And hello everybody. Welcome back to the channel. Today we’re going to be hearing from Zack Palinski, the leader of the Green Party. Now, this plonker sits there with a straight face and claims that a murderous terrorist regime that beats women to death for showing their hair is already at the negotiating table.
Now, forget all of the terror plots on British soil. Forget about everything and all of the killing that has happened there. uh the slaughtering of their own citizens according to this absolute idiot. The real villain is the West um in this whole incident. Insane to me. It’s just crazy and it’s dangerously stupid and uh these individuals are actually garnering some support in this country.
Yes, 20% of the UK actually back a party led by the by led by Zack Palanski. Now, let’s have a listen to him quickly, guys. But first, please do hit the like button and hit the subscribe button for more. >> Well, I think we need to listen to Iranian voices like Rana at the beginning of your program who said powerfully she’s been waiting for this moment.
Her entire life we’ve seen the end of a brutal murderous dictator. At the same time though, I heard Rana say, “Iran is not free and in fact the world is no longer is no safer.” I thought that was quite an astounding interview you just had with the defense secretary. We’ve seen what I would say is an illegal and unprovoked attack.
In fact, Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s own international editor, said, “This is a war of choice.” So, we’ve got a defense secretary saying that diplomacy is the long runway we need. But he won’t condemn Donald Trump when he attacks a country and assassinates its leader. That’s the law of the jungle. That’s an end to international law.
And it’s quite astounding that we have a prime minister that seems to be singularly incapable of standing up to Donald Trump and letting the UK stand on its own two feet. And I’m worried we’re going to be pulled into another illegal war. >> But if you think these strikes were illegal and you’ve condemned them, what is your alternative? >> Well, the alternative is to listen to the Iranian people and to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to foster calm in the region to encourage >> Iranian regime didn’t listen to its own
people. It killed many of its own people who wanted a different government. So why do you think that the Iranian regime or what’s left of it this morning would listen to Western governments when they haven’t for decades? >> Well, this is why we need deescalation in the region. And we’re already seeing the conflict spread even wider.
I don’t have an easy answer on how we make peace and diplomacy and democracy in the region. But I do know that there’s no example in history where you’ve bombed people to democracy. Putting air strikes for regime change has never led an example where a country is better off afterwards. But but you say that you should there should be negotiation.
You should listen to the Iranian people. I would ask you again, what would your alternative be? Clearly, you don’t like it. But Israel Israel and America made the calculation. It seems it’s very clear if what it took was strikes to end a repressive regime. It was worth it. So what would your alternative be? >> Well, I don’t accept the presupposition of the question.
I don’t think it took strikes because actually Iran were already at the negotiating table under President Obama. We saw progress with Iran. Donald Trump took them to the negotiation table, but it was clear it was totally bad faith because they literally murdered the leader at the same time they’re at the negotiation table. >> But that leader murdered many of his own people just weeks ago.
And if you look at the pattern of Iran over the years, yes, there have been negotiations, but the international nuclear watchdog, for example, has upgraded and reprimanded Iran on many occasions for breaking its rules. Iran’s been supporting Russia against Ukraine. Iran has planned plots in this country, too.
So, what earthly evidence do you have that Iran would have said, “Oh, okay. Actually, we’ll listen to you this time.” >> Well, I’m here in no way to defend the Iranian regime. I’m here to defend and speak up for the Iranian people. >> But the question is, why do you think that negotiation could have been an option here? What evidence do you have of that when it’s failed for decades? >> Because the moment you’ve ruled out negotiation, you’ve accepted that you’re going to war.
And I don’t think the British people want to see another war in that region. So the question becomes how do you make diplomacy and negotiation work. Now what I know is negotiation was happening. Whether it was working or not is a legitimate question. But I don’t think the answer can be it’s not working so we’re going to bomb and kill them.
The answer has to be how do we work harder to make it work. Now all I can say with regard to this plonker, there’s not much reaction I can give. Although he’s, you know, the light is on, but nobody’s home. This guy is absolute, you know, brain dead. Uh let’s be perfectly honest. And I was just thinking as I was listening to this, um, can anyone start a political party cuz, uh, I might do if that guy can be a leader or something and actually garner a support. Insane.
No other, um, you know, he’s out here talking about the US shouldn’t have done this, done that, and done this, but they he’s got no answers despite him wanting to be a leader. He’s just it’s just it just insane to me. I just don’t know what else like this guy just has to pander to his radical left at all times.
The Iranian people were happy, so they’re happy. Everybody else is happy, so why is he standing up for it? I mean, I’ll leave that for you to decide down there in the comments.