Piers Morgan Uncensored - “Get the F*** Out of Gaza!” Trump Seals Israel-Hamas Peace Deal | With Cenk Uygur & Daniella Weiss

Episode Date: October 9, 2025

President Donald Trump has announced that both Israel and Hamas have agreed to the first phase of a peace deal. Could this really be the end of the war in Gaza - and will it last? A ceasefire is set to begin immediately, with aid moving in and Israeli troops moving out. And all remaining Israeli hostages will finally be allowed to go home and more than 1,700 Gazans are also expected to be released. To debate the US-backed deal and what happens next, Piers Morgan speaks to leader of the Nahala settlement movement and Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Daniella Weiss before being joined in the Uncensored studios by leader of the British Green Party, Zack Polanski, then Israeli-American journalist Emily Schrader and President of the Australian Palestine Advocacy Network, Nasser Mashni.Piers then speaks to founder and CEO of The Young Turks Cenk Uygur and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Brooklyn Bedding: Enter our show name after checkout so they know we sent you! Visit https://Brooklynbedding.com for 30% off & use promo code PIERS! Oxford Natural: To watch their full stories, scan the QR code on your screen or visit https://oxfordnatural.com/piers/ to get 70% off your first order when you use code PIERS. Birch Gold: Visit https://birchgold.com/piers to get your free info kit on gold. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We're very close to a deal in the Middle East, and they'll get a need me pretty quickly. So let's get it clear right now. Israel should get the fuck out of Gaza. Well, the United States didn't get the F out of Japan. Israel has done 70 October 7th already. 70! Trump is a real estate guy. He's looking at Gaza and he's saying, I see a bunch of rubble. Why don't we have nice buildings and clean streets? You've been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. This certainly was a surprise to me.

It was a surprise for me, too. My husband, he just wanted to know how much money it is. Palestinians are an invention. Just to be clear, you would like all of the land between from the river to the sea. I want all the land from the Ephritis to the Nile. What do you mean? This is one of the more ludicrous pitches

for a Nobel Peace Prize I think I've ever heard in my life. The last pitches will come back. They're coming back on Monday. Oh! Was what happened on October the 7th, two years ago, an active resistance? Palestinians rose up and resisted Israeli oppression. But this is my problem.

It wasn't an active resistance. It was an act of despicable terrorism. I'm not going to call it an active terrorism. There is nothing pro-Palestinian about Hamas as an organization, and they are an organization that needs to be destroyed for the well-being of Israelis and Palestinians. For the first time in more than two years, Palestinians in Gaza and the hostage families in Israel are celebrating, albeit cautiously. The war may finally be over.

U.S. President Donald Trump made the announcement that both Israel and Hamas have agreed to the first phase of a peace deal. This is how he got the historic news. Come on up here, Marcia. Anything we should know about the Middle East? Well, they're smart, but they're not smart enough. They...

Oh, my microphone's broken. They're smart, but they're not smart enough. They have been... covered by these liberal cities for so many years and that's why we're all working with Treasury with all these different departments to find the criminal conspiracy okay I'm just given yeah I was just given a note by the Secretary of State saying that we're very close to a deal in the Middle East and they'll get a need be pretty quickly an incredible moment of course there's every reason to be

be unsure about whether this will last. Many of the crucial details remain unclear. But the most important details is that a ceasefire will begin immediately. Aid will move in. Israeli troops will move out. And all of the remaining Israeli hostages will finally be allowed to go home. The president spoke to their ecstatic families by phone last night. President Trump, you have the best crowd of the world. What do you guys have to say to President Trump? The hostages will come back. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Well, as part of a deal, Israel is expected to release more than 1,700 Gazans detained since October the 7th.

The grim truth is that they will be returning to a decimated land, blighted by unspeakable destruction, grief and uncertainty. There are a major unanswered questions about the extent of a mass disarmament, about who governs and rebuilds Gaza, and about who makes sure this deal, like others before it, doesn't simply fall apart. But for now, it's a moment in history to savour and to celebrate for the first time in 24 months. Tomorrow should be better than today. To debate the US Bank deal and what happens next, I spoke to Chek Yuga, founder and CEO of the Young Turks and filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza,

whose latest releases about the rise of Islamism after October the 7th. Chek, I've not talked to you since this peace plan was presented. I read it in detail, and I found myself nodding at a lot of it. It seems to me to be the most likely framework to get this war over. Yeah, so my sense of it is that Trump is actually trying to get the peace. Obviously he's massively biased towards Israel and this deal is biased towards Israel, but I would take it.

And so now I'm not Hamas, so it's easy for me to say, I want the hostages home. I've wanted the hostages home from day one. So in the deal, the hostages get released, Hamas does not rule Gaza. I'm happy with both of those things. But the critical part peers is Israel has to leave God. So right now, what they're saying is, yeah, we're going to get what we want. We're going to get our hostages back. But we're not going to leave.

And they claim they're getting a security permit, which is just more land. And I told you from day one, this was never about self-defense. This is about land acquisition. They're trying to build greater Israel. So then Natnyahu says yes to the deal because he has no choice because Trump makes him, which I like, good job by Trump on that. Then he goes home and says in Hebrew, not in English, oh, don't worry, we're going to have the idea of deep inside Gaza. So in other words, we're not going to do the peace deal. We're

going to get the hostages back and we're going to grab as much of Gaza for Israel as we can. So that's the part that I can't stand. If I was Hamas, I'd sign the deal anyway, take Israel's excuse away from them. They'd be using the host. That's why Nanjahu didn't want the hostages back because he wanted as an excuse. But it doesn't really matter because even if you take that excuse away from him, what he's going to do next is Hamas didn't surrender enough. They didn't turn it enough weapons. I have to murder more Palestinians. I have to ethnically cleanse them more.

So when the hostages are returned peers, and we come back on here, will you tell all of your Zionists, Israeli zealot? Yes. Okay, you guys betrayed the deal. You were supposed to leave Gaza, and you didn't. So Jenk was right, and all of your critics were right. This was always about stealing Palestinian land. Okay, so that's what's going to happen, I guarantee it.

So I just want to set ahead of time so then people don't try to score them out of it. Oh, no, they didn't turn. They turned in 12,000 guns, but we wanted 13,000 guns. We have to keep murdering. We have to keep stealing land, right? So let's get it clear right now. Israel should get the fuck out of Gaza, and they should end the occupation entirely. Otherwise, they're in the land stealing business, which is what they've been in for the last

at least 58 years. Okay. Dinesh, your response to that? Well, the United States didn't get the F out of Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor. This was something that the Japanese started, and the United States not only finished it, but after the war, there was denazification,

there was a restructuring of Japan. So I'm just saying that when you start a war, it's not gonna end your way. Now, I do support the Trump plan. I, through my adult lifetime, I've seen so many bungled peace plans that the fact that this one is kind of close, to signature, I think is itself incredible. I think Trump is a real estate guy. He's looking at Gaza

and he's saying, I see a bunch of rubble. Why don't we have nice buildings and clean streets and people in suits going to work and maybe a Trump hotel? Why don't we have trade and prosperity? So he's offering a different path to the path that we've seen so far. And on the balance, I think it's a good path. So even though I think for Israel, it's painful to exchange terrorists for hostages. That's hardly a fair part of the deal, but I think Israel is right to swallow and take it. I think also the demilitarization of Gaza and having an international authority mainly made up of Muslims and Muslim countries, I think is a good way to go. Chang, the suggestion that Tony Blair might be a leading figure in that has enraged a lot of

people. Others say, look, he got peace in Norman Island. He's been a Middle East peace envoy. Iraq was a disaster, but everything he's done since has been aimed at trying to forge peace. What's your view of somebody like him being involved? So Tony Blair is a toty for the Israelis, and that's super obvious, and I'll give you a fact that proves it. Do you know who's funding the Tony Blair Institute to the tune of $350 million? Larry Ellison, the same Larry Ellison, who is the biggest charitable donor to the ID. he gave them $16.6 million in the middle of a genocide. Oh, yeah, go murder more Palestinians.

Here's my charity to Israel. Go steal more land. So that guy is paying off the guy, Tony Blair, who's supposed to be neutral here? No, he's got 350 million reasons not to be neutral. He's going to be biased in favor of Israel in every way, shape, and form. He has been bought by Israel. He helped to start the Iraq War. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.

Iraq had nothing to do with America. At the time, Israeli leaders said that it was Israel's number one enemy, and Tony Blair said, yes, sir, absolutely, sir, we'll invade them, sir. And now we're told that he's neutral when he's obviously and literally and empirically bought by Larry Ellison, who's a massively pro-Israel zealot, near lunatic, honestly, on, he's saying, yeah, I'd like to donate charitably to a genocide. It's unbelievable. And so, and one more thing about what Dinesh said.

So look, these guys always say, oh, well, look, there was World War II and we dropped a nuclear bomb. Like, why? But what we were supposed to learn from history. So, yes, the Mongols went into Baghdad and killed 800,000 people, every man, woman, and child about a thousand years ago. Does that mean we should all do it? No, we're supposed to get better as we go along. And that's why we passed laws after World War II that we should not do indiscriminate mass murder of civilians. And the only country that doesn't agree, Israel, they're like, no, we reserve the right to do mass slaughter of civilians. That's because they're totally outside of the rule of law.

They're a pariah terrorist state, and we've got to stop funding them. There's a debate about the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but even the people who say that that was a bad idea think that there should have been instead a land invasion of Japan, which sort of itself have produced untold casualties. So there's no real debate. Hold on, let me finish. You keep shouting. Let me finish. So the point I'm trying to make here is when Japan starts it, the United States gets to finish it,

and there's no need to have a, quote, neutral authority that somehow neutralizes the influence of the victor. Look, if Israel had carpet bombed Hamas and carpet bombed Gaza on October 8th, they would have gotten away with it. The reason that they are getting all the heat now is they dragged it out, and in fact, they are trying surgically to distinguish between Hamas and civilians an extremely difficult job to do when Hamas. grabs its own mothers and daughters and puts them right in front of Hamas and says, we dare you to shoot because that's going to make you a murderer. There's nothing more important than good sleep,

and it's probably time you upgraded yours, as I have, with our sponsor, Brooklyn Bedding. Brooklyn mattresses deliver top-tier quality on its pricing and true American craftsmanship. They've won awards, and they are one of the very few brands, to be endorsed by the American Chiropractic Association. My Aurora Lux mattress was handcrafted in their Arizona the factory and delivered directly to my door. You can start with their sleep quiz to find your

perfect match in just minutes and they offer a 120-night comfort trial. If you don't love it, they'll help you to return it or swap it hassle-free. Go to Brooklynbending.com and use my promo code Peers, that's P-I-E-R-S, for up to 30% off site-wide. This offer is not available anywhere else. Go to Brooklynbending.com and use promo code Peers for 30% off. And make sure you mention, Pears Morgan Unsensored at Brooklyn Benning.com. Promote Peers. 100% propaganda, 100% fabrication. But in fact, there is

pictures and videos of the past two years? No, no, that's total Israeli propaganda. In reality, in reality, there's literally pictures of videos of Israeli soldiers, let me finish, let me finish Israeli soldiers putting Palestinian kids in front of them. They're the ones

who do human shields. Do you know where the head of Mossade is, the headquarters? It's right in the middle of civilian Tel Aviv. So it's actually the Israelis that hide behind human shields. They also hide behind all Jews across the world. They say, oh, if you're going to criticize their government, that means you're attacking all Jews. So you better not.

No, no, no, don't take what you're doing, the maniacal genocidal actions of Israel and put that on Jews across the world. That is deeply anti-Semitic action by the government of Israel. Stop blaming Jews for it. It is not Jews. It is Israel, it is the government, the national government of Israel that is committing these atrocities. And Dinesh, we're supposed to get better than nuking 100,000 civilians.

I'm not debating World War II. I'm saying today we should be better than that. You know, when we dropped a nuke, we burned the babies and the grandmothers alive. That is not a thing that you should be bragging about. Maybe, you know, back then, you couldn't use historical context. But today, we're all trying to get better, except, one country israel says we will not get better we want to go backwards and and the most important part of this peers is

when is this brutal terrible racist evil occupation going to end fifty eight years israel has its boot on the neck of the palestinians so let our people go and i say are not in terms of because i was born muslim american but the whole world is saying it italy is on fire everyone is protesting saying my god how much more are you going to brutalize these poor people? And why do the Israelis want to be the face of evil? What a preposterous, terrible thing to do for your own country, let alone Judaism, which stop appropriating Judaism for your own evil, nationalistic, governmental, personal,

political reasons. So, Dinesh, this is totally unjustifiable in any way. Israel has done 70 October 7th already. 70. They've done 70 October 7s. One is. One is a lot. One is Is that Israeli terrorism going to be enough where we go, that's it. We're not funding the Israeli terrorists anymore. Shank, you're not being paid by the word. You don't have to filibuster this way. Let me just say this. It's really interesting to me that Israel has not taken hostages, right?

And you might think it's because Israel doesn't do that. They have five and a half million hostages. Let me finish. Hold on a minute. The reason that Israel hasn't taken hostages, the way Hamas did on October 7th is this. Hamas wouldn't care. value of Israel taking hostages would be absolutely zero. Hamas would basically say, go and kill them.

We are indifferent to what you do. Now, this really right here shows the moral chasm between Israel and Hamas. Israel values these human lives go to great lengths. Israel is freeing scores of terrorists in exchange for ordinary men, women, and children that are sitting under forced captivity by Hamas. This is not a fair exchange, but Israel is doing it because they're like, we value life. And Hamas is like, we value death. Yeah, it's hilarious.

Okay, so brother, they did 70 October 7th. Their civilian kill ratio is worse than Hamas. Hamas is terrible. I don't defend Hamas at all. There's civilian kill ratio on October 7. What was the kill ratio? Okay. What was the kill ratio of the Allies in World War II?

With the president bombing and the hamper. Let's see, you want to go backwards. What was the kill ratio of civilians? Okay. So, Denesh. Dinesh. Dinesh, the reason you want to go back to World War II and to dropping nukes on people and back to the Mongols

or whatever you want to go back to is because you're to hold on, hold on, because you're trying to justify the vicious terrorism of Israel. So they have done 70 October 7th. So if one October 7th is terrible, and I say it is terrible, isn't 70 October 7s an enormous disregard for human life? Isn't an 83% civilian kill ratio

literally the very worst in the world? So that means Israel is targeting civilians worse than any other terrorist group in the world right now. Worse than Bashar al-Assad did, worse than Hamas did, and on top of the fact that they kill more civilians on purpose, on average, than any other terrorist group. They then did 70 times what October 7 was. So now they're at 66,000 dead, 160,000 injured, 20,000 murdered, 20,000 murdered, when is it going to be enough? How much murder do you want? Hey, hang on, Cheng, let me jump in. So if this plan can't work, what plan can?

No, no, the plan can work, peers. So there's nothing wrong with the plan except for the so-called security perimeter. So the number one thing is it has to be fair. So on my side, I go, oh yeah, get Hamas out of Gaza, definitely return the hostages and the war. I don't want any civilians killed going forward. But Israel has to leave Gaza. They have to actually hold up their end of the deal.

And you know, and Dinesh knows, and everybody knows, Israel's not going to leave Gaza because this was never about defense. It was about offense. And they have pictures of greater Israel. And they'll talk about it. Net Yahoo! Say, hold on, let me just finish this quick thought. Nanyahu has said that it is historical and spiritual mission to set up greater Israel.

That includes Gaza and the West Bank. Why isn't American media honest about that? Why don't they say, oh, yeah, the objective of the leader of Israel is to take all of Gaza for Israel. This is nothing to do with self-defense. This is an aggressive imperial war to capture that land because it's not me saying it. Nanyahu said it. Ben-Gavir said it, Smotrich said it. And they all say that they can countenance the entire annihilation of Gaza.

So why doesn't the American government, British government and our media condemn the world's largest terrorists, which unfortunately today is the Israeli government? All right. So since 2005, a right-wing Israeli government pulled out of Gaza and essentially had Gaza under Palestinian control, the people of Gaza voted for Hamas. So you basically had a two-state solution.

The Israelis were not really involved. Gaza was being autonomously governed by Hamas until October 7th. Now, October 7th is a case, for example, that's kind of like your neighbor doing a home invasion on you and massacring your family. You're obviously going to be kind of uneasy.

And then if you, Chank, come along and say, well, listen, we've got to be fair. You need to clear out of the place. You can't keep an eye on my fence anymore, even though I did this to you. I mean, I totally understand where the Israelis are coming from. Now, that being said, I think Trump is saying to the Israelis, pull back, let's have an international authority. Let's have a bunch of Muslims, but Muslims without the Hamas track record of bloody footprints running the place, I think that's about the best you can do. The Bible is to be believed.

I don't think that this problem has a permanent or ultimate solution, but that's not to say it can't have a temporary or penultimate solution. So I think, Shank, you and I are sort of arguing heatedly here, but we do agree that this plan is a legitimate basis for going forward. Okay. You know what? I'm going to take a slight win there, Chek, where there's broad agreement that this is a basis for potentially lasting peace.

I happen to agree with you, Chek. I don't see a way that this will ever work. as long as Israel remains in Gaza. So at some stage, they have to leave. And the Palestinian people have to have their own state. And you have to have a two-state solution. I see no other way this ever actually ends up in proper peace. But I do want to end on a, not just a moment of surprise agreement there,

a gear change. Chank, I want to get your reaction to this, because Dinesh posted on X in July and said, I think I look pretty good for 64, compare, say, with Chink Yuga, who is much younger than me, but looks old enough to be my dad. Oh my gosh. What a great line by me. Chink, Chink? I mean, obviously, the viewers will now be making their own minds up here. Out of interest, Chang. How old are you?

So I'm 55 and I'm pretty. All right, so you're nine years younger than Dinesh. Deneh, you think you look a lot younger than, you think the Czech is all. old enough to be a dad? I think this may be another point of another point of potential agreement between Chank and me as we close out here.

What's the point of agreement? What are you being, Jack? Well, that he's old enough to be your dad? Well, I'm obviously being facetious here, and I think Chank knows. Chank and I have debated before. I do

like Chank, and I do think I do respect his passion. So, Chank, take it as a joke because it was intended that way. Chank? Yeah. So it does, I was going to say, it does give you a sense of who's more attached to reality. But, okay, yes. No, my looks are not my number one trait.

Okay. You know what? But yes, as the best looking member of the three of us, I'll end things there. I'm 60 going on 40, so I'll take the win. Guys, thank you very much. A serious debate ending with a bit of levity. It's always my preferred word doing it. So thank you both very much indeed.

Today's show is sponsored by Oxford Natural, makers of the optimum day and optimum night all-natural supplements. Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results. Optimum day boosts your energy and supports weight loss throughout the day. Optimum night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep. They have countless success stories, including from some very familiar faces. England legend Michael Owen, we lost £40,000. AFTV's Robbie, we lost more than £100.

pounds. To watch their full stories and many more, scan the QR code on your screen or visit Oxfordnatural.com slash peers. And here's the best part. Use the code peers and get 70% off your first order. Get 70% off with the code peers. Coming up, we'll debate at the UK government's crackdown on pro-Palestine protests and the prime minister's claim that demonstrations on October the 7th were un-British. But first we turn to the Nobel Peace Prize, which the US president would dearly like to win. Judging by the number of people in the news media and politics who are lavishing him with praise today,

the idea isn't sounding anything like his fanciful as it did when he returned to the White House last year. The winner of the world's greatest honour for leaders who advanced peace, democracy and human rights will be announced tomorrow on whether he wins it this year or not. It'll be mentioned in every news report about it across the entire world. For him, that will be a win in himself.

Well, the Nobel Committee has been secretly deliberating nominations made globally from governments, judges, scholars and previous winners. The short list is always secret, many know the nominations made public by the people who made them. One eyebrow-raising name they will be discussing is Daniela Weiss, leader of the fundamentalist Israeli settler movement, Nihala, who joined me to make her final pitch on peace, democracy and human rights. Welcome back, Daniela Weiss, too uncensored.

First of all, you've been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. I have to say that given our last interview, this certainly was a surprise to me that you were being seen as somebody driving peace. But do you think that you are worthy of this honour? Well, it was a surprise for me too. The one who is most interested in it is my husband. He just wanted to know how much money it is

and if he has to pay tax. But if we put this aside, I don't think that. that prize is something that is more important than what I do all my life. I dedicate my life to establishing communities on the mountain ridge, and now I'm intended even now to build, to establish communities in the entire Gaza area. After the hostages are home, and I hope they will be with the families in the coming two, three days.

And then we will continue with our efforts to establish Jewish communities in Gaza. I think that when Jews, wherever Jews live, there is more chance for peace than in areas where there are no Jewish communities. So I didn't ask for the prize. But if you ask, if I compare what I do or what the Nakhala movement,

my movement does to other people or to other organizations, I think that we do a lot for peace in the Middle East and in the world. But as you know, since the start of this war two years ago, there has been aggressive expansion and settlements on the West Bank, for example, very aggressively fought for and land seized, and Palestinians displaced from their homes. I wouldn't categorize that as peaceful actions. In fact, it's quite the opposite, isn't it?

It is strange to call what Jews do in their homeland, in the land that was given to us by God, to call this grabbing by force. This is our land, this is our homeland. And to be specific, we care to establish communities on government property. So, I mean, the word that you use should be taken back by you.

Well, not really. Not really. Well, let me explain why I won't because the UK government sanctioned you in May of this year. In the sanctions, you were described as having been involved in threatening, perpetrating, promoting and supporting

acts of aggression and violence against Palestinian individuals. The vast majority of the international community, including the UK, considers these settlements illegal under international law. Last year, the UN's top court, the International Court of Justice, said Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories

is against international law. You know, when I last interview you... It's very strange. You didn't even use the term Palestinians when I spoke to you last time. Are you prepared to acknowledge that are Palestinians? First of all, I think the British government made a big mistake by ignoring

that the initial right of... to the land of Israel is the right of the Jews. Palestinians are an invention, and it was invented as a result of the big success of the ingathering of the Jews to the land of Israel after 2,000 years diaspora. When was Israel created? When was Israel created?

When was Israel created? Yes. We were created. We were created. in the year 1948 of the creation of the world. Just to be clear, let me say the number. The state of Israel has only existed since...

No, no, most people don't know. No, you missed me because it didn't let me finish. Let me finish. Ninety-48... One second. Ninety-48 for the creation of the world. It's interesting to see that when Abraham got the promise from God for the land of Israel,

the world existed 1948 and now in modern history in 1948 the modern Jewish state was established. That was the only historical point that I wanted to make. You didn't let me finish

the sentence so I had to raise my voice. I have no intention to have any fight with you I want to have a pleasant talk. I don't mind what kind of conversation we have but you say the Palestinians don't exist. I didn't get your comment. Your position is that the Palestinians don't exist. So what are they?

It's an invention. It's an invention that is secondary to the important fact that the Jewish nation, that the land of Israel belongs only to one nation. And this is the Jewish nation. The Palestinians are Arabs who try to compete with the big success of the Jews in the land of Israel. And actually, the word Palestine was used by Adrian, the Roman emperor. But the modern Palestinians are Arabs who want the same place that the Jews made a paradise of. They want to take it from us. And we won't let it happen. Actually, actually what's happening is you want to take their land, isn't it? Okay. So you make your position. I make wine. mine and the world will judge.

And I mean, you know, it's interesting that when there are historical facts that can be proven, and then you still, you cling to what? I really don't understand what history you represent. Does anybody doubt? Well, Ms. Weiss, taking your argument to its logical extension, then you believe that Israelis, and Jewish people should be entitled to all of the West Bank and all of Gaza. If it's your land, as you say...

Not just all of the West Bank. It's not bank. Bank is a narrow place. It's the major part of the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. So you would like, just to be clear, just to be clear, you would like all of the land between, from the river to the sea, to be Israeli Jewish, yeah? I want all the land from the Ephraites to the Nile. mean. Why hide the history? I'm curious what you intend to do with all the Palestinians who

currently live there. Those, you see, I have, I trust, in God I trust. And I live by faith, by Amunha and by the Bible. Yeah. What are you going to do with all the millions of Palestinians? What happens? I'm telling you, what Joshua, Joshua, the first settlers, he gave me. I don't need a history lesson. I'm just asking you, what do you intend to do with the millions of Palestinians who currently live in Gaza and the West Bank? Exactly what Joshua did.

Let me get straight to the point. Gold is up by around 40% this year. That's not speculation, that's reality. And as some of your savings aren't diversified into gold, you're missing the boat. Here's the facts. Inflation is still too high. The US dollar is still too weak.

And the government's debt is insurmountable. That's why central banks are, flock into gold and driving prices to record highs. It's not too late to get involved. Birch Gold Group will help you convert an existing IRA or a 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold. You don't pay a dime out of pocket. Just text peers, P-I-E-R-S, to 989-898 and claim your free info kit.

There's no obligation. There's useful information. The best indicator of the future is the past. And gold has been a safe haven for millennia. What other investment can say that? Text appears to 989-8-8-9-8 to claim your free info kit on gold. That's peers to 989-89-89-p Protect Your Future with Birch Gold. When Joshua came with us from Egypt, he had to cope with seven peoples who lived here.

Why God chose to bring us from Egypt to such a complicated place and not to Canada? I don't know. But the fact of the matter is that Joshua... said, those who accept our sovereignty, our government will stay. Those who fight will fight them. And those who do not accept our sovereignty, our government, they will go to other places. There is a clear formula. So I do not have to think.

I just go by the Bible. But again, to be clear, your clear formula, there's a legal term for it. It's called ethnic cleansing. What you're saying is if Palestinian people do not subscribe to the fact they should be ruled by Israel and have you as their sovereign state, then they have to leave, right? So six, seven million Palestinians would have to leave and go and live elsewhere. That's your position. Why do? I know from modern history that when there was an attempt to switch between Arabs who live in Judean and Samaria and those who live inside the official state of Israel,

Arabs did not want to live Israel because we are a successful country because it's good to live in Israel. So Arabs who accept Israel and who accept the state of Israel and who accept the government of Israel, they live here good life. So if a Palestinian agrees

that they should live under the sovereignty of Israel, they can stay, but if they don't, they have to leave. They stay. But if they don't, they have to leave? Sure. Great. So really what you're saying is you're a superior race who should be dominant over the Palestinian people. You know, it's a funny story. I want to be polite. I don't find any of this very funny.

What do you say? I don't think any of this is very funny. No, I'll tell you why I laugh. Because I can use the word superior. Like if the French is proud of being French, he's sweet. superior to the British. You know the famous, it's not famous, a joke, that the British say that the continent was, because of fog,

was cut off from England. England is the empire and the continent is secondary. So you see it in this superiority, what do you see in it? Each nation is proud of its heritage, of its culture, of its tradition. What's superior about it? Israel is our homeland. It's the homeland of the Jewish nation,

and we are proud of it. Those who do not accept it will not stay. God forbid, if you go to another country and you do not accept the rules of the other country, then you cannot stay. So what's superior in it? This is why I say it's funny. We all hear you loud in fear.

It's funny to distort such a basic thing. This is one of the more ludicrous pitches for a Nobel Peace. I think I've ever heard in my life, but I appreciate you joining me on Uncensored, Daniel Lo Weiss, thank you very much. You're most welcome. Well, returning to the controversy surrounding protests now,

and I'm joined in the studio by Zach Polanski, leader of the UK Green Party. I mean, just on that interview, Zach, your response to that. This is not an unusual thought process. There are hard-line members of this Israeli government, Smodrich, Ben-Givir and others, and increasingly, from his rhetoric,

Prime Minister Netanyahu, who probably be probably We don't necessarily disagree with what we've just heard, who do actually think this is all Israel's land, and they should be entitled to have it back. I thought it was an extraordinary interview, and to talk about from a river to the sea, but in terms of the genocide of the Palestinians, which she couldn't have been much clearer about.

You encouraged her to give more information than she backtracked a little bit, but the intent was very clear. It's not just senior ministers. The Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu talked about the Amalek, talking about the smiting of the Palestinians. I think the mask is well and truly off.

And, you know, what I would say to this is for that person, Daniela, advice, to be given a Nobel Peace Prize, shows the absolute incoherency around the world's response. To be clear, I don't think she's going to. And I think the process for nominations is quite flawed. It allows people like her to be nominated and then claim to be nominated. But there's another flip side to this, which has been the flip side from the start, which is that Hamas are also wedded to a... a genocidal onslaught against the Jewish people.

They've made no pretense of it. Well, they did on October the 7th, two years ago, in their marauding over the border with 1,200 people murdered, 250 plus kidnapped, you know, the devastation they wrought, the murder, the mayhem, and their vow to keep doing this. Do you share the same view about Hamas

as you do about those who would seek to expel all Palestinians? I condemn all the violence, including from a terrorist organization, And you accept that Hamas is a terror organisation. Of course, they kill civilians and that's literally the definition. I mean, the BBC don't call them terrorists. Well, the UN were very clear that Hamas are committing war crimes and Israel are committing war crimes, in fact, a genocide.

But our British government only talk about one of those, which is Hamas. We never hear them talk about. The war crimes are there active participants. But do you think the Israeli government is a terrorist organization? I think the Israeli army, certainly, in terms of should be prescribed, in terms of when we look at the behavior in the way they've behaved. There's a surgeon, a British surgeon, called Nick Maynard. He was in one of the hospital.

He said that on one day, you would see every casualty would come in with an ankle injury. The next an abdomen, the next day teenage boys would have wounds and their testicles. The only conclusion you could make is that the Israeli government were using these children as target practice. That's disgusting behavior. I think more widely, though, so there's only been five Jewish people in the last 100 years in Britain who have led a political party. I'm one of them. So I felt October 7th very deeply, as I know the entire Jewish community. In fact, the entire world did.

At the same time, that can never justify the response that we've seen from this as very legal. And in fact, just yesterday, I think we heard Andrew Neal say that Israel might be losing the peace. I think that's the end of the statement. He said a very good thing actually on camera. I read the transcript to it. And there's no doubt that polling yesterday I saw, I think Washington Post, but it showed that most Israelis now want this over. And most Israelis view of Netanyahu has plummeted now from his high, some several months into the war, which may be one of the reasons why he's being slow in getting across the line here.

It's interesting that you categorize Hamas as a terror group, only because in the UK the BBC do not yet, which I find enduringly baffling. But Palestine action is a complex one. So they're a British direct action group that was prescribed as a terrorist organization by the government in July, and to be clear, that means membership or support of the group

as a criminal offence, punishable over up to 14 years in prison. Now, this came after activists broken DeBrys Norton, the big RAF base in June and caused seven million pounds worth of damage by spray painting to RF Voyager planes. They claim responsibility. So there was a protest against the UK support of Israel's war in Gaza and as a consequence have been designated a terror organisation. More than 2,000 people have been arrested at demonstrations across the UK. You oppose this categorisation. Why? It's absolutely outrageous. We're seeing 89-year-olds with walking sticks and wheelchairs being arrested. The conversation we just had about whether... If they were carrying, just on that point,

if they were carrying Hamas flags, would you accept they should be arrested? Well, I think that's a completely separate question. Well, no, but it's a hypothetical, but I want to understand that it's not about whether they're 89 years old, is my point. It's what they're doing. Yeah, well, I don't think anyone should be carrying a Hamas flag. But if they were, if you're 89-year-old you're talking about was carrying a Hamas flag at a protest rally, would you accept that there was a right to arrest them? I think arresting anyone for carrying a flag is probably a silly way. So, in other words, the point I'm making is the age is kind of irrelevant. It's what they're doing.

Well, I think the real point here is that we need to see a free Palestine. We know that a lot of the population in this country, the majority of the population, are disgusted by what they're seeing, and they're disgusted that what they're seeing as a genocide. And rather than worrying about the flags of the words, I think the government need to worry about the bombs, the fighter jet components, they're selling, which are literally raining down the Palestinian people. And I think it's important. But if somebody who wants to be a British Prime Minister, I presume,

at some stage. Otherwise, why I go into politics? You'd like to lead the country? Well, at the moment, I'm focused on getting more MPs and challenging. Right, but you don't become a politician not to one day leave your country. I'm not going to encourage me to do a Joe Swinson on your show here. I can't even remember what Joe Swinson did. She said that she was going to be Prime Minister and promptly lost her seat.

Well, do you not want to be? At the moment, I'm really, really focused on the central mission, which is we just got 90,000 members in the Green Party. I am a completely straight talker. Do you want to be a Prime Minister or not? I want to make sure that there's a Green Prime Minister in the future. Whether that's me or not, that's going to be for the British public to this time. I'm trying to work out the headline is Zach Polanski,

I do not want to be a prime minister, or I do. That's definitely not the headline. The headline is right now I'm focused on growing those 90,000 members. We've got nearly 2 million votes. But ultimately, you want power, otherwise you can't do anything. Yes, I absolutely want to see a great government. Otherwise, you're just talking.

Right. So a politician obviously needs the mechanism of power, otherwise you can't do anything you're talking about. Totally, but at the same time... So, de facto, you want to be prime minister, don't you? Well, otherwise, how can you do anything? At the moment, I'm focused on me. Otherwise, why am I interviewing you?

Well, seriously. Why would I listen to a word you say... You only interview people who want to be prime minister at the next general election. If you genuinely don't aspire for power, you can't do any of the things you're talking about. I really want to see a green government. I really want to see a green prime minister.

Whether that person is me or not, I think it's a separate conversation. Why wouldn't it be you then? Because at the moment, we've only got four MPs and even as the leave of a party, I don't expect to be in power of the next election. Really? Yeah.

Why? I don't think there'll be a green government because I don't think there'll even be a Nigel Farage reform government. Singular lack of ambition. Well, no, because we have a first pass for posts. I have a postcard on my desk in my office. and it was given to me by my mother. And it's a hippopotamus flying with a flock of seagulls

and the headline ambition knows no bounds. Right. That's fueled me my entire life. Why would you be so lacking in ambition? I'm deep to ambitious. I want to make sure that the Green Party is in the balance of power. And the next election will be calling for a wealth tax, proportional representation, and action on the climate crisis.

I think that's pretty ambitious. Do you think the British people are going to be supporting and voting for somebody who thinks it's okay to go and smash up plane? at RAF bases, planes which are used by us to defend our country. I think the British police, British public, will absolutely support someone who says that we stand against this genocide and we stand against the non-violent rights protest.

Well, the UK government has not categorised it as genocide. And there's a reason for that, as you know, right? And the reason for that is that there has never been an established genocide by the international court ever. I mean, it's incoherent to not call this a genocide. Anyone can look on the phone or their TV screens. Rwanda, it was determined. was never actually determined to be a genocide.

The bar for a genocide is incredibly high. That's why I've resisted using that word. I prefer the word ethnic cleansing for what's going on. I think the word genocide gets tossed around. It was tossed around within days of October the 7th, which I found nonsensical. Well, let's start from first principles. If there's an ethnic cleansing going on,

should we not stop it? Yes. Well, I think then the word... I think words do matter. Well, of course they matter, and I think it's very clearly a genocide. And by the way, most genocide scholars... But why would you...

I do not think that actually breaking into bases illegally, causing millions of pounds with the damage to planes, is not an act of terror. Because there's a genocide going on, or as you call it, an ethnic cleansing. But that's what a bouserry. I'm talking about what they actually did. Well, no, I don't mean it's poor boutsary at all.

I think that's the British public saying, if our politicians are not going to listen to us, we're going to take non-violent direct actions. It wasn't non-violent. It was literally breaking up planes. I don't think the plane's going to cry from its hurt wounds. I think this is ultimately about making... Well, seven million pounds of the taxpayer money was taken

to repair the damage to these planes. What is that plane going to do, Pits? What is that plane going to do? All sorts of things. Possibly go and kill people, right? And drop bombs. Possibly defend the country against an attack, as it did in World War II,

as it might do if Vladimir Putin decides to fire some rocket cellway. The idea that the RAF only do things that you don't like or agree with is insulting to them. Well, I think you put words in my mouth. I think the RF do lots to defend our country. You said, what do they do? It's an RAF plane.

What do you think they do? Well, when we're supplying RIF planes to Gaza and share intelligence and fly over while we're massacring people. On average, a childhood, a classroom of children are dying every single day. I think it's about getting back to those first principles that all of this is happening. It's happening in our native. So you would ground all RAF planes now?

From being involved with the genocide, absolutely. Where would you allow them to be involved? Well, if they're defending our country, as you said, but as far as I know of the moment, would you allow them to be involved in any overseas military action? Well, I think there is a question about Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria, all places we've had. interventions in and all places, in fact, Iraq that you famously opposed, and quite rightly, too, where we've actually made things worse. So I'm not a pacifist.

I think there are times when we do need to get involved with war, where we do need to make sure we're defending our own country. But I don't see any of that applying in Palestine. You see, if I take your 89-year-old, I have a problem just with the free speech thing and the way it's going in this country, right? It seems to be ridiculous. When Graham Linehill was arrested at an airport by five armed police for, you know, jokes on X, it's ridiculous.

Well, I think they were armed because he was in an airport. I've heard that argument, actually, there are many unarmed cops at the airport. So they're not armed. But most cops in the airport are armed, right? Many are armed and many are not armed. So I think it's a bit of a fatuous. I just do you really think, though, they said, we've got Graham Linehan, let's go get some.

I don't know why they're arresting any British citizen for jokes on X. It's ridiculous. Well, I think talking about punching someone in the balls. It was an obvious joke, wasn't it? I don't think it's funny, though. You've been to a Ricky Jave show. Okay, let's start with this. Well, hang on, hang on, hang on.

Hey crime against LGBT people. Have you been to a Riquette? Have you been to a Riquette? in the last five years. So Ricky Jervais should be arrested? I would rather pinch my eyes out than go to see a Ricky Jervais show. But that's fine.

That's fine. Ricky Jervase is entitled to go make those jokes. He's actually hilarious. Jokes and inciting violence are very different things. And I think we've got to have a line. You'd agree there's a line, right? I think it was obvious the joke he was making. What, punching people in the boys?

Well, let me ask you, the build-up to that joke was he does not believe that biological men should be using women's spaces. Do you? I think the phrase biological men needs unpacking them. Not really. You're either born. male or female? Yes, and then lots of people transition and lots of people identify as other things.

Well, yeah, but this idea you can become a woman. You want to talk about free speech, but what about tolerance? You know, for a long time. But what about women's rights? Well, women's rights are totally fine? In fact, well... They're not, though, are they've come under massive attacks. I would say they're totally fine. Mainly... You didn't let me finish the sentence.

Yeah. They're totally fine in reference to trans people. They're totally fine. The problems that women have, gynecology appointments that they need, the gender pay gap, yeah, violence against women and girls. Right. domestic abuse, these are the problems. These aren't the problems of trans people.

But do you think trans athletes should be in women's sport? Yes. What? If a trans athlete is a woman, then of course they should be in a sport that they're participating. But they're not a woman, they're a man. Well, I think that's deeply offensive. They're born biological men. They can call themselves trans women.

I'll respect them if they want to be called she or he. That's fine. I don't care. But what you can't have is biological males competing in women's sport. Everybody with half a brain knows this is completely outrageous, wrong, dangerous, as we saw in the Paris Olympics, where you had a boxer quitting after 40 seconds because she'd never been hit that hard in the ring by somebody turns out as male chromosomes. And you want to be Prime Minister of his country? Well, maybe you

don't. We're not sure. But either way, you want to lead a party in this country that thinks that's fine. I'm glad that you think this is the number one issue when I actually want to talk about the cost of living crisis and inequality. I think it's actually much more important issue. Let's talk about sports. Essentially, there is a whole spectrum of testosterone and estrogen, which you have in terms of people who are biological sex. You're a man or woman and men should not... I think that's the simplistic, stupid argument. Men who don't actually look at the information...

Men who are born biological... If you're born a biological man and you want to identify as a trans woman, you'll have my full respect. You can have exactly the same rights. You don't sound very respectful. No, no, I do. It sounds very insulting.

No, no. I've always said, I want them to have the exact same rights to fairness, equality and safety as me and you. Do you know how many people in the country care about this when you poll them? Less than 1%. It's interesting than we talk about it. So much. What's going on in there?

Could it be that we're trying to distract from the wealth of multimillionaires and billionaires, the fact that people are homeless, the fact that people are struggling on the street by talking about trans people? And there, more victims of inequality itself. We should be talking about the inequality and not this culture war, bollips. You might think defending women's rights is bollocks.

No, defending women's rights is really, really important, but we're not defending women's rights right now. You don't want to defend them. We're in this silly culture war discussion that isn't defending women's rights. You want to trash women's rights. who are institutionally misogynistic and sexist. Let's have a conversation about that. That's about women's rights.

That's not about trans rights. Okay. But actually, you want to trample on women's rights in sport? No, I don't know at all. You said you're fine with biological men. You're beating in women's court. Because a trans woman is a woman, so I'm not trampling on their rights.

What I'm doing is defending their rights. But the UK Supreme Court has established that a male is a male and a female is a female. Are they wrong? Is they wrong? Their job is to look at what's been legislated for. The legislation is wrong, and we should get better parliamentarians

who actually stand. by trans people. Do you think a woman... Recognise their a marginalised group in this country. They were being bullied by people like you peers. I'm not a bully. I stand up... You should know better than to target these people rather than targeting the actual problem in the country. Can a woman have a penis?

Yes. It's going to take them a long time on the National Health Service to get rid of it. All right. I think we'll leave it on a woman can have a penis. I think you're lacking nuance and complexity about a pretty complicated conversation. Not really. You couldn't have been clearer. I'm clear because actually when you want to look at the science...

You were crystal clear. ask you a simple question. But you're laughing at it, which I think the means trans people. I can think it's absolutely ridiculous response. What if you're against trans people? Why are you punching down? Why are you not saying the real problem in this country? I've already told you that I think trans people...

You sound like you have a huge problem with trans people. No, no. It sounds to me like you don't understand what a woman is. I think it's a huge problem for someone leading a party in this country. A woman is a gender. Sorry? You said what's a woman? No, a woman is a biological female.

No, no. Gender is a spectrum. It's not complicated. A woman is a biological spectrum. Is it that binary to me? Do you think people are born male? of female? Not necessarily. Oh, for God's sake. I think it's more complicated

than that. It's not more complicated than that if you're a TV show host who wants to make it binary and ridiculous. Zach, you're going to have to work this stuff around me. Let me see. Let me see. You know when I asked you if you want to be... When I asked you if you want to be Prime Minister, there is not a cat in hell's chance if you ever becoming Prime Minister, if you don't know what a woman is. Well, you'll see us going up in the polls. We're the most favourable party in London right now,

so let's see about it. Why do you start going out tomorrow with your big campaign that women can have penises? I'm going to be going out tomorrow with my big campaign about inequality in this country between the multimillionaires and billionaires and working class communities who are really suffering. Because you're trying to distract from inequality. And actually, I think those people don't care about the conversation with her. They just care about the fact they want to put food on the table, you are a fast emerging, and that trans people as well.

You are a fast emerging politician in this country. I'm perfectly entitled to ask you what you believe. You're absolutely entitled. And you've been crystal clear what you believe. of these questions rather than tackling the inequality in the fact we're not funding a national health service. The fact we've got schools crumbling. The fact that people are struggling to put food on the table. That's what people are worried about, not trans people. Okay. Actually, they're worried about women's rights.

I'm worried about women's rights too. But as I said, I offered several times to talk about the police force. I offered several times to talk about the inequality payout. You want to talk about other things. I get that. I want to talk about women's rights. Let's have a conversation about women's rights. But let's not talk about trans women specifically. You think women have penises? You said to me, can a woman have a penis? And I said yes.

So if they're transitioning, for instance, and of course a woman can have a penis. It's complete bullshit. When were you a doctor or an expert in women's rights or sites? The UK Supreme Court has made it crystal clear of what a woman is. But that's not the Supreme Court's job. The Supreme Court's job is to look at legislation and then make a legal ruling.

Okay. So you know more than the Supreme Court? Well, yes, actually. In this case, yes, I do. Zach Pulaski. It's good to meet you. Lovely to meet you, Piers. That was a favourite.

And best of luck on your campaign to become British Prime Minister. If you need a ball of your lesson, You can find me after the show. I definitely won't be coming to you, Tess. Excellent. Well, joining me in the studio to debate the issue of protests and free speech is Israeli-American journalist, Emily Schrader, and the president of the Australian-Palestine Advocacy Network, NASA Mashni. Well, welcome to both of you.

Well, Emily, you were listening to that. This could be the future of the UK. Well, you know, I'm not going to comment on all of the women's issues and the internal issues because I'm not British, but I will say that I find it very disappointing to hear anyone who is advocating. for a lack of respect for the rule of law. Whether someone is 89 years old or 19 years old, if they're breaking what the law is, that needs to be taken seriously.

And that is the job of the police. It's not their job to legislate or make the laws. It's their job to enforce the laws. And I think that needs to be respected. And it's very problematic the actions of the Palestine Action Group and the fact that they don't have any respect for British law or even for the REF. Is it terrorism, though, to spray on a plane

if you think that plane should not be used in Gaza? Is that an act of terrorism? or is an act of vandalism by people, a peaceful act of vandalism, albeit one that causes material damage? I don't think you could say that it's a peaceful action at all. I think it's clearly illegal, and it is vandalism. It's not up to me to decide as someone who isn't British, who isn't a legislator here, whether or not that's terrorism.

Terrorism is politically motivated violence against civilians traditionally. But that's not a plane. Correct, correct, which is why I personally would categorize it as vandalism, but that has not been made my decision by the UK government. But the point being, as Zach Polanski pointed out, is if you've got 89-year-old people who are supporting this group being arrested for supporting a terrorist group, does that sit easily with you? Well, I don't think it's up to me to decide. It's up to the police. And if that's what the government has determined as a terrorist group, then it is up to the police to enforce that law. Whether or not they should be designated as a terror group specifically, that's an entirely different issue. It doesn't matter whether the person is 89 years old or 19, as I said, or even if they pose an actual threat, it matters whether or not.

or not they're a member of a designated terror group. OK. Now, so I'm going to play a clip. This is of an incident in New York yesterday, I believe, where it's pretty clear what these protesters were saying. So let's take a look. We must show up. We must show up.

Brokier than we did the 1st October 7. Louder than we did the 1st October 7. Louder than we did the 1st October 7. We make it clear that we are not going anywhere. We will keep fighting. We will keep fighting. Until Palestine is free. Until Palestine is free.

The problem with that, Nazar, is that that is not a peace. I don't call that a peaceful protest. When you have people shouting, we're going to do it louder than October the 7th. What else can that mean other than an incitement to violence? Look, I can't speak to the intention of the speakers or what they meant or what anybody's articulation on. But this is what the whole protest thing

about is that are they inciting violence, are they supporting Hamas, are they, or are they just peacefully protesting against what they see as a genocide of guards and people? This is why it really matters. When I see a clip like that in America yesterday, those, that speaker whipped up crowd to say we should do things louder the media on October the 7th. That to me is a clear incitement to terrorism. Well, that's in the United States. We're in Britain, I'm an Australian. But the same principle really applies around the world. Well, I don't know, peers. I think we need to look at what happened on October 7,

but also what happened on October 6, and take all of the context into situations. What we are often framed is that this all happened, that there's a war between Israel and Hamas. Israel's at war with Palestinians. When a settler colony comes in and needs to extinguish, to eradicate the indigenous people, they will do what they did in the country

I was born in Australia, in North America, New Zealand, etc. Israel failed. The Zionist experiment failed in ethnically cleansing. and extinguishing all of the Palestinians. And the Palestinians for an oppressor, pieces when the oppressed isn't resisting, when they're silent. Would you categorize October the 7th as an act of resistance? I would classify Palestinians having a right to fight against their oppressors as legitimate.

That wasn't the question. Was what happened on October the 7th two years ago an active resistance? Palestinians rose up and resisted Israeli oppression. But this is my problem. It wasn't an active resistance. It was an act of despicable terrorism. So I can absolutely condemn. Babies being kidnapped.

Holocaust victims being kidnapped. People being tortured, set on fire. Homes set up a place. You know, we live in this world where nothing can justify October 7, yet October 7 satisfies everything. You did justify. 731 days. You did just justify.

731 days where a baby has been killed every hour. I understand. Israel has been very critical of the Israeli government. You haven't been. But the reason. Well, I have been, you haven't been listening. But the reason early on, I was very emphatic that Israel had a right to defend itself.

And the reason... Israel doesn't have a right to defend it. Well, of course it did. No, of course he did. But the reason... Why does it? Okay, if you don't think they do, that's fine. But we'll come to that.

International law is very explicit. It says a country cannot or doesn't have the right to imprison people to impose a pardon. Sorry, if the country has 1,200 people of its murder, has a right to defend itself. Against the people that it occupies? Right. But you've already framed it as resistance.

And my point of view is, if you frame an act... And I'm against the killing of civilians. If you frame an act... You're not, though. You call it an act of resistance. No, the breaking out of Gaza, the fight of Palestinians... They killed 1,200 people. Absolutely.

They're a horror of the death of every innocent person. They kidnap babies and grandmothers. How's that resistance? Israeli ministers are protests that have protests in front of prisons for the right to rape Palestinian prisoners, yeah? Sorry, I'm not talking about October the 7th. No, I'm talking about the days since October 7th. Why would you call that resistance?

Do you expect the world wants to see a situation of October 6 again? I expect any civilised, decent person with an ounce of humanity to categorise what happened on October 7th as a despicable act of terrorism by 3,000 terrorists who poured over a border, who attacked a music festival, killing hundreds of young people, kidnapping them. I've been unequivocal time after time condemning the killing of civilians. You just called an active resistance. Why would you condemn an act of resistance?

Pierce, I am very clear that human beings have a right to live, that killing innocent civilians in the heart. You just called it. You just called it. You just called it active. You just called it. A masked gunman, a Hamas operative. You literally called it five minutes ago, an act of resistance.

Palestinians will resist whether that is the boycott. Why would you condemn an act of resistance? Yes, I'm condemning the killing of civilians. and I will continue to do that. Palestinians will resist their occupies. Was it an act of terrorism or was it an act of resistance? Israeli terrorism has existed yet, absolutely, since Belfort and... From Hamas that day?

What? Was it an act of terrorism? I'm not going to call it an act of terrorism now. What would you call it? I'm going to call it part of the Palestinian resistance. Right, so therefore legitimate. Well, Palestinians have a right to fight for freedom. Right, so why are you just pretending you care about the deaths of civilians?

Of course I care. I mean, why are you saying that I'm in humane? They have a right to commit that act of resistance. I want to know why nobody cared about Palestinians on October 6. A lot of people cared about. A lot of people cared about Palestine. Like Daniela Weiss. They don't care about us.

Israel's got a Palestinian problem. I'm sure she doesn't. And there are many like her. But I certainly did. Well, perhaps you. Let me bring in Emily. I don't believe that Emily did. Emily, I'm pretty shocked by that.

I think that to be the day after the second anniversary and to categorize what happened that day as an act of rightful resistance, I think is actually tantam out to supporting terrorism? I agree with you. I obviously think that that's extremely problematic. I don't see how you can say that kidnapping and killing Kfir and Ariel Bebas or maintaining the kidnapping of hostages for over 730 days, 48 of which still remain in the Gaza Strip. I don't know how you can call that resistance because we're talking about civilians who were

murdered and kidnapped. But I actually want to go back to the protest issue. I do not think that that speech itself is terrorism. I was actually at the... protest yesterday as well here in the UK. And I heard very similar rhetoric. I do think, however, it's incitement to terrorism. And when you hear people chanting to globalize the intifada... Obviously, they're not committing an act, but it's encouraging them to think this is an act of resistance. Right. And unfortunately, what we see as the byproduct of that, whether that's what the speaker's intentions are or not, is that people do take matters into their own hands. They do engage in acts of violence against Jewish individuals, just like we saw with the Manchester attack, just

a few days ago. And that's part of the very concerning part about the dramatization of language when it comes to what's happening in this conflict. I think it's been really irresponsible. And I say this as someone who has plenty of condemnation for the Israeli government. I do not support the comments of Danielle LeVice at all. I do care about the future of Palestinians. I did on October 6th as well. And I find it extremely concerning that people will continue to justify the dehumanization of Israelis, Israeli civilians. I want to emphasize, who are still being held captive by Hamas in the Gaza Strip. And I also want to add one more thing, which is that Hamas is violently oppressing Palestinians as well,

and has for many, many years. There is nothing pro-Palestinian about Hamas as an organization, and they are an organization that needs to be destroyed for the well-being of Israelis and Palestinians alike. And the way to destroy that is to destroy every single school, hospital, the IVF clinic, 4,000 unborn embryos, to imprison 10,000 people, to hostage two million Palestinians. Every Palestinian is hostage to Israeli apartheid. My father is buried in land that is strange to him, not next to his grandfather, grandmother, great-grandmother, great-grandfather. That's apartheid.

That's genocide. That's Israel. And the world has seen it. And so you're seeing today... You can throw out all of the buzzwords you want. It doesn't make it the reality. What you're seeing, Emily, today is that the world has seen what Zionism is. What we have known of topism is.

What they have seen is a violent... Which, by the way, is not unlike what Daniela said, mutually exclusive. violent, settler, racist, colonial movement that is predicated. Vanessa, NASA, you sent you... NASA, you gave us a picture. You gave us a picture of you with this performer, Bob Villas. Bob, yeah.

You like him, yeah? Well, he's a person fighting against power, fighting for justice, fighting for humanity. I'm a fan of... And he also, as we know, sang this. And death to every single IDF soldier out there as an agent of terror for Israel. Death to that.

Death to the IDF, you think that's acceptable to sing that in the UK? You know, if you have a look at what the IDF is doing today. Yeah, if you have a look... My question is, is that acceptable? Do you agree with him? Look, I'm not going to be saying those words, but I'm not going to be denying... So you condemn...

I'm not condemning anything, Piers. What I want to condemn is Israel's actions. You don't condemn anything, do you? Western support. Western support for a government that is killing, maiming, destroying humanity. But why should anybody... With respect, NASA, with respect to...

Why should anyone condemn Israel for their response, given that you refused to condemn what Hamas did on October the 7th? I condemn the killing of innocent civilians. But you didn't, though. You said the whole thing was rightful resistance. I said I condemned. No, no, you began to equivocate when I took you on. No, I don't know not equivocate.

But then you repeated, to me, it's a rightful act of resistance. People are allowed to resist their occupiers. It's international law. Then you're endorsing what happened. Respectfully, respectfully. Respectfully. Was Hindrajab, a terrorist, 355? In Najab was never a target.

355 bullets. There's a difference between legitimately declared war, which is justified, and civilian casualties in war, and walking into someone's house on a Jewish holiday and kidnapping and murdering children. There is a difference. That is not what the IDF is doing. Whatever mistakes the IDF has made, that is not what the IDF is doing. Emily, the world has seen your lines.

You can shout over me. You can use all of everything. My point is this. I've been really critical to the Israeli government this year, right, increasingly. And rightly so. I think most people, actually, I've spoken to, Israelis, Jews, Muslims, everyone I've talked to it. There's a general consensus emerging from those who I would say are not on the extremities of this, right? Who say that Israel was always going to defend itself aggressively from what happened. You know, it was the equivalent of 40,000 Americans being killed in one day.

Of course they were going to respond with great force. Hamas knew that. They may well have sucked Israel into a trap. It may well be what the narrative eventually. turns out to be. And they had a woeful disregard for the lives of their own Palestinian people. I don't think they cared. And the same way, I don't think Daniela Weiss cares, right? But the scale of what has been happening since, particularly this year, I think, has been indefensible. And that is why a rising number of Israelis no longer support what is happening and want this war over and what Netanyahu gone. And I think that that is what most rational-minded people think looking at this.

this peace plan finally seems to me detailed it seems to me sensible the Palestinian people get to stay Hamas no longer have any form of government they get to demilitarize on the on the face of it yes it's going to be tweaked

but the Arab country leader have been responding very favourably the Americans are behind this Israel have accepted it what is wrong with it well firstly I want the killing to stop let's be absolutely clear I want the hostages to go home

I want Palestinian hostages to be released. What we have, when the world has abandoned the Palestinians yet again, we are being forced to negotiate with our genocide ears while they genocide us. This has to be removed from this situation where we have a master servant, where the boot of oppression, the boot of genocide, and we're having to try and speak to it from on the ground. It needs to go to an international formula like the United Nations. Imagine Tony Blair and Trump get to decide how Gaza gets rebuilt,

how Palestinians are compensated, what sort of accountability mechanisms? It's absolutely absurd. I'm not sure why you want Palestinians to live under Hamas, which, by the way, you mentioned before that Israel is starving Palestinians. In fact, Hamas has been using food as a weapon against their own people. They have been stealing aid. They have been selling it at triple the prices. Your former defense minister cut off the food, gas, electricity and Edison,

there is no limitation on aid right now. I think that anyone who is against ending the war right now is problematic to begin with. Why do you want more power? Palestinians to die. Why do you want this war to continue? You don't make peace with your friends. Palestinians want liberation. That is what we're talking about doing right now. Why would you want a war to continue, which you are claiming is a genocide? You want more Palestinians to die? I said. We want the hostages to come home. That is our number one priority when it comes to this.

Your number one priority is the vanquishing of the Palestinian people, which is what, you've destroyed 91% of the house. Israel wants to destroy every hospital. Israel wants to implement this deal. You've killed a child eight hour. Why haven't Hamas? That's true. All that is true. Why has Hamas not released the hostages? Hamas offered the hostages on October 8. Why haven't just released them? Because they know what's happening. What's going to happen? I imagine what they've seen. But Israel has said this war ends when they release the hostages. They were offered the hostages in October 8 and October 9. But why haven't Hamas just released them?

That's the only bargaining chip they have. I imagine. I imagine if I was in a negotiation. So those lines are a bargaining chip. In a negotiation, we're just talking about why wouldn't I want to end the war. knowing what Israel will do, what everybody has seen today, what the world has risen up. And we used to say in our thousands and our millions, we're all Palestinians. We say in our millions and our billions, the whole world has risen up

because they've seen the ideology that Emily believes in, this racist ideology that wants to kill every Palestinian and to take all the land. And according to Daniel We've also... We've also... So that's Jordan, Saudi Arabia. On this show, explicitly said I disagree with.

She doesn't agree with. She also doesn't think Palestinians have a right to a country and what might that look like. Well, I do. Do I get to go home? That's not true. Do I get to go home? If they have a leadership that is willing to make peace with Israel, go for it.

All right. I'm going to leave you there. Can I come home? If there is a Palestinian state, you can go to Palestinian state. No, no. I'm from Jerusalem. I'm from Jerusalem. If that was a part of Palestine, yes, but it is not.

This needs to be decided with a leadership that can actually maintain peace agreement with the state of Israel. Okay. I can't go home. I can go home to Jerusalem. Thank you both. Where my grandfather is buried. I have to leave it there.

deny me that right. That's Zionism, ladies and gentlemen. No, Zionism is the right to self-determination from the Jewish people, which is not mutually exclusive. Denying the right of indigenous people to return home. All right, I've got to leave you there. Thank you both very much. Thank you. Pierce Morgan Unsencent is proudly independent. The only boss around

here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensit 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. Independent uncensored media has never been more critical,

and we couldn't do it without you.