He doesn't even know how these blockades work or why they're in place. Understandably as he likes to profess to be an exeprt on the Middle East but has never even been as Murray called him out on.
But this is the problem that Murray was rightly highlighting at the start, we live in a world now where comedians, with little actual knowledge, profess themselves to be experts when they know next to nothing. They then go on podcasts like rogan and convince people that they have seriously studied these conflicts when really they only have a surface level understanding and when someone pulls them up on that they then retreat to the "hey, I'm just a comedian man" BS
1. Ok first, don't ignore my question and explain the context of the above quotes by you.
2. As I quoted him earlier, he claims to be a comedian who has an interest in history and geopolitics. That's 100% every one of us on this thread, that is literally what he said. Why do you keep lying about him claiming himself to be an 'expert'when he has said numerous times 'I am no expert'.
3. He described in detail why and how the blockades are, including citing an example of duel use cookies, but the point stands that isreal over reach of blockades is a factual evidenced claim. Do you not believe that?
In this context, Murray is making the claim Isreal have done nothing wrong in Gaza, Smith made the claim it isn't that simple, and i 100% agree with Smiths point. Are you in alignment with Murray that this war is down to Palestinian actions?
4. That might have been Murrays most embarrassing take I've ever seen him make, the fake dramatic 'what, you've never been?' Hahaha the idea, that spending time with the IDF and Isreali leaders gives you far more knowledge on a war is crazy dumb. Do you also make the claim that all death stats coming out of Palestine are mere Hamas propaganda, as Murray made seconds after this point?
5. No, you have massively mischaracterised Murrays first point, he had NO criticism of Togan or Dmith, and was claiming that those 2 guys Carrol and (I can't remember the other guy) should not be allowed to hold big platforms to talk about politics, which is the authoritarian stance Murray would argue against the left.
Murray was hot off the topic that Churchill was criticised for being a proponent of WW2 in a non super hero light. Murray has a huge Churchil sized chip on his shoulder from his claims that the left wanted to reframe history, and make Churchill an evil guy, and destroy his statues etc... and he made valid points then, but that trauma has spilled over let's be honest.
I find it gobsmacking that you would defend Murray with such vigour and falsehoods, please answer the questions above, it's incredibly important you explain whether you misheard or are being nefarious