Podcast appearances and mentions of Benito Mussolini

At that moment, Greece under the Metaxas Regime was saving the Jews from Hitler and Mussolini

As we near the end of 2025, Trump has implemented Opus Dei's Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 to fundamentally gut America's core values and checks and balances. The depth of harm is incalculable and Americans are 70% against Trump's handling of the economy. Threats to free speech, ignoring Constitutional guarantees, unprecedented corruption and violence undermine people's feelings of safety and security. So we are resharing this vital interview in the hopes of educating and motivating millions of Americans and people worldwide to stand up for democracy and rule of law. In this discussion with historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat, we discuss the subtle and often sinister ways authoritarianism intertwines with the psychological mechanisms of control. We connect the dots from my experiences with cults and coercive persuasion. Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a historian, as an NYU professor and expert on fascism and authoritarianism. She is also a celebrated author,  Her book Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present explores the tactics of illiberal rulers and the history of resistance against them. With a focus on unraveling the complex tapestry of undue influence in modern politics, my discussion with historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat sheds light on the intricate relationship between authoritarianism and its psychological underpinnings. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Could Trump woo the upcoming 2026 World Cup and subvert the world's most beloved sport for his own ugly ends? Not according to Simon Kuper, the Anglo-Dutch-French football writer whose adventures at the last nine World Cups are documented in his upcoming book World Cup Fever. Mussolini failed to control the 1934 World Cup in Italy, Kuper reminds us, and Trump won't have any more success manipulating the 2026 competition in America. Rather than a stage for political power, he argues, the World Cup represents the greatest of all communal sporting experiences. The Beautiful Game 1 Authoritarians 0. Justice is round. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

47 MinutesPG-13Kurt works for Antelope Hill Publishing.Kurt joins Pete to talk about the speeches of Mussolini in the late war years, detailed in "Rise and Fight: Speeches from the 1943–1945 Italian Social Republic," which Antelope Hill recently published in English.Antelope Hill - Promo code "peteq" for 5% offRise and Fight: Speeches from the 1943-1945 Italian Social RepublicThe Battle for BerlinPete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

Il Morning Show 19 Dicembre 2025Sostieni anche tu questo programma...dona!https://buy.stripe.com/dR6bJU69Cf7k6WseUU

Il protagonista di questa storia è venuto a mancare ad un anno dalla registrazione della puntata. Con grande rammarico per la scomparsa, speriamo che questo lavoro possa essere un ulteriore ricordo di Dino Dal Pan. Auguriamo un buon ascolto.Se volessi contribuire a questo progetto, ecco il linkwww.storiedimontagna.comContatti: andataeritorno.podcast@gmail.com La nostra pagina InstagramIl nostro canale Youtube

Weitere spannende Geschichten findet ihr in der aktuellen Ausgabe 01.2026 von DAMALS - Das Magazin für Geschichte.Folgt uns auf eurer Lieblings-Podcast-Plattform und in den Sozialen Medien:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1526985154Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2Ek5jIhFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/damalspodcast/Twitter: https://twitter.com/damalspodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/damalsundheute_podcast/ Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Tras la derrota del Tercer Reich y de la Italia gobernada por Mussolini, los nazis y fascistas europeos huyen de la justicia aliada. Esta huida es conocida como “las líneas de rata”. La ciudad de Madrid, a partir de 1945, se convierte en un refugio idóneo para todos ellos, amparados por el régimen franquista.

Hey before I begin I just want to thank all of you who have joined the patreon, you guys are awesome. Please let me know what other figures, events or other things you want to hear about in the future and I will try to make it happen.   If you are a long time listener to the Pacific War week by week podcast over at KNG or viewer of my youtube channel you have probably heard me talk about Tomoyuki Yamashita, the Tiger of Malaya quite often. It goes without saying when it comes to Japanese generals of WW2 he stands out. Not just to me, from the offset of the war he made a large impression on westerners, he achieved incredible feats early on in the war. Now if you look up books about him, you will pretty much only find information in regards to his infamous war crimes trial. Hell it was so infamous the legal doctrine of hierarchical accountability for war crimes, whereby a commanding officer is legally responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by his subordinates, was created. This is known as the command responsibility or “the Yamashita standard”. His court case was very controversial, he remains a controversial figure, certainly to the people of territories he campaigned in, but I think what can be said of him the most is he was special amongst the Japanese generals. Anyways lets get the show on the road as they say.   So who was Yamashita? When he was 59 years old commanding forces in the Philippines against General Douglas MacArthur, he weighed 220 ls and stood 5 feet 9 inches. His girth pressed out against his green army uniform. He had an egg shaped head, balding, wide spaced eyes and a flat nose. He wore a short mustache, sort of like Hitlers, until it grayed then he shaved it off. He was not a very attractive man, Filipinos referred to him as “old potato face” while Americans called him “a florid, pig faced man”.   Tomobumi Yamashita was born in 1885, he was the second son of Dr. Sakichi Yamashita and Yuu Yamashita in Osugi village, on Shikoku island. Like most males of his day he was indoctrinated into military preparatory school from a young age. Yamashita had no chosen the army as a career, in his words ‘my father suggested the idea, because I was big and healthy, and my mother did not seriously object because she believed, bless her soul, that I would never pass the highly competitive entrance examination. If I had only been cleverer or had worked harder, I would have been a doctor like my brother”Yamashita would graduate from the 18th class of the IJA academy in november of 1905, ranked 16th out of 920 cadets.    In 1908 he was promoted to the rank of Lt and during WW1 he fought against Imperial German and Austro-Hungarian forces in the famous siege of Qingdao, which if you are interested I did an episode over on my Youtube channel about this battle. Its a very overlooked battle, but many histories firsts occurred at it like the first carrier attack. In 1916 he was promoted to captain and attended the 28th class of the Army War college to graduate sixth in his class that year. He also married Hisako Nagayama in 1916, she was the daughter of the retired General Nagayama.    It seems Yamashita's brush against the Germans in 1914 had a huge influence on him, because he became fascinated with Germany and would serve as assistant military attache at Bern and Berlin from 1919-1922. He spent his time in Germany alongside Captain Hideki Tojo, both men would run into each other countless times and become bitter rivals. Both men toured the western front, visiting Hamburg and witnessed first hand the crippling inflation and food prices that came from Germany's defeat. Yamashita said to Tojo then “If Japan ever has to fight any nation, she must never surrender and get herself in a state like this.” He returned to Japan in 1922, was promoted to major and served a few different posts in the Imperial Headquarters and Staff College. Yamashita became a leading member of the Kodoha faction, while Tojo became a leading member of the rival Toseiha faction. In 1927 Yamashita was sent again to Europe, this time to Vienna as a military attache. Just prior to departing he had invested in a business selling thermometers starting by one of his wife's relatives, the business failed horribly and Yamashita was tossed into debt, bailiffs literally came to seize his house. As told to us by his biographer “For a regular officer to have contracted such a debt, however innocently, was a disgrace. He felt he should resign his commission.” Yamashita's brother refused to allow him to quit, instructing him to leave for Vienna, while he resolved his debts. His days in Vienna were the best of his life, professed Yamashita. He studied economics at Vienna university and made friends with a Japanese widow, who introduced him to a German woman named Kitty and they had an affair. This would spring forward his reputation as an eccentric officer. Yamashita was obsessed over hygiene,and refused to eat fruit unless it was thoroughly washed. He avoided ice water, hated dancing and never learnt how to drive a car. One of his most notable quirks was his habit of falling asleep often during meetings where he legendarily would snore. Like I may have said in previous podcast and youtube episodes, this guy was quite a character, often described as a big bear.    Now this is not a full biography on Yamashita so I cant devolve to far into things, such as his first fall from grace. During the February 26th coup incident of 1936, Yamashita was a leading member of the Kodoha faction and helped mediate a peaceful end to the standoff, however in truth he was backing the coup. He simply managed to not get caught red handed at the time doing too much for the mutineers, regardless he lost favor with the outraged Emperor and many young captains whom he loved like sons killed themselves in disgrace. If you want to know more about the February coup of 1936, check out my series on Emperor Hirohito or General Ishawara, they both talk about it in depth and touch upon Yamashita's role a bit.    The coup led to the dissolvement of the Kodoha faction and the dominance of the Toseiha, led by Tojo. Yamashita tried to resign from the IJA, but his superiors dissuade him. He was relegated to a post in Korea, which honestly was a punishment. Yamashita would say “When I was posted to Korea, I felt I had been given a tactful promotion but that in fact my career was over. Even when I was given my first fighting company in North China, I still felt I had no future in the Army, so I was always on the front line, where the bullets flew the thickest. I sought only a place to die.”  He had some time to reflect upon his conduct while in Korea, he began to study Zen Buddhism. He was promoted to Lt General in November of 1937 and when the China war broke out he was one of those speaking out that the incident needed to end swiftly and that peaceful relations must be made with the UK and US. He received a unimportant post in the Kwantung army and in 1938 was assigned command of the IJA 4th division. He led the forces during in northern china against insurgents until he returned to Tokyo in July of 1940. His fellow officers lauded him as Japan's finest general. Meanwhile Tojo had ascended to war minister and one of his first moves was to send a delegation to Germany. Tojo considered Yamashita a ruthless and forceful commander and feared he would become a powerful rival against him one day. Yamashita would go on the record to say then “I have nothing against Tojo, but he apparently has something against me.” You see, Yamashita had no political ambitions, unlike Tojo who was by nature a political monster. “My life, is that of a soldier; I do not seek any other life unless our Emperor calls me.” In late 1940, Tojo asked Yamashita to lead a team of 40 experts on a 6 month train tour of Germany and Italy, a move that kept him out of Tokyo, because Tojo was trying to solidify his political ambitions. This is going to become a looming theme between the two men.   He was presented to Adolf Hitler in January of 1941, passing along messages from Tojo and publicly praising the Fuhrer, though privately he was very unimpressed by the man  “He may be a great orator on a platform, with his gestures and flamboyant way of speaking. But standing behind his desk listening he seems much more like a clerk.” Hitler pressed upon him to push Japan to declare war on Britain and the US. At the time of course Japan was facing China and had two major conflicts with the USSR, thus this was absolutely not in her interest. “My country is still fighting in China, and we must finish that war as soon as possible. We are also afraid that Russia may attack us in Manchuria. This is no time for us to declare war on other countries.” Yamashita hoped to inspect Germany's military techniques and technology to help Japan. Hitler promised open exchanges of information stating “All our secrets are open to you,”, but this would prove to be a lie. “There were several pieces of equipment the Germans did not want us to see. Whenever I tried to persuade the German General Staff to show us things like radar—about which we had a rudimentary knowledge—the conversation always turned to something else.”   Yamashita met with field Marshal Hermann Goring who gave him an overview of the war in europe. Goring would complain about Yamashita falling asleep during lectures and meetings and he believed the man was drunk often. Yamashita met Benito Mussolini in June of 1941 receiving a similar rundown to what he got in Germany. Yamashita visited Kitty in Vienna for a quick fling, but overall the trip deeply impacted Yamashita's resolve that Japan should stay out of the Europeans war and that Germany made a grievous error invading the USSR in June of 1941. This is what he said the members of the commission “You know the results of our inspection as well as I do. I must ask you not to express opinion in favor of expanding the alliance between Japan, Germany and Italy. Never suggest in your report that Japan should declare war on Great Britain and the United States. We must not and cannot rely upon the power of other nations. Japan needs more time, particularly as there may be aggression against us from Russia. We must have time to rebuild our defense system and adjust the whole Japanese war machine. I cannot repeat this to you often enough.” His report was similar, and it really pissed off Tojo who was trying to develop plans for a war against America. Yamashita would then get exiled to Manchuria in July of 1941, but Tojo's resentment towards him could only go so far, because Yamashita was one of their best generals and in his planned war against Britain and America, he would need such a man.   Yamashita's time in Europe reshaped his views on how to conduct war. He saw first hand blitzkrieg warfare, it seems it fascinated him. He consistently urged the implementation of new proposals calling for the streamlining of air arms; to mechanize the Army; to integrate control of the armed forces in a defense ministry coordinated by a chairman of Joint Chiefs of staff; to create a paratroop corps and to employ effective propaganda. Basically he saw what was working for the Germans against the allies and wanted Japan to replicate it. Tojo did not like many of the proposal, hated the fact they were coming from Yamashita, so he obviously was not keen on making them happen. Luckily for Yamashita he would be given a chance to implement some of his ideas in a big way.   On November 6th of 1941, Lt General Yamashita was appointed commander of the 25th Japanese army. His orders were to seize the Malay Peninsula and then the British naval base at Singapore. The Malaya Peninsula snakes 700 miles south of Thailand, a rugged sliver of land that constricts at its narrowest point to about 60 miles wide. It hold mountains that split the peninsula in half, some going as high as 7000 feet. During this time Malaya produced around 40% of the worlds rubber, 60% of its tin, two resources vital for war. At its very southern tip lies Singapore, a diamond shaped island connected to the mainland by a 1115 stone causeway. Singapore's largest asset was its naval base guarding the passage from the Pacific and Indian oceans. Together Malay and Singapore represented the key to controlling what Japan called the Southern Resource Area.   Singapore was known as the gibraltar of the east for good reason. It was a massively fortified naval base. The base had been developed between 1923-1938 and cost 60 million pounds, around 2 billion pounds today. It was 21 square miles, had the largest dry dock in the world, the 3rd largest floating dock and enough fuel tanks to support the entire royal navy for 6 months. She was defended by 15 inch naval guns stationed at the Johre battery, Changi and Buona vista battery. And despite the infamous myth some of you may have heard, these guns were fully capable of turning in all directions including the mainland. For those unaware a myth perpetuated after the fall of Singapore that her large 15 inch guns could not turn to the mainland and that this spelt her doom, no it was not that, it was the fact they mostly had armor piercing shells which are using to hit ships and not land targets. Basically if you fire an armor piercing shell at land it imbeds itself then explodes, while HE shells would have torn any Japanese army to pieces. Alongside the 15 inch monsters, there were countless other artillery pieces such as 9.2 inch guns. By December of 1941 Malaya and Singapore held 164 first line aircraft out of a total of 253 aircraft, but many of the fighters were the obsolete Brewster F2A Buffalo, a pretty slow, fat little beast that could take a licking as it was armored, but against the Zero fighter it was unbelievably outmatched in speed and maneuverability.    The Japanese acquired a major gift prior to the outbreak of war. On november 11th, 1940, the SS Automedon, a German raider attacked the HMS Atlantis which was carrying documents intended for the British far east command. The documents indicated the British fleet was not going to help Singapore; that Britain would not declare war if Thailand was invaded and that Hong Kong was expendable. The Germans gave the documents to the Japanese who were very excited by the information.    Starting in January of 1941, Colonel Masanobu Tsuji led the Taiwan Army Research section based on Formosa to investigate how a campaign could be waged in Malay and Singapore. His findings on the defenses of Malay and Singapore were summed up in these 3 points: 1. Singapore Fortress was solid and strong facing the sea, but vulnerable on the peninsular side facing the Johore Strait;  Newspaper reports of a strong Royal Air Force (RAF) presence were propaganda;  Although British forces in Malaya numbered from five to six divisions (well over 80,000 men), less than half were Europeans.    Now just a little bit about Tsuji as he was to become the chief of staff operations and planning under Yamashita. Tsuji was extremely insubordinate and a political schemer. He was a Toseiha faction fanatic, loyal to Tojo and thus definitely an enemy to Yamashita. Yamashita wrote of Tsuji in his war diary “is egotistical and wily. He is a sly dog and unworthy to serve the country. He is a manipulator to be carefully watched.” Tsuji would go on to have a infamous reputation for ordering atrocities in the name of his superiors, often without them knowing and this would be very much the case under Yamashita. Now using Tsuji's intelligence Yamashita began plans at his HQ at Samah, a port on Hainan island, starting in November of 1941 on how to launch the campaign. He was initially offered 5 divisions for the invasion, but he felt he could accomplish the objective with only three. There are a few reasons why he believed this; first, Tsuji's research suggested the peninsula roads would be the center of the battlefront and that the flanks would extend no more than a km or so to the left or right due to the dense jungle terrain (in fact Yamashita was planning to assault from the jungle specifically); 2nd intelligence indicated the defending troops were not of the highest caliber (the British were busy in Europe thus many of the troops in southeast asia were poorly trained, half were british regulars the rest were Australian, Indian and Malayan); 3rd Yamashita was aware “the Japanese army were in the habit of flinging more troops into the battle than could possibly be maintained” boy oh boy tell that one to the future boys on Guadalcanal. Thus he calculated 3 divisions was the maximum to be fed, equipped and supplied. Based on his recommendations the 25th army was created with 3 divisions; the 5th under Lt General Takuma Matsui; 18th under Lt General Renya Mutaguchi and the Imperial guards division of Lt General Takuma Nishimura. Supporting these would be two regiment of heavy field artillery and the 3rd tank brigade. Something that made Yamashita's campaign quite interesting was the usage and amount of tanks. He was invading with around 200 or so tanks consisting of the Type 95 Ha-Go light tank, type 97 Chi-Ha and Type 89 I-Go medium tanks and Type 97 Te-Ke tankettes. For aircraft he had the 3rd Air division, 459 aircraft strong with an additional 159 aircraft from the IJN to support them. The 3rd air division had a variety of aircraft such as Nakajima Ki-27 Nate's, Nakajima ki-43 Oscars, Kitsubishi ki-51 Sonia's, Kawasaki ki-48 Lily's, Mitsubishi ki-21 sally's, Mitsubishi ki-30 Ann's, Mitsubishi ki-15 babs and Mitsubishi ki-46 dinahs. For the IJN it was the 22nd air flotilla using Mitsubishi G3M1 Nell's, Mitsubishi A5M4 Claudes and some A6M Zeros. To say it was a lot of firepower at his disposal is an understatement, Yamashita was packing heat, heat he could use in a blitzkrieg fashion.   His staff at Samah identified 5 operational objectives: 1 Simultaneous capture of Singora and Patani, Thailand and Kota Bharu, Malaya.  2 Capture of all enemy airfields in southern Thailand and Malaya.  3 Occupation of Kuala Lumpur, Malaya.  4 Occupation of Johore Bahru, and control of Johore Strait.  5 Conquest of Singapore.    Colonel Tsuji, appointed Chief of Operations and Planning for the 25th Army, proposed the following plan which was readily approved:  Land the main strength of the 5th Division simultaneously and without warning at Singora and Patani, and at the same time land a powerful section of the 18th Division to attack Kota Bharu.  The troops disembarked at Singora and Patani to press forward immediately to attack the line of the Perak River Hand capture its bridge and the Alor Star aerodrome.  The troops landed at Kota Bharu to press forward along the eastern coast as far as Kuantan.    The landing at Kota Bharu, the only one in Malaya was expected to be opposed and quite risky. But if it was successful, it would create a useful diversion away from the main force landings in Thailand.   The landings took place around 2:15am local time on December 8th, about an hour and 20 minutes before the attack on Pearl Harbor. The landings went largely unopposed, except at Kota Bahru where the Japanese saw heavy resistance. The British had anticipated this landing point and created operation Matador, a plan to pre-emptively invade southern thailand to secure defensive lines against the Japanese, however this plan was never accepted by British high command for obvious political reasons. But on December 5th, with a Japanese invasion looking certain, suddenly London gave permission to the Far east commanders to decide if Operation matador should be activated or not. The commander in Malaya, General Arthur Percival recommended forestalling it, fearing to violate Thai sovereignty, which ultimately would be the doom of a defense for Malaya.   At the battle of Kota Bharu, the 9th infantry division of Major General Barstow attempted holding off the Japanese from taking the important Kota Bharu airfield. The 8th brigade of Billy Key had fortified the beaches with pillboxes, barbed wire and land mines. The Japanese took heavy losses, but they were able to find gaps and fill them up until Brigadier Key had to ask permission to pull out. The royal air force at Kota Bharu tossed Hudson bombers to hit the troop transports, but it was a suicide mission to do so. Meanwhile the IJA 5th division landed at Pattani and Songkhla in Thailand while the Imperial guards division marched over the border from French Indochina. The Japanese encountered very little resistance, the leader of Thailand Plaek Pibulsonggram had been trying to get assurances from the allies and Japanese all the way up until the invasion, once the Japanese landed he knew his best option was to play nice and sign an armistice. This basically spelt doom for malaya as the Japanese were given access to Thailand's airfields which they used to smash the forward airfields in Malaya.   The first day of aerial encounters were a catastrophe for the British. General Percival would comment “The rapidity with which the Japanese got their air attacks going against our aerodromes was quite remarkable. Practically all the aerodromes in Kelantan, Kedah, Province Wellesley, and Penang, were attacked, and in most cases fighters escorted the bombers. The performance of Japanese aircraft of all types, and the accuracy of their bombing, came as an unpleasant surprise. By the evening our own air force had already been seriously weakened.” Brigadier Key withdrew after causing an estimated 800 casualties upon the Japanese while taking roughly 465. While Kota Bharu was being fought over, Percival unleashed Operation Krohcol, a 2.0 of Matador seeing British forces cross into Thailand to intercept the incoming enemy. It was an absolute disaster, the British attackers were defeated not only by the Japanese 5th division, but some Royal Thai police also defended their territory. The operation had basically become a race to who could seize the important focal point first and the Japanese took it first thus winning decisively. To add to that misery, force Z, consisting of the battleship HMS Prince of Wales,, battlecruiser Repulse and 4 destroyers tried to intercept the Japanese invasion fleet only to be utterly destroyed by overwhelming Japanese airforces.   Within 4 days of the landings, the 5th division advanced from Singora through the town of Jitra to capture the RAF airfield at Alor star, around 100 miles away. Yamashita managed this using flanking techniques that saw his army take town after town and airfield after airfield. There were numerous natural obstacles to the advance such as dense jungles, very long supply lines, torrential rain and heat, but he had a secret weapon, bicycles. At Jitra Percival made his first major stand. Holding Jitra would safeguard the northern airfields of Malaya, but it was a folly to do so as the airfields in question were not provided adequate aircraft and the British lacked something extremely important to be able to defend themselves, tanks. Colonel Tsuji saw the fighting at Jitra first hand and reported “Our tanks were ready on the road, and the twenty or so enemy armored cars ahead were literally trampled underfoot … The enemy armored cars could not escape by running away, and were sandwiched between our medium tanks … It was speed and weight of armor that decided the issue.” The British had spread themselves far too thinly across a 14 mile front with jungle on their right flank and rubber plantations and mangrove swamps to their left. Yamashita used a innovative blitzkrieg like tactic, he combined his air, artillery, tanks and bicycle infantry to punch holes in concentrated attacks forcing allied defenders to withdraw. As Percival would write later in his memoirs “This withdrawal would have been difficult under the most favorable conditions. With the troops tired, units mixed as the result of the fighting, communications broken and the night dark, it was inevitable that orders should be delayed and that in some cases they should never reach the addressees. This is what in fact occurred … the withdrawal, necessary as it may have been, was too fast and too complicated for disorganized and exhausted troops, whose disorganization and exhaustion it only increased”    Yamashita had ingeniously thought of employing large numbers of bicycles for his infantry so they could keep up momentum and speed with his mechanized forces. Oh and he didn't bring thousands of bicycles over to Malaya, the real genius was that they were there ready for him. His intelligence prior to the invasion indicated nearly all civilians in malaya had bicycles, so when the Japanese came over they simply stole them. Half of Yamashitas troops moved in motor vehicles while the rest road on 18,000 bicycles. As noted by Tsuji “With the infantry on bicycles, there was no traffic congestion or delay. Wherever bridges were destroyed the infantry continued their advance, wading across the rivers carrying their bicycles on their shoulders, or crossing on log bridges held up on the shoulders of engineers standing in the stream.” They Japanese overwhelmed the defenders who were forced to fight, flee into the jungles or flee along the roads where they were simply outsped by the faster Japanese. The defenders left numerous stores of food, abandoned vehicles, and supplies that Yamashita's men would dub “churchill's allowance”. British Lt Colonel Spencer Chapmanwas forced to hide on the sides of roads watching Japanese pedal past remarking “The majority were on bicycles in parties of forty or fifty, riding three or four abreast and talking and laughing just as if they were going to a football match.” The Japanese had the ability to carry their gear on the bicycles, giving them an enormous advantage over the allies fleeing on foot. The Japanese could travel faster, further and less fatigued. When the British destroyed 250 bridges during their flight, “the Japanese infantry (to continue) their advance, wading across the rivers carrying their bicycles on their shoulders, or crossing on log bridges held up on the shoulders of engineers standing in the stream”. The British could not escape the bicycle blitzkrieg as it became known, countless were forced to surrender under constant pressure and relentless pursuit.    Alongside the bicycle warfare, whenever Yamashita faced terrain unsuitable for his tanks, he ordered amphibious landings further south to outflank the enemy's  rear.   Meanwhile the war in the air went equally terrible for the allies. The RAF had pulled back its best pilots and aircraft to deal with the war for Britain against the Luftwaffe. 21 airfields were in Malaya and Singapore, few of them had modern facilities, only 15 concrete runways. The heavy rain made the grass airstrips unusable. All the airfields were allocated around 8 heavy and 8 light anti aircraft guns. Quality radar units were completely inadequate. The Super Spitfires and Hyper Hurricanes were mostly in Britain fighting the Germans, while Buffaloes were allocated to Malaya. The Japanese airforces easily overcame the allied opposition and established air superiority quickly. Launching from airfields in Vietnam, they bombed all the airfields into submission and continuously applied pressure to Singapore. . The aerial dominance of the Zero and ‘Oscar' fighters served to undermine the morale of the British infantryman on the ground. As historian H. P. Wilmot has observed, “in the opening phase of the war the Zero-sen was just what the Japanese needed, and the Allies were devastated by the appearance of a ‘super fighter.' To add insult to injury, every airfield taken starting at the most northern going further and further south towards Singapore offered the Japanese new launching points to make for faster attack.   Yamashita's forces reached the southern tip of the peninsula in just 8 weeks, his men had covered some 700 miles, about 12 miles a day on average. They fought 95 large and smaller battles doing so. Multiple lines of defense were erected one after another to try and halt the Japanese advance, to kill their momentum. Starting at the beach landings, to Jitra, then to Kampar, over the Slim river, then Johor. The British failed to employ “leave behind forces” to provide guerilla warfare in lost territories leading not only the Japanese to easily consolidate their gains, the Thai's also came down and grabbed some territory. At the battle of Muar Major General Gordon Bennet deployed the allied defenders south of the Muar River and it was widely believed here they would finally halt the Japanese. Then the Imperial Guards division outflanked them performing an amphibious landing and advancing down the coastal route. The 5th Japanese division followed a parallel route through the center and the 18th division landed near Endau. The allies were thus surrounded and took heavy casualties, countless were forced to flee through swamps and thick jungle abandoned their stuff. Gordons 45th brigade were absolutely shattered, effectively disbanded and left north of the Muar river as the rest of the allies fled south. The defeat at Muar broke the British belief they could hold even a toehold on Malay. Percivals strategy to fight delaying actions until the arrival of reinforcements to Singapore had fatally undermined his troops ability to hold onto defensive positions. As the British governor of the Johore straits settlement, Sir Shenton Thomas would say on January 6th ‘“We … have gone in for mechanized transport to the nth degree. It is a fearsomely cumbersome method. We have pinned our faith to the few roads but the enemy used tracks and paths, and gets round to our rear very much as he likes.”” Yet alongside the conquest came a series of atrocities.    At the Parit Sulong Bridge south of the Muar, Captain Rewi Snelling was left behind with 150 wounded Australian and Indian soldiers not able to trek south. The Imperial guards division herded them into buildings, denied them medical treatment, many of the Indians were beheaded, others shot. This become known as the parit sulong massacre. Its hard to saw what Yamashita would have known about this incident, it technically was under the command of Takuma nishimura. On January 22nd, Nishimura gave the orders for prisoners to be forced outside, doused with petrol and set on fire. Nishimura would be sentenced to life in prison by a Singapore court, but on a flight back to Japan he was hijacked by Australian military police in Hong Kong who grabbed him and held a trial for the Parit Sulong massacre, finding him guilty and hanging him on june 11th of 1951.    When the Japanese reached the straits of Johore, Yamashita took several days to perform reconnaissance, allowing his forces to regroup and prepare to attack the massive fortress. His plan for the invasion would see the Imperial guards perform a feint attack on the northeast side of Singapore, landing on the nearby Palau Ubin island on february 7th. The 5th and 18th division would remain concealed in the jungle until the night of the night of the 8th when they would cross the Johore and hit the northwest side of Singapore. The causeway to Singapore had been blown up by the retreating British, but the ability for Singapore to defend itself from a northern attack was lackluster. When Churchill was told by Wavell the Japanese sat on the other side of the Johore strait ready to attack the fortress he said ““I must confess to being staggered by Wavell's telegram. It never occurred to me for a moment that … Singapore … was not entirely fortified against an attack from the Northwards …””   With barely enough supplies or logistical support for his campaign, Yamashita's rapid advance down the Malay peninsula walked a tightrope of what was possible. His 70,000 men of which 30,000 were frontline troops had overcome a British force double their number. In Japan he garnered the epithet “Tiger of Malaya”, which ironically he was not too happy about. Later on in the war he would bark at a German attache “I am not a tiger. The tiger attacks its prey in stealth but I attack the enemy in a fair play”.   By this point Singapore had swollen from a population of 550,000to nearly a million. Percival had a total of 70,000 infantry of mixed experience plus 15,000 clerks and support staff to man lines if necessary. 38 battalions, 17 Indian, 13 British, 6 Australian and 2 Malayan. He placed his weakest troops west of the causeway, near the abandoned naval base rather than nearby the airfield which he considered was going to be Yamashita's thrust. He placed his best forces over there, which would prove fatally wrong as Yamashita hit west of the causeway. Yamashita meanwhile could only muster 30,000 troops, he was outnumbered 2:1 and amphibious assaults called for the attacker to hold a 2:1 advantage for success. Yamashita's men were exhausted, they had suffered 4565 casualties, roughly 1793 deaths in their 55 day advance south. Worse yet, Yamashita had a critical supply issue. He had greatly exceeded his supply lines and had been surviving on the abandoned churchill stores along the way. His ammunition was critical low, it is said he was down to 18 functional tanks, allowing his men to fire 100 rounds per day, the fuel ran out, and as Yamashita put it “My attack on Singapore was a bluff—a bluff that worked. I had 30,000 men and was outnumbered more than three to one. I knew that if I had to fight for long for Singapore, I would be beaten. That is why the surrender had to be at once. I was very frightened all the time that the British would discover our numerical weakness and lack of supplies and force me into disastrous street fighting.” He told his men of the 5th and 18th division not to build any cooking fires so they could conceal their positions in the jungle as he gathered hundreds of collapsible boats and other crafts to ford the strait. He gathered 40 divisional commanders and senior officers to a rubber plantation and with a flushed red face read out his attack orders while pouring them Kikumasamune (ceremonial wine). He made a traditional toast and said “It is a good place to die; surely we shall conquer”. He had to get the British to surrender quickly, he had to essentially ‘bluff” his enemy. He had to make the British think he was fully armed and supplied for a prolonged siege, how could he do so? He fired his artillery like a mad man, knowing full well they would run out of shells.   Starting on February 3rd,  Yamashita's artillery supported by aerial bombings hit Singapore for 5 days. On the night of the 7th, 400 Imperial Guards crossed to the Ibin island performing their feint attack. Percivals attention was grabbed to the east successfully, while on the night of the 8th the 5th and 18th divisions assembled carefully at the water's edge. At 8:30pm the first wave of 4000 Japanese troops crossed the Johore strait aboard 150 small vessels. The noise of their engines was drowned out by artillery. The thinly spread Australian lines, 3000 or so men led by Major General Bennet were breached fast leading to pockets of surrounded australian troops. As Lewis Gunner cliff olsen recalled “We were horribly spread out and it was pitch black and they [Japanese troops] were very hard to see. They walked through us half the time.” A beachhead was formed, a soon 14,000 Japanese had crossed by dawn.    Communications broke down for the allies, Percival unwilling to believe the Japanese's main thrust was in the west declined to send reinforcements there. When he did finally realize the main thrust was in the west he began to withdraw troops from quiet sectors and built up a reserve. The Japanese held air supremacy and their artillery was fierce. The big 15 inch guns of singapore held mostly armor piercing shells designed to hit ships, there were few HE shells available. When they fired upon the Japanese the shells would hit the ground they would embed deeply before exploding doing little damage. The defenders had no tanks, basically no more aircraft. The last departing ships fled the scene as everything was burning chaos around them. Morale was breaking for the defenders. By the 9th, Japanese bombers were raining bombs on allied positions unopposed. Bennet was forced to pull men back to a new line of defense from the east of the Tengah airfield to the north of Jurong. Poor communications hampered the northern sector of Brigadier Duncan Maxwell whose troops actually battered the hell out of the Imperial Guards who had landed at 10pm on the 9th. The Imperial guards gradually managed a foothold on a beach, but Maxwell feared encirclement and withdrew his men against direct orders of Bennet. The retreat opened up the flank of the 11th indian division who were overrun. All of the beaches west of the causeway fell to the enemy, when they did Yamashita brought over his tanks to smash the new Jurong line. The Japanese could have potentially stormed the city center at this point, but they held back, because in reality, Percival had created a formidable reserve in the middle. The Australian 22nd brigade took the brunt of the fighting.    Yamashita was running out of reserves and his attacks were reaching their limit, but he needed the battle to end swiftly. Yamashita was shocked and shaken when he received a report that the British troop strength within the city was twice what they believed. With covert desperation, Yamashita ordered his artillery to fire until their last rounds and sent Percival a demand for surrender. “In the spirit of chivalry we have the honour of advising your surrender. Your army, founded on the traditional spirit of Great Britain, is defending Singapore, which is completely isolated, and raising the fame of Great Britain by the ut¬ most exertions and heroic feelings. . . . From now on resistance is futile and merely increases the danger to the million civilian inhabitants without good reason, exposing them to infliction of pain by fire and sword. But the development of the general war situation has already sealed the fate of Singapore, and the continuation of futile resistance would only serve to inflict direct harm and in¬ juries to thousands of non-combatants living in the city, throwing them into further miseries and horrors of war. Furthermore we do not feel you will in¬ crease the fame of the British Army by further resistance.”   Singapore had received another order prior to this from Churchill “It is certain that our troops on Singapore Island greatly outnumber any Japanese that have crossed the Straits. We must defeat them. Our whole fighting reputation is at stake and the honour of the British Empire. The Americans have held out on the Bataan Peninsula against far greater odds, the Russians are turning back the picked strength of the Germans, the Chinese with almost complete lack of mod¬ ern equipment have held the Japanese for AVi years. It will be disgraceful if we yield our boasted fortress of Singapore to inferior enemy forces. There must be no thought ofsparing troops or the civil population and no mercy must be shown to weakness in any shape or form. Commanders and senior officers must lead their troops and if necessary die with them. There must be no question or thought of surrender. Every unit must fight it out to the end and in close contact with the enemy. ... I look to you and your men to fight to the end to prove that the fighting spirit that won our Empire still exists to enable us to defend it.”   What was Percival to do? The Japanese had seized control over Singapore water reservoirs, the population would die of thirst within 2-3 days. Japanese shells were causing fires and death everywhere. People were panicking, trying to get on the very last boats leaving the port, even though that surely meant death to the IJN. An American sailor recalled “There was a lot of chaos and people killed on the docks during these bombardments. Everywhere you looked there was death. Even in the water there were dead sharks and people floating all around.” Defeatism was endemic. Australian troops were overheard saying “Chum, to hell with Malaya and Singapore. Navy let us down, air force let us down. If the bungs [natives] won't fight for their bloody country, why pick on me?” Sensing a complete collapse Percival formed a tight defense arc in front of the city, and by the 13th his commanders were telling him they believed Singapore was already doomed. Wavell was asked for approval for surrender, but he replied  “to continue to inflict maximum damage on enemy for as long as possible by house-to-house fighting if necessary.” Percival then told him the water reservoirs were taken, so Wavell sent back “YOUR GALLANT STAND IS SERVING A PURPOSE AND MUST BE CONTINUED TO THE LIMIT OF ENDURANCE”   On the 15th, Percival held a morning conference reported there was no more fuel, field gun nor bofor ammunition. In 24 hours their water would be done. He told them he would ask for a ceasefire at 4pm, by the end of the day Wavell gave him permission to surrender. Over at his HQ on the Bukit Timah heights, Yamashita was staring at a Union Jack fluttering over Fort Canning. Then a field phone rang, and a frontline commander reported the British were sending out a flag of truce.   Meanwhile back on February the 14th, Japanese forces reached the Alexandra Barracks hospital at 1pm. At 1:40pm a British Lt greeting them waving a white flag and was bayoneted on the spot. The Japanese stormed the hospital and murdered the staff and patients. 200 male staff and patients, badly wounded were bound over night and marched to an industrial estate half a mile away. Anyone who collapsed was bayoneted. The survivors of the march were formed into small groups and hacked to death or bayoneted. For a few days over 320 men and women were massacred. Only 5 survivors would give recounts of the event. It is suspected by historians that Tsuji was the architect of the Alexandra hospital massacre. This is because he was the instigator of countless atrocities he ordered unbeknownst to his superior commanders such as Yamashita.    Percival was ordered to go to the Ford motor factory to where he met with Yamashita. Yamashita was hiding his surprise that the surrender party came and as he glanced at the surrender terms he said through his interpreter “The Japanese Army will consider nothing but surrender,” Yamashita knew his forces were on the verge of running out of ammunition and he still held half troops Percival did, he was anxious Percival would figure it out. Percival replied “I fear that we shall not be able to submit our final reply before ten-thirty p.m.,” Percival had no intention of fighting on he simply wanted to work out specific details before signing the surrender. Yamashita was sure Percival was stalling. “Reply to us only whether our terms are acceptable or not. Things must be settled swiftly. We are prepared to resume firing.Unless you do surrender, we will have to carry out our night attack as scheduled.”” Percival replied ““Cannot the Japanese Army remain in its present position? We can resume negotiations again tomorrow at five-thirty A.M”. Yamashita screamed “Nani! I want the hostilities to cease tonight and I want to remind you there can be no arguments.” Percival replied ““We shall discontinue firing by eight-thirty p.m. Had we better remain in our present positions tonight?” Yamashita said yes and that firing would cease at 8:30pm and that 1000 allied men could keep arms to maintain order within the city. Yamashita stated “You have agreed to the terms but you have not yet made yourself clear as to whether you agree to surrender or not.” Percival cleared his throat and gave a simple nod. Yamashita looked at his interpreter “There's no need for all this talk. It is a simple question and I want a simple answer.” He turned to Percival and shouted, “We want to hear ‘Yes' or ‘No' from you! Surrender or fight!” Percival finally blurted out  “Yes, I agree. I have a request to make. Will the Imperial Army protect the women and children and British civilians?”Yamashita replied  “We shall see to it. Please sign this truce agreement”. At 7:50 the surrender was signed off, 40 minutes later Singapore was in the hands of the Japanese. In 70 days Yamashita took at the cost of 9824 casualties, had seized Malaya and Singapore, nearly 120,000 British surrendered. It was the greatest land victory in Japanese history.   Churchill called the fall of Singapore to the Japanese "the worst disaster and largest capitulation in British history" Churchills physician Lord Moran wrote The fall of Singapore on February 15 stupefied the Prime Minister. How came 100,000 men (half of them of our own race) to hold up their hands to inferior numbers of Japanese? Though his mind had been gradually prepared for its fall, the surrender of the fortress stunned him. He felt it was a disgrace. It left a scar on his mind. One evening, months later, when he was sitting in his bathroom enveloped in a towel, he stopped drying himself and gloomily surveyed the floor: 'I cannot get over Singapore', he said sadly   With the fall of singapore came another atrocity, the Sook Ching massacre. After February 18th, the Japanese military began mass killings of what they deemed undesirables, mostly ethnic Chinese. It was overseen by the Kempeitai and did not stop in Singapore, but spread to Malaya. It seems the aim of the purge was to intimidate the Chinese community from performing any resistance. According to postwar testimony taken from a war correspondent embedded with the 25th army, Colonel Hishakari Takafumi, he stated an order went out to kill 50,000 Chinese, of which 20 percent of the total was issued by senior officials on Yamashita's operations staff, most likely Tsuji. It is certain at the behest of Tsuji the orders were extended to Malay. The death toll is a tricky one, the Japanese went on the record to admit to 6000 murders, the Singaporean Chinese community and the Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew allege 70,000-100,000. Historians analyzing the scale of discovered mass graves after some decades think around 25,000-50,000. How much Yamashita knew of the massacre is debatable, the orders came from his office after all, but it seems Tsuji had orchestrated it. Many of Japan's generals wanted Yamashita to be appointed war minister, a move that obviously threatened then Prime Minister Hideki Tojo, who feared his rival. Tojo retaliated, ordering Japan's new war hero back to Manchuria. On the surface, the assignment appeared worthy as Yamashita would serve as the first line of defense against a possible Soviet invasion. But since the two nations had signed a neutrality pact in April 1941, and Soviets were bogged down fighting the Germans, immediate war appeared unlikely. In reality, Tojo had parked Yamashita on the war's sidelines. Tojo went even further, he barred Yamashita any leave in Tokyo, preventing him from visiting his wife as well as from delivering a speech he had written for the emperor. No worries though, an aide of Yamashita's sent him three geishas. Allegedly he said this “I know they want to please me with these girls. But send them back—and don't forget to tip them.” The Tiger of Malaya would maintain a low profile in Manchuria where he received a promotion to full General. As months fell to years Yamashita sat on the sidelines helpless to aid the Japanese forces. His exile would come to an end in 1944 when Tojo was outed and the Tiger was required to try and save the Philippines from General Douglas MacArthur.

Explore the Mysteries of the National Parks with author Mike Bezemek. Discover forgotten stories of the first UFO sighting, lost explorers, and other unsolved national park mysteries.Episode Resources:Get your copy of "Mysteries of the National Parks"Learn more about Mike Bezemek's workWas the first-ever UFO sighting covered up by the Roswell incident? What really happened to the honeymooners who vanished on the Colorado River? Author and outdoor adventurer Mike Bezemek joins us to uncover the shocking secrets and strange events hidden within America's most treasured landscapes. In this episode, we dive deep into his fascinating book, Mysteries of the National Parks, exploring forgotten tales that defy simple explanation.From bizarre crimes to perplexing natural phenomena, this conversation peels back the curtain on the unsolved national park mysteries that have puzzled historians and scientists for decades. We investigate the incredible story of the first UFO sighting in 1947, where pilot Kenneth Arnold witnessed nine mysterious objects over Mount Rainier, an event that predates the more famous Roswell incident. Mike Bezemek reveals why this foundational story has been largely forgotten and shares the plausible explanation behind the Roswell craze that followed. We then travel to Yosemite for the tale of a brazen stagecoach robbery where the bandits posed for a photograph—possibly the only authentic picture of a Wild West holdup in existence.The discussion covers a wide range of incredible stories, including the tragic Glenn and Bessie Hyde disappearance in the Grand Canyon, where the newlywed couple and their boat vanished without a trace after a perilous journey down the Colorado River. We also explore the eerie phenomenon of the Angel's Glow at Shiloh Battlefield, where wounded Civil War soldiers' wounds emitted a strange blue light, a mystery later potentially solved by a high school science project involving bioluminescent bacteria. Other incredible topics include the strange history of the Gateway Arch and its surprising connection to Mussolini, the famous sliding stones of Death Valley's Racetrack Playa, and the debate over whether Utah's Upheaval Dome was created by a salt formation or a massive meteor impact. These tales are just a fraction of the 35 incredible cases explored in the book, revealing that our national parks hold more than just beautiful scenery—they hold secrets.About Our Guest:Mike Bezemek is an author, outdoor writer, and adventurer whose work focuses on history, travel, and mystery. His latest book, "Mysteries of the National Parks," is the culmination of decades of exploring the U.S. National Park system, from the grand landscapes of Yosemite to the historic battlefields of the East. His curiosity was sparked during a cross-country road trip that led him to investigate the Lost Colony of Fort Raleigh, inspiring him to collect and document the strangest and most compelling mysteries our parks have to offer.Timestamps / Chapters:(00:00) The Hidden Mysteries in Our National Parks(02:17) Mount Rainier 1947: The Forgotten First UFO Sighting(08:27) Behind the Book: Weaving History, Adventure, and Mystery(10:22) Yosemite's Bizarre Stagecoach Robbery: The Only Known Photograph(13:51) The Author's Inspiration: A Cross-Country Journey of Discovery(17:31) The Gateway Arch's Twisted History: A Surprising Mussolini Connection?(20:56) Death Valley's Racetrack Playa: The Mystery of the Sliding Stones(24:27) Vanished on the Colorado: The Disappearance of Glenn and Bessie Hyde(29:24) Angel's Glow: Solving a Civil War Mystery at Shiloh Battlefield(34:18) The Making of a Mystery Book: A Lifetime of Research(39:35) Upheaval Dome: Meteor Impact or Salt Dome?(42:21) What's Next for Mike Bezemek?

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! Acceso anticipado para Fans - ** VIDEO EN NUESTRO CANAL DE YOUTUBE **** https://youtube.com/live/uu6O33kqgkA +++++ Hazte con nuestras camisetas en https://www.bhmshop.app +++++ #historia #historiamilitar #áfrica Etiopía: la nación que humilló a Italia, que resistió al fascismo y que luego fue devorada por sus propias guerras. En este nuevo episodio, junto al profesor Carlos Caballero, recorremos el siglo más sangriento de la historia etíope. Un país orgulloso, heredero de imperios milenarios, que se enfrentó a invasores europeos, dictaduras marxistas, guerras civiles y al desgarro de su unidad nacional. Desde la gesta de Adwa hasta la pesadilla del Derg. Desde los aviones de Mussolini lanzando gas mostaza hasta los AK-47 de los milicianos tigrinos. Desde Haile Selassie como emperador de un imperio cristiano, hasta la descomposición de un Estado multinacional. Un viaje a través de la guerra, la política y la historia de una nación indomable. África no se entiende sin Etiopía. ️ En este programa descubrirás: Cómo Etiopía venció a una potencia europea en 1896... y fue invadida 40 años después. - La invasión italiana y la guerra química olvidada por Occidente. - El último emperador, Haile Selassie, y la traición que acabó con el Imperio. - El terror rojo del Derg y la guerra civil más sangrienta de África. - La independencia de Eritrea y la fractura definitiva del Estado etíope. - El actual conflicto en Tigray: etnicismo, geopolítica y violencia sin fin. SUSCRÍBETE A @BELLUMARTISHISTORIAMILITAR Y @BELLUMARTISACTUALIDADMILITAR para no perderte ningún programa y únete a nuestra comunidad de apasionados por la historia militar, la geopolítica y los conflictos del mundo. Apóyanos para seguir creando contenido riguroso e independiente: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/bellumartis PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/bellumartis Bizum: 656 778 825 Libros de Francisco García Campa (Paco): Un Mundo Convulso — https://franciscogarciacampa.com/ Ejemplares firmados y dedicados disponibles en la web oficial. Síguenos también en redes: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/bellumartis X / Twitter: https://x.com/bellumartis Bellumartis Historia Militar — Porque entender el pasado es prepararse para el futuro.Escucha este episodio completo y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo de BELLUMARTIS PODCAST. Descubre antes que nadie los nuevos episodios, y participa en la comunidad exclusiva de oyentes en https://go.ivoox.com/sq/618669

Historian and journalist Vijay Prashad talks with Steve about why Antonio Gramsci still matters. Listeners to this podcast know that we have a pretty good grasp of the monetary system. But we're constantly working to expand our understanding of the systemic underpinnings of real power. How else will we be able to seize it? For help, we turn to Gramsci. According to Vijay, Gramsci was doing class forensics. His core puzzle was brutal and practical: why did big chunks of Italy's working-class bail on their own unions and parties and drift into fascism? That's the real origin story of “cultural hegemony,” “common sense,” and the whole Gramscian toolbox: figuring out how consent gets manufactured and how counterrevolution recruits. Vijay takes us through Gramsci's political development and his imprisonment under Mussolini, where he wrote his seminal Prison Notebooks. Then they get into Gramsci's key concepts: hegemony (borrowed from Lenin and, per Vijay, more than a “culture theory”), the necessity of a Leninist-type party as the modern Prince, and the need to build alliances to create working-class leadership over society. After taking a hard look at the left in the US, Steve and Vijay discuss the limits of electoral politics and the missing infrastructure for a serious battle of ideas. It's a wide-ranging conversation about class power, organizing, and what it actually takes to change how people understand the world they're living in. Vijay Prashad is the Executive Director of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research. He is a historian, journalist, and author of forty books, including Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassination; Red Star over the Third World; and The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World. thetricontinental.org @vijayprashad on X

Marco Buticchi"La più bella del mondo"Longanesi Editorewww.longanesi.itGallia, I secolo a.C. Un villaggio viene distrutto per stanare la druida Artio, ma la donna riesce a fuggire insieme a Lugh, suo apprendista. Quando Giulio Cesare invade la Gallia, Lugh viene catturato e, al seguito di Cesare, finisce in Egitto, alla corte di Cleopatra. Qui, tra i misteri dell'antica terra dei faraoni, perfeziona le arti magiche tramandategli dalla druida, immergendosi nel fascino occulto di una civiltà leggendaria…Europa, anni Venti. Sin da piccola, Hedwig Kiesler mostra una spiccata propensione per la recitazione e intraprende una promettente carriera come attrice. Hedwig conquista l'amore di Fritz Mandl, ricco mercante d'armi, e impara presto a memorizzare le informazioni raccolte nelle cene di lavoro del marito, alla presenza dei leader di un'Europa sull'orlo di un nuovo conflitto mondiale. Il destino però la conduce a Hollywood: è lì che cambia nome e diventa Hedy Lamarr, l'attrice «più bella del mondo». I servizi segreti statunitensi la mettono alle strette: è stata testimone di conversazioni riservate, conosce molte persone nella cerchia di Hitler e Mussolini, e può diventare la chiave per disinnescare la minaccia nazista.Hollywood, 2026. Oswald Breil e Sara Terracini sono ospiti alla notte degli Oscar. L'Academy conferisce un premio a Daniel Berg, anziano produttore di origini ebraiche. Quando l'uomo si alza per ricevere la statuetta viene ucciso con un colpo sparato da un'arma di precisione. Breil ha notato qualcosa e collabora con gli inquirenti. Da quel momento riceve una serie di minacce affinché abbandoni Hollywood e le indagini, ma questo non lo fermerà nella ricerca di una verità che può costargli la vita.Ancora una volta Marco Buticchi scava nella Storia portando alla luce i segreti che costellano la straordinaria carriera di Hedy Lamarr e i misteri che affondano le radici nell'epoca di Cesare e Cleopatra, dando vita a un romanzo carico di tensione e fascino.Marco Buticchi, il maestro italiano dell'avventura, è nato alla Spezia nel 1957 e ha viaggiato moltissimo per lavoro, nutrendo così anche la sua curiosità, il suo gusto per l'avventura e la sua attenzione per la storia e il particolare fascino dei tanti luoghi che ha visitato. È il primo autore italiano pubblicato da Longanesi nella collana «I maestri dell'avventura» (accanto a Wilbur Smith, Clive Cussler e Patrick O'Brian), in cui sono apparsi con grande successo di pubblico e di critica Le Pietre della Luna (1997), Menorah (1998), Profezia (2000), La nave d'oro (2003), L'anello dei re (2005), Il vento dei demoni (2007), Il respiro del deserto (2009), La voce del destino (2011), La stella di pietra (2013), Il segno dell'aquila (2015), La luce dell'impero (2017), Il segreto del faraone nero (2018), Stirpe di navigatori (2019), L'ombra di Iside (2020), Il mare dei fuochi (2021), Il serpente e il faraone (2022), L'oro degli dei (2023) e Il figlio della tempesta (2024), disponibili anche in edizione TEA, oltre a Scusi bagnino, l'ombrellone non funziona (2006) e a Casa di mare (2016), un appassionato ritratto del padre, Albino Buticchi. Nel dicembre 2008 Marco Buticchi è stato nominato Commendatore dal Presidente della Repubblica per aver contribuito alla diffusione della lingua e della letteratura italiana anche all'estero. www.marcobuticchi.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Johan läser om komplicerade stjärnor och blir därför extra nyfiken på dramat kring Salah. Anders ger sina tankar om det och har nyheter om en VM 94-medalj på vift. Dessutom: VM-lottningen, fotbollshipsters i Köpenhamn, Jesse Marschs attack på kollegorna, Mussolinis mästerskap, Tetris i Trelleborg, Vinicius allt starkare kort, Simon Åströms öronbedövande tystnad och självbedrägeriet när man blir köpsugen på fotbollsmemorabilia.Gör tomten glad, bli Offsidemedlem i dag. Ta del av vårt julerbjudande här.

Only a few years ago, European elites were patting themselves on the back for fending off thetide of right-wing anti-system parties (often styled as populists). But recent polls in France,Germany and the United Kingdom show that that the far right is once again gaining traction,thanks in no small part centrist governments that have demoralized the population andlegitimized xenophobia. David Broder, author of Mussolini's Grandchildren and European editorof Jacobin, wrote a wide-ranging essay on this for The New York Times. I spoke to David aboutboth the dismal decisions of mainstream parties and also possible alternatives.Our Sponsors:* Check out Avocado Green Mattress: https://avocadogreenmattress.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Only a few years ago, European elites were patting themselves on the back for fending off thetide of right-wing anti-system parties (often styled as populists). But recent polls in France,Germany and the United Kingdom show that that the far right is once again gaining traction,thanks in no small part centrist governments that have demoralized the population andlegitimized xenophobia. David Broder, author of Mussolini's Grandchildren and European editorof Jacobin, wrote a wide-ranging essay on this for The New York Times. I spoke to David aboutboth the dismal decisions of mainstream parties and also possible alternatives.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Alessandra Caneva"Natale 1938"Ianieri Edizioniwww.ianieriedizioni.comCate, una giovane e brillante medico, vive un'esistenza divisa tra l'impegno quotidiano in corsia e un matrimonio aristocratico che sembrava perfetto. A pochi giorni dal Natale del 1938, un misterioso incidente d'auto che rischia di costarle la vita costringe Cate a letto e mette in luce un tradimento ancora più oscuro: il marito, il conte Alessio, attratto dall'ingente patrimonio della moglie, ha manomesso i freni della sua Alfa Romeo nel tentativo di ucciderla.Con la mente da clinica investigatrice, Cate trasforma il proprio dolore in un vero e proprio “esame” dell'anima. Passa al setaccio ogni sguardo, ogni parola e ogni gesto del loro rapporto alla ricerca della genesi di un gesto tanto brutale. Il suo percorso interiore – tra ricordi dolorosi e speranze sconvolte – diventa la trama di un'indagine sull'origine del male e sulla possibilità di estirparlo dall'animo umano.Ambientato negli anni delle leggi razziali italiane e dell'alleanza sempre più stretta tra Mussolini e Hitler, Natale 1938 è un romanzo di grande intensità emotiva e spirituale. Un viaggio di dolore, scoperta e speranza, che ci invita a esplorare l'abisso del male senza rinunciare alla luce salvifica del perdono. “Hitler aveva attratto in maniera ipnotica la sua attenzione. In un primo momento sembrava avesse avuto la meglio su di lei, ma Cate aveva delle armi sulle quali lui non poteva nulla: il suo sguardo clinico, penetrante, intelligente, smascherante, che comunque le permetteva di creare un certo distacco, anche se subiva una sorta di assedio psicologico.”Alessandra Caneva. Soggettista, sceneggiatrice, scrittrice e saggista, Alessandra Caneva ha lavorato come consulente editoriale per la Lux Vide, come consulente artistico letterario per la struttura di Rai Fiction e come consulente letterario per Rai Cultura. Ha ideato e scritto numerosi soggetti per fiction televisive, in particolare Lourdes, Padre Pio (diretto da Giulio Base e vincitore dell'Oscar televisivo 2001). È coautrice del soggetto di serie Don Matteo. Tra le sue numerose pubblicazioni, L'immaginario contemporaneo (Mimesis, 2018) e Rapsodia d'Autunno (Ianieri, 2022).Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

The planning for Operation Husky was anything but smooth and comprehensive. Everyone had a dog in this fight, but in the end, Monty won. Meanwhile, Mussolini is tempted to pull out of the war. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Sun and the Star, ch. 47 to 51 I rthink i Hauve covid Come back next week for The Court of the Dead, ch. 1 to 6 Check out our Patreon! (https://www.patreon.com/unwisegirls) Follow the show (https://twitter.com/unwisegirls) Join our Discord! (https://discord.gg/XnhhwzKQ8d) Hosted by Jacqueline (https://twitter.com/swampduchess) and Jane (https://twitter.com/janeyshivers). Edited by Jacqueline. Cover art by Vera (https://twitter.com/Innsmouth_Inn). Intro/outro: "Super Mariocean" by spacepony (https://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01147) This podcast is powered by Pinecast.

Pascal Praud revient pendant deux heures, sans concession, sur tous les sujets qui font l'actualité. Vous voulez réagir ? Appelez le 01.80.20.39.21 (numéro non surtaxé) ou rendez-vous sur les réseaux sociaux d'Europe 1 pour livrer votre opinion et débattre sur les grandes thématiques développées dans l'émission du jour. Vous voulez réagir ? Appelez-le 01.80.20.39.21 (numéro non surtaxé) ou rendez-vous sur les réseaux sociaux d'Europe 1 pour livrer votre opinion et débattre sur grandes thématiques développées dans l'émission du jour.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Luciano Benetton rose from poverty in postwar Italy to found a chain of 7,000 high street fashion stores and create some of the most controversial advertising campaigns in history, becoming a billionaire along the way. Journalist Zing Tsjeng and BBC business editor Simon Jack discover how it all started for Luciano Benetton with a yellow sweater knitted by his sister, on a journey that takes in Benito Mussolini, Dolce Vita, Formula One, and Princess Diana. But Benetton wasn't just about fashion; with photographer Oliviero Toscani, the entrepreneur launched a series of highly controversial ad campaigns that tackled race, religion, AIDS, and the death penalty, that made the fashion brand infamous. Good Bad Billionaire is the podcast that explores the lives of the super-rich and famous, tracking their wealth, philanthropy, business ethics and success. There are leaders who made their money in Silicon Valley, on Wall Street and in high street fashion. From iconic celebrities and CEOs to titans of technology, the podcast unravels billionaire stories of fortune, power, economics, ambition and moral responsibility to explore how they achieved financial success, before asking the audience to decide if they are good, bad, or just billionaires. Some of the people we've featured previously on Good Bad Billionaire include Tyler Perry, Evan Spiegel, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Henry Ford, LeBron James, Selena Gomez and Martha Stewart. Every episode is available to listen wherever you get your BBC podcasts. To contact the team, email goodbadbillionaire@bbc.com or send a text or WhatsApp to +1 (917) 686-1176. Find out more about the show and read our privacy notice at www.bbcworldservice.com/goodbadbillionaire

Good Sunday to you,A bit of admin before we come to today's thought piece.First, in case you missed it, here is this week's commentary, mostly ranting about the budget, the UK's inept leadership and what actions you, as an investor, should take:And this week I also appeared on comedian Geoff Norcott's podcast, What Most People Think. Here are the links to the show on Apple and Spotify, if of interest.But for your thought piece today, we have another great little World War Two gold story which didn't make the cut. The farcical journey of Albanian and Italian gold (NB: a tonne of gold is about a medium-sized suitcase full).As the Nazis took both Austria and Czechoslovakia with ease, Italian Prime Minister Benito Mussolini grew anxious to flex his own muscles.Albania would be his target. Geographically, culturally and historically, it made sense: Albania had been part of the Roman Empire even before northern Italy.In April 1939, Italy invaded with a force that contained 400 planes, 300 small tanks, 12 warships, and 22,000 men. But some untrained Albanian locals with the help of a few soldiers managed to drive them back into the sea. Such was 20th century Italian warfare.The Italians made it on the second attempt, however, and the capital, Tirana, fell.The Albanian King Zog gave an impassioned speech on the radio, urging resistance, but nobody heard it because Albania at the time had fewer than 2,000 radios, and the Italians soon managed to jam the airwaves anyway. Shortly after giving the speech, like the true patriot he was, he fled the country, taking enough gold with him to lead a long life of luxury in exile, eventually ending up in Egypt as a guest of King Farouk, to whom he had to pay $20 million for refuge.Albania's founders believed in gold, and their currency, the lek, was based on it. Inflation, as a result, had been nonexistent. The central bank was established in the summer of 1925, and it had worked hard to build up its gold holdings. At home, it had encouraged citizens to swap their jewellery for paper money. That private gold was then added to the nation's gold holdings. Whenever possible, the country increased its gold holdings in London.But by the time of the invasion in 1939, most of Albania's 2.3 tonnes was in Italy anyway, where it had been sent for safekeeping. The Italians managed to confiscate quite a bit more in coins and jewellery from citizens.We fast forward four years.The Italian dilemma: give their gold to the Nazis or the Allies? In 1943, Allied forces moved north from Africa into Sicily and then Italy: the invasion of the soft underbelly of Europe had begun.Hectic days followed the ousting of Mussolini in July. The Italian Fascists were still nominally in charge. They declared Rome an open city in the hope of avoiding Allied air attacks. But by September 1943, the Nazis had control of the capital and central Italy, and they wanted Italy's gold moved to Berlin, while they still had control of the area.They began confiscating the gold of Italian citizens in Rome, especially Italian Jews. The amounts demanded were unrealistic, but Roman Jews reached into their family treasures, their synagogues and institutions to turn in what they had. The Pope, Pius XII, heard about the demands and authorised Catholic churches to lend Jews gold so they could reach the quota.But the big prize was in the Italian Central Bank, and several Nazi organisations had their eyes on it: Himmler's SS, Göring's Four Year Plan, von Ribbentrop's Foreign Office, and Funk's Reichsbank. Even the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), which was worried about its investments in Italy, started making demands that Italy send it gold. Initially, the governor of the Italian bank, Vincenzo Azzolini, made out that he was offended by the idea, but he soon realised the BIS was a better option than Berlin, whichever Nazi department received it.The Italians did not know what to do. On the one hand, they did not want the Nazis to have their gold, but nor did they want the invading Allies to have it either. They thought of sending it to Sardinia, they thought of sending it to the Swiss border. They sent small amounts of gold to branch offices around Italy, but the Bologna gold went missing, as did much of the Milan gold - now supposedly in Turin, but actually hidden in a well. They even sent some to colonial outposts in Benghazi, Rhodes and Addis Ababa.The Albanian gold Italy had stolen was still sitting in the Italian bank's vault, so, under pressure from the Nazis, they sent that up to the Reichsbank in Berlin, while they tried to come up with a solution.The following day, Niccolò Introna, the Italian bank's deputy general manager, had his plan: to build a false wall in the bank's underground vaults. He would then backdate documents to show the gold had been moved to Potenza, a town in the Italian south that was about to fall into Allied hands, but hide the gold behind the wall.Bank governor Azzolini approved the plan, but then ruled that only half the gold should be hidden. The next day the wall was built. The day after that, the official order to ship the gold to Berlin came in from the German ambassador. If the bank did not agree, the Germans would simply seize it. At this point, Azzolini learned that the Germans had seized government records, from which they would know the size and location of the country's gold. Azzolini lost his nerve and had the wall torn down.The next day, the German military unit arrived at the bank with orders to move the gold north by air. Azzolini stalled them, saying it would be safer by train. The Germans sent 5 tonnes by air, the rest - 119 tonnes - was sent by train to Milan. From there, it was shipped to Fortezza, Bolzano, close to the border with Germany and under their control, where it stayed for several months. The now-ousted Mussolini even signed his approval that it be sent there.The following spring, Azzolini, who above all wanted to stop the gold going to Berlin, struck a deal with Swiss and German representatives that would see 26 tonnes sent to Switzerland, some to the BIS and some to the Swiss National Bank.Göring, however, insisted he needed money and suggested giving Italy Reichsmarks for its gold. The deal was signed without the Bank of Italy knowing about it. 50 tonnes left Fortezza, which included 8 tonnes Italy had stolen from Yugoslavia earlier in the war in "restitution" (that's another story). The delivery arrived in Berlin a tonne light. As almost always by this point in the war, someone had their hands in the till.The process of shipping the next batch of Italian gold - some 22 tonnes - went on for months, as some (but not all) Italian officials tried to stall. But eventually, that too was dispatched. That too arrived in Berlin a tonne light.When American forces eventually liberated Fortezza, they found 25 tonnes. It was handed over to the Bank of Italy.What a mess.Stories like this fill the pages of The Secret History of Gold (although this one didn't actually make the cut).The Secret History of Gold is available at Amazon, Waterstones and all good bookshops. I hear the audiobook, read by me, is excellent. And it would make a wonderful Christmas present! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

No podemos cerrar la termporada 10 en el año 2025 sin daros la mejor arma (el conocimiento) sobre el tema tan candente que nos atañe en este siglo. EL AUGE DEL FASCISMO. Que es el fascismo. El unico fascismo real es el de Mussolini? Es verdad que Franco no era Fascista? Es verdad que los Nazis eran socialistas? Es Pedro Sanchez un Fascista? Lo es Trump? O Milei? Era el regimen sovietico fascista? Es verdad que hoy en dia no existe el fascismo? Es fascista un termino usado para denominar todo lo que no te gusta? Deberiamos llamar fascista a los que no estan de acuerdo con nosotros? Este largo programa te va a dar muchas respuestas para que en la cena de navidad de nochebuena, o en la reunion de la oficina, le puedas callar a ZASCAS la boca a ese cuñao borracho que habla del fascimo sin tener dos neuronas para rescatar. Y a todos los que vais a comentar en el muro. dejadnos saber cuando comentais a que segmento del programa os referis. VIAS DE CONTACTO: Radio: https://edenex.es/ RADIOCADENA SPAIN www.radiocadenaspain Un abrazo desde Argentina fmlarama.listen2myradio.com fmlarama.blogspot.com Fm 107.3 Mhz. Email: podclave45@gmail.com Web: clave45.wordpress.com Google+ : podclave45@gmail.com Twitter: @laclave45 @santiso6969 Facebook: https://facebook.com/clave45 YouTube.com iTunes.com Spotify.com

Angel Studios https://Angel.com/HermanJoin the Angel Guild today where you can stream Thank You, Dr. Fauci and be part of the conversation demanding truth and accountability.  Renue Healthcare https://Renue.Healthcare/ToddYour journey to a better life starts at Renue Healthcare. Visit https://Renue.Healthcare/Todd Bulwark Capital https://KnowYourRiskPodcast.comBe confident in your portfolio with Bulwark! Schedule your free Know Your Risk Portfolio review. Go to KnowYourRiskPodcast.com today. Alan's Soaps https://www.AlansArtisanSoaps.comUse coupon code TODD to save an additional 10% off the bundle price.Bonefrog https://BonefrogCoffee.com/ToddThe new GOLDEN AGE is here!  Use code TODD at checkout to receive 10% off your first purchase and 15% on subscriptions.LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE at:The Todd Herman Show - Podcast - Apple PodcastsThe Todd Herman Show | Podcast on SpotifyWATCH and SUBSCRIBE at: Todd Herman - The Todd Herman Show - YouTubeDavid French: a Hilarious Tragedy. // Netflix and the NY-Times are Incestuous Cousins. // The Inverse Gospel of “Progressive ‘Christianity'”Episode Links:Our Foremost Contrary Indicator Nails It AgainDavid French has some very serious mental issues all related to TDS. Here, he praised a judge's farcical decision banning President Trump from using the National Guard in Portland, Oregon. BREAKING: The No Kings “protest” in Portland is now a FULL-ON RIOT here outside of the ICE facility, and federal agents are UNLOADING tear gas on rioters who are assauIting agents. It's only 4pm, and “protestors” are ALREADY getting vioIent. WE NEED NATIONAL GUARD!Here's what the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said about the decision (a PDF download) Drama series about Mussolini has him turn to the camera and say “Make Italy Great Again” in plain English. BREAKING - Video emerged showing Zohran Mamdani's lead canvassing director, Robert Alkleh, being asked what NYC police think of Mamdani, with Alkleh responding, “Who gives a sh-t what they think? They're city employees, we tell them what to do, shut up.”Rev. Ashley Mathews of Trinity Anglican Church of Atlanta, says people who DON'T hang out with LGBTQ people CAN'T understand John 15:13 and what Jesus meant when he said "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down his life for his friends"Arizona dad who left 2-year-old daughter to die in sweltering car was distracted by porn: prosecutors 

In this final instalment of the Fascism miniseries, Cameron and Ray trace how fascism didn't die after 1945 but simply changed its wardrobe. Once openly discredited, fascist ideology went underground, hiding behind anti-communism, Catholic conservatism, Cold War geopolitics, and the language of “law and order.” The pair outline how the same structural anxieties that fuelled Mussolini and Hitler found new hosts in post-war regimes like Franco's Spain and Salazar's Portugal, apartheid South Africa, Cold War dictatorships in Latin America, and today's far-right populists in Europe and the United States. They explore how neoliberalism, manufactured fear of socialism, weaponised Christianity, resentful middle-class voters, and billionaire backing continue to make fascism useful to the powerful. The conversation ends by drawing uncomfortable parallels between classical fascism and modern MAGA politics, arguing that America is not on the verge of fascism — it is living through it in a new, suited, media-savvy form. The post #142 – Fascism Goes Corporate appeared first on The BS Filter.

While he may have been called a demagogue and a counterfeit Mussolini, Huey Long had some darn tootin' good ideas—mainly taxing the rich into oblivion. Strange Country cohosts Beth and Kelly talk about Long's rise to populist power in the 1930s and the corruption in its wake, but also how much a 65% tax increase on the rich makes a whole lotta sense. Like Long said "We only propose that, when one man gets more than he and his children and children's children can spend or use in their lifetimes, that then we shall say that such person has his share. That means that a few million dollars is the limit to what any one man can own." Theme music: Big White Lie by A Cast of Thousands Cite your sources: Burns, Ken, director. Huey Long. PBS, 1985.   Ganz, John. "Swamp Creature." When the Clock Broke : Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked up in the Early 1990s, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2024, pp. 1-42.   "Governor Huey Long: Kidnapper." Medium, 21 November 2021, https://medium.com/historys-trainwrecks/governor-huey-long-kidnapper-52b69644141c. Accessed 15 November 2025.   Kolbert, Elizabeth. "The Big Sleazy." The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 12 June 2006, https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006/06/12/the-big-sleazy. Accessed 15 November 2025. White Jr., Lamar (April 2, 2018). "Huey P. Long wasn't assassinated"Bayou Brief. Archived from the original on June 9, 2020 White, Richard D. Kingfish : the Reign of Huey P. Long. Random House, 2006.

Você já parou pra pensar quem traduz os livros que você lê e como esse trabalho molda a forma como entende o mundo? Neste episódio, Lívia Mendes e Lidia Torres irão nos conduzir em uma viagem no tempo para entendermos como os textos gregos e latinos chegam até nós. Vamos descobrir por que traduzir é sempre também interpretar, criar e disputar sentidos. Conversamos com Andrea Kouklanakis, professora permanente na Hunter College, Nova York, EUA, e Guilherme Gontijo Flores, professor da Universidade Federal do Paraná. Eles compartilharam suas trajetórias no estudo de línguas antigas, seus desafios e descobertas com o mundo da tradução e as questões políticas, históricas e estéticas que a prática e as teorias da tradução abarcam. Esse episódio faz parte do trabalho de divulgação científica que a Lívia Mendes desenvolve no Centro de Estudos Clássicos e Centro de Teoria da Filologia, vinculados ao Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem e ao Instituto de Estudos Avançados da Unicamp, financiado pelo projeto Mídia Ciência da FAPESP, a quem agradecemos pelo financiamento. O roteiro foi escrito por Lívia Mendes e a revisão é de Lidia Torres e Mayra Trinca. A edição é de Daniel Rangel. Se você gosta de literatura, história, tradução ou quer entender novas formas de aproximar o passado do presente, esse episódio é pra você. __________________________________________________________________ ROTEIRO [música, bg] Lívia: Quem traduziu o livro que você está lendo? Lívia: E se você tivesse que aprender todas as línguas dos clássicos que deseja ler? Aqueles livros escritos em russo, alemão ou qualquer outra língua diferente da sua? Lívia: E aqueles livros das literaturas que foram escritas em línguas que chamamos antigas, como o latim e o grego? Lidia: A verdade é que, na maioria das vezes, a gente não pensa muito sobre essas questões. Mas, no Brasil, boa parte dos livros que lemos, tanto literários quanto teóricos, não chegaria até a gente se não fossem os tradutores. Lidia: Essas obras, que fazem parte de todo um legado social, filosófico e cultural da nossa sociedade, só chegaram até nós por causa do trabalho cuidadoso de pesquisadores e tradutores dessas línguas, que estão tão distantes, mas ao mesmo tempo, tão próximas de nós. [música de transição] Lívia: Eu sou a Lívia Mendes. Lidia: E eu sou a Lidia Torres. Lívia: Você já conhece a gente aqui do Oxigênio e no episódio de hoje vamos explorar como traduzimos, interpretamos e recebemos textos da Antiguidade greco-romana. Lidia: E, também vamos pensar por que essas obras ainda hoje mobilizam debates políticos, culturais e estéticos. Lívia: Vem com a gente explorar o mundo da antiguidade greco-romana que segue tão presente na atualidade, especialmente por meio da tradução dos seus textos. [vinheta O2] Andrea [1:05-2:12]: Então, meu nome é Andrea Kouklanakis e, eu sou brasileira, nasci no Brasil e morei lá até 21 anos quando eu emigrei para cá. Lívia: O “cá” da Andrea é nos Estados Unidos, país que ela se mudou ainda em 1980, então faz um tempo que ela mora fora do Brasil. Mas mesmo antes de se mudar, ela já tinha uma experiência com o inglês. Andrea Kouklanakis: Quando eu vim pra cá, eu não tinha terminado faculdade ainda, eu tinha feito um ano e meio, quase dois anos na PUC de São Paulo. Ah, e mas chegou uma hora que não deu mais para arcar com a responsabilidade financeira de matrícula da PUC, de mensalidades, então eu passei um tempo trabalhando só, dei aulas de inglês numa dessas escolas assim de business, inglês pra business people e que foi até legal, porque eu era novinha, acho que eu tinha 18, 19 anos e é interessante que todo mundo era mais velho que eu, né? Os homens de negócios, as mulheres de negócio lá, mas foi uma experiência legal e que também, apesar de eu não poder estar na faculdade daquela época, é uma experiência que condiz muito com o meu trabalho com línguas desde pequena. Lívia: Essa que você ouviu é a nossa primeira entrevistada no episódio de hoje, a professora Andrea Kouklanakis. Como ela falou ali na apresentação, ela se mudou ainda jovem pros Estados Unidos. Lidia: E, como faz muito tempo que ela se comunica somente em inglês, em alguns momentos ela acaba esquecendo as palavras em português e substitui por uma palavra do inglês. Então, a conversa com a Andrea já é um início pra nossa experimentação linguística neste episódio. Andrea Kouklanakis: Eu sou professora associada da Hunter College, que faz parte da cidade universitária de Nova York, City University of New York. E eles têm vários campus e a minha home college é aqui na Hunter College, em Manhattan. Eh, eu sou agora professora permanente aqui. Lívia: A professora Andrea, que conversou com a gente por vídeo chamada lá de Nova Iorque, contou que já era interessada por línguas desde pequena. A mãe dela trabalhava na casa de uma professora de línguas, com quem ela fez as primeiras aulas. E ela aprendeu também algumas palavras da língua materna do seu pai, que é grego e mais tarde, estudou francês e russo na escola. Lidia: Mas, além de todas essas línguas, hoje ela trabalha com Latim e Grego.Como será que essas línguas antigas entraram na vida da Andrea? Andrea Kouklanakis: Então, quando eu comecei aqui na Hunter College, eu comecei a fazer latim porque, bom, quando você tem uma língua natal sua, você é isenta do requerimento de línguas, que todo mundo tem que ter um requerimento de língua estrangeira na faculdade aqui. Então, quando eu comecei aqui, eu fiquei sabendo, que eu não precisava da língua, porque eu tinha o português. Mas, eu falei: “É, mas eu peguei pensando a língua é o que eu quero, né?” Então, foi super assim por acaso, que eu tava olhando no catálogo de cursos oferecidos. Aí eu pensei: “Ah, Latim, OK. Why not?. Por que não, né? Uma língua antiga, OK. Lívia: A professora Andrea, relembrando essa escolha por cursar as disciplinas de Latim, quando chegou na Hunter College, percebeu que ela gostou bastante das aulas por um motivo afetivo e familiar com a maneira com que ela tinha aprendido a língua portuguesa aqui no Brasil, que era diferente da forma como seus colegas estadunidenses tinham aprendido o inglês, sem muita conexão com a gramática. Lidia: Ela gostava de estudar sintaxe, orações subordinadas e todas essas regras gramaticais, que são muito importantes pra quem quer estudar uma língua antiga e mais pra frente a gente vai entender bem o porquê. [som de ícone] Lívia: sintaxe, é a parte da gramática que estuda como as palavras se organizam dentro das frases pra formar sentidos. Ela explica quem é o sujeito, o que é o verbo, quais termos completam ou modificam outros, e assim por diante. [som de ícone]: Lívia: Oração subordinada é uma frase que depende de outra para ter sentido completo. Ela não “anda sozinha”: precisa da oração principal pra formar o significado total. [música de transição] Lidia: E, agora, você deve estar se perguntando, será que todo mundo que resolve estudar língua antiga faz escolhas parecidas com a da professora Andrea? Lidia: É isso que a gente perguntou pro nosso próximo entrevistado. Guilherme Gontijo: Eu sou atualmente professor de latim na UFPR, no Paraná, moro em Curitiba. Mas, eu fiz a minha graduação em letras português na UFES, na Federal do Espírito Santo. E lá quando eu tive que fazer as disciplinas obrigatórias de latim, eu tinha que escolher uma língua complementar, eu lembro que eu peguei italiano porque eu estudava francês fora da universidade e eu tinha que estudar o latim obrigatório. Estudei latim com Raimundo Carvalho. Lívia: Bom, parece que o Guilherme teve uma trajetória parecida com a da Andrea e gostar de estudar línguas é uma das premissas pra se tornar um estudioso de latim e de grego. Lidia: O professor Raimundo de Carvalho, que o Guilherme citou, foi professor de Latim da Federal do Espírito Santo. Desde a década de 80 ele escreve poesias e é um importante estudioso da língua latina. Ele quem traduziu a obra Bucólicas, do Vírgílio, um importante poeta romano, o autor da Eneida, que talvez você já deva ter ouvido falar. O professor Raimundo se aposentou recentemente, mas segue trabalhando na tradução de Metamorfoses, de outro poeta romano, o Ovídio. Lívia: O Guilherme contou o privilégio que foi ter tido a oportunidade de ser orientado de perto pelo professor Raimundo. Guilherme Gontijo: Eu lembro que eu era um aluno bastante correto, assim, eu achava muito interessante aprender latim, mas eu estudei latim pensando que ele teria algum uso linguístico pras pessoas que estudam literatura brasileira. E quando ele levou Catulo pra traduzir, eu lembro de ficar enlouquecido, assim, foi incrível e foi a primeira vez na minha vida que eu percebi que eu poderia traduzir um texto de poema como um poema. E isso foi insistivo pra mim, eu não tinha lido teoria nenhuma sobre tradução. Lívia: Um episódio sobre literatura antiga traz esses nomes diferentes, e a gente vai comentando e explicando. O Catulo, que o Guilherme citou, foi um poeta romano do século I a.C.. Ele é conhecido por escrever odes, que são poemas líricos que expressam admiração, elogio ou reflexão sobre alguém, algo ou uma ideia. A obra do Catulo é marcada pelos poemas que ele dedicou a Lésbia, figura central de muitos dos seus versos. Guilherme Gontijo: Eu fiz as duas disciplinas obrigatórias de latim, que é toda a minha formação oficial de latim, acaba aí. E passei a frequentar a casa do Raimundo Carvalho semanalmente, às vezes duas vezes por semana, passava a tarde inteira tendo aula de latim com ele, lendo poetas romanos ou prosa romana e estudava em casa e ele tirava minhas dúvidas. Então, graças à generosidade do Raimundo, eu me tornei latinista e eu não tinha ideia que eu, ainda por cima, teria ali um mestre, porque ele é poeta, é tradutor de poesia. Lidia: Essa conexão com a língua latina fez o Guilherme nunca mais abandonar a tradução. Ele disse que era uma forma natural de conseguir conciliar o seu interesse intelectual acadêmico e o lado criativo, já que desde o início da graduação ele já era um aspirante a poeta. Lívia: É importante a gente lembrar que o Guilherme tem uma vasta carreira como autor, poeta e tradutor e já vamos aproveitar pra deixar algumas dicas dos livros autorais e dos autores que ele traduziu. Lívia: Guilherme é autor dos poemas de carvão :: capim (2018), Todos os nomes que talvez tivéssemos (2020), Arcano 13 em parceria com Marcelo Ariel. Ele também escreveu o romance História de Joia (2019) e os livros de ensaios Algo infiel: corpo performance tradução (2017) em parceria com Rodrigo Gonçalves e A mulher ventriloquada: o limite da linguagem em Arquíloco (2018). Se aventurou pelo infanto-juvenil com os livros A Mancha (2020) e o Coestelário (2021), ambos em parceria com Daniel Kondo. E traduziu autores como Safo, Propércio, Catulo, Horácio, Rabelais e Whitman. Lidia: Os poetas Rabelais e Whitman são autores modernos, viveram nos séculos XVI e XIX, já os outros poetas são da antiguidade romana, aquele período aproximadamente entre o século IV a.C. e o século V d.C. Lívia: Então, o Guilherme traduz tanto textos de línguas modernas quanto de línguas antigas. E, a gente perguntou pra ele se existe alguma diferença no trabalho do tradutor quando vai traduzir um texto de uma língua moderna, que está mais próxima de nós no tempo, e quando vai traduzir do latim ou do grego, que são línguas mais distantes temporalmente. Lívia: O Guilherme falou que quando ele vai traduzir de uma língua moderna pra outra língua moderna existem duas possibilidades: traduzir diacronicamente, que é quando o tradutor escreve o texto na língua produzida como se fosse da época mesmo que ele foi escrito. E a outra possibilidade é traduzir deslocando o autor temporalmente, e fazendo a linguagem do texto conversar com a linguagem contemporânea. Lidia: Pode parecer um pouco confuso de início, mas ouve só o exemplo do Guilherme da experiência de tradução que ele teve com o Rimbaud, que é um autor francês. Guilherme Gontijo: Por exemplo, fui traduzir Rimbaud, o Rimbaud do século XIX. Quando eu vou traduzir, eu posso tentar traduzir pensando diacronicamente e aí eu vou tentar traduzir o Rimbaud pra ele parecer um poeta do século XIX em português. E aí eu vou dar essa sensação de espaço temporal pro leitor contemporâneo agora. É, o Guilherme de Almeida fez um experimento genial assim, traduzindo o poeta francês François Villon para uma espécie de pastiche de galego-português, botando a linha temporal de modo que é isso, Villon é difícil para um francês ler hoje, que a língua francesa já sofreu tanta alteração que muitas vezes eles leem numa espécie de edição bilíngue, francês antigo, francês moderno. A gente também tem um pouco essa dificuldade com o galego-português, que é a língua literária da Península ali pra gente, né? Ah, então essa é uma abordagem. Outra abordagem, eu acho que a gente faz com muito menos frequência, é tentar deslocar a relação da temporalidade, ou seja, traduzir Rimbaud, não para produzir um equivalente do Rimbaud, século XIX no Brasil, mas pra talvez criar o efeito que ele poderia criar nos seus contemporâneos imediatos. Lívia: Ou seja, a ideia aqui seria escrever um texto da maneira como se escreve hoje em dia, meio que transpondo a história no tempo. Lidia: Pra quem não conhece, fica aqui mais uma dica de leitura: o poeta francês Arthur Rimbaud, que o Guilherme citou, viveu entre 1854 e 1891 e escreveu quase toda sua obra ainda adolescente. Ele renovou a poesia moderna com imagens ousadas, experimentação formal e uma vida marcada pela rebeldia. Abandonou a literatura muito jovem e passou o resto da vida viajando e trabalhando na África. Lívia: Mas, e pra traduzir da língua antiga, será que esse dois caminhos também são possíveis? Guilherme Gontijo: Quando eu vou traduzir do latim, por exemplo, eu não tenho esse equivalente. Não existe o português equivalente de Propércio. O português equivalente de Propércio como língua literária é o próprio latim. Lívia: Ou seja, o que o Guilherme quis dizer é que não existe uma possibilidade de traduzir um texto latino como ele soava na antiguidade, porque o latim é a língua que originou as línguas modernas latinas, e a língua portuguesa é uma delas, junto com o espanhol, o francês e o italiano. Lidia: Mas, o que pode acontecer é uma classicização dos textos antigos e o Guilherme enfatizou que acontece muito nas traduções que a gente tem disponível do latim pro português. A classicização, nesses casos, é traduzir os textos da antiguidade com o português do século XVIII ou XIX, transformando esses textos em clássicos também pra nós. Guilherme Gontijo:Curiosamente, a gente, quando estuda os clássicos, a gente sempre fala: “Não, mas isso é moderno demais. Será que ele falaria assim?” Acho curioso, quando, na verdade, a gente vendo que os clássicos tão falando sobre literatura, eles parecem não ter esses pudores. Aliás, eles são bem menos arqueológicos ou museológicos do que nós. Eles derrubavam um templo e botavam outro templo em cima sem pensar duas vezes enquanto nós temos muito mais pudores. Então, a minha abordagem atual de traduzir os clássicos é muito tentar usar as possibilidades do português brasileiro, isso é muito marcado pra mim, uma das variedades do português brasileiro, que é a minha, né? De modo ativo. Lívia: Só pra dar um exemplo do que faz a língua soar clássica, seria o uso do pronome “tu” ao invés de “você”, ou, os pronomes oblíquos como “eu te disse” ou “eu te amo”, porque ninguém fala “eu lhe amo” no dia a dia. Lidia: E esse é justamente o ponto quando a gente fala de tradução do texto antigo. Eles não vão ter um equivalente, e a gente não tem como traduzir por algo da mesma época. Guilherme Gontijo: Então, a gente precisa fazer um exercício especulativo, experimental, pra imaginar os possíveis efeitos daqueles textos no seu mundo de partida, né? A gente nunca vai saber o sabor exato de um texto grego ou romano, porque por mais que a gente tenha dicionário e gramática, a gente não tem o afeto, aquele afeto minucioso da língua que a gente tem na nossa. Lívia: Essas questões de escolhas de tradução, que podem aproximar ou afastar a língua da qual vai se traduzir pra língua que será traduzida se aproximam das questões sociais e políticas que são intrínsecas à linguagem. [música de transição] Lidia: Assim como qualquer outro texto, os escritos em latim ou grego nunca serão neutros. Mesmo fazendo parte de um mundo tão distante da gente, eles reproduzem projetos políticos e identitários tanto da antiguidade quanto dos atuais. Andrea Kouklanakis: Eu acho que esse aspecto político e histórico dos estudos clássicos é interessante porque é uma coisa quando você tá fazendo faculdade, quando eu fiz pelo menos, a gente não tinha muita ideia, né? Você tava completamente sempre perdida no nível microscópico da gramática, né? De tentar a tradução, essas coisas, você tá só, completamente submersa nos seus livros, no seu trabalho de aula em aula, tentando sobreviver ao Cícero. Lívia: Como a Andrea explicou, os estudos que chamamos de filológicos, soam como uma ciência objetiva. Eles tentam achar a gênese de um texto correto, como uma origem e acabam transformando os estudos clássicos em um modelo de programa de império ou de colonização. Andrea Kouklanakis: Então, por exemplo, agora quando eu dou aula sobre o legado dos estudos clássicos na América Latina Agora eu sei disso, então com os meus alunos a gente lê vários textos primários, né, e secundários, que envolvem discurso de construção de nação, de construção de império, de construção do outro, que são tecidos com os discursos clássicos, né, que é essa constante volta a Atenas, a Roma, é, o prestígio dos estudos clássicos, né? Então, a minha pesquisa se desenvolveu nesse sentido de como que esses latino afro brasileiros, esses escritores de várias áreas, como que eles lidaram na evolução intelectual deles, na história intelectual deles, como que eles lidaram com um ramo de conhecimento que é o centro do prestígio. Eles mesmo incorporando a falta de prestígio completa. O próprio corpo deles significa ausência total de prestígio e como que eles então interagem com uma área que é o centro do prestígio, sabe? Lidia: Então, como você percebeu, a Andrea investiga como os escritores afro-latino-americanos negociaram essa tradição clássica, símbolo máximo de prestígio, com suas histórias incorporadas a um lugar sem prestígio, marcadas em seus corpos pelo tom de pele. Lívia: Esse exercício que a professora Andrea tem feito com seus alunos na Hunter College tem sido uma prática cada vez mais presente nos Estudos Clássicos da América Latina e aqui no Brasil. É um exercício de colocar um olhar crítico pro mundo antigo e não apenas como uma forma de simplesmente celebrar uma antiguidade hierarquicamente superior a nós e a nossa história. Lidia: Nesse ponto, é importante a gente pontuar que a professora Andrea fala de um lugar muito particular, porque ela é uma mulher negra, brasileira, atuando em uma universidade nos Estados Unidos e em uma área de estudos historicamente tradicional. Lívia: Ela relatou pra gente um pouco da sua experiência como uma das primeiras mulheres negras a se doutorar em Estudos Clássicos em Harvard. Andrea Kouklanakis: Eu também não queria deixar de dizer que, politicamente, o meu entendimento como classista foi mais ou menos imposto de fora pra mim, sobre mim como uma mulher de cor nos estudos clássicos, porque eu estava exatamente na década de final de 90, meio final de 90, quando eu comecei a fazer os estudos clássicos na Harvard e foi coincidentemente ali quando também saiu, acho que o segundo ou terceiro volume do Black Athena, do Bernal. E, infelizmente, então, coincidiu com eu estar lá, né? Fazendo o meu doutorado nessa época. E na época existiam esses chat rooms, você podia entrar no computador e é uma coisa estranha, as pessoas interagiam ali, né? O nível de antipatia e posso até dizer ódio mesmo que muitas pessoas expressavam pela ideia de que poderia existir uma conexão entre a Grécia e a África, sabe? A mera ideia. Era uma coisa tão forte sabe, eu não tinha a experiência ou a preparação psicológica de receber esse tipo de resposta que era com tantos ânimos, sabe? Lidia: Com esse relato, a professora Andrea revelou pra gente como o preconceito com a população negra é tão explícita nos Estados Unidos e como ela, mesmo tendo passado a infância e a adolescência no Brasil, sentiu mais os impactos disso por lá. Lívia: Mas, fora o preconceito racial, historicamente construído pelas nossas raízes de colonização e escravização da população negra, como estudiosa de Estudos Clássicos, foi nessa época que a Andrea percebeu que existia esse tipo de discussão e que ainda não estava sendo apresentada pra ela na faculdade. Andrea Kouklanakis: Depois que eu me formei, eu entrei em contato com a mulher que era diretora de admissão de alunos e ela confirmou pra mim que é eu acho que eu sou a primeira pessoa de cor a ter um doutorado da Harvard nos Estudos Clássicos. E eu acho que mesmo que eu não seja a primeira pessoa de cor fazendo doutorado lá, provavelmente eu sou a primeira mulher de cor. Lidia: Vamos destacar agora, alguns pontos significativos do relato da professora Andrea. [som de ícone] Lívia: O livro que ela citou é o Black Athena, do estudioso de história política Martin Bernal. A teoria criada pelo autor afirmava que a civilização clássica grega na realidade se originou de culturas da região do Crescente Fértil, Egito, Fenícia e Mesopotâmia, ao invés de ter surgido de forma completamente independente, como tradicionalmente é colocado pelos historiadores germânicos. [som de ícone] Lívia: Ao propor uma hipótese alternativa sobre as origens da Grécia antiga e da civilização clássica, o livro fomentou discussões relevantes nos estudos da área, gerando controvérsias científicas, ideológicas e raciais. [som de ícone] Lidia: Em contrapartida às concepções racistas vinda de pesquisadores, historiadores e classicistas conservadores, a professora Andrea citou também um aluno negro de Harvard, o historiador e classicista Frank Snowden Jr.. [som de ícone] Lívia: Entre seus diversos estudos sobre a relação de brancos e negros na antiguidade, está o livro Before Color Prejudice: The Ancient View of Black, em português, Antes do Preconceito Racial: A Visão Antiga dos Negros. Um aprofundamento de suas investigações sobre as relações entre africanos e as civilizações clássicas de Roma e da Grécia e demonstra que os antigos não discriminavam os negros por causa de sua cor. [som de ícone] Lidia: O livro lança luz pra um debate importantíssimo, que é a diferença de atitudes dos brancos em relação aos negros nas sociedades antigas e modernas, além de observar que muitas das representações artísticas desses povos se assemelham aos afro-americanos da atualidade. Andrea Kouklanakis: Mas, então é isso, então essa coisa política é uma coisa que foi imposta, mas a imposição foi até legal porque aí me levou a conhecer e descobrir e pesquisar essa área inteira, que agora é uma coisa que eu me dedico muito, que é olhar qual que é a implicação dos estudos clássicos na política, na raça, na história e continuando dando as minhas aulas e traduzindo, fazendo tradução, eu adoro tradução, então, esse aspecto do estudo clássico, eu sempre gostei. [música de transição] Lívia: O Guilherme também falou pra gente sobre essa questão política e histórica dos Estudos Clássicos, de que ficar olhando pro passado como objeto desvinculado, nos impede de poder articular essas discussões com a política do presente. Guilherme Gontijo: E acho que o resultado quando a gente faz isso é muitas vezes colocar os clássicos como defensores do status quo, que é o que o um certo império brasileiro fez no período de Dom Pedro, é o que Mussolini fez também. Quer dizer, vira propaganda de estado. Lidia: Mas, ao contrário, quando a gente usa os clássicos pra pensar as angústias do presente, a gente percebe que é uma área de estudos que pode ser super relevante e super viva pra qualquer conversa do presente. Lívia: E, na tradução e na recepção desses textos antigos, como será que essas questões aparecem? O Guilherme deu um exemplo pra gente, de uma tradução que ele fez do poeta romano Horácio. [som de ícone] Lidia: Horácio foi um poeta romano do século I a.C., famoso por escrever poesias nos formatos de Odes, Sátiras e Epístolas, e defendia a ideia do “justo meio” — evitar excessos e buscar a medida certa na vida. Guilherme Gontijo: Tô lembrando aqui de uma ode de Horácio, acho que esse exemplo vai ser bom. Em que ele termina o poema oferecendo um vai matar um cabrito pra uma fonte, vai oferendar um cabrito para uma fonte. E quando eu tava traduzindo, vários comentadores lembravam de como essa imagem chocou violentamente o século XIX na recepção. Os comentadores sempre assim: “Como assim, Horácio, um homem tão refinado vai fazer um ato tão brutal, tão irracional?” Quer dizer, isso diz muito mais sobre a recepção do XIX e do começo do XX, do que sobre Horácio. Porque, assim, é óbvio que Horácio sacrificaria um cabrito para uma fonte. E nisso, ele não está escapando em nada do resto da sua cultura. Agora, é curioso como, por exemplo, o nosso modelo estatal coloca a área de clássicas no centro, por exemplo, dos cursos de Letras, mas acha que práticas do Candomblé, que são análogas, por exemplo, você pode oferecer animais para divindades ou mesmo para águas, seriam práticas não não não racionais ou não razoáveis ou sujas ou qualquer coisa do tipo, como quiserem. Né? Então, eu acho que a gente pode e esse é o nosso lugar, talvez seja nossa missão mesmo. Lívia: Como o Guilherme explicou, nós no Brasil e na América Latina temos influência do Atlântico Negro, das línguas bantas, do candomblé, da umbanda e temos um aporte, tanto teórico quanto afetivo, pra pensar os clássicos, a partir dessas tradições tão próximas, que a própria tradição europeia tem que fazer um esforço gigantesco pra chegar perto, enquanto pra gente é natural. Lidia: E não podemos nos esquecer também da nossa convivência com várias etnias indígenas, que possuem comparações muito fortes entre essas culturas. Guilherme Gontijo: Eu diria, eu entendo muito melhor o sentido de um hino arcaico, grego, ouvindo uma cantiga de terreiro no Brasil, do que só comparando com literatura. Eu acho que é relevante para a área de clássicas, não é uma mera curiosidade, sabe? Então, eu tenho cada vez mais lido gregos e romanos à luz da antropologia moderna, contemporaneíssima, sabe? Eu acho que muitos frutos aparecem de modo mais exemplar ou mais óbvio quando a gente faz essa comparação, porque a gente aí tira de fato os clássicos do lugar de clássicos que lhes é dado. [música de transição] Lívia: Pra além dessas discussões teóricas e políticas, a tradução é também um ato estético e existem algumas formas de repensar a presença da poesia antiga no mundo contemporâneo a partir de uma estética aplicada na linguagem e nos modos de traduzir. Lidia: No caso do Guilherme, ele vem trabalhando há um tempo com a tradução como performance. Guilherme Gontijo: E aí eu pensei: “Não, eu poderia traduzir Horácio para cantar”. Eu vou aprender a cantar esses metros antigos e vou cantar a tradução na mesmíssima melodia. Quer dizer, ao invés de eu pensar em metro no sentido do papel, eu vou pensar em metro no sentido de uma vocalidade. E foi isso que eu fiz. Foi o meu o meu doutorado, isso acabou rendendo a tradução de Safo. Lívia: Além das traduções publicadas em livros e artigos, o Guilherme também coloca essas performances na rua com o grupo Pecora Loca, que desde 2015 se propõe a fazer performances de poemas antigos, medievais e, às vezes, modernos, como um modo de ação poética. Lidia: Inclusive a trilha sonora que você ouviu ali no início deste trecho é uma das performances realizada pelo grupo, nesse caso do poema da Ode 34 de Horácio, com tradução do próprio Guilherme e música de Guilherme Bernardes, que o grupo gentilmente nos passou. Guilherme Gontijo: Isso pra mim foi um aprendizado teórico também muito grande, porque você percebe que um poema vocal, ele demanda pra valorizar a sua ou valorar a sua qualidade, também a performance. Quer dizer, o poema não é só um texto no papel, mas ele depende de quem canta, como canta, qual instrumento canta. Lívia: O Guilherme explicou que no início eles usavam instrumentos antigos como tímpano, címbalo, lira e até uma espécie de aulos. Mas, como, na verdade, não temos informações precisas sobre como era a musicalidade antiga, eles resolveram afirmar o anacronismo e a forma síncrona de poesia e performance, e, atualmente, incorporaram instrumentos modernos ao grupo como a guitarra elétrica, o baixo elétrico, o teclado e a bateria. Guilherme Gontijo: Então, a gente tem feito isso e eu acho que tem um gesto político, porque é muito curioso que a gente vai tocar num bar e às vezes tem alguém desavisado e gosta de Anacreonte. Olha, caramba, adorei Anacreonte. É, é, e ela percebe que Anacreonte, ela ouviu a letra e a letra é basicamente: “Traga um vinho para mim que eu quero encher a cara”. Então ela percebe que poesia antiga não é algo elevado, para poucos eleitos capazes de depreender a profundidade do saber grego. Ó, Anacreonte é poema de farra. Lidia: A partir da performance as pessoas se sentem autorizadas a tomar posse dessa herança cultural e a se relacionar com ela. O que cria uma forma de divulgar e difundir os Estudos Clássicos a partir de uma relação íntima, que é a linguagem musical. Guilherme Gontijo: E a experiência mais forte que eu tive nisso, ela é do passado e foi com o Guilherme Bernardes. Lembro que dei uma aula e mostrei a melodia do Carpe Diem, do Horácio. Da Ode. E tava lá mostrando o poema, sendo bem técnico ali, como é que explica o metro, como é que põe uma melodia, etc, etc. E uns três dias depois ele me mandou uma gravação que ele fez no Garage Band, totalmente sintética. De uma versão só instrumental, quer dizer, o que ele mais curtiu foi a melodia. E a gente às vezes esquece disso, quer dizer, um aspecto da poesia arcaica ou da poesia oral antiga romana é que alguém poderia adorar a melodia e nem prestar tanta atenção na letra. E que continuariam dizendo: “É um grande poeta”. Eu senti uma glória quando eu pensei: “Caraca, um asclepiadeu maior tocou uma pessoa como melodia”. A pessoa nem se preocupou tanto que é o poema do Carpe Diem, mas a melodia do asclepiadeu maior. [som de ícone] Lívia: Só por curiosidade, “asclepiadeu maior” é um tipo de verso poético greco-latino composto por um espondeu, dois coriambos e um iambo. Você não precisa saber como funcionam esses versos na teoria. Essa forma poética foi criada pelo poeta lírico grego Asclepíades de Samos, que viveu no século III a.C., por isso o nome, o mais importante é que foi o verso utilizado por Horácio em muitas de suas odes. [música de transição] Lidia: Agora, já encaminhando para o final do nosso episódio, não podemos ir embora sem falar sobre o trabalho de recepção e tradução realizado pela professora Andrea, lá na Hunter College, nos EUA. Lívia: Além do seu projeto sobre a presença dos clássicos nas obras de escritores afro-latino-americanos, com foco especial no Brasil, de autores como Lima Barreto, Luís Gama, Juliano Moreira e Auta de Sousa. A professora também publicou o livro Reis Imperfeitos: Pretendentes na Odisseia, Poética da Culpa e Sátira Irlandesa, pela Harvard University Press, em 2023, e as suas pesquisas abarcam a poesia homérica, a poética comparada e as teorias da tradução. Lidia: A professora Andrea faz um exercício muito importante de tradução de autores negros brasileiros pro inglês, não somente das obras literárias, mas também de seus pensamentos teóricos, pra que esses pensamentos sejam conhecidos fora do Brasil e alcance um público maior. Lívia: E é muito interessante como a relação com os estudos da tradução pra professora Andrea também tocam em um lugar muito íntimo e pessoal, assim como foi pro Guilherme nas suas traduções em performances. Lidia: E ela contou pra gente um pouco dessa história. Andrea Kouklanakis: Antes de falar da língua, é eu vou falar que, quando eu vejo a biografia deles, especialmente quando eu passei bastante tempo com o Luiz Gama. O que eu achei incrível é o nível de familiaridade de entendimento que eu tive da vida corriqueira deles. Por exemplo, Cruz e Souza, né? A família dele morava no fundo lá da casa, né? Esse tipo de coisa assim. O Luiz Gama também quando ele fala do aluno lá que estava na casa quando ele foi escravizado por um tempo, quando ele era criança, o cara que escravizou ele tinha basicamente uma pensão pra estudantes, que estavam fazendo advocacia, essas coisas, então na casa tinham residentes e um deles ensinou ele a ler, a escrever. O que eu achei interessantíssimo é que eu estou há 100 anos separada desse povo, mas a dinâmica social foi completamente familiar pra mim, né? A minha mãe, como eu te falei, ela sempre foi empregada doméstica, ela já se aposentou há muito tempo, mas a vida dela toda inteira ela trabalhou como empregada doméstica. E pra mim foi muito interessante ver como que as coisas não tinham mudado muito entre a infância de alguém como Cruz e Souza e a minha infância, né? Obviamente ninguém me adotou, nada disso, mas eu passei muito tempo dentro da casa de família. que era gente que tinha muito interesse em ajudar a gente, em dar, como se diz, a scholarship, né? O lugar que a minha mãe trabalhou mais tempo assim, continuamente por 10 anos, foi, aliás, na casa do ex-reitor da USP, na década de 70 e 80, o Dr. Orlando Marques de Paiva. Lívia: Ao contar essa história tão íntima, a Andrea explicou como ela tenta passar essa coincidência de vivências, separada por cem anos ou mais no tempo, mas que, apesar de todo avanço na luta contra desigualdades raciais, ainda hoje refletem na sua memória e ainda são muito estáticas. Lidia: Essa memória reflete na linguagem, porque, como ela explicou, esses autores utilizam muitas palavras que a gente não usa mais, porque são palavras lá do século XVIII e XIX, mas o contexto chega pra ela de uma forma muito íntima e ainda viva, por ela ter vivenciado essas questões. Andrea Kouklanakis: Eu não sou poeta, mas eu tô dando uma de poeta, sabe? E quando eu percebo que tem algum estilo assim, a Auta de vez em quando tem um certo estilo assim, ambrósia, não sei do quê, sabe? Eu sei que ela está querendo dizer perfume, não sei o quê, eu não vou mudar, especialmente palavras, porque eu também estou vindo da minha perspectiva é de quem sabe grego e latim, eu também estou interessada em palavras que são em português, mas são gregas. Então, eu preservo, sabe? Lívia: Então, pra Andrea, no seu trabalho tradutório ela procura mesclar essas duas questões, a sua relação íntima com os textos e também a sua formação como classicista, que pensa a etimologia das palavras e convive com essa multiplicidade de línguas e culturas, caminhando entre o grego, o latim, o inglês e o português. [música de transição] [bg] Lidia: Ao ouvir nossos convidados de hoje, a Andrea Koclanakis e o Guilherme Gontijo Flores, percebemos que traduzir textos clássicos é muito mais do que passar palavras de uma língua pra outra. É atravessar disputas políticas, revisitar o passado com olhos do presente, reconstruir memórias coloniais e imaginar novos modos de convivência com as tradições antigas. Lívia: A tradução é pesquisa, criação, crítica e também pode ser transformação. Agradecemos aos entrevistados e a você que nos acompanhou até aqui! [música de transição] [créditos] Livia: O roteiro desse episódio foi escrito por mim, Lívia Mendes, que também fiz a locução junto com a Lidia Torres. Lidia: A revisão foi feita por mim, Lidia Torres e pela Mayra Trinca. Lidia: Esse episódio faz parte do trabalho de divulgação científica que a Lívia Mendes desenvolve no Centro de Estudos Clássicos e Centro de Teoria da Filologia, vinculados ao Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem e ao Instituto de Estudos Avançados da Unicamp, financiado pelo projeto Mídia Ciência da FAPESP, a quem agradecemos pelo financiamento. Lívia: Os trabalhos técnicos são de Daniel Rangel. A trilha sonora é de Kevin MacLeod e também gentilmente cedida pelo grupo Pecora Loca. A vinheta do Oxigênio foi produzida pelo Elias Mendez. Lidia: O Oxigênio conta com apoio da Secretaria Executiva de Comunicação da Unicamp. Você encontra a gente no site oxigenio.comciencia.br, no Instagram e no Facebook, basta procurar por Oxigênio Podcast. Lívia: Pra quem chegou até aqui, tomara que você tenha curtido passear pelo mundo da antiguidade greco-romana e entender um pouco de como os textos antigos chegam até nós pela recepção e tradução. Você pode deixar um comentário, na sua plataforma de áudio favorita, contando o que achou. A gente vai adorar te ver por lá! Até mais e nos encontramos no próximo episódio. [vinheta final]

L'idée peut sembler absurde aujourd'hui : dans les années 1930, Benito Mussolini ordonne de redresser la tour de Pise. Oui, cette tour mondialement célèbre justement parce qu'elle penche depuis le Moyen Âge. Pourtant, pour le dictateur fasciste, ce geste n'avait rien d'anecdotique : il relevait de sa vision politique, idéologique et propagandiste de l'Italie.Pour comprendre cette décision, il faut d'abord se rappeler que Mussolini voulait bâtir une image d'une Italie forte, moderne et disciplinée, coupée des faiblesses supposées du passé. Dans cette logique, tout ce qui semblait imparfait, fragile ou « dégénéré » devait être corrigé ou éliminé. Pour lui, la tour de Pise, monument mondialement connu, représentait une gêne : sa position inclinée passait pour un symbole de déséquilibre, presque de décadence. Il fallait donc, selon Mussolini, la remettre dans l'axe… pour remettre l'Italie dans l'axe.À cette motivation idéologique s'ajoute la propagande. Le régime fasciste utilisait les grands chantiers comme manifestations spectaculaires de sa puissance. Redresser la tour de Pise aurait constitué un exploit technique, une preuve que l'Italie fasciste pouvait accomplir ce que personne n'avait osé tenter depuis sept siècles. Mussolini espérait ainsi offrir au monde une démonstration éclatante de la supériorité de son régime, à une époque où les dictatures rivalisaient de symboles.En 1934, les travaux commencent. Le plan est simple en théorie : injecter du ciment sous la base de la tour pour stabiliser le sol. Résultat ? Une catastrophe. L'opération aggrave l'inclinaison au lieu de la réduire, fragilisant dangereusement la structure. Les ingénieurs prennent peur : la tour risque littéralement de s'effondrer. On arrête tout, et l'affaire est discrètement mise sous silence.Cet épisode révèle un aspect essentiel du fascisme : la volonté constante de remodeler le réel pour qu'il corresponde à un récit idéologique, quitte à maltraiter l'histoire, la science ou le patrimoine. La tour de Pise, chef-d'œuvre médiéval, n'était pas pour Mussolini un héritage à préserver, mais un instrument de communication. Sa singularité millénaire importait moins que son potentiel propagandiste.Ironie de l'histoire, ce que Mussolini percevait comme un défaut – l'inclinaison – est aujourd'hui la raison même pour laquelle la tour est connue dans le monde entier. Le « problème » que le dictateur voulait effacer est devenu l'un des symboles les plus aimés de l'Italie… un monument qui a survécu, là où son régime, lui, s'est effondré. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Sonja Koppitz, Judith Werner www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Plus Eins

En 1936, l'Espagne est profondément divisée par la victoire aux élections du Front Populaire. Le gouvernement de gauche est visé par un coup d'Etat de généraux conservateurs. Parmi eux se trouve Franco. Après avoir pris la tête des troupes basées au Maroc, il a besoin d'avions pour faire passer ses hommes en Espagne. Hitler et Mussolini se chargent de les lui fournir. Ce sont les débuts de la guerre civile. Les troupes de Franco, désormais leader des généraux rebelles, multiplient les exactions.En nouveau chef suprême, Franco commence à diffuser son image et à mettre en place le culte de sa personnalité. La victoire sur les Républicains est pourtant loin d'être acquise. La guerre civile s'achève en 1939. L'Espagne est franquiste, mais l'Europe bascule la même année dans la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Franco reste à l'écart, trop attaché à son rêve de restaurer la grandeur de l'Espagne. Au retour à la paix, Franco est certes toujours là, mais, muré dans le passé, le pays sombre dans la pauvreté.Dans la suite de ce récit, Virginie Girod vous raconte comment il s'est emparé du pouvoir et l'a conservé par la force. (rediffusion)Au Cœur de l'Histoire est un podcast Europe 1.- Auteure et Présentatrice : Virginie Girod - Production : Caroline Garnier- Réalisation : Nicolas Gaspard- Direction artistique : Julien Tharaud- Composition de la musique originale : Julien Tharaud et Sébastien Guidis- Edition et Diffusion : Nathan Laporte et Clara Ménard- Visuel : Sidonie Mangin- Patrimoine sonore : Sylvaine Denis, Laetitia Casanova et Antoine ReclusBibliographie :- Bartolomé Bennassar, Franco, Perrin coll. Tempus, 2002. Ressources en ligne :- https://www.eldiario.es/comunitat-valenciana/informacion-alemana-masones-franco-espanoles-gestapo_1_1271932.html - https://historia.nationalgeographic.com.es/a/entrevista-franco-y-hitler-estacion-hendaya_17306 - https://www.retronews.fr/conflits-et-relations-internationales/interview/2023/05/30/guerre-civile-espagnole-interview-franco - https://www.persee.fr/doc/casa_0076-230x_1994_num_30_3_2722Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

General Francisco Franco died in November 1975, ending 36 years of dictatorship over Spain. The general had been in power since 1939 after winning the country's bloody civil war, and his death followed a long illness.He was mourned by conservative Spaniards but those on the left celebrated, calling him a fascist who had once been an ally of Hitler and Mussolini.In 2015, Louise Hidalgo spoke to Jose Antonio Martinez Soler, a young journalist about the ending of an era.Eye-witness accounts brought to life by archive. Witness History is for those fascinated by the past. We take you to the events that have shaped our world through the eyes of the people who were there. For nine minutes every day, we take you back in time and all over the world, to examine wars, coups, scientific discoveries, cultural moments and much more. Recent episodes explore everything from the death of Adolf Hitler, the first spacewalk and the making of the movie Jaws, to celebrity tortoise Lonesome George, the Kobe earthquake and the invention of superglue. We look at the lives of some of the most famous leaders, artists, scientists and personalities in history, including: Eva Peron – Argentina's Evita; President Ronald Reagan and his famous ‘tear down this wall' speech; Thomas Keneally on why he wrote Schindler's List; and Jacques Derrida, France's ‘rock star' philosopher. You can learn all about fascinating and surprising stories, such as the civil rights swimming protest; the disastrous D-Day rehearsal; and the death of one of the world's oldest languages.(Photo: General Francisco Franco lies in state in Madrid, 1975. Credit: Central Press/Getty Images)

Built Not Born Podcast (Episode 179)- Enri Pjetri: Rome Revealed - Gladiators, Emperors & Michelangelo's Secrets ⚔️

Włoska agresja na Etiopię z 1935 roku jest jednym z najbardziej kompromitujących momentów w historii Ligi Narodów. Mimo prób powstrzymania konfliktu, społeczność międzynarodowa okazała się bezradna wobec imperialnych ambicji Benito Mussoliniego. Dlaczego duce chciał kontroli nad tym afrykańskim państwem? W Misji specjalnej odkrywamy tajemnice II wojny włosko-abisyńskiej.

Dietro la maschera del dittatore d'acciaio si nascondeva un uomo tormentato, fragile e ossessionato dal controllo. Dalle passioni segrete alle relazioni distruttive, scopri il lato più intimo e sconosciuto di Benito Mussolini.

In this episode of VISITORS, UFO researcher Craig Oliver unpacks the Magenta Project. A complex web connecting a 1933 UFO retrieval in Mussolini's Italy to the formation of America's modern intelligence apparatus. Craig, working alongside researcher Michael Arementor have constructed an extensive timeline revealing how this pre-WWII incident may have shaped everything from the OSS to the CIA's creation just two months after Roswell. The discussion traces how Italian researcher Roberto Pinotti first documented the Magenta retrieval in the 1990s, later brought to prominence by David Grusch's testimony. Craig explains how Mussolini's son-in-law, Galeazzo Ciano, managed both the recovered craft and intelligence operations while attempting to keep Italy out of WWII. The conversation weaves together threads involving the Vatican's knowledge of anomalous phenomena, the Knights of Malta's intelligence connections, and figures like Vannevar Bush (distantly related to the Bush political family), who controlled radar development—potentially the first technology capable of downing UFOs. Craig argues that understanding this history matters even for non-believers, as it illuminates how America transformed from a nation with minimal intelligence infrastructure before WWII into today's labyrinthine security state. The through-line connects suppressed free energy research by Tesla and Marconi, the rise of oil-dependent power structures, and the deliberate concealment of exotic technology by those who recognized it as a threat to their control—a pattern of obfuscation that began in 1933 and continues today. The Magenta Project on X: https://x.com/MagentaUFOUAP The Magenta Project Go Fund Me: https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-groundbreaking-ufo-research-the-magenta-project   Patreon ⇒     http://patreon.com/frightday      TikTok ⇒     http://tiktok.com/frightdaypodcast     Spotify ⇒  https://open.spotify.com/show/14ioP0z... Website ⇒  https://www.frightday.com   Apple Podcasts  ⇒   https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... Instagram ⇒  http://instagram.com/frightday    X ⇒   https://x.com/frightday Media Inquiries ⇒  byron@frightday.com

The World Cup is a sporting competition between national football teams to determine the best of them. But it's always been a vessel for so much more, not least the ambitions of political leaders ranging from the mildly ethical to the downright evil. Host countries want to tell a story about themselves on the global stage, the winners make the case for their own national greatness, and there are a million more stories around this famous tournament that nobody planned for.A new book from Jonathan Wilson — columnist for The Guardian, co-host of the Libero podcast, and esteemed local Substacker — seeks to tell the very best tales from nearly 100 years of World Cup football. The Power and the Glory: The History of the World Cup is a delightful read, full of sharp insight and laugh-out-loud moments. From Benito Mussolini's bonus trophy for the 1934 World Cup winners — the Coppa del Duce — to the inside story of France's disastrous 2010 World Cup, to the insidious inner workings of FIFA in the modern era, it's all there.Wilson joins the show this week to talk a little Premier League title race before we get into his book, the latest edition of the World Cup next summer, why Gianni Infantino's reign as FIFA chief makes us all pine for the days of Sepp Blatter, and a whole lot more.Go get your copy of The Power and the Glory after you've had a listen here!Get more sharp coverage of the world's game at TheFootballWeekend.com ↗️ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A brilliant circus family's hidden legacy unfolds as descendants reunite across continents, revealing their Australian Aboriginal ancestry, global stardom, and the extraordinary secrets they kept in order to survive. The greatest entertainment on earth in the 1900s was the circus and its performers were the global superstars. The big top transported children and adults alike into a world where anything was possible.Con Colleano, ‘the wizard on the wire' defied gravity, while he and his family defied all odds to become a global phenomenon. Through the Colleano family's remarkable home movies, never-before-seen footage, family interviews and archive, their extraordinary story is revealed. Rooted in humble beginnings from the Australian bush, the family outmanoeuvred punitive Australian laws and prejudice to travel the world, concealing their Indigenous heritage and reaching the highest echelons of circus stardom.Con Colleano dazzled fans while also mingling with icons including Charlie Chaplin, at the most exclusive social sets of America and Europe, beguiling even the likes of Hitler and Mussolini.As the filmmaker, Pauline Clague, reveals her connection to the story, she finds Australian Deb Hescott, who uncovers her own secret link to this family. Connecting with Molly, one of the oral history holders of the family, they go on a profound journey of discovery. The Colleano Heart unravels the hidden secrets of their family of circus royalty, revealing them as survivors of Australia's Hidden Generation of Aboriginal people.The Colleano Heart presents a rich portrait of the family, and the global socio-cultural shifts shaping First Nations lives. The Colleano Heart recently screened at the Adelaide Film Festival, and Nadine Whitney spoke with director Pauline Clague ahead of the films screening about her film. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A brilliant circus family's hidden legacy unfolds as descendants reunite across continents, revealing their Australian Aboriginal ancestry, global stardom, and the extraordinary secrets they kept in order to survive. The greatest entertainment on earth in the 1900s was the circus and its performers were the global superstars. The big top transported children and adults alike into a world where anything was possible.Con Colleano, ‘the wizard on the wire' defied gravity, while he and his family defied all odds to become a global phenomenon. Through the Colleano family's remarkable home movies, never-before-seen footage, family interviews and archive, their extraordinary story is revealed. Rooted in humble beginnings from the Australian bush, the family outmanoeuvred punitive Australian laws and prejudice to travel the world, concealing their Indigenous heritage and reaching the highest echelons of circus stardom.Con Colleano dazzled fans while also mingling with icons including Charlie Chaplin, at the most exclusive social sets of America and Europe, beguiling even the likes of Hitler and Mussolini.As the filmmaker, Pauline Clague, reveals her connection to the story, she finds Australian Deb Hescott, who uncovers her own secret link to this family. Connecting with Molly, one of the oral history holders of the family, they go on a profound journey of discovery. The Colleano Heart unravels the hidden secrets of their family of circus royalty, revealing them as survivors of Australia's Hidden Generation of Aboriginal people.The Colleano Heart presents a rich portrait of the family, and the global socio-cultural shifts shaping First Nations lives. The Colleano Heart recently screened at the Adelaide Film Festival, and Nadine Whitney spoke with director Pauline Clague ahead of the films screening about her film. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Oui, c'est vrai : Benito Mussolini, le dictateur fasciste italien, a bien tenté — sans succès — de faire disparaître les pâtes de la table italienne. Derrière cette idée apparemment absurde se cachait un projet politique, idéologique et économique profondément révélateur de son époque.Dans les années 1920 et 1930, Mussolini voulait faire de l'Italie une puissance autosuffisante, libérée de toute dépendance étrangère. Il lance alors ce qu'il appelle la battaglia del grano, la “bataille du blé”. L'objectif : produire suffisamment de céréales sur le sol italien pour nourrir toute la population et ne plus importer de grains, notamment des États-Unis ou de l'Europe de l'Est. Cette campagne nationaliste devient un pilier de la propagande fasciste.Mais un problème se pose rapidement : la production de blé italien, même augmentée, ne suffit pas à couvrir les besoins d'un pays où les pâtes sont un aliment de base. Et la culture du blé, plus exigeante en eau et en terres, concurrence celle des légumes et de l'huile d'olive. Résultat : les ressources s'épuisent, et les prix flambent. Pour résoudre ce paradoxe, le régime décide alors de… dissuader les Italiens de manger des pâtes.Dans les années 1930, certains intellectuels proches du régime, comme le poète Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, chef du mouvement futuriste, publient des textes provocateurs vantant la “cuisine de l'avenir” et dénonçant les pâtes comme un symbole de mollesse et de passéisme. Marinetti écrivait que “le peuple qui mange trop de pâtes devient lent, pessimiste et nostalgique”. Mussolini, séduit par cette rhétorique de virilité et de modernité, soutient l'idée d'un remplacement des pâtes par des plats à base de riz ou de céréales locales, plus conformes à son idéal d'autarcie.Des campagnes officielles encouragent alors les Italiens à consommer du riz de la plaine du Pô, des légumes, ou même du pain. Certains restaurants fascistes retirent temporairement les pâtes de leur menu. Mais la résistance populaire est immédiate. Les Italiens refusent d'abandonner ce plat millénaire, symbole de leur identité et de leur culture. Même les hiérarques du régime continuent d'en manger en privé.Devant cet échec culinaire et politique, Mussolini finit par abandonner la croisade. Les pâtes survivent à la dictature, triomphent de la propagande, et deviennent après-guerre un symbole d'unité nationale. Ironie de l'histoire : l'homme qui voulait forger un “Italien nouveau” s'est heurté à ce qui, encore aujourd'hui, reste l'un des piliers les plus solides de la culture italienne — un bon plat de spaghetti. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

REDIFF - Italie, octobre 1922 : une marche chaotique sur Rome propulse Benito Mussolini à la tête du gouvernement. Dès lors, l'Italie sombre dans deux décennies de fascisme et de dictature. Pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, Mussolini se rapproche d'Hitler et collabore avec lui, jusqu'à ce jour d'avril 1945 où le Duce est arrêté et exécuté. Revivez l'ascension et la chute du fascisme à travers le destin de son fondateur. Crédits : Lorànt Deutsch, Bruno DeltombeHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

This week on the Mark Levin Show, we need to rid the Republican Party, the movement, and constitutional conservatism of bigots, racists, anti-Semites, and anti-Americans. These low lives, like Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon and Nick Fuentes, dishonor the greatest generation that defeated Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini. It's a time for choosing between the good guys and the bad guys, America or the Third Reich/Soviet Union. Republicans must stand up and confront the spread unlike Democrats who allowed it. Mamdani and his supporters like Linda Sarsour refuse assimilate and instead aim to conquer, devour, and dismantle the culture, police, communities, private property rights, and economy. This would attract unassimilated individuals from afar, harden electoral battles, and escalate into a cultural war beyond politics, with devastating effects on education, policing, healthcare, and wealth redistribution, driving successful people away. Tuesday's election results were no surprise because the Democrats immigration strategy to change the demographics and citizenry, without assimilation, has worked. NYC will decline, the question is by how much and Virginia is now part of the federal government. If the election was about affordability why did NJ vote to increase their property taxes and energy bills? neither the law nor the Constitution prohibits a President from imposing tariffs, which can serve purposes like rebuilding industries, countering foreign tariffs, or ensuring national security. Congress holds the power of the purse and could pass statutes to limit presidential tariff authority, but it has not done so, making judicial intervention unnecessary and a potential separation of powers issue. The Court should refrain from involvement, as any limits would come from congressional action or voter disapproval. Every conservative faith leader, organization head, think tank, legal group, media, and political entity need to boldly speak out against vile, poisonous movements on the left and the radical right, specifically fascists, thugs, and neo-Nazis, rather than true conservatives or constitutionalists. Tucker Carlson and his ilk have promoted harmful ideas and attacked traditional Christians and Jews and they need to be rejected. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On Monday's Mark Levin Show, we need to rid the Republican Party, the movement, and constitutional conservatism of bigots, racists, anti-Semites, and anti-Americans. These low lives, like Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon and Nick Fuentes, dishonor the greatest generation that defeated Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini. It's a time for choosing between the good guys and the bad guys, America or the Third Reich/Soviet Union. Republicans must stand up and confront the spread unlike Democrats who allowed it.  Later, electing Zohran Mamdani in New York City would lead to its downfall, causing investors, businesses and residents to flee and the city's capitalist core will be destroyed, just like London and Paris. Mamdani and his supporters like Linda Sarsour refuse assimilate and instead aim to conquer, devour, and dismantle the culture, police, communities, private property rights, and economy. This would attract unassimilated individuals from afar, harden electoral battles, and escalate into a cultural war beyond politics, with devastating effects on education, policing, healthcare, and wealth redistribution, driving successful people away.  After, the Democrats in New Jersey caused high electricity bills and property taxes by cutting off traditional energy supplies and relying on ineffective primitive technologies like wind and solar, driven by ideology over practical knowledge. Voters need to reject the Democrat government mismanagement. Voting Democrat means more of the same destruction as seen in California, Finally, Winsome Earle-Sears, a Black women running for Virginia Governor, undermines the Democrat's identity politics and propaganda. Barack Obama campaigned for Abigail Spanberger, a White women running for Virginia Governor, who pretends to be moderate but votes radically left. This election is about ideology from the third world and seventh century, not race. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today we're joined by Despina Stratigakos and Elana Shapira about their new book, Finding Ella Briggs: The Life and Work of an Unconventional Architect. Ella Briggs was a talented architect, designer, and writer whose influence was felt on both sides of the Atlantic. She trained with the Viennese Secessionists and brought their radical ideas to Gilded Age New York. She designed modernist housing for the masses in Austria, was jailed as a suspected spy in Mussolini's Italy, and thrived in Weimar Germany before suffering persecution under the Nazis. Fleeing to London, she contributed to England's postwar reconstruction. Yet despite a long and prolific career, her name is largely forgotten today. Finding Ella Briggs restores Briggs to her rightful place in the history of modernist design. To purchase: https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691263953/finding-ella-briggs?_gl=1*m5kt06*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTMxMTM1OTU5Ny4xNzQzMTczMTE1*_ga_N1W9JWKLY3*MTc0MzQyMzU2Mi41LjAuMTc0MzQyMzU2Mi4wLjAuMTc5NTE3MjM2MA..

Joe Wright's known for Oscar-winning WWII epics like DARKEST HOUR. But his latest look at the era is a different animal: The nightmarish series MUSSOLINI: SON OF THE CENTURY, about the rise of the godfather of fascism. Joe tells host Rico Gagliano about the Italian dictator, the echoes he sees in politics today... and why he spent his own teen years blasting '30s pop tunes.MUSSOLINI: SON OF THE CENTURY is now streaming on MUBI in the US, Canada, Latin America, Turkey and India. To stream some of the films we've covered on the podcast, check out the collection Featured on the MUBI Podcast. Availability of films varies depending on your country.MUBI is a global streaming service, production company and film distributor dedicated to elevating great cinema. MUBI makes, acquires, curates, and champions extraordinary films, connecting them to audiences all over the world. A place to discover ambitious new films and singular voices, from iconic directors to emerging auteurs. Each carefully chosen by MUBI's curators.

Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.Yesterday, Southern California Edison (SCE), the utility whose power lines may have started the devastating Eaton Fire, announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program. Under the program, people affected by the fire can receive hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation, in a matter of months rather than years—but in exchange, they must give up their right to sue.It should come as no surprise that SCE, in designing the program, sought the help of Kenneth Feinberg. For more than 40 years, often in the wake of tragedy or disaster, Feinberg has helped mediate and resolve seemingly intractable crises. He's most well-known for how he and his colleague Camille Biros designed and administered the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. But he has worked on many other headline-making matters over the years, including the Agent Orange product liability litigation, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Trust, the multidistrict litigation involving Monsanto's Roundup weed killer—and now, of course, the Eaton Fire.How did Ken develop such a fascinating and unique practice? What is the most difficult aspect of administering these giant compensation funds? Do these funds represent the wave of the future, as an alternative to (increasingly expensive) litigation? Having just turned 80, does he have any plans to retire?Last week, I had the pleasure of interviewing Ken—the day after his 80th birthday—and we covered all these topics. The result is what I found to be one of the most moving conversations I've ever had on this podcast.Thanks to Ken Feinberg for joining me—and, of course, for his many years of service as America's go-to mediator in times of crisis.Show Notes:* Kenneth Feinberg bio, Wikipedia* Kenneth Feinberg profile, Chambers and Partners* L.A. Fire Victims Face a Choice, by Jill Cowan for The New York TimesPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fourth episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, October 24.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.I like to think that I've produced some good podcast episodes over the past three-plus years, but I feel that this latest one is a standout. I'm hard-pressed to think of an interview that was more emotionally affecting to me than what you're about to hear.Kenneth Feinberg is a leading figure in the world of mediation and alternative dispute resolution. He is most well-known for having served as special master of the U.S. government's September 11th Victim Compensation Fund—and for me, as someone who was in New York City on September 11, I found his discussion of that work profoundly moving. But he has handled many major matters over the years, such as the Agent Orange product liability litigation to the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund. And he's working right now on a matter that's in the headlines: the California wildfires. Ken has been hired by Southern California Edison to help design a compensation program for victims of the 2025 Eaton fire. Ken has written about his fascinating work in two books: What Is Life Worth?: The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11 and Who Gets What: Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Ken Feinberg.Ken, thank you so much for joining me.Ken Feinberg: Thank you very much; it's an honor to be here.DL: We are recording this shortly after your 80th birthday, so happy birthday!KF: Thank you very much.DL: Let's go back to your birth; let's start at the beginning. You grew up in Massachusetts, I believe.KF: That's right: Brockton, Massachusetts, about 20 miles south of Boston.DL: Your parents weren't lawyers. Tell us about what they did.KF: My parents were blue-collar workers from Massachusetts, second-generation immigrants. My father ran a wholesale tire distributorship, my mother was a bookkeeper, and we grew up in the 1940s and ‘50s, even the early ‘60s, in a town where there was great optimism, a very vibrant Jewish community, three different synagogues, a very optimistic time in American history—post-World War II, pre-Vietnam, and a time when communitarianism, working together to advance the collective good, was a prominent characteristic of Brockton, and most of the country, during the time that I was in elementary school and high school in Brockton.DL: Did the time in which you grow up shape or influence your decision to go into law?KF: Yes. More than law—the time growing up had a great impact on my decision to give back to the community from which I came. You've got to remember, when I was a teenager, the president of the United States was John F. Kennedy, and I'll never forget because it had a tremendous impact on me—President Kennedy reminding everybody that public service is a noble undertaking, government is not a dirty word, and especially his famous quote (or one of his many quotes), “Every individual can make a difference.” I never forgot that, and it had a personal impact on me and has had an impact on me throughout my life. [Ed. note: The quotation generally attributed to JFK is, “One person can make a difference, and everyone should try.” Whether he actually said these exact words is unclear, but it's certainly consistent with many other sentiments he expressed throughout his life.]DL: When you went to college at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, what did you study?KF: I studied history and political science. I was very interested in how individuals over the centuries change history, the theory of historians that great individuals articulate history and drive it in a certain direction—for good, like President Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, or for ill, like Adolf Hitler or Mussolini. And so it was history that I really delved into in my undergraduate years.DL: What led you then to turn to law school?KF: I always enjoyed acting on the stage—theater, comedies, musicals, dramas—and at the University of Massachusetts, I did quite a bit of that. In my senior year, I anticipated going to drama school at Yale, or some other academic master's program in theater. My father gave me very good advice. He said, “Ken, most actors end up waiting on restaurant tables in Manhattan, waiting for a big break that never comes. Why don't you turn your skills on the stage to a career in the courtroom, in litigation, talking to juries and convincing judges?” That was very sound advice from my father, and I ended up attending NYU Law School and having a career in the law.DL: Yes—and you recount that story in your book, and I just love that. It's really interesting to hear what parents think of our careers. But anyway, you did very well in law school, you were on the law review, and then your first job out of law school was something that we might expect out of someone who did well in law school.KF: Yes. I was a law clerk to the chief judge of New York State, Stanley Fuld, a very famous state jurist, and he had his chambers in New York City. For one week, every six or seven weeks, we would go to the state capitol in Albany to hear cases, and it was Judge Fuld who was my transition from law school to the practice of law.DL: I view clerking as a form of government service—and then you continued in service after that.KF: That's right. Remembering what my father had suggested, I then turned my attention to the courtroom and became an assistant United States attorney, a federal prosecutor, in New York City. I served as a prosecutor and as a trial lawyer for a little over three years. And then I had a wonderful opportunity to go to work for Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington and stayed with him for about five years.DL: You talk about this also in your books—you worked on a pretty diverse range of issues for the senator, right?KF: That's right. For the first three years I worked on his staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee, with some excellent colleagues—soon-to-be Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer was with me, noted litigator David Boies was in the office—and for the first three years, it was law-related issues. Then in 1978, Senator Kennedy asked me to be his chief of staff, and once I went over and became his chief of staff, the issues of course mushroomed. He was running for president, so there were issues of education, health, international relations—a wide diversity of issues, very broad-based.DL: I recall that you didn't love the chief of staff's duties.KF: No. Operations or administration was not my priority. I loved substance, issues—whatever the issues were, trying to work out legislative compromises, trying to give back something in the way of legislation to the people. And internal operations and administration, I quickly discovered, was not my forte. It was not something that excited me.DL: Although it's interesting: what you are most well-known for is overseeing and administering these large funds and compensating victims of these horrific tragedies, and there's a huge amount of administration involved in that.KF: Yes, but I'm a very good delegator. In fact, if you look at the track record of my career in designing and administering these programs—9/11 or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill or the Patriots' Day Marathon bombings in Boston—I was indeed fortunate in all of those matters to have at my side, for over 40 years, Camille Biros. She's not a lawyer, but she's the nation's expert on designing, administering, and operating these programs, and as you delve into what I've done and haven't done, her expertise has been invaluable.DL: I would call Camille your secret weapon, except she's not secret. She's been profiled in The New York Times, and she's a well-known figure in her own right.KF: That is correct. She was just in the last few months named one of the 50 Women Over 50 that have had such an impact in the country—that list by Forbes that comes out every year. She's prominently featured in that magazine.DL: Shifting back to your career, where did you go after your time in the Senate?KF: I opened up a Washington office for a prominent New York law firm, and for the next decade or more, that was the center of my professional activity.DL: So that was Kaye Scholer, now Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer. What led you to go from your career in the public sector, where you spent a number of your years right out of law school, into so-called Biglaw?KF: Practicality and financial considerations. I had worked for over a decade in public service. I now had a wife, I had three young children, and it was time to give them financial security. And “Biglaw,” as you put it—Biglaw in Washington was lucrative, and it was something that gave me a financial base from which I could try and expand my different interests professionally. And that was the reason that for about 12 years I was in private practice for a major firm, Kaye Scholer.DL: And then tell us what happened next.KF: A great lesson in not planning too far ahead. In 1984, I got a call from a former clerk of Judge Fuld whom I knew from the clerk network: Judge Jack Weinstein, a nationally recognized jurist from Brooklyn, the Eastern District, and a federal judge. He had on his docket the Vietnam veterans' Agent Orange class action.You may recall that there were about 250,000 Vietnam veterans who came home claiming illness or injury or death due to the herbicide Agent Orange, which had been dropped by the U.S. Air Force in Vietnam to burn the foliage and vegetation where the Viet Cong enemy might be hiding. Those Vietnam veterans came home suffering terrible diseases, including cancer and chloracne (a sort of acne on the skin), and they brought a lawsuit. Judge Weinstein had the case. Weinstein realized that if that case went to trial, it could be 10 years before there'd be a result, with appeals and all of that.So he appointed me as mediator, called the “special master,” whose job it was to try and settle the case, all as a mediator. Well, after eight weeks of trying, we were successful. There was a master settlement totaling about $250 million—at the time, one of the largest tort verdicts in history. And that one case, front-page news around the nation, set me on a different track. Instead of remaining a Washington lawyer involved in regulatory and legislative matters, I became a mediator, an individual retained by the courts or by the parties to help resolve a case. And that was the beginning. That one Agent Orange case transformed my entire professional career and moved me in a different direction completely.DL: So you knew the late Judge Weinstein through Fuld alumni circles. What background did you have in mediation already, before you handled this gigantic case?KF: None. I told Judge Weinstein, “Judge, I never took a course in mediation at law school (there wasn't one then), and I don't know anything about bringing the parties together, trying to get them to settle.” He said, “I know you. I know your background. I've followed your career. You worked for Senator Kennedy. You are the perfect person.” And until the day I die, I'm beholden to Judge Weinstein for having faith in me to take this on.DL: And over the years, you actually worked on a number of matters at the request of Judge Weinstein.KF: A dozen. I worked on tobacco cases, on asbestos cases, on drug and medical device cases. I even worked for Judge Weinstein mediating the closing of the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island. I handled a wide range of cases where he called on me to act as his court-appointed mediator to resolve cases on his docket.DL: You've carved out a very unique and fascinating niche within the law, and I'm guessing that most people who meet you nowadays know who you are. But say you're in a foreign country or something, and some total stranger is chatting with you and asks what you do for a living. What would you say?KF: I would say I'm a lawyer, and I specialize in dispute resolution. It might be mediation, it might be arbitration, or it might even be negotiation, where somebody asks me to negotiate on their behalf. So I just tell people there is a growing field of law in the United States called ADR—alternative dispute resolution—and that it is, as you say, David, my niche, my focus when called upon.DL: And I think it's fair to say that you're one of the founding people in this field or early pioneers—or I don't know how you would describe it.KF: I think that's right. When I began with Agent Orange, there was no mediation to speak of. It certainly wasn't institutionalized; it wasn't streamlined. Today, in 2025, the American Bar Association has a special section on alternative dispute resolution, it's taught in every law school in the United States, there are thousands of mediators and arbitrators, and it's become a major leg in law school of different disciplines and specialties.DL: One question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter you are most proud of?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the hardest matter you've ever had to deal with?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter that you're most well-known for?” And I feel in your case, the same matter is responsive to all three of those questions.KF: That's correct. The most difficult, the most challenging, the most rewarding matter, the one that's given me the most exposure, was the federal September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, when I was appointed by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft to implement, design, and administer a very unique federal law that had been enacted right after 9/11.DL: I got chills as you were just even stating that, very factually, because I was in New York on 9/11, and a lot of us remember the trauma and difficulty of that time. And you basically had to live with that and talk to hundreds, even thousands, of people—survivors, family members—for almost three years. And you did it pro bono. So let me ask you this: what were you thinking?KF: What triggered my interest was the law itself. Thirteen days after the attacks, Congress passed this law, unique in American history, setting up a no-fault administrator compensation system. Don't go to court. Those who volunteer—families of the dead, those who were physically injured at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon—you can voluntarily seek compensation from a taxpayer-funded law. Now, if you don't want it, you don't have to go. It's a voluntary program.The key will be whether the special master or the administrator will be able to convince people that it is a better avenue to pursue than a long, delayed, uncertain lawsuit. And based on my previous experience for the last 15 years, starting with Agent Orange and asbestos and these other tragedies, I volunteered. I went to Senator Kennedy and said, “What about this?” He said, “Leave it to me.” He called President Bush. He knew Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was his former colleague in the U.S. Senate, and he had great admiration for Senator Ashcroft. And so I was invited by the attorney general for an interview, and I told him I was interested. I told him I would only do it pro bono. You can't get paid for a job like this; it's patriotism. And he said, “Go for it.” And he turned out to be my biggest, strongest ally during the 33 months of the program.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.You talk about this in your books: you were recommended by a very prominent Democratic politician, and the administration at the time was Republican. George W. Bush was president, and John Ashcroft was the attorney general. Why wouldn't they have picked a Republican for this project?KF: Very good question. Senator Kennedy told both of them, “You better be careful here. This is a very, very uncertain program, with taxpayer money used to pay only certain victims. This could be a disaster. And you would be well-advised to pick someone who is not a prominent friend of yours, who is not perceived as just a Republican arm of the Justice Department or the White House. And I've got the perfect person. You couldn't pick a more opposite politician than my former chief of staff, Ken Feinberg. But look at what he's done.” And I think to Senator Kennedy's credit, and certainly to President Bush and to John Ashcroft's, they selected me.DL: As you would expect with a program of this size and complexity, there was controversy and certainly criticism over the years. But overall, looking back, I think people regard it widely as a huge success. Do you have a sense or an estimate of what percentage of people in the position to accept settlements through the program did that, rather than litigate? Because in accepting funds from the program, they did waive their right to bring all sorts of lawsuits.KF: That's correct. If you look at the statistics, if the statistics are a barometer of success, 5,300 applicants were eligible, because of death—about 2,950, somewhere in there—and the remaining claims were for physical injury. Of the 5,300, 97 percent voluntarily accepted the compensation. Only 94 people, 3 percent, opted out, and they all settled their cases five years later. There was never a trial on who was responsible in the law for 9/11. So if statistics are an indication—and I think they are a good indication—the program was a stunning success in accomplishing Congress's objective, which was diverting people voluntarily out of the court system.DL: Absolutely. And that's just a striking statistic. It was really successful in getting funds to families that needed it. They had lost breadwinners; they had lost loved ones. It was hugely successful, and it did not take a decade, as some of these cases involving just thousands of victims often do.I was struck by one thing you just said. You mentioned there was really no trial. And in reading your accounts of your work on this, it seemed almost like people viewed talking to you and your colleagues, Camille and others on this—I think they almost viewed that as their opportunity to be heard, since there wasn't a trial where they would get to testify.KF: That's correct. The primary reason for the success of the 9/11 Fund, and a valuable lesson for me thereafter, was this: give victims the opportunity to be heard, not only in public town-hall meetings where collectively people can vent, but in private, with doors closed. It's just the victim and Feinberg or his designee, Camille. We were the face of the government here. You can't get a meeting with the secretary of defense or the attorney general, the head of the Department of Justice. What you can get is an opportunity behind closed doors to express your anger, your frustration, your disappointment, your sense of uncertainty, with the government official responsible for cutting the checks. And that had an enormous difference in assuring the success of the program.DL: What would you say was the hardest aspect of your work on the Fund?KF: The hardest part of the 9/11 Fund, which I'll never recover from, was not calculating the value of a life. Judges and juries do that every day, David, in every court, in New Jersey and 49 other states. That is not a difficult assignment. What would the victim have earned over a work life? Add something for pain and suffering and emotional distress, and there's your check.The hardest part in any of these funds, starting with 9/11—the most difficult aspect, the challenge—is empathy, and your willingness to sit for over 900 separate hearings, me alone with family members or victims, to hear what they want to tell you, and to make that meeting, from their perspective, worthwhile and constructive. That's the hard part.DL: Did you find it sometimes difficult to remain emotionally composed? Or did you, after a while, develop a sort of thick skin?KF: You remain composed. You are a professional. You have a job to do, for the president of the United States. You can't start wailing and crying in the presence of somebody who was also wailing and crying, so you have to compose yourself. But I tell people who say, “Could I do what you did?” I say, “Sure. There are plenty of people in this country that can do what I did—if you can brace yourself for the emotional trauma that comes with meeting with victim after victim after victim and hearing their stories, which are...” You can't make them up. They're so heart-wrenching and so tragic.I'll give you one example. A lady came to see me, 26 years old, sobbing—one of hundreds of people I met with. “Mr. Feinberg, I lost my husband. He was a fireman at the World Trade Center. He died on 9/11. And he left me with our two children, six and four. Now, Mr. Feinberg, you've calculated and told me I'm going to receive $2.4 million, tax-free, from this 9/11 Fund. I want it in 30 days.”I said to Mrs. Jones, “This is public, taxpayer money. We have to go down to the U.S. Treasury. They've got to cut the checks; they've got to dot all the i's and cross all the t's. It may be 60 days or 90 days, but you'll get your money.”“No. Thirty days.”I said, “Mrs. Jones, why do you need the money in 30 days?”She said, “Why? I'll tell you why, Mr. Feinberg. I have terminal cancer. I have 10 weeks to live. My husband was going to survive me and take care of our two children. Now they're going to be orphans. I have got to get this money, find a guardian, make sure the money's safe, prepare for the kids' schooling. I don't have a lot of time. I need your help.”Well, we ran down to the U.S. Treasury and helped process the check in record time. We got her the money in 30 days—and eight weeks later, she died. Now when you hear story after story like this, you get some indication of the emotional pressure that builds and is debilitating, frankly. And we managed to get through it.DL: Wow. I got a little choked up just even hearing you tell that. Wow—I really don't know what to say.When you were working on the 9/11 Fund, did you have time for any other matters, or was this pretty much exclusively what you were working on for the 33 months?KF: Professionally, it was exclusive. Now what I did was, I stayed in my law firm, so I had a living. Other people in the firm were generating income for the firm; I wasn't on the dole. But it was exclusive. During the day, you are swamped with these individual requests, decisions that have to be made, checks that have to be cut. At night, I escaped: opera, orchestral concerts, chamber music, art museums—the height of civilization. During the day, in the depths of horror of civilization; at night, an escape, an opportunity to just enjoy the benefits of civilization. You better have a loving family, as I did, that stands behind you—because you never get over it, really.DL: That's such an important lesson, to actually have that time—because if you wanted to, you could have worked on this 24/7. But it is important to have some time to just clear your head or spend time with your family, especially just given what you were dealing with day-to-day.KF: That's right. And of course, during the day, we made a point of that as well. If we were holding hearings like the one I just explained, we'd take a one-hour break, go for a walk, go into Central Park or into downtown Washington, buy an ice cream cone, see the kids playing in playgrounds and laughing. You've got to let the steam out of the pressure cooker, or it'll kill you. And that was the most difficult part of the whole program. In all of these programs, that's the common denominator: emotional stress and unhappiness on the part of the victims.DL: One last question, before we turn to some other matters. There was also a very large logistical apparatus associated with this, right? For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers. It wasn't just you and Camille trying to deal with these thousands of survivors and claimants; you did have support.KF: That's right. Pricewaterhouse won the bid at the Justice Department. This is public: Pricewaterhouse, for something like around $100 million, put 450 people to work with us to help us process claims, appraise values, do the research. Pricewaterhouse was a tremendous ally and has gone on, since 9/11, to handle claims design and claims administration, as one of its many specialties. Emily Kent, Chuck Hacker, people like that we worked with for years, very much experts in these areas.DL: So after your work on the 9/11 Fund, you've worked on a number of these types of matters. Is there one that you would say ranks second in terms of complexity or difficulty or meaningfulness to you?KF: Yes. Deepwater Horizon in 2011, 2012—that oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico blew up and killed about, I don't know, 15 to 20 people in the explosion. But the real challenge in that program was how we received, in 16 months, about 1,250,000 claims for business interruption, business losses, property damage. We received over a million claims from 50 states. I think we got probably a dozen claims from New Jersey; I didn't know the oil had gotten to New Jersey. We received claims from 35 foreign countries. And the sheer volume of the disaster overwhelmed us. We had, at one point, something like 40,000 people—vendors—working for us. We had 35 offices throughout the Gulf of Mexico, from Galveston, Texas, all the way to Mobile Bay, Alabama. Nevertheless, in 16 months, on behalf of BP, Deepwater Horizon, we paid out all BP money, a little over $7 billion, to 550,000 eligible claimants. And that, I would say, other than 9/11, had the greatest impact and was the most satisfying.DL: You mentioned some claims coming from some pretty far-flung jurisdictions. In these programs, how much of a problem is fraud?KF: Not much. First of all, with death claims like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombings or the 20 first-graders who died in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, at the hands of a deranged gunmen—most of the time, in traumatic death and injury, you've got records. No one can beat the system; you have to have a death certificate. In 9/11, where are your military records, if you were at the Pentagon? Where are the airplane manifests? You've got to be on the manifest if you were flying on that plane.Now, the problem becomes more pronounced in something like BP, where you've got over a million claims, and you wonder, how many people can claim injury from this explosion? There we had an anti-fraud unit—Guidepost, Bart Schwartz's company—and they did a tremendous job of spot-checking claims. I think that out of over a million claims, there may have been 25,000 that were suspicious. And we sent those claims to the Justice Department, and they prosecuted a fair number of people. But it wasn't a huge problem. I think the fraud rate was something like 3 percent; that's nothing. So overall, we haven't found—and we have to be ever-vigilant, you're right—but we haven't found much in the way of fraud.DL: I'm glad to hear that, because it would really be very depressing to think that there were people trying to profiteer off these terrible disasters and tragedies. Speaking of continuing disasters and tragedies, turning to current events, you are now working with Southern California Edison in dealing with claims related to the Eaton Fire. And this is a pending matter, so of course you may have some limits in terms of what you can discuss, but what can you say in a general sense about this undertaking?KF: This is the Los Angeles wildfires that everybody knows about, from the last nine or ten months—the tremendous fire damage in Los Angeles. One of the fires, or one of the selected hubs of the fire, was the Eaton Fire. Southern California Edison, the utility involved in the litigation and finger-pointing, decided to set up, à la 9/11, a voluntary claims program. Not so much to deal with death—there were about 19 deaths, and a handful of physical injuries—but terrible fire damage, destroyed homes, damaged businesses, smoke and ash and soot, for miles in every direction. And the utility decided, its executive decided, “We want to do the right thing here. We may be held liable or we may not be held liable for the fire, but we think the right thing to do is nip in the bud this idea of extended litigation. Look at 9/11: only 94 people ended up suing. We want to set up a program.”They came to Camille and me. Over the last eight weeks, we've designed the program, and I think in the last week of October or the first week of November, you will see publicly, “Here is the protocol; here is the claim form. Please submit your claims, and we'll get them paid within 90 days.” And if history is an indicator, Camille and I think that the Eaton Fire Protocol will be a success, and the great bulk of the thousands of victims will voluntarily decide to come into the program. We'll see. [Ed. note: On Wednesday, a few days after Ken and I recorded this episode, Southern California Edison announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program.]DL: That raises a question that I'm curious about. How would you describe the relationship between the work that you and Camille and your colleagues do and the traditional work of the courts, in terms of in-the-trenches litigation? Because I do wonder whether the growth in your field is perhaps related to some developments in litigation, in terms of litigation becoming more expensive over the decades (in a way that far outstrips inflation), more complicated, or more protracted. How would you characterize that relationship?KF: I would say that the programs that we design and administer—like 9/11, like BP, plus the Eaton wildfires—are an exception to the rule. Nobody should think that these programs that we have worked on are the wave of the future. They are not the wave of the future; they are isolated, unique examples, where a company—or in 9/11, the U.S. government—decides, “We ought to set up a special program where the courts aren't involved, certainly not directly.” In 9/11, they were prohibited to be involved, by statute; in some of these other programs, like BP, the courts have a relationship, but they don't interfere with the day-to-day administration of the program.And I think the American people have a lot of faith in the litigation system that you correctly point out can be uncertain, very inefficient, and very costly. But the American people, since the founding of the country, think, “You pick your lawyer, I'll pick my lawyer, and we'll have a judge and jury decide.” That's the American rule of law; I don't think it's going to change. But occasionally there is a groundswell of public pressure to come up with a program, or there'll be a company—like the utility, like BP—that decides to have a program.And I'll give you one other example: the Catholic Church confronted thousands of claims of sexual abuse by priests. It came to us, and we set up a program—just like 9/11, just like BP—where we invited, voluntarily, any minor—any minor from decades ago, now an adult—who had been abused by the church to come into this voluntary program. We paid out, I think, $700 million to $800 million, to victims in dioceses around the country. So there's another example—Camille did most of that—but these programs are all relatively rare. There are thousands of litigations every day, and nothing's going to change that.DL: I had a guest on a few weeks ago, Chris Seeger of Seeger Weiss, who does a lot of work in the mass-tort space. It's interesting: I feel that that space has evolved, and maybe in some ways it's more efficient than it used to be. They have these multi-district litigation panels, they have these bellwether trials, and then things often get settled, once people have a sense of the values. That system and your approach seem to have some similarities, in the sense that you're not individually trying each one of these cases, and you're having somebody with liability come forward and voluntarily pay out money, after some kind of negotiation.KF: Well, there's certainly negotiation in what Chris Seeger does; I'm not sure we have much negotiation. We say, “Here's the amount under the administrative scheme.” It's like in workers' compensation: here's the amount. You don't have to take it. There's nothing to really talk about, unless you have new evidence that we're not aware of. And those programs, when we do design them, seem to work very efficiently.Again, if you ask Camille Biros what was the toughest part of valuing individual claims of sexual-abuse directed at minors, she would say, “These hearings: we gave every person who wanted an opportunity to be heard.” And when they come to see Camille, they don't come to talk about money; they want validation for what they went through. “Believe me, will you? Ken, Camille, believe me.” And when Camille says, “We do believe you,” they immediately, or almost immediately, accept the compensation and sign a release: “I will not sue the Catholic diocese.”DL: So you mentioned there isn't really much negotiation, but you did talk in the book about these sort of “appeals.” You had these two tracks, “Appeals A” and “Appeals B.” Can you talk about that? Did you ever revisit what you had set as the award for a particular victim's family, after hearing from them in person?KF: Sure. Now, remember, those appeals came back to us, not to a court; there's no court involvement. But in 9/11, in BP, if somebody said, “You made a mistake—you didn't account for these profits or this revenue, or you didn't take into account this contract that my dead firefighter husband had that would've given him a lot more money”—of course, we'll revisit that. We invited that. But that's an internal appeals process. The people who calculated the value of the claim are the same people that are going to be looking at revisiting the claim. But again, that's due process, and that's something that we thought was important.DL: You and Camille have been doing this really important work for decades. Since this is, of course, shortly after your 80th birthday, I should ask: do you have future plans? You're tackling some of the most complicated matters, headline-making matters. Would you ever want to retire at some point?KF: I have no intention of retiring. I do agree that when you reach a certain pinnacle in what you've done, you do slow down. We are much more selective in what we do. I used to have maybe 15 mediations going on at once; now, we have one or two matters, like the Los Angeles wildfires. As long as I'm capable, as long as Camille's willing, we'll continue to do it, but we'll be very careful about what we select to do. We don't travel much. The Los Angeles wildfires was largely Zooms, going back and forth. And we're not going to administer that program. We had administered 9/11 and BP; we're trying to move away from that. It's very time-consuming and stressful. So we've accomplished a great deal over the last 50 years—but as long as we can do it, we'll continue to do it.DL: Do you have any junior colleagues who would take over what you and Camille have built?KF: We don't have junior colleagues. There's just the two of us and Cindy Sanzotta, our receptionist. But it's an interesting question: “Who's after Feinberg? Who's next in doing this?” I think there are thousands of people in this country who could do what we do. It is not rocket science. It really isn't. I'll tell you what's difficult: the emotion. If somebody wants to do what we do, you better brace yourself for the emotion, the anger, the frustration, the finger pointing. It goes with the territory. And if you don't have the psychological ability to handle this type of stress, stay away. But I'm sure somebody will be there, and no one's irreplaceable.DL: Well, I know I personally could not handle it. I worked when I was at a law firm on civil litigation over insurance proceeds related to the World Trade Center, and that was a very draining case, and I was very glad to no longer be on it. So I could not do what you and Camille do. But let me ask you, to end this section on a positive note: what would you say is the most rewarding or meaningful or satisfying aspect of the work that you do on these programs?KF: Giving back to the community. Public service. Helping the community heal. Not so much the individuals; the individuals are part of the community. “Every individual can make a difference.” I remember that every day, what John F. Kennedy said: government service is a noble undertaking. So what's most rewarding for me is that although I'm a private practitioner—I am no longer in government service, since my days with Senator Kennedy—I'd like to think that I performed a valuable service for the community, the resilience of the community, the charity exhibited by the community. And that gives me a great sense of self-satisfaction.DL: You absolutely have. It's been amazing, and I'm so grateful for you taking the time to join me.So now, onto our speed round. These are four questions that are standardized. My first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law in a more abstract sense.KF: Uncertainty. What I don't like about the law is—and I guess maybe it's the flip side of the best way to get to a result—I don't like the uncertainty of the law. I don't like the fact that until the very end of the process, you don't know if your view and opinion will prevail. And I think losing control over your destiny in that regard is problematic.DL: My second question—and maybe we touched on this a little bit, when we talked about your father's opinions—what would you be if you were not a lawyer?KF: Probably an actor. As I say, I almost became an actor. And I still love theater and the movies and Broadway shows. If my father hadn't given me that advice, I was on the cusp of pursuing a career in the theater.DL: Have you dabbled in anything in your (probably limited) spare time—community theater, anything like that?KF: No, but I certainly have prioritized in my spare time classical music and the peace and optimism it brings to the listener. It's been an important part of my life.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?KF: Well, it varies from program to program. I'd like to get seven hours. That's what my doctors tell me: “Ken, very important—more important than pills and exercise and diet—is sleep. Your body needs a minimum of seven hours.” Well, for me, seven hours is rare—it's more like six or even five, and during 9/11 or during Eaton wildfires, it might be more like four or five. And that's not enough, and that is a problem.DL: My last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?KF: Yes, I'll give you some career and life advice. It's very simple: don't plan too far ahead. People have this view—you may think you know what you want to do with your career. You may think you know what life holds for you. You don't know. If I've learned anything over the last decades, life has a way of changing the best-laid plans. These 9/11 husbands and wives said goodbye to their children, “we'll see you for dinner,” a perfunctory wave—and they never saw them again. Dust, not even a body. And the idea I tell law students—who say, ”I'm going to be a corporate lawyer,” or “I'm going to be a litigator”—I tell them, “You have no idea what your legal career will look like. Look at Feinberg; he never planned on this. He never thought, in his wildest dreams, that this would be his chosen avenue of the law.”My advice: enjoy the moment. Do what you like now. Don't worry too much about what you'll be doing two years, five years, 10 years, a lifetime ahead of you. It doesn't work that way. Everybody gets thrown curveballs, and that's advice I give to everybody.DL: Well, you did not plan out your career, but it has turned out wonderfully, and the country is better for it. Thank you, Ken, both for your work on all these matters over the years and for joining me today.KF: A privilege and an honor. Thanks, David.DL: Thanks so much to Ken for joining me—and, of course, for his decades of work resolving some of the thorniest disputes in the country, which is truly a form of public service.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 12. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; (3) transcripts of podcast interviews; and (4) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

While Hitler's rise to power In Germany seems unstoppable and Mussolini celebrates ten years of fascism in Italy, Australia's homegrown New Guard numbskulls have already become irrelevant – and escaped investigation for their planned insurrection. Plus: Ripley's Believe it Or Not; an extraordinary outback survival story with a Nazi aftertaste; a 'fun' bigamy story turns very dark; and everything that was ‘wrong' with modern women.It's easy to get a free trial that will give you access to ad-free, early and bonus episodes. Hit either of these links:Patreon: patreon.com/forgottenaustraliaApple: apple.co/forgottenaustraliaWant more original Australian true crime and history? Check out my books!They'll Never Hold Me:https://www.booktopia.com.au/they-ll-never-hold-me-michael-adams/book/9781923046474.htmlThe Murder Squad:https://www.booktopia.com.au/the-murder-squad-michael-adams/book/9781923046504.htmlHanging Ned Kelly:https://www.booktopia.com.au/hanging-ned-kelly-michael-adams/book/9781922992185.htmlAustralia's Sweetheart:https://www.booktopia.com.au/australia-s-sweetheart-michael-adams/book/9780733640292.htmlEmail: forgottenaustraliapodcast@gmail.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today’s topic is an abandoned mansion, but it was once a gorgeous and luxurious home designed for a prominent citizen of northern Italy. It’s often described as haunted and as having a dark history, but there are some interesting contradictions regarding that story. Research: “Caravan Journal, the rediscovered manuscript. The Orient through the eyes of a forgotten Milanese patriot: Felice De Vecchi.” Arte.IT: The Map of Art in Italy. https://www.arte.it/calendario-arte/milano/mostra-giornale-di-carovana-il-manoscritto-ritrovato-l-oriente-attraverso-gli-occhi-di-un-patriota-milanese-dimenticato-felice-de-vecchi-4835 “Cesare Maria De Vecchi in Rhodes.” Palace of the Grand Master. https://grandmasterpalacerhodes.gr/cesare-maria-de-vecchi/ Claus, Patricia. “Mussolini's Old Villa on Rhodes Still on Real Estate Market.” Greek Reporter. July 17, 2020. https://greekreporter.com/2020/07/17/mussolinis-old-villa-on-rhodes-still-on-real-estate-market/ Britannica Editors. "Aleister Crowley". Encyclopedia Britannica, 11 Oct. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aleister-Crowley Frigo, Marco. “Villa De Vecchi: the haunted mansion inhabited by ghosts not far from Milan with a mysterious, dramatic and fascinating past.” Milano Segreta. Oct. 6, 2025. https://milanosegreta.co/en/villa-de-vecchi-ghost-mansion/ Linstrom, Emily. “Villa de Vecchi.” Atlas Obscura. Lecco, Alberto, Foot, John. "Milan". Encyclopedia Britannica, 13 Oct. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/place/Milan-Italy Linstrom, Emily. “Villa de Vecchi.” Atlas Obscura. https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/villa-de-vecchi “History of Milan.” Civitatis Milan. https://www.introducingmilan.com/history Imam, Maham. “ATHENAEUM: Adaptive reuse of Villa De Vecchi into a public Library.” University of Management and Technology, Lahore. 2023. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j3dhAHK8v4i-vV_IkAB8WXWMXpCEP_BQ/view?pli=1 Philip, Lizzie. “The Real Story Behind Northern Italy’s Abandoned ‘Ghost Mansion.’” Atlas Obscura. Oct. 17, 2018. https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/ghost-mansion-in-northern-italy#:~:text=Place-,Villa%20de%20Vecchi,explore%20more%20Atlas%20Obscura%20videos. Pitzalis, Bruno. “Step Inside an Abandoned ‘Ghost Mansion’ of Northern Italy. Atlas Obscura. Oct. 9, 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTP2erZ7CBc&t=38s Santarelli, Enzo. “DE VECCHI, Cesare Maria.” Biographical Dictionary of Italians. https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/de-vecchi-cesare-maria_(Dizionario-Biografico)/ “Sidoli, Alessandro (1812-1855), Architekt, Maler und Graphiker.” Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon. Austrian Center for Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage. (Translated.) https://www.biographien.ac.at/oebl/oebl_S/Sidoli_Alessandro_1812_1855.xml Smee, Taryn. “The Red House – Italy’s Most Haunted Villa Which Lies Abandoned and Off Limits.” The Vintage News. Nov. 20, 2018. https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/11/20/villa-de-vecchi/ “Villa De Vecchi, Italy: A Timeless Masterpiece of Architectural Splendor.” Rethinking the Future. https://www.re-thinkingthefuture.com/articles/villa-de-vecchi-italy See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels declared the Loch Ness Monster a hoax to mock British intelligence and Mussolini claimed Italy bombed Nessie to death, the Allies fired back with the ultimate counter-propaganda: the lake monster survived and became a war hero.Support our Halloween “Overcoming the Darkness” campaign to help people with depression: https://weirddarkness.com/HOPEIN THIS EPISODE: You probably saw the title of this episode and immediately thought, “Whaaa?” Well, I'm going to tell you one of the most ridiculous stories I've ever heard that is 100% true. The Axis powers of World War II tried to kill the Loch Ness Monster. (The Assassination of the Loch Ness Monster) *** As far back as time is recorded, mankind has had a fascination with Sirius, the Dogstar. But what is so special about it aside from the fact that it's one of the brightest stars in our sky? Might there be an extraterrestrial connection as well? (Why So Serious About Sirius?) *** UFO reports come in constantly to police stations and online sites dedicated to the subject of Ufology – practically on a daily basis. And many sightings are by people you would consider above reproach such as law enforcement, scientists, military, numerous sightings by pilots… but when you head out into space and see a UFO, as is what happens with astronauts' reports, that's something you take a much closer look at. (Code Word: Santa Claus) *** Jimmy Logue left his wife after only two years of marriage. Without first getting divorced, he married another woman – whom he badly mistreated, so she left him. But he had already started an affair with her sister, so he married her next – now on his third wife. He abused her as well. He was also a career criminal – spending half his life living off the spoils of his thievery, the other half behind bars when caught. So it probably comes as no surprise that he was suspect number one when his third wife was found murdered. (A Romance In Crime) CHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Show Open00:02:46.639 = The Assassination of the Loch Ness Monster00:06:29.397 = A Romance In Crime00:14:10.249 = ***Why So Serious About Sirius?00:37:43.689 = ***Code Word: Santa Claus00:46:08.503 = Show Close*** = Begins immediately after inserted ad breakSOURCES and RESOURCES – and/or --- PRINT VERSION to READ or SHARE:BOOK: “The Sirius Mystery: New Scientific Evidence of Alien Contact 5,000 Years Ago” by Robert Temple: https://amzn.to/2JDnD27BOOK: “The Secret Teachings of All Ages” by Manly P. Hall: https://amzn.to/3mNlkbo“Why So Serious About Sirius?” by Gregg Prescott, M.S. for Message To Eagle: https://tinyurl.com/y2v4gqsd“The Assassination of the Loch Ness Monster” by Blake Stilwell for Military.com: https://tinyurl.com/y2kpzrn5“A Romance in Crime” by Robert Wilhelm for Murder by Gaslight: https://tinyurl.com/y584we6w“Code Word: Santa Claus” by Tim Swartz, for Mysteries Magazine (no longer online or in print)=====(Over time links may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2025, Weird Darkness.=====Originally aired: December 05, 2020EPISODE PAGE (includes sources): https://weirddarkness.com/NazisVsNessieABOUT WEIRD DARKNESS: Weird Darkness is a true crime and paranormal podcast narrated by professional award-winning voice actor, Darren Marlar. Seven days per week, Weird Darkness focuses on all thing strange and macabre such as haunted locations, unsolved mysteries, true ghost stories, supernatural manifestations, urban legends, unsolved or cold case murders, conspiracy theories, and more. On Thursdays, this scary stories podcast features horror fiction along with the occasional creepypasta. Weird Darkness has been named one of the “Best 20 Storytellers in Podcasting” by Podcast Business Journal. Listeners have described the show as a cross between “Coast to Coast” with Art Bell, “The Twilight Zone” with Rod Serling, “Unsolved Mysteries” with Robert Stack, and “In Search Of” with Leonard Nimoy.DISCLAIMER: Ads heard during the podcast that are not in my voice are placed by third party agencies outside of my control and should not imply an endorsement by Weird Darkness or myself. *** Stories and content in Weird Darkness can be disturbing for some listeners and intended for mature audiences only. Parental discretion is strongly advised.#WeirdDarkness #WWIIHistory #LochNessMonster #Propaganda #NaziGermany #BizarreHistory #WorldWarII #Nessie #StrangeButTrue #WeirdHistory

Bizable https://GoBizable.comUntie your business exposure from your personal exposure with BiZABLE.  Schedule your FREE consultation at GoBizAble.com today. Renue Healthcare https://Renue.Healthcare/ToddYour journey to a better life starts at Renue Healthcare. Visit https://Renue.Healthcare/Todd Bulwark Capital https://KnowYourRiskPodcast.comBe confident in your portfolio with Bulwark! Schedule your free Know Your Risk Portfolio review. Go to KnowYourRiskPodcast.com today. Alan's Soaps https://www.AlansArtisanSoaps.comUse coupon code TODD to save an additional 10% off the bundle price.Bonefrog https://BonefrogCoffee.com/toddThe new GOLDEN AGE is here!  Use code TODD at checkout to receive 10% off your first purchase and 15% on subscriptions.LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE at:The Todd Herman Show - Podcast - Apple PodcastsThe Todd Herman Show | Podcast on SpotifyWATCH and SUBSCRIBE at: Todd Herman - The Todd Herman Show - YouTubeDavid French: a Hilarious Tragedy. // Netflix and the NY-Times are Incestuous Cousins. // The Inverse Gospel of “Progressive ‘Christianity'”Episode Links:Our Foremost Contrary Indicator Nails It AgainDavid French has some very serious mental issues all related to TDS. Here, he praised a judge's farcical decision banning President Trump from using the National Guard in Portland, Oregon. BREAKING: The No Kings “protest” in Portland is now a FULL-ON RIOT here outside of the ICE facility, and federal agents are UNLOADING tear gas on rioters who are assauIting agents. It's only 4pm, and “protestors” are ALREADY getting vioIent. WE NEED NATIONAL GUARD!Here's what the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said about the decision (a PDF download)Drama series about Mussolini has him turn to the camera and say “Make Italy Great Again” in plain English. BREAKING - Video emerged showing Zohran Mamdani's lead canvassing director, Robert Alkleh, being asked what NYC police think of Mamdani, with Alkleh responding, “Who gives a sh-t what they think? They're city employees, we tell them what to do, shut up.”Rev. Ashley Mathews of Trinity Anglican Church of Atlanta, says people who DON'T hang out with LGBTQ people CAN'T understand John 15:13 and what Jesus meant when he said "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down his life for his friends"Arizona dad who left 2-year-old daughter to die in sweltering car was distracted by porn: prosecutors 

America saw a significant reverse-migration in the 1800s and 1900s, with 20–50% of Italian immigrants returning to Italy as ritornati and tens of thousands of Americans, including ideologues and workers, moving to Germany, Italy, and the USSR in the 1930s seeking political or economic opportunities. Some of these American expatriates were drawn to revolutionary movements in Europe and Asia, blending idealism with political activism Today’s guest is David Mayers, author of Seekers and Partisans: Americans Abroad in the Crisis Years, 1935–1941. We discuss alienated Americans who went abroad during the interwar years in search of a new home and/or to further deeply personal causes. They include John Robinson, a black aviator who in 1935 led the Ethiopian air force against the Italian invasion; Agnes Smedley, who joined the Chinese communists during the Sino-Japanese war; Helen Keller, an advocate of the seeing- and hearing-impaired; Ezra Pound, a lauded poet who championed Mussolini; and Anna Louise Strong, drawn to Stalin's USSR.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.