Podcasts about Sha

One of morning blessings we are required to recite each day is "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" – "who Has made for me all that I need." This Beracha expresses gratitude for the ability to wear shoes, as it is only because we have shoes that we can go about and do all that we need to do. On a personal note, I gained greater appreciation for this Beracha after a bizarre experience I had during a trip to Mexico City. I was invited by the Syrian-Jewish community there to come as a guest speaker, and I stayed in a hotel. In the hotel room, I noticed that the hotel offered a shoe-polishing service, whereby the guest gives in his shoes before going to sleep, and they are placed outside his door freshly-polished the next morning. I gave in my shoes, but the next morning, after I got dressed, they were not by my door. I had no choice but to go down the lobby – where the leaders of the community were meeting me to bring me to the synagogue – without my shoes. I explained to them what happened, and we spoke to the hotel staff. They brought me to the room where the shoes are kept, and I had to rummage through piles of shoes for quite some time until I found mine. That morning, I understood the significance of this Beracha that we recite each morning – "She'asa Li Kol Sorki." We tend to take it for granted that we can put on shoes every morning, but this is, in truth, a wonderful gift that we must appreciate. This message applies as well to the Beracha of "Malbish Arumim" which we recite each morning to thank Hashem for having clothing. This blessing, too, should never be taken for granted. Every so often it happens that a fire breaks out in a home or building during the night, forcing the residents to go outside in their bathrobes, as all their clothing goes up in flames. We must always appreciate the fact that Hashem provides us with clothing and shoes to wear each and every day. Grammatically, the word "She'asa" in the phrase "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" should be pronounced with the emphasis on the second syllable: "She-A-sa." This Beracha is unique in that it is formulated in the past tense – "She'asa" ("who has made"), as opposed to the present tense – "Ha'oseh" ("who makes"). The reason why this Beracha is formulated in the present tense might be that people sometimes recognize how Hashem has fulfilled their needs only in retrospect, after the fact. Often, things happen in life that make us feel that Hashem is specifically not fulfilling our needs, that He is ignoring us, or withholding our necessities from us. For example, when a person loses his job, or when his business takes a downturn, he might not recognize how "Oseh Lo Kol Sorki," that G-d is currently taking care of him. But later, when he finds a better job, or when he finds a different business opportunity, he realizes that everything was for the best, and that Hashem was always doing what was best for Him. Therefore, it is only afterward when we can look back and say, "She'asa Li Kol Sorki," recognizing in hindsight that Hashem was caring for us all along, even when it seemed like He wasn't. Our custom is to recite the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" after the Beracha of "Ha'mechin Mis'adeh Gaber" (as opposed the custom to reverse the order). Furthermore, we pronounce the final word of this blessing "Sorki," and not "Sorkai." There are two days on the Jewish calendar – Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur – when Halacha forbids wearing regular shoes. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Vayesheb, thus writes that the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" is not recited on these days. Since this Beracha expresses gratitude for the ability to wear shoes, it is omitted on days when wearing shoes is forbidden. Citing the Sha'ar Ha'kavanot, the Ben Ish Hai explains that although the Arizal taught that there are deep mystical concepts underlying the morning blessings, and their meaning thus extends beyond the actual phenomena which they mention, nevertheless, this is relevant only when other Jews benefit these phenomena. If a person himself does not benefit from a certain phenomenon mentioned by one of the Birkot Ha'shahar, he nevertheless recites that Beracha because others are benefitting. On Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, however, nobody is allowed to wear shoes, and so the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" cannot be recited. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in a responsum in Yabia Omer, questions this ruling of the Ben Ish Hai, presenting several reasons why this Beracha should be recited even on days when wearing shoes is forbidden. Firstly, Halacha permits wearing shoes on Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur to protect against potential harm, such as if there may be scorpions on the ground where one walks. Therefore, we indeed benefit from the protection provided by shoes even on Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur. Secondly, we recite Birkot Ha'shahar to thank Hashem for "Minhago Shel Olam" – the natural order which He created that allows us to live and function, irrespective of whether we actually benefit from these phenomena on a particular day. Therefore, even on days when we do not wear shoes, we should thank Hashem for the blessing of shoes from which people normally benefit. Another argument is that Halacha does not forbid all shoes on Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, only those made from leather. Therefore, there is reason to recite the Beracha of "She'asa Lo Kol Sorki" even on these days. Additionally, at night, after the conclusion of Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, we are permitted to wear shoes, and as Birkot Ha'shahar are recited only in the morning, they clearly cover the entire day and also the following night. Hence, even if we would understand Birkot Ha'shahar as expressing gratitude for the benefit we receive, we should still recite "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" on Yom Kippur and Tisha B'Ab, because we can wear shoes at night. (The Gaon of Vilna had the practice of reciting "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" when he put on his shoes upon the conclusion of Yom Kippur. We, however, follow the view that Birkot Ha'shahar can be recited only during the day, and the Beracha covers the rest of the day and the following night.) Finally, whereas the Arizal maintained that Birkot Ha'shahar thank Hashem specifically for the blessings that He grants us, the Jewish Nation, others, including Rabbenu Nissim, felt that these Berachot refer to the natural order that benefits all mankind. Hence, even though Jews do not wear shoes on Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" should perhaps be recited since gentiles benefit from shoes on these days. Indeed, Rav Yosef Karo (author of the Shulhan Aruch, 1488-1575), in one of his published responsa (Abkat Rochel, 54), writes explicitly that the accepted custom is to recite the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" even on Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, and emphasizes that this custom should be followed. Accordingly, Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that if somebody asks whether or not to recite this Beracha on Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, he should be told not to recite it, given the different views that exist. If, however, a person does recite the Beracha, he should not be corrected, because this practice has strong Halachic basis. This ruling of Hacham Ovadia appears in the first edition of Yalkut Yosef (p. 55). But in a later work – Halichot Olam (vol. 1, p. 53) – the Hacham changed his position, and ruled that the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" should be recited on Yom Kippur and Tisha B'Ab. This was his final ruling, and this is the Halacha that should be followed. Hacham Ovadia's son, Hacham David Yosef, writes in Halacha Berura that his father would make a point of wearing his regular leather shoes at night after Tisha B'Ab and Yom Kippur, in order to strengthen the case for reciting the Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" on these days. It goes without saying that a mourner, Heaven forbid, recites "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" even though he does not wear regular shoes, since everybody else is wearing shoes. Summary: The Beracha of "She'asa Li Kol Sorki" – which thanks Hashem for the gift of shoes – should be recited after the Beracha of "Ha'mechin Mis'adeh Gaber." The emphasis in the word "She'asa" should be on the second syllable ("She-A-sa"). We pronounce the final word "Sorki," and not "Sorkai." The Beracha should be recited even on days when shoes are not worn – during mourning, on Tisha B'Ab, and on Yom Kippur.

Dr Boyce and Dr Alicia explain why Sha'Carri Richardson's trauma may cost her everything.

One of the Berachot we recite each morning as part of Birkot Ha'shahar is "Malbish Arumim," with which we express gratitude to Hashem for the gift of clothing. The clothing that we wear protects us from the elements, and maintains our dignity. As such, it is a precious gift that we must never take for granted, and the Sages therefore instituted a special blessing to thank G-d for the garments that we are privileged to wear in the morning. The literal meaning of the words "Malbish Arumim" is "who clothes the naked." Grammatically, the letter Mem has a "Dagesh" (a dot for emphasis), such that it is to be pronounced as a strong "m," as opposed to a Mem without a "Dagesh" which is pronounced as a softer "m." One should pronounce the word properly, with a "Dagesh" in the Mem, because the word "Arumim" with a soft Mem, without a "Dagesh," means "clever people." It would thus sound as though G-d provides clothing only to the wise, which is, of course, not true. We want to emphasize that Hashem provides clothing to all His creatures, and so we must ensure to recite the word "Arumim" correctly. In several sources, the text of this Beracha is "Malbish Ha'arumim" (as opposed to "Malbish Arumim," without "Ha-"). This is the text found in Sha'ar Ha'kavanot (by Rav Haim Vital, 1542-1620), and this was the view also of Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868). The Sedeh Hemed (Rav Haim Hizkiya Medini, 1834-1904) writes that he taught his students to recite this text. The reason given is that if one recites, "Baruch Ata…Melech Ha'olam Malbish Arumim," he might pronounce the words "Ha'olam" and "Malbish" as one long word. Since the word "Ha'olam" ends with a Mem, and the word "Malbish" begins with a Mem, a separation must be made to avoid combining them into a single long word that has no meaning. This problem is avoided by adding the prefix "Ha-" before "Malbish." (Some also suggest proving this text from a phrase in the Book of Shmuel II 1:24.) Nevertheless, the common custom is to recite "Malbish," and not "Ha'malbish," and this is the text that appears in the ancient Siddur of Rav Amram Gaon (Babylonia, 810-875). Another Beracha which we recite each morning is "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah," thanking Hashem for "giving strength to the weary." G-d created our bodies with the ability to rejuvenate itself through sleep, such that we can regain our strength and energy, and so we thank Him each morning for granting us the physical strength we need to function. Interestingly enough, this Beracha appears nowhere in the Gemara. When the Gemara lists the blessings that one should make in the morning, it makes no mention of "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah." Therefore, the Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 46) writes that the custom to recite this Beracha is incorrect, as we do not have the authority to introduce new Berachot that the Sages in the Talmud did not institute. This Beracha does not appear in Rav Amram Gaon's Siddur, either. The question thus arises as to why the widespread practice is to recite this Beracha, which does not appear anywhere in the Talmud, and which the Shulhan Aruch thus opposed. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) writes that although the Shulhan Aruch opposed reciting this Beracha, the Arizal maintained that this Beracha should be said. In the view of the Hida, the teachings of the Arizal are authoritative and binding, even when they conflict with the rulings of the Shulhan Aruch. The Hida even speculates that if the Shulhan Aruch had been aware of the Arizal's teaching, requiring the recitation of this Beracha, he would have concurred. This is the position taken also by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) – that we must always follow the Arizal's opinions, regardless of which and how many Rabbis rule differently. Hacham Ovadia Yosef does not accept this approach. In his view, the Arizal's opinions are not necessarily more authoritative than those of other Poskim. And in the case of "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah," Hacham Ovadia notes, the Ashkenazim also recite this Beracha, even though they do not always follow the Arizal's teachings. Hacham Ovadia therefore gives a different explanation for the widespread practice to recite this Beracha. He shows that this Beracha appears in early sources – such as in Mahzor Vitri, and in the writings of Rav David Abudarham (Spain, 14 th century), and the Tur (Rabbenu Yaakob Ben Asher, 1270-1340) – indicating that this practice earned widespread acceptance well before the Shulhan Aruch. And when there is an accepted Minhag (custom), Hacham Ovadia writes, we follow the custom even if it runs counter to the ruling of the Shulhan Aruch. Rav Haim Vital cites the Arizal as explaining the deeper meaning underlying the two Berachot we have been discussing – "Malbish Arumim" and "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah." The Arizal taught that our sins have the effect of removing, or tearing, the "garments" that cover our souls. The missing garment, or the missing portion of the garment, is replaced by the "Kelipot" – harmful spiritual energies. A relatively minor sin wears out this "garment," whereas a grievous sin causes the garment to be removed entirely. When a person goes to sleep at night, his soul ascends to the heavens, where Hashem, in His infinite mercy and kindness, "repairs" the damaged "garment" for us, so we will not be subject to the harmful effects of the "Kelipot." When our souls are restored in the morning, they are newly clean and pristine. The Arizal taught that the two Berachot of "Malbish Arumim" and "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah" thank Hashem for this precious gift. The Beracha of "Malbish Arumim" refers to the new "garments" that Hashem grants to those who had committed severe sins which caused the complete loss of their soul's "garment." The Beracha of "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah" speaks of the "weary" souls, those which had been tainted by minor transgressions, and whose garments thus needed "mending." These two blessings, then, thank Hashem for His mercifully cleansing and repairing our souls each and every night. In light of this teaching of the Arizal, some have suggested that we should reverse the order, and recite "Ha'noten La'ya'ef Koah" before "Malbish Arumim." After all, once we thank Hashem for replacing a lost "garment," this encompasses also His repairing the damaged "garments." Common practice, however, is to first recite "Malbish Arumim." These Berachot thank Hashem not for our personal experience of these phenomena, but rather for the phenomena themselves, for the fact that Hashem has made them part of the natural order. As such, the sequence of these blessings is not important, as both the replacement of lost spiritual "garments" and the repair of the damaged "garments" occur regularly, warranting our expression of praise and gratitude to the Almighty.

Hey Friends! This week we talk about the Southwest pilot that was arrested for a DUI before boarding the plane! Sha'carri Richardson is arrested for putting her hands on her boyfriend, Lisa Raye thinks there's a double standard in Hollywood for black women, and 2 women go viral for doing VERY unique things.Have you ever wondered why? people make up song lyrics???In the Reality Round-up, we talk Big Brother 27.

In this episode, we're diving into the latest headlines stirring up conversation. First, we discuss RZA's interesting baby name suggestion for A$AP Rocky and Rihanna's third child, a tribute to the late Ol' Dirty Bastard. Then, we unpack the serious allegations against New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell, who is facing federal indictment over an alleged affair with her bodyguard and misuse of city resources.We also cover the disturbing incident at a Buffalo Wild Wings, where a teenager filed a discrimination charge after being harassed in the women's restroom over her appearance. Finally, we're talking about Sha'Carri Richardson's recent public apology after an altercation with her boyfriend and the mixed reactions it's receiving online.

This week the guys kick things off with an interview of recording artist B DA Future (0:31) Beef (pause) between Cam'ron and Omar Gooding (39:14). Backlash from the annual red dress run in New Orleans (42:51). NFL has an abundance of male cheerleaders (46:20). The guys the worst things that can happen during a zoom meeting (48:38). Mayor Latoya Cantrell being indicted (51:03). Trouble at the airport, track star Sha'Carri Richardson arrest for domestic violence (53:37). Bum talk (57:37), careers you could never date (1:03:20) and much more so tune in........https://linktr.ee/ToxicMasculinityIssues

The downfall of Dr Umar, KFC vs Popeyes, Sha'carri arrest and the Trump Boyz in DC

Dom and D are back with another great episode. This one they discuss: 2:38 Dez Bryant apologizes to Nicki Minaj 9:04 Shedeur Sanders preseason debut 14:09 Ari Lennox views on colorism and the comedy of the Martin TV show and Bernie Mac stand up 28:00 David Justice's comments on his marriage Halle Berry 45:07 Cam'ron's epic troll of Omar Gooding 52:01 Sha'carri Richardson's airport incident and apology 59:03 Uncle Nearest lawsuit over misappropriation of funds 1:07:28 AI Brand Influencers are coming   Subscribe to the Everyone Needs an Aquarius Patreon https://bit.ly/3tXnnCz  Go cop your candles from Dom at www.saint-angeles.com/candles and use the promo code: Aquarius Email the show at straightolc@gmail.com           Follow SOLC Network online Instagram: https://bit.ly/39VL542                                    Twitter: https://bit.ly/39aL395                                     Facebook: https://bit.ly/3sQn7je                            To Listen to the podcast Podbean https://bit.ly/3t7SDJH                                YouTube http://bit.ly/3ouZqJU                                Spotify http://spoti.fi/3pwZZnJ                                Apple http://apple.co/39rwjD1                                                         IHeartRadio http://ihr.fm/2L0A2y 

Can you own intellectual property? Can it be stolen if it's not tangible and there's no act of theft? Do you have to pay for enjoyment? Dina D'Malcusa Dina Aveida M'Daas And much more..... with Rabbi Yosef Dovid Josilowsky – Dayan, Beis HaVaad – 10:10 with Rabbi Chaim Jachter – Rav of Sha'arei Orah in Teaneck, Dayan on the Elizabeth Beis Din – 32:39 מראי מקומות   

Dr Boyce Watkins uses Sha'Carri Richardson as an example of the massive loss of black generational wealth.

The Sha'carri Richardson arrest/ The Weeknd concert in Nashville TN

As US gas prices go down, WA gas prices are going up / Seattle orders  homeless encampment following double homicide / Another prisoner escaping custody at SEA airport // Seattle residents have to make $10,000 dollars more to afford average rent costs // Sha’carri Richardson "apologizes" for domestic abuse charge in SEA airport, remains the face of Nike

Send us a textThe Mixed Vibes crew shares their wildest experiences with people shooting their shot, from Willie Earl lingering at the desk until 5am to unexpected come-ons at Disney World during a church trip.• Hosts discuss Offset's ongoing comments about Cardi B and Stephon Diggs, debating whether it's heartbreak or bitter baby daddy behavior• The crew analyzes Sha'Carri Richardson's airport altercation and subsequent arrest, speculating about relationship troubles• Discussion about breaking toxic dating cycles and why people keep dating the same type of person• "Is It Important?" segment covers Rashida vs K. Michelle streaming stats, Claressa Shields challenging Laila Ali, and BET canceling awards shows• Fat Joe's comments about "gentrification" affecting BET programming spark conversation about the evolution of Black entertainment networksFollow us on social media and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts - Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok.FOLLOW. SUBSCRIBE. SHARE. Contactmixedvibeztv@gmail.com (720) 381-1092Facebook www.facebook.com/mixedvibezYouTube https://youtube.com/@mixedvibezmediaTikTokhttps://www.tiktok.com/@mixedvibezmedia?_t=8aEYresFfkw&_r=1Instagramhttps://www.instagram.com/mixedvibezpodcast/

LaVar, TJ, and Plax talk about the continuing saga between Jerry Jones and Micah Parsons, the airport incident with Sha’Carri Richardson and her boyfriend, Geno Smith’s preseason return to Seattle sparks some gestures, and more! #fsrweekendsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dans le CQFR du jour, Antoine Pimmel et Shaï Mamou discutent de la rumeur Josh Giddey aux Golden State Warriors, de l'énorme performance d'Alyssa Thomas avec Phoenix et de la raison pour laquelle c'est la joueuse préférée de Shaï. Au menu aussi, le projet loufoque de Mr Beast qui veut organiser un 1vs1 entre LeBron James et Michael Jordan...Voici tout Ce Qu'il Fallait Retenir en cette matinée du 8 août 2025.Commandez l'Anthologie REVERSE Vol.1 https://www.basketsession.com/produit/reverse-anthologie-20-ans-de-basketball/Commandez le Mook REVERSE #16 spécial MIAMI https://www.basketsession.com/produit/mook-reverse-16-miami/Commandez le livre GOATs - Le meilleur (et le pire) de la NBA en 130 Tops https://www.basketsession.com/produit/goats-le-meilleur-et-le-pire-de-la-nba-en-130-tops/Commandez le livre Une saison en enfer https://www.basketsession.com/produit/une-saison-en-enfer/Nos émissions sur YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@BasketSessionREVERSELe Mook REVERSE ► https://www.basketsession.com/mook-reverse/Instagram ► https://www.instagram.com/reversemagazineBlueSky ►https://bsky.app/profile/reversemagazine.bsky.social Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/BasketSession Twitch ► https://www.twitch.tv/reverse_basketsession

On this episode, DCMWG discusses Shannon Sharpe's firing from ESPN (3:35), the conviction of rapper KSOO (9:55) and the arrest of Olympic track star Sha'carri Richardson (13:00). The Rapper vs. Athlete drama has been dominating social media and DCMWG steps right in it starting with the former NFL player Johnny Manziel and Philly rapper turned podcaster Gillie Da King feud (20:00) and the twitter/X beef between Nicki Minaj and Dez Bryant (25:30). DCMWG discusses the announcement of Boosie taking a plea deal (30:35), and the arrest of Gilbert Arenas for running an illegal gambling operation in his California mansion (33:05), plus more trending topics. The episode closes with a recap of the Richmond show and upcoming tour dates (36:50), and DCMWG's  Darkside of the DM (46:25).                                                                                                                                                               ------------------------- JOIN THE DCMWG PLUS COMMUNITY FOR UNCENSORED & BONUS EPISODES, AD-FREE LISTENING & OTHER EXCLUSIVE CONTENT: https://dcmwg.supportingcast.fm -------------------- This episode is sponsored by Kikoff. Start building credit today, go to https://getkikoff.com/dcmwg and you can get your first month for as little as one dollar! -------------------- Get your real life advice from Mona on the show! Dial 267-225-2492 and leave a question for a chance to have your voicemail answered on an episode. The best voicemails may get a call back on our Callin' All Cousins subscription episodes. ------------------------- See Mona's Stand Up Or Sit Down Comedy Tour at these upcoming shows: 8/29- Baton Rouge,  9/11 - Los Angeles, San Diego - 9/14. Get tickets at https://linktr.ee/DontCallMeWhiteGirl ------------------------- Executive Producers for Breakbeat: Dave Mays & Brett Jeffries Executive Producer: Don't Call Me White Girl Producer: Zack James Co-Producer: Ebonie Dukes (@iammsdukes) Visual Production: Creative Mind Productions: Vernon Ray (@AllMoneyShots) & Rebel Hill Productions: Zack James (@ZJames_RHC) Instagram: @BreakbeatMedia @DontCallMeeWhiteGirl @PhelpsJugo  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr Boyce discusses Sha'Carri Richardson and economic mistakes she's making

mobilinternetekPassau találkozástalanságMilyen az igazi linzer?drága parkolásLegoland élményekaz igazi szar kávényári italnyelvi sokszínűségLa Marzocco kávégépekSage SOV905Sage BGR820Loveramics kerámiákanalóg örömökTwitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitteren Írhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

Sha'Carri Richardson arrested at SeaTac // The most unusual service on state ferries // JRod // AGREE TO DISAGREE: Gee takes a cognitive test // The hydros at T Mobile Park are more interesting than the real hydros // WE HEAR YOU! and WORDS TO LIVE BY

We're back and this week Ronnie is joined by a brand new guest* as they talk about the 1999 David Fincher film Fight Club. Yep. Every podcast talks about this film even though its a clear violation of Rule #1 but rules are for butt wipes and space monkeys. In this Glass Half Full we ask our usual questions: when did we first see this film, 3 things we love about it, and 1 thing to change. We also ramble about toxic masculinity in podcasting, logistics of domestic terrorism, male genitalia, 1 star IMDb reviews, and occasionally bring up the film. We spoil the ending of this film so don't listen if you're one of the 100 people in the world who have never seen Fight Club. *Sha'ne's audio is awful and he is dead to this podcast againEnd Theme made by: brainless_bearyann. Check him out on Instagram! Thanks to FreeSounds.org contributors. Audio clips were used from Fight Club, deadmeme on YouTube, Saturday Night Night - Matt Foley, Burn After Reading, KaraFun Karaoke Where Is My Mind?, Nacho Libre, and the Phantom Menace. Follow us:Instagram: podcastwastedpotentialEmail: podcastwastedpotential@gmail.com #fightclub #bradpitt #edwardnorton #davidfincher

In This Week's Episode--Shannon Sharpe and Ocho in trouble--Sha'Carri Richardson--Beyonce gets ripped off in Atlanta--NC Democrats screw over their voters--And more...

Dr. Vinod Rao (Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston) join AJP Audio to discuss predicting the relative risk of patients with an ADHD diagnosis developing a later stimulant or substance use disorder based on the method of prescription, in person or via telehealth. Afterwards, AJP Editor-in-Chief Dr. Ned Kalin discusses the rest of the August issue of the Journal. 00:07   Rao interview 01:53   Stimulant use disorder versus substance use disorder 02:59   Cohort size and incidence of SUDs 04:28   Length of clinician engagement in non-profit versus for profit hospital systems 05:18   Patient cohort 06:20   Potential difference in mechanism between prescribing practices 07:35   Continued use of telehealth 08:43   Limitations 10:03   Further research 11:17   Kalin interview 11:24   Rao et al. 15:41   Mahjani et al. 19:59   Zhang et al. 25:11   Sha et al. 29:33   Gao and Olfson Transcript Be sure to let your colleagues know about the podcast, and please rate and review it on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to it. Subscribe to the podcast here. Listen to other podcasts produced by the American Psychiatric Association. Browse articles online. How authors may submit their work. Follow the journals of APA Publishing on Twitter. E-mail us at ajp@psych.org

Can you scale fast without falling into legal traps?In this episode of The BarberShop with Shantanu, we are joined by Archana Rajaram (Managing Partner, River Law) and Anup Agarwal (Co-Founder & CEO, Mintifi) to decode a side of entrepreneurship that's often left behind and what really happens when capital, compliance, and chaos collide.From helping founders steer clear of costly mistakes to making sense of India's tricky legal systems, Archana breaks down how "good lawyering should never come in the way of business". And Anup shares how Mintifi is not just simplifying credit for distributors but doing it while keeping unit economics and risk in check.This episode is basically a founder survival guide on what to fight for, what to let go, and how to not get distracted by vanity clauses.Key Takeaways from the episode:Why not hiring a lawyer early could cost you crores.The dos and don'ts of equity dilution, term sheets, and board control.How Mintifi is solving working capital at scale using tech-first lending.When you should fight a clause and when to just move on.If you're a founder, investor, or just someone trying to make sense of startup chaos, this episode will make you think and maybe double-check your SHA.Let us know in the comments what's one legal or financial misstep you wish someone had warned you about.

The team is back with another crazy and insightful time in RnB Music. Avehre, Ta'Sha, Dimps & Mr. Rellion, We also have the young and talented Miss Zoe Johnson in the building. @ZoeJohnsonVEVO-l9k

a sokszavas tituluskapitány vs. első tisztMicorosoft Flight Simulator élmények és hasznosságaMiért lett mégis elsőnek közgazdász?vitorlázórepülés fontosságasoklépcsős út a légitársaságigWizz Air Pilot AcademyMilyen nyelven beszélnek a repülőn?a titkos projektórák gyűjtögetése szorgalmasanAirbus ismeretetés rövidennagygépes szimulátorozás - típusképzéskadét élet légtitársaságnálhangulat a repülőgépenoktatói létTwitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitterenÍrhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

The 2025 USATF Outdoor Track and Field Championships start Thursday in Eugene. Wejo, Rojo, and Jon give their picks for Tokyo in all the distance events and then surmise about some of the other events. Want podcasts from USAs? You have to be a LetsRun.com VIP to get them. Join our Suppoters Club today https://www.letsrun.com/subscribe Play in our $200,025 USAs Prediction Contest Show notes: 00:00 Introduction and Supporters Club Promotion 01:02 Start 03:08 SF Marathon Banter 05:23 USAs Prediction Contest 06:29 USAs Previews 08:08 Men's 800m *link 18:09 Women's 800m 25:15 Men's 1500m *link 34:19 Women's 1500 37:03 Men's Steeplechase 45:31 Women's Steeplechase 51:11 Men's 5000m w Intern Tate 01:09:38 Women's 5,000 01:16:01 Men's 10,000 01:18:58 Women's 10,000 01:22:34 Top Storylines at USAs 01:22:46 Men's 100: What about Noah and the high schooler? What about Sha'Carri? 01:32:18 Women's 400 & Sydney 01:34:49 Ethiopian Team Selections 01:40:30 Grand Slam Track Update Contact us: Email podcast@letsrun.com or call/text 1-844-LETSRUN podcast voicemail/text line. Want a 2nd podcast every week? And savings on running shoes? Join the LetsRun.com Supporters Club today for exclusive content, a bonus weekly podcast, shoe savings, and more. Cancel anytime .https://www.letsrun.com/subscribe Check out the LetsRun.com store. https://shop.letsrun.com/ We've got the softest running shirts in the business. Thanks for listening. Please rate us on your podcast app and spread the word to friend. Find out more at http://podcast.letsrun.com Give us feedback on this podcast or call us 1-844-LETSRUN and leave a voicemail https://pinecast.com/feedback/letsrun/43a26c17-01b6-40ae-854d-7fbea333e095

fiatalkorunk szalonjameteorológiai szakértéskincses kalendáriumprofi fotózás telefonnalKell-e sok megapixel?modern MILC előnye és hátrányaobjektívek és vázak amiket bérelnénkdrága hobbikközösségi prekoncepcióinkTwitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitteren Írhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

I'm sure you're familiar with the saying: “curiosity killed the cat.” We say it when curiosity leads us down an unproductive or even dangerous path. However, in a fascinating interview with Professor Tal ben Shahar, an expert in the field of positive psychology, he offers this wonderful line: “curiosity might have killed the cat, but it keeps us alive.” Curiosity, says this prominent researcher, is one of the great secrets of happiness. It ensures that even when we're alone, we're not bored. But also, says ben Shahar, being curious about others brings new relationships, can help mend broken ones and deepens connections.About Rabbi Sonia SaltzmanRabbi Sonia Saltzman is currently serving as Rabbinic Advisor for Graduate Students at Boston University Hillel. She has taught at various synagogue communities, including Temple Emanuel (Newton), Kerem Shalom (Concord) and Newbridge on the Charles (Dedham). Rabbi Saltzman was Senior Rabbi at Temple Ohabei Shalom, Brookline from 2011-2018 and from 2008-2011 she served as the rabbi of Sha'arei Shalom, Ashland.Rabbi Saltzman was ordained in 2008 as part of the first graduating class of the Rabbinical School at Hebrew College. During Rabbinical School, she held student pulpits at Temple Emanuel in Newton and at Temple Aliyah in Needham, completed chaplaincy training at Brigham and Women's Hospital, and served as faculty for the Bronfman Youth Fellowship Program in Israel. Prior to entering the rabbinate, Rabbi Saltzman worked in the field of micro-finance at ACCION International as head of the Financial Services Department, extending credit to small businesses in the developing world. She also worked in Bank of Boston's Project Finance Department and taught in its Loan Officer Development Program. Rabbi Saltzman is a graduate of Tufts University (BA in Political Science) and holds a Masters Degree in International Affairs (Columbia University) and a Masters Degree in Bible and Jewish Thought (Brandeis University).She is married to Dr. Ned Saltzman, a urologist at Newton-Wellesley Hospital and has two grown sons, Benjamin and Gabriel.

The team is back with another crazy and insightful time in RnB Music. Avehre, Ta'Sha, Dimps & Mr. Rellion

fejfedő kérdésTilley nyári kalapTravelers CompanyFiók webshop - Travelers termékekRoterfaden noteszekdigitális jegyzetek szinkronizálásadiagram kódolásrajzolásMeddig érdemes retusálni?Twitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitteren Írhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

What's the real source of simcha in Torah—and why does it sometimes feel so hard to access? This vaad explores how Torah connects us directly to Hashem, reframes the experience of learning, and helps us move past the weight of spiritual sadness (atzvus) toward deeper joy and vitality.1. Torah as Sha'ashuim→ Torah is Hashem's delight—our way to connect to the Infinite.2. Real Simcha in Learning→ Joy comes not from good sugyas alone, but from knowing what Torah is.3. Depth Over Time→ Torah must grow with you—or it withers. Simcha depends on ongoing depth.4. Atzvus vs. Merirus→ Not all sadness is holy. Learn the difference—and how to stay motivated.5. The Avodah Is the Goal→ Torah isn't a means to an end. Learning is the relationship.6. Practical Anchoring→ Show up. Say birchas haTorah with purpose. Reframe the hard days. Stay in the process.mrubin214@gmail.com

SEASON V , The Team is Back for another season. Avehre,Ta'Sha,DimplesMusic & Mr. Rellion

The pasuk in Kohelet says: " עֵת לָלֶדֶת וְעֵת לָמוּת " — "A time to be born, and a time to die." (Kohelet 3:2). The Midrash in Kohelet Rabbah teaches that from the moment a person is born, Hashem determines exactly how long that person will live. Every breath, every second, is measured. And it is considered a great merit for someone to live out every single moment of their allotted time in this world. We cannot begin to grasp the infinite value of just one second of life. Sometimes, patients who are suffering deeply may wish to pass on rather than continue living in pain, connected to machines. Their families, too, may struggle watching them suffer. These situations are deeply painful and emotionally charged—but they are also halachically complex, and a competent Rav must always be consulted. These are not decisions anyone should take into their own hands. Halachah teaches us that we desecrate Shabbat to extend the life of a patient even in a vegetable state, even if it's just for one more second. That is how precious life is in Hashem's eyes. Rabbi Aryeh Levin once visited a man who was suffering terribly in the hospital. The man asked the rabbi, "Why should I continue living like this? I can't pray, I can't learn. I'm just in pain." Rabbi Levin gently took his hand and answered, "Who knows? Perhaps one word of Shema said in pain is worth more than a lifetime of mitzvot done in comfort. Every breath you take now—with emunah—brings Hashem so much nachat." The man began to cry. From that moment on, he accepted each breath with emunah and gratitude. He passed away just a few days later—peaceful, uplifted, and surrounded by meaning. Chazal say: "Sha'ah achat shel teshuvah u'maasim tovim ba'olam hazeh yafeh mikol chayei ha'olam haba"—one hour of repentance and good deeds in this world is greater than all of the World to Come. In just one moment, a person can elevate himself spiritually forever. The Gemara in Avodah Zarah shares three separate stories of individuals who earned their entire portion in the World to Come in one moment of their life. When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard them, he wept, recognizing the unimaginable power of even a single second. The Sifrei Kodesh teach that even one thought of teshuvah can have massive spiritual effects. Even a person on his deathbed, who cannot speak or move, can—through one pure thought, one yearning for Hashem—accomplish more than all the angels in Heaven combined. If all a person can do is breathe, that breath is a treasure beyond comprehension. As long as someone is breathing, Hashem wants him alive. His mission in this world is not yet complete. A man shared with me that his father, Eddie, recently passed away. He had told his children that if he reached the end of life, he didn't want to be kept alive artificially and in pain. But when the time came, his children called Chayim Aruchim, an organization that helps families navigate end-of-life issues according to halachah. They were given a personal Rav who was an expert in this field. He came down to the hospital and explained the halachic importance—and the spiritual benefit to Eddie and his family—of staying connected to the machine, even for a short time. The Rav monitored his condition every day for ten days, ensuring halachah was followed precisely. Eventually, the doctors said Eddie's final moments had come. His children gathered around his bed and watched their father take his last breaths. They were so grateful they had consulted daat Torah and allowed their father to live every moment Hashem had intended for him. And then, just as they left the hospital, a truck drove by with the word "Eddie's" written in big letters—something they had never seen before. To them, it felt like a wink from Hashem, a small smile from Above, affirming that they had done the right thing. Every second of life is a priceless gift. In one moment, a person can earn eternity. And sometimes, the last breath we breathe with emunah is something that brings the greatest glory to Hashem.

The Barn instant kávépodcast felfedezésekkézzel írásSupernote jegyzetelőreMarkable olcsósítvairodai szerszámosládaGergő új kabátjastrapabíró ruházkodásDave táskái mindenrevakuzásbasicappleguy.comTwitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitteren Írhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

This episode explores surprising cyber security lessons hidden within Mission: Impossible's latest blockbuster. We analyze how Hollywood's depiction of AI threats, immutable backups, and air-gapped storage actually reflects real-world data protection challenges.Curtis and Prasanna dissect the movie's central premise: an AI entity altering digital reality, making it impossible to distinguish truth from fiction. The solution? An underwater Doomsday Vault containing an immutable, offline backup of the original source code. We discuss how this fictional scenario mirrors actual cybersecurity best practices, from 3-2-1 backup strategies to cryptographic hash verification.Key topics include the spectrum of immutability, why truly offline storage matters for ransomware protection, and how insider threats can compromise even the most secure systems. We also cover practical applications like object storage, SHA-256 hashing, and the human vulnerabilities that often undermine technical security measures. Whether you're a backup professional or just curious about data protection, this episode proves that sometimes the best cyber security lessons come from the most unexpected places.

Hen over sommeren vikarierer Rune Lykkeberg for Anna von Sperling på Radio Information. I dagens afsnit taler han med to af redaktørerne bag en ny bog, der bringer ti personlige vidnesbyrd om, hvad det vil sige at være palæstinenser i Danmark --- Hvad vil det sige at være palæstinenser i Danmark? Det seneste års offentlige debat har vist, at det har været svært for vores statsminister og mange andre at anerkende, at de palæstinensere, der er i Danmark, er danskere ligesom alle andre og skal omfattes med samme solidaritet og minimum af sympati. Man kan begræde, at det ikke falder naturligt, men det nytter ikke noget. Det, der nytter, er at dele historier og livsfortællinger med hinanden. Tidligere på året udkom en vigtig bog med titlen Palæstinenseren. Den består af ti personlige vidnesbyrd om, hvad det vil sige at være palæstinenser i Danmark. Hvordan dén identitet både kan være en byrde og en kilde til stolthed. Og hvilke store historier, der gemmer sig i den – men også hvilke krav og forventninger, som følger med. I denne uges sommersamtale taler Rune Lykkeberg med to af redaktører bag bogen om deres erfaringer som dansk-palæstinensere. Gæsterne er: Journalist Layal Freije, der bl.a. er radiovært på programmet Gaza FM på Radio IIII og skriver om Mellemøsten for Information. Hendes bedsteforældre kommer fra Al-Khalisa. Og jurist Tarek Ziad Hussein, der er direktør for Dansk Flygtningehjælp Ungdom (DFUNK) og bl.a. forfatter til bogen Det sorte skæg. Tareks familie stammer fra Sha'ab på farens side og Sheikh Danun på morens side. Palæstinenseren - Personlige refleksioner over arven fra Palæstina udkom på Gads Forlag tidligere i år og kan købes i enhver boghandler. 

étkezünk és kávézunkkalandok Iránbólprogramozók a filmekbengyűlölködés ellen: PridePartizán az online TVFriderikusz: TheVRrégi magyar podcastokcéges podcastokfilmajánló: F1apukajátékTwitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitteren Írhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

Join Jon & Sha as they discuss the updates on the Diddy trial.  28 Years Later makes over $103 million in it's opening week.We also review and react to the following trailers:Monster IslandShamanProject Hail MaryTroll 2The Running ManHell HouseShe Rides Shotgun

italkultúra: vitaminos Spezibajor konyhamunkahelyi fotósfotós asszisztensBayerischer WaldPeak Design bőröndcipzár standardVolvo kérdéskörcsomagok az autóbaToyota RAV4 népítéletekNintendo Switch 2 első élményekTwitterünk - Kotyogós podcast officialAntenna twitterenGergő twitteren Írhatsz nekünk e-mailt: kotyogospodcast@gmail.comHa meghívnál minket egy kávéra és ezzel hozzá szeretnél férni a specialty tartalmunkhoz megjelenés pillanatában:Patreon támogatásHa beszélgetni akartok velünk és hallgatótársaitokkal akkor Telegramon is megtehetitek ha a "t pont me per kotyogos"-ra mentek.

Es una novela aunque parezca un diario o un cuaderno de escritura. Parte de un ejercicio de un taller de escritura (esos lugares de intimidad y comunión) en el que le pidieron más: más de ese personaje, más mirada, más reflexión. Y Acoidán escribe sobre el desclasamiento, la deslocalización de Canarias a Madrid, el cambio de lenguaje del canario de su infancia a esta especie de español al que llaman "neutro" que le exigían en sus comienzos como estudiante de arte dramático y comunicación audiovisual. Ahora Acoidán es profesor de guion y padre, y, desde esa mirada, recomienda 'Un trabajo para toda la vida' de Rachel Cusk (Libros del Asteroide) y también 'Los llanos ' de Federico Falco (Anagrama). Los libros de actualidad que recomienda Asensio tienen que ver con Irán: 'Todos los hombres del Sha', de Stephen Pinker (que en su día publicó Debate pero hoy se encuentra descatalogada) y '¡Mártir!' de Kaveh Akbar (Blackie Books). La empleada destaca dos novedades: 'Europa' de Luis López Carrasco (Anagrama) y 'El guitarrista de Montreal' de Miguel Barrero (Galaxia Gutemberg). Los oyentes hoy recomiendan 'La tesis de Nancy' de Ramón J. Sénder (editorial Casals) y 'El perfume' de Patrick Suskind (Seix Barral). Y Pascual Donate rescata de la redacción 'El visionario', de Friedrich Schiller y la continuacíon de Hans Heinz Ewers (Montesinos).

Es una novela aunque parezca un diario o un cuaderno de escritura. Parte de un ejercicio de un taller de escritura (esos lugares de intimidad y comunión) en el que le pidieron más: más de ese personaje, más mirada, más reflexión. Y Acoidán escribe sobre el desclasamiento, la deslocalización de Canarias a Madrid, el cambio de lenguaje del canario de su infancia a esta especie de español al que llaman "neutro" que le exigían en sus comienzos como estudiante de arte dramático y comunicación audiovisual. Ahora Acoidán es profesor de guion y padre, y, desde esa mirada, recomienda 'Un trabajo para toda la vida' de Rachel Cusk (Libros del Asteroide) y también 'Los llanos ' de Federico Falco (Anagrama). Los libros de actualidad que recomienda Asensio tienen que ver con Irán: 'Todos los hombres del Sha', de Stephen Pinker (que en su día publicó Debate pero hoy se encuentra descatalogada) y '¡Mártir!' de Kaveh Akbar (Blackie Books). La empleada destaca dos novedades: 'Europa' de Luis López Carrasco (Anagrama) y 'El guitarrista de Montreal' de Miguel Barrero (Galaxia Gutemberg). Los oyentes hoy recomiendan 'La tesis de Nancy' de Ramón J. Sénder (editorial Casals) y 'El perfume' de Patrick Suskind (Seix Barral). Y Pascual Donate rescata de la redacción 'El visionario', de Friedrich Schiller y la continuacíon de Hans Heinz Ewers (Montesinos).

A weekly magazine-style radio show featuring the voices and stories of Asians and Pacific Islanders from all corners of our community. The show is produced by a collective of media makers, deejays, and activists. Tonight Producer Swati Rayasam showcases a community panel of how discriminatory exclusion policies during times of heightened fears of national security and safety have threatened our communities in the past, and how the activities of the current administration threaten our core constitutional rights, raising the specter of politicization and polarization of citizenship, immigration visas, naturalization rights, and the right to free speech.   Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison – “Wong Kim Ark is for All of Us” SHOW TRANSCRIPT Swati Rayasam: You are tuned in to APEX Express on KPFA. My name is Swati Rayasam and I'm back as your special producer for this episode. Tonight we have an incredible community panel titled Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison. This panel explores the history of how discriminatory exclusion policies during times of heightened fears of national security and [00:01:00] safety have threatened our communities in the past, and how the activities of the current administration threaten our core constitutional rights, raising the specter of politicization and polarization of citizenship, immigration visas, naturalization rights, and the right to free speech. I'll pass it on to UC Berkeley Ethnic Studies Professor Mike Chang to kick us off. Mike and Harvey: We're starting on Berkeley time, right on time at three 10, and I want to introduce Harvey Dong. Harvey Dong: Okay. The sponsors for today's event include, AADS- Asian American and Diaspora studies program, uc, Berkeley, Asian American Research Center, the Center for Race and Gender Department of Ethnic Studies- all part of uc, Berkeley. Off campus, we have the following community groups. Chinese for Affirmative Action, Asian Law Caucus, [00:02:00] Asian Prisoners Support Committee, and East Wind Books. Okay, so that's, quite a few in terms of coalition people coming together. My name is Harvey Dong and I'm also a lecturer in the AADS program and part of the ethnic studies department. I can say that I exist here as the result of birthright citizenship won by Ancestor Wong Kim Ark in 1898. Otherwise, I would not be here. We want to welcome everyone here today, for this important panel discussion titled: Deport, Exclude, Revoke, Imprison – Immigration and citizenship rights during crisis. Yes, we are in a deep crisis today. The Chinese characters for crisis is way G in Mandarin or way gay in [00:03:00] Cantonese, which means danger and opportunity. We are in a moment of danger and at the same time in a moment of opportunity. Our communities are under attack from undocumented, documented, and those with citizenship. We see urgency in coming together. In 1898, the US Supreme Court case, US versus Wong Kim Ark held that under the 14th Amendment birthright, citizenship applies to all people born in the United States. Regardless of their race or their parents' national origin or immigration status. On May 15th this year, the Supreme Court will hear a President Donald Trump's request to implement an executive order that will end birthright citizenship already before May 15th, [00:04:00] deportations of US citizen children are taking place. Recently, three US citizen children, one 2-year-old with cancer have been deported with their undocumented parents. The numbers of US citizen children are much higher being deported because it's less covered in the press. Unconstitutional. Yes, definitely. And it's taking place now. Also today, more than 2.7 million southeast Asian Americans live in the US but at least 16,000 community members have received final orders of deportation, placing their lives and families in limbo. This presents a mental health challenge and extreme economic hardship for individuals and families who do not know whether their next day in the US will be their last. Wong Kim Ark's [00:05:00] struggle and the lessons of Wong Kim Ark, continue today. His resistance provides us with a grounding for our resistance. So they say deport, exclude, revoke, imprison. We say cease and desist. You can say that every day it just seems like the system's gone amuk. There's constant attacks on people of color, on immigrants and so forth. And our only solution, or the most important solution is to resist, legally resist, but also to protest, to demand cease and desist. Today brings together campus and community people. We want you all to be informed because if you're uninformed , you can't do anything. Okay? You have to know where things are at. It's nothing new. What they're trying to do, in 1882, [00:06:00] during times of economic crisis, they scapegoated Asian Americans. Today there's economic, political crisis. And the scapegoating continues. They're not doing anything new. You know, it's old stuff, but we have to realize that, and we have to look at the past in terms of what was done to fight it and also build new solidarities today. Wong Kim Ark did not take his situation sitting down. He went through, lots of obstacles. He spent three months in Angel Island he was arrested after he won his case because he was constantly being harassed wherever he went. His kids when they came over were also, spotted as being Wong Kim Ark's, children, and they too had to spend months at Angel Island. So Wong Kim Ark did not take his situation sitting down. We need to learn from him today. Our [00:07:00] next, special guest is Mr. Norman Wong, a good friend of mine. He was active here in the third world Liberation Front strike that led to ethnic studies. He did a lots of work for the development of Asian American studies and we've been out in touch for about, what, 40 years? So I'm really happy that he's able to come back to Berkeley and to talk about yourself, if you wish, maybe during the Q and a, but to talk about , the significance of your great-grandfather's case. Okay, so Norman Wong, let's give him a hand. Norman Wong: Hello, my name's Norman Wong. I'm the great grandson, Wong Kim Ark. Wong Kim Ark was [00:08:00] born in the USA, like my great-grandfather. I, too was born American in the same city, San Francisco, more than 75 years after him. We are both Americans, but unlike him, my citizenship has never been challenged. His willingness to stand up and fight made the difference for his struggles, my humble thanks. Wong Kim Ark however, was challenged more than once. In late 1889 as an American, he traveled to China in July, 1890. He returned to his birth city. He had his papers and had no problems with reentry. In 1895, after a similar trip, he was stopped from disembarking and was placed into custody for five months aboard ship in port. [00:09:00] Citizenship denied, the reason the Chinese exclusion Act 1882. He had to win this case in district court, provide $250 bail and then win again in the United States Supreme Court, March 28th, 1898. Only from these efforts, he was able to claim his citizenship granted by birthright from the 14th Amendment and gain his freedom. That would not be the last challenge to his being American. My mother suffered similar treatment. She like my great-grandfather, was born in America. In 1942, she was forced with her family and thousands of other Japanese Americans to relocation camps an experience unspoken by her family. [00:10:00] I first learned about Japanese American internment from history books. Executive order 9066 was the command. No due process, citizenship's rights stripped. She was not American enough. Now we have executive order 14160. It is an attack on birthright citizenship. We cannot let this happen. We must stand together. We are a nation of immigrants. What kind of nation are we to be with stateless children? Born to no country. To this, I say no. We as Americans need to embrace each other and [00:11:00] cherish each new life. Born in the USA. Thank you. Harvey Dong: Thank you, Norman. And Annie Lee, will moderate, the following panel, involving campus and community representatives who will be sharing their knowledge and experience. Annie Lee, Esquire is an attorney. She's also the, managing director of policy for Chinese Affirmative Action, and she's also, heavily involved in the birthright citizenship issue. Annie Lee: Thank you so much Harvey for that very warm welcome and thank you again to Norman for your remarks. I think it's incredible that you're speaking up at this moment, to preserve your ancestors' legacy because it impacts not just you and him, but all of us [00:12:00] here. So thank you. As Harvey said, my name is Annie Lee and I have this honor of working with this amazing panel of esteemed guest we have today. So I will ask each of them to introduce themselves. And I will start, because I would love to hear your name, pronouns. Title and organization as well as your personal or professional relationship with the US Immigration System. So my name's Annie. I use she her pronouns. I'm the managing Director of policy at Chinese for Affirmative Action, which is a non-profit based in San Francisco Chinatown. We provide direct services to the monolingual working class Chinese community, and also advocate for policies to benefit all Asian Americans. My relationship with the immigration system is I am the child of two Chinese immigrants who did not speak English. And so I just remember lots of time spent on the phone when I was a kid with INS, and then it became U-S-C-I-S just trying to ask them what happened to [00:13:00] a family member's application for naturalization, for visas so I was the interpreter for them growing up and even today. I will pass it to Letty. Leti Volpp: Hi everybody. Thank you so much, Annie. Thank you Harvey. Thank you, Norman. That was profoundly moving to hear your remarks and I love the way that you framed our conversation, Harvey. I'm Leti Volpp. I am the Robert d and Leslie k Raven, professor of Law and Access to Justice at the Berkeley Law, school. I'm also the director of the campus wide , center for Race and Gender, which is a legacy of the Third World Liberation Front, and the 1999, student movement, that led to the creation of the center. I work on immigration law and citizenship theory, and I am the daughter, second of four, children of my mother who was an immigrant from China, and my father who was an immigrant [00:14:00] from Germany. So I'll pass it. Thank you. Ke Lam: Thank you. Thank you all for being here. Thank you, Norman. So my name's Key. I go by he, him pronouns or Nghiep “Ke” Lam, is my full name. I work for an organization called Asian Prison Support Committee. It's been around for like over two decades now, and it started behind three guys advocating for ethics study, Asian and Pacific Islander history. And then it was starting in San Quent State Prison. All three of them pushed for ethics study, hard and the result is they all was put into solitary confinement. And many years later, after all three got out, was Eddie Zang, Mike Romero and Mike no. And when they got out, Eddie came back and we pushed for ethics study again, and we actually got it started in 2013. And it's been going on to today. Then the programs is called Roots, restoring our Original True Self. So reconnecting with who we are. And one of Eddie's main, mottos that really stuck with me. He said, we need to all connect to our chi, right? And I'm like, okay, I understand what chi is, and he said no. He [00:15:00] said, you need to connect to your culture, your history, which result to equal your identity, who you are as a person. So, the more we study about our history and our culture, like, birthright citizen, it empower us to know, who we are today. Right? And also part of that is to how do we take down the veil of shame in our community, the veil of trauma that's impacting our community as well. We don't talk about issue that impact us like immigration. So I'm a 1.5 generation. So I was born in Vietnam from Chinese family that migrant from China to Vietnam started business after the fall of Vietnam War. We all got kicked out but more than that, I am directly impacted because I am a stranded deportee, somebody that got their, legal status taken away because of criminal conviction. And as of any moment now, I could actually be taken away. So I live in that, right at that threshold of like uncertainty right now. And the people I work with, which are hundreds of people, are fixing that same uncertainty.[00:16:00] Annie Lee: Thank you, Ke. I'm gonna pass it to our panelists who are joining us virtually, including Bun. Can you start and then we'll pass it to Chris after. Bun: Hey everybody, thank you for having me. My name is Bun. I'm the co-director of Asian Prison Support Committee. I'm also, 1.5 generation former incarcerated and under, direct impact of immigration. Christopher Lapinig: Hi everyone. My name is Christopher Lapinig, my pronouns are he, him and Sha. I am a senior staff attorney on the Democracy and National Initiatives Team at Asian Law Caucus, which you may know is the country's first and oldest legal aid in civil rights organization, dedicated to serving, low income immigrant and underserved AAPI communities. In terms of my connection to the immigration system, I am, I also am a beneficiary of a birthright citizenship, and my parents are both immigrants from the Philippines. I was born in New York City. My [00:17:00] extended family spans both in the US and the Philippines. After graduating law school and clerking, my fellowship project was focused on providing litigation and immigration services to, survivors of labor trafficking in the Filipino community. While working at Asian Americans Advancing Justice Los Angeles, I also was engaged in, class action litigation, challenging the first Trump administration's practices, detaining immigrants in the Vietnamese and Cambodian communities. Annie Lee: Thank you, Chris. Thank you Bun. Let's start off by talking about birthright citizenship since it's a big topic these days. On the very, very first day of Trump's administration, he issued a flurry of executive orders, including one that would alter birthright citizenship. But I wanna take us back to the beginning because why do we have this right? It is a very broad right? If you were born in the United States, you are an American citizen. Where does that come from? So I wanna pose the first question to Letty to talk about the [00:18:00] origins of birthright citizenship., Leti Volpp: Very happy to. So what's being fought about is a particular clause in the Constitution and the 14th Amendment, which says, all persons born are naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Okay, so that's the text. There's been a very long understanding of what this text means, which says that regardless of the immigration status of one's parents, all children born here are entitled to birthright citizenship with three narrow exceptions, which I will explain. So the Trump administration executive order, wants to exclude from birthright citizenship, the children of undocumented immigrants, and the children of people who are here on lawful temporary visas. So for example, somebody here on an [00:19:00] F1 student visa, somebody on a H one B worker visa, somebody here is a tourist, right? And basically they're saying we've been getting this clause wrong for over a hundred years. And I will explain to you why I think they're making this very dubious argument. Essentially when you think about where the 14th amendment came from, in the United States, in the Antebellum era, about 20% of people were enslaved and there were lots of debates about citizenship. Who should be a citizen? Who could be a citizen? And in 1857, the Supreme Court issued a decision in a case called Dread Scott, where they said that no person who was black, whether free or enslaved, could ever be a citizen. The Civil War gets fought, they end slavery. And then the question arose, well, what does this mean for citizenship? Who's a citizen of the United States? And in 1866, Congress [00:20:00] enacts a law called the Civil Rights Act, which basically gave rights to people that were previously denied and said that everybody born in the United States is a birthright citizen. This gets repeated in the 14th Amendment with the very important interpretation of this clause in Norman's great-grandfather's case, the case of Wong Kim Ark. So this came before the Supreme Court in 1898. If you think about the timing of this, the federal government had basically abandoned the reconstruction project, which was the project of trying to newly enfranchised, African Americans in the United States. The Supreme Court had just issued the decision, Plessy versus Ferguson, which basically legitimated the idea that, we can have separate, but equal, as a doctrine of rights. So it was a nation that was newly hostile to the goals of the Reconstruction Congress, and so they had this case come before them, whereas we heard [00:21:00] from Norman, we have his great-grandfather born in San Francisco, Chinatown, traveling back and forth to China. His parents having actually left the United States. And this was basically presented as a test case to the Supreme Court. Where the government tried to argue, similar to what the Trump administration is arguing today, that birthright citizenship, that clause does not guarantee universal birthright citizenship saying that children of immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because their parents are also not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The Supreme Court took over a year to decide the case. They knew that it would be controversial, and the majority of the court said, this provision is clear. It uses universal language. It's intended to apply to children of all immigrants. One of the things that's interesting about [00:22:00] what the, well I'll let Chris actually talk about what the Trump administration, is trying to do, but let me just say that in the Wong Kim Ark decision, the Supreme Court makes very clear there only three narrow exceptions to who is covered by the 14th Amendment. They're children of diplomats. So for example, if the Ambassador of Germany is in the United States, and, she has a daughter, like her daughter should not become a birthright citizen, right? This is why there's diplomatic immunity. Why, for example, in New York City, there are millions of dollars apparently owed to the city, in parking tickets by ambassadors who don't bother to pay them because they're not actually subject to the jurisdiction in the United States. Okay? Second category, children of Native Americans who are seen as having a sovereign relationship of their own, where it's like a nation within a nation, kind of dynamic, a country within a country. And there were detailed conversations in the congressional debate about the [00:23:00] 14th Amendment, about both of these categories of people. The third category, were children born to a hostile invading army. Okay? So one argument you may have heard people talk about is oh, I think of undocumented immigrants as an invading army. Okay? If you look at the Wong Kim Ark decision, it is very clear that what was intended, by this category of people were a context where the hostile invading army is actually in control of that jurisdiction, right? So that the United States government is not actually governing that space so that the people living in it don't have to be obedient, to the United States. They're obedient to this foreign power. Okay? So the thread between all three of these exceptions is about are you having to be obedient to the laws of the United States? So for example, if you're an undocumented immigrant, you are subject to being criminally prosecuted if you commit a crime, right? Or [00:24:00] you are potentially subjected to deportation, right? You have to obey the law of the United States, right? You are still subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Okay? But the Trump administration, as we're about to hear, is making different arguments. Annie Lee: Thank you so much, Leti for that historical context, which I think is so important because, so many different communities of color have contributed to the rights that we have today. And so what Leti is saying here is that birthright citizenship is a direct result of black liberation and fighting for freedom in the Civil War and making sure that they were then recognized as full citizens. And then reinforced, expanded, by Wong Kim Ark. And now we are all beneficiaries and the vast majority of Americans get our citizenship through birth. Okay? That is true for white people, black people. If you're born here, you get your ci. You don't have to do anything. You don't have to go to court. You don't have to say anything. You are a US citizen. And now as Leti referenced, there's this fringe legal theory that, thankfully we've got lawyers like [00:25:00] Chris who are fighting this. So Chris, you're on the ALC team, one of many lawsuits against the Trump administration regarding this unlawful executive order. Can you tell us a little bit about the litigation and the arguments, but I actually really want you to focus on what are the harms of this executive order? Sometimes I think particularly if you are a citizen, and I am one, sometimes we take what we have for granted and you don't even realize what citizenship means or confers. So Chris, can you talk about the harms if this executive order were to go through? Christopher Lapinig: Yeah. As Professor Volpp sort of explained this executive order really is an assault on a fundamental constitutional right that has existed for more than a hundred years at this point, or, well, about 125 years. And if it is allowed to be implemented, the harms would really be devastating and far reach. So first, you know, children born in the us, the [00:26:00] parents without permanent status, as permissible said, would be rendered effectively stateless, in many cases. And these are of course, children, babies who have never known any other home, yet they would be denied the basic rights of citizen. And so the order targets a vast range of families, and not just undocument immigrants, but also those with work visas, student visas, humanitarian productions like TPS, asylum seekers, fleeing persecution, DACA recipients as well. And a lot of these communities have deep ties to Asian American community. To our history, and of course are, essential part, of our social fabric. In practical terms, children born without birthright citizenship would be denied access to healthcare through Medicaid, through denied access to snap nutritional assistance, even basic IDs like social security numbers, passports. And then as they grow older, they'd be barred from voting, serving on juries and even [00:27:00] working. And then later on in life, they might be, if they, are convicted of a crime and make them deportable, they could face deportation to countries that they never stepped, foot off basically. And so this basically is this executive order threatened at risk, creating exactly what the drafters of the 14th Amendment wanted to prevent the creation of a permanent underclass of people in the United States. It'll just get amplified over time. If you can imagine if there's one generation of people born without citizenship, there will be a second generation born and a third and fourth, and it'll just get amplified over time. And so it truly is just, hard to get your mind around exactly what the impact of this EO would be. Annie Lee: Thanks, Chris. And where are we in the litigation right now? Harvey referenced, a hearing at the Supreme Court on May 15th, but, tell us a little bit about the injunction and the arguments on the merits and when that can, when we can expect [00:28:00] that. Christopher Lapinig: Yeah, so there were a number of lawsuits filed immediately after, the administration issued its exec order on January 20th. Asian Law Caucus we filed with the ACLU Immigrant Rights Project. Literally we were the first lawsuit, literally hours after the executive order was issued. By early February, federal judges across the country had issued nationwide preliminary injunctions blocking implementation of the order. Our case is actually not a nationwide injunction. And so there're basically, I believe three cases that are going up to the Supreme Court. And, the Trump administration appealed to various circuit courts to try to undo these injunctions. But all circuit courts upheld the injunctive relief and and so now the Supreme Court is going to be hearing arguments on May 15th. And so it has not actually ruled on whether or not the executive order is constitutional, but it's going to. I mean, it remains to be seen exactly what they're going to decide but may [00:29:00] 15th is the next date is the big date on our calendar. Annie Lee: Yeah. So the Trump administration is arguing that these judges in a particular district, it's not fair if they get to say that the entire country, is barred from receiving this executive order. Is that procedurally correct. Judges, in order to consider whether to grants an injunction, they have a whole battery of factors that they look at, including one, which is like likelihood of winning on the merits. Because if something is unconstitutional, it's not really great to say, yeah, you can let this executive order go through. And then like later when the court cases finally worked their way, like a year later, pull back from that. And so that's, it's very frustrating to see this argument. And it's also unfair and would be very messy if the states that had republican Attorneys General who did not litigate, why would you allow the executive order to go forward in those red states and not in these blue state? It really, I would say federalism run terribly amuck. Swati Rayasam: [00:30:00] You are tuned in to APEX Express on 94.1 KPFA, 89.3 KPFB in Berkeley,. 88.1. KFCF in Fresno and online@kpfa.org. Annie Lee: But anyway, let's see back off from the actual case because I think what we're really talking about and what Chris has alluded to is, these cases about birthright citizenship, all the immigration policy is essentially determining who belongs here. Who belongs here. That's what immigration policy is at its heart. And we see that the right wing is weaponizing that question, who belongs here? And they are going after very vulnerable populations, undocumented people, people who are formerly incarcerated. So Bun if you can talk about how, is the formerly incarcerated community, like targeted immigrants, targeted for deportation? What is going on with this community that I feel like most people might not know about? Thank [00:31:00] you. Bun: Yes. For our folks that are incarcerated and former incarcerated, we are the easiest target for deportation because we are in custody and in California, CDCR colludes with ICE and on the day that we are to be paroled they're at the door, cuffing us up and taking us to detention. I'm glad to hear Harvey say, this is a time of fear for us and also opportunity. Right now, our whole community, the Southeast Asian community, mainly are very effective with immigration. In the past 25 years, mostly it was the Cambodian community that was being targeted and deported. At this moment, they are targeting, all of the Southeast Asian community, which historically was never deported because of the politics and agreements, of the Vietnamese community. And now the Laos community thats more concerning, that are being targeted for deportation. Trump have opened a new opportunity for us as a community to join [00:32:00] together and understand each other's story, and understand each other's fear. Understand where we're going about immigration. From birthright to crimmagration. A lot of times folks that are under crimmigration are often not spoken about because of our cultural shame, within our own family and also some of our community member felt safe because the political agreements. Now that everybody's in danger, we could stand together and understand each other's issue and support each other because now we could see that history has repeated itself. Again, we are the scapegoat. We are here together fighting the same issue in different circumstances, but the same issue. Annie Lee: But let me follow up. What are these, historical agreements that you're talking about that used to feel like used to at least shield the community that now aren't in place anymore? Bun: Yeah. After the Clinton administration, uh, passed the IRA [immigration reform act] a lot of Southeast Asian nations were asked to [00:33:00] take their nationals back. Even though we as 1.5 generation, which are the one that's mostly impacted by this, had never even stepped into the country. Most of us were born in a refugee camp or we're too young to even remember where they came from. Countries like Cambodian folded right away because they needed the financial aid and whatever, was offering them and immediately a three with a MOU that they will take their citizens since the early two thousands. Vietnam had a stronger agreement, which, they would agree to only take folks that immigrated here after 1995 and anybody before 1995, they would not take, and Laos have just said no until just a few months ago. Laos has said no from when the, uh, the act was passed in 1995, the IRRIRA. Mm-hmm. So the big change we have now is Vietnam had signed a new MOU saying that they will take folks after 1995 [00:34:00] in the first administration and more recently, something that we never thought, happened so fast, was Laos agreeing to take their citizen back. And then the bigger issue about our Laos community is, it's not just Laos folks. It's the Hmong folks, the Myan folks, folks, folks that are still in danger of being returned back 'cause in the Vietnam War, they colluded and supported the Americans in the Vietnam War and were exiled out and kicked out, and were hunted down because of that. So, at this moment, our folks are very in fear, especially our loud folks, not knowing what's gonna happen to 'em. Ke Lam: So for folks that don't know what IRR means it means, illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. It actually happened after the Oklahoma bombing, which was caused by a US citizen, a white US citizen. Yeah. But immigration law came out of it. That's what's crazy about it. Annie Lee: Can you tell us, how is APSC advocating to protect the community right now because you [00:35:00] are vulnerable? Ke Lam: So we had to censor a lot of our strategies. At first we used to use social media as a platform to show our work and then to support our community. But the government use that as a target to capture our people. So we stopped using social media. So we've been doing a lot of on the ground movement, such as trying to get local officials to do resolutions to push Governor Newsom to party more of our community members. The other thing is we hold pardon workshops, so try and get folks to get, either get a pardon or vacate their sentence. So commute their sentence to where it become misdemeanor is not deportable anymore. Support letters for our folks writing support letters to send to the governor and also to city official, to say, Hey, please help pardon our community. I think the other thing we are actually doing is solidarity work with other organizations, African American community as well as Latin communities because we've been siloed for so long and we've been banned against each other, where people kept saying like, they've taken all our job when I grew up. That's what they told us, right? [00:36:00] But we, reality that's not even true. It was just a wedge against our community. And then so it became the good versus bad narrative. So our advocacy is trying to change it it's called re-storying you know, so retelling our story from people that are impacted, not from people, not from the one percenters in our own community. Let's say like we're all good, do you, are there's parts of our community that like that's the bad people, right? But in reality, it affects us all. And so advocacy work is a lot of different, it comes in a lot of different shapes and forms, but definitely it comes from the community. Annie Lee: Thanks, Ke. You teed me up perfectly because there is such a good versus bad immigrant narrative that takes root and is really hard to fight against. And that's why this administration is targeting incarcerated and formerly incarcerated folks and another group that, are being targeted as people who are accused of crimes, including Venezuelan immigrants who are allegedly part of a gang. So, Leti how is the government deporting [00:37:00] people by simply accusing them of being a part of a gang? Like how is that even possible? Leti Volpp: Yeah, so one thing to think about is there is this thing called due process, right? It's guaranteed under the constitution to all persons. It's not just guaranteed to citizens. What does it mean? Procedural due process means there should be notice, there should be a hearing, there should be an impartial judge. You should have the opportunity to present evidence. You should have the opportunity to cross examinee. You should have the opportunity to provide witnesses. Right? And basically Trump and his advisors are in real time actively trying to completely eviscerate due process for everybody, right? So Trump recently said, I'm doing what I was elected to do, remove criminals from our country. But the courts don't seem to want me to do that. We cannot give everyone a trial because to do so would take without exaggeration, 200 years. And then Stephen Miller said the judicial process is for Americans. [00:38:00] Immediate deportation is for illegal aliens. Okay. Quote unquote. Right. So I think one thing to notice is, as we're hearing from all of our speakers are like the boxes, the categories into which people are put. And what's really disturbing is to witness how once somebody's put in the box of being quote unquote criminal gang banger terrorists, like the American public seems to be like, oh, okay you can do what you want to this person. There's a whole history of due process, which exists in the laws which was created. And all of these early cases actually involved Asian immigrants, right? And so first they were saying there's no due process. And then in a case called Yata versus Fisher, they said actually there is due process in deportation cases, there's regular immigration court proceedings, which accord with all of these measures of due process. There's also a procedure called expedited removal, [00:39:00] which Congress invented in the nineties where they wanted to come up with some kind of very quick way to summarily exclude people. It was motivated by a 60 Minutes episode where they showed people coming to Kennedy Airport, who didn't have any ID or visa or they had what seemed to be fake visas and they were let into the United States. And then they disappeared, right? According to the 60 Minutes episode. So basically Congress invented this procedure of, if you appear in the United States and you have no documents, or you have what an immigration inspector thinks are false documents, they can basically tell you, you can leave without this court hearing. And the only fail safe is what's called a credible fear screening. Where if you say, I want asylum, I fear persecution, I'm worried I might be tortured, then they're supposed to have the screening. And if you pass that screening, you get put in regular removal [00:40:00] proceedings. So before the Trump administration took office, these expedited removal proceedings were happening within a hundred miles of the border against people who could not show that they had been in the United States for more than two weeks. In one of his first executive orders. Trump extended this anywhere in the United States against people who cannot show they've been in the United States for more than two years. So people are recommending that people who potentially are in this situation to carry documentation, showing they've been physically in the United States for over two years. Trump is also using this Alien Enemies Act, which was basically a law Congress passed in 1798. It's only been used three times in US history it's a wartime law, right? So it was used in 1812, World War I, and World War II, and there's supposed to be a declared war between the United States and a foreign nation or government, or [00:41:00] there's an incursion threatened by a foreign nation or government, and the president makes public proclamation that all natives of this hostile nation, 14 and up shall be liable to be restrained and removed as alien enemies. Okay? So we're obviously not at war with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, right? They have not engaged in some kind of invasion or predatory incursion into the United States, but the Trump administration is claiming that they have and saying things like, oh, they're secretly a paramilitary wing of the Venezuelan government, even as the Venezuelan government is like cracking down on them. It's not a quasi sovereign, entity. There's no diplomatic relationships between Tren de Aragua and any other government. So these are legally and factually baseless arguments. Nonetheless, the administration has been basically taking people from Venezuela on the basis of tattoos. A tattoo of a crown of a [00:42:00] rose, right? Even when experts have said there's no relationship between what Tren de Aragua does and tattoos, right? And basically just kidnapping people and shipping them to the torture prison in El Salvador. As I'm sure you know of the case of Kimber Abrego Garcia, I'm sure we'll hear more about this from Christopher. There's a very small fraction of the persons that have been sent to this prison in El Salvador who actually have any criminal history. And I will say, even if they had a criminal history, nobody should be treated in this manner and sent to this prison, right? I mean, it's unbelievable that they've been sent to this prison allegedly indefinitely. They're paying $6 million a year to hold people there. And then the United States government is saying, oh, we don't have any power to facilitate or effectuate their return. And I think there's a struggle as to what to call this. It's not just deportation. This is like kidnapping. It's rendition. And there are people, there's like a particular person like who's completely [00:43:00] disappeared. Nobody knows if they're alive or dead. There are many people in that prison. People don't know if they're alive or dead. And I'm sure you've heard the stories of people who are gay asylum seekers, right? Who are now in this situation. There are also people that have been sent to Guantanamo, people were sent to Panama, right? And so I think there questions for us to think about like, what is this administration doing? How are they trying to do this in a spectacular fashion to instill fear? As we know as well, Trump had said oh, like I think it would be great when he met with Bukele if you build four more or five more facilities. I wanna house homegrown people in El Salvador, right? So this is all the more importance that we stick together, fight together, don't, as key was saying, don't let ourselves be split apart. Like we need a big mass coalition right? Of people working together on this. Annie Lee: So thank you leti and I think you're absolutely right. These Venezuelans were kidnapped [00:44:00] in the middle of the night. I mean, 2:00 AM 3:00 AM pulled out of bed, forced to sign documents they did not understand because these documents were only available in English and they speak Spanish, put on planes sent to El Salvador, a country they've never been to. The government didn't even have to prove anything. They did not have to prove anything, and they just snatch these people and now they're disappeared. We do have, for now the rule of law. And so Chris, there are judges saying that, Kimber Abrego Garcia has to be returned. And despite these court orders, the administration is not complying. So where does that leave us, Chris, in terms of rule of law and law in general? Christopher Lapinig: Yeah. So, I'm gonna make a little personal. So I graduated from Yale Law School in 2013, and you might know some of my classmates. One of my classmates is actually now the Vice President of the United States. Oh man. [00:45:00] Bless you. As well as the second lady, Usha Vance. And a classmate of mine, a good friend Sophia Nelson, who's a trans and queer, was recently on, I believe CNN answering a question about, I believe JD Vice President Vance, was asked about the administration's sort of refusal to comply with usual orders. Yeah. As we're talking about here and JD had said something like, well, courts, judges can't tell the president what he can't do, and sophia, to their credit, said, you know, I took constitutional law with JD, and, we definitely read Marbury Versus Madison together, and that is the semial sort of Supreme Court case that established that the US Supreme Court is the ultimate decider, arbiter, interpreter, of the US Constitution. And so is basically saying, I know JD knows better. He's lying essentially, in all of his [00:46:00] communications about, judicial orders and whether or not a presidential administration has to comply , with these orders. So, to get to your question though, it is of course unprecedented. Really. It is essentially, you know, it's not, if we not already reached. The point of a constitutional crisis. It is a constitutional crisis. I think it's become clear to many of us that, democracy in the US has operated in large part, and has relied on, on, on the good faith in norms, that people are operating good faith and that presidents will comply when, a federal judge issues an injunction or a decision. It kind of leaves us in an interesting, unprecedented situation. And it means that, lawyers, we will continue to litigate and, go to court, but we can't, lawyers will not save the country or, immigrants or communities. We need to think extensively and creatively. [00:47:00] About how to ensure, that the rule of law is preserved because, this administration is not, abiding by the longstanding norms of compliance and so we have to think about, protests, advocacy, legislatively. I don't have the answers necessarily, but we can't rely on the courts to fix these problems really. Annie Lee: Oof. That was very real, Chris. Thank you. But I will say that when there is resistance, and we've seen it from students who are speaking up and advocating for what they believe is right and just including Palestinian Liberation, that there is swift retaliation. And I think that's partly because they are scared of student speech and movement and organizing. But this is a question to all of you. So if not the courts and if the administration is being incredibly retaliatory, and discriminatory in terms of viewpoint discrimination, in people and what people are saying and they're scouring our social [00:48:00] media like, Ke warns, like what can everyday people do to fight back? That's for all of you. So I don't know who, which of you wants to take it first? Ke Lam: Oh man. I say look at history, right? Even while this new president, I wanna say like, this dude is a convicted felon, right? Don't be surprised at why we country is in the way it is, because this dude's a convicted felon, a bad business person, right? And only care about the billionaires, you know? So I'm not surprised how this country's ending up the way it is 'cause it is all about money. One way that we can stand up is definitely band together, marched on the streets. It's been effective. You look at the civil right movement, that's the greatest example. Now you don't have to look too far. We can actually, when we come together, they can't fight us all. Right? It is, and this, it's like you look at even nature in the cell. When things band together, the predators cannot attack everyone. Right? They probably could hit a few of us, but in the [00:49:00] long run, we could change the law. I think another thing is we, we, as the people can march to the courts and push the courts to do the job right, despite what's going on., We had judges that been arrested for doing the right thing, right? And so, no matter what, we have to stand strong just despite the pressure and just push back. Annie Lee: Thanks, Ke. Chris? Christopher Lapinig: What this administration is doing is you know, straight out of the fascist playbook. They're working to, as we all know, shock and awe everyone, and make Americans feel powerless. Make them feel like they have no control, make them feel overwhelmed. And so I think first and foremost, take care of yourself , in terms of your health, in terms of your physical health, your mental health. Do what you can to keep yourself safe and healthy and happy. And do the same for your community, for your loved ones, your friends and family. And then once you've done that do what you can in terms of your time, treasure, [00:50:00] talent to, to fight back. Everyone has different talents, different levels of time that they can afford. But recognize that this is a marathon and not necessarily a sprint because we need everyone, in this resistance that we can get. Annie Lee: Thank you, Chris. Leti Volpp: There was a New Yorker article called, I think it was How to Be a Dissident which said, before recently many Americans, when you ask them about dissidents, they would think of far off countries. But they interviewed a lot of people who'd been dissidents in authoritarian regimes. And there were two, two things in that article that I'm taking with me among others. One of them said that in surveying like how authoritarian regimes are broken apart, like only 3.5% of the population has to oppose what's going on. The other thing was that you should find yourself a political home where you can return to frequently. It's almost like a religious or [00:51:00] spiritual practice where you go and you get refreshed and you're with like-minded people. And so I see this event, for example as doing that, and that we all need to find and nurture and foster spaces like this. Thank you. Annie Lee: Bun, do you have any parting words? Bun: Yeah. Like Ke said, to fight back, getting together, understanding issues and really uplifting, supporting, urging our own communities, to speak Up. You know, there's folks that can't speak out right now because of fear and danger, but there are folks here that can speak out and coming here learning all our situation really give the knowledge and the power to speak out for folks that can't speak down [unclear] right now. So I appreciate y'all Annie Lee: love that bun. I was gonna say the same thing. I feel like there is a special obligation for those of us who are citizens, citizens cannot be deported. Okay? Citizens have special rights based [00:52:00] on that status. And so there's a special responsibility on those of us who can speak, and not be afraid of retaliation from this government. I would also urge you all even though it's bleak at the federal level, we have state governments, we have local governments. You have a university here who is very powerful. And you have seen, we've seen that the uni that the administration backs down, sometimes when Harvard hit back, they back down and that means that there is a way to push the administration, but it does require you all putting pressure on your schools, on your local leaders, on your state leaders to fight back. My boss actually, Vin taught me this. You know, you think that politicians, lead, politicians do not lead politicians follow. Politicians follow and you all lead when you go out further, you give them cover to do the right thing. And so the farther you push and the more you speak out against this administration, the more you give them courage to do the right thing. And so you absolutely have to do that. A pardon [00:53:00] is critical. It is critical for people who are formerly incarcerated to avoid the immigration system and deportation. And so do that. Talk to your family, talk to your friends. My parents, despite being immigrants, they're kinda old school. Okay guys, they're like, you know, birthright citizenship does seem kind of like a loophole. Why should people like get like citizenship? I'm like, mom, we, I am a birthright citizen. Like, um, And I think for Asian Americans in particular, there is such a rich history of Asian American civil rights activism that we don't talk about enough, and maybe you do at Berkeley with ethnic studies and professors like Mike Chang. But, this is totally an interracial solidarity movement. We helped bring about Wong Kim Ark and there are beneficiaries of every shade of person. There's Yik wo, and I think about this all the time, which is another part of the 14th Amendment equal protection. Which black Americans fought for that in San Francisco. [00:54:00] Chinatown made real what? What does equal protection of the laws even mean? And that case was Seminole. You've got Lao versus Nichols. Another case coming out of San Francisco. Chinatown about English learner rights, the greatest beneficiary of Lao v Nichols, our Spanish speakers, they're Spanish speaking children in schools who get access to their education regardless of the language they speak. And so there are so many moments in Asian American history that we should be talking about, that we should educate our parents and our families about, because this is our moment. Now, this is another one of those times I wanna pass it to Mike and Harvey for questions, and I'm so excited to hear about them. Mike and Harvey: Wow, thank you so much. That's a amazing, panel and thank you for facilitating annie's wanna give it of a great value in terms of that spiritual home aspect. Norm how does your great grandfather's , experience in resistance, provide help for us [00:55:00] today? Norman Wong: Well, I think he was willing to do it. It only took one, if no one did it, this, we wouldn't be having the discussion because most of us would've never been here. And we need to come together on our common interests and put aside our differences because we all have differences. And if we tried, to have it our way for everything, we'll have it no way for us. We really need to, to bond and bind together and become strong as a people. And I don't mean as a racial or a national group. Mm-hmm. I mean, we're Americans now. We're Americans here think of us as joining with all Americans to make this country the way it's supposed to be. The way [00:56:00] we grew up, the one that we remember, this is not the America I grew up believing in. I'm glad he stood up. I'm proud that he did that. He did that. Him doing that gave me something that I've never had before. A validation of my own life. And so yes, I'm proud of him. Wong Kim Ark is for all of us. It's not for me to own. Yeah. Wow. Really not. Thank you so much. Wong Kim Ark is for all of us. And, and , talking about the good , that we have here and, the optimism that Harvey spoke about, the opportunity, even in a moment of substantial danger. Thank you so much everybody. Mike and Harvey: This was amazing and really appreciate sharing this space with you and, building community and solidarity. Ke Lam: But is there any, can I leave with a chant before we close off? Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. Thank you so much. So this is a chant that we use on the ground all the time. You guys probably heard it. When I said when we fight, you guys said we [00:57:00] win when we fight. We win when we fight, we win. When we fight, we win up. Swati Rayasam: Thanks so much for tuning into APEX Express. Please check out our website at kpfa.org/program/apexexpress to find out more about the show tonight and to find out how you can take direct action. We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating, and sharing your visions with the world. Your voices are important. APEX Express is produced by Miko Lee, along with Jalena Keene-Lee, Ayame Keene-Lee, Preeti Mangala Shekar, Anuj Vaida, Cheryl Truong, Isabel Li, Ravi Grover, and me Swati Rayasam. Thank you so much to the team at KPFA for their support, and have a good [00:58:00] night.   The post APEX Express – 6.26.25-Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison – Wong Kim Ark is for All of Us appeared first on KPFA.

It's cold, the markets are weird, and the boys are back. Cameron and Tony kick things off with oil-patch whiplash, Iran–Israel theatre, and Trump's “Mission Accomplished 2.0” tweet-storms. Portfolio numbers, confession-season land-mines, and sudden 30 % face-plants (looking at you, **AMI**) follow. Tony spotlights surprise winners (**OML**, **SHA**, **SRG**, **GNG**) and takeover bait (**STO**, **THL**), while ASX cops an ASIC probe for dropping the tech ball. Virgin's second-shot IPO, Karoon's Brazilian land-grab, and a pulled-pork deep dive on **COG** round out the finance. After hours: jazz-piano Goldblum, Kelly's Heroes, and Peter Ellyard's octogenarian optimism. 

A Preplanned Detour - Groundwork for RedemptionWebsite: http://www.battle4freedom.com/Network: https://www.mojo50.comStreaming: https://www.rumble.com/Battle4Freedomhttps://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2043%3A11&version=CJBIsaiah 43:11I, yes I, am Adonai; besides me there is no deliverer.Genesis 46:1 Isra'el took everything he owned with him on his journey. He arrived at Be'er-Sheva and offered sacrifices to the G_d of his father Yitz'chak. 2 In a vision at night G_d called to Isra'el, "Ya`akov! Ya`akov!" He answered, "Here I am." 3 He said, "I am G_d, the G_d of your father. Don't be afraid to go down to Egypt. It is there that I will make you into a great nation. 4 Not only will I go down with you to Egypt; but I will also bring you back here again, after Yosef has closed your eyes."Genesis 46:5 So Ya`akov left Be'er-Sheva; the sons of Isra'el brought Ya`akov their father, their little ones and their wives in the wagons Pharaoh had sent to carry them. 6 They took their cattle and their possessions which they had acquired in the land of Kena`an and arrived in Egypt, Ya`akov and all his descendants with him — 7 his sons, grandsons, daughters, granddaughters and all his descendants he brought with him into Egypt.Genesis 46:8 These are the names of Isra'el's children who came into Egypt, Ya`akov and his sons: Re'uven Ya`akov's firstborn; 9 and the sons of Re'uven — Hanokh, Pallu, Hetzron and Karmi. 10 The sons of Shim`on: Y'mu'el, Yamin, Ohad, Yakhin, Tzochar and Sha'ul the son of a Kena`ani woman. 11 The sons of Levi: Gershon, K'hat and M'rari.Genesis 46:12 The sons of Y'hudah: `Er, Onan, Shelah, Peretz and Zerach; but `Er and Onan died in the land of Kena`an. The sons of Peretz were Hetzron and Hamul. 13 The sons of Yissakhar: Tola, Puvah, Yov and Shimron. 14 The sons of Z'vulun: Sered, Elon and Yachle'el. 15 These were the children of Le'ah whom she bore to Ya`akov in Paddan-Aram, with his daughter Dinah. In sum, his sons and daughters numbered thirty-three. Genesis 46:16 The sons of Gad: Tzifyon, Haggi, Shuni, Etzbon, `Eri, Arodi and Ar'eli. 17 The children of Asher: Yimnah, Yishvah, Yishvi, B'ri`ah, and their sister Serach. The sons of B'ri`ah were Hever and Malki'el. 18 These were the children of Zilpah, whom Lavan gave to Le'ah his daughter; she bore them to Ya`akov — sixteen people. Genesis 46:19 The sons of Rachel Ya`akov's wife: Yosef and Binyamin. 20 To Yosef in the land of Egypt were born M'nasheh and Efrayim, whom Osnat the daughter of Poti-Fera priest of On bore to him. 21 The sons of Binyamin: Bela, Bekher, Ashbel, Gera, Na`aman, Echi, Rosh, Mupim, Hupim and Ard. 22 These were the children of Rachel who were born to Ya`akov — in sum, fourteen people.Genesis 46:23 The sons of Dan: Hushim. 24 The sons of Naftali: Yachtze'el, Guni, Yetzer and Shillem. 25 These were the sons of Bilhah, whom Lavan gave to Rachel his daughter; she bore them to Ya`akov — in sum, seven people.Genesis 46:26 All the people belonging to Ya`akov coming into Egypt, his direct descendants (not counting Ya`akov's sons' wives), totaled sixty-six. 27 The sons of Yosef, born to him in Egypt, were two in number. Thus all the people in Ya`akov's family who entered Egypt numbered seventy.Genesis 46:28 Ya`akov sent Y'hudah ahead of him to Yosef, so that the latter might guide him on the road to Goshen; thus they arrived in the land of Goshen. 29 Yosef prepared his chariot and went up to Goshen to meet Isra'el his father. He presented himself to him, embraced him and wept on his neck for a long time. 30 Then Isra'el said to Yosef, "Now I can die, because I have seen your face and seen that you are still alive."Genesis 46:31 Yosef said to his brothers and his father's family, "I'm going up to tell Pharaoh. I'll say to him, `My brothers and my father's family, who were in the land of Kena`an, have come to me. 32 The men are shepherds and keepers of livestock; they have brought their flocks, their herds and all their possessions.' 33 Now when Pharaoh summons you and asks, `What is your occupation?' 34 tell him, `Your servants have been keepers of livestock from our youth until now, both we and our ancestors.' This will ensure that you will live in the land of Goshen — for any shepherd is abhorrent to the Egyptians."Credit to:https://unsplash.com/photos/pathway-between-trees-74TufExdP3Yhttps://unsplash.com/photos/black-and-white-arrow-sign-Vckq-heaypghttps://unsplash.com/photos/gray-wall-paint-taO2fC7sxDU

The Hid"a (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his work Abodat Ha'kodesh (listen to audio recording for precise citation), writes that one must make a special effort on Shabuot morning, after staying awake through the night, to pray properly. Many people tend to doze during the prayer service on Shabuot morning, such that they do not recite the words properly, skip sections of the service, and certainly do not concentrate on the meaning of the words. The Hid"a writes that "Yasa Secharam Be'hefsedam" – these people lose their reward for learning throughout the night by failing to pray properly in the morning. After staying awake studying Torah throughout the night, one must make an effort to remain fully awake and alert during the prayer service on Shabuot morning so he can pray properly. It should be noted that the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) viewed the period of Sefirat Ha'omer as an extended Tikkun ("repair" of spiritual imperfections in the upper worlds) that begins on the second night of Pesah and reaches its culmination in the Musaf prayer on the first day of Shabuot. Accordingly, the Shaharit and Musaf prayers on Shabuot morning are laden with spiritual significance, and it is critical for one to recite these prayers properly. One who sleeps through these prayers, or does not recite them as he should, runs the risk of forfeiting the spiritual achievements of the entire Omer period. Therefore, it is critical after staying awake on Shabuot morning to muster all one's strength to pray properly on Shabuot morning. One who suspects that he will be unable to remain awake and alert through the end of the Musaf prayer should recite Shema and then take a nap. It is preferable to complete the prayer service later, after sleeping and rejuvenating oneself, than to risk dozing during the Tefila. When is the earliest time for reciting Shaharit on Shabuot morning? Generally speaking, one should not recite the Amida prayer of Shaharit before sunrise (Netz Ha'hama). On Shabuot morning, however, some authorities permit congregations to begin the Amida before sunrise. Since it is very difficult for people to pray properly after remaining awake throughout the night, there were some who held that the prayer may be recited earlier to help ensure that everyone will be able to properly pray the entire service. This is the ruling of the Peri Megadim (492) and the Mishna Berura (89:1, and in Sha'ar Ha'siyun 5). There are many congregations that nevertheless ensure to wait until sunrise before beginning the Amida on Shabuot morning, and though this is certainly an admirable custom, those who pray the Amida before sunrise certainly have authorities on whom to rely. Indeed, the practice of Hacham Baruch Ben Haim was to pray the Amida before sunrise on Shabuot morning, and, as mentioned, this practice is perfectly acceptable. This is the ruling of Rabbi Karp in his work Hilchot Hag Be'hag (p. 132; listen to audio recording for precise citation). It should be noted that congregations that recite the Amida before sunrise on Shabuot morning must ensure not to recite Shema before the earliest time for Shema, which occurs approximately 10-15 minutes after dawn. (Generally, however, by the time these congregations reach the Shema prayer, that time has already passed.) Summary: One must make a special effort to remain awake and alert throughout the prayer service on Shabuot morning after remaining awake through the night. If one suspects that he will be unable to remain awake and pray properly throughout the service, it is preferable to recite Shema, take a nap, and then complete the prayer service properly. Although the Amida of Shaharit generally should not be recited before sunrise, some congregations have the custom of reciting the Amida on Shabuot morning before sunrise in consideration of the difficulty entailed in remaining awake and alert throughout the prayer service. This is certainly an acceptable practice.

*The music in this video is copyrighted and all rights reserved to the respective copyright holders* In a bombshell episode of RugPull Radio, GMoney is joined by Luke Danielsan for an in-depth dig into the 780th Military Intelligence Brigade (Cyber), a unit whose iconography, timelines, and mission suggest deep ties to the origins of Bitcoin. Luke walks through his strange personal link to the brigade, shares his discovery of a cryptographic “7-8-Q” symbol buried on their site, and explores how its mission aligns with softwar strategy, information warfare, and a nonviolent counterinsurgency against globalist institutions. The conversation blends symbolism, history, and open-source intelligence, touching on NSA origins of SHA-256, the mysterious “Praetorians,” cryptographic keys, and uncanny date alignments with drops. Luke also reveals never-before-discussed magazine articles hinting at digital deterrence, military-civilian collaboration, and quantum threats to encryption. GMoney and Luke argue that Bitcoin are two sides of the same strategic coin, engineered to awaken and equip the public for digital sovereignty. With appearances from Musk memes, Satoshi breadcrumbs, and rare Pepe lore, this episode is a masterclass in narrative warfare, and may just flip your understanding of everything.

  Last time we spoke about the February 26th incident. Within the turbulent “ government of assassination” period of 1936 Japan, a faction of discontented junior officers, known as the Kodoha, believed that their emperor, Hirohito, was being manipulated by corrupt politicians. In a desperate bid for what they termed a "Showa Restoration," they meticulously plotted a coup d'état. On February 26, they launched a rebellion in Tokyo, attempting to assassinate key figures they deemed responsible for undermining the emperor's authority. The young officers executed coordinated attacks on prominent leaders, resulting in several deaths, while hoping to seize control of the Imperial Palace. However, their plan unraveled when their actions met with unexpected resistance, and they failed to secure strategic locations. Dark snow blanketed the city as Hirohito, outraged by the violence, quickly moved to suppress the uprising, which ultimately led to the downfall of the Kodoha faction and solidified the military's grip on power, ushering in a new era marked by militarism and radicalism.   #151 The Suiyuan Operation Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. So we last left off with the February 26th incident breaking out in Japan, but now I would like to return to China. Now we spoke a little bit about some influential Japanese politicians in the previous episode. Prime Minister Satio Makoto oversaw Japan from May 1932 to July 1934, succeeded by Prime Minister Keisuke Okada from July 1934 to March 1936. The foreign policy of Japan towards China during the Saitō and Okada administrations exhibited a notable paradox, characterized by two conflicting elements. On one hand, Foreign Minister Hirota championed a diplomatic approach that emphasized friendship, cooperation, and accommodation with China. On the other hand, the military actively undermined the authority of the Nationalist government in northern China, creating a significant rift between diplomatic rhetoric and military action.    The Okada cabinet then endorsed the Army Ministry's "Outline of Policy to Deal with North China" on January 13, 1936. This policy document explicitly proposed the eventual detachment of five provinces, Hubei, Chahar, Shanxi, Suiyuan, and Shandong from the Nationalist government in Nanking. The approval of this outline marked a pivotal moment, as it represented the first official government endorsement of the military's longstanding agenda and underscored the army's evolution from a mere rogue entity operating in the region to the de facto authority dictating the course of Japan's policy towards China. Despite this, on January 22, during the 68th Diet session, Hirota reaffirmed his dedication to fostering better ties with China, to which a representative from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded positively. The Nationalist government in Nanjing also expressed interest in engaging in formal negotiations. However, this diplomatic initiative quickly faltered, and the expected discussions in Nanjing never took place. Shortly thereafter, a mutiny by young army officers on February 26, 1936, led to the fall of the Okada cabinet. Following Prince Konoe Fumimaro's refusal of the imperial mandate to form a new government, Hirota stepped in to establish a cabinet on March 9. General Terauchi Hisaichi was appointed as the Minister of the Army, Admiral Nagano Osami took charge of the Navy Ministry, and Baba Eiichi became the finance minister. Hirota briefly served as foreign minister until Arita Hachirö, who had just submitted his credentials as ambassador to China on March 6, returned to Japan. The Hirota Koki cabinet, established immediately following the February 26 incident further entrenched military influence in politics while allowing interservice rivalries to impede national objectives. In May 1936, Hirota, influenced by army and navy ministers, reinstated the practice of appointing military ministers solely from the ranks of high-ranking active-duty officers. He believed this would prevent associations with the discredited Imperial Way faction from regaining power. By narrowing the candidate pool and enhancing the army's power relative to the prime minister, Hirota's decision set the stage for army leaders to leverage this advantage to overthrow Admiral Yonai's cabinet in July 1940. Arita began his new job by meeting with Foreign Minister Chang Chen while hearing views from the Kwantung Army chief of staff General, Itagaki Seishiro. Yes, our old friend received a lot of promotions. Itagaki had this to say about the Kwantung Army's policy in China "The primary aim of Japan's foreign policy, is the sound development of Manchukuo based upon the principle of the indivisibility of Japan and Manchukuo. If, as is probable, the existing situation continues, Japan is destined sooner or later to clash with the Soviet Union, and the attitude of China at that time will gravely influence operations [against the Soviet Union]." The Kwantung Army's was growing more and more nervous about the USSR following its 7th comintern congress held in July and August of 1935. There it publicly designated Japan, Germany and Poland as its main targets of comintern actions. Japanese intelligence in the Red Army also knew the Soviets were gradually planning to expand the military strength so they could face a simultaneous west and east front war. This was further emboldened by the latest USSR 5 year plan. Alongside the growing Red northern menace, the CCP issued on August 1st a declaration calling upon the Nationalist Government to end their civil war so they could oppose Japan. By this time the CCP was reaching the end of its Long March and organizing a new base of operations in Yenan in northern Shanxi. The developments by the USSR and CCP had a profound effect on Japan's foreign policy in China. The Kwantung Army believed a war with the USSR was imminent and began to concentrate its main force along the border of Manchukuo. The Kwantung Army's plan in the case of war was to seize Vladivostok while advancing motorized units towards Ulan Bator in Outer Mongolia, hoping to threaten the Trans-Siberian Railway near Lake Baikal. Their intelligence indicated the USSR could muster a maximum of 250,000 troops in eastern Siberia and that Japan could deal with them with a force two-thirds of that number. The IJA at that point had inferior air forces and armaments, thus urgent funding was needed. The Kwantung Army proposed that forces in the home islands should be reduced greatly so all could be concentrated in Manchuria. To increase funding so Kwantung leadership proposed doing away with special allowances for Japanese officials in Manchuria and reorganizing the Japanese economic structure. The Kwantung leaders also knew the submarine base at Vladivostok posed a threat to Japanese shipping so the IJN would have to participate, especially against ports and airfields. All said and done, the Kwantung Army planned for a war set in 1941 and advised immediate preparations. On July 23, 1936, Kanji Ishiwara presented the army's document titled “Request Concerning the Development of Industries in Preparation for War” to the Army Ministry. He asserted that in order to prepare for potential conflict with the Soviet Union, Japan, Manchukuo, and North China must have the industries critical for war fully developed by 1941. Ishiwara emphasized the urgent need for rapid industrial growth, particularly in Manchukuo. He followed this request on July 29 with a draft of a “Policy on Preparations for War” regarding the Soviet Union, advocating for immediate reforms to Japan's political and economic systems to facilitate economic expansion and lay the groundwork for future fundamental changes. However, he cautioned that if significant turmoil erupted in economic sectors, Japan must be ready to execute a comprehensive overhaul without delay. At the same time, the Hirota cabinet initiated a review of its policy towards China. In the spring of 1936, a secret committee focused on the Current Situation was formed, consisting of officials from the Army, Navy, and Foreign ministries. Their discussions led to the adoption of the "Measures to Implement Policy toward China" by the Four Ministers Conference on August 11, along with the "Second Outline of Policy to Address North China," which the cabinet approved as part of the "Fundamentals of National Policy" on the same day. The first of these documents outlined the following actionable steps: “1. Conclusion of an anti-Communist military pact. a) To prepare for the conclusion of such a pact, a special secret committee of military experts from both countries should be organized. b) Their discussions should cover the scope and substance of the pact and ways and means of realizing the objectives of the pact.  2. Conclusion of a Sino-Japanese military alliance. A special secret committee, composed of an equal number of delegates from each nation, should be organized to prepare for the conclusion of an offensive and defensive alliance against attack by a third country.  3. Acceleration of solutions of pending questions between China and Japan. a) Engagement of a senior political adviser: The Nationalist government should engage a senior Japanese political adviser to assist in the conduct of the domestic and foreign affairs of the Nationalist government. b) Engagement of military advisers: The Nationalist government should engage military advisers, along with military instructors. c) Opening of airline services between China and Japan: Airline services between China and Japan should be opened immediately. To realize such a service, various means should be used to induce the Nanking authorities to establish an airline corporation in North China, to begin flights between Formosa and Fukien province, and to start test flights between Shanghai and Fukuoka. d) Conclusion of a reciprocal tariff treaty: A reciprocal tariff treaty should be concluded promptly between China and Japan, on the basis of the policy approved by the ministries concerned, with regard to the abolition of the special trade in eastern Hopei province and the lowering of the prohibitively high tariffs. For this purpose Japan should, if necessary, propose the creation of a special committee composed of Japanese and Chinese representatives.  4. Promotion of economic cooperation between China and Japan. Japan should promote cooperation with the common people of China to establish realistic and inseparable economic relations between China and Japan that will promote coexistence and co-prosperity and will be unaffected by changes in the Chinese political situation. “ The document also included suggestions for Japan's economic expansion into South China. This included tapping into the natural resources of the provinces of Fujian, Guangdong, and Guangxi, building a railway between Guangzhou and Swatow, and establishing air routes between Fuchoz and Taipei, which would connect to services in Japan and Thailand. It also called for survey teams to be dispatched to explore the resources of Sichuan, Gansu, Xinjiang, and Qinghai provinces, and for support to be provided to the independence movement in Inner Mongolia. However, these initiatives presented significant challenges. The preface to the "Second Outline of Policy to Deal with North China" cautioned, "In implementing this policy, we must carefully consider the Nanking government's prestige and avoid actions that could prompt it to adopt an anti-Japanese stance in response to the desires of the Chinese people."  On September 19th, six fundamental points for a settlement in North China were dictated to China to “establish a common defense against communism, promoting economic cooperation, lowering tariffs, initiating an airline service between the two nations, employing Japanese advisers, and controlling subversive Koreans." September 22 was set as the deadline for a response from China. While agreeing to some Japanese requests, the Chinese included several counter-demands that the Japanese found completely unacceptable. These demands required Japan to “(a) refrain from using armed intervention or arbitrary actions in its dealings with China, (b) recognize China as an equal and sovereign state, (c) avoid leveraging antigovernment groups or communist elements, and (d) remove any derogatory references to China from Japanese textbooks. The Chinese also insisted that any agreement regarding North China “must precede the annulment of the Tanggu and Shanghai cease-fire agreements, the disbanding of the East Hopei regime, a prohibition on unauthorized Japanese flights over North China, a ban on smuggling activities by Japanese, the restoration of China's right to control smuggling, and the disbandment of the illegal East Hopei government along with the armies of Wang Ying and Prince De in Suiyuan”. Now that mention of a Prince De in Suiyuan brings us to a whole new incident. This podcast series should almost be called “the history of Japanese related incidents in China”. Now we've spoken at great lengths about Japan's obsession with Manchuria. She wanted it for resources, growing space and as a buffer state. Japan also had her eyes set on Inner Mongolia to be used as a buffer state between Manchukuo, the USSR and China proper. Not to mention after the invasion of North China, Inner Mongolia could be instrumental as a wedge to be used to control Northern China. Thus the Kwantung Army began fostering a Mongolian independence movement back in August of 1933. They did so through a special organ led by chief of the general staff Koiso Kuniaki. He began work with the Silingol League led by Prince Sonormurabdan or “Prince So” and another influential Mongol, Prince Demchukdongrob or “Prince De”. Prince De was the West Sunid Banner in Northern Chahar. Likewise the Kwantung Army was grooming Li Xuxin, a Mongol commoner born in southern Manchuria. He had been a bandit turned soldier absorbed into Zhang Xueliangs army. Li had distinguished himself in a campaign against a group of Mongols trying to restore the Qing dynasty to further establish an independent Mongolia. During Operation Nekka Li had served in a cavalry brigade under Zu Xingwu, reputed to be the best unit in Zhang Xueliangs Northeastern border defense army. He led the army's advance unit into western Shandong. Afterwards Li suddenly became friends with Major Tanaka Hisashi, the head of the Special Service Agency at Dungliao where he defected to the Kwantung Army. He soon was leading a force too strong to be incorporated into the Manchukuo Army, thus it was disbanded, but his Kwantung Army buddies encouraged him to move to Tolun in Rehe province. At one point during the Nekka campaign, Li's army was threatened by a strong Chinese counterattack, but they had Manchukuo air support allowing them to capture Tolun. This victory launched what became the East Chahar Special Autonomous District with Li becoming a garrison commander and chief administrator.  Back in time, upon the founding of the Chinese Republic, the affairs of Inner Mongolia fell upon the Bureau of Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs. This was reorganized in 1930 into the Commission on Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs when the provinces of Chahar, Suiyuan and Ningxia were organized. Prince De had been a member of a nationalist group known as the Young Mongols, although his aim was self-determination for Inner Mongolia within China, not independence. The Nationalist government's support for Chinese settlement in Mongol territories and its disregard for Mongol perspectives quickly triggered a rise in Mongol nationalism and anti-Chinese feelings. This was exacerbated by the government's introduction of a law on October 12, 1931, requiring local Mongolian administrative units to consult with hsien officials on matters concerning their administration. The nationalist sentiment was further fueled by the presence of the neighboring Mongolian People's Republic in Outer Mongolia and the establishment of Xingan province in western Manchuria by Manchukuo authorities in March 1932. This new province included the tribes of eastern Inner Mongolia and granted them greater autonomy than other Manchukuo provinces while banning Chinese immigration into it. When Nanjing did not react to these developments, Prince De and his supporters took steps toward gaining autonomy. On July 15th, 1933, Mongol leaders from western Inner Mongolia gathered at Pailingmiao for two weeks to deliberate on a declaration for regional independence. Although many princes were initially hesitant to take this step, they reconvened on August 14 and sent a cable to Nanjing announcing their decision to create an autonomous Mongolian government. The cable was signed by Prince So and Prince De. Over the following two months, additional conferences at Pailingmiao were held to organize the new government, which would operate under Nanking's guidance but without involvement from provincial chairmen. On October 22, Prince Yun, head of the Ulanchap League and a close ally of Prince De, was elected to lead the new regime, with Prince De assuming the role of chief of its political affairs bureau. After receiving a cable from the Mongolian leaders in August, Nanjing quickly sent Minister of the Interior Huang Shao-hung and Xu Qingyang, head of the Commission on Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs, to halt the movement. However, the Mongols declined to travel to Kalgan or Kueisui to meet Huang. In November, as the leader of a special commission appointed by Nanjing, Huang reached an agreement with Yun De and other Mongolian leaders concerning a proposal that abandoned the Mongols' demand for an autonomous government. This agreement was later altered by Nanjing, and its essential points were excluded from a measure approved by the Central Political Council of the Kuomintang on January 17, 1934. The dispute reignited, fueled by the Nationalist government's rising concerns over the anticipated enthronement of Pu Yi in Manchukuo. On February 28, the Central Political Council enacted a measure that outlined "eight principles of Inner Mongolian autonomy" and created the Mongolian Local Autonomous Political Council. Since these principles did not grant authority over foreign and military affairs, powers explicitly reserved for the central government in the January measure, they were seen as a concession to the Mongols and were accepted. On March 7, the central government issued regulations to establish a semi autonomous regime for Inner Mongolia, which was officially launched at Pailingmiao on April 23. Although the council was led by three moderate princes, Prince Yun, supported by Princes So and Sha, the real administrative authority was held by Prince De, who served as the secretary-general. Most of the twenty-five council members were of Mongolian royalty, through whom Prince De aimed to fulfill his objectives. Nevertheless, the Nationalist government seemed to consider the council merely a token gesture to placate De, as Nanking never provided the promised administrative funds outlined in the "eight principle declaration." Was not much of a shock Prince De sought support from the Kwantung Army, which had established contact with him as early as June 1934. Japanese pressures in North China were starting to alter the power dynamics, and after the first Western incident in Jehol in February 1935, it compelled the relocation of Sung Queyuan's army from Chahar to Hopei, providing encouragement to Prince De. In May, he met with Kwantung Army Vice Chief of Staff Itagaki Seishirö, Intelligence Section Chief Kawabe Torashirö, and staff officer Tanaka Ryükichi, where he was officially informed for the first time about the Kwantung Army's intention to assist him. On July 25, the Kwantung Army drafted its "Essentials of Policy toward Inner Mongolia," which regarded Japanese support for cooperation between De and Li Xuxin as part of their strategic preparations for a potential conflict with the Soviet Union. Shortly after this policy was adopted, a conflict arose over who had the authority to appoint the head of the Mongol Xukung banner, situated north of the Yellow River and Paot'ou. Following the death of the previous administrator, Prince Xu declared that he had taken control of the position. In response to a request from the local abbot, Prince Yun, acting in his capacity as chairman of the Mongolian Political Council, dismissed Xu. Xu then turned to Nanking through Suiyuan Provincial Chairman Fu Zuoyi, arguing that the central government held the authority to appoint heads of administrative units. In retaliation, Prince De dispatched troops to Xukung. On November 10, Fu presented a mediation proposal, which was rejected since it not only failed to acknowledge Shih's dismissal but also demanded the withdrawal of De's forces. De refused to pull back, further intensifying his hostility toward the Nanking government. In December, the Kwantung Army attempted to move Li's forces from eastern Chahar into the six Xun to the north of Kalgan, which serves as Chahar's granary. Following the Qin-Doihara agreement, Matsui Gennosuke from the Kalgan Special Service Agency secured a deal to separate these six districts from the southern region predominantly populated by Chinese; a Mongolian peace preservation corps was tasked with maintaining order in the northern area, while a Chinese corps was responsible for the south. During the discussions for an autonomous regime centered around Song Queyuan in North China in November 1935, Kwantung Army troops were concentrated around Gubeikou. To exert pressure on Song's rear, the Kwantung Army proposed replacing the Chinese peace preservation unit in the area north of Kalgan with Li Xuxin's army, which would establish this territory as its base.   The operation commenced on December 8. In a surprise attack just before dawn, Li captured Paochang. By December 12, despite facing strong Chinese resistance and the heaviest snowfall in sixty years, Li, aided by Kwantung Army planes disguised as those of the Manchukuo Airline Corporation, had taken control of Kuyuan. Further advances were halted by an order from Kwantung Army headquarters, and on December 13, it was reported that, had the operation not been stopped, Tokyo would have issued an imperial command. The operation had faced opposition from the Tientsin army, which feared it would weaken Song Queyuan's position just as they were informing Tokyo that the autonomy movement was going smoothly. Additionally, both Britain and the United States publicly expressed strong opposition to the Kwantung Army's involvement in the autonomy movement. However, the directive was ultimately prompted by the emperor's anger upon discovering that a unit of the Kwantung Army led by Colonel Matsui Takurö had advanced to Tolun to support Li's progress. Although Li's advance was halted, the operation undeniably contributed to the formation of the Hopei-Chahar Political Council.   Although the operation was halted, the Kwantung Army remained committed to its objectives. They contended that Li's army's advance into the six districts north of Kalgan was merely a peace preservation unit moving into territory within the truce line established by the Tanggu Agreement. Consequently, on December 29, they ordered Li to advance southward. Li peacefully occupied Changpei the following day and entered Shangtu on December 31. Manchukuo civil officials were appointed to oversee the six districts, and the currency of Manchukuo was introduced, although the existing tax system initially remained unchanged. The Kwantung Army allocated silver worth 6 million yuan to support administrative expenses. This outcome, known as the Eastern Chahar incident, marked a complete success for the Kwantung Army, which then redirected its focus toward Suiyuan Province. Each year, the Kwantung Army developed a secret plan for covert operations for the following year. The 1936 plan included strategies to secure air bases for routes connecting Europe and Asia, targeting Tsinghai and Sinkiang provinces, Outer Mongolia, Western Mongolia, and even remote areas of Ningxia province. In January 1936, staff officer Tanaka Ryūkichi formulated a document titled "Essentials of Policy Toward (Northwestern) Inner Mongolia." This document advocated for the establishment of a Mongolian military government to facilitate Japanese operations in northwestern Mongolia and suggested pushing Fu Tso-yi out of Suiyuan into Shansi province. Tanaka's proposals were incorporated into the final plan of the Kwantung Army, ultimately leading to the Suiyuan incident of November 1936. In February 1936, a meeting at Pailingmiao, where Prince De proposed the independence of Inner Mongolia, resulted in the departure of Prince So and several other Mongolian leaders from the coalition. They sought to establish a rival political council at Kueisui under the protection of Fu Zuoyi. By April, De and his supporters decided to form a military government at Tehua in Chahar, which was officially inaugurated in June as the Inner Mongolian government, headed by De with Li Shou-hsin as his deputy. This new government quickly signed a mutual assistance treaty with Manchukuo, and the emperor granted De the title of prince.   In July, at a conference in Tehua, Tanaka was appointed as the head of the Special Service Agency for Inner Mongolia with the mission of implementing the army's Intelligence Section plans. He traveled to Pingtiqüan alongside Chief of Staff Itagaki and Intelligence Chief Mutō Akira to propose a local anti-Communist agreement to Fu. After failing to convince Fu, he attempted to persuade Sun Tien-ying to form a puppet army but managed to recruit only a bandit from Suiyuan, Wang Ying. The February 26 mutiny in Tokyo heightened anti-Japanese sentiments in China, resulting in increased violence. By August, the construction of an airplane hangar in Paot'ou was halted due to riots by local Chinese residents. On August 13, a group of fifteen Japanese, led by Nakajima Manzo, was ambushed while delivering ammunition to a pro-Japanese leader who was shortly thereafter assassinated. Chinese soldiers from Wang Qingkuo's 70th Division carried out the attack, and tensions escalated as the arrival of ammunition and Japanese laborers in Kalgan prompted border villages to strengthen their defenses.   By late September, Tanaka's "Guidelines for the Execution of the Suiyuan Operation" received approval, with operations set to commence in early November. The plan evolved from a covert mission into a personal initiative by Tanaka, financed largely through funds from the Kwantung Army's secret services and profits from special trading in eastern Hopei. Tanaka claimed to have transported 600,000 yen to Tehua in October and later sent 200,000 yuan into Inner Mongolia, estimating total expenses at approximately 6 million yen. He acquired new weaponry from the disbanded Northeast Army and established three clandestine forces: Wang Ying led 500 men, including artillery; Qin Xiashan commanded 3,000 from Sun Tienying's army; and Chang Futang also led 3,000 specialized units. During strategic meetings, Tanaka dismissed proposals for unified command and refusing to integrate secret units into the Mongolian army. He advocated for the slogan "Overthrow Chiang Kai-shek," while Matsui managed to include "Independence for Inner Mongolia."   The Japanese had developed the entire battle strategy. The 1st Army, commanded by Li Xuxin, would serve as the left flank, while the 2nd Army, led by Demchugdongrub, would be positioned on the right. Wang Ying's forces were designated as the central force. Their initial targets would be Hongort, Xinghe, Tuchengzi, and Guisui city, followed by a division to seize Jinging, Baotou, and Hetao. On November 13, Prince Demchugdongrub's and Wang Ying's forces left Shandu in two columns to assault Xinghe and Hongort. By the 15th, 1,500 troops reached Hongort, where they engaged the 1st Cavalry Division led by Peng Yubin. The next day, Ryukichi Tanaka, Demchugdongrub's chief advisor, sent two cavalry brigades and one infantry brigade to capture the town, effectively overrunning its defenders. Meanwhile, Wang Ying dispatched a smaller group to secure Tuchengzi.   Fu Zuoyi established his headquarters in Jining that same day. After assessing the situation, he concluded that if the enemy secured Hongort, it would diminish his defenders' morale. Consequently, he launched a counterattack. Peng Yubin led a joint force of the 1st Cavalry Division and Dong Qiwu's 218th Brigade to confront around 400 of Wang Ying's men defending Hongort and Tuchengzi. By 7 AM on the 18th, Tuchengzi was reclaimed, and at 8:30 AM, the 1st Cavalry Division entered Hongort, charging through 500 of Wang Ying's soldiers. The struggle for Hongort persisted for over three days, resulting in nearly 1,000 casualties before Fu Zuoyi regained control.   As the tide shifted against the invaders, Fu Zuoyi initiated an offensive toward the Bailing Temple, the rear base of the enemy, well-stocked and defended by 3,000 men under Prince Demchugdongrub. Fu Zuoyi ordered the 2nd Cavalry Division, along with the 211th and 315th Brigades, the 21st Artillery Regiment, and a convoy of 20 trucks and 24 armored vehicles to assault the Bailing Temple as quickly as possible. Taking advantage of the Mongolian chaos, Fu Zuoyi's 35th Brigade executed a flanking maneuver west of the Bailing Temple amid a severe snowstorm.   At 1 AM on the 24th, the battle for the Bailing Temple commenced as the Chinese engaged the Mongolians for the fortified positions around the temple. From 2 to 4 AM, the Chinese advanced closer to the temple walls, facing artillery and machine-gun fire. They launched desperate frontal assaults against the city gates, suffering heavy losses. A fierce stalemate ensued, with Japanese aerial bombardments causing significant casualties to the Chinese forces. Fu Zuoyi subsequently ordered all armored vehicles to converge at the main city gate. Despite intense fire, the armored cars managed to breach the gate, allowing Chinese infantry to flood into the temple area. The resulting carnage within the temple walls led to 900 Mongol deaths, with 300 captured as the rest fled. The Chinese suffered 300 casualties but secured the strategically vital rear base, along with a substantial stockpile of provisions, including 500 barrels of petrol, 600 rifles, 10 machine guns, vehicles, and field guns. Following the devastating defeat at Bailing Temple, the invaders regrouped at Xilamuleng Temple. On the 28th, the Japanese sent 100 vehicles to transport 3,000 troops to prepare for a significant counteroffensive to recapture Bailing Temple. On the 29th, Wang Ying personally led 2,000 cavalry north of Shangdu to Taolin in an attempt to contain the enemy. However, after he left the bulk of his forces at Xilamuleng Temple, officers from the Grand Han Righteous Army secretly began negotiating to defect to the Chinese side, undermining the forces needed for the counterattack against Bailing Temple.   The counteroffensive commenced on December 2nd, with 10 armored vehicles and 1,000 Mongol troops leading the charge at 6 AM. They were pushed back by the heavily fortified 211th Brigade, which was well-supplied with machine guns and artillery. The following day, at 3 AM, the Mongols attempted a surprise attack but faced an ambush as they crept toward the temple. They incurred hundreds of casualties, with 230 men either captured or having defected. After this, the counterattack stalled, as the Mongol forces couldn't approach within 3 miles of the temple. Subsequently, the Chinese 2nd Cavalry Division launched a pincer maneuver, causing significant casualties among the invaders. By 9 AM, the enemy had suffered 500 casualties and was in retreat. At 7 PM, Fu Zuoyi ordered another counteroffensive. By the next morning, hundreds more had been lost, and several hundred soldiers were captured. With such heavy losses, the defense of Xilamuleng Temple weakened significantly, prompting more officers to defect to the Chinese. Late on the 4th, Fu Zuoyi assembled a force comprising two cavalry regiments, one infantry regiment, one artillery battalion, four armored vehicles, and a squadron of cars to launch a nighttime assault on Xilamuleng Temple.   Meanwhile, the 2nd Cavalry Division clashed with Wang Ying's cavalry 30 miles northeast of Wulanhua. Wang Ying's 2,000 cavalry had been raiding nearby villages to create diversions, drawing enemy forces away from the Bailing-Xilamuleng theater. By the 9th, Wang Ying's cavalry were encircled in Xiaobei, where they were nearly annihilated, with Wang escaping with around a hundred guards toward Changpei. On the 7th, some Grand Han Righteous Army officers set in motion plans to defect to the Chinese side. Early on the 9th, these officers led their men to invade the residence of Japanese advisors, killing all 27 Japanese officers under Colonel Obama. Simultaneously, Fu Zuoyi's forces executed a flanking maneuver against the Xilamuleng Temple amidst the chaos. With mass defections, the Chinese forces surged into the temple area, resulting in the invader army disintegrating in confusion and surrender. After seizing the temple, the invaders were routed, their lines of communication severed, and only isolated pockets continued to resist. Taking advantage of the confusion, Fu Zuoyi launched simultaneous attacks, attempting to capture Shangdu. However, Yan Xishan sent him a telegram, ordering him to halt, stating that Shangdu fell under the jurisdiction of Shanxi and not Suiyuan.   In response to the loss, Tanaka planned a counteroffensive with Qin's troops, but Chiang kai-shek commanded a strong defense of Pailingmiao, successfully outmaneuvering Tanaka's strategies. The resurgence of Chinese forces led to the disintegration of Qin's troops, who revolted and eventually joined the Nationalist army. The Kwantung Army aimed to redeploy its forces for recovery but faced opposition from Tokyo, which criticized the situation. After Chiang kai-shek was kidnapped by Zhang Xueliang on December 12, Tanaka and Prince De seized the opportunity to reassess their strategy. Ultimately, the Kwantung Army decided to abandon efforts to reclaim Pailingmiao, marking the official end of hostilities on December 21. The Suiyuan incident ultimately strengthened Chinese resolve against Japan and increased international distrust.   The defeat of Japan's proxy forces inspired many Chinese to advocate for a more vigorous resistance against the Japanese. The triumph in Suiyuan was celebrated throughout China and surprised the international media, marking the first occasion where the Chinese army successfully halted a Japanese unit. Delegations traveled from as distant as southern Chinese provinces to encourage the defenders to continue their fight. Captured Japanese weapons and equipment served as proof of Japan's involvement in the conflict, despite Japan's Foreign Minister Hachirō Arita claiming that "Japan was not involved in this conflict in Suiyuan at all." After his defeat, Prince Demchugdongrub and his Inner Mongolian troops retreated to northern Chahar, where he had to reconstruct his army due to significant losses. The Japanese implemented new regulations for the Mongolian Army to enhance its effectiveness, and efforts to recruit new soldiers commenced.   I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. More incidents and more battles to seize territory raged in North China. However things did not go according to plan for the Japanese and their puppets. The tides had turned, and now a more angry and invigorating China would begin lashing out against the encroachment. It was only a matter of time before a full blown war was declared. 

David HaMelech tells us in Tehillim, וצדקתך ירננו , which the Sha'arei Chaim explains to mean that even when we face difficulties, we are meant to respond by singing to Hashem. How is that possible? The pesukim before reveal the secret: דור לדור ישבח מעשיך —each generation should relate to the next the chesed they have seen from Hashem in their lives. ודברי נפלאותיך אשיחה —David HaMelech would constantly speak, even in everyday conversation, about the wonders of Hashem. וגדולתך אספרנה —he would speak of the endless greatness and kindness Hashem bestows upon the world. זכר רב טובך יביעו —our mouths should overflow with praise for Hashem's goodness like a spring that never runs dry. If a person constantly talks about Hashem's kindness, then when something happens that appears negative, it won't shake him. He'll already be fortified with the understanding that Hashem only does good. The Midrash says that from the day Hashem created the world, no one sang shirah until Bnei Yisrael sang אז ישיר at Keri'at Yam Suf. The Sfat Emet asks: we know Adam HaRishon sang shirah— מזמור שיר ליום השבת —as did others. What does it mean that no one sang until Az Yashir? He explains that until that moment, people only sang about the salvation after it came. But at Yam Suf, Bnei Yisrael reached a higher level—they sang about the difficulties too, because they saw that even the hardships were part of Hashem's goodness. אמר אויב ארדף אשיג —they sang about Pharaoh chasing them. מי כמוך באלים ה׳ —they declared; Who is like You among the mighty, Hashem? Chazal explain on this phrase: מי כמוך באלמים ה׳ —Who is like You, Hashem, who remains silent when the worst seems to be happening? How could Hashem be silent when the enemy entered the Beit HaMikdash to destroy it? When Titus HaRasha stabbed the parochet and blood came pouring out? When the resha'im tormented His beloved people in Mitzrayim and, centuries later, in Nazi Germany? At Yam Suf, Bnei Yisrael understood the greatness of Hashem: that He could remain silent because only He saw the ultimate good in every moment. Even the most painful events, seemingly caused by human actions, were all orchestrated by Hashem for our benefit. In the Haggadah, we say: לבן ביקש לעקור את הכל -וירד מצרימה . The mefarshim ask, what's the connection between Lavan wanting to destroy Yaakov and the descent to Mitzrayim? They explain that Lavan's switching of Rachel for Leah led to the shevatim being born from different mothers. Rachel, being the more beloved wife, caused the brothers to feel resentment toward her son, Yosef. That led to Yosef being sold—and eventually to the entire family descending to Egypt. This wasn't really Lavan's doing. Hashem had planned it from the time He told Avraham Avinu that his children would be strangers in a land not their own. Nothing is random. People are not in control—only Hashem is. And He does everything for our good. The more we speak about His hashgachah, His chesed, and His love for us, the more these truths will sink into our hearts. Then, when difficulties arise, we'll have the strength to sing even through the pain. In the future, Hashem will reveal to us all the good behind every event. But if we can trust Him now—before the light shines through—and sing in the darkness, we will reach the highest spiritual levels.