Hey guys, greatly appreciate the work you do. Have you considered 'selling' life-time memberships? It would be an integrity issue, but I know that I and many of your viewers trust you. In the years to come you guys will no doubt be forced to change platforms, etc. But if you made a promise to your viewers, that say, $1000 buys you access to our work in the years to come, wherever and however we do it, I'm confident many people woulf take the leap with you. The way I see it, the best political contribution that I can make is to support high-quality independent journalists, like the two of you.
Just a thought: I believe a case could be made to include the Nathan Thrall interview to the justification for the show's expansion to Locals and Rumble. Yes, the interview has 60K views, however, it is never recommended-one must specifically seek it out. CONGRATS on three years!!!!
Krystal and Saagar, Thus far your coverage has largely convinced me that Israel should be doing more to avoid civilian casualties. The use of "dumb" bombs, the bombing of previously declared safe areas in the south of Gaza, the "Where's Daddy" program, etc. These all seem like cases where Israel is at the very least indifferent to civilian casualties. However, I hear RFK Jr and others arguing that the civilian casualty ratio in Gaza is actually quite small compared to other modern wars. I find it extremely difficult to find a answer here. I see the IDF claims 1:1, whereas some sources (including Krystal) claim 1:9. Where can you find an accurate answer on this? And how does it compare to other modern wars, for instance the Iraq War? -Brandon E