We'll try and have a 45 minute panel discussion now and try and link in some of the questions that we've been receiving during these talks. Just just to reiterate, thank
you very much to all your talks. I think providing people me but also the wider audience out there with some incredible in depth analysis and understanding what's going on which is critical if we're trying to make sense of this situation that we're seeing in the Middle East. And as I said before, this is a very dangerous moment clearly based upon what Les has been telling us but also in the other talks. I guess maybe just to kick it off, I mean we started at the
very beginning obviously with me and talking about 9/11. 911 is a structural deep event and it's one she describes a false flag, it's a self-inflicted wound in order to get series of wars, regime change, wars, starting the restructuring of the Middle East and so on. I mean going to October seven, obviously we're not thinking the evidence that's suggesting it's
that type of false flag event. But it does seem to be from what a lot of you are saying that sort of you know there is certainly Israel is tried to exploit what happened on October seven for its own strategic purposes. And I guess that raises you know the first question, does this look like a a lie hop let it happen on purpose as being the most kind of likely scenario in this case. And just and in addition to that I'll put that out to everyone.
But in addition to that, we've got a question from somebody saying that, well, if if Israel let it happen and they knew it was going to occur and they have sought strategic advantage by exploiting it in order to do what they're doing in Gaza, what exactly does Hamas presumably and Palestinian resistance would have known this? What exactly is their strategic motivation in in this action that was taken?
So just to start us off, I mean, and does anyone want to pick up on that on sort of is this looking like the most likely assessment of this is a lie hot and it's been exploited. They knew it was going to happen and they're using it to pursue, you know, removal of Palestinians from Gaza, for example. Is that the most likely scenario that we have in terms of understanding what happened? Yes, I would say something like Aaron because he was most
focused on that. Yeah. I mean it it looks apparently like they would have let some attack happened and that the response was rather slow and that they also used, you know, massive indiscriminate violence, you know, to to attack the Hamas and others in order to have a higher death count because they preferred that to hostages. So I mean this the way that they have exaggerated it and used it this way, I think that they would have.
There's there's a lot of reason to think that they let it happen and that they came in and even added a lot more. I don't know that I would guess, honestly that it was the plan, the objective of Hamas and these other parties that had joined not to attack civilians, not to massacre civilians, but actually to take hostages. I think they wanted hostages. That's logical. And that does seem to be what we
hear from the hostages. So that makes the most sense to me. I don't I if I'm not saying there were no atrocities and I can't know everything that
happened. But the fact that all of these things have been debunked and even when they come out with these rape stories, you know, as Max Blumenthal has done very well, they're actually very thinly sourced and there's nothing really to hang them on. So they the way that they're being treated so credulously, despite a much real confirmation in terms of evidence, is really is really notable now on the side of Hamas, why they would have done it.
I think that preventing the normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel may have been the more pressing thing for them. I think that in a if if Israel is not able to to really go forward with this as they had planned, if they're not able to massively ethnically cleanse the the Palestinians in Gaza, then I think it will rebound to Israel's strategic defeat massively because they have lost
so much legitimacy here. I don't even think if they liquidate the Palestinians that this will be a win for them because their position in the world depends on US hegemony, US control of the of the dollar and US as the global bully and that is all crumbling. I think that is why partially why they did what they did along with Benjamin Netanyahu's
political fortunes. So if Hamas, even if even if all of Gaza gets wiped out, Hamas may actually be, they may actually win in terms of destroying Israel. Because I don't see how Israel can be viable in the post US unipolar world as a as a pariah and as a the perpetrator of unspeakable crimes, of genocidal crimes that we haven't seen. Something like this on the scale happened in Indonesia in 1965,
but there wasn't TikTok videos. It wasn't the whole world watching it saying can you stop this? And the US saying, no, this is not happening. What you're seeing is not what you're seeing. This isn't what it is. We or just, you know, we can't do anything about it. So I think it's, I think it's a disaster, but it's also very dangerous because I don't know that the people in charge of the US war machine are going to suffer this defeat gladly along with Ukraine.
It seems like the US empires aren't. So I'll let it happen, but one that has backfired or is backfiring now effectively Asif. Yeah, I would like to add a couple of things. First, this is not the first time Israel has invaded Gaza and has come in and out several times before. I doubt very much that whatever plan they are executing now, this was not part of the plan that they have prepared for. There is evidence.
They have been talking to the Egyptian government, trying to transfer the Palestinians into Sinai or even into a new city they created in the desert. So to some extent the plan of the Israelis to empty Gaza for the reasons I've mentioned and for the other reasons that my colleagues have mentioned is there. And there is no question about it. Israel is seeking it economic advantage and exploiting the opportunities that this emptying of Gaza would prevent would present them.
Why would the Pancinian do it? I mean, I think Aaron has already mentioned the idea that it seems every Arab country won't say every, but at least the Gulf countries seem to have accepted this Abrahamic initiatives and they're making their ways. Maybe Saudi Arabia did not declare its agreement with Israel, but certainly it never denied it and at some time mentioned that things are really moving in the direction of a greater normalization.
So to some extent what the Palestinians have done have been motivated by the fact that the Palestinian question all of a sudden has become on the back burner of the Arab agenda.
So what they've tried to do basically, even if it isn't new and the new might not really succeed totally, is that they basically and fundamentally turn the tables around in such a way that the Palestinian question that has been put on the back burner to simmer in the background is now on the forefront and has to a great extent derail whatever agreement the Arab states, whether it is Sudan or malaria or Egypt,
Jordan and Bahrain and the UAE. I think to some extent it drove a wedge between the government and the people. And I don't believe that the Arab governments are now in the same comfortable position of making an accommodation with Israel before that was happening, before the events indeed. Richard.
Yes, just to supplement what Aaron and Atif have said, with which I agree we should remember that before October 7th ever happened, this was described as the most extreme government ever to emerge in Israel. And what that translated into, in my understanding, is that it was intent on giving the settler violence a green light on the West Bank and creating a situation where the final, the end game of the Zionist project
could be carried out. And I think contextualizing what's happened after October 7th, even if you grant the validity of Israel believing that it was subject to a surprise attack, even if you grant that the illogic of their response suggests that they had other priorities in mind. Both the territorial priorities of expanding to Greater Israel and the economic priorities that Atif has described to us.
So that this didn't come out of a vacuum, as the Secretary General said, and you must, you should remember the speech that Netanyahu gave in the General Assembly of the UNA couple of weeks before this attack, which were, which was highlighted by showing a map without Palestine on it. And there undoubtedly was some impulse on the Palestinian resistance movement to say we have to act now or this we will
be subject to a fed accompli. And so the historical timing, even if the deep structure, structural event, dimension is present, they re it reinforces that and creates this very dangerous present situation, which is that Israel can neither win nor lose. See. And what does it do when it's confronted by that? It the only thing it can do is widen the combat zone by bringing Iran somehow into the conflict and therefore bringing the US in as an alternative to its ceding control over the
whole region. So this is a worrisome moment in a horrible crisis situation from if looked at from a humanitarian and Palestinian perspective. And only I think, civil society, a surge of civil society activism, can challenge these forces that are seeking the perpetuation of American post Cold War unipolar hegemony. Yeah, certainly.
The kind of the feeling I get is this sort of this, the weakening empire and increasingly extreme desperate actions and so on being taken both the US and Israel, which, you know, what you made earlier creates this very dangerous situation, sort of a wounded animal, as it were, becomes more and more violent.
Kevin, did you want to come in on that or did you want to just comment on especially what you heard from in Aaron's presentation, sort of any sort of bits of evidence in there which you were to pick up as, yeah, this is very indicative of certainly a let it happen operation.
Would you be willing to sort of put your money on the table and that at the moment in terms of thinking, yeah, there's something that's just fairly solid there which we could look to and suggest that, you know, they at least knew this was going to happen or as am I pushing you too hard on that? Yeah, no, when I when I gave the my talk, I I mentioned that everything that so far I've seen seems to match the pattern that I've seen with other state crimes.
And and certainly there was foreknowledge on the part of Israel. And you know, I would say one other thing that I've read about the fact that the operation involved the simultaneous compromising of 29 points on the iron wall, 29 points of a of a boundary that is so highly observed on a daily basis. Combined with the foreknowledge of the plan and the of the exercises that mimic the event, it does very much seem like it was allowed to happen.
If there's more to it than that I think that we need to just continually re evaluate our perspective based on evidence that that is revealed. Because as I said you know with deep events that it's it's all defined as being hidden and so it won't be revealed necessarily for for some time.
But I can say I am worried about what Professor Faulk has said, that this may be something and and Vanessa has also said may be leading to a wider war and there may be have been a a an intention there all along which is very troubling. Yeah, Vanessa, did you dropped out there for a second. Did you want to come in on? Would you?
Yeah, I mean I think all I wanted to say about the, the Hamas operation and I don't know if anybody mentioned that while I kind of disappeared back to three and Internet was the name of the operation, which is Al Aqsa flood of course, and this is a very important aspect, is the potential for the Zionist destruction of Al Aqsa Mosque, which is I think the third most holy Islamic site in favour of Temple Mount.
And so I think this was also so the normalization with Saudi Arabia, which as I said in my talk, was to effectively bring an end to the Palestinian battle for just the freedom, liberation from the apartheid, oppressive settler, colonialist entity rule. And then of course this ongoing invasion really of Al Aqsa and the prevention of worship in Al Aqsa for for Palestinian Muslims. So I think this was also a very important aspect of this
operation. OK. Thanks. But to sort of move this on to question of genocide, so we've got, well, we've got probably a fairly straightforward question here which which Richard can answer what one question which came in just said, well, what do you say to people that this, what do you say to people who say that this is not genocide, it's simply war? I'll just pass that to Richard to quickly address before we get on to other issues in relation to the genocide question.
Well, as I tried to suggest, Israel can. As the occupying power has no authority to wage war, it has it has the authority to re establish its security by reasonable and appropriate means while upholding its primary obligation as the occupying power of protecting, not not decimating the civilian population. The whole emphasis of the Geneva Conventions when it comes to belligerent occupation is the duty of the occupying power to
protect the civilian population. And this kind of response that had very little relevance to future Israeli security, in fact was dysfunctional from that, obviously dysfunctional from that perspective, suggests that it has to be judged on the basis of what kind of operation this was. And given the statements of the Minister of Defence, the Prime Minister and the religious leaders in the Israeli cabinet, there is no reasonable doubt that the intention was
genocidal. And I would be very surprised even if a relatively conservative the International Court of Justice does not agree with that assessment. Yeah, I mean it's it's quite incredible to me. I'm, as you all know, I mean, based in Germany and in Berlin and it's, you know, the German government and certainly the German elite. It's quite remarkable the extent to which they have fallen behind in support of Israel.
And it's remarkable to watch and see that there's this blindness to reality what's going on on on this question of of and this is linked partly to a question which came in of of what the Israeli population, how it sort of is cut up in terms of its position in relation to what's going on. I mean clearly, you know, there is going to be some opposition within Israel to what's going on and I guess, you know these things took a kind of broader question about where the kind of
resistance might come to this. We're witnessing yet again genocide now in the 21st century. You know, are we look, populations in the West sort of where where do people feel that those populations are in terms of having realised what's going on the global audience of the South, the global South and so on. But starting off with, you know, what's the sense of the population within Israel for Israelis who are witnessing
what's going on? Is there a significant resistance or pushback or is it very limited? Is the pushback going to have to come from Western populations or from the global S? Where do people see the pushback coming from against this genocide? Vanessa, if I can hop in there. Well, I've seen a number of interviews with Alistair Crook, who has a wide breadth of experience of Israeli society and the Middle East.
And According to him, 80 to 90% of the Israeli population actually believe that the Israeli forces are not doing enough, that they should crack harder on the political of course, as they see that there are no innocent in Gaza are all out that that you know were or were not carried out on October the 7th. There is, however, a strong pushback against, particularly in Yahoo, but even against the security services, against the Army.
I believe now there is a court case by the families of those that were killed on October the 7th by the IOF helicopters and tanks both on October the 7th and I think two days after, to take them to court for the killing of their relatives.
There's a huge amount of fracturing within Israeli society, but as regards the attitudes towards Palestinians, as Alastair has said on a number of occasions, it's very percentage that that want an end to it, that want Palestinians ethnically cleansed from all of the occupied territories, including West Bank and Gaza. Yeah, I I wonder if you there's always this idea of the rally effect because it's, you know, well documented with the kind of rather tedious academic analysis
of public opinion in conflict situations. He always gets rally around the flag effect and so on at the
beginning of a conflict. It's this instinctive, but it tends to ebb over time or weaken and so on as as a conflict goes on. But, you know, maybe this ties into what Richard was saying you have, you've had a shift to the right, a very extreme government in Israel, probably with a huge amount of propaganda surrounding that and the Israeli population being subjected to that sort of maybe that's going to be the last place we're going to see sort of serious, sort of popular. Very.
Also a massive indoctrination. I can't remember the name of the documentary that was very recently released, but it's terrified of indoctrination, the garden upwards, which has ensured this, this expansion of extremism and expansionism. Because of course, Netanyahu is a Revisionist Zionist that goes back to the Abbotinsky cult which was had very close alliances to the Nazis in Ukraine through Simon Petler and was effectively is effectively a very supremacist expansionist.
And so therefore that that's very much what is filtered through the education in Israel and is effectively indoctrinating and programming Israelis into the thinking that they now have. And just to add a word to that, we should remember that authoritative human rights groups had concluded in the years, the five or six years prior to October 7th, that Israel was an apartheid state.
And part of what allows the genocidal narrative to take such a vicious form is the total dehumanization of the Palestinians as human beings entitled to the protection of law and morality. The language of Netanyahu and Gallant, which talked of the Palestinians as human animals who deserve to be treated as such, was then intensified by other ministers who said, Oh well, they're not even human
animals. And this kind of dehumanization is integral to a genocidal movement of the sort that we're seeing carried out. And what's significant also is that no significant Israeli voices have challenged it.
There's a consensus that may not like Netanyahu and the religious right, but they're not willing to depart from this idea of dehumanization of the Palestinians, which was written into the Basic Law of Israel in 2018, where it was declared that only the Jewish people have a right of self determination within the borders of Israel. Yeah, the. So it raises this kind of point of you know, propaganda of war.
I mean probably in in wartime it always involves this dehumanisation I guess sort of picking up on on Kevin's point about indicators of state crimes against democracy and so on. But you know war propaganda is you know we've seen this you see it in the First World War, Second World War and so on. And but I I'm, I'm betting your viewers to do some detailed media analysis of Israeli media. You'd see some pretty terrifying patterns there in terms of precisely that process.
OK, got a couple of very specific questions and I will obviously we'll run for another 10 minutes up to. So we had 45 minutes, but I'm conscious of everybody's time and you've given an awful lot of your time so far. Got a couple of very specific questions. One was for Kevin actually, in relation to. If you can detect these events in real time, what do you do then? What's the purpose of?
That being able to, yeah, I mentioned a little bit about the fact that this is not an academic exercise or or necessarily an attempt to, you know, document history. It's really for practical purposes for those of us who are individuals living in the world and trying to understand what's going on. And so I gave a couple of examples of of things we could, we could use this perspective for. First of all, to reject narratives that are obviously false.
That's going to help us understand what's going on better and be able to make decisions relative to any information we received for about it. And also to reject the sources of misinformation. So you know as we as we watch these events all unfold, we'll see as we do with with most Deep State events, I think we'll see sometimes sources of information that don't appear to be being as forthright as as they could be about the actual facts of what's
happening. I don't have an example at the moment on the on the tip of my tongue but I also gave the the example which I think was a very relevant one for certainly for me and and for many others relative to COVID. In that you know when when people are caught up in the in the in the middle of a what what really appears to be a false narrative and and they're being forced to do certain things whether it be locked down or more importantly accept experimental injections into their bodies.
I think that this is the kind of perspective that if they could, they could match the narrative to a pattern of of deception in the past. They might be able to make a better decision for themselves with regard to what's going on today. So that's what I that's what I
stated. Our opportunities to use a perspective that that doesn't necessarily have every fact nailed down, every T crossed and every I dotted as to exactly what happened, but but still knowing that we have a deception involved and very likely a state crime in progress. Yeah. And and for sure we're definitely in an era now where you know, a much larger section of the population is, you know, beginning to be switched on to these kind of deep state events and so on.
People don't buy into the kind of conspiracy theory smear in the way that they used to and so on. So you know there is fertile ground I think for people, you know they're armed with the kind of more detailed analysis identifiers and so on to to react and then to actually push back and so on. So a specific question in relation to somebody's asked about if you could try to map out the alternative trade routes the US is aiming create and how that relates to current alliances in the region to.
A great extent. It's exploiting and trying to organize the region along the street. Notice that it's not just a random choice that you pass it through Dubai and from Dubai through Saudi Arabia, Jordan. I mean, it's difficult to forget that they are trying to exploit all these regional arrangements. I mean, you're picking exactly the countries that you want to be involved and to exclude the
countries you don't want. You're bringing in, in Saudi Arabia, you're bringing in UAE, you're excluding Syria, you're excluding Iran. So to a great extent, the trade rules are used as a way of reorganizing regional
interactions and interests. And in this respect, you know, I don't suspect at all that you are not just trying to oppose China and limit China's advantage, but you're also trying to weave your economic relationships and the trade routes and what they carry with them in terms of benefits within the area and the actors that are closer to you. So it's in a way. Or the other is trying to rewind the region to organize it. In. A way where the economics and the strategic interests are
aligned. OK. Thank you. Just to move to to just a closing kind of broader question for everyone to to respond to. I mean we, we all, it's very clear that we have genocide occurring at the moment. It's very clear that there is you know major geopolitical dimension and resource battles. This is part of the kind of regime change, wars, restructuring the Middle East that we saw, you know, and those quotes from the Chilcot Inquiry at the start and so on.
And you know, and we are seeing this kind of point of I guess crisis point for the Western Empire and this danger of escalation now in the Middle East. What happens now? And I know I'm asking everyone to get their crystal balls out and so on and make some predictions, but how is this going to end? Is there going to be a scenario where the Western Empire is going to step down willingly, as it were, or not so much willingly has be forced to step down?
Or is this going to lead in to a greater conflict which will then play out and perhaps lead to the end of the Western Empire? But where is this, you know, what is going to bring an end to this imperialism in, in your view at the moment in terms of what's happening in the Middle East? And I'll leave that to anyone who wants to jump in first with that, with an answer to that. Maybe I'll jump in just to say a
couple of words. There are about 3 dynamics here and depending on how these dynamics would work out, they're going to influence the course of it. One of the dynamic that has been established is the big wedge between Arab governments and Arab people. Will this event create another Arab Spring? There are lots of people are discussing that we may be seeing another Arab Spring where the people who felt this enfranchise and who felt their governments did not come with the kind of
response they wanted. Look, in 1973 King Faisal stopped the production of oil and threatened that he would not bring back oil embargo to the West and to the countries supporting Israel until they show a change.
Maybe he stopped it and dismissed it before it created all this fact, but at least it showed willingness on the part or an obligation or being forced by the the way he expected the reaction to be for these governments to do it in this conflict, Have you heard one single oil producer saying I'm going to cut my production until the West would show some accommodation, some understanding? I would refrain from supporting Israel. I I guess that this is going to be a far more challenging issue.
These regimes are now keeping this conflict going and have an interest in keeping going because they know when the guns are going to stop really blazing, They'll have to face the chorus of their own people to see why have you, Egypt, not delivered food when you have an Rafah passage? Why didn't you do more? Why didn't you threaten to know more? Why Saudi Arabia? You didn't even mention at least a day or a week cut in the oil
supply to the world. Why every other country have not really, particularly Arabs, including really Iran and others have not come with any concrete support or at least a measure and a effective initiative that would have really had some impact. So this is the first dynamic,
the second dynamic. I don't think that anybody in the Arab world is now unaware of the hypocrisy of the West and the way the West has completely turned its back on the massacres and on the savagery and indiscriminate bombing to a great extent, countries like France that had really somehow projected itself to be independent, neutral and not pushing the US agenda. Where is that? W They all seem to be exactly on the same side and have not in any concrete way came to put an end.
They refused even to have a humanitarian extended the humanitarian ceasefire. So this dynamic of where the West hypocrisy, where all the masks have completely fallen, where people are now exposed for where they are, they no longer fooling the people talking about human rights. The third dynamic is the big difference between how the West reacted to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and how they have reacted to the invasion of Israel.
I think the three dynamics are likely to play and to have an influence on the course of events. Yeah, for sure. Sure. Double standards etcetera are absolutely crystal clear at this point and I think felt by a lot of people in Europe on the street as well, maybe not in the elites, but certainly across
populations. You know, in Ukraine as well, there's a lot of unease, I think on the German St., about what's happening in Israel, Gaza, which you don't see reflected in the governments and so on. But but there is no positive dynamic and just only say one thing and this is something I have experienced first hand in Canada, is the strong support the youth and of segments of society in the West that we're willing to go on this street and we're willing to lose their jobs
and we're willing to confront the established order, a standing on the side of humanity and defending the sanctity of life and the protection of civilians. This was never seen before. I've I've experienced this first. Yeah, Pierce, I think that this is really the, I would echo a lot of what a thief says and other people have about many of these dynamics here. the US position is weaker than it has ever been.
I was speaking to Lawrence Wilkerson recently and he was a Bush official under I think in both administrations really. He had a lower position before and was in the military. But he was saying he thinks that Israel is going to end within, you know, within a number, you know, within a decade, more or less. And that so when you look at the dynamics of the region and what the US did, it wasn't that the US was always in the pocket of Israel like this.
In 9th in JFK was telling the Ben Gurion that he needed to end this nuclear program or aid would be cut off. And Kennedy, Ben Gurion resigns. And you know Kennedy's dead very shortly. And then you go in the next administration, it's basically LBJ. Let's gives them a pass to attack the USS Liberty and to start that Six day war. And you got to look back and think how do you go from Kennedy doing what he was doing and he also wanted a solution to the Palestinian crisis as well.
And then Eisenhower intervenes on the side of the global S basically in the Suez crisis. So how do you go from that to LBJ this hard right turn which is we see across the board Vietnam, Indonesia, Congo, Latin America, everywhere. He he reversed all these policies.
It was a hard right turn for the US empire basically when they get rid of of Kennedy who seemed to be a bridge between you know cold Warrior but also like the Henry Wallace internationalism and wanting to wind down the Cold War and then and they didn't they took a hard right turn and then you have that's an end. The Israel side seems to have
been a part of that. And then in the 70s they, you know, Nix after Nixon, you have the neocons come in who now we now know is people very much associated with Zionism, Rumsfeld, Cheney, right. That's who ends up emerging from the chaos of Watergate. And then you have a Carter administration that's kind of feckless. But then Reagan brings these guys back, all of these right wingers, and it's as though the Watergate and the Vietnam War lessons and everything else never happened.
You end up more right wing, more aggressive, more pro Israel than before. And that's and and then you have the end of the Cold War. Bush tries to like deal with this and he can't. He's he's overcome probably, as Lawrence Wilkerson was saying to me, probably, and that article that I showed as well, probably because of Israel. I think it's been hard for people to grasp how powerful Israel has been. It's it's even deeper than what Mearsheimer and Walt and Mearsheimer say in the Israel
lobby. It's not just all of those things that you can observe. I think that they are intertwined with the clandestine side, the the secret fascist element of the US, the sexual blackmail business that you see with Epstein and who knows what else. I mean that and the the Zionists are fanatical in their beliefs.
And when you look at how after the end of the Cold War and especially in the 2000s, the US abandons realism, they don't even function as an effective empire because there's something at the top of the of the apex of power, the black box, that we can't see in that is making them pursue stupid and crazy policies. And these are generally things that when you look at them, you see that like, well, they are also in accordance with like hardline Zionism.
And nobody ever questions Zionism in the US. And now that we see what Israel is getting away with in broad daylight, it points to them being even more powerful than people like Mearsheimer and Waltz were trying to tell us it is. It is perhaps the explanation for how the US went from doing being a pretty vicious empire but kind of a pragmatic 1 to being kind of insane in the 21st century, to the point that we've basically lost the empire.
And a lot of it is due to the consequences of these actions that were taken pretty much in accordance with what the Zionist faction of the Americans deep state would have wanted. And this is a lot for people to try to process and understand it. I don't.
It didn't really require me to revise my own thinking about the deep state because I basically said the same thing, that, yeah, sometimes we outsource things to countries and they get powerful because they are doing, you know, dirty deeds for us. And the Israel lobby is a part of the deep state. Yeah, I said all those things before, but I don't think I didn't really grasp how significant it was until until
this. It is these two, these two projects US global dominance, which is really a disguised fascism because they'll they'll shoot you like JFK if you are in the way of the empire. And then there's the Israeli version of like more blood and soil scary fascism, you know of a German flavor. I mean, that's really what it is ideologically and and there's a lot of resistance to wanting to
acknowledge that. I'm not saying it's the that Zionism equals Nazism. I'm just saying Zionism as we see it unfolding now in with Gaza as this concentration camp turned into a death camp that they are. They're not the same thing, but they are the same type of thing. And this is something that more and more people are like be finding themselves unable to deny anymore.
And I think that as the US is materially weakening, you have this, this terrible loss of legitimacy for the US and for Israel for what they are doing now. And once the reality of what we've done in Ukraine really dawns on people and becomes totally undeniable, that's going to be even worse. I don't know how US hegemony can
continue in this way. And thus these were are going to seem like really horrible, counterproductive moves of a dying regime that has intertwined US imperialism and Zionism because of historical accidents and circumstances. And when this dissipates, it will be for the good of mankind, as long as it doesn't involve nuclear doomsday. It does seem that the Zionism is just part of this kind of broader feature of Western cultural superior supremacism and so on. You see it in, you know, the
colonialism, empire, etcetera. It's just one of the outgrowth of this, you know, Western sense of supremacy and so on. It's our role to lead the world and then to do whatever we want, etcetera. I'm conscious of time Just Vanessa, I mean is it going to require OK, there might be this kind of slow grinding to a halt of of the empire and so on. Is it going to however require some kind of defeat, some kind of distinct military defeat at some point.
And we've had Ukraine obviously, you know, Afghanistan and Syria you know the attempt to overthrow did not succeed. But they're still trying very, very hard. But is this going to end up in some kind of escalation followed by a significant, potentially significant military defeat for the West, which is the straw which breaks the camel's back and all of this? And is that one scenario that's
possible? I think it was Edward Said that had, you know, the US of the Super force, the Super force can only be defeated by an even greater force. I'm paraphrasing. I don't think that's the exact rotation. So I think what we've also seen from from Yemen has been incredibly effective because it
really has damaged the economy. I mean at if you were talking about the fact that you know many patients hadn't bonded in this way despite the proposal that was put through at the emergency Arab League summit that was vetoed by Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. And I I I think so there's 22 streams here. First of all there is the success of the Yemeni operation for which there is potential for
for Yemen to be attacked. Though it's undergone already 8 years of of incredible aggression by Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel kind of leading a proxy war against Antrala in Yemen. And as you know the unsure lowest spokespeople have said will stop threatening you know if you're going to attackers, attackers. But so far it's been a lot of belligerent rhetoric and they haven't actually really carried out any attacks on on Yemen and mainland. So there's this sort of juxtaposition of as you both,
Gallant said. They need victory in order to survive. But how elusive is that victory? Really. You know, and to what extent are they prepared to to push forward in conflict that they cannot win Shami? No one said.
But you're now getting this unification of Arab populations, even if there are in Arab countries like Saudi Arabia that are still on the brink of this normalization with Israel, the population in various recent polls has demonstrated that it's it wants the genocide against Gaza and want bank to finish the Arab population consensus shifting away from Israel. And that's another very dangerous point. So I I guess the question is how many lunatics are in power in
the United States? How influenced are they by lunatics in the Zionist far right extremist factions in Israel and the United States and even in the UK. You know how far are they going to be influenced? And you have to bring in kind of state evangelical end timers also, but believe that the world has to kind of enter an apocalypse for the coming of the second coming of Christ.
I mean, you know, people might laugh about that, but that's the whole point of Alex, the Temple Mount and and all of that. So it's a big element amongst the Christians and the evangelicals in America. So we're in a we're really kind of very scary tipping point, as are pointed out much more eloquently than yeah, I'm really not at all. I guess by any measure we've got quite a lot of lunatics at the top. OK I think we should wrap up there. I see Richard's dropped off.
I know that we're we're very much overtime now and and I'm very grateful to everybody for having devoted so much time to this event. I think it's been extremely valuable. A lot of great important information has been disseminated through this event. It is a bleak time we're in we're witnessing genocide and I think we are now ended Mike I'm assuming that we oh I'm still
alive. OK it doesn't appear to be I don't appear to be still alive on my screen but so anyway to wrap everything up and but that myself to the seriousness of the situation. Yeah we are at this point we are at a point where genocide is occurring.
We're at a point where there is potential for great risk of escalation in the Middle East. Certainly time for populations to wake up if they haven't already woken up and start pushing back against their governments and hopefully what we've heard today from all that, great speakers, excellent speakers, give some people some kind of sort of ammunition and tools of intellectual self defence in order to wake up and push back against what we're seeing at the moment.
So thank you very much for attending and listening to this event and we hope to see you at the next event, which we will surely have at some point in the near future. Thank you very much.