Live on Sky News is Sharry.
Good Evening Tonight.
Donald Trump lands at NATO, says he's proud of Israel, and lashes out at CNN and The New York Times for claims the nuclear sites weren't obliterated. A B two stealth bomber pilot will be live on the show to give his take on all of this. Leaked recordings of Mossad agents telling Iranian generals they had just hours to flee the calls designed to destabilize the regime. Well Tonight, a long term Mossad division head will join us on the show for.
An exclusive interview.
I said today Susan Lee calls for more women in politics despite reducing the number of women in shadow cabinet in her first move as.
A liberal leader.
I'll speak about this with Brahmin Bishop and Graham Richardson a bit later. Plus reporter Caroline Marcus harassed by pro Palestinian activists while trying to cover the Low Tooth case.
People.
More on that disgusting behavior later.
But there's so much to speak about tonight, from Trump's epic spray to Iran's cruel execution of those it claims are Israeli spies. Now, just as the President was looking calm, rational presidential making decisions thoughtfully and in a considered way, he undoes it all with a foul mouthed ti rate. He could have picked up the phone to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Nettanyahu last night and urged him not to resume the military campaign against Iran, to stick with the ceasefire.
He could have had a rational conversation, but instead he criticized one of his closest allies in front of the world.
There was one rocket that I guess was fired overboard.
It was after the.
Time limit and admits it's target, and now Israel's going up. These guys got to calm down ridiculously.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board summed up this bizarre statement perfectly, writing, Israel and Iran exchanged serious fire in the hours before the ceasefire, as is common, but Iran fired three missiles after the truce went into effect in response miss The Trump unloaded his anger on Israel.
For planning to retaliate, and.
The piece went on to explain what many guests on this program did.
Last night, that it's about deterrence.
If there's a ceasefire, it has to be abided by these terrorist regimes, whether it's Iran or Hesbalah or Hamasid's terror proxies, they need to know they can't fire missiles into suburban areas.
Into homes whenever they like.
But the part of Trump Spray that's had the world in a spin is this explosive sentence. In it, Trump drew an unwarranted equivalence between Israel and Iran, alluding to the forever war narrative.
We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what they're doing now.
The Wall Street Journal again put it perfectly when its editorial board said, the president seem to treat Israel and Iran as to equivalent threats to his diplomacy. Here's what they're doing. Iran fights because it is devoted to Israel's destruction. Israel fights because it is devoted to not being destroyed.
Couldn't be said better than that.
And Iran needs to now show that it is going to give up its forever goal to destroy Israel.
Unless it does this, there can be.
No genuine ceasefire, no genuine peace, just a brief truce until the Iranian regime finds another way to kill Israeli's and westerners, and this should be a key feature of the talks that America is urging Iran to resume, and Trump should also insist on Iran providing access to the
International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect its nuclear sites. Now, of course, Trump's unpresidential conduct and swearing made headlines the world over, and the papers had some fun with the dramatic events last night with a West Australian headline trump drops f bomb and then also by Chris Doah in the Nightly after Iran broke the ceasefire.
Iran can't handle the truce, but.
It does look like Trump's public threats to Israel worked. It was diplomatic pressure taken to new and extreme levels that I think are truly unbecoming the president. The President shouldn't have treated Israel that way. It was disappointing behavior from Trump, although there is still cause to be immensely grateful for his military strike that made the world undoubtedly a safer place, and so long as Israel has finished
the job, it's not a bad thing. Trump is imposing the ceasefire, and he also has we have to keep in mind a possible ulterior motive as well.
He wants to win the Nobel Peace Prize.
He probably doesn't have a chance, but he certainly doesn't have a chance of Israel and Iran are still at war, and just hours after Trump's vicious spray last night, Benjamin Ettaya, who showed he is a true diplomat, remaining composed and gracious even thanking Trump.
Lam loyalil you did God Kamana Sitampa by Telivan Vanimodlomude the Deef.
And Ndaya, who has said that the war goals in Iran are complete Israel always expected them to take about two weeks. But then today making major global news was a leaked report by Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency. It's cast doubt on whether the nuclear material has in fact been destroyed, and this report claims that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was probably moved to a secret site. Now the key words there are probably moved, so it doesn't seem like
this agency knows for certain now. Nedajahu and Trump have both rejected this claim, as has the United States Ambassador to Israel, Steve Wikoff. He said he'd read the damage assessment reports, not just from the American government, he said, from multiple governments.
We put twelve bunker buster bombs and four do. There's no doubt that it breached the canopy. There's no doubt that it was well within reach of the depth that these bunker buster bombs go to, and there's no doubt that it was obliterated. So the reporting out there that that that in some ways suggests that we did not achieve the achieve the objective is just completely preposterous.
And Trump lashed out at the CNN and The New York Times tonight at the NATO summit. This just in the past couple of hours for publishing reports that the sites hadn't been destroyed. He called them scum, and he repeated that insults multiple times.
You had some great reporters, but you have scum. CNN is scum, MSDS is scum. The New York Times is scum. They're bad people, They're sick.
He also praised Israel for turning its planes around and sticking with the ceasefire.
Israel came back instiday.
I'm so proud of them because they came back.
You know, they went out because they felt it was a violation, and technically they were right. But it just wouldn't have worked out very well.
And they brought the planes back.
And Trump said, if he hadn't sent in the B two bombers with the bunker busting bombs, the war on Iran would still be continuing.
But had we not succeeded with that hit, that hit ended the war. That hit ended the war.
Now, apart from his fury towards the media, Trump seemed a lot calmer today. He's obviously pleased the ceasefire has held for the time being. But while Iran isn't firing missiles at Israel, there are serious repercussions internally. It has reportedly executed three people that it claims were Mossad spies and moss Out, if you don't know, is the Israeli intelligence agency. Iran claims the men smuggled in equipment that we used to kill one Iranian by Israel, and these
three men were hanged. And this is the third set of executions of people accused of being moss Had agents, just in the past few days. And this is the true nature of the Iranian regime. It's epitomized by cruelty, theocratic tyranny, persecution, state sponsored violence, and brutality, and looking back now after the past couple of weeks, we have to say it is a great pity that this evil
regime survived the war. Now, the president of the United States, as you know, has always loved social media, declaring to the world what he's thinking or feeling about anyone or any topic without any regard for the consequences. Diplomacy is a thing of the past for this current president. He told the media when he spoke before flying to NATO last night that he'd been up all night watching cable television. And then you can see by the time that he posts on truth social that he went on a posting
spree as well. He unleashed on AOC in one post, calling her stupid and one of the dumbest.
People in Congress. No complaints there.
In another post, he complained in capital letters about the fake new CNN and New York Times, which he said teamed up to.
Demean his strikes on Iran.
Now, this is obviously highly amusing, highly entertaining, very unpresidential. But then Trump posted a video that even for him, is highly controversial. Now he's trying to get a Ran to abide by a cease fire. He yelled at Israel over this desperately wants Iran to abide by the ceasefire. Yet at the same time he's posting this bomb.
Bomb my Ram, bom bom bom bom bomb, My Ram got a big sem random bom bomb My ends.
I went to a mosque, throws some rocks.
Tell me I had told I gotta.
Got a B S B.
D.
Uncle Sam getting pretty hot.
And I ran until he's got a big S.
And that's, of course to the happy tune of the Beach Boys Barbara An And did you hear that line there was in the sub subtitles put the Ayatola in a box. Well, let's hope that doesn't offend the Supreme Leader Kimani to such an extent that he resumes his campaign of terror against Israel. A big show ahead, Like I said, one of Massad's head of divisions will be on later plus a B two stealth bomber pilot to tell us just whether he thinks those nuclear sites would
have been destroyed. But now let's bring in barrister and UK lawyers for Israel Charitable Trust legal director Natasha Holstoff, and she joins me live from London Natasha, great to see you again. Now, Trump lashed out at Israel, not Iran, Israel last night after the Islamic Republic breached the ceasefire.
Was this misplaced?
Do you think surely Israel had every right to hit back at Iran if it wanted to.
It certainly had every right to do so, And indeed, from the outset here, israel strikes have been entirely lawful. This is part and parcel of the ongoing armed conflict between Israel and Iran. I'd be encouraged to take with a pinch of salt what President Trump says over social media, or indeed in clips of interviews that I think are made perhaps more of by the media than they ought to be. This is a man's actions. I would suggest
that perhaps speak louder than his words. But it is confusing, especially in circumstances where the ceasefire was only broken by Iran, and Israel's response, which had been promised to be significant, appears to have been more muted than we might have expected.
Now, Trump also criticized Israel for going hard before the ceasefire came into effect. But again, if Israel needed to finish the in time to meete a ceasefire if it still had targets military sides, nuclear sides.
Who knows that it needed to hit.
Then again, it had every right to do that before the ceasefire started, don't you think in your legal.
Opinion that's correct? And I think it also had every right to respond forcefully as it had promised to Iran's breach of that ceasefire. And appreciate ceasefires in this region frequently take a few attempts to come into place. I mean since then, of course, we've seen relative quiet. I believe there were a few drones, but from Iran it may have been that they were just slow in reaching
Israel proper. The fact of the matter is, though that Israel would be lawfully able to continue striking military targets in Iran. It has done so, for example in Lebanon, despite there being an existing SEASPI, because it has maintained the ability and the right to act as and when it sees threats materializing, even in the context of a ceasefire.
We're seeing moves by some Democrats, but also anti Trump Republicans to call for Donald Trump to be impeached. Algreen lost his bid to have Trump impeached over around nuclear strikes.
It was voted down.
By one hundred and twenty eight Democrats to seventy nine. What are the legalities of this claim that Trump had no right to make this decision on his own?
They don't appear to me to be any It's extraordinary that one sees these party political claims being advanced. We didn't see this, however, in relation to Trump's previous action against al Bagdadi, against Sulimani, or indeed to Obama strikes in Yemen in Syria. It's a very basic matter of US constitutional structure that the president does not need to
seek permission from Congress in any of these respects. A full declaration of war would be a different matter, but of course that hasn't occurred as far as America's involvement here has been concerned so far. So a strange attempt, I think, born out of politics rather than a proper application of US constitutional law here.
So what does this come down to?
So if it was a war, would he need to get the approval of Congress?
Is that where the line.
Is for a formal declaration of law? Yes, that's my understanding. I'm not a US lawyer, but I've spent a little bit of time in the United States a national security law context, so certainly that's my reading of it, and from what I can see that's been endorsed by constitutional lawyers and those that understand the process. I imagine it's one of the reasons that this impeachment attempt wasn't successful.
But I think in contrast to previous actions, previous strikes conducted by America under various presidents in the Middle East, it is striking that these complaints would be raised in this context, in the context of much needed strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, and strikes which I should stress have made the region as well as the world a great deal safer. All of these rhetorical flourishes of starting World
War III, frankly, are being proven to be ridiculous. Any steps that minimize Iran's ability to continue to terrorize the region and operate terrorist proxies around the world targeting Western interests, and minimizing its ability to continue to do that in the future under a nuclear umbrella ought to be celebrated as bringing peace and stability to the world.
Just finally, Natasha, we're seeing that the US is trying to encourage Iran now to engage in talks about its nuclear program. It should allow the IAEA to have access to its nuclear sites.
Would you be trusting around in this scenario.
Well, certainly not. Of course. This is a regime that broke the cease fire within hours. It is a regime that has consistently used previous agreements with the United States and others to continue to advance covertly its nuclear ambitions. The most important development over the last week is that its nuclear program has been put back significantly. In that context, those negotiations may of course continue, but its actions here that I think again speak louder than words, and we're
never going to have a situation. Let me acknowledge that there is a final nail in the coffin of Iran's problematic ambitions as the Islamic republic that I'm talking about, unless we see regime change coming from within, an opportunity for the people to throw off this oppressive, tyrannical regime that they have suffered under for some forty six years. But for that sort of change in Iran, I'm afraid all we can anticipate and hope for is a control
on its annihilation. Attempts on Israel and other Western interests. But in that context, there has been significant advantage from what's happened over the last week that can certainly lead to more productive talks. But I wouldn't trust anything that the Iranians commit to because there is a track record here of them consistently lie. And this is a regime that uses that sort of subterfuge and dishonesty to advance
its ambitions, in particular the death to Israel ambition. But let's not forget death to America, includes death to the UK, death to Australia. This is a regime that has pitted itself against Western liberal democracies from its inception in nineteen seventy nine.
Indeed, Natasha, really appreciate your time. Great to have you on the show once again. Thank you so much. All Right, let's bring in now Sky News contributor Kosher Gada, and Kosher let's pick up on Donald Trump's spray last night, his post on truth Social this unorthodox way of handling foreign policy and was where he publicly criticizes an ally one minute and then says he's proud of them the next, swearing calling the media scum. What can we make of this bizarre way of running the world.
You know, I think it's another illustration show I agreed to be with you as always have. Let Trump be Trump. That adage is something now that's been spoken so many times over the past decade. I would piece a part two or three things that are going on in there. One is style stylistically, and profanity is something I don't think he's done from the bullie pulpit as president before. But in general, he plays fast and loose with rhetoric.
He loves to be bombastic, whether it's calling North Korea's leader Rocketman or the clips over here that he's retweeting. He does that to some effect. It is controversial, but by and large people have kind of gotten used to it. A lot of people like it and think that it's effective. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But in general that
is his way and it's part of his approach. Stylistically, I think he likes to throw people off balance and have a big stick rhetorically and keep people guessing essentially in terms of the substance of what he said. So there's a couple of things there. One is attacking the media, calling them scum, that's like a tried and tested strategy for him. The media's trust is at an all time low.
He's very adversarial with them. His base hates the media and doesn't trust them, and that tends to actually play well. He's also angry with the cleanup that he's having to do. I think that was a communications misstep of not putting the reports out there, and people are questioning how effective the bomb strikes were. And then the last bit is, of course, the way he went after Israel. That is
unusual for a US president. But I think he's just expressing his frustration and the fact that it's a layered issue domestically and with his baes about whether or not the US should have gotten involved or should continue to get involved in that region, and he's just giving.
Voice to that indeed.
And also he'd promised it would be forever cease fire, and it didn't look like it was going to last more than a few hours, although thankfully now it's been a bit of a calm day. Kosher in New York today there was a huge upset with TikTok influencer Zoran mum Dani. Not sure if I'm saying his name correctly, ma'm dani beating former New York Governor Andrew Cmo in the Democratic primary election for mayor. Now, this influencer is
an outspoken anti Zionist. He's refused to condemn calls to globalize the enter faighter and here he was at a protest probably.
I mean kosher.
This seems like a shocking result today and shurely people don't want this kind of behavior from their politicians, we.
Would hope, and yet the result tells us otherwise. This one shar really pains me as a longtime New Yorker. One of the greatest cities in the world. It's the epicenter of the Western Hemisphere and one of the most important cities, and he looks like he is on a glide path to winning. He defeated Andrew Cuomo. As you said, he sort of was flying under the radar and came out of nowhere. And not only those comments and his position there with respect to Israel and everything else he
was saying with Intafada. He's also anti policing. He believes the police force should be abolished in New York and social workers should be doing that. He's anti private sector. He wants public grocery stores and other things. Even though the New York City is running one hundred billion dollars in debt, he thinks the buses should be free, with no explanation for how anybody is going to pay for that. And just one of quick point I would make too,
is it is really interesting. It's an example of the downstream consequences of immigration and multiculturalism that he is somebody who was born outside of the US. He's a Muslim and Hindu heritage. He identifies as Muslim. And you've got the mayor of London, the mayor of Rotterdam, the mayor of Calgary, and potentially the mayor of New York City being these folks, how compatible are they really with the cities that they're governing. That is I think the elephant in the room.
That's really interesting.
And you know the current mayor, Eric Adams, He's running as an independent, so we have to see what chance he has against the official Democratic candidate. I mean, he seems like he has been doing an excellent job, not without controversy, but we have to hope he gets there now.
Just quickly before you go farmer.
Florida Congressman Matt Gates has been caught out in an embarrassing text exchange with his mum. So someone was sitting behind him on a flight and photographed his phone as she texted him saying, don't be criticizing the president or his actions. He's trying to keep pass safe. That's his job. Maga will turn on you and kosher. He was also bragging about how much he has in the.
Bank and his real estate.
This is pretty embarrassing, definitely a little bit cringe.
He is known to be braggadocious, and it is certainly a reminder to be aware of your surroundings and her public figure in a public space. I think he handled as well as someone could when it went viral, and he leaned into it and used humor. But I think, you know, in terms of substance, it was another microcosm or another glimpse into what was happening in the Trump base in the last week and how that faction was very worried about the strikes and was going to lead.
It was a slippery slope of US involvement. That was kind of the crux of what he was discussing with his mother. But luckily none of that came to pass and We're generally in a pretty good place today.
All right, Kosha, thank you so much. Pleasure to have you on again.
All right, let's turn now to this explosive leaked audio. This first was in the Washington Post, where a Mossad agent tells an Iranian general that he has twelve hours to escape with his family before Israel kills him.
Jina A ham Ktoy.
Now, the call is thought to have been part of an intelligence operation that accompanied the strikes and Iranian nuclear facilities, and it would have been presumably designed to further destabilize the Iranian regime.
Let's go live to Israel now.
I'm joined by the former head of Massads Hostages and Mia Division. Also the former a former Massad division head, Rami Igar Rami. Welcome to the show. Now, obviously you wouldn't be able to comment specifically about this case, but what can you tell us about these sorts of operations generally speaking, Well.
I'll let you know that my telephone number is known in Tehran and I've been receiving these kind of messages for the last two years more or less. Funny enough, half of these messages are threatening, and half of these messages are people that wish to be recruited and help Israel in its plate.
So you find a very diverse.
Iranian Iranian society, and this diverse society is a very good hunting ground for intelligence agencies.
But in terms of when you have an operation like Israel has had in a Ran over the past thirteen days or so, it has been incredibly successful. But it's not just the military might. Intelligence has been a key part of this. Can you tell us about what would gone into that and how important that intelligence gathering was with operatives deep undercover in Tehran for years and years and years Before something like this can be successfully pulled off.
It is an endeavor that has taken many years, many years. Israel, like by the way you run, the same way on the other side, has been recruiting agents, especially for operational usage, not for intelligence. Traditionally, before the internet and before this world is diversed and technologically, intelligence agency has recruited people in order to collect information, including to collect intelligence.
But this has changed over.
The years and now intelligence intelligence agencies recruits on the other side people to be operational of the day on the d day, and as you've seen here in Iran, Israel has and I explained why, because there is a huge fraction in Iran that is anti government and anti government for many, many reasons, and these people are recruited over the years and set to operate on the right day,
as they have done in this operation. But at the end of the day, and we'll go further into this and into what has happened with all the military success of Israel and the United States and the intelligence success of Israel, at the end of the day, Iran is still there with four hundred and fifty kilograms of Fisher's material material that is suited for several nuclear bombs.
You believe that.
Hasn't been destroyed, Rami, you believe that hasn't been destroyed.
I believe it hasn't been destroyed.
And I do not buy not Trump's declarations and not anybody else's. The Iranians are very clever people, and they have known there was a war coming on, and they know how important these four hundred and fifty kilograms are for their future military capabilities but also for their negotiating capability.
Intelligence have tracked where it was moved to if it was moved.
Maybe and maybe not if you ask me not, because if it was very clear.
We would have heard this in the press, but it doesn't matter.
We have to assume, and our assumption is very important for the future of the Western world.
We have to assume these four.
Hundred and fifty kilograms have somehow been disposed in some other locations, as the Iranians are saying. And as long as this is true, and knowing that in the past Iran has been able to resurrect its center fuel operation very fast within months, we should all understand that the end of this endeavor is in some kind of an agreement with Iran. And without an agreement, none of us have gone very far. We have had a very successful war.
It has been incredible in many ways. Israel and the United States have been able to do some things that we couldn't imagine before. But at the end of the day, we need an agreement if we want the Iranians at the end to be to comply with us and to stop their ambitions for nuclear for a nuclear bomb at the end, we need an agreement, and an agreement which would be better than Obama maybe, but I'm not sure that we are able to get there.
All right, Very interesting, Rami, great to have you on the show, Thank you so much for your time.
So there you go.
Even some Israelis are questioning that that four hundred kilograms of enriched uranium has not been destroyed. The President says it has been. We'll see still to Karma. B two Stealth Bomber Pilot gives his take on this very question. Plus car Carline Marcus harassed while covering the Antoinette Latouf case as she gloats outside court froman Bishop and Graham Richardson.
While unpack all of that. Next welcome back.
Pro Palestinian activist Antoinette Latouf should never have been hired by the ABC, which is required by its charter to be impartial, and that shocking decision to hire her has come back to bite them. The federal court found that the ABC unlawfully terminated her after three days of work in twenty twenty three. The judge found while the ABC claimed it had directed Latouf not to post about the war in Gaza during her time there, it had only advised her, not given her an official direction, and so
there was no misconduct. And this is the critical point that's been conveniently overlooked.
By many media outlets.
Now, my poor friend Ansky News report at Caroline Marcus was covering this today and had to come face to face with all of the Tooth's supporters, lovely activists like this one.
Well, there was a loud applause after that decision was handed down. There was a fairly large group of supporters in court for Antoinette Latouf. You can see some of them here behind me at the moment, shouting about the Israel Garza conflict, many wearing Kafir scarfs, screaming about media censors.
Sorry, we'll just cut it there because that's just rude.
Karlen Marcus trying to do her job there.
Now, when I spoke to Caroline about this early and that wasn't the only incident. Pro Palestinian activists were harassing her.
She was simply.
Doing her job professionally and they were trying to intimidate her. And one activist, a former journalism lecturer, even tried to film Cara Line on her mobile phone.
I mean, it's disgraceful.
Let's bring it now from a Speaker of the House, Brom and bishop and labor legend Graham Richardson.
Brom.
When this is an infuriating finding, if it's a regular workplace sure, you can't fire someone for their political opinion.
But at the ABC they're required in their.
Charter to be impartial and objective, so there should be a.
Question about whether those rules apply.
Well, here's the problem. The charter is not enforceable. In fact, the actor actually says that nothing in that charter can be enforced in a court of law in any way, shape or form. So until that charter is enforceable, it's really ridiculous to discuss enforcing impartiality on the question of your new touch on the really key point, and that is there was no direction given to her. It was
said to be merely an advice or suggestion. So once again the ABC has gone to court with a pretty ify case, which you could see right from the beginning, and what wracked up another million dollars in podcast. So you know, management has got to change at the ABC and that charter needs to be enforceable.
Richard, My worry is this is just going to embolden the ABC activists with their social media posts, with their activism. We already know she was paid for those two shifts she did at work. Now she gets another seventy thousand dollars compensation on top of that. I mean, the whole thing is quite ludicrous.
I think ludergris is a fair description. This saga has dragged on. It's been ridiculous in the last few days. I don't quite understand why someone couldn't put an end to it. Someone couldn't find a way through. It's not that difficult. I think. I always around and I sort of that out in five minutes.
She shouldn't have been in the first place.
Exactly, she shouldn't have been hired in the first base. That was the problem.
Now, Opposition leader Susan Lee fronted the National Press Club for the first time as Opposition leader, and she was pretty pointed about wanting more women in the Liberal Party. If some state divisions choose to implement quotas, that's fine. This is despite the fact in her first move as Liberal leader, she reduced the number of women in shadow cabinet, dumping for talented women.
Brown.
Do you agree that the party should now be open to quotas.
I'll never agree to quotas ever, because I think it's an insult to women that they can't be judged simply on what they've got to offer. If it's a bit harder don't waste your time windy about it. Put the effort into overcoming that difficulty. But I think Susan did
quite well today. If you compare Albow's first speech about being growing up in a housing condition house and going to a private school at the cathedral and having this tough life compared to what Susan described as her early days in early life, he had a pretty easy ride, and she's become a lot of hardships to become the person she is. So let's give her a go. And let's face it, the parliament isn't sitting yet. I mean, we had to make way for Albow. EBB.
What is it.
With these with these trips away? So the parliament's not sitting it, So let's wait and see.
Rich.
I do you agree with me that it's hypocritical her point on women, and how do you think she performed, particularly her admission that the Liberal Party was in a terrible position.
Yeah, well, I think you know, you're starting off with a pretty weakened hand, and so you've got to extend I think some sympathy for her in that respect. It's not an easy job. It's a really tough one and it'll be a while before we can really make a proper judgment as to how well she's going. But I think she's off to a reasonable start. I think I
think Labor has got to concede that. It's like, you know, when Tony Havebott became leader, people were in the Labor Party were rubbing their hands with the glee saying, you know, is this terrific? Didn't turn out so well? I think you've got to remember that.
But Richard, it's been nearly three months since the election and the Liberals are nowhere. They haven't even started having a debate about energy policy.
Now.
The Liberals are in a mess. There's no doubt about that, and there are plenty of examples of it. I think the difficulty is going to be trying to sort out a coherent policy line. You know, they don't have a policy line. They've got a few policies they don't ness necessarily jell really well together, and it's a difficult job to make that happen. But that is a job. That's what she's been given the task for, so she's going to have to overcome it.
Rom just quickly.
It just looks like they're kicking the energy debate down the road, doesn't it that?
When are they actually going to have it?
Wow, that's that's a really good question. We should not be pushing this down the road. This should be dealt with now. It is a significant problem.
But Albo, you've got a ridiculous policy in the Labor Party with regard to energy. It is unaffordable, it is sending us bankrupt, it's destroying the countryside, it's destroying one wildlife.
It's citizen policy. The levels don't even have a policy.
Well, let's see that some of us in the Liberal Party ever always had a policy, and it is that net zero should never have been agreed to by Morrison and that the answer is we have to have affordable, reliable energy source.
What do you think?
Very quickly, I'm so out of time, But rich are you think the Liberal Party should dump the net zero commitment or not?
Would that be a good political decision?
I think net zero's a really bad idea to keep batting on with for the Liberals, and I think they'd save themselves a lot of strife if they just got away and just said no nonsense.
There you go. Graham Richardson from a bishop, didn't expect it'd be so much agreement on energy policy. Maybe you boy should sit down a season lee Now still to come, we'll cross live to Israel for the latest on the family killed by the Iranian strikes yesterday. But first I'll be joined by forming United States Air foced Lieutenant General Mark Weatherington, one of the few people who's been in the cockpit of the much feared BE Too stealth bomber that's after this quick break, welcome back.
Well.
Seven be Too stealth bombers were used during Operation Midnight Hammer, each manned by a two person crew who flew for thirty seven hours. This is an incredible feat of human endurance, requiring a lot of skill and experience. From a deputy commander of Fox Global Strike Command, Mark Weatherington is one of the few people who knows what it's like to be in the cockpit of these planes, and I'm pleased to say he joins me now, make thank you so
much for coming on the program. Can you tell us what it's like to fly a B two stealth bomber, especially for those kind of extraordinary long hours.
Well, Cherry, thanks for having me.
Glad to join you tonight. The B two is very similar to most of the aircraft that we operate, the bomber aircraft, it doesn't fly an incredibly different manner. However, long duration stories can be an extreme challenge for the pilots, very fatiguing, especially with the two person crew, and so we work hard to prepare them to get them the rest they need ahead of time. They can stretch out and sleep and move around in non critical phases of flight.
One of them can while the other piloting the aircraft. And it's an extreme effort, but they handle it very well, skillfully and professionally.
Yeah, and I also read that there's a microwave and a fridge on board thirty seven hours. Of course you need to eight in that period, not just sleep, as you said, refueling mid air.
Is that a difficult challenge, Well.
It can be, certainly.
These pilots are very practice set and for a B two, a long range strike platform, that's one of the most important things we can do. Recognize that these pilots on this mission probably had three to four air fuelings going into the target area and coming out of the target area, and each one of those is about twenty minutes where they're piloting that large airplane about twelve feet behind and
beneath another very big aircraft transferring fuel. And so it's a very very important aspect of the mission and one where they really have to be focused and prepared.
Now in terms of the impact that the bunker buster bombs, that the B two stealth bombers carry, the.
Impact that they would have.
As you know, there's been a lot of discussion over whether around nuclear sites, particularly four doughs eighteen to ninety meters underground beneath the mountain, would have been entirely obliterated. To use Donald Trump's phrase, do you believe there's any possibility it would have just done damage and not completely destroyed the site from your knowledge of how these bombs land.
Jerry, I think, as I've stated on several other programs this week, it's going to take days, weeks, months for us to fully understand the damage at Foordeaux and how far that program may have been set back. And so it's possible that an operation like this can be very decisively ordered, which I think it was, and it can be very well executed, which I think it was, and still not.
Achieved the desired results. And so there's a lot of unknowns.
It appears to me that the weapons performed the way they were supposed to perform, arrived on the aim coins precisely, and did the damage that they or executed. They're part of it to play that they were supposed to. But whether it caused that damage that we were looking for, we just don't know.
Yeah, we'll need I suppose people on the ground because we've already seen satellite vision yet, so to properly ascertain whether it has completely destroyed the site, you would need people on the ground, wouldn't you.
Some ways, you're going to need to be able to exploit that site, probably with someone there on the ground. There may be some clandestine sources that you can use. There's probably some measures and signals, intelligence and other things that will help build that complete picture. But yes, Sherry, unless you're really at the site and you can see that damage firsthand, it's hard to make a full assessment.
Just finally, when you have dropped a bomb of that size, if you have in your professional.
Experience, what is it like? What is the sound like?
You know, do you have to get out of the area pretty quickly?
What's the impact like?
Well, Sherry, in this case, you can certainly feel it on the airplane. When thirty pounds falls off the airplane, there's going to be an effect on the flight, and certainly their practice they understand that. But as far as other effects, you know, they're dropping them from medium altitude and so the impact of that weapon is probably going to take about a minute for it to fall and hit the ground, and they're continuing to fly on to either their next target or to leave the target area.
They're not going to really realize any of the effects, whether that's a shock wave or a flash or anything like that.
Fascinating mac Rington. Really appreciate your time and insights tonight. Thanks so much. Now after the break, the Prime Minister's former press director Daniel Seaman would join me.
That's after this next break, welcome back. Well.
In the Iranian strikes, yesterday after the ceasefire was announced, a beautiful family was murdered.
Here's mother Michel zachs her.
Son Etan, his girlfriend Noah, and the fourth victim was no Mischannan who lived in a nearby apartment. Joining us now the Prime Minister's former press director Daniel Seaman. Daniel, thank you again for your time. Look, this is the latest example of Iran targeting civilians after the ceasefire was announced.
Now they claimed that it was done before the hour, but they ignore the fact that they was supposed to be seven o'clock their time. They are an hour ahead of Israel, so they knew very well that they were firing at the afterwards in violating.
But it's nothing new. They always are held to different standards and always violate the principles. So we're not surprised. But that was yesterday. We have to move on because the war here is not over yet.
Well, the ceasefire deal.
You say, the world's not over yet, but the ceasefire deal does look like it's holding despite that rocky start.
Do you think this is going to last?
No, because it never does. They make it very clear. They say what their intent is.
The people in the West choose, and I admit, even in Israel for too many years when the jihadists were telling us something or threatening us, we tend to ignore it and apply our values and our principles.
On them and think that they hold.
To them, and they don't, and they'll look for different ways of doing it.
I think.
The interesting thing yet, from what Trump did yesterday was not only sending a message to Israel when he was angry at Israel.
Fine, but I think it was more a message to the other side.
Look, if I with my ally, who I appreciate and hold the high esteem I'm holding them to observe and commit themselves to the ceasefire, you can imagine what I'll do to them. So I think this was a roundabout way of signaling to them very much that he's serious about the ceasefire.
So it very well could be. But Trump has also said that if he sees that they're.
Continuing to try to develop a nuclear bomb, it's unacceptable what this means to see in the future.
And NATANIEO have been very good at keeping things.
I don't want to say secret, but I've been very mum about what their intentions are.
We know what the goal is, but how they're going to go about doing it.
They've done a very good job of doing what is necessary when it's necessary.
Yeah, And I was speaking on the show last night about the formidable partnership they were forging, and then you know, just as we came to that view, Trump publicly criticized Israel verbally and on truth. Knowing Ntanyahu as you do, how would he have taken this sort of public rebuke.
Natanielle is the kind of person who keeps his He's focused on the ball.
He keeps his eye on the ball. He knows what needs to be done.
He ignores the media and the clapping of the media. He ignores what is the clamoring going on with the public. He's very focused on It's the same thing here with Trump.
He focuses on the relationship between the United States and Israel.
He knows very well that Trump is the President of the United States.
He has his interests, but Natanielle knows that he's the Prime Minister of the State of Israel.
He will keep his eye focused on our interests.
And as long as we can work together with the United States and advance the looks. Some of the interests of the United States coincide, but those of Israel, so he'll do that.
They did talk afterwards. They had a very good conversation.
He knows who he's dealing with, so I don't think he's not going to let that change his goal and his focus on what needs to be done.
And we'll do it the best way possible with the United States.
Right, Daniel Stephen, thank you very much for joining us.
Really appreciate it.
And that's all we've got time for tonight. I'll see you tomorrow at eight. And right now, here's Paul Murray.