Podcasts about guantanamo bay

Share on
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Reddit
Copy link to clipboard

Bay located in Guantánamo Province

  • 565PODCASTS
  • 733EPISODES
  • 49mAVG DURATION
  • 5WEEKLY NEW EPISODES
  • Oct 23, 2021LATEST
guantanamo bay

POPULARITY

20112012201320142015201620172018201920202021


Best podcasts about guantanamo bay

Latest podcast episodes about guantanamo bay

The Lawfare Podcast
Lawfare Archive: Paul Lewis on Not Closing Guantanamo

The Lawfare Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 23, 2021 41:02


From February 25, 2017: Under the oversight of Paul Lewis, the Department of Defense's Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure under the Obama administration, the detainee population at Guantanamo Bay went from 164 to 41. But Guantanamo remains open, and the Trump administration has promised not only to halt any further transfers or releases of detainees, but also to possibly bring in more detainees in the future. And that's aside from the fact that recent news reports indicate that a former Guantanamo detainee was responsible for an ISIS suicide bombing in Mosul.With this in mind, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Paul to discuss his time as special envoy, President Obama's failure to close the detention center, and what's next for Gitmo under President Trump.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Smashing The Ceiling
Vicki Prais - on international human rights and a lifetime of advocating for others

Smashing The Ceiling

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 21, 2021 38:24


When you think about human rights, what's the first thing that comes to mind? Maybe it's the treatment of prisoners overseas, or working conditions and pay in a place of employment, or freedom of speech, or the right of an individual to live freely and safely in whatever manner they choose? Maybe it's a multitude of other things, because the subject of human rights is broad and deep. It's also vitally important. My guest today is Vicki Prais, a human rights lawyer and consultant, podcaster and writer. We love women with adventurous and challenging careers on this podcast, and Vicki has that in spades. She's worked for the UN in Kosovo, Amnesty International, Penal Reform International and the British Government. She's worked in Ukraine, Russia and Armenia, and consulted on cases involving Guantanamo Bay. "We are all experts in our own little niches" she says. Vicki Prais, welcome to Smashing The Ceiling. Useful Links Vicki's Website: https://vickiprais.com Connect with Vicki on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vicki-prais-5862151/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/vickiprais?lang=en

RENDERING UNCONSCIOUS PODCAST
RU170: DR STEVEN REISNER PRESENTS "Crazy Like A Fox" at The New School for Social Research

RENDERING UNCONSCIOUS PODCAST

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 21, 2021 108:30


This episode of Rendering Unconscious podcast is a lecture by Dr. Steven Reisner “Crazy Like a Fox: Evil is Not a Psychiatric Illness ” presented at the New School for Social Research, January 31, 2017. Dr. Reisner is introduced by Dr. Chris Christian, who organized the event. This event available to view at YouTube: https://youtu.be/Ty1HhODKVaI Steven Reisner, PhD is a psychoanalyst, psychologist and political activist. He is a founding member of the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, Advisor on Psychology and Ethics for Physicians for Human Rights and past-President of Psychologists for Social Responsibility. He was a leader in the successful movement to prohibit psychologists from their central role in CIA and military abuses of detainees. As a result of these efforts, psychologists were removed from Guantanamo Bay in January 2016. Dr. Reisner hosts the podcast MADNESS: Where Psychology & Capitalism Collide: http://madnesspodcast.com Follow him at Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drreisner Dr. Reisner contributed to Rendering Unconscious, the book! Rendering Unconscious: Psychoanalytic Perspectives, Politics and Poetry (Trapart Books, 2019): https://store.trapart.net/details/00000 You can support Rendering Unconscious Podcast at our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/vanessa23carl Rendering Unconscious Podcast is hosted by psychoanalyst Dr. Vanessa Sinclair: http://www.drvanessasinclair.net Visit the main website for more information and links to everything: http://www.renderingunconscious.org The song at the end of the episode is from the album LUNACY (OST) by Vanessa Sinclair and Carl Abrahamsson: https://vanessasinclaircarlabrahamsson.bandcamp.com/album/lunacy-ost Lunacy the film is available to view at Vimeo on Demand: https://store.trapart.net/details/00016 Many thanks to Carl Abrahamsson, who created the intro and outro music for Rendering Unconscious podcast. https://www.carlabrahamsson.com Image from the event

Ideas Untrapped
RULE OF LAW AND THE REAL WORLD

Ideas Untrapped

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 21, 2021 64:14


''Rule of law'' is the generally accepted description for how well a political system conforms to formal rules - rather than functioning through the whims of the most powerful social or political agents. For a society to be described as one functioning under rule of law - there must be rules and those rules must be equally applied to everyone in the society. Let us call this Letter of the Law. These rules are usually expressed through the constitution of a country and enforced through the courts. But simply having rules and enforcing them does not suffice in the making of the rule of law - and it is an incomplete (however accurate) conception of it. Some rules can be drafted in bad faith or with the express purpose of protecting the interest of the political elites responsible for governance. This is why many scholars have argued that the rule of law can only be said to exist in a state that functions under rules designed to protect the civil liberties (individual rights, freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc.) of the people living within its territory. Let us call this the Character or Spirit of the Law. The character of the law understood as the fulfilment of constitutionally-guaranteed civil liberties is the most common standard by which governance is judged to conform or deviate from the rule of law. For example, countries that routinely violate the rights of citizens in whatever form cannot be said to be governed by the rule of law, even if it has a written constitution. Consideration of the character of the law is the context to understanding the work of my guest on this episode, Paul Gowder.He is a professor of law at NorthWestern university with a broad research interest and expertise. Paul departs from this common derivation of the character of the law as rooted in liberty - and argued that for the rule of law to be broadly applicable in different societies (not dependent on the political institutions and ethical ideals of any specific society) with varying cultures and traditions of governance, it must be rooted in Equality. To understand Paul's argument, I will briefly state two important aspects that set the tone for our conversation - this should not be taken as an exhaustive summary of his work and I encourage you to check out his website and book. The first is that the rule of law as a principle regulates the actions of the state (government), and it is not to be conflated with other rules that regulate the actions of citizens. This is such an important point because one of the most egregious expressions of the law is when a government uses it to oppress citizens. Secondly, Paul outlines three components of the rule of law based on equality as 1) regularity - the government can only use coercion when it is acting in ''good faith'' and under ''reasonable interpretation'' of rules that already exist and are specific to the circumstances. 2) publicity - the law has to be accessible to everyone without barriers (''officials have a responsibility to explain their application of the law, ...failure to do so commits hubris and terror against the public"). 3) generality - the law must be equally applicable to all. Putting all these elements together gives us a rule of law regime where everyone is equal before the law, and the state does not wantonly abuse citizens or single out particular groups for systematic abuse.I enjoyed this conversation very much, and I want to thank Paul for talking to me. Thank you guys too for always listening, and for the other ways you support this project.TRANSCRIPTTobi; I greatly enjoyed your work on the rule of law. I've read your papers, I've read your book, and I like it very much. I think it's a great public service if I can say that because for a lot of time, I am interested in economic development and that is mostly the issue that this podcast talks about. And what you see in that particular conversation is there hasn't really been that much compatibility between the question of the rule of law or the laws that should regulate the actions of the state, and its strategy for economic development. Most of the time, you often see even some justification, I should say, to trample on rights in as much as you get development, you get high-income growth for it. And what I found in your work is, this does not have to be so. So what was your eureka moment in coming up with your concept, we are going to unpack a lot of the details very soon, but what motivated you to write this work or to embark on this project?Paul; Yeah, I think for me, part of the issue that really drives a lot of how I think about the rule of law and you know, reasons behind some of this work is really a difference between the way that those of us who think about human freedom and human equality, right? I think of it as philosophers, right. So they're philosophers and philosophers think about the ability of people to live autonomous lives, to sort of stand tall against their government, to live lives of respect, and freedom and equality. And that's one conversation. And so we see people, like, you know, Ronald Dworkin, thinking about what the rule of law can deliver to human beings in that sense. And then, you know, there's this entire development community, you know, the World Bank, lots of the US foreign policy, all of the rest of those groups of people and groups of ideas, talk about the rule of law a lot and work to measure the rule of law and invest immense amounts of money in promoting what they call the rule of law across the world. But mostly, it seems to be protecting property rights for multinational investment. And I mean, that makes some kind of sense, if you think that what the rule of law is for is economic development, is increasing the GDP of a country and integrating it into favourable international networks of trade. But if you think that it's about human flourishing, then you get a completely different idea of what the rule of law can be, and should be. And so this sort of really striking disjuncture between the two conversations has driven a lot of my work, especially recently, and especially reflecting even on the United States, I think that we can see how domestic rule of law struggles - which we absolutely have, I mean, look at the Trump administration, frankly, as revolving around this conflict between focusing on economics and focusing on human rights and human wellbeing.Tobi; It's interesting the polarization you're talking about. And one way that I also see it play out is [that] analyst or other stakeholders who participate in the process of nation-building in Africa, in Nigeria… a lot of us that care about development and would like to see our countries grow and develop and become rich, are often at opposite ends with other people in the civil society who are advocating for human rights, who are advocating for gender equality, who are advocating for so many other social justice issues. And it always seems like there's no meeting ground, you know, between those set of views, and I believe it does not have to be so. So one thing I'm going to draw you into quite early is one of the distinctions you made in so many of your papers and even your book is the difference between the conception of the rule of law that you are proposing versus the generally accepted notion of the rule of law based on individual liberty in the classical liberal tradition. I also think that's part of the problem, because talking about individual liberty comes with this heavy ideological connotation, and giving so many things that have happened in Africa with colonialism and so many other things, nobody wants any of that, you know. So you are proposing a conception of the rule of law that is based on equality. Tell me, how does that contrast with this popularly accepted notion of the rule of law [which is] based on individual liberty?Paul; So I think the way to think about it is to start with the notion of the long term stability of a rule of law system. And so here is one thing that I propose as a fact about legal orders. Ultimately, any kind of stable legal order that can control the powerful, that is, that can say to a top-level political leader, or a powerful multinational corporation, or whomever, no, you can't do this, this violates the law and make that statement stick depends on widespread collective mobilization, if only as a threat, right. And so it's kind of an analytic proposition about the nature of power, right? If you've got a top-level political leader who's in command of an army, and they want to do something illegal, it's going to require very broad-based opposition, and hence very broad-based commitment to the idea of leaders that follow the law in order to prevent the person in charge of an army from just casually violating it whenever they want. Okay, accept that as true, what follows from that? Well, what follows from that is that the legal system has to actually be compatible with the basic interests of all. And what that tends to mean and I think this is true, both historically, and theoretically, is leaving aside the philosophical conceptual difference between liberty and equality, which I'm not sure is really all that important. Like I think, ultimately, liberty and equality as moral ideas tend to blur together when you really unpack them. But practically speaking, any stable legal order that can control the powerful has to be compatible with the interests of a broad-based group of the human beings who participate in that legal order. And what that entails is favouring a way of thinking about the rule of law that focuses on being able to recruit the interests of even the worst off. In other words, one that's focused on equality, one that's focused on protecting the interests of the less powerful rather than a laissez-faire libertarian conception of the rule of law that tends to be historically speaking, compatible with substantial amounts of economic inequality, hyper-focus on ideas - like property rights, that support the long-standing interests of those who happen to be at the top of the economy, often against the interests of those that happened to be at the bottom of the economy, right. That's simply not a legal order that is sustainable in the long run. Lately, I've been thinking a lot about the way that this has played out in [the] United States history, in particular. I might have a book that's coming out in December that focuses on a historical account of the development of the rule of law, particularly in the United States. I mean, it's my own country. And so at some point, I had to get talked into writing that book. And we can see that in our history right at the get-go, you know, in the United States, at the very beginning, the rule of law dialogue tended to be focused on protecting the interests of wealthy elite property holders. And this actually played a major part, for example, in the United States' most grievous struggle, namely the struggle over slavery, because slaveholders really relied on this conception of the Rule of Law focusing on individual freedom and property rights to insist on a right to keep holding slaves against the more egalitarian idea that “hey, wait a minute, the enslaved have a right to be participants in the legal system as well.” And so we can see these two different conceptions of legality breaking the United States and breaking the idea of legal order in the United States right at the get-go. And we see this in country after country after country. You know, another example is Pinochet's Chile, which was the victim of [the] United States' economics focused rule of law promotion efforts that favoured the interests of property holders under this libertarian conception over the interests of ordinary citizens, democracy and mass interests. In other words, over the egalitarian conception, and again, you know, devolved into authoritarianism and chaos.Tobi; Yeah, nice bit of history there, but dialling all the way, if you'll indulge me... dialling all the way to the present, or maybe the recent past, of course; where I see another relevance and tension is development, and its geopolitical significance and the modernization projects that a lot of developed countries have done in so many poor and violent nations, you know, around the world. I mean, at the time when Africa decolonized, you know, a lot of the countries gravitated towards the communist bloc, socialism [and] that process was shunted, failed, you know, there was a wave of military coups all over the continent, and it was a really dark period.But what you see is that a lot of these countries, Nigeria, for example, democratized in 1999, a lot of other countries either before then or after followed suit. And what you see is, almost all of them go for American-style federal system, and American-style constitutional democracy, you know. And how that tradition evolved... I mean, there's a lot you can explain and unpack here... how that tradition evolved, we are told is the law has a responsibility to treat people as individuals. But you also find that these are societies where group identities are very, very strong, you know, and what you get are constitutions that are weakly enforced, impractical, and a society that is perpetually in struggle. I mean, you have a constitution, you have rules, and you have a government that openly disregards them, because the constitutional tradition is so divorced from how a lot of our societies evolve. And what I see you doing in your work is that if we divorce the rule of law from the ideal society, you know [like] some societies that we look up to, then we can come up with a set of practical propositions that the rule of law should fulfil, so walk me through how you resolve these tensions and your propositions?Paul; Well, so it's exactly what you just said, right? I mean, we have to focus on actual existing societies and the actual way that people organize their lives, right. And so here's the issue is, just like I said a minute ago, the rule of law fundamentally depends on people. And when I say people, I don't just mean elites. I don't just mean the wealthy, I don't just mean the people in charge of armies, and the people in charge of courthouses, right? Like the rule of law depends, number one, on people acting collectively to hold the powerful to the law. And number two, on people using the institutions that we say are associated with the rule of law. And so just as you describe, one sort of really common failure condition for international rule of law development efforts - and I don't think that this is a matter of sort of recipient countries admiring countries like the US, I think this is a matter of international organizations and countries like the US having in their heads a model of what the law looks like and sort of pressing it on recipient countries.But you know, when you build institutions that don't really resemble how the people in a country actually organize their social, political and legal lives, you shouldn't be surprised when nobody uses them. You shouldn't be surprised when they're ineffective. But I mean, I think that it's been fairly compared to a kind of second-generation colonialism in that sense where countries like the US and like Germany, attempt to export their legal institutions to other countries, without attending to the ways that the people in those countries already have social and legal resources to run their lives. And so I'll give you an example that's interesting from Afghanistan. So in Afghanistan, sort of post the 2000s invasion, and so forth, some researchers, mostly affiliated with the Carnegie Institution, found that the really effective rule of law innovations, the really effective interventions were ones that relied on existing social groups and existing structures of traditional authority. And so, you know, you could build a courthouse and like, ask a formal centralized state to do something, maybe it would work, maybe it wouldn't, maybe people would use it, maybe they wouldn't. But if you took local community leaders, local religious leaders, gave them training, and how to use the social capital they already have to help do things like adjudicate disputes, well, those would actually be effective, because they fit into the existing social organization that already exists. So I'll give you another example. I have a student who... I had… I just graduated an S.J.D student from Uganda who wrote a dissertation on corruption in Uganda. And one of the things that he advocated for I think, really sensibly was, “ okay, we've got this centralized government, but we've also got all of these traditional kingdoms, and the traditional kingdoms, they're actually a lot more legitimate in the sociological sense than the centralized government.People trust the traditional kingdoms, people rely on the traditional kingdoms for services, for integrating themselves into their society. And so one useful way of thinking about anti-corruption reforms is to try and empower the traditional kingdoms that already have legitimacy so that they can check the centralized government. And so that kind of work, I think, is where we have real potential to do global rule of law development without just creating carbon copies of the United States. Tobi; The process you describe, I will say, as promising as it may sound, what I want to ask you is how then do you ensure that a lot of these traditional institutions that can be empowered to provide reasonable checks to the power of the central government also fulfil the conditions of equality in their relation to the general public? Because even historically, a lot of these institutions are quite hierarchical...Paul; Oh, yeah... and I think in particular, women's rights are a big problem.Tobi; Yeah, yeah and there's a lot of abuses that go on locally, even within those communities, you know. We have traditional monarchies who exercise blanket rights over land ownership, over people's wives, over so many things, you know, so how then does this condition of equality transmit across the system?Paul; Yeah, no, I think that's the really hard question. I tell you right now that part of the answer is that those are not end-state processes. By this I mean that any realistic conception of how we can actually build effective rule of law institutions, but also genuinely incorporate everyone's interests in a society is going to accept that there's going to be a kind of dynamic tension between institutions.You know, sometimes we're going to have to use the centralized state to check traditional institutions. Sometimes we're going to have to use traditional institutions to check the centralized state. Elinor Ostrom, Nobel Prize-winning political scientist and her sort of the Bloomington School of Political Economy, emphasized for many years this idea that they called Polycentrism. That is the idea that multiple, overlapping governance organizations that are sort of forced to negotiate with one another, and forced to learn from one another, and really integrate with one another in this sort of complex tension-filled kind of way, actually turns out to be a really effective method of achieving what we might call good governance. And part of the reason is because they give a lot of different people, in different levels of [the] organization, ways to challenge one another, ways to demand inclusion in this decision, and let somebody else handle that decision, and participate jointly in this other decision. And so I think that neither the centralized state alone, nor traditional institutions alone is going to be able to achieve these goals. But I think efforts to integrate them have some promise. And India has done a lot of work, you know, sort of mixed record of success, perhaps, but has done a lot of work in these lines. I think, for example, of many of the ways that India has tried to promote the growth of Panchayats, of local councils in decision making, including in law enforcement, but at the same time, has tried to do things like promote an even mandate, the inclusion of women, the inclusion of Scheduled Castes, you know, the inclusion of the traditionally subordinated in these decision making processes. And as I said, they haven't had complete success. But it's an example of a way that the centralized state can both support traditional institutions while pushing those institutions to be more egalitarian.Tobi; Let's delve into the three conditions that you identified in your work, which any rule of law state should fulfil. And that is regularity, publicity, and generality. Kindly unpack those three for me.Paul; Absolutely. So regularity is...we can think of it as just the basic rule of law idea, right? Like the government obeys the law. And so if you think about this notion of regularity, it's... do we have a situation where the powerful are actually bound by legal rules? Or do we have a situation where, you know, they just do whatever they want? And so I'd say that, you know, there's no state that even counts as a rule of law state in the basic level without satisfying that condition, at least to some reasonable degree. The idea of publicity really draws on a lot of what I've already been saying about the recruitment of broad participation in the law. That is, when I say publicity, what I mean is that in addition to just officials being bound by the law, ordinary people have to be able to make use of the law in at least two senses. One, they have to be able to make use of the law to defend themselves. I call this the individualistic side of publicity, right? Like if some police officer wants to lock you up, the decision on whether or not you violated the law has to respond to your advocacy, and your ability to defend yourself in some sense. And then there's also the collective side of this idea of publicity, which is that the community as a whole has to be able to collectively enforce the boundaries of the legal system. And you know, we'd talk a lot more about that, I think that's really the most important idea. And then the third idea of generality is really the heart of the egalitarian idea that we've been talking about, which is that the law has to actually treat people as equals. And one thing that I think is really important about the way that I think about these three principles is that they're actually really tightly integrated. By tightly integrated, I mean you're only going to get in real-world states, regularity (that is, officials bound by the law) if you have publicity (that is, if you have people who aren't officials who actually can participate in the legal system and can hold officials to the law). We need the people to hold the officials in line. You're only going to get publicity if you have generality. That is, the people are only going to be motivated to use the legal system and to defend the legal system if the legal system actually treats them as equals. And so you really need publicity to have stable regularity, you really need generality to have stable publicity.Tobi; Speaking of regularity, when you say what constrains the coercive power of the state is when it is authorised by good faith and reasonable interpretation of pre-existing reasonably specific rules. That sounds very specific. And it's also Scalonian in a way, but a lot of people might quibble a bit about what is reasonable, you know, it sounds vague, right? So how would you condition or define reasonable in this sense, and I know you talked about hubris when you were talking about publicity. But is there a minimum level of responsibility for reasonability on the part of the citizen in relation to a state?Paul; That's, in a lot of ways, the really hard philosophical question, because one of the things that we know about law is that it is inherently filled with disagreement, right? Like our experience of the legal system and of every state that actually has something like the rule of law is that people radically disagree about the legal propriety of actions of the government. And so in some sense, this idea of reasonableness is kind of a cop-out. But it's a cop-out that is absolutely necessary, because there's no, you know, what [Thomas] Nagel called a view from nowhere. There's no view from nowhere from which we can evaluate whether or not on a day to day basis, officials are actually complying with the law in some kind of correct sense. But again, I think, you know, as you said, to some extent, that implies that some of the responsibility for evaluating this reasonableness criterion falls down to day to day politics, falls down to the judgment of ordinary citizens. Like, my conception of the rule of law is kind of sneakily a deeply democratic conception, because it recognizes given the existence of uncertainty as to what the law actually requires of officials both on a case by case basis. And, broadly speaking, the only way that we're ever going to be able to say, Well, you know, officials are more or less operating within a reasonable conception of what their legal responsibilities are, is if we empower the public at large to make these judgments. If we have institutions like here in the US, our jury trials, if we have an underlying backstop of civil society and politics, that is actively scrutinizing and questioning official action.Tobi; So speaking of publicity, which is my favorite...I have to say...Paul; Mine too. You could probably tell. Tobi; Because I think that therein lies the power of the state to get away with abusive use of its legitimacy, or its power, so to speak. When you say that officials have a responsibility to explain their application of the law, and a failure to do so commits hubris and terror against the public. So those two situations - hubris and terror, can you explain those to me a bit?Paul; Yeah. So these are really, sort of, moral philosophy ideas at heart, particularly hubris. The idea is there's a big difference, even if I have authority over you, between my exercising that authority in the form of commands and my exercising that authority in the form of a conversation that appeals to your reasoning capacity, right. So these days, I'm thinking about it in part with reference to... I'm going to go very philosophical with you here... but in reference to Kant's humanity formulation of the categorical imperative, sorry. But that is a sense in which if I'm making decisions about your conduct, and your life and, you know, affecting your fundamental interests, that when I express the reasons to you for those decisions, and when I genuinely listen to the reasons that you offer, and genuinely take those into account in my decision making process, I'm showing a kind of respect for you, which is consistent with the idea of a society of equals.As opposed to just hi, I'm wiser than you, and so my decision is, you know, you go this way, you violated the law, right? Are we a military commander? Or are we a judge? Both the military commander and the judge exercise authority, but they do so in very different ways. One is hierarchical, the other I would contend is not.Tobi; Still talking about publicity here, and why I love it so much is one important, should I say… a distinction you made quite early in your book is that the rule of law regulates the action of the state, in relation to its citizens.Paul; Yes.Tobi; Often and I would count myself among people who have been confused by that point as saying that the rule of law regulates the action of the society in general. I have never thought to make that distinction. And it's important because often you see that maybe when dealing with civil disobedience, or some kind of action that the government finds disruptive to its interests, or its preferences, the rule of law is often invoked as a way for governments to use sometimes without discretion, its enforcement powers, you know.So please explain further this distinction between the rule of law regulating the state-citizen relation versus the general law and order in the society. I mean, you get this from Trump, you get this from so many other people who say, Oh, we are a law and order society, I'm a rule of law candidate.Paul; Oh, yeah.Tobi; You cannot do this, you cannot do that. We cannot encourage the breakdown of law and order in the society. So, explain this difference to me.Paul; Absolutely, then this is probably the most controversial part of my account of the rule of law. I think everybody disagrees with this. I sort of want to start by talking about how I got to this view. And I think I really got to this view by reflecting on the civil rights movement in the United States in particular, right. Because, you know, what we would so often see, just as you say about all of these other contexts, is we would see officials, we would see judges - I mean, there are, you know, Supreme Court cases where supreme court justices that are normally relatively liberal and sympathetic, like, you know, Justice Hugo Black scolding Martin Luther King for engaging in civil disobedience on the idea that it threatens the rule of law. It turns out, and this is something that I go into in the book that's coming out in December... it turns out that King actually had a sophisticated theory of when it was appropriate to engage in civil disobedience and when it wasn't. But for me, reflecting on that conflict in particular, and reflecting on the fact that the same people who were scolding peaceful lunch-counter-sit-ins for threatening the rule of law and, you know, causing society to descend into chaos and undermining property rights and all the rest of that nonsense, were also standing by and watching as southern governors sent police in to beat and gas and fire hose and set dogs on peaceful protests in this sort of completely new set of like, totally unbounded explosions of state violence. And so it seems to me sort of intuitively, like these can't be the same problem, right, like ordinary citizens, doing sit-ins, even if they're illegal, even if we might have some reason to criticize them, it can't be the same reason that we have to criticize Bull Connor for having the cops beat people. And part of the reason that that's the case, and this is what I call the Hobbesian property in the introduction to the rule of law in the real world...part of the reason is just the reality of what states are, right? Like, protesters don't have tanks and police dogs, and fire hoses, right? Protesters typically don't have armies. If they do, then we're in a civil war situation, not a rule of law situation, the state does have all of those things. And so one of the features of the state that makes it the most appropriate site for this talk about the rule of law is this the state has, I mean, most modern states have, at least on a case by case basis, overwhelming power. And so we have distinct moral reasons to control overwhelming power than we do to control a little bit of legal disobedience, right, like overwhelming power is overwhelming. It's something that has a different moral importance for its control. Then the second idea is at the same time what I call the [...] property... is the state makes claims about its use of power, right? Like ordinary people, when they obey the law or violate the law, they don't necessarily do so with reference to a set of ideas that they're propagating about their relationship to other people. Whereas when modern states send troops in to beat people up, in a way what they're doing is they're saying that they're doing so in all of our names, right, particularly, but not exclusively in democratic governments. There's a way in which the state represents itself as acting on behalf of the political community at large. And so it makes sense to have a distinctive normative principle to regulate that kind of power.Tobi; I know you sort of sidestepped this in the book, and maybe it doesn't really fit with your overall argument. But I'm going to push you on that topic a bit. So how does the rule of law state as a matter of institutional design then handles... I know you said that there are separate principles that can be developed for guiding citizen actions, you know...Paul; Yes. Tobi; I mean, let's be clear that you are not saying that people are free to act however they want.Paul; I'm not advocating anarchy.Tobi; Exactly. So how does the rule of law state then handle citizens disagreements or conflicting interests around issues of social order? And I'll give you an example. I mentioned right at the beginning of our conversation what happened in Nigeria in October 2020. There's a unit of the police force that was created to handle violent crimes. Needless to say that they went way beyond their remit and became a very notoriously abusive unit of the police force. Picking up people randomly, lock them up, extort them for money. And there was a situation where a young man was murdered, and his car stolen by this same unit of the police force and young people all over the country, from Lagos to Port Harcourt to Abuja, everywhere, felt we've had enough, right, and everybody came out in protest. It was very, very peaceful, I'd say, until other interests, you know, infiltrated that action. Paul; Right. Tobi; But what I noticed quite early in that process was that even within the spirits of that protests, there were disagreements between citizens - protesters blocking roads, you know, versus people who feel well, your protest should not stop me from going to work, you know, and so many other actions by the protesters that other people with, maybe not conflicting interests, but who have other opinions about strategy or process feel well, this is not right. This is not how to do this. This is not how you do this, you know, and I see that that sort of provided the loophole, I should say, for the government to then move in and take a ruthlessly violent action. You know, there was a popular tollgate in Lagos in the richest neighbourhood in Lagos that was blocked for 10 days by the protesters. And I mean, after this, the army basically moved in and shot people to death. Today, you still see people who would say, Oh, well, that's tragic. But should these people have been blocking other people from going about their daily business? So how does the rule of law regulate issues of social order vis-a-vis conflict of interest?Paul; So I think this is actually a point in favour of my stark distinction between state action and social action as appropriate for thinking about the rule of law. Because when you say that the state used...what I still fundamentally think of as like minor civil disobedience...so, like blocking some roads, big deal! Protesters block roads all the time, right, like protesters have blocked roads throughout human history, you know, like, sometimes it goes big, right? Like they love blocking roads in the French Revolution. But oftentimes, it's just blocking... so I blocked roads.I participated in, you know, some protests in the early 2000s. I participated in blocking roads in DC, right, like, fundamentally "big deal!" is the answer that the state ought to give. And so by saying to each other and to the government, when we talk about the rule of law, we mean, the state's power has to be controlled by the law, I think that gives us a language to say... even though people are engaging in illegal things, the state still has to follow legal process in dealing with it, right.The state still has to use only the level of force allowed by the law to arrest people. The state can't just send in the army to shoot people. And the principle that we appeal to is this principle of the rule of law. Yeah, maintaining the distinction between lawbreaking by ordinary people and law-breaking by the state helps us understand why the state shouldn't be allowed to just send in troops whenever people engage in a little bit of minor lawbreaking and protests.Tobi; So how does the law... I mean, we are entering a bit of a different territory, how does the law in your conception handles what... well, maybe these are fancy definitions, but what some people will call extraordinary circumstances. Like protests with political interests? Maybe protesters that are funded and motivated to unseat an incumbent government? Or in terrorism, you know, where you often have situations where there are no laws on paper to deal with these sort of extraordinary situations, you know, and they can be extremely violent, they can be extremely strange, they're usually things that so many societies are not equipped to handle. So how should the rule of law regulate the action of the state in such extraordinary circumstances?Paul; Yeah, so this is the deep problem of the rule of law, you know, this is why people still read Carl Schmitt, right, because Carl Schmitt's whole account of executive power basically is, hey, wait a minute emergencies happen, and when emergencies happen, liberal legal ideas like the rule of law dropout, and so fundamentally, you just have like raw sovereignty. And that means that the state just kind of does what it must. Right. So here's what I feel about Schmitt. One is, maybe sometimes that's true, right? And again, I think about the US context, because I'm an American and you know, I have my own history, right? And so in the US context, I think, again, about, Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War, right.Like Abraham Lincoln broke all kinds of laws in the Civil War. Like today, we'd call some of the things that he did basically assuming dictatorial power in some respects. I mean, he did that in the greatest emergency that the country had ever faced and has ever faced since then. And he did it in a civil war. And sometimes that happens, and I think practically speaking, legal institutions have a habit of not standing in the way in truly dire situations like that. But, and here's why I want to push back against Carl Schmitt... but what a legal order can then do is after the emergency has passed...number one, the legal order can be a source of pressure for demanding and accounting of when the emergency has passed, right. And so again, I think of the United States War on Terror, you know, we still have people in United States' custody imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay.September 11 2001, was almost 20 years ago. It's actually 20 years ago and a month, and we still have people locked up in Guantanamo Bay. That's insane. That's completely unjustifiable. And one of the jobs of the legal system is to pressure the executive to say, okay, buddy, is the emergency over yet? No, really, we think that the emergency is over yet. I want reasons, right, publicity again, I want an explanation from you of why you think the emergency is still ongoing. And the legal system can force the executive to be accountable for the claim that the emergency is still ongoing. That's number one. Number two is that law tends to be really good at retroactively, sort of, retrofitting things into legal order, right. And so again, I think about the Civil War. You know, after the US Civil War, lots of civil wars, sorry. American-centric person trying to fight against it. But after the US Civil War, you know, the courts took a pause. And then we have a lot of cases where they took a lot of the things that Lincoln did, they said, okay, some of them at least were illegal, some of them were legal, but only under very specific circumstances. And so they actually built legal doctrine that took into account the emergency that Lincoln faced, and then later wars, such as in the Second World War, the courts took the lessons from the experience in the American Civil War, and used that to impose more constraints. So to bring it about that the emergency actions that Franklin Roosevelt took in the Second World War weren't completely sui generis, sort of like right acts of sovereignty, but were regulated by legal rules created during the Civil War, and after the Civil War. And again, they weren't perfect, right? You know, during the Second World War, the United States interned Japanese Americans, you know, again, sort of completely lawless, completely unjustifiable, but you know, it's an ongoing process. The point is that the legal system is always... the law is always reactive in emergencies. But the reactive character of the law can nonetheless be used as a way to control and channel sovereign power, even in these sort of Schmittian emergency situations.Tobi; So two related questions, your work is interdisciplinary, because you try to blend a lot of social science into legal philosophy. But speaking of legal order and your primary profession, I mean.. for the sake of the audience parties into a lot of other cool stuff, I'm going to be putting up his website in the show notes. But speaking of legal order, and the legal profession, why is so much of the legal profession fascinated with what I would say the rule by law, as opposed to the rule of law. A lot of what you get from lawyers, even some law professors in some situations is [that] the law is the law, and you have to obey it. And even if you are going to question it, however unjustified it may seem, you still have to follow some processes that maybe for ordinary citizens are not so accessible or extremely costly, you know, which I think violate regularity, right, the way you talk about it retrospective legislation, and so many other things. So why is the legal profession so fascinated with the law, as opposed to justification for the law?Paul; Yeah, I think that question kind of answers itself, right. It's unfortunate... I mean, it's sort of natural but it's unfortunate that the people who most influence our dialogue about the way that we, you know, live in [the] society together with a state, namely by organizing ourselves with law happen to be people who are the specialists who find it easiest, right? And so I think the simple answer is right on this one, at least in countries like the United States, I'm not sure how true this is in other countries. But in the United States, the domination of legal discourse by lawyers necessarily means that the sort of real practical, real-world ways in which ordinary people find interacting with anything legal to be difficult, oppressive, or both just aren't in view, right? This is hard for them to understand.But I think in the US, one of the distortions that we've had is that we have an extremely hierarchical legal profession, right. So we have very elite law schools, and those very elite law schools - one of which I teach at - tend to predominantly produce lawyers who primarily work for wealthy corporations and sort of secondarily work for the government. Those lawyers tend to be the ones that end up at the top of the judiciary, that end up in influential positions in academia, that end up, you know, in Congress. The lawyers that, you know, see poor people, see people of subordinated minority groups and see the very different kinds of interactions with the legal system that people who are worse off have, that see the way that the law presents itself, not as a thing that you can use autonomously to structure your own life. But as a kind of external imposition, that sort of shows up and occasionally inflicts harm on you. Those lawyers aren't the ones who end up in our corridors of power. And it's very unfortunate, it's a consequence of the hierarchical nature of, at least in the US, our legal profession. And I suspect it's similar in these other countries as well.Tobi; In your opinion, what's the... dare I say the sacrosanct and objective - those are rigid conditions sorry - expression of the rule of law? The current general conception of the rule accedes to the primacy of the Constitution, right. I've often found that problematic because in some countries you find constitutional provisions that are egregious, and in other cases, you find lawyers going into court to challenge certain actions that they deem unjust, or that are truly unjust on the basis of the same constitution. Right. So what do you think is the most practical expression of the rule of law? Is it written laws? Is it the opinion of the judges? Is it how officials hold themselves accountable? What's the answer?Paul; So I think I'm gonna like sort of twist this a little bit and interpret that question is like, how do you know the extent to which the rule of law exists in a particular place? And my answer is, can ordinary people look officials in the eye, right, you know... if you're walking down the street, and you see a police officer, you know, are you afraid? Or can you walk past them and confidently know you're doing nothing wrong so there's nothing really effectively but they can do to you, right? If you're called in to deal with some kind of bureaucratic problem, like the tax office, can you trust that you exist in a relationship of respect? You know, can you trust that when you show them, actually here are my receipts, I really did have that expense, that that's going to be taken seriously? You know, if people, everybody, feels like they can stand tall, and look government officials in the eye, then to that extent, I think that the rule of law exists in a society.Tobi; Final question, what's the coolest idea you're working on right now?Paul; Oh, gosh. So like I said, I've got two books under contract right now. The first book is a history/theoretical constitutional law account of the development and existing state of the rule of law in the United States. The second book, which I'm more excited about, because it's the one that I plan to write this year, but it's also a lot harder, is I'm trying to take some of the governance design ideas that we see from the notion of rule of law development, and others such as governance development things and apply them to Private Internet platforms, right? Like, basically to Facebook. Um, I was actually involved in some of the work, not at a super high level, but I was involved in some of the work in designing or doing the research for designing Facebook's oversight board. And I'm kind of trying to expand on some of those ideas and think about, you know, if we really believe that private companies, especially in these internet platforms are doing governance right now, can we take lessons from how the rest of the world and how actual governments and actual states have developed techniques of governing behaviour in highly networked, large scale super-diverse environments and use those lessons in the private context? Maybe we can maybe we can't I'm not sure yet. Hopefully, by the time I finish the book, I'll know.Tobi; That's interesting. And I'll ask you this, a similar, I'll say a related situation is currently happening in Nigeria right now, where the President's Twitter handle or username, tweeted something that sounded like a thinly veiled threat to a particular ethnic group. And lots of people who disagreed with that tweet reported the tweet, and Twitter ended up deleting the tweet in question, which high-level officials in Nigeria found extremely offensive, and going as far as to assert their sovereign rights over Twitter and say, well, it may be your platform, but it is our country and we are banning you. How would you adjudicate such a situation? I mean, there's the question of banning Donald Trump from the platform and so many other things that have come up.Paul; Yeah, I mean, it's hard, right? So there are no easy answers to these kinds of problems. I think, ultimately, what we have to do is we have to build more legitimate ways to make these decisions. I mean, here are two things that we cannot do, right?Number one is we can't just let government officials, especially when, you know, as with the Donald Trump example, and so many others, the government officials are the ones who are engaging in the terrible conduct make these decisions. Number two is we also just can't let a bunch of people sitting in the Bay Area in California make those decisions. Like, ultimately, this is on, you know, property in some abstracted sense of like the shareholders of these companies. But we cannot simply allow a bunch of people in San Francisco, in Menlo Park, and you know, Cupertino and Mountain View, and all of those other little tech industry cities that have no understanding of local context to make the final decisions here. And so what we need to do is we need to build more robust institutions to include both global and local and affected countries, grassroots participation, in making these decisions. And I'm trying to sort of sketch out what the design for those might look like. But, you know, talk to me in about a year. And hopefully, I'll have a book for you that will actually have a sketch.Tobi; You bet I'm going to hold you to that. So, a year from now. So still on the question of ideas, because the show is about ideas. What's the one idea you'd like to see spread everywhere?Paul; Oh, gosh, you should have warned me in advance... that... I'm going to go back to what I said at the very beginning about the rule of law. Like I think that the rule of law depends on people, right? Like there is no such thing as the rule of law without a society and a legal system that genuinely is equal and advantageous to ordinary people enough to be the kind of thing that people actually support. Like ordinary people... if you cannot recruit the support of ordinary people for your legal political and social system, you cannot have the rule of law. That's true whether you're a developing country, that's true whether you're the United States, right. Like I think, you know, part of the reason that we got Donald Trump in the United States, I think, is because our legal system and with it our economy, and all the rest are so unequal in this country, that ordinary voters in the United States didn't see any reason to preserve it. Right and so when this lunatic and I mean, I'm just going to be quite frank here and say Donald Trump is a complete lunatic, right... when this lunatic is running for office who shows total disregard for existing institutions, like complete willingness to casually break the law. An electorate that actually was full of people who felt (themselves) treated respectfully and protected and supported by our legal and political institutions would have sent that guy packing in a heartbeat. But because the American people don't have that experience right now, I think that's what made us vulnerable to somebody like Donald Trump.Tobi; Thank you so much, Paul. It's been so fascinating talking to you.Paul; Thank you. This has been a lot of fun. Yeah, I'm happy to come back in a year when I've got the platform thing done.Tobi; Yeah, I'm so looking forward to that. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.ideasuntrapped.com/subscribe

Next in Foreign Policy
Cybersecurity with Ben Read

Next in Foreign Policy

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 19, 2021 30:00


This week Grant and Zoe are joined by Bryan Read, Director of Cyber-Espionage Analysis at Mandiant and Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University. Ben talks about the importance of Cyber Hygiene, the impact of cryptocurrencies on ransomware, and the balance between private and public defenses. In the final segment, Zoe talks about some news out of Guantanamo Bay, Ben suggests The Children's Illustrated Clausewitz, Grant continues to sound the alarm on the situation in Ethiopia. If you are under 40 and interested in being featured on the podcast, be sure to fill out this form: https://airtable.com/shr5IpK32opINN5e9

Christopher Lochhead Follow Your Different™
245 Duped: Double Lives, False Identities, and the Con Man I Almost Married with Bestselling Author Abby Ellin

Christopher Lochhead Follow Your Different™

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 18, 2021 88:41


Do you know what it feels like to be duped, or lied to in an extraordinarily manner? Imagine falling in love, and having a whirlwind romance with a doctor, who also serves in the military, claimed to have been stationed at Guantanamo Bay for a time, and claim many other extraordinary things about his life and career. Imagine being proposed to and expecting to marry this amazing man who also worked at the Pentagon. Then imagine it was all a big lie. In this episode of Follow Your Different, Abby Ellin shares her story and more. Abby Ellin is an extraordinary bestselling author, New York Times writer, and contributor to a ton of other prestigious publications. Her book is called Duped: Double Lives, False Identities, and the Con Man I Almost Married. In our dialogue, we go deep into her story, and find out why agrees that you can't see red flags through rose colored glasses. Abby Ellin on being Duped The conversation starts off reminiscing about meeting famous people in the past, when we can all actually go outside. The topic then got to Leonard Cohen, and how they were a fan of his work. This segues into the topic at hand, as Leonard Cohen himself was duped by his longtime manager. Abby Ellin's book, Duped, seems very personal, and it was radically transparent on what transpired in her life. She didn't appear to do anything to make herself look good. It was an unembellished account of what she had gone through, and the manipulation that she was subjected to. “When I write, I can write something but I'm also controlling what you know, and I was totally willing to sound like an asshole and duped because that was part of what needed to be done for that story. I was trying to channel the way other people think about someone who gets deceived, that I was engaged to a pathological liar. He went to jail. And everyone I know who I said that story to have their own story or knew somebody who did. Some of them didn't want to tell the story publicly or use their names because they felt like such idiots. I was like, “Hey, man. I'm an idiot and I own it. Because it happens and it's real.” – Abby Ellin Monetized Suffering I then comment on Abby's book, and how it reads and feels like a suspense novel. Abby appreciates the description, and shares that she actually sold the rights to it. So at the very least, someone shares that sentiment as well. “The operative words here are monetize suffering. So when, when life gives you lemons, you make lemon meringue pie and you eat it and you don't worry about getting fat. I saw the podcast writes and it's coming out in September, I think, but it's going to be like a six part series, and it's like a suspense thing.” – Abby Ellin Abby Ellin on Quitting Diet Coke We then talk about the article that Abby wrote about Diet Coke, and how she quit from it. She has had it since she was around 12 years old, and had been drinking it ever since. People have told her to quit, but she told them to mind their own business. Yet she knew she was addicted. She was drinking three to four cans a day, and go looking for it when she didn't have any in reach. But something happened that prompted her to consider quitting. “My stomach started hurting a lot recently and no one knew why. And I was tasting this diet coke and it started to taste really chemical-y. I asked them if they changed the formula and they said no, but I just was like, I'm done. And I that was it.” – Abby Ellin To hear more from Abby Ellin and her story on being duped, diet cokes and her thoughts on the Madoff scam, download and listen to this episode. Bio Abby Ellin is an award-winning journalist and the author of "Duped: Double Lives, False Identities and the Con Man I Almost Married" and "Teenage Waistland: A Former Fat Kid Weighs In On Living Large, Losing Weight and How Parents Can (and Can't) Help." For five years she wrote the "Preludes" column about young people and money for the Sunday Money and Business section of the New York Times...

The Recount Daily Pod
Closing Gitmo: Will President Biden succeed?

The Recount Daily Pod

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 12, 2021 29:27


The infamous prison camp at the US Navy Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was opened in early 2002 to house alleged terrorists the U.S. apprehended in Afghanistan. The camp became notorious as a symbol of U.S. human rights abuses. President Joe Biden has pledged to finally close it. Will he succeed? Karen Greenberg, Director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law, joins us today to break it all down. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

FM Talk 1065 Podcasts
Midday Mobile - The History of Guantanamo Bay - October 5 2021

FM Talk 1065 Podcasts

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 5, 2021 39:32


Faithful Politics
"The Constitution of Vaccines" - w/Professor Eric Berger

Faithful Politics

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 5, 2021 60:24


Vaccine mandates, love them or hate them, they are most likely affecting you in some shape and form. But what exactly does the constitution have to say about mandates? On this episode, your political host, Will Wright, talks with Constitutional Professor Eric Berger about the constitutionality of vaccine mandates. Then they discuss a Supreme Court case that is often cited to justify mandates, Jacobson v. Massachusets, and lastly Will finally gets his chance to flex his knowledge of OSHA to the professor! Guest Bio:Professor Berger clerked for the Honorable Merrick B. Garland on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He then practiced in Jenner & Block's Washington, D.C. office, where he worked on litigation in several state and federal trial and appellate courts, including the United States Supreme Court. Professor Berger's matters there included cases involving lethal injection, same-sex marriage, the detention of foreign nationals at Guantanamo Bay, and internet obscenity. Professor Berger teaches Constitutional Law I (structure), Constitutional Law II (rights), Constitutional History, Federal Courts, First Amendment, and Statutory Interpretation. He also teaches a class for undergraduates on Legislation and Regulation. He has been voted Professor of the Year by the upperclass law students six times. He has also received the College Distinguished Teaching Award (in 2010), the Law Alumni Council Distinguished Faculty Award (in 2018), and the John H. Binning Award for Excellence (in 2019). Professor Berger's scholarship focuses on constitutional law.  Much of his work explores judicial decision making in constitutional cases, with special attention to deference, fact finding, rhetorical strategies, and other under-theorized factors that help shape judicial opinions in constitutional cases.  His article Individual Rights, Judicial Deference, and Administrative Law Norms in Constitutional Decision Making, 91 B.U. L. REV. 2029 (2011), was named the 2011 winner of the American Constitution Society's Richard D. Cudahy Writing Competition on Regulatory and Administrative Law.  Professor Berger has also written extensively about lethal injection litigation.   Professor Berger has testified in the Nebraska legislature about a variety of constitutional issues, including free speech, lethal injection, and the process for amending the U.S. Constitution.  He is also the faculty advisor to the Law College's chapter of the American Constitution Society and to the Community Legal Education Project, which sends law students into Lincoln public schools to teach about the Constitution.Professor Berger served as Associate Dean for Faculty from 2016 to 2020.Support the show (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/faithpolitics)

The Critical Hour
Trump Sues Twitter for Reinstatement; Pandora Papers Expose Corruption

The Critical Hour

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 5, 2021 117:40


Gerald Horne, professor of history at the University of Houston, author, historian, and researcher, joins us to discuss the Pandora Papers. A trove of 11.9 million documents containing financial information on some of the world's richest and most powerful people has been released by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. The documents have already created embarrassing situations for powerful politicians in Ukraine and England.Dr. Yolandra Hancock, board-certified pediatrician and obesity medicine specialist, joins us to discuss covid. Drugmaker Merck is about to release a powerful new antiviral medicine that is believed to be a breakthrough tactic for addressing the covid pandemic. Also, the winter approaches and observers expect the delta variant to begin spreading rapidly soon.Daniel McAdams, executive director of the Ron Paul Institute, joins us to discuss censorship. The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity temporarily lost their YouTube channel last week and no reasonable excuse was given by YouTube. Also, former President Donald Trump has filed papers in a Florida court arguing that Twitter acted on behalf of Democrat operatives in removing his personal account.John Burris, civil rights attorney, joins us to discuss the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). The conservative SCOTUS is scheduled to make major decisions regarding issues that have both political and social ramifications. The major cases on the SCOTUS docket will address gun control, abortion, religious liberty, national security, and capital punishment, among other issues.George Koo, journalist, social activist, international business consultant, and chemical engineer, joins us to discuss China. China has shocked the US military planners with its aggressive response to the Taiwan threat. China has begun regularly flying warplanes in and around Taiwan, and has stated that they will be prepared to attack whenever the order is given. Also, they have admonished the EU to "mind their own business" regarding China's internal affairs.John Kiriakou, journalist, author and host of The Back Story, joins us to discuss a Common Dreams article on torture. The article addresses the issue of torture. Guantanamo Bay is discussed, but the article also speaks of another little-known remote torture site in Poland. Leo Flores, Latin America coordinator for Code Pink, joins us to discuss the Global South. An interesting war of words is taking place between Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro and the former prime minister of Spain, José María Aznar. Maduro has recently argued that Spain should apologize for its colonial rampage of genocide and slavery in Latin America and the Caribbean, while Aznar simply laughs off the demands for acknowledgment of the evil deeds.Scott Ritter, former UN weapon inspector in Iraq, joins us to discuss Centcom. In his latest Responsible Statecraft article, Andrew Bacevich argues that the very existence of the Central Command and its 10 sister command centers is a horrible mistake for the US empire and the world. Bacevich goes on to point out that regional stability has decreased since the development of the command system.

The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast
S4 E49: Enhanced Interrogation Techniques | Mohamedou Ould Slahi

The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 4, 2021 165:20


Mohamedou Ould Slahi was detained at Guantanamo Bay without charge for 14 years. His best-selling memoir ‘Guantánamo Diary: The Fully Restored Text' and movie ‘The Mauritanian' are available now. Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors: Helix Sleep: Go to www.Helixsleep.com/Jordan for $200 off all mattress orders and two free pillows. Dr. Jordan Peterson's guest Mohamedou Ould Slahi shares his experience with more than a decade of torture and depression in Guantánamo Bay. Mohamedou starts with his childhood and guides us through his journey across Germany and Canada. The life-changing phone call and his hard-to-hear torture sessions are shared as he explains the change he experienced in his beliefs. Check out this episode to listen to how his 14 years of pain ended. Mohamedou Ould Slahi was detained for 14 years at Guantanamo Bay detention camp without charge. Though the Mauritanian citizen continued journaling while imprisoned, the U.S. government declassified it. In January 2015, the diary became an international bestseller and a 2021 drama film titled “The Mauritanian”. Read Mohamedou's memoir: http://guantanamodiary.com/  Watch the trailer of The Mauritanian on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WJSjln30BQ Follow Mohamedou on Twitter: https://twitter.com/mohamedouould  - Subscribe to the “Mondays of Meaning” newsletter here:  https://linktr.ee/DrJordanBPeterson Follow Dr. Peterson:  Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/c/JordanPetersonVideos  Twitter - https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson  Instagram - https://instagram.com/jordan.b.peterson  Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/drjordanpeterson  Website: https://jordanbpeterson.com/ Visit our merch store:  https://shop.jordanbpeterson.com/ Interested in sponsoring this show? Reach out to our advertising team: sponsorships@jordanbpeterson.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

By Any Means Necessary
Only A People's Movement Can Resist Joe Manchin and Pass the Reconciliation Bill

By Any Means Necessary

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 1, 2021 113:10


In this episode of By Any Means Necessary, hosts Sean Blackmon and Jacquie Luqman are joined by Nick Stender, a member of the Chicago Teachers Union and an activist with Reds in Ed to discuss what's at stake in the social spending budget for working and poor people, the squabbles over the infrastructure spending package and the social spending bill, and the Democrats' lack of interest in fighting for reforms that would provide relief to working people.In the second segment, Sean and Jacquie are joined by Amir Khafagy, an award-winning journalist based out of New York City who you can follow on Twitter @AmirKhafagy91 to discuss the illegal detention of Muslim, South Asian, and Arab men in New York in the aftermath of September 11th, the abuse of people detaind at New York City's Guantanamo Bay, and the myth of unity after 9/11.In the third segment, Sean and Jacquie are joined by Miguel Garcia, Justin Williams, co-host of Red Spin Sports and Miguel Garcia, host and creator of the Sports as a Weapon podcast to discuss the loud minority of the NBA's anti-vaccine players, the NCAA's fearmongering about players receiving labor rights including compensation, and the NCAA's insistence of using the term “student-athletes” rather than “employees” to continue exploiting athletes.Later in the show, Sean and Jacquie are joined by Mondale Robinson, founder of the Black Male Voter Project to discuss the budget reconciliation bill and how it exposes the false promises that the Democratic Party made to Black voters, underreporting of police killings over the past decade, and how a broad people's movement requires intergenerational solidarity.

By Any Means Necessary
Police Abuse in the Aftermath of 9/11

By Any Means Necessary

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 1, 2021 13:28


In this segment, Sean and Jacquie are joined by Amir Khafagy, an award-winning journalist based out of New York City who you can follow on Twitter @AmirKhafagy91 to discuss the illegal detention of Muslim, South Asian, and Arab men in New York in the aftermath of September 11th, the abuse of people detaind at New York City's Guantanamo Bay, and the myth of unity after 9/11.

On the Media
Out of Sight

On the Media

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 1, 2021 51:53


Facebook and Instagram are harming young users, according to leaked research discussed in a Senate hearing this week. On this week's On the Media, hear why lawmakers are chasing the white whale that is tech accountability. Also, how do we cover the tightly guarded, and complicated, news that comes from Guantanamo Bay? And, as the documentary industry booms, its ethics standards lag far behind.  1. Brandy Zadrozny [@BrandyZadrozny], NBC senior reporter, unpacks the evolving responsibilities of social media companies for our health. Listen. 2. Jess Bravin [@JessBravin], Supreme Court reporter for The Wall Street Journal, and Michel Paradis [@MDParadis], senior attorney for the Department of Defense, on the lasting difficulties of covering one of America's most notorious military prisons, Guantanamo Bay. Listen. 3. Muira McCammon [@muira_mccammon], doctoral candidate at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School of Communications, on what the library at Guantamo Bay can tell us about the place and the media's coverage. Listen. 4. Patricia Aufderheide [@paufder], University Professor of Communication Studies in the School of Communication at American University, on the tension between production and ethics in the world of documentaries. Listen. Music from this week's show: Nino Rota - Juliet of SpiritsNicola Cruz - ColibriaKronos - FlugufrelsarinnVijay Iyer - Human NatureMerkabah - John ZornBooker T and The MG's - Slim Jenkins PlaceAlex Wurman - Going Home for the First Time

Heat Death of the Universe
104 - The Hidden Optimism of the Doomsday Clock

Heat Death of the Universe

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2021 83:11


Steven Donziger finally catches a break. Conceptual art scams again. An unorthodox beverage choice causes a forest fire. 2021 Doomsday Clock Statement. Ban backpacks, not guns. 500k Americans lack indoor plumbing. Ban border patrol horses and everything will fall perfectly into place. Guantanamo Bay will be expanded, further privatized, and no goddamn horses or their pills and pastes will be allowed. Plus, we play around with this website.Support: patreon.com/heatdeathpodGeneral RecommendationsJD's Recommendation: DiabloJNM's Recommendation: The Grayzone and more specifically these two videos: 20 years after 9/11, millions of victims of 'War on Terror'Biden's UN speech shows further US commitment to war and meddling, not 'diplomacy'Further Reading, Viewing, ListeningHighest U.N. Human Rights Body Rules U.S. Government Must Release Steven Donziger from “Arbitrary” Detention and Compensate Him for Legal Violations An Artist Was Paid $84,000 By A Museum—And Delivered Two Blank Canvasses Woman Accused of Starting Fawn Fire Was Attempting To Boil Bear Urine to DrinkIt is 100 seconds to midnight - 2021 Doomsday Clock StatementNot a single G20 country is in line with the Paris Agreement on climate, analysis shows Is it too late to prevent climate change? Triple jeopardy: Children face dark future of climate disastersGun Fears See School Ban Backpacks, Forcing Students to Improvise With Random ItemsWhite House says border officials in Del Rio will no longer use horsesBiden Administration Seeks A Contractor For A Migrant Facility At Guantanamo Locationless Locationsheatdeathpod.comEvery show-related link is corralled and available here.Twitter: @heatdeathpodPlease send all Letters of Derision, Indifference, Inquiry, Mild Elation, et cetera to: heatdeathoftheuniversepodcast@gmail.comAlso, check out our newly updated YouTube channel for the hell of it

Siraj Hashmi - Off The List - Episode #174

"YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2021 72:13


American writer, journalist, and one half of the Habibi Bros., Siraj Hashmi joins Michael this week for a discussion on The List of Twitter users who need their phone taken away, whether or not a large part of the lockdown crisis is about the intentional creation of an outgroup, how the collective social outrage for Trump may have mutated into hatred for the unvaxed, how people currently cherry-pick their values to suit their social needs, how AOC plays a professional wrestling heel for the GOP and how her image has been severely compromised, why Neo-Confederate Rick Wilson is arguably the worst person on Twitter, Siraj's deep connection to Pakistan and being forced to flee shortly after the events of 9/11, how poorly South Asians are treated in the Middle East, how America has earned the moniker of "The Great Satan" overseas, why it's more important to value truth over picking a side, an explanation of what Taliban rule will mean for the people of Afghanistan, plus how the CIA dealt with not knowing how to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and so much more!When it comes to online dating, there are superficial swiping apps, and then there are the "expert" matching apps. Both of which will usually waste your time. The solution is values-based matching with our friends over at Dröm. Dröm is a new, and FREE, values-based dating app. You pick dealbreakers & dealmakers, there are no experts or match percentages, and you don't have to addictively check the app. Sign up for Dröm using our link at https://drom.date/malice and find your perfect match today!At RockAuto you can easily find everything you need and whether you're a mechanic, an auto shop, or working on your own car, everyone has access to the same incredible pricing at https://www.RockAuto.com!If you want to last longer, and perform better in bed, head to https://www.bluechew.com and use promo code MALICE to get your first shipment for FREE!Siraj Hashmihttps://twitter.com/SirajAHashmihttps://www.instagram.com/sirajhash/https://www.patreon.com/habibibroshttps://sirajhashmi.locals.com/https://sirajhashmi.substack.com/https://linktr.ee/sirajhashmiMichael MaliceOrder THE ANARCHIST HANDBOOKhttps://www.amzn.com/B095DVF8FJOrder THE NEW RIGHT: https://amzn.to/2IFFCCuOrder DEAR READER: https://t.co/vZfTVkK6qf?amp=1https://twitter.com/michaelmalicehttps://instagram.com/michaelmalicehttps://malice.locals.com https://youtube.com/michaelmaliceofficialIntro song: "Out of Reach" by Legendary House Catshttps://thelegendaryhousecats.bandcamp.com/The newest episode of "YOUR WELCOME" releases on iTunes and YouTube every Thursday! Please subscribe and leave a review.You can watch "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice LIVE for FREE every Tuesday at 12:30 PM at http://www.GaSDigitalNetwork.com/liveVisit http://www.podcastmerch.com/ for exclusive "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice merchandise!For access to our entire catalog of episodes On Demand in HD, subscribe to www.GaSDigitalNetwork.com. Use promo code "YWMM" for a 7-day free trial and 15% OFF your monthly membership. There, you'll have access to ALL of the other amazing shows on GaS Digital Network!

Siraj Hashmi - Off The List - Episode #174

"YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2021 72:13


American writer, journalist, and one half of the Habibi Bros., Siraj Hashmi joins Michael this week for a discussion on The List of Twitter users who need their phone taken away, whether or not a large part of the lockdown crisis is about the intentional creation of an outgroup, how the collective social outrage for Trump may have mutated into hatred for the unvaxed, how people currently cherry-pick their values to suit their social needs, how AOC plays a professional wrestling heel for the GOP and how her image has been severely compromised, why Neo-Confederate Rick Wilson is arguably the worst person on Twitter, Siraj's deep connection to Pakistan and being forced to flee shortly after the events of 9/11, how poorly South Asians are treated in the Middle East, how America has earned the moniker of "The Great Satan" overseas, why it's more important to value truth over picking a side, an explanation of what Taliban rule will mean for the people of Afghanistan, plus how the CIA dealt with not knowing how to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and so much more!When it comes to online dating, there are superficial swiping apps, and then there are the "expert" matching apps. Both of which will usually waste your time. The solution is values-based matching with our friends over at Dröm. Dröm is a new, and FREE, values-based dating app. You pick dealbreakers & dealmakers, there are no experts or match percentages, and you don't have to addictively check the app. Sign up for Dröm using our link at https://drom.date/malice and find your perfect match today!At RockAuto you can easily find everything you need and whether you're a mechanic, an auto shop, or working on your own car, everyone has access to the same incredible pricing at https://www.RockAuto.com!If you want to last longer, and perform better in bed, head to https://www.bluechew.com and use promo code MALICE to get your first shipment for FREE!Siraj Hashmihttps://twitter.com/SirajAHashmihttps://www.instagram.com/sirajhash/https://www.patreon.com/habibibroshttps://sirajhashmi.locals.com/https://sirajhashmi.substack.com/https://linktr.ee/sirajhashmiMichael MaliceOrder THE ANARCHIST HANDBOOKhttps://www.amzn.com/B095DVF8FJOrder THE NEW RIGHT: https://amzn.to/2IFFCCuOrder DEAR READER: https://t.co/vZfTVkK6qf?amp=1https://twitter.com/michaelmalicehttps://instagram.com/michaelmalicehttps://malice.locals.com https://youtube.com/michaelmaliceofficialIntro song: "Out of Reach" by Legendary House Catshttps://thelegendaryhousecats.bandcamp.com/The newest episode of "YOUR WELCOME" releases on iTunes and YouTube every Thursday! Please subscribe and leave a review.You can watch "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice LIVE for FREE every Tuesday at 12:30 PM at http://www.GaSDigitalNetwork.com/liveVisit http://www.podcastmerch.com/ for exclusive "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice merchandise!For access to our entire catalog of episodes On Demand in HD, subscribe to www.GaSDigitalNetwork.com. Use promo code "YWMM" for a 7-day free trial and 15% OFF your monthly membership. There, you'll have access to ALL of the other amazing shows on GaS Digital Network!

Siraj Hashmi - Off The List - Episode #174

"YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2021 72:13


American writer, journalist, and one half of the Habibi Bros., Siraj Hashmi joins Michael this week for a discussion on The List of Twitter users who need their phone taken away, whether or not a large part of the lockdown crisis is about the intentional creation of an outgroup, how the collective social outrage for Trump may have mutated into hatred for the unvaxed, how people currently cherry-pick their values to suit their social needs, how AOC plays a professional wrestling heel for the GOP and how her image has been severely compromised, why Neo-Confederate Rick Wilson is arguably the worst person on Twitter, Siraj's deep connection to Pakistan and being forced to flee shortly after the events of 9/11, how poorly South Asians are treated in the Middle East, how America has earned the moniker of "The Great Satan" overseas, why it's more important to value truth over picking a side, an explanation of what Taliban rule will mean for the people of Afghanistan, plus how the CIA dealt with not knowing how to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and so much more!When it comes to online dating, there are superficial swiping apps, and then there are the "expert" matching apps. Both of which will usually waste your time. The solution is values-based matching with our friends over at Dröm. Dröm is a new, and FREE, values-based dating app. You pick dealbreakers & dealmakers, there are no experts or match percentages, and you don't have to addictively check the app. Sign up for Dröm using our link at https://drom.date/malice and find your perfect match today!At RockAuto you can easily find everything you need and whether you're a mechanic, an auto shop, or working on your own car, everyone has access to the same incredible pricing at https://www.RockAuto.com!If you want to last longer, and perform better in bed, head to https://www.bluechew.com and use promo code MALICE to get your first shipment for FREE!Siraj Hashmihttps://twitter.com/SirajAHashmihttps://www.instagram.com/sirajhash/https://www.patreon.com/habibibroshttps://sirajhashmi.locals.com/https://sirajhashmi.substack.com/https://linktr.ee/sirajhashmiMichael MaliceOrder THE ANARCHIST HANDBOOKhttps://www.amzn.com/B095DVF8FJOrder THE NEW RIGHT: https://amzn.to/2IFFCCuOrder DEAR READER: https://t.co/vZfTVkK6qf?amp=1https://twitter.com/michaelmalicehttps://instagram.com/michaelmalicehttps://malice.locals.com https://youtube.com/michaelmaliceofficialIntro song: "Out of Reach" by Legendary House Catshttps://thelegendaryhousecats.bandcamp.com/The newest episode of "YOUR WELCOME" releases on iTunes and YouTube every Thursday! Please subscribe and leave a review.You can watch "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice LIVE for FREE every Tuesday at 12:30 PM at http://www.GaSDigitalNetwork.com/liveVisit http://www.podcastmerch.com/ for exclusive "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice merchandise!For access to our entire catalog of episodes On Demand in HD, subscribe to www.GaSDigitalNetwork.com. Use promo code "YWMM" for a 7-day free trial and 15% OFF your monthly membership. There, you'll have access to ALL of the other amazing shows on GaS Digital Network!

FULCRUM News with David Seaman
Jack Posobiec Tops "New York Times" The Daily Podcast In Chart Upset

FULCRUM News with David Seaman

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 26, 2021


Jack Posobiec's new podcast tops the news charts — even more popular than New York Times' The Daily, and the Washington Post's various podcast updates. Prior to journalism, Jack Posobiec was a guard at Guantanamo Bay's detainment facility, and before that a major motion picture actor who lived in China. Someone should make a movie about this guy's life, and that's not even sarcasm — remarkable how many hats Jack Posobiec has worn over the years.

The Chad Prather Show
Ep 514 | Our Southern Border Needs to Be SECURED at All Costs

The Chad Prather Show

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 23, 2021 46:58


The new narrative on the southern border is getting out of control. As Haitians encamp at Del Rio, Texas, after entering the U.S. illegally, Border Patrol agents are accused of whipping illegals and mistreating them by hitting them. The Biden administration is looking for contractors to help in the military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who know Haitian Creole language. Does this mean that Haitian migrants are being flown to Cuba? White House press secretary Jen Psaki tells us, “They [Haitians] are not intending to stay here for a lengthy period of time …” What does that even mean, Psaki? If America is so EVIL, please explain: Why do we have a border crisis? Sara Gonzales, host of “The News and Why It Matters,” highlights a story that didn't get much attention about Haitian migrants hijacking a bus and attempting to escape federal custody. Why is the corporate media not covering this? Today's Sponsors: Visit https://HomeTitleLock.com and enter the promo code CHAD for 1-month free of risk-free protection. Go to https://Purple.com/watchchad10 and use promo code watchchad10. Visit BrickhouseChad.com and use the offer code CHAD. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stuff They Don't Want You To Know
Guantanamo Bay, Part Two: The Future

Stuff They Don't Want You To Know

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 22, 2021 53:53


What will happen to one of the world's most infamous modern prisons? How long can a person be held without trial -- and what happens when the government sets those people free? In the second part of this two-part series, the guys explore the future of Gitmo. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Stuff They Don't Want You To Know
Guantanamo Bay, Part One: An Origin Story

Stuff They Don't Want You To Know

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 17, 2021 46:31


Today, the word "Guantánamo" is, for most people, synonymous with one of the world's most infamous prisons -- but, as it turns out, the troubled story of this location dates back much further. In part one of this two-part series, the guys explore the history of Guantánamo Bay, from the 15th century to the modern day. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Vital Interests Podcast
The Guantanamo Docket: New York Times Journalists Carol Rosenberg and Charlie Savage on Keeping a Record of Guantanamo

Vital Interests Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 14, 2021 48:21


Who remains at Guantanamo Bay? What's more to be known? And can the Biden administration finally close the notorious detention center? Journalists Carol Rosenberg and Charlie Savage discuss lessons culled from nearly two decades of reporting on the prison as part of Vital Interest's special-edition “9/11-Twenty Years Later.”

The FOX News Rundown
Gov. Newsom Fights For Survival In CA Recall

The FOX News Rundown

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 14, 2021 31:08


Today is the California Recall Election to unseat Governor Gavin Newsom (D). Throughout the election Newsom has received support from top Democrats including President Biden who was in California Monday night campaigning to keep the California Governor in office. We speak with one of the many opponents running against Newsom in the recall election, businessman John Cox (R). He also ran against Newsom in 2018. Cox explains why he thinks Newsom should be recalled, what the people of California are really concerned about and if he thinks Newsom will change if he win today's race. We also speak with Democratic strategist and FOX News contributor Leslie Marshall about why she's voting to keep Newsom in office, why she is against recall elections and what she thinks about Republican frontrunner and conservative talk show host Larry Elder.   Over the weekend Americans paused to remember the lives lost in the horrific attacks of 9/11 20 years ago. Now, the focus is back on Afghanistan and how the war on those terror attacks came to an end. While the debates on how to evacuate civilians from Afghanistan rage on, the terrorists who plotted the 9/11 attacks have been in court, but have yet to go on trial. Fox's Pentagon Correspondent Lucas Tomlinson joins to recount his experience in Guantanamo Bay at the pretrial hearings, why the trial has dragged on for nearly a decade, and what confinement looks like for Khalid Sheik Mohammad at GITMO. Lucas also shares how Guantanamo Bay is changing and how the terrorist suspects looked and acted in the courtroom.   Plus, commentary by FOX Nation host Tomi Lahren.

Bill Handel on Demand
The Bill Handel Show - 8a - Biden's Uncertain Path to Closing Guantanamo Bay & WOTN [LE]

Bill Handel on Demand

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 13, 2021 32:45


Wayne Resnick sits in for Bill Handel. 20 years after 9/11, President Biden faces an uncertain path to closing Guantanamo Bay. From pariah to partner: How Qatar's role in Afghanistan helped to restore U.S. relations. Jennifer Jones Lee and the man himself! Bill Handel join Wayne for the Late Edition of HANDEL on the News, where the trio discuss news topics that include: President Biden heads out west to assess the wildfires and campaign for Gavin Newsom, tropical storm Nichols threatens the Gulf Coast with heavy rain and flooding, and Israel has shot down Hamas rockets in addition to launching air strikes in the Gaza Strip.

The FOX News Rundown
FOX News Rundown EXTRA: After 20 Years Alleged 9/11 Mastermind Still Awaits Trial

The FOX News Rundown

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 12, 2021 21:06


It's 20 years since America was attacked by terrorists, but after almost two decades the alleged mastermind behind the attacks Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other accused of conspiring with him are still awaiting trial for what for what happened on that day. This week, after a year-and-a-half delay due to the coronavirus pandemic the pretrial for the five plotters began at Guantanamo Bay. Earlier this week, host Lisa Brady spoke with former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and Fox News Contributor Andrew McCarthy about why the trial has been delayed for so long. The conversation was too long and we could not include the whole interview. On today's FOX News Rundown EXTRA you will hear McCarthy talk about the case, the controversy behind the enhanced interrogation techniques used and the ability to appeal if found guilty. Plus, he weighs in on the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and if we have learned anything from the War on Terror.

Parallax Views w/ J.G. Michael
9/11 and Saudi Arabia w/ Journalist Dan Christensen

Parallax Views w/ J.G. Michael

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 11, 2021 53:51


On this edition of Parallax Views, it's the 20th anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks that took down the World Trade Center buildings and damaged the Pentagon (another plane was headed for the White House but ended up crashing in Shanksville, PA). Questions remain, even after the 9/11 Joint Inquiry and the 9/11 Commission, about the role of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the events of that fateful day. A lawsuit by the 9/11 victims' families is underway. Joining us to untangle the question of the Saudi connection to 9/11 is Dan Christensen of the Florida Bulldog (formerly the Broward Bulldog). Dan Christensen is an journalist who has been covering the story of 9/11 for some years now alongside Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan, authors of The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11. As a Florida resident Dan covered the Sarasota, Florida connection to the 9/11 story. Specifically, he detailed the figure of Abdulaziz al-Hijji and his reported relationship to 911 hijackers Mohammad Atta and Marwan al-Sheh. Additionally, Dan has also covered the renegade FBI investigation known as Operation Encore. He has received redacted documents related to Operation Encore that relate to 9/11 and Saudi Arabia. In this conversation we cover all of that as well as the ways in which the FBI has seemingly stonewalled investigations into the Saudi connection to 9/11, the Southern California connection to 9/11 vis-a-vis the suspected Saudi agents Omar al-Baymoui, Musaed al-Jarrah,  and Fahad al-Thumairy, Saudi Arabian diplomat Prince Bandar bin Sultan (nicknamed "Bandar Bush") and his subpoena by the 9/11 victims' families, Osama bin Laden, Biden's Executive Order calling for the review of 9/11 records to be declassified, the FBI, Sen. Bob Graham, the infamous "28 pages", Guantanamo Bay detainee Abu Zubaydah and Prince Bandar, the role of Congress in pushing the issues related to Saudi Arabia and 9/11, why the 9/11 victims' family lawsuit matters for society at large, state secrets, the secret pre-9/11 report on al Qaeda sleeper cells in America, the ongoing efforts to unveil the seeming connection between Saudi Arabia and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and much, much more.

Secure Freedom Radio Podcast
Debra Burlingame, Douglas Feith and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser

Secure Freedom Radio Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 10, 2021 52:57


DEBRA BURLINGAME, Lawyer and Activist, Sister of Flight 77 Pilot, Charles "Chic" Burlingame III:  Debra Burlingame revisits the events of September 11, 2001 and the death of her late brother Captain Charles "Chic" Burlingame III Burlingame: Many of the Guantanamo Bay inmates were not simple “farmers” who got swept up in a conflict, they were veterans of previous holy wars Burlingame: There is no safe haven from Radical Islamic terrorism  DOUGLAS FEITH, Former US Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Author, "War and Decision," Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute: Douglas Feith revisits where he was on September 11, 2001 Feith talks about the United States' originally, retaliatory approach to terrorist attacks Feith delves into the Bush administration's efforts to target terrorists abroad following 9/11 Feith: Nobody can argue that the Bush administrations counterterrorism strategy did not succeed in its main goal, preventing another 9/11 DR. M. ZUHDI JASSER, President, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Former US NAVY Lieutenant-Commander, Host, Blaze Radio Podcast: “REFORM THIS!," Founder, Take Back Islam, Co-Founder, Muslim Reform Movement, Author, A Battle for the Soul of Islam, @DrZuhdiJasser 6 million people have signed up to serve in the U.S. military since the attacks on September 11, 2001 Dr. Zuhdi Jasser: Since its founding, Islam has never truly gone through a reformation Dr. Jasser: There are those who want to reform Islam but do not have the backing of big oil and Al Jazeera  

Scott Horton Show - Just the Interviews
9/6/21 Clive Stafford Smith on Ahmed Rabbani and the Other Innocent Men Being Held at Guantanamo Bay

Scott Horton Show - Just the Interviews

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 10, 2021 34:20


Scott interviews Clive Stafford Smith about a recent article written by his client Ahmed Rabbani. Rabbani has been in custody for 19 years without a single charge being brought against him. In 2002 he found himself in the hands of the CIA who allegedly believed he was a man named Hassan Ghul. But even after the real Ghul was captured and brought to the same prison Rabbani was being kept in, the CIA kept trying to extract information from Rabbani. Ghul cooperated and was freed. But Rabbani was sent to Guantanamo Bay where he remains today. Smith explains some of the difficulties facing him as he argues Rabbani's case and sheds some light on how common his story really is. Discussed on the show: “The U.S. Has Held Me For 19 Years Without A Charge. I Have Just One Chance To Be Freed” (Huffington Post) The Senate Torture Report Clive Stafford Smith is founder of Reprieve, and is now director of his new non-profit the 3DCentre. He is the author of Bad Men: Guantánamo Bay and the Secret Prisons and Injustice: Life and Death in the Courtrooms of America. Follow him on Twitter @CliveSSmith. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: The War State and Why The Vietnam War?, by Mike Swanson; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; EasyShip; Thc Hemp Spot; Green Mill Supercritical; Bug-A-Salt; Lorenzotti Coffee and Listen and Think Audio. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjYu5tZiG.

The Libertarian Institute - All Podcasts
9/6/21 Clive Stafford Smith on Ahmed Rabbani and the Other Innocent Men Being Held at Guantanamo Bay

The Libertarian Institute - All Podcasts

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 10, 2021 34:20


Scott interviews Clive Stafford Smith about a recent article written by his client Ahmed Rabbani. Rabbani has been in custody for 19 years without a single charge being brought against him. In 2002 he found himself in the hands of the CIA who allegedly believed he was a man named Hassan Ghul. But even after the real Ghul was captured and brought to the same prison Rabbani was being kept in, the CIA kept trying to extract information from Rabbani. Ghul cooperated and was freed. But Rabbani was sent to Guantanamo Bay where he remains today. Smith explains some of the difficulties facing him as he argues Rabbani's case and sheds some light on how common his story really is. Discussed on the show: “The U.S. Has Held Me For 19 Years Without A Charge. I Have Just One Chance To Be Freed” (Huffington Post) The Senate Torture Report Clive Stafford Smith is founder and director of Reprieve, and the author of Bad Men: Guantánamo Bay and the Secret Prisons and Injustice: Life and Death in the Courtrooms of America. Follow him on Twitter @CliveSSmith. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: The War State and Why The Vietnam War?, by Mike Swanson; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; EasyShip; Thc Hemp Spot; Green Mill Supercritical; Bug-A-Salt; Lorenzotti Coffee and Listen and Think Audio. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjYu5tZiG.

Parallax Views w/ J.G. Michael
Have Forever Wars Become Forever Policy? w/ Karen J. Greenberg

Parallax Views w/ J.G. Michael

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2021 40:11


On this edition of Parallax Views, has the post-911 Forever Wars created a slew of forever policies that'll live with us long after American military incursions in Afghanistan and Iraq are decades behind us? That's the case Karen J. Greenberg, of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law, joins us on this edition of Parallax Views to discuss that subject as outline in her recent TomDispatch piece "Will the Forever Wars Become Forever Policy?" and her new book Subtle Tools: The Dismantling of American Democracy from the War on Terror to Donald Trump. Karen argues that although we may be seeing some pivots in terms of policies put in place during the War on Terror, many of the policies of the Forever War years remain "on the table". In this conversation we discuss the Department of Homeland Security, managed counter-terrorism handled multilaterally, the War on Terror and the U.S. as "police men of the world", the Authorization for the Use of Military Force and the problem of its broadness, the opening of a Pandora's Box through AUMFs, the Presidency of George W. Bush and overreach of power, the college generation's relationship to the War on Terror and 9/11, U.S. torture programs and the unprecedented use of police powers in the post-9/11 world, domestic terror threats, whether or not the War on Terror has made us more safe and granted us a sense of security, the Guantanamo Bay pictures and their publication by the Pentagon, violations of norms and Constitutional principles during the War on Terror, militarization at home as well as abroad, climate change and globalization, and much, much more.

The FOX News Rundown
9/11 Terror Suspects on Trial Two Decades Later

The FOX News Rundown

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2021 29:24


After almost two decades since the September 11th attacks and a year-and-a-half pause due to the coronavirus pandemic, the pretrial hearing of suspected 9/11 architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four others accused of conspiring in the attacks, continued this week at Guantanamo Bay. Former assistant U.S. attorney and Fox News Contributor Andy McCarthy weighs in on why this trial has dragged on for all these years, the challenges this case faces, and with the upcoming 20th anniversary of September 11th, if we've learned anything from past terrorism cases and the War on Terror.   The biggest trial in France's modern history is underway, with the court looking to serve justice to the victims of the November 2015 terror attacks in Paris that left hundreds of French citizens dead or injured. Survivors and families of victims are looking to this trial for closure; meanwhile France will use this trial to investigate how national security failed to catch this attack carried out by ISIS. Fox News Senior Foreign Affairs Correspondent Amy Kellogg joins to discuss the immense significance of the trial in holding the Islamic State terrorists accountable for their attack, the security threat that this trial poses, why France has been a hotspot for terror attacks in the last few years and how families of the victims feel about getting closure through this trial.   Plus, commentary by former White House speechwriter and FOX News contributor Marc Thiessen.  

The Charlie Kirk Show
Trading Traitors for Taliban

The Charlie Kirk Show

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2021 36:59


Imagine the worst trade in professional sports history? Now take that trade and multiply it by 85 million, and then put it on steroids. Then maybe you'd begin to see how incredibly dumb a prisoner exchange orchestrated by then President Obama truly was when he negotiated the return of known deserter, Bowe Bergdahl, for the "Taliban Five," who were serving time in Guantanamo Bay indefinitely. Those five are now leading players in the new Taliban government that will be inaugurated on 9/11/2021 - the 20th Anniversary of the deadliest attack on the US mainland. In yet another stunning and humiliating surrender by the Biden Administration, put in motion years ago by Obama, we see how the left quite literally ruins everything it touches.  Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/support See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Apple News Today
Here's why the accused 9/11 planner is still awaiting trial

Apple News Today

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 8, 2021 7:31


Twenty years after 9/11, the accused mastermind behind the attacks is still awaiting trial at Guantanamo Bay. NBC News investigates why the process is taking so long. After the widespread protests against police brutality that followed George Floyd’s murder, leaders in law enforcement and city halls said police were demoralized and quitting in waves. The Marshall Project finds that labor data tells a very different story. Men are falling even further behind women in college enrollment. The Wall Street Journal looks at how colleges are dealing with this controversial issue. National Geographic reports on a new study that offers a ”treasure map” to an undiscovered planet that may be hiding in our solar system.

World News Tonight with David Muir
Full Episode: Tuesday, September 7, 2021

World News Tonight with David Muir

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 8, 2021 23:56


Child COVID cases increasing nationwide to its largest number since the beginning of the pandemic with a reported 252,000 new cases in just the last week. President Biden tours the hardest hit areas of New Jersey and New York City that were affected by the remnants of Hurricane Ida. Four Americans have been rescued from Afghanistan. The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks appearing in court in Guantanamo Bay. And Ethel Kennedy weighs in on the possible parole of her husband's killer.

The FOX News Rundown
Evening Edition: Pretrial For 9/11 Suspects Begins In Guantanamo Bay

The FOX News Rundown

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 7, 2021 7:08


Its been two decades but the trial for alleged mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and four others accused of conspiring in the attacks is set to resume. This comes after a year and a half delay caused by the coronavirus pandemic and a number of legal hurdles. FOX's John Saucier speaks to FOX's State Department Correspondent Rich Edson about the first day of pretrial for the suspects and the challenges faced in the case. 

Astra Report | WNTN 1550 AM | Grecian Echoes
Daily Global News - TUE SEP 7th - 9/11 trial and Covid

Astra Report | WNTN 1550 AM | Grecian Echoes

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 7, 2021 11:33


Listen to the Daily Global #News from Grecian Echoes and WNTN 1550 AM.  Pretrial hearings in the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has been accused of being the lead plotter behind the September 11 attacks, and four other detainees at Guantanamo Bay are set to resume today.  Covid-19 cases have been on the rise in much of the US, and the seven-day average of new cases yesterday was more than 300% higher than Labor Day of last year, Johns Hopkins University data shows.  A Guinean military officer broadcast a statement on Sunday announcing that Guinea's constitution has been dissolved in an apparent coup.

Start Here
The Unemployment “Benefits Cliff”

Start Here

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 7, 2021 26:43


Key federal unemployment programs, created for the pandemic, come to an end. New Orleans residents are shipped off to other cities as power outages grow dangerous. And families of 9/11 victims and survivors head to Guantanamo Bay for the trial of the attacks' alleged architect.

SBS World News Radio
US finally tries alleged mastermind of 2002 deadly Bali bombings

SBS World News Radio

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 1, 2021 4:27


18 years after his arrest, Hambali and two accomplices have finally appeared in court in the US military facility at Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba.

KFI Featured Segments
@GaryAndShannon - Gil Barndollar

KFI Featured Segments

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 27, 2021 6:36


Defense Priorities Senior Fellow, Gil Barndollar, discusses the recent attacks in Kabul, Afghanistan. Barndollar has be deployed to Afghanistan twice as well as Guantanamo Bay and the Persian Gulf.

Stand Up! with Pete Dominick
Spencer Ackerman and Christian Finnegan Episode 417

Stand Up! with Pete Dominick

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 20, 2021 61:26


Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every week day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of almost 800 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous soul. sign up now and join us every Thursday night for a virtual happy hour. Now on to today's show notes For nearly the entire War on Terror, Spencer Ackerman has been a national-security correspondent for outlets like The New Republic, WIRED, The Guardian and currently The Daily Beast. He has reported from the frontlines of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay. He shared in the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service Journalism for Edward Snowden's NSA leaks to The Guardian, a series of stories that also yielded him other awards, including the Scripps Howard Foundation's 2014 Roy W. Howard Award for Public Service Reporting and the 2013 IRE medal for investigative reporting. Ackerman's WIRED series on Islamophobic counterterrorism training at the FBI won the 2012 online National Magazine Award for reporting. He frequently appears on MSNBC, CNN, and other news networks. We talked about his very important new book Reign of Terror: How the 9/11 Era Destabilized America and Produced Trump Also subscribe to Spencer's Substack foreverwars.substack.com Christian Finnegan  is an American stand-up comedian, writer and actor based in New York City. Finnegan is perhaps best known as one of the original panelists on VH1's Best Week Ever and as Chad, the only white roommate in the “Mad Real World” sketch on Comedy Central's Chappelle's Show. Additional television appearances as himself or performing stand up have included “Conan”, “The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson”, "Would You Rather...with Graham Norton", “Good Afternoon America” and multiple times on The Today Show and Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and on History's I Love the 1880s. He hosted TV Land's game show "Game Time". As an actor, Finnegan portrayed the supporting role of "Carl" in the film Eden Court, a ticket agent in "Knight and Day" and several guest roles including a talk show host on "The Good Wife". In October 2006, Finnegan's debut stand up comedy CD titled Two For Flinching was released by Comedy Central Records, with a follow-up national tour of college campuses from January to April 2007. “Au Contraire!” was released by Warner Bros. Records in 2009. His third special "The Fun Part" was filmed at the Wilbur Theatre in Boston on April 4, 2013 and debuted on Netflix on April 15, 2014. Check out all things Jon Carroll Follow and Support Pete Coe Pete on YouTube Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page

SDPB News
SD National Guard Unit To Deploy To Guantanamo Bay For One Year | Aug 6 Podcast

SDPB News

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 6, 2021 12:39


The South Dakota National Guard is deploying to Guantanamo Bay for the first time since the detention camp opened in 2002. Plus, Governor Kristi Noem says the Board of Regents has approved a draft policy restricting the teaching of critical race theory in the state's universities. The policy encourages exposing students to a variety of viewpoints, but never mentions critical race theory. The governing body of the state's public universities adopted a statement called “Opportunity For All.” All this and more in today's SDPB News Podcast. Find it on Apple Podcasts or Spotify today.

AmiTuckeredOut
Ending Mass Incarceration with Premal Dharia

AmiTuckeredOut

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 5, 2021 45:07


Premal Dharia is the Executive Director of the Institute to End Mass Incarceration at Harvard Law School. She has spent the last twenty years dedicated to challenging injustice in the criminal system.Ms. Dharia spent nearly 15 years as a public defender in three different places: the Public Defender Service in Washington, D.C., the Office of the Federal Public Defender in Baltimore, Maryland, and the military commission at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. She has tried dozens of cases and supervised lawyers at various levels of practice.In 2014, Ms. Dharia was selected for a three-month fellowship to help build out and train three new public defender offices in Palestine. After years in the field of public defense, she brought her years of direct service and substantial expertise to systemic work at Civil Rights Corps, where she was the Director of Litigation.In 2019, Ms. Dharia, started building a new organization to incorporate public defender advocacy into the broader push for systemic change to the criminal legal system. She was a Criminal Justice Fellow at the Reflective Democracy Campaign, a project of the Women Donors Network, which supported the launch of that organization, the Defender Impact Initiative (DII), and Dharia's investigation into the intersection of reflective democracy and the criminal system.Through DII, Ms. Dharia worked to reimagine the role of public defenders as systemic change agents, engaging community organizers, advocates and attorneys in the process.https://endmassincarceration.org/https://inquest.org/ 

Top of Mind with Julie Rose
Guantanamo, Athletes' Mental Health, Princesses

Top of Mind with Julie Rose

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 3, 2021 103:24


Now that American troops are leaving Iraq and Afghanistan, should the detention center at Guantanamo Bay close? Then, The mental health of athletes is a hot topic after Simone Biles withdrew from the majority of the gymnastics events at the Tokyo Olympics. Plus, girls and boys actually internalize healthy ideas from Moana, Elsa, and other Disney Princesses. Also, on today's show: how caffeine helps bumblebees focus on a very particular job; lead pollution could have poisoned some people's personalities; the new trend of female pop stars baring their bodies and their souls. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)

The Lawfare Podcast
A Guantanamo Update with Latif Nasser and Steve Vladeck

The Lawfare Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 23, 2021 50:40


It's been a busy couple of weeks at Guantanamo Bay, a place that has not had a busy couple of weeks in a while. There was a transfer, there was a resumption of military commissions, and the chief prosecutor of military commissions resigned abruptly.To go over these events, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Steve Vladeck, a Lawfare contributing editor and a professor at the University of Texas, and Latif Nasser, a co-host of the show Radiolab from New York Public Radio, where he did an extended series about a Guantanamo Bay detainee, who just happens to be the one who was transferred this week. They talked about who the transferee was and why he was held so long, about the resumption of military commissions and why they are stagnated even when resumed, about the resignation of General Martins, and about the DC Circuit's latest forays into Guantanamo Bay.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

PBS NewsHour - Segments
As Biden releases first Guantanamo detainee, could the camp's closure be far behind?

PBS NewsHour - Segments

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 19, 2021 5:42


The Biden administration released its first detainee from the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba on Monday. Abdul Latif Nasser was never charged with a crime, yet remained detained for 19 years. Nearly 800 prisoners have passed through Guantanamo since early 2002. Now, 39 remain. Thomas Durkin, Nasser's lawyer, joins Amna Nawaz to discuss his release and the camp's future. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Skullduggery
Guantanamo debacle continues (with Carol Rosenberg and Jeh Johnson)

Skullduggery

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 19, 2021 56:27


It has been just about twenty years since the opening of Guantanamo Bay and we are no closer today than we were back then to resolving what will go down in history as one of the biggest debacles in American history. After the recent news that Chief Guantánamo Prosecutor Gen. Mark Martins announced his surprise retirement, what will be the next steps in relieving the stalemate preventing things from moving forward? The families of those lost in the horrific attacks on 9/11 are sitting on what is now two decades worth of frustration with no end in sight. Carol Rosenberg, reporter for The New York Times, who's been covering Guantanamo since the beginning joins to put forth her solution. Then, Former United States Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, weighs in on the matter in addition to the withdrawing of US Troops in Afghanistan.GUESTS:Carol Rosenberg (@carolrosenberg), covers Guantánamo Bay, the base, policy, prison, people and war court for The New York TimesJeh Johnson, Former United States Secretary of Homeland SecurityHOSTS:Michael Isikoff (@Isikoff), Chief Investigative Correspondent, Yahoo NewsDaniel Klaidman (@dklaidman), Editor in Chief, Yahoo NewsVictoria Bassetti (@VBass), fellow, Brennan Center for Justice (contributing co-host) RESOURCES:Rosenberg latest article on Guantanamo - Here. Follow us on Twitter: @SkullduggeryPodListen and subscribe to "Skullduggery" on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.Email us with feedback, questions or tips: SkullduggeryPod@yahoo.com. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

All In with Chris Hayes
Senate Republicans block voting rights expansion

All In with Chris Hayes

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 23, 2021 45:14


Tonight: An expansion of voting rights in America is blocked in the Senate. Then, the growing outrage on the left over the Sen. Sinema filibuster defense. And as we learn about Donald Trump's idea to send Covid patients to Guantanamo Bay, Dr. Anthony Fauci joins us to discuss today's big concession on vaccinations by the White House. Guests: Rep. James Clyburn, Sherrilyn Ifill, Michelle Goldberg, Heather McGhee, Dr. Anthony Fauci

The Daily Zeitgeist
NCAA Owned, GOP Blames Poors For Chipotle Complaints 6.22.21

The Daily Zeitgeist

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 22, 2021 73:53


In episode 935, Jack and Miles are joined by The Limit Does Not Exist's Cate Scott Campbell to discuss the Supreme Court ruling against the NCAA, the new covid delta variant, Trump wanting to send infected people to Guantanamo Bay, the countries drought, a Federalist essay on Chipotle, and more! FOOTNOTES: Supreme Court rules against NCAA in landmark antitrust case With Vaccination Goal in Doubt, Biden Warns of Variant's Threat Trump discussed sending infected Americans to Guantanamo Bay: book ‘Mega-heat wave' is peaking in the West, breaking records and intensifying drought, fires A California reservoir is expected to fall so low that a hydro-power plant will shut down for first time 'There's no water,' says California farm manager forced to leave fields fallow My Chipotle Bowl Just Got More Expensive, And It's The Federal Government's Fault LISTEN NOW: CANCREJO - JESUS CRISTO'S PLAN Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

The MeidasTouch Podcast
Activism in the Post-Trump Era with Amy Siskind

The MeidasTouch Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 22, 2021 72:31


On today's episode of The MeidasTouch Podcast, the brothers sit down with activist, feminist, author and host of The Weekly List podcast, Amy Siskind. During the interview, Amy discusses her journey from Wall Street Executive to one of the most renowned activists in politics today. We discuss a myriad of topics from GOP voter suppression bills, to how we can hold our own accountable without sounding defeatist and dissect the role of activism in the post-Trump era. Amy also takes us through her experiences covering the Trump presidency and how frightened she truly was for democracy. The brothers then discuss some big Biden wins, our special Father's Day tribute video that made headlines across the world and of course the recent news about Trump suggesting that we should put COVID-positive Americans in Guantanamo Bay (seriously). Make sure you tune in every Tuesday & Friday for NEW episodes of the podcast and if you have a moment today please be sure to rate and review this episode! Thank you! Get your new Meidas Merch only at store.meidastouch.com! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/meidastouch/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/meidastouch/support