UROS751

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grbVulyQ3qk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_NCvFJApeM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIHtjH6UkBk

https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/1805894419515576712 🇺🇦‼️🚨 "We have 80% sick people in the storm troopers, elderly people. HIV, tuberculosis nobody give a f***. They're just throwing them into busses and straight to the front." -- Complains military medic from "Azov" Olena Malok

https://x.com/Resist_05/status/1806223412744089788 Why are they working for Israel? Are we crazy? Are we out of our minds? How are we letting this happen? How are we letting it happen? Our money, our representatives, our military, rather than stopping it, is not only allowing it to happen, but is participating willfully in this horrifically, like I said, sadistic form of genocide. And like Zarifa was saying, the genocide didn't start after October 7th. And the whole conversation about genocide is really quite interesting. Genocide is a crime. It's a well-defined crime. It was defined in 1949 to a large degree as a result of the genocide of the Jews in Europe by the Nazis. It's a well-defined crime. You can read it. It's not a question of opinion. It's not a question of do we feel about it? Do we feel it's genocidal? Do we not? But this is how the conversation is. Do you feel like it might be genocide? Is your opinion that it might be genocide? Read the law. It's very clear. It fits. It's genocide. They are murdering civilians for almost eight decades in a systemic way. Systematic erasure of a nation. Systematic erasure of a culture, a history, and a country. That is genocide. There's no opinion here. The law is clear. The evidence is clear. And yet, the money is coming from us. The weapons are coming from us. The support is coming from us. And rather than condemning that, we're asked to condemn the Palestinians, the victims of this. Not the Palestinians are victims. I don't like to use that term. Palestinians are heroes. They're not victims. But who is it that we're trying to, that we're supposed to condemn and why? And there's a lot of similarities to what we're seeing now on campuses. You see the politicians come out. You see the university administrators and presidents come out. Why are they not standing with the students? Why are they not standing with the students? How can they justify to themselves not standing with the students? The students are demanding that their campuses divest from that war machine, that genocide machine. And who are the administrators and the politicians condemning? The students. Who are the police beating up? The students. Who's being arrested and punished and suspended? The students. Once again, we're out of our minds and we're allowing this to happen? These administrators have a right to suspend these heroes? These encampments will be remembered as one of the greatest moments in the history of these campuses. Your names will be remembered. They'll be put on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT7HEIc5RoM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghP7kImI9WM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaNtyl22f6M

Bassem Youssef is a beautiful guy and a great comedian. I don't like just describing him as the Egyptian-born Jon Stewart. He's a lot more than that, because he has given millions of Americans perspective on the realities of the Middle East they didn't have before. Now, I'm not saying you're going to agree with everything, but that's not the point. The point is, is it food for thought? And the answer is absolutely yes. It's great to have you back. You've been touring all over the world. You just gave me a little tasty bit in the commercial that you are going to tape your own special, and then we'll see where it lands. Yes, hopefully in October, in the winter, in Los Angeles, 4th of October. Now, when they were chasing you, essentially, out of Egypt, did you ever imagine that, living your dream of testing power through humor and human dynamics, that you would be, not just in America, not just around the world, telling jokes, but that you'd be doing a special, and maybe, you know, who knows next? No, I never thought about it, but it's funny that you mention Egypt, because I have to say that watching the news in America in the last few months kind of gave me a sense of nostalgia. I kind of like said, oh my God, I feel like home. In a bad way. No, no, in a funny way, because when I was in Egypt, I was accused of all kinds of things. I was accused of being an American operative. Actually, one of the rumors that was written about me in the newspapers was that I am a CIA operative that was recruited by Jon Stewart in order to bring down the country through satire and comedy. And the thing is, there was absolutely nothing that supports that. And there are a lot of my friends who know me all my life who actually stop talking to me because they believe that kind of propaganda. And then I come here, and I see the same. All kinds of conspiracy and whatever, you know, like what happened in the colleges. I mean, I watch, like you said, the college students were funded by Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood? Yes. Wow. Do you know what that means to me? Because in Egypt, it makes sense that America can infiltrate Egypt and fund people inside. But when you tell me that Hamas is funding people inside America, this is like the Amish hacking NASA. It's like the Wi-Fi in the Hamas tunnels really worked that well. How does this work here? And how people, it's so easy to accuse people of being funded. But is there any evidence of this? Has the CIA, the Treasury, the NSA actually had reports about that? The good bad news is, if, it wouldn't be the CIA, but if a government agency came out and said, we know this, people wouldn't believe it. I know, but how come those people, and you're talking about treason, espionage, training camps. I don't know where Hamas were training these college people. No, I don't think that's the suggestion. I think the suggestion is, that is a concern of transparency, is that you have petrodollars finding their ways. And when I say petrodollars, I mean oil-producing states, whether it's Saudi. Our ally? Are they? Or is it a convenient relationship where you're being friends with a snake? So Saudis and Qatar who have the biggest American-U.S. And protests? What do they get for that money? Do they help fund the organizations? Is that bad if they do? These are provocative questions that we've never dealt with. But it's interesting when we talk about funding and how we talk about how students who, what they have showed up for the funding is like a couple of tens from Amazon. And we don't talk about the funding of AIPAC. You just mentioned the opening. Isn't that more important that a foreign nation is buying our election? Isn't that more important? Isn't that like, how come not every single news show... I think it's the same question. Because I don't think AIPAC is buying your elections, any more than any other dark money gets to fund elections and have influence. Money is everything in our politics. How many foreign countries are influencing the American election like Israel affecting ours? I haven't heard of the Qatar or the Saudi lobby putting $15 million in a local district in New York just because a guy said that he doesn't agree with the... No, he said Israel is committing genocide. So? What do you mean so? I know that one of his things that he denied, but in a country where... Well, that matters too, by the way. When you deny reality, you create an impression of Jewish people, not just Israel, as liars and... So don't conflate both of them. And second, in a country where you're allowed to deny the existence of God, you're even allowed to deny that Biden won the election. While AIPAC has actually financed more than 104 Republican candidates who did not sign the ratification of the 2020 elections. And that is fine. So basically AIPAC is allowed to allow people who deny that Biden won the elections. But we have a problem. We pay $15 million because someone denied the point of view of Israel. I'm someone who denies a lot of this, because many of the things that Israel claimed that happened came from organizations like Zaka and Hezbollah United, who also talked about babies in an oven, who talked about babies being on laundry. And you know what drives me crazy, Chris? That even the Israeli media, they have refuted these lies many, many, many times. And that's why I believe in you. I believe that you're an independent journalist and you can do something that not a single American news person has done. Just translate what is being said in the Israeli media. The Israeli media said that there was no babies in an oven. Many of the sexual harassment, sexual violence did not happen. Many of the women that was mentioned in the Sherzod Samberg movie and the New York Times article were actually found to be true. Even there was like families of women that said they were being raped and that didn't happen. So you have Israelis saying, basically, this is the biggest bro code I've ever seen in my life. No bro code when you lie for your bro. You're lying for your bro and your bro doesn't want you to lie because he said that didn't happen. So I don't know why is the American media being more royal than the king? Why they're not actually telling you what the Israeli media is saying about October 7th? I think it gets complicated in this way. Were people sexually abused, killed, and a whole host of other things on October 7th? Yes, full stop. So when you start slicing into, yeah, but this one didn't happen, even if this does and did, even if they did this, this and this, they didn't do that, it starts to get into comparing the horrible in a way that distorts the reality. The reality is October 7th happened and it was terrible. That should be enough. To do an accounting of it, I think, is counterproductive. Does it matter that there weren't the dead babies and the headless babies? Yes, which is why I brought it up so much. Because the decapitated babies. That was a very powerful image. All of that was actually made in order to have people turning a blind eye for the genocide. And if you don't like the word genocide, how about too much killing? Here's why I don't like genocide. We both know if the Israeli army wanted to kill as many people as they can, there'd be no people left there. Let's do that. One of the things that I, the exercise that I try to do is I try to see things from Israeli point of view. I understand that there's a lot of anti-Semitism. There's a lot of hatred. A lot of people hate us. And that's why we need to kill as many Hamas people and we need to eradicate Hamas. There's a collateral damage. We can't do anything about it. But I don't think that's enough. Because when all of this, like so far, 35,000, 40,000 people killed, those people have families, those have children that will be alive, right? Those people, do you think they will love Israel anymore? No. So they would be hating Israel. So what should we do? Israel should kill those people too. And when Israel is comfortable enough with killing as many people and taking as much land, and it's safe, you'll have another problem. You'll have all of the Arab countries and the Muslim countries around, do you think they will love Israel? No. So you eliminate and kill those countries too. And then by the time that Israel is comfortable enough with as much land and as much people that they kill, you'll have a bigger problem. You'll have all of these white people in colleges that are against Israel. That's a lot of anti-Semitism. So they go and they kill. And the thing is, we will only be safe if Israel is safe, and Israel will be safe if all of us are dead. But that's never happened. If anything, a history that Israel is struggling with right now in its relationship with the United States is that the United States has consistently stopped them from fighting back against their enemies. How can you say that they stopped them? They stopped them by sending them $26 billion. Well, right now they're slowing down. They're slowing down weapons. Awesome. Let's talk about the United States for a second. Yes, please. If you had American hostages, the way Hamas has the hostages, that they won't give back, even though that would be their best leverage move. Give the hostages back. Any killing that happens after that, you obviously have high ground. And say, why are you doing this? We gave you the people back. Now it must just be malice. But they're not giving them back. If they were all Americans, that place would be razed. It would be razed. I love that. Yes. Much more than Israel. And I tell all of the kids watching this. Much more than Israel. Whenever you are faced with this dilemma, if you have a moral dilemma, always ask yourself, what would America do? It's like taking inclusion tips from the Inquisition. Yes, but that is the state of play. And look, it's not like we're dealing with the Middle East with the most genteel people. I could make a very easy argument that I'm sure you would accept that your home country, Egypt, their border wall with Rafa and Palestine does not speak to brotherhood. You want them out? You don't want more to get in? You don't want more in Egypt? You have not treated the ones that are there as well? Let's talk about the secondary effect of the killing. I told you this example before. This is like you going in, killing someone in Fifth Avenue, and you're angry at the neighbors for not burying the corpse. Why don't you stop the killing? That is the question. Explain to me, like a five-year-old who hasn't lost his limbs in Gaza yet. Explain to me how... Don't make me laugh. I'll tell you. I will give you a five-year-old analogy. Please. Palestine is like a fishbowl. A fishbowl. It's a lot of fish. It's condensed. There's like so much fish in so little air. And Israel is like the person over that bowl and just like crashing the bowl, killing or taking the fish any time. Because you talk about Palestinian hostages. Before October 7th, 5,000 Palestinian hostages in the prison of Israel. Now there's 12,000. Every single day, Israel can go in any house, take the house, burn the land, burn the olive oil, take the people, put them in that hostage. So Israel can do anything with this fishbowl. At a certain point, Israel is just hovering over that fishbowl. And then at one moment, a fish, crazy enough, suicidal enough, will jump from the bowl through the air, bite the pinky of Israel. And Israel's like, oh my God, that bitch bit my pinky. My hand was not even in the bowl. And then she goes and they destroy the bowl. And all you can see is Israel's pinky. You know what I call this? Tunnel vision. Yes, I love the analogy because the pinky, I get it. The pinky is not a good analogy to October 7th. Really? And no, it's not just the pinky. How many civilians were killed on October 7th? For Israel, let's say it was 800. 373. Let's say it was, they say it was 1,400. Then the final was 1,129. 373 of them were civilians. 759, let's say 56 of them were military and police. So 370. Why do you think the number came down from 1,400 to 1,129? Because it was an accident. No. Why? According to Israeli officials, because so many bodies were so burned and so stuck together, they could not distinguish the Hamas fighters from the Israeli hostages. Right? So that much fire, that burns the body that much. Do you think people with machine guns or motorcycles have that kind of fight? No, that was the firepower of tanks and Apache. And according to Israeli witnesses, Israel was a lot, according to Hannibal Directive, if people would like to actually look that up, Israel actually killed many of those hostages on the way out. As a matter of fact, one of the soldiers said, I saw a car running back to the borders, and I know that there were hostages. So I thought of killing everybody instead of taking them hostage. And that is so effective. You understand what the soldier said? He was like, OK, if they are dead, there's no hostages. There's no rescue effort. So now I have saved one shift. This is amazing. Basically, their idea of not negotiating with terrorists is not having anything to negotiate about. And those pictures of cars that were incinerated and burned to a crisp, this is not the firepower. And this is another thing that I want you to do, Chris, because nobody talks about this. The Hannibal Directive and how Israel has messed up this has been talked about for months in Israel, and not a single American news person has talked about that. I will talk to you as an American funder. My tax money funds that war. And we fund Israel for a very important thing, to keep Jewish people safe. Right? We need to keep Jewish people safe. When October 7th happened, the response time was six hours. Now, just for people who don't know the Middle East, Israel is as big as New Jersey. It's that small and that horrible. And if you have a place that small, they have more military bases and airfields, more than Manhattan has. So why do you think it was so slow? I don't know. I'm telling you. I don't know. If I cannot stop the war, at least as someone who financed that, I need a performance report. They took six hours to move in something that shouldn't take more than five minutes. Six hours. Did they stop to ask for directions? You are suggesting that they wanted it to go. I don't know. I don't know. I am asking you as a performer, why are we not talking about the failure of that state that we financed? Because they are in the midst of crisis. No. When we were in the middle of a crisis, you can evaluate the people that you are financing. We never do that. We never do that. I'm sick and tired of this, Chris. We never do that. They cannot play the victim and the oppressor at the same time. They are basically, they have been crying for eight months. I would argue that Israel is the only place that can argue both at the same time. They are both David and Bilal. They are the strongest in the region. They are also the most hunted in the region. They are a small group of people who have been kicked out of all the surrounding countries. They are left in one. And they are very strong in that one. Where did all the Jews go in the other countries? I can tell you exactly how that happened. But Israel is like a serial killer who is bitching about a paper cut while he is on a killing spree. That's what Israel is. They are the most hunted. How often is a serial killer surrounded by people who want to kill him? Really? They are surrounded by people who protected him. You know what? When Iran sent the drone attacks, where do you think the flights that actually intercepted came from Arab countries that are friends with Israel? The biggest military power in the region is Egypt. Did you see Egypt firing a single missile towards Israel? Jordan. Saudi Arabia. You are talking about Hezbollah and Hamas. I don't see Egypt hunting Israel or Jordan hunting Israel. Not right now. They have in the past. If it weren't for the United States, Egypt would have taken aid. I feel... Well, actually, you know what? Egypt takes aid from America in order for Israel's security. Do you understand how much Israel is costing us? And let's talk about America again for a second. You have a joint session from Congress inviting Netanyahu, a war criminal, someone with a global approval rate that's worse than Satan. And then you bring them here. While the whole world is telling you this is a war criminal. You have people going on pilgrimages to Tel Aviv to tell Netanyahu that we are very sorry for Biden is not supporting you enough. Who are these people loyal to? Are they loyal to the United States or are they loyal to the people who pay for their elections? You have an AIPAC bragging about spending $100 million and having a 98% success rate in the Congress. How is not that the main news in every single news? All those comedians who think that they're tough people talking about America, talking about making fun of everything. Isn't that enough material? About talking about the effect of a foreign country in our elections? It should all be on the table. One sad thing for me is when you start getting into money in American elections, there's so many deep pockets now because of what we have made legal. The problem in our politics for the first time ever is not illegal money, illegal influence. It's legal. Legal money and legal influence. I got to jump. I appreciate you ceding conversation for people. I know people aren't going to like a lot of what he said. Some people will like a lot of what he said. I don't have the same experience. I'll never demonize him for it. He is my friend. I'll never demonize him. He's legit. He's like Hugh Jackman. It's all passed. All passed. I have to take a break. Bassem Youssef, okay? He is a brilliant comedian. I know we're talking politics, but he has many talents. Hey, thank you for watching. Please go to NewsNationNow.com. NewsNationNow.com. And you can find News Nation on your television provider. And don't forget to click the red subscribe button down below. Then you will get more of News Nation's fact-driven coverage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_eyBju7hzY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4L4WdhcStQ We have lost our identity as Jews and human beings.” Ami Ayalon comments on “selfie” photos of Israeli soldiers in Gaza and “the injured Jenin” Amir Ayalon, welcome back to our program. Thank you. So can you explain what your Prime Minister has been saying to Israeli media about his view of a partial end to this? He said he's ready for a partial deal with Hamas for some of the hostages. Now, as far as I was aware, the people of Israel's first goal is to get all of the hostages back. The so-called Israeli plan that the Biden administration stated was precisely for that, or for all. Some people say, like the hostage families forum, they condemn it. They say he's just walked back from everything. What's a partial deal for the partial release of hostages? It's the only way for him to survive in power. That's it. It's the only way for him to make sure that the war will not come to an end. And this is what he's doing. I think that he really believes that we don't understand, but we do understand most of the Israelis. And today, our Prime Minister does not represent the people of Israel. In a recent poll, I have here the figures. 76% of Israelis believe that he should resign immediately. 65% demand elections today. And 74%, 75% believe that the only way to end this war is by a political achievement that will enable us to bring back all the hostages. Second, to end the war. And third, to create a regional coalition that will create a better reality and more safety to Israel. I'm really surprised by what you said, in that he doesn't want to end the war. Right. I mean, that sounds crazy to me. Why? Well, why? Why not? Israelis are being killed. Palestinians are being killed. Israel's losing its moral high ground. It's becoming a pariah. We call it toxic leadership. In academia, toxic leadership is a great charisma of a person who leads many people, but he leads them to the wrong place, to the end of Zionism. This is what he's doing. You have to understand that the first cabinet meeting, when we went to war, after the 7th of October, and we hate to go to war, because after the massacre, et cetera, it was a war of defense. But the decision of, do not discuss the day after. What is the meaning? I'll tell you something. In this war, when you send your people, your youngster, to kill, and many of them will die there, when you tell them that there is no political goal to this war, immediately what happens? The goal, the war becomes the end, and not the mean. Now, when the war becomes the end, the goal of itself, this is exactly what we see today in the Middle East. We know how to start wars. This government do not know and do not want to end this war. OK, I'm going to get back to Gaza in a second. But Netanyahu himself said in this so-called interview conversation that they might be prepared for another war, that the real so-called kinetic combat phase in Gaza could be coming to an end, but that they will move troops and forces to the north. That means Hezbollah. Are you prepared? Do you think this is going to happen, a full-scale war again, a la 2006, with Lebanese Hezbollah? Well, I think it is a real scenario. If we cannot change our perception of ourselves and the Middle East, it is a real scenario. Not because somebody want, because this is the only option. If we believe only in power, if we believe that war is not the last option, is the first and only option, this is what we should see. Our security doctrine should be based on two pillars. Yes, we should always have to maintain and to preserve a huge military power, but it will never be enough. Unless we understand diplomacy, unless we can speak in two languages, we should not be secure and we should lose our identity. And why has it taken eight months for the people like yourself? I know you've been saying it because you're out of, governing Shin Bet, et cetera, right now. Because I'm a minority in my people. Okay, you're a minority. But it's suddenly becoming out there, like the head of the idea has clearly empowered his spokesman, Admiral Hagari, who said last week that it's just throwing sand into the eyes of the Israeli people, saying that you can defeat Hamas. More and more people are beginning to say what you're telling me now, that there needs to be a day after plan. Yes, I don't blame, but I think that I expected more from our generals. I still remember during the first intifada, when Rabin gave us an order, instructed us to break the bones and some commanders did it, literally. And the chief of general staff told publicly to Rabin, Mr. Defense Minister, this is not a military phenomenon. This is a social, political, violent phenomenon. And I expected our generals to say it as early as possible. The moment that the cabinet accepted this decision, not to discuss the day after, it was clear that this is a never ending war and they should do it much earlier. Do you think, because you saw the justified horror that was unleashed over the weekend, when a picture of a wounded Palestinian, tied to the boat of one of your military vehicles, was driven out of the Jenin area and the Palestinians accused your forces of using them as a human shield. The Israeli military then shortly thereafter said, those forces violated orders and standard operating procedures. They'll be investigated. Not many people have faith in the investigation because it's very rarely those investigations happen. But what's happening? I mean, are you saying that this war without any political end is also causing this kind of stuff, including the selfies of your forces inside Gaza, taking pictures with the rubble, with this, with that. It's just not very nice at all. No, it's horrible. Do you feel they're losing their morality, their humanity? Not today. We are losing. We are losing our identity as people, as Jews and as human beings. Did you ever think you would say that you're the former head of Shin Bet? Yes. Did you ever think you'd get no points? Yes, I said it many times. And I said it in the Shin Bet when we tried to think of our code of ethics. I said, when we go to war, people do not think, when you send us to war, you do not send us to negotiate. You send us to kill. Now, we are born with the idea of you shall not kill. And now you tell me, okay, you go to war, kill all the enemies. Now, the idea that I have the right to kill. Now, with the time, it becomes a nature. We do not ask why. The only question that we ask when we go to war is how to kill. Whether we should use a knife or a gun or a missile. But it's become a second nature. And this is a danger in every war. And we saw it in all history. What Americans did in Iraq and Afghanistan, what we did in the past, unless we understand that every war must end. This is what we should see. We should lose our identity as democratic human beings. And we shall create a reality of never ending war.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4fF4rSktug

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PV33km79tU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VTt_THL4A Mehdi Hasan and Ilan Pappé debate whether Anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitism with Times columnist Melanie Phillips and Israeli former Member of the Knesset Einat Wilf in this Intelligence Squared debate from June 2019. _________________________ Is there a country in the world that attracts so much criticism as nazi Israel? Studies consistently show Israel to be one of the most disliked nations in the world (along with Iran and North Korea). But how much of this is to do with genuine concern about Israel’s nazi actions, and how much is actually a cover for the 'age-old hatred of the Jews'? Mehdi Hasan of The Intercept and the Israeli historian Ilan Pappé go head to head with Times columnist Melanie Phillips and Israeli former Member of the Knesset Einat Wilf in this Intelligence Squared debate from June 2019.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YCQV_iUGRE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unu1QcaszVY I'm Barry Pollack, a criminal defense lawyer for Julian Assange. The prosecution of Julian Assange is unprecedented. In the hundred years of the Espionage Act, it has never been used by the United States to pursue a publisher, a journalist, like Mr. Assange. Mr. Assange revealed truthful, important, and newsworthy information, including revealing that the United States had committed war crimes, and he has suffered tremendously in his fight for free speech, for freedom of the press, and to ensure that the American public and the world community gets truthful and important newsworthy information. We firmly believe that Mr. Assange never should have been charged under the Espionage Act and engaged in an exercise that journalists engage in every day, and we're thankful that they do. It is appropriate, though, for this fight to end, and it is appropriate for the judge, as she did today, to determine that no additional incarceration of Mr. Assange would be fair, would be appropriate, and it is time for him to be reunited with his family. Mr. Assange is grateful for all of the support that he has received and looks forward to reuniting with his wife and his children and getting back home to Australia. Thank you. Mr. Assange will not be taking statements when we conclude here. We'll go back inside and we'll leave with Mr. Assange, but he will not be taking questions. WikiLeaks' work will continue, and Mr. Assange, I have no doubt, will be a continuing force for freedom of the speech and transparency in government. He is a powerful voice and a voice that cannot and should not be silenced. Because his supposed crime occurred entirely outside of the United States, whatever district is the first district that he enters is the appropriate district for him to be prosecuted. By agreement with the government, we decided that this was an appropriate venue. It is closest to Australia. It allowed us to come in, allowed Mr. Assange to walk out a free man, and to quickly get back to his family in Australia. What sends a chilling precedent is the prosecution, the fact that the United States elected to charge Mr. Assange with violating the Espionage Act. The court today determined that no harm was caused by Mr. Assange's publications. We know that they were newsworthy. We know that they were quoted by every major media outlet on the planet, and we know that they revealed important information. That is called journalism. The United States prosecuted that. They exposed Mr. Assange to 175 years in prison. That is what has a chilling effect. To make, today, a decision that it's time for Mr. Assange to go home, that doesn't have a chilling effect. The chilling effect is the United States pursuing journalism as a crime. I hope this is the first and last time that ever occurs. You know what, you just said how difficult was it for Mr. Assange to come here and make this deal? Of course he wants to go home. How difficult was it for him to swallow that? Mr. Assange was not going to agree to any disposition of this case that required him to accept allegations that are simply not true. Mr. Assange did not plead guilty to, and would not plead guilty to, 17 counts of the Espionage Act, computer hacking. There was a very narrow agree-upon set of facts here, and Mr. Assange acknowledges that of course he accepted documents from Chelsea Manning, and published many of those documents because it was in the world's interest that those documents be published. Unfortunately, that violates the terms of the Espionage Act. That's what we acknowledged today. We also said, Mr. Assange said very clearly, that he believes there should be First Amendment protection for that conduct. But the fact of the matter is, as written, the Espionage Act does not have a defense for the First Amendment. So what he acknowledged is what he has to acknowledge, which is true, and nothing that he should be ashamed of. Yes, he received classified information from Chelsea Manning, and he published that information. That should not be a crime. But does he feel that the legacy that he's leaving behind, the legacy that he's made and built in the last 20 years, should actually still be here? I hope he feels very good about it. He has, I think, spurred an important discussion in the United States about how to balance national security and freedom of the press. He has standed by his principles, putting up with detention in the embassy, incarceration in high-security prison. I hope that every one of us would have the courage to stand by our ideals the way Mr. Assange has. And so I certainly hope he feels that he has left a powerful legacy. And I'm certain that there are other chapters in the Julian Assange story yet to be written. With that, I'm going to turn it over to- How long has Julian Assange been here? Years? Months? 62 months in Belmarsh to get this deal. I'm going to turn it over to Jennifer Robinson, Mr. Assange's Australian and United Kingdom counsel. Good morning, everyone. My name's Jen Robinson. I'm Julian Assange's counsel. I've been his longest-serving counsel. Today is a historic day. It brings to an end 14 years of legal battles. And finally, after 14 years of legal battles, Julian Assange can go home a free man. This also brings to an end a case which has been recognised as the greatest threat to the First Amendment in the 21st century. So it is a huge relief to Julian Assange, to his family, to his friends, to his supporters, and to us, and to everyone who believes in free speech around the world, that he can now return home to Australia and be reunited with his family. I want to take this opportunity to thank the many people who have around the world supported Julian Assange over these years and who have supported us in defending him. There has been a global movement behind Julian to protect free speech, and it is because of that global movement of support that today's outcome is possible. I also want to take time to thank the Australian people and the Australian government for all of the support that we've received from home in Australia. In particular, I want to thank our Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, for his statesmanship, his principled leadership, and his diplomacy, which made this outcome possible. It was as leader of the opposition, he said, and took a stand for justice and said, enough is enough. There is nothing to be served by Julian's continued incarceration. As Prime Minister, he stood true to his word, and he did what he needed to do to ensure Julian's freedom. He raised it at the highest level, at every opportunity, and when Australian officials were making outreach to the US, they knew that they were acting with the full authority of the Prime Minister of Australia. It was his intention that this be done, and we wouldn't be here today without the Prime Minister of Australia's support. So I want to thank Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. I also want to thank our Attorney-General, Mark Dreyfuss, our Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, and give particular thanks to our US Ambassador and former Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, for his adept diplomacy and his relentless efforts in Washington that facilitated our negotiations with the US government and ensured this outcome. I also want to thank our High Commissioner in London, Stephen Smith, whose tireless work enabled us all to be here today. I think it's also important that we recognise the free speech implications of this case. Julian has suffered for more than 14 years because of the risk of extradition to the United States. He faced 175 years in prison for publishing evidence of war crimes, human rights abuse, and US wrongdoing around the world. Today, he pleaded guilty to an offence for having published information in the public interest for which he's won journalism awards the world over and been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize every year for the past decade. This sets a dangerous precedent. This prosecution sets a dangerous precedent that should be of concern to journalists everywhere. The US is seeking to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction over all of you without giving you constitutional free speech protections, and anyone who cares about free speech and democratic accountability should stand against it. But I want to encourage everyone that stood up and fought for Julian to continue to stand up and fight against this dangerous precedent. I hope that the fact that we've been able to free Julian Assange today against all the odds and against one of the most powerful governments in the world will give hope to all journalists and publishers who are imprisoned around the world, and we encourage everyone who stood up to fight for Julian to continue that fight for him and for all of those others in the hope that we can secure their freedom too. Thank you very much. Will you be going to Dubai this weekend? What will work? We're not going to be taking any more questions, but I want to encourage you that we're going to go back inside to join Julian, and you'll get your shot of us all coming out of court. But thank you all for being here today. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We'll hear from everyone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PeYDphtHYo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KeXolkASyk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6bVl47kdNk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeZhGTVFfeQ British journalist Richard Medhurst has reported from inside the court on Julian Assange's case for 4 years. The WikiLeaks founder has just been freed in a deal with the United States!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40D57loIGuo

https://rumble.com/v53duiu-ilan-pappei-hope-for-the-end-of-israel-and-the-creation-of-free-palestine-f.html Ilan Pappe:I hope for the end of Israel and the creation of free Palestine from the river to the sea Finally, I think that I want also to be optimistic, because it's very clear that what I was talking about up to now is a huge, powerful alliance, first included Britain, then the United States, then multinational cooperation. The Palestinians really, I mean, were facing an alliance so powerful economically, politically, strategically. And it's all focused on the idea of this project of displacement and replacement, displacing the Palestinians and replacing them. It's almost incredible that they're still there, fighting, showing resilience and resistance. This is also what my book taught me once more, that how unbelievable is the fact that Palestine and the Palestinians are still there. It's not taken for granted. But what brings me hope, and for me, I want to explain that nobody misunderstand what I mean for me. Hope for me is the end of Israel and the creation of a free Palestine from the river to the sea. What brings me hope is the fact that the powerful lobby and the alliance were very effective when it comes to politics from above. From the very early on, they understand that all they have to do is follow politicians at the early stages of their career, making sure that they are allies in the later stage in their career, using money, influence, intimidation if needed in order to get whether the American or the British political system to abide by their demands. However, they find it very difficult and always found it very difficult to deal with the civil society. They don't know how to deal with alternative media today. They have no idea how to deal with it. They don't know how to deal with civil society, with communal action, with boycott initiatives, with divestment initiatives. All their methodology, all the weaponry, all the armory that they have is useless, it seems, against people. That gives us hope. And the hope is that probably this is not the only issue in which the politicians of this particular era are not representing us well. I don't remember as an historian an age like this when politics, and I'm generalizing, of course, that politicians were of such a low caliber. Intellectually, morally, corrupt, shallow, reductionist, people who have very little to offer their society apart from their own careers. It doesn't matter which party. It's really the age of the lack of any status for the politicians. So their ideas of how to deal with global warming, how to deal with poverty, how to deal with issues that really trouble people are not very interesting and are not very successful and are not very effective because they don't care about these issues. They care about their own careers. It's not surprising that also their ideas about Palestine are irrelevant and are harmful and negative. So we should hope that when people struggle against this lobby, they're also struggling against other lobbies that make their life miserable and disable them to solve problems of poverty, ecological danger, injustices in society beyond the question of Palestine. I think this explains why so many people are galvanized behind the Palestine question as symbolizing struggle against injustices anywhere else in the world as well. And Palestine is an indication that there is a different kind of politics that we would wish for ourselves for our next generations. And that's why so many hopes are pinned on the Palestinian liberation movement, sometimes probably unreasonably actually that Palestine would be the paragon state that all the other failed decolonized world was unable to fulfill. But it explains because this is a demand for a different kind of politicians and a different kind of the idea, what is universal justice? This is the big challenge the ICJ and the ICC are having. It's not a coincidence that for the first time, they at least provided a stage for what people think about Palestine and not governments, if you think about it. And they did it intentionally. I talked with some of them. They did it intentionally. They wanted to show that international tribunals are also listening to people, not just to the politics of power. Hopefully, this is just the beginning of a process that would lead for a better world, first of all for the Palestinians, and then for all of us. Thank you.

https://x.com/NABEELRAJAB/status/1805347146310250709

🇺🇲🇮🇱 When the White House spokesman was asked about the killing of a 6-year-old child by Israel, he said that US asked Israel to investigate: Reporter: "Israeli tank likely killed 6yr-old Hind Rajab, her car was hit with 355 bullets." Miller: "Israel says there were no tanks in the area." Reporter: "So, who shot the 355 bullets?" Miller: "We've asked Israel to investigate."

Mujahed Abbadi who was shot and left to bleed for around 2 hours .. when the Israeli soldiers came his way, they tied him on the hood of the jeep for 20 minutes....