Podcasts about joint declaration

Hello Youtube Members, Patreons and Pacific War week by week listeners. Yes this was intended to be an exclusive episode to join the 29 others over on my Youtube Membership and Patreon, but since we are drawing to the end of the Pacific War week by week series, I felt compelled to make some special episodes to answer some of the bigger questions. Why did Japan, or better said, why did Emperor Hirohito decide to finally surrender? It seems obvious on the face of it, but there is actually a lot more to it than bombs or Soviet invasions. I guess you can call this episode a teaser or a shameless plug for going over to my Youtube Membership or Patreon. There's honestly a lot of interesting subjects such as ‘why was the japanese army so brutal”, “Hirohito's war time responsibility”, “the 4 part Kanji Ishiwara series”. Thus if you liked this one please show some love and check out my other stuff on my Youtube Membership or over at www.patreon.com/pacificwarchannel.   Stating all of that lets just jump right into it.   We first need to start off briefly looking at Emperor Hirohito.    Upon taking the throne, Emperor Hirohito in 1926 Hirohito inherited a financial crisis and a military that was increasingly seizing control of governmental policies. From the beginning, despite what many of you older audience members may have been told, Hirohito intensely followed all military decisions. Hirohito chose when to act and when not to. When the Kwantung Army assassinated Zhang Zuolin, he indulged their insubordination. This emboldened them to invade Manchuria in 1931, whereupon Hirohito was furious and demanded they be reigned in. Attempts were made, but they were heavily undermined by radicals. Hirohito could have put his foot down, but he chose not to. On September 22nd, at 4:20pm Hirohito said to the IJA Chief of General staff, Kanaya Hanzo “although this time it couldn't be helped, the army had to be more careful in the future”. Thus Hirohito again acquiesced to the military, despite wanting them to stop or at least localize the conflict. The military had disregarded his wishes, they should have been severely punished. Why did Hirohito not take a firmer stance?    Again for older audience members you may have heard, “hirohito was a hostage at the whim of his own military”. This narrative made it seem he was some sort of hostage emperor, but this is not the case at all. In fact Hirohito was instrumental in many military decisions from 1931-1945. The reason this, I will call it “myth” , went on was because after Japan's surrender, the US basically rewrote the Japanese constitution and covered up the Emperor's involvement in all the nasty stuff, to maintain control over Japan. Yeah it sounds a bit conspiracy esque, but I assure you it was indeed the case. This narrative held firm all the way until Hirohito's death, when finally meeting notes and personal accounts from those close to him came out, illuminating a lot. Though to this day, many records are still red -tapped.   The reason Hirohito did not stamp his foot down has to do with the Kokutai.    The Kokutai   So before I carry on, I have to explain what exactly is the Kokutai.    The Kokutai, loosely translated as "national essence," refers to the qualities that distinguish the Japanese identity. However, this concept is remarkably vague and poorly defined; even Japanese historians acknowledge this ambiguity. In contrast to Kokutai is seitai, or "form of government." While the Kokutai embodies the eternal and immutable aspects of Japanese polity—rooted in history, traditions, and customs centered around the Emperor—Japan's seitai has evolved significantly throughout its extensive history. For instance, shoguns governed for over 700 years until 1868, when the Meiji Restoration reinstated direct imperial rule.   Nevertheless, Emperor Meiji's direct authority came to an end with the adoption of the Meiji Constitution in 1889, which established a constitutional monarchy, introducing significant complexities into the governance system.   Article 4 of the constitution declares: “The Emperor is the head of the Empire, combining in Himself the rights of sovereignty, uniting the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, although subject to the consent of the Imperial Diet.” Under this framework, the Emperor alone possessed the power to appoint or dismiss ministers of state, declare war, negotiate peace, conclude treaties, direct national administration, and command the army and navy.   A glaring flaw in this arrangement is the inherent ambiguity of the Meiji Constitution. While it established a democratic parliament, it simultaneously afforded the Emperor absolute authority to usurp it. The document failed to clearly define the relationships between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and its language was intentionally vague. Most critically, the military—the army and navy—were not directly accountable to the civilian government.    So with the kokutai, the Emperor is a divine figure who embodies the state's sovereignty. It was not necessarily the Emperor's job to surrender on behalf of the official government of Japan, but he most certainly could do so, given the Japanese people still remained faithful to the kokutai.    Now Hirohito did not live an ordinary life. According to the imperial custom, Japanese royals were raised apart from their parents, at the age of 3 he was placed in the care of the Kwamura family who vowed to raise him to be unselfish, persevering in the face of difficulties, respectful of the views of others and immune to fear. One thing that was absolutely indoctrinated into him was to defend the kokutai. It became his top mission as a monarch, it was the only mission in many ways. At the very core of how he saw the world and how he acted, it was always to protect the kokutai.    So when the Japanese military began these insubordinate acts, Hirohito's primary concern was to the kokutai, ie: anything that threatened his imperial authority and the imperial institution itself. Although the military usurped his authority, the operations had been successful. Hirohito was not at all opposed to seeing his empire expand. He understood the value of manchuria, he was fully onboard with the military plans to eventually seize control over it, but these radicals were accelerating things to quickly for everyone's liking. He turned a blind eye, dished light punishments and carried on. However the local conflict escalated. It traveled to Shanghai by 1932 and here Hirohito took action. He understood Shanghai was full of western powers. Nations like Britain and America could place economic sanctions on Japan if things were allowed to get out of hand here. So he ordered General Yoshinori Shirakawa to bring the Shanghai expedition to a close.    During this period, two factions emerged within the Japanese military: the Kodoha, or “Imperial Way,” and the Toseiha, or “Control” faction. The Kodoha was founded by General Sadao Araki and his protégé, Jinzaburo Masaki. Their primary objective was a Shōwa Restoration aimed at purging Japan of corrupt politicians and businessmen, especially those associated with the zaibatsu. Composed mainly of young army officers, the Kodoha espoused a romanticized and radical interpretation of Bushido, idealizing pre-industrial Japan, which Araki believed had been tainted by Western influences. To achieve their goals, they resorted to assassinations and planned a coup d'état.   In response, the Toseiha faction was formed, initially led by Lt. General Tetsuzan Nagata and later by Hideki Tojo. Like the Kodoha, the Toseiha sought a Shōwa Restoration but adopted a more moderate and conservative approach. They recognized the importance of preserving traditional values while integrating Western ideals, advocating for a balanced perspective. The Toseiha promoted pragmatic military strategies to navigate the complexities of modern warfare. Although they acknowledged the existence of corrupt politicians and zaibatsu, they preferred to work within the existing political system, anticipating that future total wars would necessitate a strengthened industrial and military capacity. Their ranks primarily included promising graduates from the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) Academy, Army Staff College, and select naval members. The most significant distinction between the two factions was that the Toseiha explicitly rejected the use of a coup d'état in pursuit of their goals.   Between 1932-1936 radical officers, mostly of the Kodoha faction assassinated politicians and military leaders trying to usher in a showa restoration. You might be led to believe this was in the interest of Hirohito, you would be mistaken. Hirohito did not want a military dictatorship at the whim of the cult of the emperor. Ironic to say, given how WW2 turns out mind you. This really would have been a hostage situation. Hirohito wanted to maintain the exact ambiguous situation that was Showa Era Japan pre 1945. He saw this as the most ideal structure to defend the kokutai, because blame could not be placed solely upon his shoulders. He always maintained a get out of jail free card one could say.    The February 26 incident of 1936, was the climax of the Kodoha faction. They performed a mutiny trying to usher in a SHowa restoration. They assumed when their messenger came to the emperor he would join them and take direct rule. Instead Hirohito was furious. His first thought was the mutineers were trying to enlist his brother Chichibu to overthrow him. He dragged his brother who was a fraternizer amongst the kodoha members mind you, into a meeting, demanding he never associate with them again nor attempt to challenge him. Then Hirohito furious demanded the mutineers be dealt with. At one point he even threatened to lead the imperial guards to put them down. The coup failed, the kodoha faction was destroyed. Ironically the toseiha faction were the ones to do it and thus they became the defacto ruling clique.    The military, especially the kwantung army did not stop with their insubordination.    On July 8th of 1937 the Kwangtung army performed the Marco Polo Bridge incident, ushering in the second sino-japanese war. This was one of many false flag operations they had pulled off over the years. Upon being told about this Hirohito's first response was whether the USSR would invade Manchukuo over the matter. This is what he said to Prime Minister Konoe and army minister Sugiyama “What will you do if the Soviets attack us from the rear?” he asked the prince. Kan'in answered, “I believe the army will rise to the occasion.” The emperor repeated his question: “That's no more than army dogma. What will you actually do in the unlikely event that Soviet [forces] attack?” The prince said only, “We will have no choice.” His Majesty seemed very dissatisfied. Hirohito furious demanded to know what contingency plans existed and his advisors told him before he gave his red seal of approval to invade northern china.   Henceforth he micromanaged a lot of the military decisions going forward and he oversaw the forming and dissolving of numerous cabinets and positions when things went his way or did not in the military and political scene.  Emperor Hirohito was presented with several opportunities to cause cease-fires or peace settlements during the war years. One of the best possible moments to end it all came during the attack on Nanking when Chiang Kai-sheks military were in disarray. On July 11 of 1938, the commander of the 19th division fought a border clash with the USSR known to us in the west as the battle of Lake Khasan. It was a costly defeat for Japan and in the diary of Harada Kumao he noted Hirohito scolded Army minister Itagaki “Hereafter not a single soldier is to be moved without my permission.” When it looked like the USSR would not press for a counter attack across the border, Hirohito gave the order for offensives in China to recommence, again an example of him deciding when to lay down the hammer.   By 1939 the US began threatening sanctions for what Japan was doing in China. Hirohito complained to his chief aide de camp Hata Shunroku on August 5th “It could be a great blow to scrap metal and oil”. Hirohito was livid and scolded many of his top officials and forced the appointment of General Abe to prime minister and demanded of him “to cooperate with the US and Britain and preserve internal order”.   Fast forward a bit, with war raging in Europe Hirohito, on June 19th of 1940 Hirohito asked if chief of staff Prince Kan'in and Army Minister Hata “At a time when peace will soon come in the European situation, will there be a deployment of troops to the Netherlands Indies and French Indochina?” This question highlighted Hirohito's belief at that time that Germany was close to achieving victory, which led him to gradually consider deploying troops to French Indochina and the Dutch East Indies since neither of those parent nations was in a position to protect their territories and vital resources. Regarding the war in China, the Japanese aimed to stop the flow of materials entering China from places like Hong Kong. Hirohito received reports indicating that Britain would not agree to block the shipment of materials into China via Hong Kong. The military recognized that an invasion of Hong Kong might be necessary, which would mean declaring war on Britain. When this was communicated to him, Hirohito responded, “If that occurs, I'm sure America will enforce an embargo, don't you think?” In response, Kido, the lord of the privy seal, reassured him by stating, “The nation must be fully prepared to resist, proceeding with caution and avoiding being drawn into events instigated by foreign interests.”   Hirohito went through countless meetings, but eventually signed order number 458 authorizing the invasion of French Indochina, knowing full well the consequences. The US,UK and Netherlands began embargoes of oil, rubber and iron. In the words of Admiral Takagai “As time passes and this situation continues, our empire will either be totally defeated or forced to fight a hopeless war. Therefore we should pursue war and diplomacy together. If there is no prospect of securing our final line of national survival by diplomatic negotiations, we must be resolved to fight.” Hirohito understood the predicament full well, that each day Japan was wasting its oil reserves, if they were to strike it had to be quickly.   On October 13th Hirohito told his closest advisor Koichi Kido “In the present situation there seems to be little hope for the Japan–U.S. negotiations. If hostilities erupt this time, I think I may have to issue a declaration of war.”   The reason I am bringing up all this stuff is to solidify, Hirohito had agency, he was micromanaging and forming decisions. After the war broke out with the west, Hirohito did have the ability to stamp his foot down. Of course there could have been wild repercussions, his military could have usurped him with Chichibu, it was definitely possible. But you need to keep this mind set, as far as why Hirohito acts or doesn't, its always to protect the Kokutai. Thus one of the levers for peace, solely rested on Hirohito's perception if the kokutai could be retained or not.    From the outset of the Pacific War, Hirohito believed Germany was going to defeat the USSR. In line with his military leaders, they all believed Japan had to seize everything they could in the asia-pacific and thwart off the US until a negotiated peace could be met. Hirohito committed himself to overseeing the war, determined to achieve victory at any cost. He was a very cautious leader, he meticulously analyzed each campaign, anticipating potential setbacks and crafting worst-case scenario predictions. He maintained a skeptical view of the reports from his senior officials and was often harshly critical of high commanders.   While he did not frequently visit the front lines like other commanders in chief, Hirohito wielded significant influence over theater operations, shaping both planning and execution whenever he deemed necessary. Similar to his approach during the war in China, he issued the highest military orders from the Imperial Headquarters, conducted audited conferences, and made decisions communicated under his name. He regularly welcomed generals and admirals to the imperial palace for detailed briefings on the battlefront and visited various military bases, battleships, and army and naval headquarters. His inspections encompassed military schools and other significant military institutions, adding to his comprehensive involvement in the war effort.   Now the war went extremely well for Japan until the battle of Midway. This was as major setback, but Japan retained the initiative. Then the Guadalcanal campaign saw Japan lose the initiative to the Americans. Upon receiving the initial report of the Ichiki detachment's destruction, Hirohito remarked, “I am sure it [Guadalcanal] can be held.” Despite the numerous reports detailing the devastating effects of tropical diseases and starvation on his troops, he persistently demanded greater efforts from them. Hirohito exerted continuous pressure on his naval and land commanders to retake the island. On September 15th, November 5th, and November 11th, he requested additional Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) troops and aircraft to be allocated to the cause.   General Sugiyama expressed concerns about dispatching more IJA pilots due to their inexperience in transoceanic combat, preferring to reinforce the North China Army for an attack on Chongqing instead. Hirohito pressed the issue again, but Sugiyama responded that the IJA had diverted its air resources to New Guinea and Rabaul. Undeterred by the objections from senior commanders, Hirohito persisted in his demands. By late November, it became evident that Guadalcanal was a lost cause.   At an Imperial Headquarters conference on December 31st, 1942, the chiefs of staff proposed canceling the attempts to recapture Guadalcanal. Hirohito sanctioned this decision but stated, “It is unacceptable to just give up on capturing Guadalcanal. We must launch an offensive elsewhere.” He insisted on this point, leading to the selection of new strategic targets in the Solomons, north of New Georgia, and in the Stanley Range on New Guinea. Hirohito even threatened to withhold authorization for withdrawing troops from Guadalcanal until a new plan was established. He later opposed the withdrawal from Munda Airfield, as it contradicted the newly defined defensive line.   As the defensive perimeter in the central and northern Solomons began to crumble, Hirohito continued to insist that the navy engage in decisive battles to regain the initiative, allowing for the transport of supplies to the many soldiers trapped on various islands. When he learned of the navy's failure to reinforce Lae on March 3rd, he asked, “Then why didn't you change plans immediately and land at Madan? This is a failure, but it can teach us a good lesson and become a source of future success. Do this for me so I can have peace of mind for a while.” The phrase “Do this for me” would come to be his signature rallying cry.   After Guadal canal, it was loss after loss for Japan. By February of 1944, Hirohito forced Sugiyama to resign so Hideki Tojo could take his position as chief of the general staff, note Tojo was prime minister and army minister at this point. Hirohito worked alongside Tojo to plan some last ditch efforts to change the war situation. The most significant one was Operation Ichi-Go. As much damage as they did to China with that, Chiang Kai-Shek's government survived. Hirohito watched as island by island fell to the Americans. When the Americans were poised to take Saipan he warned Tojo “If we ever lose Saipan, repeated air attacks on Tokyo will follow. No matter what it takes, we have to hold there.” Saipan fell, so Hirohito stopped supporting Tojo and allowed his rivals to take down his cabinet by june 18th of 1944.    Hirohito remained resolute in his determination to wrest victory from the Allies. On October 18th, the Imperial Headquarters ordered a decisive naval engagement, leading to the Battle of Leyte Gulf. After the war, Hirohito publicly stated, "Contrary to the views of the Army and Navy General Staffs, I consented to the showdown battle at Leyte, believing that if we launched an attack and America hesitated, we might find an opportunity to negotiate." Leyte Gulf didnt work. The military began the kamikaze program. On new years day of 1945 Hirohito inspected the special last meal rations given to departing kamikaze units. Iwo Jima fell. Okinawa remained, and Hirohito lashed out “Is it because we failed to sink enemy transports that we've let the enemy get ashore? Isn't there any way to defend Okinawa from the landing enemy forces?” On the second day of Okinawa's invasion Hirohito ordered a counter landing by the 32nd army and urged the navy to counterattack in every way possible. It was a horrible failure, it cost the lives of up to 120,000 Japanese combatants, 170,000 noncombatants. The Americans lost 12,500 killed and 33,000 wounded. An absolute bloodbath.    The Surrender time   Now we come to the time period where Japan seriously began looking for ways to surrender. In Europe Germany was heading to its defeat and Japan knew this. As for Japan, their army in Burma had been annihilated. Their forces in China were faring better after Operation Ichi-go, having opened up a land corridor along the main railway from Beiping to Wuhan and from throughout Guangdong but still stuck in a deadlock stalemate, facing a guerrilla war that was costing them 64% of their military expenditures. They deeply feared once the Soviets finished up with Germany, they would undoubtedly turn east against Manchuria. With the Soviets attacking from the north, the US would attack from the south, perhaps landing in Shanghai and the home islands. The Kamikaze tactics were proving formidable, but not nearly enough. By 1945, 43% of the IJA were now stationed in Japan, Korea and Formosa, bracing for the final stand. Former prime minister Reijiro Wakatsuki came out of retirement in may of 1945, having heard Germany collapsed, to urge Hirohito and the Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki to open negotiations with the US as soon as possible. However he also said “the enemy must first be made to see the disadvantages of continuing the war”. To this Hirohito's chief counselor Makino Nobuaki said that “the ultimate priority is to develop an advantageous war situation.” Advisor admiral Kesiuke Okada said Japan should wait for “a moment favorable for us,” then make peace. Advisors Kiichiro Hiranuma and Koki Hirota advised the emperor to fight on until the end.   Now I want to bring in a key player to the surrender decision, that of Prince Konoe. Konoe was very close to Hirohito and understood the emperors mentality, especially how he viewed things in relation to the kokutai.    The senior statesman Prince Konoe had been consulting with Hirohito for over 18 months at this point trying to convey the message that if the war continued it would threaten the kokutai. Many months prior, he confided in the emperor's brother, Prince Takamatsu, that the army was suffering from “a cancer” in the form of the Toseiha faction. However, he noted that “Kido and others” did not share his perspective, while “his Majesty is relatively unconcerned with ideological issues.” For the past four years, he continued, the emperor had been advised and still believed that “the true extremists are the Kodoha faction.” In reality, the greater threat to the kokutai arose from the Toseiha faction. Konoe further asserted that if the war escalated, they would attempt to alter the kokutai.   Konoe speculated that whether the threat originated from communists within the nation, primarily referring to left-wing radicals in the Toseiha faction, or from the “Anglo-American enemy,” both would seek to preserve the emperor while pushing towards the country's communization.In his written report to the emperor on February 14, which Kido listened to attentively, Konoe elaborated on his conspiracy theory. He asserted that the Soviet Union regarded Japan as its primary threat in East Asia. The Soviets had allied with the Chinese Communists, the largest and most formidable Communist party in Asia, and were collaborating with the United States and Britain to drive Japan out of China. He warned that they would enter the war when the opportunity arose.   Defeat, he cautioned the emperor, was inevitable if the conflict persisted. However, he emphasized that a far greater fear was the potential destruction of the kokutai. The ongoing war was eroding the domestic status quo, unleashing forces that threatened Japan and its imperial institution from within as much as from external adversaries. The real danger lay in the emperor's and Kido's trust in the generals of the Toseiha faction, who were unintentionally facilitating the communization of Japan. Konoe implored for a swift peace settlement before a Communist revolution emerged, making the preservation of the kokutai impossible. Hirohito agreed with Konoe but stated “ To end the war would be “very difficult unless we make one more military gain.” Konoe allegedly replied, “Is that possible? It must happen soon. If we have to wait much longer, . . . [a mere battle victory] will mean nothing.” Hirohito replied “If we hold out long enough in this war, we may be able to win, but what worries me is whether the nation will be able to endure it until then.”   On February 15th of 1945, Hirohito's intelligence warned the Soviet Union would likely abrogate its Neutrality Pact with Japan. Even Tojo conceded there was a 50/50 chance the USSR would invade Manchuria. In March, the US began B-29 incendiary bombing raids over Tokyo, turning 40% of the capital into ash. On March 18th, Hirohito with some aides drove around the capital to witness the devastation. The civilians looked exhausted and bewildered to Hirohito. Factory production was collapsing, absenteeism was rising, instances of lese majeste were running rampant. For the next 5 months imperial family members and senior statesmen all began speaking to Hirohito about the “crises of the kokutai”. The threat Konoe had warned about for months was becoming the main talking point. It seemed like the Japanese people within the countryside and urban areas remained steadfast in the resolve to obey their leaders, work and sacrifice for their nation, but for how long would they feel so?    It was only after the battle for Okinawa was lost and 60 Japanese cities had been leveled by American incendiary bombs that Hirohito openly indicated he wanted to negotiate a surrender.   Kido's diary reveals the first clear indication that the emperor might be urged to consider an early peace on June 8, 1945, when Kido drafted his “Draft Plan for Controlling the Crisis Situation.” This marked a pivotal moment. It followed the unintentional bombing of the Imperial Palace, the complete loss of hope for saving Okinawa, and coincided with the day the Supreme War Leadership Council adopted the “Basic Policy for the Future Direction of the War.” With the fighting in Europe concluded, Japan found itself entirely isolated. Kido's plan, although vague, proposed seeking the Soviet Union's assistance as an intermediary to help Japan gain leverage in negotiations with its adversaries. By drafting this plan, Kido signaled the end of his long alliance with the military hard-liners. Hirohito's acceptance of it indicated his readiness for an early peace.   Hirohito was moved to an underground bunker in the mountains of Matsushiro in Nagano prefecture where upon those around him noted he fell into a deep depression. On June 22nd  Hirohito informed the Supreme War Leadership Council he wanted them to open diplomatic maneuvers to end the war. In early July Soviet Ambassador Jacob Malik broke off inconclusive talks with Hirota. Hirohito stepped in immediately and ordered a new special envoy be sent to Moscow. However Hirohito nor the Suzuki government had concrete plans on how to mediate a surrender through the Soviets. The only things they did prioritize was a guarantee of the emperors political position and retainment of the imperial system, ie the kokutai. This was taken into consideration rather than ending the war as quickly as possible to save the lives of millions.    From April 8, 1945, until Japan's capitulation, the Suzuki government's chief war policy was “Ketsugo,” an advanced iteration of the “Shosango” (Victory Number 3) plan for defending the homeland. The hallmark of this strategy was a heavy reliance on suicide tactics, including deploying a massive number of kamikaze “special attack” planes, human torpedoes launched from submarines, dynamite-stuffed “crash boats” powered by truck engines, human rocket bombs carried by aircraft, and suicide assaults by specially trained ground units.   While preparations for Operation Ketsu progressed, the Imperial Diet convened on June 9 to pass a Wartime Emergency Measures Law, along with five additional measures aimed at mobilizing the entire nation for this final battle. On the same day, the emperor, who had yet to initiate efforts to end the war, issued another imperial rescript in conjunction with the Diet's convocation, instructing the nation to “smash the inordinate ambitions of the enemy nations” and “achieve the goals of the war.” Concurrently, the controlled press launched a daily die-for-the-emperor campaign to foster gratitude for the imperial benevolence and, from around mid-July onward, initiated a campaign to “protect the kokutai.”   The Americans countered with their own propaganda aimed at breaking Japan's will to fight. B-29 bombers dropped millions of leaflets written in Japanese, announcing the next scheduled targets for bombing raids and urging surrender, while using the emperor to challenge the militarists. Leaflets bearing the chrysanthemum crest criticized the “military cliques” for “forcing the entire nation to commit suicide” and called on “everyone” to “exercise their constitutional right to make direct appeals [for peace] to the Emperor.” They asserted that “even the powerful military cliques cannot stop the mighty march for peace of the Emperor and the people.” One notable batch of seven million leaflets conveyed the terms of the “joint declaration” issued by the United States, Great Britain, and China. “Today we come not to bomb you,” they stated. “We are dropping this leaflet to inform you of the response from the United States government to your government's request for conditions of surrender.... Whether the war stops immediately depends on your government. You will understand how to end the war if you read these two official notifications.”   Amid pressures from imperial edicts to continue preparations for a final battle and focus solely on victory, the Japanese people were also subjected to an intense American psychological warfare campaign in addition to aerial bombardment. During late July and August, prefectural governors, police chiefs, and officers of the “special higher police” submitted reports to the Home Ministry detailing the rapidly deteriorating national morale.    Now on the other side, Roosevelt made it known back in January of 1943 at the Casablanca conference, the allies would only accept unconditional surrender. By 1945, the allies understood the predicament this left Japan with. On May 8th of 1945, Truman added “Japan's surrender would not mean the extermination or enslavement of the Japanese people” trying to indicate a non vindictive spirit. However the Kokutai question always remained ambiguous. State Department Joseph Grew, the former ambassador to Japan, began arguing to Truman they needed to make public a clear definition of the terms to persuade Japan to surrender. As he argued to Truman: Emperor Hirohito was seen as the key figure in Japan's surrender, likened to a "queen bee in a hive... surrounded by the attentions of the hive." Throughout the war, he was characterized in various ways—as a “puppet” of the militarists, a constitutional monarch, and a pacifist. Grew had immense faith in the influence exerted by what he referred to as the “moderates” surrounding the Japanese throne.    However many of Grew's colleagues argued the future existence of the monarchy was intolerable as it was akin to fascism. Many wanted to punish the emperor. Truman was in a tug of war. The Potsdam declaration issued on July 26th of 1945 came in the form of a ultimatum aiming to quicken japans surrender. Truman clarified the terms for the unconditional surrender at the end of its terms: "We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction." Zero mention of the emperor. Grew had argued to add “this may include a constitutional monarchy under the present dynasty.” But it was deleted from the article. The status of the emperor was not guaranteed, the kokutai was thus up in the air.    The next day, the Suzuki cabinet rejected the terms. The Japanese leadership and Hirohito were still banking and awaiting Soviet replies to their terms.    Lets talk about the Soviet talks now   Back on July 12th ambassador Naotake Satō sent this message to the Soviets: “His Majesty the Emperor, mindful of the fact that the present war daily brings greater evil and sacrifice upon the peoples of all the belligerent powers, desires from his heart that it may be quickly terminated. But so long as England and the United States insist upon unconditional surrender, the Japanese Empire has no alternative but to fight on with all its strength for the honor and existence of the Motherland”.  However the Soviets had made commitments to their allies, promising in fact to invade Japan to aid them.    As for the Soviets their primary objective was to ensure unrestricted access to the Pacific Ocean. The year-round ice-free areas of the Soviet Pacific coastline, particularly Vladivostok, could be blockaded by air and sea from Sakhalin Island and the Kurile Islands. Securing these territories to guarantee free access to the Soya Strait was their main goal. Secondary objectives included acquiring leases for the Chinese Eastern Railway, the Southern Manchuria Railway, as well as gaining control over Dairen and Port Arthur.   To achieve these aims, Stalin and Molotov prolonged negotiations with the Japanese, creating a false sense of hope for a Soviet-mediated peace. Simultaneously, in their discussions with the United States and Britain, the Soviets insisted on strict adherence to the Cairo Declaration, which had been reaffirmed at the Yalta Conference. This declaration stipulated that the Allies would not accept a separate or conditional peace with Japan; thus, the Japanese would need to surrender unconditionally to all the Allies. The Soviets aimed to prolong the war by opposing any efforts to dilute this requirement. This approach would provide the Soviets with the necessary time to complete the transfer of their troops from the Western Front to the Far East and to conquer Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, northern Korea, South Sakhalin, the Kuriles, and potentially Hokkaidō, starting with an assault on Rumoi. AUGUST 1945   Thus we come to at last the critical point, August of 1945.    The Americans prepared for the deployment of atomic bombs and for an invasion of southern Kyushu, known as Operation Olympic, scheduled to commence on November 1. At 8:15 A.M. on August 6, a single B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay dropped little boy, devastating much of the undefended city of Hiroshima, instantly killing an estimated 100,000 to 140,000 people and leading to the deaths of possibly another 100,000 over the next five years. At the epicenter of the explosion, “a light appeared 3,000 times brighter than the sun,” creating a fireball that emitted thermal radiation capable of “instantly scorching humans, trees, and houses.” As the air heated and rushed upward, cold air surged in to ignite a firestorm. Hours later, a whirlwind escalated the flames to their peak until more than eight square miles were virtually reduced to cinders. Subsequently, black, muddy rain filled with radioactive fallout began to fall. Two days later, using Japan's rejection of the Potsdam Declaration as a pretext, the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. Then on August 9, the United States dropped a second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, resulting in the immediate deaths of approximately 35,000 to 40,000 people and injuring more than 60,000.   Meanwhile, in Tokyo, during the critical period between the Potsdam Declaration and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Emperor Hirohito remained silent about accepting the Potsdam terms. However, on July 25 and 31, he explicitly conveyed to Kido that the imperial regalia must be defended at all costs. The three sacred objects—a mirror, a curved jewel, and a sword—symbolized the legitimacy of his rule through the northern court and were integral to his identity as the divine sovereign. Hirohito's focus was on protecting these symbols of office, as he insisted on having them brought to the palace. This fixation on maintaining his symbols occurred during a pivotal moment when the pressing issue was whether to accept immediate capitulation. Reflecting on this, he was unprepared to seize the opportunity to end the war himself.   Prime Minister Suzuki, following his initial rejection of the Potsdam ultimatum, also saw no need for further action. His Cabinet Advisory Council, which included the president of Asano Cement, the founder of the Nissan consortium, the vice president of the Bank of Japan, and other representatives from the nation's leading business interests that had profited significantly from the war, convened on the morning of August 3. They recommended accepting the Potsdam terms, arguing that the United States would permit Japan to retain its non-military industries and continue participating in world trade.    Here are some reactions to the two bombs and invasion of Manchuria.    Yonai Mitsumasa said to admiral Takagi Sokichi, on August 12, that “I think the term is perhaps inappropriate, but the atomic bombs and the Soviet entry into the war are, in a sense, gifts from the gods [tenyu, also “heaven-sent blessings”]. This way we don't have to say that we quit the war because of domestic circumstances. I've long been advocating control of our crisis, but neither from fear of an enemy attack nor because of the atomic bombs and the Soviet entry into the war. The main reason is my anxiety over the domestic situation. So, it is rather fortunate that we can now control matters without revealing the domestic situation”.    Konoe's characterized the Soviet involvement in the war as “a godsend for controlling the army,”. Kido viewed of both the atomic bombings and the Soviet entry into the conflict as “useful” elements for ensuring a smooth transition. A nascent power struggle was unfolding, rendering the potential death toll—whether one hundred thousand or two hundred thousand—immaterial to those involved, as long as their desired outcome was achieved: an end to the war that would leave the monarchy intact and capable of managing the discontent that defeat would inevitably provoke. Throughout the final acts of this wartime drama, the Japanese “moderates” found it easier to capitulate to external pressures than to take decisive action on their own to conclude the war.   Another illuminating looks at Japan's elite's perspective on surrender terms was the document titled “Essentials of Peace Negotiations” (wahei kosho no yoryo). Drafted by Konoe and his adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Sakai Koji, after Konoe had reluctantly accepted a mission to Moscow, this document, stipulated the preservation of the emperor system, along with most of the imperial prerogatives, as the absolute minimum condition for peace. It defined the “original” or “essential homeland” as including the southern half of the Kurile Islands but showed a willingness to concede all overseas territories to the enemy, including Okinawa and the American-occupied Bonin Islands, as well as the southern half of Sakhalin. The “Essentials” also accepted complete disarmament for an unspecified period, thereby compromising on the issues of demobilizing and disarming the armed forces. More significantly, an “explanation” attached to the “Essentials” emphasized that “the main aim is to secure the imperial line and maintain the political role of the emperor.”    Why Japan surrendered   We come to it atleast after a long podcast. Why did Japan ultimately surrender?   The twin psychological shocks of the first atomic bomb and the Soviet entry into the war, combined with Kido's and the emperor's concern over escalating public criticism of the throne and its occupant, fueled an almost paranoid fear that, sooner or later, the populace would react violently against their leaders if the war persisted much longer. These factors ultimately led Hirohito to accept, in principle, the terms of the Potsdam Declaration.   At the first meeting of the six member constituents of the Supreme War Leadership Council, held from 10:30 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. on August 9, Army Minister Anami Korechika, Chiefs of Staff Umezu Yoshijiro, representing the army, and Yonai, representing the navy, along with Tōgō, from the Foreign Ministry, were expected to discuss the acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration. Instead, the conversation revolved around whether to attempt a conditional surrender—specifically, should they insist on one condition, the preservation of the kokutai, or four?   After Suzuki addressed the assembly regarding the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the Soviet attack, Yonai, as recounted by Navy Chief of Staff Toyoda, was the first to speak, framing the issue in terms of four conditions. “Let's start to talk, Do we accept the Potsdam Declaration with no conditions? If not, and we wish to insist on attaching hopes and conditions, we may do so this way. First, preservation of the kokutai; then for the rest, the main items in the Potsdam Declaration: treatment of war criminals, method of disarmament, and the matter of sending in an army of occupation.” Thus, the participants identified what they perceived to be the ambiguous points within the Potsdam Declaration and used them as the foundation for their discussions.   The army insisted on four conditions: First, the preservation of the kokutai, which they considered distinct from the Potsdam Declaration itself. The other conditions proposed were, second, that the Imperial Headquarters assume responsibility for disarmament and demobilization; third, a prohibition on occupation; and fourth, the delegation of the punishment of war criminals to the Japanese government. The army equated the kokutai with the emperor's right of supreme command. Their self-serving desire for autonomous war crimes trials was based on the belief that the Allies would use such trials to politically indict the military. Consequently, army leaders aimed to preempt the activities of any international tribunal by conducting their own trials—similar to the approach taken by the uninvaded and unrepentant Germans after World War I.   Supporting the military's views during cabinet meetings that day were three civilian members of the Suzuki cabinet: Justice Minister Matsuzaka Hiromasa, Home Minister Yasui Toji, and Minister of Health Okada Tadahiko. At the imperial conference that night, which extended into the early hours of the tenth, Foreign Minister Tōgō's interpretation of the “preservation of the kokutai” referred solely to the safeguarding of the Imperial House or dynasty, rather than the continuation of Hirohito's reign.   Hiranuma, another advocate for the single condition, interpreted the kokutai as the “emperor's sovereign right to rule the state [not] deriving from national law. Even if the entire nation is sacrificed to the war, we must preserve both the kokutai and the security of the imperial house.” This discrepancy illustrated that there was no completely unified understanding of what the kokutai entailed; the debate over one condition versus four represented conflicting visions for the future of the Japanese state and masked the competition for political power that was already unfolding.   It remains doubtful whether the emperor and Kido initially sided with Tōgō against the four conditions proposed by the senior military leaders. A more likely inference is that both men retained sympathies for the hardliners, both military and civilian, who preferred to continue the futile war rather than surrender immediately and unconditionally. This may explain why, on August 9, Konoe had Hosokawa Morisada approach Navy General Headquarters to urge the emperor's brother, Prince Takamatsu, to pressure Hirohito (through Kido) to accept the Potsdam terms. Later that afternoon, Konoe enlisted the help of diplomat Shigemitsu Mamoru to persuade Kido to reconsider his stance on the four conditions. Ultimately, at the urging of Takamatsu and Shigemitsu, Kido did shift to support Tōgō's position.   At the end of the war, as at its beginning and throughout every stage of its progression, Emperor Hirohito played a highly active role in supporting the actions carried out in his name. From the very beginning of the Asia-Pacific war, the emperor played a significant role in the unfolding events around him. Prior to the Battle of Okinawa, he consistently advocated for a decisive victory. Afterward, he acknowledged the necessity of pursuing an early peace, although he did not favor an immediate cessation of hostilities. Instead, he wavered, steering Japan toward ongoing warfare rather than direct negotiations with the Allies. When the final crisis fully unfolded, the only option left was unconditional surrender. Even then, he continued to procrastinate until the atomic bomb was dropped and the Soviets launched their attack. The wartime emperor ideology that once sustained morale made it exceedingly difficult for Japan's leaders to accept the act of surrender. Aware of their objective defeat, yet indifferent to the suffering the war inflicted on their own people—as well as on the populations of Asia, the Pacific, and the West whose lives they had disrupted—the emperor and his military leaders sought a means to lose without appearing to lose. They aimed to mitigate domestic criticism following surrender while preserving their power structure.   Blinded by their fixation on the fate of the imperial house and committed to an overly optimistic diplomacy toward the Soviet Union, Japan's leaders missed several opportunities to end their lost war. Would Japan's leaders have surrendered more promptly if the Truman administration had “clarified” the status of the emperor before the cataclysmic double shocks of the atomic bomb and the Soviet entry into the war? Probably not. However, it is likely they would have surrendered to prevent the kokutai from being destroyed from within. The evidence suggests that the first atomic bomb and the Soviet declaration of war led Hirohito, Kido, and other members of the court to believe that continuing the war would inevitably result in that destruction. They recognized that the populace was war-weary and despondent, with rising hostility toward the military and the government, accompanied by increasing criticism of the emperor himself. More specifically, Kido and Hirohito were privy to Home Ministry reports, which contained information from governors and police chiefs nationwide. These reports indicated that citizens were beginning to label the emperor as an incompetent leader responsible for the deteriorating war situation.   This is the third variable, never spoken about. Many first look at the atomic bombs. Bigger brain people turn to the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria. But hardly anyone reads about how the collapse of Japan's social fabric, scared the shit out of the Emperor and his closest advisors. You can't have a kokutai, without a populace that worshiped you.    When the emperor expressed in February, “What worries me is whether the nation [could] endure” long enough to achieve victory, he was not merely voicing concern for the suffering of his subjects; rather, he feared that such suffering could lead to social upheaval—in short, revolution. At that time, he referred to the ordinary, war-related hardships of food shortages, air raids, devastated cities, destruction of homes, and the omnipresent grief from the loss of loved ones. The atomic bomb escalated death, pain, and suffering to unimaginably higher levels, intensifying the threat from within. After the bombings of Japan and two atomic bombs, Hirohito was in a dark way, given a golden get out of jail free card. Hirohito could now save his suffering people from further anguish by surrendering, allowing him to deflect responsibility for leading them into misery while adopting an air of benevolence and care. Indeed, Hirohito did care—though not primarily for the Japanese people, but rather for the survival of his own imperial house and throne.   After the bombing of Hiroshima, Hirohito delayed for a full two days before instructing Kido, shortly before 10 A.M. on August 9, to “quickly control the situation” because “the Soviet [Union]” had declared war. Kido immediately communicated with Prime Minister Suzuki, who began arrangements for an Imperial Conference scheduled for later that night. Following the seidan of August 10, Chief Cabinet Secretary Sakomizu took charge of drafting the “Imperial Rescript Ending the War” based on Hirohito's directives. Assisted by two scholars of the Chinese classics, Kawada Mizuho and Yasuoka Masahiro, Sakomizu worked tirelessly for over three days before submitting a version of the rescript to the Suzuki cabinet. After six hours of contentious discussion on the night of August 14, the cabinet modified and approved the document. Hirohito promptly signed it, and Shimomura and Kido persuaded him to record a suitably opaque final version for broadcast to the nation.   On the night of August 14, the Suzuki government notified the United States and other Allied nations that it had accepted both the Potsdam Declaration and the Byrnes letter of August 11. Accelerating the emperor's actions during this climactic moment of the unconditional surrender drama was the American psychological warfare campaign. When a leaflet dropped from B-29 bombers came into Kido's possession on the night of August 13 or the morning of the fourteenth, he conferred with the emperor and explained the gravity of the situation. The latest enemy leaflets were informing the Japanese people of the government's notification of surrender under one condition, along with the full text of Byrnes's response. If this continued, it would undermine the imperial government's reliance on secrecy to obscure the true nature of the lost war and the reasons for the prolonged surrender delay.   Given Kido's and the emperor's concerns about rising signs of defeatism, including criticism of the throne, immediate action was necessary to prevent the populace from acting on their own initiative. Thus, the second seidan was convened. At noon on August 15, the Japanese people gathered around their radio receivers and heard, for the first time, the high-pitched voice of their emperor telling them:    “After pondering deeply the general trends of the world and the actual conditions obtaining in Our Empire today, We have decided to effect a settlement of the present situation by resorting to an extraordinary measure. We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration. To strive for the common prosperity and happiness of all nations as well as the security and well-being of Our subjects is the solemn obligation which has been handed down by Our Imperial Ancestors and which lies close to Our heart. Indeed, We declared war on America and Britain out of Our sincere desire to ensure Japan's self-preservation and the stabilization of East Asia, it being far from Our thought either to infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations or to embark upon territorial aggrandizement. But now the war has lasted for nearly four years. Despite the best that has been done by everyone—the gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people—the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest. Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers... The hardships and sufferings to which Our nation is to be subjected hereafter will be certainly great. We are keenly aware of the inmost feelings of all of you, Our subjects. However, it is according to the dictates of time and fate that We have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable”.   Clearly Hirohito sought to justify his decision to surrender by citing the dropping of the atomic bombs. He wanted to become the saviour of the Japanese people. Hirohito wanted to obfuscate the issue of accountability, to prevent expressions of strife and anger and to strengthen domestic unity around himself, to protect and raise the kokutai.  Interestingly, the surrender declaration to the civilian population was not the same one sent to the military. On August 17th Hirohito issued a second “rescript to soldiers and sailors” throughout the asia-pacific.   “ Now that the Soviet Union has entered the war against us, to continue . . . under the present conditions at home and abroad would only recklessly incur even more damage to ourselves and result in endangering the very foundation of the empire's existence. Therefore, even though enormous fighting spirit still exists in the Imperial Navy and Army, I am going to make peace with the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, as well as with Chungking, in order to maintain our glorious national polity”.   The lesser-known August 17 rescript to the army and navy specified Soviet participation as the sole reason for surrender, while maintaining the kokutai as the primary aim. Dissembling until the end—and even beyond—it was noted that the emperor presented two different justifications for his delayed surrender. Both statements were likely true.   Months later Hirohito's said this about his decision to surrender “The main motive behind my decision at that time was that if we . . . did not act, the Japanese race would perish and I would be unable to protect my loyal subjects [sekishi—literally, “children”]. Second, Kido agreed with me on the matter of defending the kokutai. If the enemy landed near Ise Bay, both Ise and Atsuta Shrines would immediately come under their control. There would be no time to transfer the sacred treasures [regalia] of the imperial family and no hope of protecting them. Under these circumstances, protection of the kokutai would be difficult. For these reasons, I thought at the time that I must make peace even at the sacrifice of myself.”    There exists this sort of childish argument today whether it was the atomic bombs or the Soviet Invasion that caused Japan to surrender. However, this overlooks as I think I've explained in 9000 words jeez, the influence of the kokutai. Defending the kokutai was Hirohito's number one priority. The Soviets threatened it. Communism threatened it. What Japan perceived to be “democracy” threatened it. American victory threatened it. And the destruction of Japan's social fabric threatened it. I love this one piece of history, that I have only come across in one book, that being the main one I am using here.   On August 12th, Hirohito came to the imperial family to tell them he had made the decision to surrender. His uncle Prince Yasuhiko Asaka asked him whether the war would be continued if the kokutai could not be preserved. Hirohito replied “of course”.

Five international Christian denominations convened in Strasbourg from January 30 to February 1 to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification—a huge step forward in the ongoing establishment of the prophesied world religion. We analyze this event on today's edition of the Endtime Show --------------- 📱: It's never been easier to understand. Stream Only Source Network and access exclusive content: https://watch.osn.tv/browse 📚: Check out Jerusalem Prophecy College Online for less than $60 per course: https://jerusalemprophecycollege.com 🏧: America's Christian Credit Union: Make the switch from the BIG banks: https://www.endtime.com/switch ☕️: First Cup Coffee: Use code ENDTIME to get 10% off: https://www.firstcup.com 🥤: Ready Pantry: https://www.readypantry.com/endtime ⭐️ Birtch Gold: https://www.birchgold.com/endtime Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Joint Declaration on Justification, the aevum, abortion and Church leadership are only some of the topics on today's Called to Communion with Dr. David Anders.

The Joint Declaration on Justification, the aevum, abortion and Church leadership are only some of the topics on today's Called to Communion with Dr. David Anders.

In today's show Dr. Anders explains what is the purpose of the Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification between Catholics and Protestants. Also takes us into the Sonship of Christ, tithes, Mary Baker's Christian Science Church and more.

In today's show Dr. Anders explains what is the purpose of the Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification between Catholics and Protestants. Also takes us into the Sonship of Christ, tithes, Mary Baker's Christian Science Church and more.

Latest news from 16 June 2024, as reported in the Ukrainian media. Easy ways to support us: Subscribe to our Patreon to give monthly support https://www.patreon.com/highlightsfromukraine Send us a one-time 'thank you' tip via PayPal at: highlightsfromukraine@gmail.com Out YouTube channel: https://bit.ly/3oH111z Special thanks to our top Patreon supporters - Helena Pszczolko O'Callaghan, mattg629, krissi, Jared and Dick Warner!

As the peak travelling season begins, the Irish aviation industry is launching a declaration to combat unruly passenger behaviour in airports and on flights as part of the #NotOnMyFlight campaign. The safety of flights, passengers and crew can be affected by the unruly behaviour of a small minority of passengers. All Irish airlines and airports, An Garda Síochana, the Irish Aviation Authority, AirNav Ireland, ground handlers and international aviation organisations have all come together to tackle the issue of disruptive and dangerous behaviour, which affects passengers and staff almost every day of the year. There has been a 3-fold increase in passenger unruly behaviour reported between 2019 v 2023. Unruly behaviour can include intoxication, aggressive or inappropriate behaviour as well as not following the commands of flight crew, who are there to ensure passenger safety. The declaration sets out how the aviation industry aims to combat the issue of unruly behaviour on flights. The vast majority of passengers comply with instructions and show respect to staff and other passengers. However, the signatories of this Joint Declaration recognise the need to actively promote good passenger conduct due to the adverse impact that disruptive and unruly behaviour can have on the safety of a flight and passenger experience. The signatories of the joint declaration will not tolerate any behaviour that has the potential to disrupt the passenger experience, impact the safety of the cabin crew and airport staff or create a safety risk to the aircraft and those on board the flight. This includes physical and sexual assault, threatening and abusive behaviour and generally disruptive acts. Angela Willis, Assistant Commissioner, DMR of An Garda Síochána, welcomed the Declaration: "We all want to ensure that air travel is pleasant and, most importantly, safe for all users. While the vast majority of people that use air travel have the highest regard for fellow passengers, unfortunately, there are a small minority whose behaviour at airports or on aircraft can have a significant impact on the experience and safety of other passengers or flight crew. An Garda Síochána is delighted to sign this declaration and to work with our partners to combat disruptive and dangerous behaviour which will not be tolerated." A Ryanair spokesperson said: "Ryanair is pleased to support this Irish aviation industry declaration to combat unruly passenger behaviour on aircraft. The safety and wellbeing of our crew and passengers is Ryanair's No.1 priority and we try to eradicate unruly behaviour onboard our aircraft. We will continue to work closely with An Garda Síochána, the IAA, Irish Airports and the wider aviation industry to eliminate all forms of unruly behaviour in airport terminals and onboard our aircraft." According to Kenny Jacobs, CEO of daa, the operator of Dublin and Cork airports: "We've great passengers at Dublin and Cork airports, but like every airport in the world, there's sometimes a few bad eggs whose behaviour impacts everyone. We want our airports to be enjoyable and stress-free for passengers, and we're pleased to see the sector coming together to tackle the issue of unruly and dangerous behaviour. Everyone needs to play their part, and daa will continue to work closely with our Airport Police teams, our airline partners and An Garda Síochána to ensure unruly passengers are dealt with, and our airports are safe and enjoyable places for all." Lynn Embleton, Chief Executive of Aer Lingus, commented on the charter: "At Aer Lingus we put safety first, there is nothing more important. We understand that a comfortable and respectful environment is key to ensuring your journey is a pleasant experience. Aer Lingus does not tolerate unruly behaviour of any kind, and in the rare cases where unruly behaviour does occur, we have strict measures in place to ensure that the safety and comfort of our customers and crew is maintained." Jim Gavin, Chief Ope...

Leaders of China, Japan and South Korea have issued a joint declaration following their trilateral meeting in Seoul.

Shrnutí událostí z měsíce 04/24 Finále Kybersoutěže 2024 AfterMovie - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0g8_GXZZNk&ab_channel=CzechCyberCompetition-Kybersout%C4%9B%C5%BE%C4%8CR Rozhovory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rlNdWhlFSo&t=158s&ab_channel=ALEFSecurity Kapitoly: 00:00 Úvod 01:05 Připsání kyberútoků na Česko skupině APT28 04:50 Blíží se konec koncového šifrování zpráv? 11:54 Velká Británie zpřísňuje pravidla pro chytrá zařízení 15:43 LastPass a pokus o deepfake phishing 18:20 Statistiky ransomware skupin Q1/24 24:15 České Noviny zneužity k publikaci dezinformací 27:36 6 Čechů součástí scamového call-centra zatčeno 31:15 Proběhlo Národní finále Kybersoutěže 32:56 Cisco a kampaň „ArcaneDoor“ 35:46 Doporučení pro Architekty a Manažery KB Odkazy a zdroje: https://www.root.cz/clanky/postrehy-z-bezpecnosti-ruske-utoky-nejen-na-cr/ https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/EDOC-%231384205-v1-Joint_Declaration_of_the_European_Police_Chiefs.PDF https://therecord.media/united-kingdom-bans-defalt-passwords-iot-devices https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/lastpass-hackers-targeted-employee-in-failed-deepfake-ceo-call/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/ransomware-payments-drop-to-record-low-of-28-percent-in-q1-2024/ https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/clanek/domaci/stranky-ceske-tiskove-kancelare-napadli-hackeri-utokem-se-zabyva-kontrarozvedka-348509 https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/arcanedoor-hackers-exploit-cisco-zero-days-to-breach-govt-networks/ https://untrustednetwork.net/ https://stanovo.cz Jsme také na Spotify a dalších audio platformách: https://anchor.fm/alefsecuritycast Sledujte nás na X: https://twitter.com/AlefSecurity https://twitter.com/Jk0pr Všechny díly SecurityCastu: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnvU6FnpuLT0Rlxvu-aEW0d2rIis5ceNa Všechny díly Světlé Strany Internetu: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnvU6FnpuLT23xGxRcIuMmUA5Tomx12Pb #IT #ITBezpecnost #Bezpecnost #CyberSecurity #Novinky

Guest: Dr Teuns Elof See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Shrnutí týdne v kyberprostoru. Kapitoly: 00:00 Úvod 00:30 Europol se vyjádřil k e2e šifrování zpráv 04:23 Statistiky ransomware skupin Q124 07:32 Zranitelnost v PuTTY SSH klientovi 09:01 Finále kybersoutěže 2024 10:10 Meme Of The Week https://discord.gg/qQvXnUyeH2 Odkazy a zdroje: https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/EDOC-%231384205-v1-Joint_Declaration_of_the_European_Police_Chiefs.PDF https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/ransomware-payments-drop-to-record-low-of-28-percent-in-q1-2024/ https://thehackernews.com/2024/04/widely-used-putty-ssh-client-found.html www.stanovo.cz Všechny díly SecurityCastu: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnvU6FnpuLT0Rlxvu-aEW0d2rIis5ceNa Všechny díly Světlé Strany Internetu: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnvU6FnpuLT23xGxRcIuMmUA5Tomx12Pb #ITBezpecnost #IT #Novinky #Bezpecnost #Česko

The Strategic Partnership, inked by Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. during the Prime Minister's visit to Manila on September 8, marks a significant step toward strengthening the bilateral ties between the two countries. - Nilagdaan nina Pangulong Bongbong Marcos at Prime Minister Anthony Albanese noong ika-8 ng Setyembre ang Joint Declaration on Strategic Partnership na layuning mapapatatag ang kooperasyon ng dalawang bansa sa iba't ibang larangan.

Join Rev. Emily E. Ewing (they) and Rev. Kay Rohloff (she) to explore new and nerdy connections to the scripture for 7th Sunday of Easter, which falls on May 21st this year, including our deep dive into ecumenism!  The scripture we refer to for this episode can be found here.  Check out more about the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.  Check out more about the Catholic and Coptic churches sharing saints.  We talked about this year's Easter 5 episode on martyrdom, this year's Ascension Day episode on UFOs, last year's Holy Trinity episode on Woman Wisdom, and this year's Palm Sunday episode on Judas. For more on ecumenical justice movements, check out the Poor People's Campaign, the movement of Christians against Christian Nationalism, and the Institute for Welcoming Resources.  For more about ecumenism, check out this article or this article.  We also talked about Star Wars, so check out Horror Nerds at Church's announcement for their (Revenge of the) Sixth Season! To support Nerds At Church, you can become a Patreon Supporter at any tier for extra perks and bonus content including uncut guest episodes, Live Q&As, merch, and more.  If becoming a paying supporter isn't possible right now, please leave us a review instead — it helps sustain the show and spread the word!  Check us out on Facebook & Twitter at @NerdsAtChurch to connect! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nerdsatchurch/message

나토-EU 공동선언문 발표Guest: Prof. Jonathan Grady, the Principal of The Canary Group, the Stern School of Business at New York University, and a Protégé of Bruce Bueno de MesquitaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

21/11/2022. The latest news from Ukraine and about Ukraine. The war - Ukraine under attack. Fierce fighting in Donbas. The Ukrainian flag raised above 12 settlements in the Luhansk Oblast. Ukraine and its allies work to develop a Joint Declaration on Air Shield. This year, many people in the world saw how important the contribution of Ukrainians to global food security is, as the lives of millions of people in different countries directly depend on Ukrainian agricultural sector. President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskye said this in his address to the nation. - 21/11/2022. Добірка новин із героїчної України. "Сьогодні 270-й день повномасштабної війни. Понад 4700 ракет застосувала Росія. Сотні наших міст просто спалені. Тисячі людей загинули. Сотні тисяч силою депортовані в Росію. Мільйони поїхали з України до інших країн, рятуючись від війни. Ми маємо це зупинити. Маємо зупинити російську агресію”, - зазначив у своєму зверненні до учасників Міжнародної організації Франкофонія Президент Володимир Зеленський, інформує пресслужба Офісу Президента..

After a month away, Allan and Darren try to make sense of a big month of news. They start with the Chinese Community Party's 20th Party Congress, where President Xi Jinping secured an unprecedented 3rd term as leader, and (somewhat more surprisingly) was completely successful in elevating loyalists to the Party's inner leadership circle. Is China just a ‘normal' authoritarian country now? Next, in what is arguably the most significant policy decision affecting US-China relations in decades, the Biden Administration has imposed sweeping new controls on the export of semiconductors and other advanced technologies to China. These are perceived to be ‘force multipliers' and thus necessary to curtail China's military development. The issue is that they are also widely used in commercial technologies, and Beijing will thus perceive this as economic “containment”. Allan talks through the implications for Australia and Darren offers his cost/benefit analysis of the policy. Finally, the past month has also been extremely busy in Australian foreign policy! Allan and Darren opt to focus on Japanese PM Kishida's visit to Australia and the Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation that resulted. Allan explains the history of bilateral cooperation, while Darren uses the Declaration to (begin to) give some form to a theory of Australian foreign policy under the new government. We thank Atikah Mekki for audio editing and Rory Stenning for composing our theme music. Relevant links Scott Waldron, Darren J. Lim, Victor Ferguson, “Exploring the Domestic Foundations of Chinese Economic Sanctions: The Case of Australia”, China Brief 22(18), October 4, 2022: https://jamestown.org/program/exploring-the-domestic-foundations-of-chinese-economic-sanctions-the-case-of-australia/ Darren Lim and John Ikenberry, “China and the logic of illiberal hegemony”, Security Studies (forthcoming): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4244377 Andrew Nathan, “China's changing of the guard: Authoritarian resilience”, Journal of democracy 14(1), 2003: https://www.cecc.gov/sites/chinacommission.house.gov/files/documents/hearings/2004/CECC%20Hearing%20Testimony%20-%20Andrew%20Nathan%20additional%20PDF%20-%206.3.04.pdf Remarks by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan at the Special Competitive Studies Project Global Emerging Technologies Summit, 16 September 2022: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/09/16/remarks-by-national-security-advisor-jake-sullivan-at-the-special-competitive-studies-project-global-emerging-technologies-summit/ Darren Lim and Victor Ferguson, “Conscious decoupling: The technology security dilemma”, China Dreams (China Story Yearbook 2019): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3484171 Zack Cooper, “he fundamental tension in Biden's national security strategy”, Channel News Asia, 29 October 2022: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/us-biden-national-security-strategy-russia-china-asia-3030556 Isabella Keith, “11 November 2022: The Week in Australian Foreign Affairs”, Australian Outlook, 11 November 2022: https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/11-november-2022-the-week-in-australian-foreign-affairs/ Australia-Japan Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation, 22 October 2022: https://www.dfat.gov.au/countries/japan/australia-japan-joint-declaration-security-cooperation Anthony Albanese and Kishida Fumio, Opening remarks – Australia Japan Leaders' Meeting, 22 October 2022: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/opening-remarks-australia-japan-leaders-meeting Everything everywhere all at once (film): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_Everywhere_All_at_Once Michael Wesley, “The war in Ukraine: implications for Asia”, Lowy Interpreter, 28 October 2022: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/war-ukraine-implications-asia George Packer, “Ukrainians are defending the values Americans claim to hold”, The Atlantic, 6 September 2022: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/10/ukraine-invasion-civilian-volunteers-survival/671241/ Jason Bordoff and Meghan O'Sullivan, “Green upheaval: The new geopolitics of energy”, Foreign Affairs Jan/Fen 2022: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2021-11-30/geopolitics-energy-green-upheaval ChinaTalk podcast (on export controls, see episodes on 11 Oct and 4 Nov) Trade Talks podcast, Ep 170, “National security, semiconductors, and the US move to cut off China”, 2 November 2022: https://tradetalkspodcast.com/podcast/170-national-security-semiconductors-and-the-us-move-to-cut-off-china/ The Prince (podcast), Bonus: 20th party congress, 31 October 2022: https://www.economist.com/podcasts/2022/10/31/bonus-20th-party-congress

Your daily news in under three minutes.

Donate Video presentation, Audio podcast (download below), https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS4h04KASXUQdMLQObRSCNA We've got your back, JB West and JB East Remember, it all starts with the mother lode. Download here, share and discuss, International Criminal Court Covid Dec 2021 More details and connections can be downloaded here, Joint Declaration on War Crimes, by Jeff J. Brown and James...

India is a party to a recent Joint Declaration made by ten countries to recognize privacy freedoms and guarantees, aiming for closer cooperation on promoting high privacy standards and convergence of data regimes. This podcast discusses the joint declaration in light of cross-border conditions and data subject rights under forthcoming data protection law and its impact on data transfer impact assessments in EU-to-India data transfers. Audio Source: An article published on the LKS website in February 2022 https://www.lakshmisri.com/insights/articles/evolving-cooperation-on-facilitating-easier-cross-border-data-flows/# Authors:  Sameer Avasarala, Sr. Associate (LKS), and Prashant Phillips, Partner (LKS) Voice: Ena Chakravorty Head- PR & Corporate Communications (LKS)www.lakshmisri.com

In Revelation 17, the Apostle John describes in great detail the characteristics of a false church that will be the partner of the Antichrist. Was he describing the Roman Catholic Church? To answer that question, Dave Hunt spent years gathering research and indisputable historical documentation (primarily Catholic sources) providing information not generally available. Are you missing half the story about the last days? Virtually all attention these days is focused on the coming Antichrist—but he is only half the story. Many are amazed to discover in Revelation 17 that there is also another mysterious character at the heart of prophecy—a woman who rides the beast. Who is this woman? Tradition says she is connected with the church of Rome. But isn't such a view outdated? After all, today's Vatican is eager to join hands with Protestants worldwide. "The Catholic church has changed," is what we hear. Or has it? In A Woman Rides the Beast, prophecy expert Dave Hunt sifts through biblical truth and global events to present a well-defined portrait of the woman and her powerful place in the Antichrist's future empire. Eight remarkable clues in Revelation 17 and 18 prove the woman's identity beyond any reasonable doubt.

In Revelation 17, the Apostle John describes in great detail the characteristics of a false church that will be the partner of the Antichrist. Was he describing the Roman Catholic Church? To answer that question, Dave Hunt spent years gathering research and indisputable historical documentation (primarily Catholic sources) providing information not generally available. Are you missing half the story about the last days? Virtually all attention these days is focused on the coming Antichrist—but he is only half the story. Many are amazed to discover in Revelation 17 that there is also another mysterious character at the heart of prophecy—a woman who rides the beast. Who is this woman? Tradition says she is connected with the church of Rome. But isn't such a view outdated? After all, today's Vatican is eager to join hands with Protestants worldwide. "The Catholic church has changed," is what we hear. Or has it? In A Woman Rides the Beast, prophecy expert Dave Hunt sifts through biblical truth and global events to present a well-defined portrait of the woman and her powerful place in the Antichrist's future empire. Eight remarkable clues in Revelation 17 and 18 prove the woman's identity beyond any reasonable doubt.

Do we really understand the doctrine of righteousness by faith? Why is the law essential to the righteousness of Christ? What is the relationship between law and grace? The Bible clearly defines righteousness by faith, but there is also a false righteousness by faith which Satan is using to deceive people. We must know the difference between the two if we are to avoid the mistake the Jews made when they rejected Christ their King and chose Caesar instead. In this video, Professor Walter J. Veith studies what the Bible teaches on justification and compares it with statements Protestants have agreed to in the document Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.

Why has the Catapult been at the UN's COP26 Climate Summit in Glasgow? Because so much of what was discussed, planned and negotiated in Glasgow had everything to do with cities, how we think about place, and how we imagine, design, build and finance places that are not just liveable, but also low carbon and sustainable. One of the big questions we've been tackling is How can cities strengthen their business cases for net zero investment? And if their plans are brought together and aligned in a new and creative ways, could they generate greater scale, volume and predictability in ways that might make them more attractive to investors? To answer this, the Connected Places Catapult has teamed up with the UK's Core Cities and London Councils to create the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission. The aim is to the leverage the combined scale and clout of the UK's cities to mobilise investment into low and net-zero carbon projects across all of the UK's largest cities, not just individual ones. In the lead up to COP26 we published our City Investment Analysis Report and Glasgow has been an invaluable opportunity engage with businesses and the investment community. In part I of ‘Live from COP26' we heard from a number of voices from across the financial industry, including two of the UK's leading banks and two new banks in Britain's financial infrastructure. In part II we hear from Mayors and civic leaders from across the UK and what the challenge and the opportunity of net zero infrastructure means for places. We also take some time to reflect on some of the other conversations that the Catapult has been having at COP26 with technology companies, asset owners and other place leaders. Music on this episode is by Blue Dot Sessions and Phill Ward Music (www.phillward.com) Show notes: You can read the Joint Declaration of the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission on our website, as well as our City Investment Analysis Report. You can also listen to the first podcast we did to introduce the Commission, as well as a follow episode on decarbonising transport in cities. To read and download the Catapult's Net Zero Places Innovation Brief, which explores a number of new market opportunities in the active travel sector, click here. If you'd like to get in touch with your feedback, comments and suggestions on what you'd like to hear more of on Connected Places, please email: podcast@cp.catapult.org.uk. We're looking forward to hearing from you! To find out more about what we do at the Connected Places Catapult and to hear about the latest news, events and announcements, please sign up to our newsletter! Follow the show! Don't forget to subscribe to the show on iTunes, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Please also take a moment to write a review and rate us so that more people can hear about the podcast and what we do at Connected Places Catapult. 

(Your host enjoys using the umlaut function for this episode!) Who is Eberhard Jüngel? Dr. Dave Nelson joins the podcast to discuss a significant and interesting 20th-century German theologian who is sometimes overlooked in the 'Anglosphere'. Tune in to this episode learn more about Jüngel, his commentary on secularization, his relationship to the theologies of Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann, and the 'New Hermeneutic' (or New Quest for the Historical Jesus), as well as Jüngel's ecumenical work and revolt against (and later endorsement of!) JDDJ (the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification between the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation). This was fascinating stuff! Dr. David Nelson received his Ph.D. from Aberdeen University where he studied under John Webster. Dr. Nelson is the Senior Acquisitions Editor for Baker Academic and Brazos Press, and editor for Lutheran Forum, USA. As of 2022, Dr. Nelson is the Director of Baylor University Press. He has authored, edited, and contributed to several books including Jüngel: A Guide to the Perplexed and The Interruptive Word: Eberhard Jüngel on the Sacramental Structure of God's Relation to the World. Dr. Nelson also taught courses at the Institute of Lutheran Theology, where your host Rev. Andrew studies at. Links to purchase the previously mentioned workes by Dr. Nelson: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/j%C3%BCngel-a-guide-for-the-perplexed-9780567660053/ https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/interruptive-word-9780567658609/ --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

①China vows to treat market entities equally and build open market system. ②China and the United States issue joint declaration on enhancing climate action. ③Tech giant Google loses appeal against 2.4 billion euro fine in Brussels.

We arrive at the COP26 German Pavilion for a scheduled interview with the German delegation's spokesperson, Stephan Gabriel Haufe, right as a press conference titled "Joint Declaration for a Nuclear-Free Green Taxonomy" is wrapping up. Mr. Haufe and I discuss Germany's Energiewende, expedited nuclear phaseout, ongoing reliance on coal until 2038, and the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline.

So why has the Connected Places Catapult been at the UN's COP26 Climate Summit in Glasgow? Well, because so much of what's being discussed, planned and negotiated here in Glasgow has everything to do with cities, how we think about place, and how we imagine, design, build and finance places that are liveable, sustainable, low carbon and fit for the 21st Century.  One of the big questions we've been tackling is How can cities strengthen their business cases for net zero investment? And if their plans are brought together and aligned in a new and creative ways, could they generate greater scale, volume and predictability in ways that might make them more attractive to investors? To answer this, the Connected Places Catapult has teamed up with the UK's Core Cities and London Councils to create the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission. The aim is to the leverage the combined scale and clout of the UK's cities to mobilise investment into low and net-zero carbon projects across all of the UK's largest cities, not just individual ones. In the lead up to COP26 we published our City Investment Analysis Report and Glasgow has been an invaluable opportunity engage with businesses and the investment community. In this episode we present some highlights from the events and conversations we've been convening at COP26. We hear from; Prof. Greg Clark, Chair of the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission Cllr Susan Aitken, Leader of Glasgow City Council John Flint, CEO of the UK Investment Bank Ian Stuart, CEO of HSBC UK Carl Ennis, CEO of Siemens Elsa Palanza, Global Head of Sustainability & ESG, Barclays Susan Campbell, Investment Director for Sustainable Investment, Scottish National Investment Bank Stephen Pegge, Managing Director for Commercial Finance, UK Finance Music on this episode is by Blue Dot Sessions and Phill Ward Music (www.phillward.com) Show notes: You can read the Joint Declaration of the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission on our website, as well as our City Investment Analysis Report. You can also listen to the first podcast we did to introduce the Commission, as well as a follow episode on decarbonising transport in cities. To read and download the Catapult's Net Zero Places Innovation Brief, which explores a number of new market opportunities in the active travel sector, click here. If you'd like to get in touch with your feedback, comments and suggestions on what you'd like to hear more of on Connected Places, please email: podcast@cp.catapult.org.uk. We're looking forward to hearing from you! To find out more about what we do at the Connected Places Catapult and to hear about the latest news, events and announcements, please sign up to our newsletter! Follow the show! Don't forget to subscribe to the show on iTunes, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Please also take a moment to write a review and rate us so that more people can hear about the podcast and what we do at Connected Places Catapult. 

How can cities strengthen their business cases for net zero investment? And if their plans are brought together and aligned in a new and creative ways, could they generate greater scale, volume and predictability in ways that might make them more attractive to investors? To answer these and other questions, the Connected Places Catapult has teamed up with the UK's Core Cities and London Councils to create the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission. The aim is to the leverage the combined scale and clout of the UK's cities to mobilise investment into low and net-zero carbon projects across all of the UK's largest cities, not just individual ones. As an initial step we have commissioned research to assess and analyse the low carbon investment that cities need, and the associated investment cases. The findings of the report will be launched at the COP26 Climate Summit in Glasgow and will look at the following sectors; commercial and industrial property, waste and electricity generation, and transport. In this episode we take a look at transport, which contributes almost a quarter (22%) of the UK's green house gas emissions. There are of course different modes of transport – cars, buses, lorries, trains – and they each contribute emissions in different ways too. In a UK context you also have to bear in mind that local authorities have limited impact on most of those modes, and zero impact on some. So the Commission has been focussing on where councils can have the most impact through policy and investment: Reducing the need to travel. Increasing the use of public transport Increasing the uptake of active travel - walking, cycling Converting from fossil fuelled to electrified forms of transport Prof. Greg Clark, who chairs the Commission, speaks to Cllr Susan Aitken, Leader of Glasgow City Council about what this looks like from the perspective of one of the UK's core cities. We also meet Andrea Fernandez, Managing Director of C40 Cities Climate Leadership and specialist in climate finance in cities, as well as Asif Ghafoor, CEO of Iduna, a company playing a leading role in Greater Manchester's electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Music on this episode is by Blue Dot Sessions and Phill Ward Music (www.phillward.com) Show notes: To read the Joint Declaration of the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission on our website. You can also watch a recording of the launch of the Commission, which was held on 1st July, which included a presentation on the initial findings of the research report. To read and download the Catapult's Net Zero Places Innovation Brief, which explores a number of new market opportunities in the active travel sector, click here. To register for our Pathway to Net Zero Investment event on the 21st October, where the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission will be presenting its findings, click here. You can also learn more about the organisations featured on this episode; Iduna – a UK infrastructure company specialising in mobility, telecoms and energy. EV. – Iduna's electric vehicle charging company which operates Greater Manchester's largest EV charging network. C40 Cities – a network of 100 megacities committed to addressing climate change. City of Glasgow's plans to host the UN's COP26 Climate Summit from 31 October – 12 November 2021. If you'd like to get in touch with your feedback, comments and suggestions on what you'd like to hear more of on Connected Places, please email: podcast@cp.catapult.org.uk. We're looking forward to hearing from you! To find out more about what we do at the Connected Places Catapult and to hear about the latest news, events and announcements, please sign up to our newsletter! Follow the show! Don't forget to subscribe to the show on iTunes, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Please also take a moment to write a review and rate us so that more people can hear about the podcast and what we do at Connected Places Catapult. 

What does the Joint Declaration tell us about reunification of Lutherans and Catholics?

On July 2, 2021, 16 national conservative political parties signed the so-called Joint Declaration on the Future of the European Union. In the document, they outlined their perception on the future of the EU: a re-deepening of sovereignty of Member States accompanied by the strengthening of the nation-state system in opposition to other more integrated visions of the EU.What are the parties behind the document which was announced as a response to the Conference on the Future of Europe? How is it perceived in different European countries? And, finally, what role can the national conservative forces play in the Europe of tomorrow?In the episode, Daniel Martinek is hosting Emilie Laborel, Dominik Koc and Misha Nychyporuk, current trainees at IDM, who are analysing both the Declaration and its signatory parties as well as their relations to the EU.Production Emma Hontebeyrie See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

How can cities strengthen their business cases for net zero investment? And if their plans are brought together and aligned in a new and creative ways, could they generate greater scale, volume and predictability in ways that might make them more attractive to investors? To answer these and other questions, the Connected Places Catapult has teamed with a number of partners to create the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission. The aim is to the leverage the combined scale and clout of the UK's cities to mobilise investment into low and net-zero carbon projects across all of the UK's largest cities, not just individual ones. As an initial step we have commissioned research to assess and analyse the low carbon investment that cities need, and the associated investment cases. The findings of the report will be launched at COP26 with a series of dissemination events being planned in the months leading up to November. The aim of the commission is to; Support UK cities in achieving their carbon reduction targets, whilst developing a deeper understanding of the low carbon investment opportunities and challenges faced by UK cities. Create increased confidence within the investment community in low carbon projects by leveraging the benefits of the scale offered through networks of cities rather than individual ones. Provide the basis for engaging with industry on the opportunities for the supply and deployment of low carbon technologies into the marketplace. This episode is a summarised overview of the work of the commission using audio from the launch event that was held on 1st July, 2021 chaired by Andrew Carter, Chief Executive of the Centre for Cities and attended by Prof. Greg Clark, Chair of the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission, Cllr Susan Aitken, Leader of Glasgow City Council, Niall Bolger, CEO of the London Borough of Hounslow, Rachel Dickie, Executive Director for Investment at Grosvenor Britain and Ireland, Shuen Chan, Head of ESG at Legal & General Investment Management (LGIM). Music on this episode is by Blue Dot Sessions and Phill Ward Music (www.phillward.com) Show notes: To read the Joint Declaration of the UK Cities Climate Investment Commission on our website. You can also watch a recording of the launch of the Commission, which was held on 1st July, which included a presentation on the initial findings of the research report. To read and download the Catapult's Net Zero Places Innovation Brief, which explores a number of new market opportunities in the active travel sector, click here. You can register for the live City Leader Dialogues with Sir Richard Leese, Leader of Manchester City Council on Monday 26th July, and Mayor of Bristol, Mayor Marvin Rees on 7th September. You can also register for our Innovation Places Summit on 23rd September, as well as our Active Travel Summit on 29th September. If you'd like to get in touch with your feedback, comments and suggestions on what you'd like to hear more of on Connected Places, please email: podcast@cp.catapult.org.uk. We're looking forward to hearing from you! To find out more about what we do at the Connected Places Catapult and to hear about the latest news, events and announcements, please sign up to our newsletter! Follow the show! Don't forget to subscribe to the show on iTunes, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Please also take a moment to write a review and rate us so that more people can hear about the podcast and what we do at Connected Places Catapult. 

This video is sponsored by Faithful Counseling. For 10% off your first month, use the link, http://www.faithfulcounseling.com/gospelsimplicityWhat does the Catholic church teach when it comes to the topic of Justification? If you're familiar with a bit of church history, you know that justification, and specifically the doctrine of justification by faith alone, sola fide, was at the heart of the Reformation. Churches have split, anathemas have been pronounced, and no small amount of ink has been shed on the topic of Justification. Since the Second Vatican Council, Protestants and Catholics have been participating in dialogues to see if perhaps they can come together on this doctrine. Most famously, in 1999 the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification was signed between the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation. However, despite this progress, Catholics and Protestants remain divided, and many Protestants wonder what it is that Catholics teach about Justification. Do Catholics believe that we're justified by works? Can Catholics agree to the doctrine of justification by faith alone and what does all this talk about "merit" mean? In this interview, we tackle these questions and more as Jimmy Akin carefully guides us through a Catholic understanding of the doctrine of Justification. Jimmy Akin is a Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers. You can find his books, podcast, and more by going to http://www.jimmyakin.comSupport Gospel Simplicity:Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/gospelsimplicity​One Time Donation: https://www.paypal.me/gospelsimplicityMerch: https://gospelsimplicity.creator-spring

BalkanPod Part #29 | An Assessment of RYCO's first term Broadcaster: Dilek KÜTÜK @dilektkGuest: Đuro Blanuša, the first Secretary-General of ( @RYCOwb )Enjoy Listening!BIOGRAPHYMr. Đuro Blanuša is the first Secretary-General of the Regional Youth Cooperation Office, RYCO. Before working in RYCO, he was a senior advisor in the Sector for International Cooperation and European Integration in the Ministry of Youth and Sports of the Republic of Serbia. RYCO is an organization which has come as a result of the Berlin process. During the Western Balkans Summit in Vienna, in 2015, the Prime Ministers of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia have signed a “Joint Declaration on the establishment of the Regional Youth Cooperation Office”. RYCO is an initiative to support youth projects and establishing new relations amongst young people in the Western Balkans.

Now is the winter of our discontent... or is it the winter of our ecumenism? Either way, the mission-motivated drive to reconcile bitterly divided Christians has succeeded so well that all the frisson has vanished right out of it, but hasn't succeeded enough to actually make us one as Jesus and his Father are one. So in this episode, Dad and I talk through our own interest in and commitment to the search for Christian unity, what unity is not, how an ecumenical document differs from a confessional document, and the lively but relatively unknown history of this 110-year-old movement. Also, a few unguarded opinions. Support us on Patreon! Notes: 1. Tons of resources about ecumenism at the Institute for Ecumenical Research. 2. Some of the ecumenical documents we mention in this episode: Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, Healing Memories, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, Unto the Churches of Christ Everywhere, Mortalium Animos, Unitatis Redintegratio. 3. Not mentioned by name but highly relevant are the document Lutherans and Pentecostals in Dialogue and the new ecumenical outfit Global Christian Forum. 4. Dad on ecumenism: “Staying Lutheran in the Changing Church(es)” in Changing Churches; Luther vs. Pope Leo; “Scripture as Matrix, Christ as Content” in Luther Refracted; Luther for Evangelicals; “Theological Anthropology: Towards Integrating Theosis and Justification by Faith," Journal of Ecumenical Studies 34/1 (1997): 38–73; and “Process, Convergence, Declaration: Reflections on Doctrinal Dialogue,” The Cresset 64/6 (2001): 13-18. 5. Me on ecumenism: "Reflections Five Years into Ecumenism," "Six Ways Ecumenical Progress Is Possible" Concordia Journal 39/4 (2013): 310–32, entries on "Ecumenical Movement" and "Pentecostalism, Global" in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Martin Luther, and A Guide to Pentecostal Movements for Lutherans. 6. And heck, let's get the whole family in on the fun: check out my husband Andrew's book Here I Walk: A Thousand Miles on Foot to Rome with Luther tracing our pilgrimage on the 500th anniversary of Luther's. (Except it was the 499th... we found out too late.) 7. If you want to take up the catechetical call at the end of the episode, why not try the Small Catechism: Memorizing Edition? More about us at sarahhinlickywilson.com and paulhinlicky.com!

In this episode of "Technically Human," I sit down with Dr. Mark Z. Jacobson, one of the world's leading experts in climate science.  We talk about the technologies that can prevent environmental destruction, and how tech innovation can drive a clean energy vision for the future. Mark explains why we already have the science and tech to build this future, and how--with the political and social will--we can create a world powered by renewable energy--not in a distant future, but NOW.  Mark Z. Jacobson is Director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program and Professor of Civil and Environmental  Engineering at Stanford University. He seeks to understand air pollution and global warming problems, and to develop large-scale clean, renewable energy solutions to these major and urgent problems. His most recent book, published by Cambridge University Press, is titled 100 Percent Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage for Everything. The book is the culmination of Dr. Jacobson’s life's work on  transitioning the world to 100% clean, renewable energy, and it examines the  technologies, economics, and social/political aspects of that transition. On February 9, as part of the Joint Declaration of the Global 100% Renewable Energy Strategy Group, Dr. Jacobson joined other leading climate scientists and experts to propose a 10 point declaration to transform the world’s energy supply to 100% renewable energy. This statement will be specifically published in support of President Biden’s United States climate change agenda. To support the transformation to renewable energy by signing your name to the declaration, please visit www.global100restrategygroup.org. This episode was produced by Matt Perry. Podcast art by Desi Aleman

Last updated : 2020.09.18 The latest news from home and abroad, with a close eye on Northeast Asia and the Korean Peninsula in particular

In the first high-level joint declaration between India & China since the Ladakh stand-off began, External Affairs minister S. Jaishankar and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi issued a 5-point joint declaration after their talks in Moscow. In episode 565 of Cut The Clutter, Shekhar Gupta going point by point to tell you what we surely know about the crisis, what is safe to infer and what we might guess China’s motivations to be.----more----Read Snehesh Alex Philip's report here: https://theprint.in/opinion/brahmastra/india-china-endgame-scary-unless-modi-and-xi-get-face-saver-deal/499883/----more----Read the 5-point declaration here:  https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/32962/Joint_Press_Statement__Meeting_of_External_Affairs_Minister_and_the_Foreign_Minister_of_China_September_10_2020

Trump signs a joint declaration with the president of Mexico July 8, 2020 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/ushistory/message

Britain announced Wednesday that it was extending residency rights for up to 3 million Hong Kongers eligible for the British National Overseas passport, stressing that it would uphold its historic duty to the former British colony after Beijing imposed a sweeping new national security law in the city.Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told lawmakers that amid widespread concerns about Beijing's tightening grip on Hong Kong, the U.K. was changing its immigration rules to give people who are connected to Britain by virtue of the city's status as a former British colony a special route to citizenship.Eligible individuals from Hong Kong currently can come to the U.K. for six months without a visa. Under the new policy, they will have the right to live and work in the country for five years. After that, they will be allowed to apply for settled status and then again for citizenship.Hong Kongers who were born after the end of British rule in 1997 are not eligible, meaning that in effect, many of the city’s young student activists who are most at risk of arrest under the new law cannot take advantage of the British offer.The announcement came hours after China imposed a sweeping new national security law in Hong Kong that Britain calls a flagrant breach of China’s international obligations and a “clear and serious violation” of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.That treaty paved the way for Hong Kong's handover from British to Chinese rule in 1997, and was supposed to guarantee at least 50 years of Western-style rule of law and civil liberties for the city under a “One Country, Two Systems” principle until 2047.Chinese officials have in the past referred to the treaty as a “historical document,” a claim that Britain strongly rejects.“The prime minister and the government are crystal clear that the United Kingdom will keep its word,” Raab said. “We will live up to our responsibilities to the people of Hong Kong.”The U.K. introduced a special, limited type of British nationality in the 1980s for people who were a “British dependent territories citizen by connection with Hong Kong.” The passports did not confer nationality or the automatic right to live and work in Britain, but entitled holders to consular assistance from U.K. diplomatic posts.Britain’s government estimates there are about 350,000 current holders of the British National Overseas passports, with a total of around 2.9 million people eligible for it. It says the extended residency rules will apply to all of them and their immediate dependents.No exact date was given for the new rule’s implementation, and Raab said further details will be announced later.The Foreign Office on Wednesday summoned Liu Xiaoming, the Chinese ambassador, to a meeting with permanent secretary Simon McDonald, who made clear Britain's concern about the security law.Raab called the security law a “grave and deeply disturbing step,” and told Parliament that it contained measures that directly threaten the judicial independence and freedoms of speech and protest protected by the Joint Declaration. It was particularly concerning that mainland Chinese authorities can now take jurisdiction over some cases without independent oversight, and try those cases in Chinese courts, he said.Trust in China's ability to live up to its international responsibilities took “a big step backwards,” he added.The security law makes secessionist, subversive, terrorist activities and foreign intervention in Hong Kong's affairs illegal. The most serious offenders, such as those deemed to be masterminds behind the crimes, could receive a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.Many critics in the city and abroad say the law effectively ends “One Country, Two Systems” policy and erases the legal firewall between Hong Kong and the mainland's Communist Party rule.Hong Kong police arrested 10 people under the law Wednesday, the first day it came into effect. They included a man with a Hong Kong independence fl...

An interview with Prof. Michael Reeves, President and Professor of Theology at Union School of Theology, UK. Author of books such as The Unquenchable Flame. Discovering the Heart of the Reformation (2010) and (with Tim Chester), Why The Reformation Still Matters (2016).On October 31, 1999, the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed ‘The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification' (JDDJ), claiming that they were ‘now able to articulate a common understanding of our justification by God's grace through faith in Christ.' This has led many since to think that the fundamental theological differences of the Reformation have now been resolved, and that there remains little or nothing of real theological substance to prevent evangelical-Catholic unity. Professor Mark Noll, for instance, boldly declared,If it is true, as once was repeated frequently by Protestants conscious of their anchorage in Martin Luther or John Calvin that iustificatio articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae (justification is the article on which the church stands or falls), then the Reformation is over.Is the Reformation indeed, over? Listen as Dr. Reeves helps us make sense of the JDDJ.Episode ResourcesLearn more about Dr. Reeves and his ministry, Union Mission, at www.union-mission.orgRead a similar interview with Dr. ReevesRead the 1999 Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of JustificationRead and sign the statement: "Is the Reformation Over? A Statement of Evangelical Convictions"

“Sicherheitshalber” ist der Podcast zur sicherheitspolitischen Lage in Deutschland, Europa und der Welt. In Folge 25 spekulieren Thomas Wiegold, Ulrike Franke, Frank Sauer und Carlo Masala zuerst darüber, welche internationalen Auswirkungen und vor allem globalen Machtverschiebungen die Corona-Pandemie womöglich nach sich ziehen könnte. Im zweiten Teil beleuchten die vier Podcaster den beginnenden Abzug der internationalen Truppen aus Afghanistan. Abschließend wie immer der “Sicherheitshinweis”, der kurze Fingerzeig auf aktuelle, sicherheitspolitisch einschlägige Themen und Entwicklungen - diesmal mit Abschreckung im Pazifik, einer vermeintlichen Seeschlacht, dem Corona-Kalender der Rüstungskontrolldiplomate und dem bevorstehenden Ende des “Vertrags über den Offenen Himmel (Open Skies)”. Außerdem: maritime Metaphern! Globale Machtverschiebungen durch Corona?: 00:02:10 Abzug aus Afghanistan: 00:43:29 Sicherheitshinweise: 00:58:48 Unser Shop: https://shop.spreadshirt.de/sicherheitshalbershop/ Erwähnte Literatur: Thema 1 - Globale Machtverschiebungen durch Corona? Matthias Rogg, COVID-19 – die Pandemie und ihre Auswirkungen auf die Sicherheitspolitik, GIDS 2020, https://gids-hamburg.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/GIDSstatement2020_1_Rogg_COVID19.pdf Henry Kissinger, The Coronavirus Pandemic Will Forever Alter the World Order, WSJl, 3.4.2020 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coronavirus-pandemic-will-forever-alter-the-world-order-11585953005 Scholz und Maas sichern EU-Partnern Solidarität in Coronakrise zu, Spiegel, 6.4.2020 https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/corona-krise-heiko-maas-und-olaf-scholz-sichern-eu-partner-solidaritaet-zu-a-526fa3de-cd1e-4e34-b92a-f7e95124ffbb Katrin Bennhold, A German Exception? Why the Country’s Coronavirus Death Rate Is Low, New York Times, 4.4. 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/world/europe/germany-coronavirus-death-rate.html Mira Rapp-Hooper, China, America, and the International Order after the Pandemic, War on the Rocks, 24.3.2020, https://warontherocks.com/2020/03/china-america-and-the-international-order-after-the-pandemic/ Ivan Krastev, Seven early lessons from the coronavirus, ECFR,18.3.2020 https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_seven_early_lessons_from_the_coronavirus Silviu Mihai, Auf dem Weg in eine Diktatur, Die Zeit, 31.3.2020, https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2020-03/ungarn-viktor-orban-notstandsgesetz-ermaechtigungsgesetz-coronavirus Thema 2 - Abzug aus Afghanistan Taliban warn peace deal with US near breaking point https://apnews.com/9f3c050dd0c7448f1b780985f461fc36 Augengeradeaus, Vereinbarung für den Frieden in Afghanistan: Truppenreduzierung bis Juli? 02.03.2020, https://augengeradeaus.net/2020/03/vereinbarung-fuer-den-frieden-in-afghanistan-truppenreduzierung-bis-juli/ Joe Felter, Leaving Afghanistan: Pulling out without Pulling the Rug Out, 19 February 2020, https://warontherocks.com/2020/02/leaving-afghanistan-pulling-out-without-pulling-the-rug-out/ Joint Declaration between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the United States of America for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/02.29.20-US-Afghanistan-Joint-Declaration.pdf Sicherheitshinweise Rike: Die Pacific Deterrence Initiative https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/04/02/inside-us-indo-pacific-commands-20-billion-wish-list-to-deter-china-and-why-congress-may-approve-it/ Carlo: Die “Schlacht von Tortuga” (nicht) https://twitter.com/Canocola/status/1246364316355514368?s=20 Frank: Der Corona-Rüstungskontrollkalender https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2020-04/news/npt-review-conference-postponed Thomas: Das Ende von Open Skies https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/05/trump-administration-treaty-war-russia-withdraw

We invited former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs, Lt. Gen. Gregson (USMC, ret.), to speak about the recent US-Taiwan-Japan joint declaration calling for enhanced American, Taiwanese, and Japanese cooperation in response to the PRC's increasing “grey zone” tactics and pressure on Taiwan. Producer: Marzia Borsoi-Kelly Host: Marzia Borsoi-Kelly Edit: Jack Liu Music: Joseph Ross

In today's show we set aside the question of whether we can say the Scriptures are true, reliable, accurate, historically verifiable, false, fake, or toxic, to ask whether they are holy--whether they are in themselves, and whether (and how) they make us holy. Reframing the question this way avoids many of the pitfalls of the past centuries and opens up new possibilities for theological reasoning.  Show Notes:  1. The texts we discuss vis-à-vis their being-holy and making-holy qualities are Joshua 8:1–29, Nehemiah 7:7bff, and Mark 9:1. We also refer to Romans 1 and I Timothy 3:16. 2. Yes! Paul Hinlicky (i.e. Dad) has a forthcoming commentary on Joshua in the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible series. Personal favorites of mine are Ephraim Radner on Leviticus, Robert Jenson on Ezekiel, and Joseph Mangina on Revelation. 3. Walter Brueggemann's book is Theology of the Old Testament. 4. Karl Barth's essay is "The Strange New World within the Bible." 5. The texts of Luther's mentioned in this episode are the Large Catechism (Apostles' Creed, Article III, §40) and "The Freedom of a Christian" (sometimes known in English as "Concerning Christian Liberty"). 6. Heiko Oberman's take on Scripture and tradition can be found in The Dawn of the Reformation. 7. Paul Hinlicky's book on God's nature and revelation in light of the gospel is Divine Complexity. 8. You can read about half of Origen's homilies on Joshua on Google Books. 9. Here is the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. More about us at sarahhinlickywilson.com and paulhinlicky.com!

Today’s episode is a lovely chat with our very interesting and talented friends Erin Kidd, Assistant Professor of Theology and Religious Studies at St. John’s University (Queens, NY), and Jakob Karl Rinderknecht, Assistant Professor of Religious Studies and Director of the Pastoral Institute at University of the Incarnate Word (San Antonio, TX). After a lively discussion of Erin’s most recent culinary catastrophes and the wild/wonderful Riverwest neighborhood of Milwaukee, we learn about Erin and Jakob’s new edited volume: Putting God on the Map: Theology and Conceptual Mapping (Fortress Press, 2018). The volume is an interdisciplinary work in theology and cognitive science, and our conversation covers the basics of cognitive linguistics and conceptual mapping. We also introduce the wide-ranging implications of their intersections and applications in theological discourse. Jon shares his Treasures Old & New, and then we say goodbye. Erin and Jakob are very generously offering our listeners a 30% discount on Putting God on the Map! Enter promotional code LEX30AUTH18 when you checkout at https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781978703964/Putting-God-on-the-Map-Theology-and-Conceptual-Mapping TITLES NAMED IN MAIN SEGMENT Johnson, Elizabeth. She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse. 10th Anniversary Edition. New York: Crossroad, 2002. Jong, Jonathan, Christopher Kavanagh, and Aku Visala. “Born Idolaters: The Limits of the Philosophical Implications of the Cognitive Science of Religion.” Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 57, no. 2 (2015): 244–66. Kidd, Erin. “The Subject of Conceptual Mapping: Theological Anthropology across Brain, Body, and World.” Open Theology 4, no. 1 (2018): 117–35. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books, 1999. Masson, Robert. Without Metaphor, No Saving God: Theology after Cognitive Linguistics. Leuven: Peeters Publishers, 2014. Ricoeur, Paul. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press, 1976. Ricoeur, Paul. The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-Disciplinary Studies in the Creation of Meaning in Language. Translated by Robert Czerny with Kathleen McLaughlin and John Costello. London: Routledge, 1978. Rinderknecht, Jakob Karl. Mapping the Differentiated Consensus of the Joint Declaration. New York: Palgrave, 2016. “TREASURES OLD AND NEW” Schleiermacher, Friedrich. Christian Faith (Two-Volume Set): A New Translation and Critical Edition. Translated by Terrence N. Tice, Catherine L. Kelsey, and Edwina Lawler. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2016. Our theme music is “14 Ghosts II” by Nine Inch Nails, available at https://archive.org/details/nineinchnails_ghosts_I_IV “14 Ghosts II” is used under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license. We would like to thank Trent Reznor and Nine Inch Nails for the use of this track. Follow us on Twitter @SystematicPod Email us at SystematicallyPodcast@gmail.com Subscribe and Review us on iTunes: Systematically Podcast Exciting reminder: We are now on iTunes! Please search for Systematically Podcast, hit the “Subscribe” button, and—if you’re feeling so inclined—leave us a review. As Jon points out, five is a good number of stars! Lastly, if you enjoy our conversations, please share them with your friends!

Today's Topics:   1) Reagan v. Gorbachev   2) Anniversary of Martyrdom of Russian Royal Family   3) Joint Declaration by Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill

"Kairos" Hosts: Darren Weeks and Vicky Davis COMPLETE SHOW NOTES AND CREDITS AT: https://governamerica.com/radio/radio-archives/22083-govern-america-november-18-2017-kairos Support pigs and oil spills. Ice cream and milk are racist. DHS plans to release chemicals along the Kansas-Oklahoma border as part of a drill. Updates on Sandy Hook, Saudi infighting, and the Vegas massacre. TV preacher, Kenneth Copeland, declares the end of the reformation. We do a deep dive into the Kairos conference and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, signed by the Vatican and the Lutheran and Methodist churches. Are the churches merging with the Vatican for unity in Christ, or submission in bondage? Is this the first step toward forming a world religion? The collusion of Ronald Reagan with Mikhail Gorbachev to bring communism to the west. PBS documentary series, Commanding Heights, reveals parallels in history between failed states and the United States. Several listener phone calls on a variety of topics.

International agreement on armed UAS import/export, quadcopter power by induction, California allows first responders to take out drones, a droneport concept, drones interrupting airport operations, an underwater UAV launch, and a very different concept for an aerial video platform. News White House Rolls Out Armed Drone Declaration The U.S. State Department calls it the first step toward creating global norms for the import and export of armed unmanned systems. More than 40 countries have agreed to the one-page Joint Declaration for the Export and Subsequent Use of Armed or Strike-Enabled Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). [PDF] Drone Flies 12 CM on Wireless Power Is transmitting power wirelessly, through thin air, science fiction? Maybe not. A quadcopter flew a short distance in a proof of concept demo. The Wirelessly Powered Quadrotor video shows a quadrotor being powered completely wirelessly via magnetic induction. Jerry Brown Lets Emergency Responders Take out Drones California Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 807, under which “An emergency responder shall not be liable for any damage to an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system, if that damage was caused while the emergency responder was providing, and the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system was interfering with, the operation, support, or enabling of the emergency services…” Droneports for the Future? Jonathan Daniels, CEO, and founder of Praxis Aerospace Concepts International Inc., wants to partner with the FAA and develop a droneport in Boulder City, Nevada. Initially used to test drone landings and departures without interfering with manned aircraft, the long-term concept is support for high volume drone movements. UAV activity disrupts Dubai Airport operations Operations at Dubai International Airport were disrupted for almost an hour due to unauthorized unmanned aerial vehicle activity. This wasn't the first time, either. United Arab Emirates (UAE) state Abu Dhabi has banned drone sales to the public because of the potential threat they pose to civil aviation. First Underwater Unmanned Aircraft Launch from an AUV In a cross-domain command and control event hosted by the U.S. Navy, a small Vector Hawk UAV was launched from a Marlin autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV). At the same time, the Submaran unmanned surface vehicle (USV) developed by Ocean Aero provided surface reconnaissance and surveillance. Introducing the Tesla Drone The Tesla Drone is a concept from U.K. based designer, Fraser Leid. Dual propellers can operate horizontally or vertically and provide enough stability that a gimbal is not required. The MagDock acts as a wireless charging station offering a 60 minute flight time from the 10,000 mAh Li-ion Powercell® battery. Video of the Week Planes & Drones in Sedona, AZ Listener Ken recently traveled to Sedona, Arizona in his 1980 Bonanza A36TC and he brought along his 3DR Solo with a GoPro 4 Black. The video is a perfect crossover between The Airplane Geeks podcast and The UAV Digest. http://youtu.be/pBNl5o0lJlc Mentioned Dronemasters MeetUp #0024 San Francisco, CA at Nightingale Security, October 20, 2016.      

In this episode, we will conclude our History of Hong Kong overview. We'll look at the years following the 1967 riots and the reforms championed by Governor Murray MacLehose in the 1970s and '80s. We'll close out this series by looking at the dramatic lead up to and the signing of the Joint Declaration, the Basic Law, and the handover on July 1, 1997. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, we will conclude our History of Hong Kong overview.  We’ll look at the years following the 1967 riots and the reforms championed by Governor Murray MacLehose in the 1970s and ’80s.   We’ll close out this series by looking at the dramatic lead up to and the signing of the Joint Declaration, the Basic Law, and the handover on July 1, 1997.

Days of the Dead: Sponsored By Cornerstone Christian Youth Camp7/23/2006 In this study we will first look at a Joint Declaration of Unity between the Catholics, Lutherans and Methodists as just one more confirmation of the emerging one world church. We...