Mehdi Hassan EXPOSES Piers Morgan's Double Standard in BRUTAL Live Debate

[00:00:00]No, I don't think they are. And I shouldn't have said that.

[00:00:02]>> Wow.

[00:00:02]>> Yeah.

[00:00:02]>> So, in order to defend Israel, you're withdrawing your allegation against Russia.

[00:00:05]>> Yeah. Because you made me think about it. I actually I I didn't remember that I'd use that word in relation to >> But it's not just Russia because >> you said it about many people.

[00:00:13]>> Well, okay. So, >> you said Bashar al-Assad in 2012, one year into the civil war in Syria when the death toll was much lower than Gaza.

[00:00:19]You said it was a genocide.

[00:00:20]>> What is going on everybody? Welcome back to the channel. Glad you are here for this one. So, in this video, we have got Medi Hassan flipping the script on Piers Morgan. Piers has spent months asking the tough questions on his show, but this time Medi has him in the guest seat and he is not letting him off easy. We are talking about double standards, the words people are afraid to use, and one moment where Piers backtracks on a major position live just to avoid being called inconsistent. Trust me, you are going to want to stay for the full thing because the moment it clicks, you will understand exactly what Medi was building toward. Drop a comment and let me know where you are tuning in from today. I always love seeing how far this community reaches. All right, let us get right into it.

[00:01:01]>> So, you think Yaha Sinoir is a terrorist, right?

[00:01:03]>> Yeah.

[00:01:03]>> And there was an arrest warrant request for Yaha Sinoir from the International Criminal Court Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, British lawyer.

[00:01:10]>> He's also put out an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu. He's accused Netanyahu. Well, he's asked for one. The court is >> being lobbied not to do it. He's he's put out an arrest he's asked for an arrest warrant. And the indictments he's put out include this is what he's accused Netanyahu. Starvation, murder, willful killing, extermination. How is Netanyahu not a terrorist per?

[00:01:28]>> Well, it may end up being that he is convicted of war crimes that suggest he's a terrorist, >> but Simo hasn't been wasn't convicted of >> Sim being consistent. The ICC chief put back to you for both.

[00:01:39]>> Here's the difference. Hamas know made no secret of what they did on October the 7th. Simo directed and ordered that attack. No one is Yeah. But what what what the difference is that Hamas said, "Here are the GoPro cameras. We're going to show the world what we're doing here."

[00:01:54]>> So is Israel. I just showed you I just mentioned a video where a kid is killed on camera. In fact, Israeli soldiers have put out Tik Toks because of their war crimes pitch.

[00:02:00]>> You're not going to get me to say that what Israel's been doing is terrorism because I believe they are defending.

[00:02:04]>> Why not though is what I'm wondering.

[00:02:06]Seems to be just a stubborn resistance.

[00:02:07]>> Because any country in the world that had October the 7th perpetrated against them would do what Israel has done.

[00:02:12]>> No, they wouldn't. Yes, they would.

[00:02:13]>> They would have killed kids at this level.

[00:02:14]>> No. If you had literally a country on your border, >> it's not a country on your border. It's occupied territory. I think you've conceded yourself in previous >> I have actually said to you I believe it was it is occupied territory. So, it's not a country on your border.

[00:02:25]>> Let's call it, what do you want to call it?

[00:02:26]>> Occupied territory.

[00:02:27]>> Well, let's call it Gaza. Okay. That on one single day in 13 different entry points, 3,000 people came through and committed as much mayhem and murder as they could possibly commit in a deliberate attempt to destabilize and take down Israel, which is the the intention of their original charter. If that happened on any border, shared border in the world, there is no country in the world that would not have responded with military force in the way that Israel has.

[00:02:58]>> I don't agree with Let me say you're right. Every country would have done that. [laughter] Doesn't make it not terrorist.

[00:03:03]>> No, but then what you're saying is that any country that then goes after terrorists that perpetrate that kind of attack automatically themsel hang on automatically themselves become terrorist. I dispute that.

[00:03:14]>> I'm saying that's a straw man. Give an example where they're not.

[00:03:17]>> I just gave you an example. They could have responded to Hamas without attacking a kid, killing the kid and when people come to rescue him, attacking them as well. I can give you I can be here all day. We don't have the time. I can go through. They couldn't have they didn't need to attack when American when American forces >> we're not doing what aboutism. We're not doing what >> when they went after ISIS but they killed a lot of innocent children in the past.

[00:03:34]>> I think those were act crimes. I think war crimes terror. So if you go I don't think I don't think >> if you go after any terror group in the world. No, I'm saying if you hold on P.

[00:03:42]The definition of terrorism according to every dictionary is the use of political violence against civilians for political goals. That is what Netanyahu is doing.

[00:03:49]He said it openly. Israelis have said it on your show.

[00:03:51]>> Well, he's responded to a terrorist attack by doing terrorism. He's killed 33 times as many people as Sino is a terrorist. Netanyahu should absolutely no longer be prime minister of Israel.

[00:04:03]>> Should he be at the ICC?

[00:04:04]>> Uh, probably. Yeah.

[00:04:05]>> So, if the warrant comes down, do you support the UK arresting him if he comes to the UK? absolutely think that his his alleged war crimes and I use that because they've not been substantiated.

[00:04:15]His alleged war crimes should absolutely be investigated. Doesn't make any sense.

[00:04:18]And I agree with you. No, no, no. We I agree with you that they haven't been substantiated, but I'm being consistent.

[00:04:23]I'm saying everyone Hamas Israel should be substantiated in investigation.

[00:04:26]You're saying one side's terrorists based on GoPro, but the other side's not terrorists, even though we've watched them kill thousands of people on camera.

[00:04:33]Literally, I've seen it. I saw them gun down an old lady holding flag. Hamas have made no secret that what they did was terrorism.

[00:04:39]>> Nor of Israel. Have you listened to Israeli soldiers? You should watch our documentary. It's called Israel's Real Extremis. Shows Israeli soldiers talking proudly about what they've done in Gaza.

[00:04:47]>> This is where the whole framework falls apart because Medi does something brilliant here. He takes the International Criminal Court and uses it as a mirror. The chief prosecutor requested arrest warrants for both sides. The charges on one side include starvation, willful actions against civilians, extermination, and Medi asks a very simple question. If one leader is considered a terrorist for directing an attack, how is the other leader not one when the international court is accusing him of the same caliber of actions? And you know what Pierce says? He goes, "Well, I believe they are defending themselves." That is his whole answer, defending. But here is what really gets me. Medi brings up the actual dictionary definition. Political violence against civilians for political goals. That is not some opinion from a random person online. That is the literal textbook definition recognized everywhere. And when you lay that next to what has been documented in this conflict, the conclusion writes itself. But Piers will not go there. He cannot bring himself to apply the same standard equally. And this is the part that should bother everyone watching. Medi points out that one side films their actions on GoPro cameras and we all agree on what to call it. The other side has soldiers posting videos showing what they have done proudly, documented, on camera, shared willingly, and PI still refuses to use the same word for both. Think about that for a second. Same type of footage, same kind of evidence, but completely different labels depending on who is holding the weapon. That is not analysis. That is not journalism. That is a selective framework designed to protect one's side. And Medi laid it completely bare right here. The fact that peers could not counter it, could not explain why the standard should be different tells you everything you need to know.

[00:06:22]>> It's not just a T-word peers that you've been reluctant to use in relation to Israel, but also the G word genocide.

[00:06:27]It's not genocide.

[00:06:28]>> Why are you so let's let's talk about that. Why are you perfectly happy to call what Russia is doing in Ukraine a genocide, but not what Israel is doing in Gaza when there are fewer civilians, far fewer kids killed in Ukraine than in Gaza, arguably way less genocidal rhetoric from the Russian government than we hear from the Israeli government. Why are you so uncensored on Russia but not on Israel? What are you afraid of?

[00:06:48]>> I actually thought when you first jumped me with that, it was a good point. I hadn't realized I'd use the word genocide in relation to what was going on in Russia. And I I did go away and think about that quite carefully because you got to be careful about the word genocide. The the word genocide is where you deliberately exterminate a group of people based on ethnicity. And the reality about let's take Gaza first of all. If Israel actually wanted to get rid of everyone in Gaza, they have the military power to do that. They have nuclear weapons. They could just nuke Gaza, as some of them, I suspect, would quite like to do. They've got some massively right-wing headbangers in that government, Beng Smodrich, and others who I suspect wouldn't hesitate to wage a form of genocide. So, I accept that completely. But the reality is that there are 2 million people in Gaza, of which depending which estimate you want to believe, but the official records from the Hamas run health authority, there are about 45,000 people have died of which it is estimated that around 15 to 20,000 are Hamas and the rest of civilians. Well, estimated by Israel, >> okay, but there are there are different figures put out, but let's assume it's in that ballpark. Okay. No.

[00:07:54]>> Well, okay. But you could say that here's my point. It's not It's not two million people, which Israel >> that's not the definition of genocide.

[00:08:01]>> Well, isn't it?

[00:08:01]>> No.

[00:08:02]>> The genocide convention doesn't say you have to kill everyone. By the way, you said this to Basamsef, our good friend, last week on the show. He said, well, I want to read you exactly what you said.

[00:08:09]Israel hasn't nuked Gaza. Quote, they could have done. They haven't done that.

[00:08:12]If you're really genocidal, why wouldn't you do that?

[00:08:16]>> But Russia has the ability to nuke Ukraine, too. Russia has the biggest stockpile of nuclear warhead in the world. So, why doesn't Russia doing a genocide?

[00:08:24]>> No, I don't think they are. And I shouldn't have said that.

[00:08:25]>> Wow. Yeah.

[00:08:26]>> So, in order to defend Israel, you're withdrawing your allegation against Russia.

[00:08:29]>> Yeah, because you made me think about it. I actually I I didn't remember that I'd use that word in relation to >> But it's not just Russia because >> you said it about many people.

[00:08:36]>> Well, okay. So, >> you said Bashar al-Assad in 2012, one year into the civil war in Syria when the death toll was much lower than Gaza.

[00:08:42]You said it was a genocide. You said the Rohhinga in Burma.

[00:08:46]>> Well, that's Well, that's interesting.

[00:08:47]>> You said Rohinga in the answer. I'm finish my question then you answer. You said the Rohhinga in 2017, far less death toll in Burma >> is a genocide. So I look at Pierers Morgan, I say here's this uncensored person, very bold, outspoken, opinionated man. He says Syria is a genocide.

[00:09:03]>> Burma's a genocide. Ukraine's a genocide.

[00:09:06]>> Israel, no, it's not a genocide. And now today, actually, I'm going to withdraw the charge of genocide with Ukraine.

[00:09:11]That's how much I don't want to accuse Israel of genocide.

[00:09:14]>> No, it's not. It feels like you're afraid.

[00:09:15]>> No. The other examples I would give I would say absolutely there was genocidal intent. Uh but you did make me think about what was happening in Russia and Ukraine and the reality is as people know in that area it is complicated because a lot of the people in the Donbass for example speak Russian right and some of them a percentage of them do identify as Russian and would quite like to go back to being Russian. So I think to use the word genocide about what Russia is doing there is the wrong term and I shouldn't have used it. I wasn't >> withdrawing on Syria and Burma as well.

[00:09:43]No, cuz I think they are definitely a genocidal intent.

[00:09:47]>> You have to understand what just happened here because this might be the most revealing moment in this entire conversation. Medi hits Piers with a question that is so clean and so airtight there is literally no escape.

[00:09:58]He asks, "Why are you so uncensored on Russia, but not here? What are you afraid of? And watch what Piers does."

[00:10:03]He actually admits it was a good point.

[00:10:05]He says he went away and thought about it. And then this happens. Piers says he no longer thinks what Russia is doing qualifies. He actually withdraws a previous position he held live on camera just to avoid having to apply that same standard to this conflict. Let that sink in. He would rather backtrack on Russia than be consistent. And here is what people need to know. There is something in international law called the genocide convention. It was created in 1948 after the world witnessed the worst atrocities in modern history specifically to define and prevent those patterns from repeating. And one of the key things about that convention is it does not require the elimination of an entire population. The intent and the systematic pattern of destruction are what matter. So this idea that it does not count because not everyone has been wiped out. That argument does not hold up legally or historically. Medi knows this. That is why he starts pulling receipts. He goes through conflict after conflict. Syria peers called it. Burma called it. Ukraine called it. All with fewer casualties. And now with the highest toll of all, suddenly the standard changes. Suddenly it does not apply. And Piers cannot explain why. He literally just says, "I changed my mind." That is not an argument. That is an admission that the standard was never really about facts. It was always about who was on the receiving end.

[00:11:16]>> The genocidal intent. What you want people to believe is that what Israel is doing without any reference to October the 7th, they want to basically kill >> Bashar Assad would say exactly what Netany is. He says, "I'm fighting terrorists. They're hiding among civilians in Homs."

[00:11:29]>> Let me ask you, let me throw it back in.

[00:11:31]>> No, no, no. To quote you, this is my show. I've got limited time. I'm asking you questions.

[00:11:36]>> Bashar al-Assad would say exactly what Netanyahu says. He says, "I'm fighting ter I don't believe him and you don't believe him. We don't like Bashar." We agree on Assad, >> but he would say exactly what Netanyahu says. I'm fighting terrorists who are hiding among civilians in Homs and I'm bombing them. I'm fighting a war of self-defense. You say genocidal. I say, "Yeah, maybe genocidal." Israel says Amalcch. They say total annihilation.

[00:11:55]They say we're going to destroy Gaza.

[00:11:57]We're going to level it, etc. You say not genocidal.

[00:12:00]>> I don't get it.

[00:12:00]>> I don't think it is genocide. No, >> even though the facts say otherwise.

[00:12:04]>> Holocaust historians like Amos Goldberg Some of the experts on Holocaust say it is a genocide.

[00:12:11]>> A lot of experts say it's not a genocide.

[00:12:13]>> Actually, some of the leading Holocaust experts are lining up in one direction.

[00:12:16]>> You've got your experts. I've seen many other experts who say it's not genocide.

[00:12:20]So, you can, you know, look, >> I just find it fascinating that you'll call every other conflict which has fewer deaths than Gaza genocide. But for some reason, >> deaths in Syria, >> there were in February 2012. I checked.

[00:12:31]You said it was a genocide in February 2012. See, I do my homework. I checked.

[00:12:35]>> 7 and a half thousand people in Syria being killed at that point. You said genocide. 45,000 people in Gaza. You say not genocide.

[00:12:40]>> Well, it comes down to what you think the intent is of the people perpetrator.

[00:12:43]>> You don't think they're trying to erase northern Gaza right now?

[00:12:45]>> Uh, I think what they're doing.

[00:12:46]>> Are you seeing what's happening in northern >> Gaza? Here's what I think they're doing.

[00:12:48]I think Israel genuinely believe what they're trying to do is eliminate Hamas, who they perceive to be a terrorist.

[00:12:54]>> I think you're speaking on behalf of Israelis to answer. They're making it very clear it's not just about Hamas.

[00:12:58]They're seizing territory in Gaza.

[00:13:00]They're planning to some of them are planning to resettle in Gaza. And right now, northern Gaza, according to the UN humanitarian chief, everyone is at risk of dying. Pierce, everyone. That's the words of the UN humanitarian chief.

[00:13:09]>> Don't misunderstand me. I think what's happening in Gaza is horrific.

[00:13:12]>> You just won't say genocide.

[00:13:13]>> No. You ask me if it's genocide. I don't think it is. And you ask me if it's terrorism. I don't think it is. Do I think it's got unacceptable the level of civilian death? Absolutely. But you do the Do I think that they have no plan for the end of this? Absolutely. Do I think Netanyahu and the headbangers and his cabinet should go? Absolutely. Do I think Hamas should have any authority going forward? No. So, there are lots of ways that we can try and >> I know, but ultimately history will judge where you were on this and they'll say you were right on Iraq and you didn't really come on board on >> and I don't think they'll find that you were right about calling it terrorism or genocide.

[00:13:46]>> I I Okay, we'll see. I hope I hope you're right. Obviously, I don't want it to be a genocide, but it looks like one, sounds like walks like one.

[00:13:52]>> And here is where Medi delivers something that I think a lot of people have been wanting someone to say on a major platform for a very long time. He draws a direct parallel that is impossible to argue with. He brings up the situation in Syria and he points out that the exact same language was used.

[00:14:06]Fighting extremists, they are hiding among the population. This is self-defense. We are protecting our country. And when Syria said that, nobody bought it. Peers did not buy it.

[00:14:15]The media did not buy it. The international community did not buy it.

[00:14:19]We all agreed that was cover for something much worse. But now when the exact same playbook is being used, when the exact same justifications are being repeated almost word for word, suddenly we are supposed to take it at face value. That is the double standard Medi has been building toward this entire segment. And right here it becomes completely undeniable. And then he hits peers with the numbers. In Syria in early 2012, roughly 7,000 people had lost their lives. Piers had no hesitation using the strongest possible language. Now we are looking at numbers six times higher and suddenly the criteria has shifted. Suddenly it is about intent. Suddenly it is about nuance. Suddenly it is complicated. But it was not complicated when it was a different country was it? And I think what makes this so powerful is that Piers actually agrees with almost everything. He says it himself. He says the civilian toll is unacceptable. He says the leadership should go. He says there is no plan. He agrees with every single premise. But he still will not say the word. And Medie closes with one of the cleanest lines I have heard in any interview. He says, "It looks like one, sounds like one, walks like one."

[00:15:20]And that is the line that is going to follow this conversation forever.

[00:15:23]Because when you agree with every symptom, but you refuse to name the diagnosis, that tells the audience everything they need to know about where the real bias lives. It is not about the evidence. It is not about the numbers.

[00:15:34]It is about who you are willing to hold accountable and who you are not. And that distinction, that is what Medi made impossible to ignore. So, what do you guys think of this? Leave your thoughts down in the comments. Please like and subscribe, and I will see you in the next video.