 Let's start with this because I think this is probably the most important question for the audience that we have right now. Why should anybody care? So why should an American who has got free speeches on the attack and we've got Islamic terrorists to worry about and we've got Trump and a massive budget and all the nonsense that is happening out of Washington, why should this rise up and catch your attention? Why is this something that Americans should be reading out right now? And of course, Europeans as well because we've got a lot of listeners from Europe and Asia and Africa and everywhere else. So why should anybody in South America, I shouldn't forget that, why should anybody around the world care? I think the answer is that this conflict is not essentially about two groups of people fighting over one piece of land, which is how it's often understood. It is much wider than that. It is a conflict between what is essentially a free society and various movements and causes that are hostile to human life and freedom. And that's been true for the last 70 years in different forms in different shapes. So that's essentially, it's a battle front for anyone who's concerned with freedom and human progress and human life fundamentally. So that's sort of the big picture context. And one of the major groups in this conflict is the Islamist movement. So the same goals that Al Qaeda and ISIS have are the goals of Hamas and Islamic, Palestinian, Islamic jihad and all of the groups that would want to lead the Palestinian movement. So the Palestinian movement has become a subset of the Islamist movement globally. And of course Al Qaeda. So if you look at Osama bin Laden's publications, one of his earliest letters to the world was the Palestine question, how we must use that to rise up against the West. So they view it as a battle front and it really is a battle front in that respect. Then a secondary issue is that America has been neck deep in this conflict and that has been a significant problem. And I mean that in a sense that my view of America's role in the conflict is that it was irrational policy that we pursued. And we, you know, the goal was to solve it, right? For the last 25 odd years we've been pursuing what's called the peace process, which is bringing the Palestinians and Israelis together for negotiations. The outcome of that approach, which I talk about in the book, is it's actually made the conflict way worse than it was before, whether you measure it in terms of the amount of fighting, the death tolls, and sort of the moral dimension of the encouragement to the Palestinian cause and Islamists more generally. So America has created, has been involved in this conflict in a deep way. It's made our Middle East, our interest in the Middle East much sort of more imperiled. And then sort of if you want to zoom out and look at the Middle East in general, a lot of people in the foreign policy establishment or sort of the people who work in this field have a view that the conflict is central to the whole region's upheavals. And now that's a piece on Earth, if not for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, yes. Now that view is much less credible these days if you've paid attention to Syria or if you've paid attention to Egypt, because the Syrian uprising that became a civil war had very zero to do with Israel-Palestinia. And the Egyptian Arab Spring had nothing to do with Israel-Palestinia. But that view that the conflict... On the war in Yemen and the civil war 20, 30 years ago in Al-Jew and the conflict in Morocco, it just goes on and on and on. The idea is so ludicrous it's never had any currency. I mean, it's never been plausible, I think, if you understand, but the problem is it has currency in the sense that it's animated American policy. And so it's given the conflict a kind of... But I do think it's important to the region. So if you want to understand the region, you have to understand that the rise of Islam is integral to this conflict. The conflict is not separable from that. And how American policy has approached this conflict has had an impact on Islam. So to give you one sort of concrete, the Bush year is George W. Bush. So he's seen as the most pro-Israel president in recent memory. Maybe Trump is going to eclipse him in some people's minds because of the things he's done over Jerusalem as the capital. But for a long time, Bush has been the most pro-Israel president. Bush, I mean, you know this, but I think the audience needs to hear that Bush's policy of bringing elections to Middle East impacted the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by putting the Islamist resistance movement, known as Hamas, to most people, in power, basically, in Gaza and supercharged them in a way that led to several wars in this conflict. So there's many dimensions to the way in which America has interest in the region from the perspective of... Why are they on Bush? Can I add to that? Go ahead. Because, you know, my favorite topic, other than going after Trump, I think, but going after Bush is not only did he promote democracy and bring about Hamas and ultimately I think led to the Arab Spring and all the negative consequences that have come from that, but I think, but also he prevented Israel from being tough. So he weakened Israel. I remember at least two, maybe three situations in which in those days, Arik Sharon, who was, you know, relative to Israeli Prime Ministers, was sometimes tough, surrounded, yes or no, it's compound. And you could imagine him wanting to kill Arafat, and you could imagine that going through Arik Sharon's mind and him getting phone calls from Bush saying, you can't touch him. You cannot do it. And what message is that sent to the world? At the same time as we're supposed to be fighting terrorism, at the same time as you post 9-11 and all of that, the weakness that that projects to the world. And this from the most Israeli-friendly presidents supposedly ever. So just to flesh out your account, so this happened in 2002 and there literally was a phone call. Don't touch him. If you touch him, you're in trouble. So this is 2002 before the rise of Hamas. What people might not realize is 2002 was the ramping up of a terrorist war within Israel led by Arafat. And we have documentation. This isn't a, it was out of his control. This was, he's directing it. And he had a shipment of ammunition, like 80 tons of ammunition that was intercepted, heading to, so he was waging a war. And here's President Bush saying, you know, here are the handcuffs, put them on yourself, and don't take any further action against this guy. Who is sort of, if you want to counterpart, you sort of have been laden within this conflict. You know, if America was facing a bin Laden and his jihadists broadly. So to sum up the point, why, who cares about this? Well, whether you care about it or not, the Middle East cares about you. You know, I hate to quote the paraphrase Trotsky, but there's something to that point. The Middle East, the jihadists are involved in this conflict. We've done things in our irrational policy that have made it worse and it sort of elevated the significance of the conflict. But then if you, what's distinctive to, I think what our context brings is, if you really care about freedom and human life and progress, independent of the conflict, there's one country in that region that deserves your attention, which is there's things to learn about it. So here's Israel and there's a lot of faults and flaws to it. And I've talked about those in the book, but one thing that I think is important, government is a necessary good. And Israel has created a society that is essentially free in a region that isn't just mediocre free, that isn't just mixed economy free, that is actually run by monarchs, dictators and theocrats. And whose goal in running a country isn't, I mean, it's basically methodically to subordinate and exploit people and kill them, enslaving people basically. So here you have a region where there's actually a virtuous country in the sense of political virtue of creating a free society and it's prospered. So it's a demonstration of the value of freedom in a region that solely needs it. And you know, American presidents have spoken for a century about we stand with those who stand for freedom, but they don't. And here's an opportunity that calls out for using freedom as the principle. So this is part of what the book argues. This is the framework to use to guide you. Who's really stands with freedom, regardless of their race, regardless of their ethnicity, regardless of all those things. And that's how you should shape your approach. And that includes anyone in the Arab world and the Palestinians who really care for freedom. They deserve your attention. And then when you add on top of that, that their enemies are Islamic totalitarians who are trying to stamp out human freedom and prosperity. Okay, well, to me, that draws a bright line. You know, it's clear what you need to understand here. Yeah, so you're saying there are two reasons people should really understand the conflict. One is because we share an enemy. And the enemy is Islamic totalitarian Islamism that is clearly trying to kill Americans and has killed Americans. And Western is generally Europeans and this is a conflict going on really all over the world. And second, and this is something we need to talk more about. If you care about freedom, then you should care about places where freedom is threatened and you should care about defending those societies, those cultures, those governments, those countries that are free against barbarism. So this is an opportunity to educate yourself about freedom and about the threats to freedom. And...