Nasrallah's Speech. From a political perspective, I don't think that this speech worked as well as the last speech. The last speech, although it was on audio, succeeded in changing the moral and opinions of many listeners, in Lebanon and beyond. Of course, Nasrallah has to focus on the Lebanese opinion at this stage because the Arab and Muslim opinion is largely solidly sympathetic to his cause, no matter what. But Nasrallah's main task is focused on Lebanese public opinion, and he did not say anything new to refute the propaganda claim of Saudi tools in the country. I don't see that this speech will go down as significant compared to the last audio one: where the delivery, and the dramatic announcement of the attack on the Israeli warship at the end, greatly influenced public opinion. This speech did not contain anything new, and I know that it needed to respond to Israeli propaganda which yesterday falsely claimed that he was hurt. I also felt that he was too defensive: he was at pains denying Iranian participation, when we know that Iranian participation is not even needed. But this was due to Saudi propaganda and the propaganda of their clients in Lebanon (Jumblat, Hariri, and the rest). He should not have been defensive on that point. If I were in his shoes, I would have not even been defensive about asking for help from Venezuela, just as Israel is not defensive in being an American military fortress. What is the big deal. I personally believe that he also should have replied toughly to the statement of Fu'ad Laval (Hariri prime minister of Lebanon), but he did not. He also should have replied very toughly to the statement of the House of Saud, and he did not. For that, I don't think that this speech worked for what he is trying to achieve.