Four minutes after ten is the time. You're listening to James O'Brien on LBC. I kind of thought

this would happen. I thought that the coverage, certainly in the newspapers, I thought it would

have to be dialed down a little when all of the original claims, which were true until they weren't,

and I mean that quite sincerely, that they were true until they weren't. And I mean that quite sincerely.

They were true until they weren't.

The idea that Israel's response to the terror attack by Hamas on October the 7th was both necessary and retaliatory was true.

And then it crossed to a point where the rationale behind the destruction ceased to apply.

You know, people were not prepared.

We discovered it live on the program.

People were not prepared to say that they were fully supportive of the complete destruction of Gaza.

And they were not prepared to say on air, they didn't care how many civilians died.

There's a slight shift.

Some people have moved to the point where they're pretending that how many civilians died. There's a slight shift. Some people have moved to the point

where they're pretending that it's somehow necessary or that it will somehow deliver the eradication of

Hamas or the release of the hostages, both of which is, I'm afraid, pie in the sky. And probably,

certainly in the case of the eradication of Hamas it was from the

start I don't laugh but you know you watch a film quite often the origin story of why

somebody became a committed radical or rebel or radicalized involves their family being killed

by their enemies.

It's even Luke Skywalker's origin story, although, of course, it was his uncle and aunt

that were killed in the sort of first act of the first Star Wars film.

The idea that by unleashing this level of carnage upon that population, upon that people,

...