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.