piers Morgan uncensored at BrooklynBetting.com.
Promo code Piers.
100% propaganda, 100% fabrication.
But in fact, you're saying that Hamas has not been using Jews for the past two years?
No.
No, that's total Israeli propaganda.
In reality, in reality, there's literally soldiers.
Let me finish.
Let me finish.
Israeli soldiers putting Palestinian kids in front of them.
They're the ones who do human shields.
Do you know where the head of Mossad is, the headquarters?
It's right in the middle of civilian Tel Aviv.
So it's actually the Israelis that hide behind human shields.
They also hide behind all Jews across the world.
They say, oh, if you're going to criticize their government, that means you're attacking all Jews.
So you better not.
No, no, no.
Don't take what you're doing, the maniacal genocidal actions of Israel and put that on Jews across the world.
That is deeply anti-Semitic action by the government of Israel.
Stop blaming Jews for it.
It is not Jews.
It is Israel.
It is the government, the national government of Israel that is committing these atrocities.
And Dinesh, we're supposed to get better than nuking 100,000 civilians.
I'm not debating World War II.
I'm saying today we should be better than that.
You know, when we dropped a nuke, we burned the babies and the grandmothers alive.
That is not a thing that you should be bragging about.
Maybe, you know, back then you can use historical context, but today we're all trying to get better except one country.
Israel says we will not get better.
We want to go backwards.
And the most important part of this, Piers, is when is this brutal, terrible, racist, evil occupation going to end?
58 years, Israel has its boot on the neck of the Palestinians.
So let our people go.
And I say our, not in terms of because I was born Muslim American, but the whole world is saying it.
Italy is on fire.
Everyone is protesting, saying, my God, how much more are you going to brutalize these poor people?
And why do the Israelis want to be the face of evil?
What a preposterous, terrible thing to do for your own country, let alone Judaism, which stop appropriating Judaism for your own evil, nationalistic, governmental, personal, political reasons.
So, Dinesh, this is totally unjustifiable here anyway.
Israel has done 70 October 7ths already.
70.
They've done 70 October 7ths.
When is the Israeli terrorism going to be enough?
Where we go, that's it.
We're not funding the Israeli terrorists anymore.
Shank, you're not being paid by the word.
You don't have to filibuster this way.
Let me just say this.
It's really interesting to me that Israel has not taken hostages, right?
And you might think it's because Israel doesn't have to be able to do it.
Hang on a second.
Let me finish.
Hold on a minute.
The reason that Israel hasn't taken hostages the way Hamas did on October 7th is this.
Hamas wouldn't care.
The value of Israel taking hostages would be absolutely zero.
Hamas would basically say, go ahead and kill them.
We are indifferent to what you do.
Now, this really right here shows the moral chasm between Israel and Hamas.
Israel values these human lives.
We'll go to great lengths.
Israel is freeing scores of terrorists in exchange for ordinary men, women, and children that are sitting under forced captivity by Hamas.
This is not a fair exchange, but Israel is doing it because they're like, we value life.
And Hamas is like, we value death.
Yeah, it's hilarious.
Okay, so brother, they did 70 October 7ths.
Their civilian kill ratio is worse than Hamas.
Hamas is terrible.
I don't defend Hamas at all.
There's civilian killers.
What was the kill ratio?
What was the kill ratio?
What was the kill ratio of the Allies?
Hold on to Israel.
With the Dresden.
What was the kill ratio of civilians in the president bombing?
Dinesh, Dinesh, the reason you want to go back to World War II and to dropping nukes on people and back to the Mars and whatever you want to do.
I'm not going to be able to do that.
It's because you're trying to hold on.
Hold on.
Because you're trying to justify the vicious terrorism of Israel.
So they have done 70 October 7th.
So if one October 7th is terrible, and I say it is terrible, isn't 70 October 7th an enormous disregard for human life?
Isn't an 83% civilian kill ratio literally the very worst in the world?
So that means Israel is targeting civilians worse than any other terrorist group in the world right now.
Worse than Bashar al-Assad did, worse than Hamas did.
And on top of the fact that they kill more civilians on purpose, on average, than any other terrorist group, they then did 70 times what October 7th.
So now they're at 66,000 dead, 160,000 injured, 20,000 murdered children.
When is it going to be enough?
How much murder do you want?
Hang on, Cheng, let me jump in.
So if this plan can't work, what plan can?
No, no, the plan can work, Piers.
So there's nothing wrong with the plan except for the so-called security perimeter.
So the number one thing is it has to be fair.
So on my side, I go, oh, yeah, get Hamas out of Gaza.
Definitely return the hostages, end the war.
I don't want any civilians killed going forward.
But Israel has to leave Gaza.
They have to actually hold up their end of the deal.
And you know, and Dinesh knows, and everybody knows, Israel's not going to leave Gaza because this was never about defense.
It was about offense.
And they have pictures of Israel.
That's not true.
And they talk about it.
Net Yahoo, Net Yahoo.
Hold on, let me just finish this quick thought.
Nanyahu has said that it is his historical and spiritual mission to set up greater Israel.
That includes Gaza and the West Bank.
Why isn't American media honest about that?
Why don't they say, oh, yeah, the objective of the leader of Israel is to take all of Gaza for Israel?
This has nothing to do with self-defense.
This is an aggressive imperial war to capture that land because it's not me saying it.
Nanyahu said it.
Ben Gavir said it.
Smotrich said it.
And they all say that they can countenance the entire annihilation of Gaza.
So why doesn't the American government, British government, and our media condemn the world's largest terrorists, which unfortunately today is the Israeli government?
All right.
So since 2005, a right-wing Israeli government pulled out of Gaza and essentially had Gaza under Palestinian control.
The people of Gaza voted for Hamas.
So you basically had a two-state solution.
The Israelis were not really involved.
Gaza was being autonomously governed by Hamas until October 7th.
Now, October 7th is a case, for example, that's kind of like your neighbor doing a home invasion on you and massacring your family.
You're obviously going to be kind of uneasy.
And then if you, Chank, come along and say, well, listen, we got to be fair.
You need to clear out of the place.
You can't keep an eye on my fence anymore, even though I did this to you.
I mean, I totally understand where the Israelis are coming from.
Now, that being said, I think Trump is saying to the Israelis, pull back.
Let's have an international authority.
Let's have a bunch of Muslims, but Muslims without the Hamas track record of bloody footprints running the place.
I think that's about the best you can do.
Look, if the Bible is to be believed, I don't think that this problem has a permanent or ultimate solution, but that's not to say it can't have a temporary or penultimate solution.
So I think Shank, you and I are sort of arguing heatedly here, but we do agree that this plan is a legitimate basis for going forward.
Okay.
You know what?
I'm going to take a slight win there, Cheng, where there's broad agreement that this is a basis for potentially last few bits.
I happen to agree with you, Cheng.
Don't see a way that this will ever work as long as Israel remains in Gaza.
So, at some stage, they have to leave.
And the Palestinian people have to have their own state and you have to have a two-state solution.
I see no other way this ever actually ends up in proper peace.
But I do want to end on a, not just a moment of surprise agreement there, a gear change.
Chenk, I want to get your reaction to this because Dinesh posted on X in July and said, I think I look pretty good for 64.
Compare, say, with Chenk Uger, who is much younger than me, but looks old enough to be my dad.
Oh, my gosh.
What a great line by me.
Chenk, I mean, obviously, the viewers will now be making their own mindset.
Out of interest, Cheng, how old are you?
So I'm 55, and I'm pretty.
All right, so you're nine years younger than Dinesh.
Dinesh, you think you look a lot younger than you think that Chenk is old enough to be your dad?
I think this may be another point of agreement.
Another point of potential agreement between Chenk and me as we close out here.
What's the point of agreement?
Well, that he's old enough to be your dad.
Well, I'm obviously being facetious here.
And I think Chenk knows, Chenk and I have debated before.
I do like Chenk, and I do think I do respect his passion.
So, Chenk, take it as a joke because it was intended that way.
Chenk?
Yeah.
So, it does, I was going to say, it does give you a sense of who's more attached to reality, but okay, yes.
No, my looks are not my number one trait.
Okay.
You know what?
But yes, as the best agreement member of the three of us, I'll end things there.
I'm 60 going on 40, so I'll take the win.
Guys, thank you very much.
Your serious debate ended with a bit of levity is always my preferred way of doing it.
So, thank you both very much indeed.
Today's show is sponsored by Oxford Natural, makers of the Optimum Day and Optimum Night All Natural Supplements.
Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results.
Optimum Day boosts your energy and supports weight loss throughout the day.
Optimum Night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep.
They have countless success stories, including from some very familiar faces.
England ledger Michael Owen, who lost £40.
AFTV's Robbie, who lost more than £100.
To watch their full stories and many more, scan the QR code on your screen or visit oxfordnatural.com/slash peers.
And here's the best part: use the code peers and get 70% off your first order.
You're 70% off with the code PEERS.
Coming up, we'll debate the UK government's crackdown on pro-Palestine protests and the Prime Minister's claim that demonstrations on October the 7th were un-British.
Superior Race Claims00:14:55
But first, we turn to the Nobel Peace Prize, which the US President would dearly like to win.
Judging by the number of people in the news media and politics who are lavishing him with praise today, the idea isn't sounding anything like as fanciful as it did when he returned to the White House last year.
The winner of the world's greatest honor for leaders who advance peace, democracy, and human rights will be announced tomorrow.
And whether he wins it this year or not, he'll be mentioned in every news report about it across the entire world.
For him, that will be a win in itself.
Well, the Nobel Committee has been secretly deliberating nominations made globally from governments, judges, scholars, and previous winners.
The shortlist is always secret.
Many know the nominations made public by the people who made them.
One eyebrow-raising name they will be discussing is Daniela Weiss, leader of the fundamentalist Israeli settler movement, Nahala, who joined me to make her final pitch on peace, democracy, and human rights.
Welcome back, Danielle Weiss, to Uncensored.
First of all, you've been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
I have to say that given our last interview, this certainly was a surprise to me that you were being seen as somebody driving peace.
But do you think that you are worthy of this honor?
Well, it was a surprise for me too.
The one who is most interested in it is my husband.
He just wanted to know how much money it is and if he has to pay tax.
But if we put this aside, I don't think that that prize is something that is more important than what I do all my life.
I dedicate my life to establishing communities on the mountain ridge, and now I intend even now to build, to establish communities in the entire Gaza area after the hostages are home.
And I hope they will be with the families in the coming two, three days.
And then we will continue with our efforts to establish Jewish communities in Gaza.
I think that when Jews, wherever Jews live, there is more chance for peace than in areas where there are no Jewish communities.
So I didn't ask for the prize.
But if you ask, if I compare what I do or what the Nahala movement, my movement, does to other people or to other organizations, I think that we do a lot for peace in the Middle East and in the world.
But as you know, since the start of this war two years ago, there has been aggressive expansion of settlements on the West Bank, for example, very aggressively fought for and land seized and Palestinians displaced from their homes.
I wouldn't categorize that as peaceful actions.
In fact, it's quite the opposite, isn't it?
It is strange to call what Jews do in their homeland, in the land that was given to them, to us by God, to call this grabbing or by force.
This is our land.
This is our homeland.
And to be specific, we care to establish communities on government property.
So, I mean, the word that you used should be taken back by you.
Well, not really, because not really.
Well, let me explain why I won't.
Because the UK government sanctioned you in May of this year.
In the sanctions, you were described as having been involved in threatening, perpetrating, promoting, and supporting acts of aggression and violence against Palestinian individuals.
The vast majority of the international community, including the UK, considers these settlements illegal under international law.
Last year, the UN's top court, the International Court of Justice, said Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories is against international law.
You know, when I last interviewed you, you didn't even use the term Palestinians when I spoke to you last time.
Are you prepared to acknowledge that are Palestinians?
First of all, I think the British government made a big mistake by ignoring that the initial right to the land of Israel is the right of the Jews.
Palestinians are an invention, and it was an invent invented as a result of the big success of the ingathering of the Jews to the land of Israel after 2,000 years' diaspora.
When was Israel created?
Yes.
We were created in the year 1948 for the creation of the world.
Okay.
Just to be clear, just to be clear.
The state of Israel is only existing.
No, no, no.
Most people don't know.
No, no, you missed me because it didn't 1948.
One second.
1948 for the creation of the world.
It's interesting to see that when Abraham got the promise from God for the land of Israel, the world existed 1948.
And now in modern history, in 1948, the modern Jewish state was established.
That was the only historical point that I wanted to make.
You didn't let me finish the sentence, so I had to raise my hand.
I had no intention to have any fight with you.
I wanted to have a pleasant talk.
I don't mind what kind of conversation we had, but you say the Palestinians don't exist.
I didn't get your comment.
Your position is that the Palestinians don't exist.
So what are they?
It's an invention.
It's an invention that is secondary to the important fact that the Jewish nation, that the land of Israel belongs only to one nation, and this is the Jewish nation.
The Palestinians are Arabs who try to compete with the big success of the Jews in the land of Israel.
And actually the word Palestine was used by Adrian, the Roman emperor.
But the modern Palestinians are Arabs who want the same place that the Jews made a paradise of.
They want to take it from us.
But actually what's happening is you want to take their land, isn't it?
Okay, so you make your position.
I make mine.
And the world will judge.
And I mean, you know, it's interesting that when there are historical facts that can be proven, and then you still, you cling to what?
I really don't understand what history you represent.
Just taking your word.
Ms. Wise, taking your argument to its logical extension, then you believe that Israelis and Jewish people should be entitled to all of the West Bank and all of Gaza.
If it's your land, is your country?
It's not just all of the West Bank.
It's not bank.
Bank is a narrow place.
It's the major part of the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.
So you would like, just to be clear, just to be clear, you would like all of the land between, from the river to the sea, to be Israeli Jewish, yeah?
No, I want all the land from the Ephritis to the Nile.
What do you mean?
Why hide the story?
I'm curious what you intend to do with all the Palestinians who currently live there.
Those, you see, I have, I trust, in God I trust.
And I live by faith, by emunah, and by the Bible.
What are you going to do with all the millions of Palestinians?
What happened to the people?
I'm telling you what Joshua, what Joshua, Joshua, the first settlers, he gave me the...
I don't need a history lesson.
I'm just asking you, what do you intend to do with the millions of Palestinians who currently live in Gaza and the West Brand?
Exactly what Joshua did.
Let me get straight to the point.
Gold is up by around 40% this year.
That's not speculation.
That's reality.
And some of your savings aren't diversified into gold.
You're missing the boat.
Here's the facts.
Inflation is still too high.
The US dollar is still too weak.
And the government's debt is insurmountable.
That's why central banks are flocking to gold and driving prices to record highs.
It's not too late to get involved.
Birch Gold Group will help you convert an existing IRA or a 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold.
You don't pay a dime out of pocket.
Just text Piers, P-I-E-R-S, to 989-898 and claim your free info kit.
There's no obligation, there's useful information.
The best indicator of the future is the past, and gold has been a safe haven for millennia.
What other investment can say that?
Text Piers to 989-898 to claim your free info kit on gold.
That's Piers to 989-898.
Protect your future with Birch Gold.
When Joshua came with us from Egypt, he had to cope with seven peoples who lived here.
Why God chose to bring us from Egypt to such a complicated place and not to Canada, I don't know.
But the fact of the matter is that Joshua said those who accept our sovereignty, our government, will stay.
Those who fight will fight them.
And those who do not accept our sovereignty, our government, they will go to other places.
There is a clear formula.
So I do not have to...
But again, to be clear, your clear formula, there's a legal term for it.
It's called ethnic cleansing.
What you're saying is if Palestinian people do not subscribe to the fact they should be ruled by Israel and have you as their sovereign state, then they have to leave, right?
So six, seven million Palestinians would have to leave and go and live elsewhere.
That's your position.
I know from modern history that when there was an attempt to switch between Arabs who live in Judea and Samaria and those who live inside the official state of Israel, Arabs did not want to leave Israel because we are a successful country because it's good to live in Israel.
So Arabs who accept Israel and who accept the state of Israel and who accept the government of Israel, they live here good life.
So if a Palestinian agrees that they should live under the sovereignty of Israel, they can stay.
But if they don't, they have to leave.
They stay.
But if they don't, they have to leave.
Sure.
Great.
So really, what you're saying is you're a superior race who should be dominant over the Palestinian people.
You know, it's a funny.
Sorry, I want to be polite.
I don't find any of this very funny.
What do you say?
I don't think any of this is very funny.
No, I'll tell you why I laugh.
Because you can use the word superior.
Like, if the French is proud of being French, he's superior to the British.
And you know that the famous, not famous, a joke that the British say that the continent was, because of fog, was cut off from England.
England is the empire, and the continent is secondary.
So you see in this superiority, what do you see in it?
Each nation is proud of its heritage, of its culture, of its tradition.
What's superior about it?
Israel is our homeland.
It's the homeland of the Jewish nation, and we are proud of it.
Those who do not accept it will not stay.
God forbid, if you go to another country and you do not accept the rules of the other country, then you cannot stay.
So, what's superior in it?
No, no, I think we are.
This is why I say it's funny.
We all hear you loud and clear.
I think it's such a basic thing.
This is one of the more ludicrous pitches for a Nobel Peace Prize I think I've ever heard in my life.
But I appreciate you joining me on uncensored, Danielle Weiss.
Thank you very much.
You're most welcome.
Well, returning to the controversy surrounding protests now, and I'm joined in the studio by Zach Bolanski, leader of the UK Green Party.
I mean, just on that interview, Zach, your response to that, this is not an unusual thought process.
There are hardline members of this Israeli government, Smodrich, Ben Guevir, and others, and increasingly from his rhetoric, Prime Minister Netanyahu, who probably don't necessarily disagree with what we've just heard, who do actually think this is all Israel's land and they should be entitled to have it back.
I thought it was an extraordinary interview and to talk about from the river to the sea, but in terms of the genocide of the Palestinians, which she couldn't have been much clearer about.
You encouraged her to give more information, then she backtracked a little bit, but the intent was very clear.
It's not just senior ministers.
The Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu talked about the Amalek, talking about the smiting of the Palestinians.
So I think the mask is well and truly off.
And what I would say to this is for that person, Danielle Weiss, to be given a Nobel Peace Prize shows the absolute incoherency around the world response.
Well, to be clear, I don't think she's going to.
And I think the process for nominations is quite flawed.
It allows people like her to be nominated and then claim to be nominated.
But there's another flip side to this, which has been the flip side from a start, which is that Hamas are also wedded to a genocidal onslaught against the Jewish people.
They've made no pretense of it.
What they did on October the 7th, two years ago, in their marauding over the border with 1,200 people murdered, 250 plus kidnapped, you know, the devastation they wrought, the murder, the mayhem, and their vow to keep doing this.
Do you share the same view about Hamas as you do about those who would seek to expel all Palestinians?
I condemn all the violence, including from a terrorist organization.
And you accept that Hamas is a terror organizer?
Of course they kill civilians and that's literally the doubt.
Hamas Genocide Allegations00:08:03
I mean the BBC don't call them terrorists.
Well the UN were very clear that Hamas are committing war crimes and Israel are committing war crimes.
In fact, a genocide, but our British government only talk about one of those, which is Hamas.
We never hear them talk about the war crimes that they're active participants in.
But do you think the Israeli government is a terrorist organization?
I think the Israeli army, certainly, in terms of, should be prescribed, in terms of when we look at the behavior and the way they've behaved.
There's a surgeon, a British surgeon called Nick Maynard.
He was in one of the hospitals.
He said that on one day you would see every casualty would come in with an ankle injury.
The next an abdomen.
The next day, teenage boys would have wounds in their testicles.
The only conclusion you could make is that the Israeli government were using these children as target practice.
That's disgusting behaviour.
I think more widely, though, so there's only been five Jewish people in the last hundred years in Britain who have led a political party.
I'm one of them.
So I felt October 7th very deeply as I know the entire Jewish community.
In fact, the entire world did.
At the same time, that can never justify the response that we've seen from this Israeli government.
And in fact, just yesterday, I think we heard Andrew Neal say that Israel might be losing the peace.
I think that's the same thing.
We said a very good thing actually on camera.
I've read the transcript to it.
And there's no doubt the polling yesterday I saw, I think, Washington Post, but it showed that most Israelis now want this over.
And most Israelis' view of Netanyahu has plummeted now from his high, some several months into the war, which may be one of the reasons why he's being slow in getting across the line here.
It's interesting that you categorize Hamas as a terror group, only because in the UK, the BBC do not yet, which I find enduringly baffling.
But Palestine action is a complex one.
So they're a British direct action group that was prescribed as a terrorist organisation by the government in July.
And to be clear, that means membership or support of the group is a criminal offence, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Now, this came after activists broke into Bryce Norton, the big RAF base in June, and caused £7 million worth of damage by spray painting to RAF Voyager planes.
They claim responsibility.
So there was a protest against the UK support of Israel's war in Gaza, and as a consequence, have been designated a terror organisation.
More than 2,000 people have been arrested at demonstrations across the UK.
You oppose this categorisation.
Why?
It's absolutely outrageous.
We're seeing 89-year-olds with walking sticks and wheelchairs being arrested.
The conversation we just had about whether...
If they were carrying, just on that point, if they were carrying Hamas flags, would you accept they should be arrested?
Well, I think that's a completely separate question.
Well, no, it's a hypothetical, but I want to understand that it's not about whether they're 89 years old, is my point.
It's what they're doing.
Yeah, well, I don't think anyone should be carrying a Hamas flag.
If your 89-year-old you're talking about was carrying a Hamas flag at a protest rally, would you accept that there was a right to arrest them?
I think arresting anyone for carrying a flag is probably a silly way to do it.
In other words, the point I'm making is the age is kind of irrelevant.
It's what they're doing.
Well, I think the real point here is that we need to see a free Palestine.
We know that a lot of the population in this country, the majority of the population, are disgusted by what they're seeing and they're disgusted that what they're seeing as a genocide.
And rather than worrying about the flags of the words, I think the government needs to worry about the bombs, the fighter jet components they're selling, which are literally raining down on the Palestinian people.
And I think it's a lot of people.
But somebody who wants to be a British prime minister, I presume, at some stage.
Otherwise, why go into politics?
You'd like to leave the country.
Well, at the moment, I'm focused on getting more MPs and challenging labour governments.
But you don't become a politician not to wonder the government.
But you're not going to encourage me to do a Joe Swinson on your show, Pierce.
I can't even remember what Joe Swinston did.
She said that she was going to be prime minister and promptly lost her seat.
Do you not want to be?
At the moment, I'm really, really focused on the central mission, which is we just got 90,000 members.
You're a bit of a straight talker.
I am a completely straight talker.
Do you want to be prime minister or not?
I want to make sure that there's a green prime minister in the future, whether that's me or not.
That's going to be for the British public to decide.
I'm trying to work out the headline is, Zach Polanski, I do not want to be prime minister.
I do not want the headline.
The headline is right now I'm focused on growing those 90,000 members.
We've got nearly 2 million votes.
But ultimately, you want power, otherwise you can't do anything.
Yes, I absolutely want to see a green protection.
Otherwise, you're just talking.
Right.
So a politician obviously needs the mechanism of power.
Otherwise, you can't do anything you're talking about.
Totally.
But at the same time.
So de facto, you want to be prime minister, don't you?
Well, this is.
Otherwise, how can you do anything?
At the moment, I'm focused on the Prime Minister.
Why am I interviewing you?
Well, seriously.
Why would I listen to a word?
Because you only interview people who want to be prime ministers.
If you genuinely don't aspire for power, you can't do any of the things you're talking about.
I really want to see a green government.
I really want to see a green prime minister.
Whether that person is me or not, I think is a separate conversation.
Why wouldn't it be you then?
Because at the moment, we've only got four MPs.
And even as the leader of the party, I don't expect to be in power at the next election.
Really?
Yeah.
Why?
I don't think there'll be a Green government because I don't think there'll even be a Nigel Farage reform government.
Singular lack of ambition.
No, because we have a first pass for post-commission.
I have a postcard on my desk in my office, and it was given to me by my mother.
And it's a hippopotamus flying with a flock of seagulls.
And the headline, ambition knows no bounds.
Right.
That's fueled me my entire life.
Why would you be so lacking in ambition?
I'm deeply ambitious.
I want to make sure that the Green Party is in the balance of power.
And the next election, we'll be calling for a wealth tax, proportional representation, and action on the climate crisis.
I think that's pretty ambitious.
Do you think the British people are going to be supporting and voting for somebody who thinks it's okay to go and smash up planes, RAF bases, planes which are used by us to defend our country?
I think the British police, British police, British public, will absolutely support someone who says that we stand against this genocide and we stand against the non-violent rights.
Well, the UK government has not categorised it as genocide.
And there's a reason for that, as you know, right?
And the reason for that is that there has never been an established genocide by the international court, ever.
I mean, it's incoherent to not call this a genocide.
Well, anyone can look on the right.
Rwanda, for example, Rwanda, it was determined, was never actually determined to be a genocide.
The bar for a genocide is incredibly high.
That's why I've resisted using that word.
I think I prefer the word ethnic cleansing for what's going on.
I think the word genocide gets tossed around.
It was tossed around within days of October the 7th, which I found nonsensical.
Well, let's start from first principles.
If there's an ethnic cleansing going on, should we not stop it?
Yes.
Well, I think then the word...
I think words do matter.
Well, of course they matter.
And I think it's very clearly a genocide.
And by the way, most genocide scholarships.
But why would you not think that actually going in breaking into bases illegally, causing millions of pounds worth of damage to planes is not an act of terror?
Because there's a genocide going on, or as you call it, an ethnic cleansing.
But that's not a battery.
I'm talking about non-blood.
I don't think it's not a battery at all.
I think that's the British public saying if our politicians are not going to listen to us, we're going to take non-violent actions.
It wasn't non-violent.
It was literally breaking up planes.
I don't think the plane's going to cry from its hurt wounds.
I think this is ultimately about.
£7 million worth of taxpayer money was taken to repair the damage to these planes.
What is that plane going to do?
What is that plane going to do?
All sorts of things.
Possibly go and kill people, right?
And drop bombs.
Possibly defend the country against an attack, as it did in World War II, as it might do if Vladimir Putin decides to fire some rockets our way.
The idea that the RAF only do things that you don't like or agree with is insulting.
Well, I think you put words in my mouth.
I think the RAF deals are.
You said, what do they do?
It's an RAF plane.
What do you think they do?
Well, when we're supplying RAF planes to Gaza and to share intelligence and flyover, while we're massacring people, on average, a childhood, a classroom of children are dying every single day.
I think it's about getting back to those first principles that all of this is happening.
It's happening in a world of...
So you would ground all RAF planes now.
From being involved with the genocide, absolutely.
Where would you allow them to be involved?
Well, if they're defending our country, as you said, but as far as I can say, would you allow them to be involved in any overseas military action?
Well, I think there is a question about Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria, all places we've had interventions in and all places, in fact, Iraq that you famously oppose.
And quite rightly, too, where we've actually made things worse.
So I'm not a pacifist.
I think there are times when we do need to get involved with war, where we do need to make sure we're defending our own country.
But I don't see any of that applying in Palestine.
Unpacking Biological Men00:07:20
You see, if I take your 89-year-old, I have a problem just with the free speech thing and the way it's going in this country.
It seems to me ridiculous.
When Graham Lineham was arrested at an airport by five armed police for jokes on X, it's ridiculous.
Well, I think they were armed because he was in an airplane.
I've heard that argument.
Actually, there are many unarmed cops at the airport.
But most cops in the airport are armed, right?
Many are armed and many are not armed.
So I think it's a bit of a fat choice.
Do you really think, though, they said, we've got Graham Linehan, let's go get it?
I don't know why they're arresting any British citizen for jokes on X.
It's ridiculous.
I think talking about punching someone in the balls.
It's an obvious joke, wasn't it?
I don't think it's funny, though.
We've been to a Ricky Gervais show.
Okay, let's start with this.
Hang on, I'm not going to be able to do it.
I'm going to hate crime against LGBTQ.
Have you been to a Ricky Gerf?
I've 120 years ago.
Have you been to a Ricky Gervais in the last five years?
So Ricky Gervais should be arrested.
I would rather pinch my eyes out than go to see a Ricky Gervais show, but that's fine.
That's fine.
Ricky Gervais is entitled to go make those jokes.
He's actually hilarious.
Jokes and inciting violence are very different things.
And I think we've got to have a line.
You'd agree there's a line, right?
I think it was obvious the joke he was making.
What, punching people in the ball?
Yes.
Well, let me ask you, the build-up to that joke was he does not believe that biological men should be using women's faces.
Do you?
I think the phrase biological men needs unpacking.
Not really.
You're either born male or female.
Yes, and then lots of people transition and lots of people identify as other things.
I think that's a good idea.
Well, yeah, but this idea you can become a woman is that...
What's about free speech?
But what about tolerance?
You know, for a long time.
Yeah, but what about women's rights?
Well, women's rights are totally fine.
In fact, well...
They're not, though, are they?
They've come under massively because...
They don't let me finish the sentence.
They're totally fine in reference to trans people.
The problems that women have, gynecology appointments that they need, the gender pay gap, violence against women and girls, domestic abuse.
These are the problems.
These aren't the problems of transportation.
But do you think trans men?
Should trans athletes be in women's sport?
Yes.
What?
If a trans athlete is a non-man.
Then of course they should be in the sport that they're participating.
But they're not a woman.
They're a man.
Well, I think that's deeply offensive to the people.
They're born biological men.
They can call themselves trans women.
I'll respect them if they want to be called she or he.
That's fine.
I don't care.
But what you can't have is biological males competing in women's sport.
Everybody with half a brain knows this is completely outrageous, wrong, dangerous, as we saw in the Paris Olympics, where you had a boxer quitting after 40 seconds because she'd never been hit that hard in the ring by somebody who turns out as male chromosomes.
And you want to be prime minister in this country.
Well, maybe you don't.
We're not sure.
But either way, you want to lead a party in this country that thinks that's fine.
I'm glad that you think this is the number one issue when I actually want to talk about the cost of living crisis and inequality.
I think it's actually much more important issue.
Let's talk about sports.
Essentially, there's a whole spectrum of testosterone and estrogen, which you have in terms of people.
You're a man or woman, and men should not.
I think that's the simplistic, stupid argument.
Men actually look at me.
If you are born biologists, you don't have any nuance or complexity.
If you're born a biological man and you want to identify as a trans woman, you'll have my full respect.
You can have exactly the same rights.
I don't sound very risky.
No, no, I do.
I don't sound very insulting.
No, no.
I've always said I want them to have the exact same rights to fairness, equality, and safety as me.
And you.
Do you know how many people in the country care about this when you poll them?
Less than 1%.
Why is Donald Translate?
It's interesting.
Why is Donald Trans president?
What's going on there?
Why is Donald Trump?
Could it be that we're trying to distract from the wealth of multi-millionaires and billionaires, the fact that people are homeless, the fact that people are struggling on the street by talking about trans people?
Are there more victims of inequality itself?
Do me a favor.
We should be talking about the inequality of people.
You should be standing.
If you want to lead...
You might think defending women's rights is bollocks.
Defending women's rights is really, really important, but we're not defeating women's rights in the world.
You don't want to be a silly culture ward that isn't defending women's rights.
Let's talk about the police force who are institutionally misogynistic and sexist.
Let's have a conversation about that.
That's about women's rights.
That's not about trans rights.
Okay.
But actually, you want to trample on women's rights in sport.
No, I don't know at all.
You said you're fine with biological men, billionaire.
Because a trans woman is a woman, so I'm not trampling on their rights.
What I'm doing is defending that.
The UK Supreme Court has established that a male is a male and a female is a female.
The UK Supreme Court is to look at that.
Yeah, of course they're wrong.
Their rob is to look at what's been legislated for.
The legislation is wrong, and we should get better parliamentarians who actually stand by trans people.
Do you think a woman recognises they're a marginalised group in this country who are being bullied by people like you, Piers?
I'm not a bit like, no, I stand woman.
You should know better than to target these people rather than targeting the actual problem in the future.
Can a woman have a penis?
Yes.
It's going to take them a long time on the National Health Service to get rid of it, but it's another separate problem.
All right.
I think we'll leave it on a woman can have a penis.
I think you're lacking nuance and complexity about a pretty good person.
Not really.
You couldn't have been clearer.
I'm clear, because actually, when you want to look at the science...
You were crystal clear.
Ask a simple question.
But you're laughing at it, which I think demands.
Do you think trans people are absolutely ridiculous?
But if you go against trans people, why are you punching down?
Why are you not saying that?
I've already told you that I think trans people.
You sound like you have a huge problem with trans people.
No, no.
It sounds to me like you don't understand what a woman is, which I think is a huge problem for someone leading a party in this country.
A woman is a gender.
Sorry?
You said what's a woman?
A woman's a gender.
And gender is complicated.
Gender is a spectrum.
It's not complicated.
A woman is a biologist.
Is gender a spectrum?
Is it that binary?
Do you think people are born male and female?
Not necessarily.
Oh, for God's sake.
I think it's more complicated than this.
It's not more complicated than.
Well, it's not more complicated than that if you're a TV show host who wants to make it binary and ridiculous.
Zach, you're going to have to say that.
If you want to have a nuanced conversation that actually reflects someone's information.
When I asked you if you want to be prime minister, there is not a cat in hell's chance of you ever becoming prime minister if you don't know what a woman is.
Well, you'll see us going up in the polls.
We're the most favourable party in London right now.
So let's see about it.
Why do you start going out tomorrow with your big campaign that women can have penises?
I'm going to be going out tomorrow with my big campaign about inequality in this country between the multi-millionaires and billionaires and women.
When people see you say to me, women have a penis.
Well, because you're not going to be able to say that you're not going to be able to do that.
They don't care about the conversation.
You want to be penalized.
They just care about the fact they want to put food on the table.
You are a fast emerging.
You are a fast-emerging politician and misguidery.
I am perfectly entitled to ask you what you believe.
You're absolutely entitled.
And people are entitled to see the ludicrousness of these questions rather than tackling the inequality and the fact we're not funding a national health service, the fact we've got schools crumbling, the fact that people are struggling to put food on the table.
That's what people are worried about, not trans people.
Okay.
No newspaper is more iconic than the New York Post.
So why not start your day with me telling you our best stories?
I'm Caitlin Becker, host of the New York Postcast.
Every weekday morning, I'll break down the headlines that matter to you and the stories you're going to want to talk to your friends about.
It's a mix of politics, business, pop culture, basically everything you expect from the New York Post.
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.
Actually, they're worried about women's rights.
I'm worried about women's rights too.
But as I said, I offered several times to talk about the police force.
I offered several times to talk about the inequality.
You want to talk about other things.
I get that.
I want to talk about women's rights.
Let's have a conversation about women's rights.
Let's not talk about trans women's.
But you think women have penises.
You have said to me, can a woman have a penis?
And I said yes.
So if they're transitioning, for instance.
And of course, a woman can have a penis.
It's completely.
When were you a doctor or an expert in women's rights?
The Supreme Court has made it crystal clear.
But that's not the Supreme Court's job.
Justifying Dehumanization00:15:17
The Supreme Court's job is to look at legislation and make a legal ruling.
Okay.
So you know more than the Supreme Court?
Well, yes, actually, in this case, yes, I do.
Zach Polanski, it's good to meet you.
Lovely to meet you, Piz.
That was a pleasure.
Best of luck on your campaign to become British Prime Minister.
If you need a biology lesson, you can find me after the show.
I definitely won't be coming to you, Piz.
Excellent.
Oh, joining me in the studio to debate the issue of protests and free speech is Israeli-American journalist Emily Schrader and the president of the Australian Palestine Advocacy Network, NASA Mashney.
Well, welcome to both of you.
Well, Emily, you were listening to that.
This could be the future of the UK.
Well, you know, I'm not going to comment on all of the women's issues and the internal issues because I'm not British, but I will say that I find it very disappointing to hear anyone who is advocating for a lack of respect for the rule of law.
Whether someone is 89 years old or 19 years old, if they're breaking what the law is, that needs to be taken seriously.
And that is the job of the police.
It's not their job to legislate or make the laws.
It's their job to enforce the laws.
And I think that needs to be respected.
And it's very problematic, the actions of the Palestine Action Group and the fact that they don't have any respect for British law or even a lot of people.
Is it terrorism, though, to spray on a plane if you think that plane should not be used in Gaza?
Is that an act of terrorism or is an act of vandalism by people a peaceful act of vandalism, albeit one that causes material damage?
I don't think you could say that it's a peaceful action at all.
I think it's clearly illegal and it is vandalism.
It's not up to me to decide as someone who isn't British, who isn't a legislator here, whether or not that's terrorism.
Terrorism is politically motivated violence against civilians, traditionally.
But that's not a plane.
Correct.
Correct.
Which is why I personally would categorize it as vandalism.
But that has not been made my decision by the UK government.
But the point being, as Zach Bolanski pointed out, is if you've got 89-year-old people who are supporting this group being arrested for supporting a terrorist group, does that sit easily with you?
Well, I don't think it's up to me to decide.
It's up to the police.
And if that's what the government has determined as a terrorist group, then it is up to the police to enforce that law.
Whether or not they should be designated as a terror group specifically, that's an entirely different issue.
It doesn't matter whether the person is 89 years old or 19, as I said, or even if they pose an actual threat, it matters whether or not they're a member of a designated terror group.
Okay.
Nasser, I'm going to play a clip.
This is of an incident in New York yesterday, I believe, where it's pretty clear what these protesters were saying.
So let's take a look.
Louder than we did the first October 7th.
We are not going anywhere.
We will keep fighting.
Until Palestine is free.
Until Palestine is free.
The problem with that, Nazar, is that that is not a peace.
I don't call that a peaceful protest.
When you have people shouting, we're going to do it louder than October the 7th, what else can that mean other than an incitement to violence?
Look, I can't speak to the intention of the speakers or what they meant or what anybody's doing.
But this is what the protest thing is about, is that are they inciting violence?
Are they supporting Hamas?
Or are they just peacefully protesting against what they see as a genocide of Gazan people?
This is why it really matters.
When I see a clip like that in America yesterday, that speaker whipped up the crowd to say we should do things louder than we did on October the 7th.
That to me is a clear incitement to terrorism.
Well, that's in the United States, where in Britain, I'm an Australian.
But the same principle really applies around the world.
Well, I don't know, Piers.
I think we need to look at what happened on October 7th, but also what happened on October 6th and take all of the context of the situations.
What we often framed is that this all happened, that there's a war between Israel and Hamas.
Israel's at war with Palestinians.
When a settler colony comes in and needs to extinguish, to eradicate the indigenous people, they will do what they did in the country I was born in, in Australia, in North America, New Zealand, etc.
Israel failed.
The Zionist experiment failed in ethnically cleansing and extinguishing all of the Palestinians.
And the Palestinians for an oppressor, peace is when the oppressed isn't resisting, when they're silent.
And that was on the right.
Would you categorise October the 7th as an act of resistance?
I would classify Palestinians having a right to fight against their oppressors.
That wasn't the question.
Was what happened on October the 7th two years ago an act of resistance?
Palestinians rose up and resisted Israeli oppression.
This is my problem.
It wasn't an act of resistance.
It was an act of despicable terrorism.
So I can absolutely condemn kidnapped.
Holocaust victims being kidnapped.
People being tortured, set on fire, homes set up.
You know, we live in this world where nothing can justify October 7th, yet October 7 justifies everything.
But you did justify 731 days.
You did justify.
731 days.
That a baby has been killed every hour.
I understand.
Israel has used the best.
I have been very critical of the Israeli government.
Well, I have been.
You haven't been listening.
But the reason early on, I was very emphatic that Israel had a right to defend itself.
And the reason I...
Israel doesn't have a right to defend it.
And the reason.
Well, of course they do.
Of course they do.
But the reason...
Why does it?
Okay, if you don't think they do, that's fine.
But we'll come to that.
Well, international law is very explicit.
It says a country cannot or doesn't have the right to imprison people to impose apartheid on them.
Sorry, if a country has 1,200 people, if it's murdered, it has a right to defend itself.
Against the people that it occupies?
Right.
But you've already framed it as resistance.
Am I putting it in the middle of the morning?
Because you're allowed to resist.
If you frame an act of...
And I'm against the video.
If you frame an act...
You're not, though.
You call it an act of resistance.
No, the breaking out of Gaza, the fight of the people.
They killed 1,200 people.
Absolutely.
They wound 7,000 people.
They kidnapped babies and grandmothers.
How's that resistance?
Israeli ministers are protested, have protests in front of prisons for the right to rape Palestinian prisoners.
Sorry, I'm not talking about October the 7th.
No, I'm talking about the days of the world.
What's called that resistance?
Palestinians, do you expect the world wants to see a world situation of October 6th against the US?
I expect any civilized, decent person with an ounce of humanity to categorize what happened on October the 7th as a despicable act of terrorism by 3,000 terrorists.
Palestinians who poured over a border, who attacked a musical festival, killing hundreds of young people, kidnapping people.
I've been unequivocal, time after time, condemning the killing of civilians.
You just called it an act of resistance.
Why would you condemn an act of resistance?
Piers, I am very clear that human beings have a right to live, that killing innocent civilians.
You just called it killed by a masked gunman, a Hamas operative.
You literally called it five minutes ago an act of resistance.
Palestinians will resist, whether that is.
Why would you condemn an act of resistance?
Yes, I'm condemning the killing of civilians.
And I will continue to do that.
Palestinians will resist their occupation.
Was it an act of terrorism or was it an act of resistance?
Israeli terrorism has existed, yeah, absolutely since the Belforum movement.
From Hamas that day.
What?
Was it an act of terrorism?
I'm not going to call it an act of terrorism.
What would you call it?
I'm going to call it part of the Palestinian resistance.
Right, so therefore legitimate.
Well, Palestinians have a right to fight for freedom.
Right, so why are you just pretending you care about the deaths of civilians?
You just call it an activist.
They're not being humane.
They have a right to communicate.
I want to know why nobody cared about Palestinians on October 6th.
A lot of people are not going to be able to do that.
A lot of people care about Palestinians.
Like Daniela Weiss.
They don't care about us.
Israel's got a Palestinian.
I'm sure she doesn't.
And there are many like...
But I certainly did.
Let me bring in Emily.
I don't believe that Emily did.
Emily, I'm pretty shocked by that.
I think that to be the day after the second anniversary and to categorize what happened that day as an act of rightful resistance, I think is actually tantamount to supporting terrorism.
I agree with you.
I obviously think that that's extremely problematic.
I don't see how you can say that kidnapping and killing Kfir and Ariel Beebas or maintaining the kidnapping of hostages for over 730 days, 48 of which still remain in the Gaza Strip.
I don't know how you can call that resistance because we're talking about civilians who were murdered and kidnapped.
But I actually want to go back to the protest issue.
I do not think that that speech itself is terrorism.
I was actually at the protest yesterday as well here in the UK, and I heard very similar rhetoric.
I do think, however, it's incitement to terrorism.
And when you hear people chanting to globalize the international system...
They're not committing an act, but it's encouraging them to think this is an act of resistance.
Right, and unfortunately, what we see as the byproduct of that, whether that's what the speaker's intentions are or not, is that people do take matters into their own hands.
They do engage in acts of violence against Jewish individuals, just like we saw with the Manchester attack just a few days ago.
And that's part of the very concerning part about the dramatization of language when it comes to what's happening in this conflict.
I think it's been really irresponsible.
And I say this as someone who has plenty of condemnation for the Israeli government.
I do not support the comments of Danielle and Weiss at all.
I do care about the future of Palestinians.
I did on October 6th as well.
And I find it extremely concerning that people will continue to justify the dehumanization of Israelis, Israeli civilians, I want to emphasize, who are still being held captive by Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
And I also want to add one more thing, which is that Hamas is violently oppressing Palestinians as well and has for many, many years.
There is nothing pro-Palestinian about Hamas as an organization, and they are an organization that needs to be destroyed for the well-being of Israelis and Palestinians alike.
The way to destroy that is to destroy every single school, hospital, the IVF clinic, 4,000 unborn embryos, to imprison 10,000 people, to hostage 2 million Palestinians.
Every Palestinian is hostage is hostage to Israeli apartheid.
My father is buried in land that is strange to him, not next to his grandfather, grandmother, great-grandmother, great-grandfather.
That's apartheid.
That's genocide.
That's Israel.
And the world has seen it.
And so we're going to throw out all of the buzzwords.
What you're saying about Emily today is that the world has seen what Zionism is.
What we have not seen.
What Zionism is, it's the right to self-determination in the Jewish homeland.
Which, by the way, is not unlike what Daniela said, mutually exclusive.
Violent, settler, racist colonial movement that is again with the buzzwords.
But you gave us a picture of you with this performer, Bob Ville.
Bob, yeah.
Yeah, you like him, yeah?
Well, he's a person fighting against power, fighting for justice, fighting for humanity.
I'm a fan of that.
And he also, as we know, sang this.
And yes, to every single IDF soldier out there as an agent of terror to Israel.
Beth billionaire.
Death to the IDF.
You think that's acceptable to the UK?
You know, if you have a look at what the IDF is doing today, if you have a look at...
No, no, my question is, is that acceptable?
Do you agree with him?
Look, I'm not going to be saying those words, but I'm not going to be denying the opportunity.
I'm not condemning anything, Piers.
What I want to condemn is Israel's actions.
You don't condemn anything, do you?
You don't think you condemn Israel?
Western support for a government that is killing, maiming, destroying humanity.
But why should anybody on genocide?
With respect to Israel.
Why should anyone condemn Israel for their response, given that you refused to condemn what Hamas did on October the 7th?
I condemn the killing of innocent civilians.
You didn't, though.
You said the whole thing was rightful resistance.
I said I condemned.
You know, you began to equivocate when I took you on.
You're not equivocated.
But then you repeated, to me, it's a rightful act of resistance.
People are allowed to resist their occupiers.
It's international law.
And you're endorsing what...
An occupier?
Respectfully.
Respectfully.
Was Hindrajab a terrorist?
355?
Hindrab was never a target.
355%.
There's a difference between a legitimately declaring war, which is justified, and civilian casualties in war, and walking into someone's house on a Jewish holiday and kidnapping and murdering children.
There is a difference.
That is not what the IDF is doing.
Whatever mistakes the IDF has made, that is not what the IDF is doing.
Emily, the world has seen the lines.
You can shout over me.
You can use all of that.
See, but Nassau, Massa, here's my point.
My point is this.
I've been really critical of the Israeli government this year, right?
Increasingly.
And rightly so.
I think most people actually I've spoken to, Israelis, Jews, Muslims, everyone I've talked to.
There's a general consensus emerging from those who I would say are not on the extremities of this, right?
Who say that Israel was always going to defend itself aggressively from what happened?
You know, it was the equivalent of 40,000 Americans being killed in one day.
Of course, they were going to respond with great force.
Hamas knew that.
They may well have sucked Israel into a trap.
It may well be what the narrative eventually turns out to be.
And they had a woeful disregard for the lives of their own Palestinian people.
I don't think they cared.
And the same way, I don't think Daniela Weiss cares, right?
But the scale of what has been happening since, particularly this year, I think has been indefensible.
And that is why a rising number of Israelis no longer support what is happening and want this war over and want Netanyahu gone.
And I think that that is what most rational-minded people think looking at this.
This peace plan, finally, seems to me detailed.
It seems to me sensible.
The Palestinian people get to stay.
Hamas no longer have any form of government.
They get to demilitarize.
On the face of it, yes, it's going to be tweaked, but the Arab country leader have been responding very favorably.
The Americans are behind this.
Israel have accepted it.
What is wrong with it?
Well, firstly, I want the killing to stop.
Let's be absolutely clear.
I want the hostages to go home.
I want Palestinian hostages to be released.
What we have, when you, the world has abandoned the Palestinians, yet again, we are being forced to negotiate with our genocideas while they genocide us.
This has to be removed from this situation where we have a master servant, where the boot of oppression, the boot of genocide, and we're having to try and speak to it from on the ground.
It needs to go to an international forum like the United Nations.
Imagine Tony Blair and Trump get to decide how Gaza gets rebuilt, how Palestinians are compensated, what sort of accountability mechanisms.
It's absolutely absurd.
I'm not sure why you want Palestinians to live under Hamas, which, by the way, you mentioned before that Israel is starving Palestinians.
In fact, Hamas has been using food as a weapon against their own people.
They have been stealing aid.
They have been selling it at triple the price this time.
Your former defense minister cut off the food, gas, allowing them to be able to get away from the people.
I think that anyone, there is no limitation on aid right now.
I think that anyone who is against ending the war right now is problematic to begin with.
Why do you want more Palestinians to die?
Why do you want this war to continue?
You don't want liberation with your friends.
You make peace with your enemies.
You want liberation.
That is what we're talking about doing right now.
Why would you want a war to continue, which you are claiming is a genocide?
You want more Palestinians to die?
Why End the War00:02:23
We want the hostages to come home.
That is our number one priority when it comes to this.
Your number one priority is the vanquishing of the Palestinian people, which is true.
Israel would not be agreeing to the peace offer right now.
You've destroyed every hospital.
Israel wants to hold them.
You've destroyed every school.
You've killed a child.
Why haven't Hamas?
All that is true.
Why has Hamas not released hostages?
Hamas offered the hostages on October.
Why haven't they just released them?
Because they know what's happening.
What's going to happen?
I imagine what they've seen.
But Israel has said this war ends when they release hostages.
They were offered the hostages on October 8th and October 9th.
Why haven't Hamas just released them?
That's the only bargaining chip they have.
I imagine.
I imagine everybody.
Those lies are a bargaining chip.
In a negotiation, we're just talking about why would I want to end the war?
Knowing what Israel will do, what everybody has seen today, what the world has risen up.
And we used to say in our thousands and our millions, we're all Palestinians.
We say in our millions and our billions, the whole world has risen up because they've seen the ideology that Emily believes in, this racist ideology that wants to kill every Palestinian and to take all the people.
We've also seen the Nile to the Euphrates.
That's Jordan, Saudi Arabia.
I'm on this show.
Which she has explicitly said she doesn't agree with.
She doesn't think Palestinians have a right to a country.
What might that mean?
Well, I do.
Do I get to go home?
Do I get to go?
Do they have a leadership that is not available?
Is your 2,000-year-old right to go?
I've got to leave it there.
Can I come home?
If there is a Palestinian state, you can go to Jerusalem.
No, no, I'm not.
What is it?
Is it of mine what the Palestinian government is?
I'm from Jerusalem, Emily.
Can I tell you that?
If that was a part of Palestine, yes, but it is not.
This needs to be decided with a leadership that can actually have a peace agreement with the state of Israel.
I've got to leave the state of Palestine.
I've got to leave it there.
I've got to go home to Jerusalem.
Thank you both.
Where my grandfather is buried.
I have to leave it.
You're going to deny me that right.
That's Zionism, ladies and gentlemen.
No, Zionism is the right to self-determination.
Denying indigenous people.
Denying the right of Indigenous people to return home.
All right.
I've got to leave it there.
Thank you both very much.
Thank you.
Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent.
The only boss around here is me.
You enjoy our show.
We 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 censored media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it Without you.