Alex Gibney

Of course, now we have an Iran war, an Lebanon war, and so forth and so on.

But one of the goals, I'm convinced, and not me, but all of the witnesses who are, you know, very reputable members of the security establishment in Israel in the film, indicate that part of the enduring...

ferocity, savagery of the war was due to becoming a wartime president who could then not be prosecuted or successfully prosecuted for the crimes he had committed.

The trial, not only the investigation, but now there's been a trial.

The trial is still ongoing.

This is 10 years after the investigation started.

So long as he's the commander in chief and he's waging war, how dare you

attack the president so so in a way this kind of venal personal corruption that starts with cigars and and pink champagne for which they had code names you know and then evolves into corrupt deals relating to the media becomes a mechanism by which slowly but surely the corruption got greater and greater and greater until it became a moral corruption in which the world is now engulfed

I should point out that when you say I spoke to, I mean, the person who directed the film was Alexis Bloom.

I got the footage.

Sure, sure, sure.

No problem.

In any event, I think there were a lot of people who felt that a proper investigation into what Netanyahu knew about

about the possible impending attack by Hamas should be commenced.

However, that got rolled under the carpet because of the fact that he's now in a war with Hamas.

I mean, Hamas doesn't really have an air force.

You can't properly call it a war.

But I think there was a lot of talk about how much and what advanced warning Netanyahu may have had about the October 7 attacks.

I've never seen prima facie evidence of that fact, but there's certainly a lot of talk about it in Israel.

I personally think it may be a bit too cynical to think that he literally engendered an attack in order to counterattack.