Piers Morgan Uncensored - Are You Pleased He's Dead?' Piers Morgan Grills Mehdi Hasan on Ayatollah - With Sam Asghari

Episode Date: March 11, 2026

For those who instinctively oppose war on the grounds of economic cost and, far more importantly, the cost in human lives, there is a lot to be frustrated about right now. Plus it’s hard to see how Iranian protesters or the wider region will benefit at all from regime change when, at this point, they haven’t even changed the Ayatollah’s name. President Trump is yet to explain what exactly happened to his firm stance against war. If his legacy-defining gamble on Iran does not pay off - if the new Iran is much like the old Iran - his successors could pay a huge political price. To discuss the situation in Iran, Piers Morgan is joined by Zeteo’s Editor-in-Chief Mehdi Hasan. Piers is also joined by Iranian-American actor Sam Asghari, who gives his insight into life in Iran and how the people there have reacted to the death of the Ayatollah - plus he touches upon the recent troubles blighting his ex wife Britney Spears. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by:Veracity Selfcare: Visit https://VeracityHealth.co & use code PIERS for up to 45% off your order! Cozy Earth: Visit https://cozyearth.com/PIERS & Use code PIERS for up to 20% off Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Are you pleased that the now dead Ayatollah Khomeini, the older Khomeini, is no longer ruling Iran? It's a good question. I don't take pleasure in killing anyone. I don't think you should have illegally killed the leader, a foreign leader of a nation, who's also, by the way, a spiritual leader to millions of Shia Muslims around the world. Brilliantly deflected. My actual question was, are you pleased that he's no longer ruling Iran? It's a loaded question because his son is leading the country, so am I pleased with that?

No. You must therefore, de facto, be pleased that the dead Ayatollah is no longer ruling the country. Am I pleased he's not ruling the country? It's a question in vacuum. It's a yes or no. You either are or you not? For those who areistically opposed war on the grounds of economic cost, and far more importantly, the cost in human lives,

there was a lot to be frustrated about right now. The case for war to the extent that it's been made at all has shifted repeatedly. It's hard to imagine an abrupt end with a mission accomplished when the mission is undefined. It's hard to see how Iranian protesters or the wider region will benefit at all from regime change when at this point they haven't even changed the Ayatollah's name. And President Trump has yet to explain what exactly happened to his firm stance against war. If his legacy defining gamble and Iran does not pay off, if the new Iran is much like the old Iran, his successors could pay a huge political price.

But just as the president has not made his case from the outset, giving him a clear yardstick to measure his war against, The opposition has been incoherent too. Senior Democrats are mostly opposing the war on the grounds of process. They should have come to Congress, which no US president has bothered to do since World War II. They say they're opposed to wars of choice, but they're very happy the Ayatollah was killed. They're against Trump, but they don't rule out supporting more spending for his war. It looks a lot like they're coming down with Kyr Stama's syndrome.

Unclear, ever-changing, and politically disastrous. Well, I'm joined now by Mehdi Hassan, editor-in-chief of Zeteo News. Medi, welcome back to Uncensored. It's probably most useful to my viewers to slightly play devil's advocate in this interview because we share a lot of views about it, I think, of where this war is going. So let me play devil's advocate. Imagine for a moment you are the Prime Minister of Israel. and for many years you have been targeted as a very small country in a region of much bigger countries

by organizations, proxy groups, terror groups, whatever you want to call them, Hasbola, the Houthis, culminating in what we saw on October the 7th. And you have your people baying for leadership to defend the people against this kind of stuff. And you know, because the world, knows a lot of the funding for these proxies has come from Iran. Therefore, they are the mothership, if you like, of supporting this kind of activity in the region aimed specifically against the Israelis. What do you do if you're the Israeli Prime Minister in that circumstance? Pierre, the first time I ever came on your show, your opening question was to me, what would you do if you were the Prime Minister of Israel? I only semi-faciously said I would resign.

The position of Benjamin Netanyi, I was an awkward one here, Israelis, because, first of all, he helped the funding of Hamas. We've discussed that on this show before. You know and I know the news reporting that he was very happy for Qatari and other money to go into Gaza and was playing divide and rule with the Palestinians. So he owns it as much as any outside group. In terms of mothership of terrorism, my position on mothership of terrorism is the mothership of terrorism is the occupation, right? That's why people revert to terror because you've ruined their lives and give them no prospect for freedom. Yes, the Iranians and other outside parties can exacerbate conflicts. You know, we see proxy wars all over the world,

but the root causes are the root causes. In terms of Netanyahu in Iran itself, peers, the problem Benjamin Netanyahu has, as he's admitted this, he admitted this last week on tape, he said, I've been yearning for this war. I've been dreaming of this war for 40 years, and Donald Trump's the first president to agree to do it. He tried it with Bill Clinton. He tried it with George W. Bush. He tried it with Barack Obama and Joe Biden. None of them agreed to go to war. Anthony Blinken just said the other day that he tried it with them. They weren't foolish enough to do this. So the problem about saying that this is about a threat and imminent threat and national security,

he's been saying this for 40 years. In fact, he's been telling us, you've seen the video montages on Twitter. You and I are terminally online. You've seen all the clips of Benjamin Netanyahu over the years say, Iran's two weeks away from a nuclear weapon. Iran is a month away from a nuclear weapon. He lied and lied about the Iranian nuclear threat for decades. No one believes a word he says.

And as for the security of Israelis, well, they're in bunkers right now. They're being attacked. They're being bombed. How has he made them more secure with this unprovoked illegal war of aggression against Iran? You know, I can see why Netanyahu is doing this. As you say, he's wanted to do it for 40 years. And I can see why he's brought the Israeli people with him by presenting it a bit like Putin has done with Ukraine as an existential threat. So I can see how this has played out domestically for Netanyahu.

What is less easy to understand, to me, is President Trump and his willingness to go along with this. right now, it seems to me an extraordinarily huge gamble by Trump, because you have the midterm elections coming in November, and they were already looking perilous for the Republicans. You know, most incumbent presidents get a whacking in the midterms. It's more likely than not he would have lost the House anyway. But there's a higher likelihood right now, many people think in Washington, that the Republicans could not just lose the House, but might lose the Senate as well. And that will lead to a cascade of attempts to impeach Trump, and he'll be powerless.

He'll be the worst kind of lame duck president imaginable, where he's no control over anything. And he's predicated his whole presidency when he campaigned on, I'm not going to get involved in foreign wars. I'm going to stabilize the economy. I'm going to sort out inflation, all this stuff. And yet here in one fell swoop, he has caused economic mayhem, which they must have known would happen. because you're attacking a country that controls the Strait of Hormuz. He has caused extraordinary instability in the Middle East, in the sense that by doing what he said he wouldn't do

and attacking another Middle Eastern country, dragging America into that war, it's provoked Iran into attacking all the neighboring Gulf states who are enraged by that, and will be, of course, blaming Iran predominantly, but also probably looking at America and saying, was this really a smart move? to do this right now.

I'm trying to work out how this is a good moment for Trump politically or economically, and the two were wedded, I think, to do this. Never mind anything else. Never mind whether it's legal or anything else. Just the politics of it make little sense to me. Yeah, he's always been his own worst enemy, peers, which is why those of us who are opposed to Trump,

and I know you're not, but I am, have always been appreciative of the fact that he's a very incompetent authoritarian, he's a very incompetent leader, in that if he was a smarter leader, we'd be in much more trouble in the US right now, he'd be able to get his agenda through much quicker to my great consternation. So I appreciate the fact that he's surrounded by incompetence,

even when he's executing a war of choice. In terms of the elections, I agree with you. I think he's made the midterms much harder to win, which is why they're doubling down now on voter suppression. They're trying to pass the SAVE Act. You saw Pierce, him threatening that he won't pass any other legislation. He won't sign a single other bill until his beloved SAVE Act, which is basically a voter suppression bill, goes into office.

He's not ruling out having ICE agents surround the polling state. as a form of voter suppression as well. So they know they're in trouble at the midterms. Rather than change course, they would try voter suppression instead, which is the Republican way. The economy is, we're only looking at the beginning of the economy tanker base. He already had the fallout from tariffs, the jobs, the jobs knew, the really bad jobs news that came out a few days ago.

That was pre-Iran. So we're looking in a really bad shape in terms of economic. And when you say everyone knew about the Straits of Hornwe's, I think you're overestimating your friend. He's not very smart. The people around him are not very smart. Everyone knew this would happen, but maybe they didn't. I mean, Trump was saying last week, Pierce,

I didn't realize Iran would attack the Gulf in this way. Why not? What did you think Iran was going to do when they were attacked? They were obviously going to hit U.S. military bases in the region. And the Emirates, you spend a lot of time in the UAE, one of the most loyal American allies, one of the most pro-Israel Muslim-majority countries. They've come up very sharply.

A businessman close to the regime wrote an open letter, slamming Trump and Graham as Israeli puppets just this week. So it's not looking good for their alliances in the region. The economy is looking bad. The politics are crazy, but I think this is the problem when you have a man-child as president, when you have someone so easily manipulated. Lindsay Graham is a man who Donald Trump dismissed 10 years ago as a warmonger. He said he's a dumb guy.

If you listen to Lindsey Graham, he'll start World War III. Well, guess who's listening to Lindsay Graham right now? Donald Trump is. Lindsay Graham bragged to the Wall Street Journal that he treated Donald Trump like a child. He spoke to him with a, quote, word association game to get him to come along with war. He said he flew to Israel and coached Netanyahu on how to manipulate Donald Trump into war. So that's what happens when you have a man-child in the White House who can be easily manipulated by the last person who spoke to him.

Today's show is sponsored by Veracity and their metabolic power protein. Let's be honest, life moves fast and regular meals sometimes don't have the punch we need. Veracity focuses on the root cause of many health issues. Metabolic health, metabolic power protein, delivers 20 grams of plant-based protein in just two scoops without all the unnecessary sugar and calories in other products. It's all natural and developed by doctors, allowing you to get the protein you need

and support your metabolism with two easy scoops every morning. It's also third-party tested for toxins and heavy metals. So get the protein in your diet the natural way with Veracity. Head to VeracityHealth.co and use code Peers, P-I-E-R-S, for up to 45% off your order. Once again, that's VeracityHealth.com for up to 45% off, and make sure you use my promo code, P-I-E-R-S, for up to 45% off. so they know I sent you. There's an interesting argument put forward by the commentator,

particularly on ex-Mario Norfolk, who said over the weekend, this war isn't about nuclear weapons. It's not about helping the Iranian people. It's not about doing Israel's bidding. It's not about Iran being a threat to the US. It's about China. China imports 45 to 57% of its oil through the strait of.

Amos, Iran has the capacity to shut it down. A US-aligned Iran means that would choke off that strait. If there's ever a real power, battle between Washington and Beijing. The AI arms race is the most important strategic competition on the planet. Limiting China's access to energy is how the US wins that race and anyone who believes in freedom of democracy should want America to win. In other words, arguing there is a much bigger geopolitical battle here at stake. And it may explain Trump's interest in Greenland, his interest in controlling the leadership in Venezuela, his

is apparent plan to maybe go into Cuba, is that if you take energy as the overarching motivation for all this and the AI war, which will use up vast amounts of energy, and the belief that if America is to prevail in that, it's going to have to win the energy war, it does make strategic overall sense. What do you think of that argument? Well, look, US foreign policy in the Middle East

has always been driven partly by energy and oil. when you and I were opposing the Iraq war 23 years ago and mentioning the oil factor, people called us conspiracy theorists. That was obviously not the case. This time round, of course, they keep saying the quiet part out loud. Lindsay Graham went on Fox over the weekend,

or one of the Sunday shows. And he said, if we control Venezuela and Iran, we control 30% of the world's oil reserves. So we'll make tons of money, he said. So, you know, quiet part out loud from the Republican Warhawks. Look, I'm sure China's a factor, but let's not overstate this. Again, Donald Trump is not Rasputin.

He is not Bismarck. he's not a big geopolitical strategist. A lot of this is old-fashioned imperialism. He likes the idea of telling countries what to do. He wants to pick Iran's next leader. He wants to pick Venezuela's next leader, et cetera. And look, this is, let's not hide the fact here. The Israeli angle is the Israeli angle.

I get why people don't want to talk about it. You get attacked. I see all the time nowadays as anti-Semitic when you dare criticize Israel. It's insane. Marco Rubio came out and said it out loud. Again, quiet power out loud. He said, last Monday, he said, we went to war

because the Israelis were going to attack. And we knew that once the Israelis, They would attack us, so we attacked first, which is a bizarre thing to say, because why not just get Israel to stop from attacking Iran if you're really worried about blowback? But the idea that this wasn't a war for Israel when the Israelis are bragging, it's their war, when Lindsay Graham is bragging, it's their war, when Marco Rubio is conceding, it's their war. I mean, this is a war they've dreamt about for years. They don't care about the future of Iran or the Iranian people. They want a neighborhood of failed states so that they can have a greater Israel. We know that. And I think, look, the Chinese factor is interesting because, Pierce, that assumes that you win this war. because right now, you could argue China and Russia are winning. Pears, you've been a great critic of Russia.

Russia right now is getting oil revenue to fund its war in Ukraine, thanks to Trump's decision to attack Iran. India is being told by the US buy oil from Russia. So Russia's now getting funding for its war effort in Ukraine, thanks to Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. And, of course, the Chinese love it when America burns through its oil reserves and its soldiers and its cash spending a billion dollars a day. The Chinese love our military over-extensions.

I wanted to play you, Medi. This was, well, six days ago, I think it was on X. When someone compared the Iranian regime to the Nazis, you chastised them saying, putting aside how lazy the Hitler-Nazi analogy is and focus on how dumb it is. Nazi Germany had invaded, occupied all its neighbors. Iran hasn't, but Israel has.

But then six days after that, you said this on MSS now. Play this. It's a moral abomination. And yes, it's tactically stupid. They bombed a submarine and just let the sailors drown to death. Going and get...

Even the Nazis didn't do that during World War II, apparently. Even the Nazis collected people from the water. Now, that is you playing the Nazi analogy just six days after you told people to stop playing the Nazi analogy, isn't it? Peers, come on. You can do better than this. There's two different things completely.

One is saying that Iran is Nazi Germany in its ambitions, in its political agenda, in its conquest plans, in its military threat. None of those things are true. No serious person looks at a country that's been besieged by sanctioned, surrounded on all sides, has a military that doesn't come anywhere close to Hitler's military, hasn't actually invaded its neighbors in the same way that Nazi Germany did,

has no aspirations to take over the continent, or the region, despite Lindsay Graham's nonsense sectarian claims. It's not Nazi Germany. I think you and I can both agree on that. Now the point I was waking on MS now was not that Iran or America. I'm not saying the American military is Nazi Germany either. I'm simply pointing out that what Peter Hexsath did by torpedoing that Iranian unarmed vessel

in international waters off the coast of Sri Lanka that was taking part in a display, in a ceremonial event in India. We knew it was an unarmed ship, posed no threat, wasn't part of the war effort. We sunk the ship with a torpedo and then left the people to die, just as they do with those boats in the Caribbean.

We left the people to die, and I was pointing out that goes against the norms of all naval maritime warfare. I'm no expert, this is what I'm told. I'm told that goes against all all the norms of maritime war, that even in World War II, there were times when the Nazi shot down boat and pulled in some of the survivors. That doesn't mean I'm saying the American military or the Israeli military is Nazi Germany. I'm simply pointing out that some of our tactics

are so barbaric that they compare to some of the worst people in history. That is not the same as saying Iran is Nazi Germany and therefore we should invade. Piers, you know this. You're slightly older than I am. You know that every time we've gone to war, we've accused our enemies of being Hitler. We said it about Saddam, we said about Milosevic, we said about Gaddafi. That is the lazy go-to move. And I know you hate me comparing Trump's rhetoric to Hitler's rhetoric. Well, that's not compared Iran to Nazi Germans. But, Medi, come on. Medi, come on. When you say things like, even the Nazis didn't do that. It's like, no, but the Nazis did murder 12 million people and did kill six million Jews in a Holocaust.

So the Nazis weren't that great. Every time I come to this show, you make this point. So let me, all right, let me make this point one more time. So first of all, I'm sure you've compared Russia's and Putin's invasion of Ukraine to horrible, horrible historical evidence. You've said this before. I just want to nail this once and for all because it's been multiple times. If you compare something to the Nazis, that doesn't mean it's always 12 million debt. Would you agree with me that Nick Griffin is a Nazi, the UK BNP leader? A court said you can call him a Nazi. Would you agree he's a neo-Nazi? Well, he's a far-right lunatic, yeah.

You would never call him a Nazi because a court said you could call him a neo-Nazi. Are you saying skinheads with swastikers who run around European towns attacking migrants who say, Heil Hitler? Are they Nazis? I would say they are. They haven't killed 12 million people. I would categorize them as far. I categorize them as Nazi sympathizers.

My point being, my point being, you went in one week, you went from saying, don't use Nazi analogies. You don't have to kill 12 million people. You're using Nazi analogies. I didn't say that. Now, it appears this is really bad on your part. That's not what I said. Medi.

I said that don't call Iran Nazi Germany. And then I said, let's not do things in the Pacific that even the Nazis didn't do. That's a completely different point. If you can't see it, I'm sure your view is due. I think probably we should just all stop using the Nazis and Hitler in every debate about everything that happens. Fair enough. Fair enough. What's odd about this war? Really odd,

because this could never have happened 25 years ago about anything. The fiercest opposition to the war hasn't just come from people like you on the left, which should be expected, but it's come from Tucker Carlson, from Candice Owens, from Nick Fuentes. Fuentes has even said it's time for the far right and far left to come together even if that means voting

Democrat, I mean an extraordinary statement to make. How do you feel about your new bedfellows? Well, come on. That's a cheap shot and you know it. And by the way, Nick Fuendez is a neo-Nazi, but he hasn't killed 12 million people. Come on, Pierce, when you opposed the Iraq war in 2003,

Nick Griffin, a Nazi in the UK, opposed the Iraq war. Was he one of your bedfellows? No, I'm not actually saying they're your bedfell. Do you understand... Do you feel like I do? By the way, by the way, look... No, no, no, of course.

No, no, of course. I'm not judging you by who's... I'm not judging you by who else shares your view of this war, because there are many people on all sides. I just think it's politically fascinating that some of the most high-profile right-wing commentators in America if you basically hid their image and their name and change their voice a bit, people might think it's you.

And I find that... That's a real shift in the conservative right in America, isn't it? It's just fascinating. Yes, it is. And I hope no one ever confuses me for Nick Fuentes or Candace Owens. But let me say this to you. Donald Trump has betrayed a section of his base. Now, look, I'm not one of these people who says it's a big split in MAGA.

You look at the polls, most Trump voters are cultists. They're happy to change their positions and suddenly become pro-war overnight. But there are a few people, as you say, like Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Green has been very strong as well in calling this out. Look, you said it at the beginning. Donald Trump has completely betrayed. he's a liar, every promise he made. He said that vote for Harris, World War III,

vote for Harris, Middle East Wars. Vote for Harris, Muslims will have to die. Vote for Harris, US troops will have to join a draft. On the weekend, Caroline Levitt appears astonishingly refused to rule out the military draft coming back, which is an insane thing to even have to be asked about. So he has completely done a U-turn on this. Whether he gets punished by a significant enough

a number of his own voters, the Nick Fuentes types who defect or stay at home in November, we shall see. But he's clearly, lied. And J.D. Vance, by the way, Beers, the man who was the most anti-war member of his cabinet, who gave long speeches about no reason to go to war with Iran. He's just

disappeared off Twitter. He used to be on there, trolling me every other week, trolling left-wing journalist. Now he's quiet. He's gone to ground because he knows they cannot defend the indefensible. We all need a bit of cozy comfort to get us over the line, and I'll be getting mine from Cozy Earth. Their bamboo

pajama set is a massive sleep upgrade. It's lightweight, but cozy, unbelievably, soft, and it drapes majestically. It sleeps cooler than cotton, so you fall asleep faster and stay comfortable all night. All of Cozy Earth sleep products come with a hundred-night sleep trial and a 10-year warranty. So, share some extra love this February and wrap yourself or somebody else in luxury comfort. Go to CozyEarth.com and use my code Peers, P-I-E-R-S, for up to 20% off. That's Code Peers for up to 20% off at CozyEarth.com, and remember to tell them that I sent you.

Interestingly, I think politically it's been a very bad week for Vance, actually, because the anticipation that he would be the logical successor to Trump, he has just disappeared this week. And the one who's emerged as a much stronger person, I think, on the Trump side, if you're looking for someone to maybe run in 2028, probably Marco Rubio now. Although I would push back in peers and say it could actually work in Vance's favour, if this turns into the disaster, some of us think it will, in that he can say, well, I was always against it.

that. Behind the scenes, I was the guy pressure. It was Marco out there trying to invade every country from Venezuela to Iran to Cuba. And look at the disasters. Marco, he was never one of us. He was never MAGA. I frankly find both of them to be deeply overrated. I wouldn't be surprised if the Republican contender in 2028, if it's not Trump, is actually neither Marco Rubio nor J.D. Vance, but it's, to quote Donald Rumsfeld, a known unknown. Someone who's out there, we don't quite know who they are, but they emerge from the ashes of another disastrous Trump presidency. I think Vance and Rubio are deeply overrated figures. You saw Rubio having to do a clean-up in Isle 12 last week

when he had to come out and say, no, no, I never blamed Israel for this. I didn't say we did it because of Israel. And then the reporter's like, well, I was the one who asked you the question. It was a greatly embarrassing moment for Marco Rubio on the Capitol. It was.

And he clearly, I think, meant what he said the first time. And then they decided to shift the narrative. Because they realized... Oh, peers, you can't say that. You'll be accused of anti-Semitism. By the way, on that, you saw the spat I've been having with Ben Shapiro.

And I've responded to him today with a quite lengthy piece about it because I do think it's ridiculous that this idea that you cannot criticize the Israeli government, specifically, I've always been very specific. I'm criticizing the government

and its actions, not the Israeli people, not Jewish people. I don't have an anti-Semitic bone in my body. But people like Ben Shapiro, if there's any sign that you are not absolutely blindly, in favor of everything Israel does,

then you are anti-Semitic and you must be shamed, mocked, preferably canceled. And he's basically gone the full hog with me. I mean, he's gone from being a willing guest on my show many times when I was always defending Israel's right to defend itself. And then the moment I got more critical of the government in the war on Gaza, that was it. Never applied to messages, and now has come out fully swinging.

I just find it ridiculous. that in a democracy like the United States, he can't see how ridiculous that is for somebody trying to position himself as a great free speech warrior. Welcome to our world, Pierce. This is what some of us endured for many years. This is cancellation of people who speak out against Israel.

There's a reason they're targeting you and Tucker Carson in particular because you have these huge platforms and you were seen as quote unquote reliable allies and you can't be dismissed as, you know, crazy leftists or mad Muslims. Therefore, you have to be shut down before anyone else. And they're not hiding this stuff, Pierce. Benjamin Netanyahu's talked about the information war being the front line, the main war that Israel's fighting,

taking over TikTok being the most important strategy for pro-Israel side with the Ellison family. They're not hiding the fact that they know they're losing the messaging war. And instead of like stop doing war crimes, they're just trying to suppress free speech. And it's going to backfire. I sadly, on Jewish friends of mine, on the Jewish community in this country. Because once you devalue a important term like anti-Semitism, once you cheapen a phrase like anti-Semitism, Once you start calling anyone who criticizes Netanyahu or the killing of kids, when you call Miss Rachel, the world's most popular children's entertainer, an anti-Semite,

because she said, don't kill kids, right? You're completely undermining the very important common struggle we should have against anti-semitism. We have Republican group chats, like every week leaking out of young Republicans talking about Jews and black people in the most vicious terms. And then you turn to the leadership of Jewish organizations in this country, the ADL, Jonathan, and they're busy just talking about Israel and Iran. And I'm very, very worry about the fact that when, you know, the, I don't want to say the real anti-Semitic walls. They're anti-Semites of all types. But when the anti-Semites, the OG anti-Semites of the far right,

the Nazi types, if you will, when they're back on the rise and you have people just singularly focused on what is some college kid on campus holding on a placard? What is Piers Morgan saying? Who is Tucker Carlson platforming? If that's your only metric for anti-Semitism, then we're all screwed because the forces of bigotry

are on the rise against Jews, against Muslims, against minorities of all types. The term moral abomination, right? I think we can all agree there's been a lot of moral abominations going on generally in the last few years. But according to independent human rights groups, the Iranian regime slaughtered up to, and I use that word, we don't know for sure, up to 30,000 of its own people during the recent protests in January. At the time you posted, I have a feeling a lot more Muslims around the world would support the Iranian protest for freedom and democracy. is so many members of the pro-regime change Iranian diaspora

weren't such raging Islamophobes. Now, my response to that would be, okay, there may be people in that pro-regime change movement who are Islamophobic. They might well be. But they're also risking their lives on the streets to get rid of a very repressive evil regime. Was it fair to muddy the waters there in the way that you did with that post?

Not really. Because it's a quote tweet, Piers. For those people are not on Twitter like you and I, quote tweet is responding to another tweet. So that tweet doesn't make sense without the tweet I was referring to, which was a tweet from a very prominent pro-regime change Iranian-American activist where she was attacking Zoran Mandani for celebrating the hijab. And I just didn't seem to understand why should women in New York,

Muslim women in New York not get to celebrate hijab, celebrate wearing the hijab, or have the right to wear hijab, simply because the Iranian government oppresses women in hijabs or forces women to wear hijabs in Iran. That's the definition of bigotry peers to attack one group of people for the actions of another. That was the only point I was making. And by the way, I wasn't talking about people on the streets of Iran. The Iranian diaspora peers, as you must have noticed by now, contain some seriously unhinged people. I think this is recognized by even Iranian Americans that there are people in their own community who were really out there. And you'll remember

this from the Iraq war. They were British Iraqis who were just raving for war. They wanted Ahmed Chalabi to come in. They said anyone who opposed the war like you and me were pro-Saddam. And that happens in every diaspora community during the war. It happened with the Syrians, too. There are Iranian monarchists, the people who support the Crown Prince, who don't want to hear any criticism. You know, Christian Amun-Poor did a tough interview with the Shah's son. They went and heckled her and said she's pro-regime. So there's a lot of irrational people. There were people at a rally over the weekend peers. I'm not sure if you saw the clips. They were saying it was worth it for these kids to have died because that's what the cost is of freeing the country.

if you're telling me that 160 kids is worth it, that I can't take you seriously. And too many people, not all of them, but too many people in the Iranian diaspora, are so keen. I understand why, to get rid of the government in Iran, that they're willing to do deals with the devil, they're willing to support Netanyahu,

they're willing to say Islamophobic things. That was the point I was making. It was an observation that I find a lot of my fellow Muslims don't sympathize, when they should, with people under oppression because they see them as somehow opposed to them and their religion. I would like to, you know, break those things out into separate categories. We should all support the rights of any people in any country, whatever their religion or race, when they are fighting for freedom.

But that doesn't mean, that doesn't excuse bigotry or, you know, generalizations by people in the diaspora. And I was referring to certain nut jobs in the diaspora. The performance of the Democrats in America in the last eight days, I would say, is pretty much sum them up. I think their leadership are very ineffectual, very important. very incompetent, don't seem very politically astute, never mind anything else. You know, you've got an overwhelming number of Democrats, Democrat voters in America that are against this. There's no fire in the belly on the Democrat side,

galvanizing the anti-war movement in the way that you would have expected. Why is that? And what is the answer for the Democrats? I thought you were going to be devil's advocate, is everything you said I agreed with 100%. Every word of that was music to my ears. They are weak. They are useless. I mean, the leadership. I don't like to generalize

because there are a lot of Democrats like your Rokunners who are doing very good work in trying to stop the war in highlighting the double standards. Senator Chris Murphy's been very strong. Senator Chris Van Holland. There's individual Democrats have been very strong. The leadership, Schumer in the Senate. Jeffreys in the House, absolutely useless.

When they're asked, are you going to fund this war? They can't just say no. We're not going to fund an illegal, immoral war. They don't understand the politics, as you say, that the party, the base is in a very anti-war, very angry position. The American public as a whole has a very dim view of the Democratic Party. Did you see the poll recently peers that says the only two things that are less popular than AI? AI is very unpopular in the US. The only things less popular than AI are the Democratic Party and the Islamic Republic of Iran, according to public opinion.

That's a savage indictment of the Democratic Party and its leadership. And that's because they are out of tune with American voters. They are definitely out of tune with their base. This is a moment now to go after Trump for his lack of a plan. lack of a strategy, betrayal of his base, his immoral killing of school girls in a school and then lying about it and trying to blame Iran, supporting a war in which they're blowing up oil depots

and civilian infrastructure without going to Congress. Pears, Tony Blair went to Parliament, went to the UN Security Council. George Bush sent Colin Powell to the UN Security Council. He went to Congress to get a vote of authorization. This guy, Trump, hasn't even bothered to do even what Bush and Cheney did when they rushed to war. And yet the Democrats' open goal,

just keep missing the goal, the leadership again of the Democratic. Party. As I say, individual Democrats, especially those running for president, are doing a good job. Ruben Gallego of Arizona has been very strong. I like his tagline that Trump was elected to try and expose paedophiles and end wars. Instead, he's protecting petapiles and starting wars. I do think that should be the line of the entire Democratic Party. Just finally, are you pleased that the now dead Ayatollah Khomeini, the older Hameini, is no longer ruling Iran? It's a good question. I don't take pleasure in

killing anyone. I don't think you should have illegally killed the leader, a foreign leader of a nation, who's also, by the way, a spiritual leader to millions of Shia Muslims around the world. He wasn't my spiritual leader, but he's a spiritual leader, but he's a spiritual leader, but he's a I hope I'm not back on the show in a year, two years, three years, saying to you, Peirs, do you remember when I told you that killing Khomeini will have a backlash? There will be terrorism, there will be revenge attack. I hope that doesn't happen. But it could happen. It might likely happen. US intelligence is suggesting it might happen. The blowback from killing a foreign head of state, from killing an Ayatullah, a religious leader, in this way, in this blazee way.

By the way, peers, they also killed the people he wanted to succeed, Khamenei. They're so incompetent. Trump now admits that in the next door building, they accidentally also killed the people they wanted to be there, Delci Rodriguez in Iran. So no, I don't, I'm never going to support assassinating foreign leaders, killing foreign leaders. So, you know, Colonel Gaddafi was raped and murdered on the side of a street in Libya. Is Libya better off with Adam? Well, A, not sure about that. B, obviously, I don't shed any tears for Gaddafi, but that is not what you do. I'm never going to support the killing of anybody outside of a trial, outside of a due process. And, you know, it's for the Iranian people to decide their future. If the Iranian people want

to get rid of Khmerang. It was up to the Iranian people, not up to Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald. Trump. And by the way, what a great regime change war this is. They replaced Ayatullah Hamanae with Ayatollah Khamanae. That's real high-level success in your regime-change war. His son, apparently, is more hardline, we're told, and his father. And why wouldn't he be? They just killed his mum, his dad, I think his wife as well, his sister. It's not a guy who's going to do a deal anytime soon or roll over for Donald Trump. So strategically, it's a disaster. And legally and morally, no, you can't just kill people you don't like. Am I going to support, you know, I don't like Benjamin Netanyahu peers? Maybe you've noticed, though, for the last

Two years, but I don't support anyone assassinating him. My actual question, though, but it was brilliantly deflected. My actual question was, are you pleased that he's no longer ruling Iran? Well, I don't support the vilayathe Faki, what is called the Islamic system of rule in Iran. So I don't support any Ayatollah's being in charge of Iran. In Iraq, for example, you have an Ayatollah named Sistani, who the Americans have worked with for a long time. He's a spiritual leader of a lot of Iraq, Shias, and a lot of Shias. He's never taken executive authority.

He's never said, I'm going to be in charge of Iraq. He sits in his house and he gives his religious rulings. I prefer that system of government. So in a sense, are you asking me, do I hope that, you know, do I want Ayatollahs to rule Iran? No, I don't. I don't. I'm on the record supporting a democratic system. No, I don't.

No, I think it was a people. No, I know. I wasn't asking if he's supported killing him. I just was asking if you're pleased he's no longer ruling the country. It's a loaded question because his son is leading the country. So am I pleased with that? No, I'm not pleased with his son reading the country. It's not a question you can answer in the back to you, can you, peers.

Well, no. So, for example, are you pleased, are you pleased, are you pleased, are you pleased that Saddam Hussein? Are you pleased that Saddam Hussein is not ruling Iraq? Yeah. But you opposed that war like I did. Yeah. Okay. The two things are perfectly compatible.

Agreed. Absolutely. Agreed. There's no problem saying that you're, I'm agreeing with you. You could easily. So you know, well, you've agreed. You've now. said that you're pleased the son, you're not pleased the son is running the country. Is that what

you said? No. No, I'm not. Not at all. I've said that publicly. So does it, does it automatically follow you? And he's only ruling the country. Hold on, hold on. He's only ruling the country because we killed the leader before him, his dad. I understand that. But I'm just trying to work out by natural process of elimination, you must therefore, de facto be pleased that the dead Ayatollah is no longer ruling the country. Am I pleased he's not ruling the country? It's a question in vacuum. Does that mean I'm pleased with his son ruling the country?

Because it says weird, gotcha question without the content. No, no, I'm not. I don't want to say yes to that because that implies that I'm okay with the fallout from it, which I'm not. But I have made my position clear. I don't think any Ayatollah should be running Iran. That's not my political or religious viewpoint. So it sounds like a yes. But I don't think you should kill them in order to get rid of them.

But I don't think you should kill Ayatollahs in order to get rid of it. I didn't ask you about. I didn't ask you if you supported killing you. I just said, are you pleased? He's no longer a rule in the country. Sounds like you are, but you're just very reluctant to use the word yes. Yeah, because I have to think through the consequence

of what I'm saying, Piers. It's good for you to ask a great question and a vacuum. But if I say yes to that question, does that mean I'm supporting what Trump and Netanyahu did? No. I don't think any of that follows.

You could just say yes or no. And I don't take pleasure in killing people without trials. If Aytala Kamani and I did something wrong, the Iranian should have tried him. That wasn't the question. The Iranian should have tried him. Wasn't the question. Medi, that wasn't my question. I didn't ask if you were pleased he got killed.

It was just a question about my feelings. I just asked you, are you pleased he's no longer ruling the country? It's a yes or no. You either are or you not? No, because I can't, no. It's not as simple as I know. I know you've now latched onto this, but I have to think this through. No, I don't think it's a matter about my feelings.

I'm only latched onto it because you weren't. I think it's an easy thing to answer, I think. I didn't know it was a therapy session to ask me about how I'm feeling. I thought it's about my political viewpoints. My political viewpoint is it was wrong to kill him. It was illegal to kill him. It will have disastrous effects for the region. It's mad to take out a head of state and a spiritual leader.

And it's even madder when you replace him with his son, who apparently is, quote unquote, worse than him, both for Iran and for US and Israeli interests. I'll just try one more time. So I'm not pleased that the situation we're in. Not asking you about the situation. simply asking, are you pleased that he's no longer ruling the country? No, I'm not pleased about what's going on right now in Iran,

which involves killing coming up. I'm not going to answer your question out of any context for you to clip this out of context. No. Nice to try. Perish the thought that either of us would take anything from our interviews and clip them out of context, but you would never do that, would you? Never, never. It's like that time you wouldn't say if Trump was a race.

racist or not when I asked you about seven times on my show. Medi, you can ask me again next time I'm on your show, but it's always good to have you on Uncensor. Thank you very much. Come back. Anytime. Thank you very much. Take care. Take care, Madi. Thank you very much. Well, the Iranian-American actor model and ex-husband of Britney Spears, Sam Asgari, grew up in Iran until the age of 13 before fleeing the regime. And he joins me now. Samisgari, welcome to Uncensored.

Thank you for having me, Pierce. I mean, I can ask you the same question. I was trying to get Medea San to say, but are you pleased that the late Ayatollah Hameini is no longer ruling the country? Am I pleased? Absolutely. And are the Iranians in diaspora and people inside of Iran are pleased? Absolutely.

Is that pleasure diluted by the fact that it appears to have had little effect on the regime because his son is now apparently the new supreme leader? And there's no sign of any uprising on the streets against the regime, despite all of the military action that's been taken. I mean, absolutely. And that was something expected already by this regime. I mean, it's something that shows you how undemocratic this regime is to replace an Ayatollah with another Ayatollah without the people's votes or without anybody involved. So that doesn't change the plan and that doesn't change what the people of Iran and the people and the people in the

diaspora want. And that's something that really doesn't, you know, phase anybody in the diaspora or the people of Iran. They want to change. They want this regime to be completely out of Iran. And this is something that I support deeply. There are lots of people who are pying about Iran without having been there. You're in a good position to talk about Iran because you were there for 13 years of your life, the first 13 years. You were born in Tehran in 1994, so 15 years after the revolution. Then you moved to the US when you were 13. But you were there long enough, I guess, to remember quite a lot of it. You know, I think people with longer memories about Iran, they don't remember the monarchy

with particularly rose-tinty spectacles. They say that one of the reasons there was an uprising in revolution, but the monarchy had become increasingly unpopular as a ruler of the country. You were there 15 years into the revolution and then spent 13 years living under it. What are your memories of this Iranian regime in that period? This Iranian regime loves to sort of brainwash everybody that lives there. So my memory growing up, it was just a regime brainwashing every single person. I mean, you got anywhere from going to school, you have to chant to death to America and death to Israel without having any education, without having any outside knowledge about what's going on in the world

and who the evil really is. So they love to brainwash everybody that is from the age of zero. And they love them to be occupied with all that in their head and sort of have that with upgrowing. And imagine how the Iranian people want this regime out and how evil it is, that even with this brainwashing and the system that they had. and all the censorship that they had, they're still so unpopular in the country of Iran.

So growing up in that country was an absolute disaster. Take a look at me now in America. I'm someone that could put my mind into anything and sort of become whoever I want. Take a look at my three sisters. I mean, there were women that were oppressed. I remember there was one night, me and my mother, I was around six or seven years old.

I remember vividly, we had to go pick up my sisters for, they were, they got arrested for wearing something that wasn't appropriate by the Islamic Revolution. And look at the fear that they put into these girls growing up and look at the opportunities that they stripped away from everybody, not only girls, from the men that could just be like me, and look at it, look at it now. I mean, take a look at the past 47 years

of how this regime, what has came out from Iran. The only thing that ever come from this regime that some way, the innovation or something like that is a suicide bomb on a drone. And take a look at everybody that have skipped Iran and that have came to America. They're one of the most successful immigrant groups, not only in America and other countries, they're innovators, they're occupying Silicon Valley. They're occupying almost everything when it comes to technology and everything. So, I mean, the opportunities are just limitless in Iran for everybody.

Do you still have family back in Tehran? Like I'd like to say, you know, I got 90 immediate family members, 90 million immediate family members in Iran, which are my brothers and sisters. That's why I feel so responsible to come on your show and to use my voice as an entertainer to be able to make the American people understand what really happens in Iran.

and what sets the people far away from their governments. And I do have family members that I have not spoke to in many weeks, and I do have friends that I have not spoke to. I had a friend that was murdered in the protest just a month before this war escalated. So this is something that I'm deeply connected to. I'm very sorry to hear about your friend. What happened to your friend? My friend was murdered on the street, you know, protesting alongside millions of other Iranians

and chanting under the same flag. I mean, the flag that we want, the previous flag before this revolution, the one that you see on the streets of Los Angeles, Toronto, New York, almost everywhere in the world, and they were under the same exact unity. And it wasn't just him. It was more than 40,000 people plus that got murdered by that regime, specifically. They opened fire using AK-47s and weapons. that you use in war.

So believe it or not, the war that's happening now against this Islamic regime, which is basically being called a rescue mission and not even war, was happening in Iran for 47 years. I mean, they were opening fire and anybody that asked for freedom for anything, anything that they protested, they opened fire on every single person that was out there. Why do you think we're not seeing any uprisings yet since the... war began eight days ago. There's a theory that because it's so dangerous on the streets from the bombing raids and the missiles coming down, that that's a major factor. Is it also

because so many, like your friend, were killed in the protests in January? Is it a combination of both? Are there other factors? But at the moment, people are surprised there's been no attempt by the people to rise up during this last week. I mean, take a look at this regime. Every time something happens, they do a complete blackout. So we're not seeing what's really happening out there, but we are seeing a lot of people recording from their rooftops, from their windows, and they're so happy about the strikes happening because they're hitting direct targets.

And obviously war is not something that anybody celebrates, but the Iranian people inside of Iran are really happy about this regime being hit accurately. They're being destroyed, they're being eliminated one by one. And that's why it doesn't change anything when the Ayatollah was replaced by another Ayatollah. I mean, this is something that they're trusting America with, and they're really believing that there's going to be a time where they're giving orders to flood the streets and to come out. But the uprising has already happened.

I mean, take a look at the Iranians outside of Los Angeles and outside of Toronto, New York, all over the world. They have already uprised and they have became the voice. of the people inside of Iran. And they do have someone that is representing them and someone that inside of Iran are calling for is Reza Pahlavi. And we do have a leader into this revolution.

And that's someone that wants a democratic future and is supporting freedom and everything that everybody's asking for for this last 47 years of Iran. So the uprising has happened and it will happen. And this is something that everybody is already extremely excited about. I know Rezbole, well, I like him personally very much.

I've been impressed when I've interviewed him. But is a return to monarchical rule, you know, the exiled son of the Shah going back when, in fact, you know, if you're being honest, the Shah at the time in 179 was not very popular in the country, would this actually have mass popular support, do you think? Or would it be better for the people of Iran to go for an absolutely full-on, full-throthold, genuine democratic future that doesn't involve a monarchy? I mean, take a look at what people have been calling for. They have been calling only one name.

And Reza Pahlavi is someone that I have spoke to. I have gone to his meetings and I deeply support. And just like many millions of Iranians outside of Iran, even inside of Iran, because he He is not actually proposing a monarchy. He's proposing a democratic future for Iran, a united Iran, and that's something that everybody truly believes and they see his genuance and they see his education and they see how he has been in touch with the western side of the world. And that is a strong leadership that he's presenting.

And he is not wanting monarchy unless the Iranian people are wanting that. So in case we see this regime fall, which we are, we're very close to it, we will have the Iranian people choosing a future, and he is someone that absolutely supports that. You know, Sam, it takes courage to speak out as an Iranian, someone who lived there and left the country. It's not at zero risk to yourself. You know that. There are many in Hollywood who've been deafening with their silence, and yet incredibly vocal about, for example, the war on Hamas in Gaza. Is that a moral cowardice? I mean, should more people where you are right now in LA, I have a home there myself. Should more Hollywood figures be speaking out

like this? Is there hypocrisy about them racing to defend Palestinians but not wanting to be vocal supporting Iranian protesters? Absolutely. I mean, Hollywood is a place where all entertainers are great people and as an artist, it's hard to believe that you don't want to support human rights and this is about human rights. It has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. There is strongly political things that are attached to what's happening. But the reason why I'm here today is because I was born in a country of Iran. And under that regime, I would be nothing. And I would have absolutely no opportunities whatsoever.

So as an American, I'm extremely proud to be in a country. And my first flag is the United States flag. And the second flag is the lion and sun flag that is going to replace this Islamic Revolution flag. And as someone that's an artist is extremely important for me to support the human rights and the humans are calling for. And I absolutely encourage people in Hollywood to understand and educate themselves onto what's really happening in Iran.

And I feel responsible for the 90 million immediate families that I have in Iran. And as someone that has the bloodline of Cyrus the Great running through my veins and the DNA of what was once the hub of human rights, I mean, I mean, Cyrus the Great invented human rights, and he wrote human rights. And as someone that has American values,

that has American grinds, that believes the United States is one of the greatest countries in the world, I feel strongly responsible to speak, especially when there's a blackout, and especially when people are being shut off from the internet and we're not able to hear what's really happening and what they really want. So it is an absolute responsibility for me

to stand for human rights. Have you had threats for speaking out? I have not really encountered with much threats just because there are so many people that are supporting this movement and they're really supporting the human right factor of this movement, not the politics of it. I mean, take a look at what's really happening. This is not just about the Islamic Republic Revolution being a threat to the outside world like America and the nuclear program.

This is about the management of what we're going. was once a great country. I mean, like I said, take a look at what has happened in the past 47 years of that country. Everybody that had fled the country for a better future, they had succeeded. Iranians are amongst one of the greatest emigrant groups in America.

And look at how they took the streets of Los Angeles and New York and Toronto. The protests were extremely friendly. They were practicing their freedom of speech. They were holding the American flag. They were cleaning up after. They were done with the protest and take a look at what was happening with the last weekend protest. Iranians took the street under one flag, which was the lion and sun flag,

calling for Reza Pahlavi to return to Iran, calling for freedom, and being happy about the Ayatollah being dead and finally this regime being on a downfall. Not only that, they were also, they had photos of the fallen soldiers. At the time it was six now at seven, but they were saluting the American soldiers. We're being extremely, you know, the number one immigrants that we're really looking for in America. And something like this was the first time in history that we are seeing an immigrant group being the most patriotic Americans out there. And they're appreciating America. And that's something that really makes me proud is to finally understanding that this regime has nothing to do with the people.

And the people of Iran and the people outside of Iran strongly value American values, and they want nothing but peace into this world, and they want nothing to do with this regime whatsoever. So it really makes me proud to see Iranians come out and wave the American flag and understand that it is because of America. They are finally having a future. Sam, you've talked very powerfully and eloquently about Iran. It would be remissingly not to ask you one question at the end about your ex-wife.

You were married to Britney Spears from June 22 to August 23 last week. As you know, and we all know, she was pulled over by California Highway Patrol officers and booked by the Ventura County Sheriff's Office before being released. Apparently, he was a DUI case. We'll wait and see how that plays out. But, you know, I had another of her ex-husbands, Kevin Fedlein, on my show, recently saying he feared for her life is a lot of concern about people around Brittany that she's spiraling out of control. You know her better than most. What do you feel about what's happening to her?

I mean, coming from the country of Iran and seeing women being oppressed, that's something that that stuck up to me and that was a value that it carried my whole entire life. And, you know, in a way, not comparing the situation whatsoever, she was also oppressed by many people that took advantage of her and sort of had the same experience as women do. in Iran and that's someone as someone that's an advocate for women rights and want freedom of speech and want freedom for everybody. It was hard to believe and hard to see that someone in America was being oppressed. So I have, you know, I admire her very well. I've seen what she struggles with even though we were married for one year. We were together for seven years. So my values for

her, my respect for her always stands. And, you know, when we go back to history, if we look at TMZ and all the press that took this and sort of reported everything. That was something that didn't help her. So I'm a strong believer that she needs her privacy and, you know, everybody makes mistakes. And if she made a mistake, I really think she's a strong woman and she could come back from this. But I think my word is for the press to stay away from this and to be able to allow her her privacy and allow her for a great recovery. Do you still talk to her, Sam? I always celebrate the past, you know.

It's something that I like to celebrate, and when things get done with, I always will appreciate it for the rest of my life, and I wish her nothing but the best. I just wondered if after what happened, given she was in the news, whether you, is that a situation where you would call her? Say that again, Pierce?

I just wondered if you called her after she was in the news or whether you just don't have that kind of relationship anymore. In the past few months, I've really been focused on what was happening, in Iran and you know my people need me and I feel deeply responsible to focus on this and I haven't been really focused on you know what was happening in pop culture and in celebrity news so I wasn't I wasn't too aware of it the first one to let me know was it was news nation and Fox so that was something that was a sort of a surprise for me but it doesn't change anything I mean I'm always

going to respect her and I'm always going to support her well-being and I truly believe that she can recover from this. Sam Muzgari, it's been a pleasure of having an Anarsensor. Thank you very much. Thank you, Pierce. Really appreciate it. Pierce Morgan, Our Sensor, is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing.

Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Unsensored on Spotify and Apple Podcast. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain. And we'll do it all for free. unscensored media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it without you.