Podcasts about Terrorism Act

Heather Brunskell-Evans, philosopher of politics, author, and academic, speaks about her experience of having protested against the Israeli genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, whereby she held a placard upon which she wrote “I oppose genocide” and “I support Palestine Action.” After holding up her sign, within seconds, Brunskell-Evans was arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 and was swiftly detained. Describing being held in solitary confinement overnight and detailing her treatment in detention, to include being enclosed in a caged area, Brunskell-Evans observes the juxtaposition of two types of police partisanship where, the Pride fluffy arm bands that adorned some of these officers symbolise the wider police support of gender ideology and the concommitant endangerment to women's safety, on the one hand, and on the other, the police force's disregard for civil liberties and the freedom of expression to protest a genocide. Criticising the gender-critical feminist movement which has remained tighly affixed to its Zionism and Islamophobic core, Bruskell-Evans vituperates contemporary feminism pointing to its “intellectual paucity” and “lack of ethics” at the heart of western feminism that denies the many incidents of sexual violence recorded by international and national NGOs, documenting decades of rape and sexual assault perpetrated by the Israeli forces against Palestinian men and women. Get full access to Savage Minds at savageminds.substack.com/subscribe

The Rebel News podcasts features free audio-only versions of select RebelNews+ content and other Rebel News long-form videos, livestreams, and interviews. Monday to Friday enjoy the audio version of Ezra Levant's daily TV-style show, The Ezra Levant Show, where Ezra gives you his contrarian and conservative take on free speech, politics, and foreign policy through in-depth commentary and interviews. Wednesday evenings you can listen to the audio version of The Gunn Show with Sheila Gunn Reid the Chief Reporter of Rebel News. Sheila brings a western sensibility to Canadian news. With one foot in the oil patch and one foot in agriculture, Sheila challenges mainstream media narratives and stands up for Albertans. If you want to watch the video versions of these podcasts, make sure to begin your free RebelNewsPlus trial by subscribing at http://www.RebelNewsPlus.com

Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, better known by his stage name Mo Chara, is due back before Woolwich Crown Court today in relation to a charge under the Terrorism Act. He is accused of allegedly displaying a flag in support of proscribed organisation, Hezbollah at a concert in the city in November 2024. Emily Keegan, Newstalk Reporter who is outside the court gave us an update.

Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, better known by his stage name Mo Chara, is due back before Woolwich Crown Court today in relation to a charge under the Terrorism Act. He is accused of allegedly displaying a flag in support of proscribed organisation, Hezbollah at a concert in the city in November 2024. Emily Keegan, Newstalk Reporter who is outside the court gave us an update.

Six Defend our Juries spokespeople have appeared in court, charged under the Terrorism Act. Plus: An interview with Kieran Andrieu from aboard the Sumud aid flotilla and Nigel Farage speaks to the US House Judiciary Committee on free speech in the UK. With NoJusticeMTG and Dalia Gebrial.

It's been a dramatic week for Irish artists, activism and the UK's terrorism law. Sally Rooney — one of Ireland's most prominent literary voices — has made headlines for her vocal support of Palestine Action, a group recently designated a terrorist organisation by the UK government. The Normal People author has pledged to donate earnings from her books and BBC adaptations to the group — a move that could place her at risk of arrest under UK anti-terror legislation. Her stance came in the same week that Kneecap rapper Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh appeared in a London court on terrorism charges, accused of displaying a flag in support of Hezbollah. Meanwhile, back home, another protest is gathering momentum — this time in the world of sport. A letter signed by around 800 GAA players — including stars from football, hurling and camogie — was delivered to Croke Park, calling on the association to cut ties with Allianz, one of its biggest sponsors. The call comes after a UN special rapporteur's report named Allianz, through its asset-management arm Pimco, as a significant buyer of Israeli government bonds. On today's Indo Daily, Tessa Fleming is joined by TRT World presenter Enda Brady and Conor McKeon, sports journalist with the Irish Independent, to look at the high-profile costs and consequences of speaking out on Israel and Palestine.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On Saturday, in Westminster, police arrested more than 500 people under the Terrorism Act. That's more in a single day than have ever been charged with terrorist-related activity in a whole year.Many of those arrested were pensioners. Their crime: holding cardboard signs which read “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”One of those 532 people arrested on Saturday was Sir Jonathon Porritt, a long-time activist and campaigner on green and social justice issues, former environmental adviser to King Charles and patron to over 20 charities. He joins Anoosh Chakelian to explain why he took part in the protest, what led to his arrest, and why he fears the Home Secretary - and the Labour party - are becoming more authoritarian.--

In this week's episode of Double Jeopardy, hosts Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined once again by an old friend of the podcast, the award-winning, former BBC, journalist and crime and justice commentator Danny Shaw. Together, they dive into the legal, political, and social repercussions faced by Palestine Action supporters following mass arrests in the wake of the decision to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist group under the Terrorism Act 2000. The trio also debate the claim by former Labour Lord Chancellor Charlie Falconer in the Guardian that Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood “has been an absolutely brilliant reforming Lord Chancellor in enormously difficult circumstances” and review Labour's law reform successes (and misses) one year into office.  They also discuss the benefits and challenges of proposed policy changes that could see foreign criminals deported immediately after conviction without serving any jail time in the UK. You can find the link to the permission judgment of Chamberlain J. on 30/7/25 in the Palestine Action judicial review case challenging the legality of the decision to proscribe PA as a terrorist group here. --- Covering the critical intersections of law and politics in the UK with expert commentary on high-profile legal cases, political controversies, prisons and sentencing, human rights law, current political events and the shifting landscape of justice and democracy. With in-depth discussions and influential guests, Double Jeopardy is the podcast that uncovers the forces shaping Britain's legal and political future. What happens when law and politics collide? How do politics shape the law - and when does the law push back? What happens when judicial independence is tested, human rights come under attack, or freedom of expression is challenged? And who really holds power in Britain's legal and political system? Get answers to questions like these weekly on Wednesdays. Double Jeopardy is presented by Ken Macdonald KC, former Director of Public Prosecutions, and Tim Owen KC, as they break down the legal and political issues in Britain. From high-profile legal cases to the evolving state of British democracy, Double Jeopardy offers expert legal commentary on the most pressing topics in UK law, politics, and human rights. Ken Macdonald KC served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2003-2008, shaping modern prosecutorial policy and advocating for the rule of law. He is a former Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, a crossbench member of the House of Lords, and a leading writer, commentator and broadcaster on politics and the rule of law. Tim Owen KC has been involved in many of the most significant public, criminal and human rights law cases over the past four decades.  Both bring unparalleled experience from the frontline of Britain's legal and political landscape. If you like The Rest Is Politics, Talking Politics, Law Pod UK and Today in Focus, you'll love Double Jeopardy.

This week Connie and Jan discuss the Public Spaces Protection Order that has been passed by Thanet District Council (TDC). In the summer of 2024, the FSU threatened legal action when TDC proposed a similar measure. This is their second attempt, and there are still serious concerns that it will infringe on speech rights and is likely to be unlawful – the swearing ban! https://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/council-launches-fresh-bid-to-fine-people-for-swearing-327075/ Jon Farley was arrested under the Terrorism Act for holding a satirical image made and published by Private Eye magazine about the proscription of Palestine Action. He was held for 6 hours and was eventually told no further action would be taken. The FSU has offered to look into helping the protestor with securing an apology from Leeds police. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/23/private-eye-cartoon-arrest-ian-hislop-protest Lord Toby Young has called for Akeela Ahmed to step down from the government's  Islamophobia Working Group due to a conflict of interest. Ms Ahmed is the incoming Chief Executive of the British Muslim Trust which aims to monitor incidents of Islamophobia and “raise awareness” of hate crime with the help of £1 million a year donation from the government, we argue that her position calls into question the ability of the working group to objectively assess the merits of an official definition of Islamophobia. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/07/21/conflict-interest-row-over-rayners-islamophobia-definition/?mc_cid=ced63ae64a&mc_eid=ad5cde99a7 Finally, some good news. Lord Chris Smith, a supporter of free speech and academic freedom, has been elected to the Chancellorship of Cambridge University! You can read his responses to a survey sent to all candidates in the election  by Alumni for Free Speech here.

In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment?The case was decided on June 20, 2025.The Supreme Court held that the PSJVTA's personal jurisdiction provision does not violate the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because the statute reasonably ties jurisdiction over the PLO and PA to conduct involving the United States and implicating sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion of the Court.The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause does not impose the same jurisdictional limitations as the Fourteenth Amendment because the federal government occupies a sovereign sphere dramatically different from that of state governments. While the Fourteenth Amendment's jurisdictional limits protect interstate federalism by ensuring states do not exceed their territorial boundaries as coequal sovereigns, these federalism concerns are inapplicable to the federal government, which possesses both nationwide and extraterritorial authority. The Constitution authorizes the federal government alone to regulate foreign commerce, prosecute offenses against U.S. nationals abroad, and conduct foreign affairs. Therefore, the Fifth Amendment permits a more flexible jurisdictional inquiry commensurate with the federal government's broader sovereign authority than the “minimum contacts” standard required under the Fourteenth Amendment.The PSJVTA represents a permissible exercise of this authority because it narrowly targets only two specific foreign entities that have longstanding, complex relationships with the United States involving terrorism concerns. The statute's jurisdictional predicates—payments to imprisoned terrorists and their families, and activities conducted on U.S. soil—directly implicate important federal policies aimed at deterring terrorism and protecting American citizens. The political branches' coordinated judgment in enacting this legislation warrants judicial deference, particularly given the statute's limited scope applying only to ATA cases and its clear notice to the PLO and PA that specified conduct would subject them to U.S. jurisdiction. Even assuming a reasonableness inquiry applies under the Fifth Amendment, the PSJVTA satisfies it given the federal government's compelling interest in providing a forum for terrorism victims, the plaintiffs' interest in obtaining relief, and the absence of any unfair burden on these sophisticated international organizations that have litigated in U.S. courts for decades.Justice Thomas authored an opinion concurring in the judgment, joined by Justice Gorsuch as to Part II, arguing that the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause imposes no territorial limits on the federal government's power to extend federal jurisdiction beyond the nation's borders.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

Reverend Sue Parfitt from Henbury in Bristol was arrested on the same day Palestine Action was outlawed. She was attending a demonstration in Parliament Square, London, on Saturday. The group became a proscribed organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000 on Saturday, making membership or expressing support for them punishable by up to 14 years in prison.Chris Hipkins spoke to Ryan Bridge this morning shutting down talks of the need for a second COVID enquiry. Mr Hipkins shut down any thought of this being a good use of time and taxpayer money saying that all the questions that are now being asked in the second enquiry were answered in the first, yet this Government refuses to action any of the recommendations of the first.Childcare rebates from the Government's flagship FamilyBoost scheme will rise with eligibility expanded, Finance Minister Nicola Willis has announced. Willis announced the changes this morning, which will see rebates increasing from 25% to 40% of weekly fees. Those with household incomes of up to $229,000 are now also eligible to apply. It comes after the programme saw lower-than-expected uptake.=================================Come support the work we're doing by becoming a Patron of ⁠⁠#BHN⁠⁠ www.patreon.com/BigHairyNews⁠=================================Merch available at www.BHNShop.nz Like us on Facebookwww.facebook.com/BigHairyNews Follow us on Twitter.@patbrittenden @Chewie_NZFollow us on BlueskyPat @patbrittenden.bsky.socialChewie @chewienz.bsky.socialEmily @iamprettyawesome.bsky.socialMagenta @xkaosmagex.bsky.social

Richie is joined by Dr. Rehiana Ali and Dr. Tom Cowan. Dr. Rehiana Ali is a distinguished consultant neurologist. Last December she was handed an 18-month suspension by the General Medical Council for speaking out against the genocide in Gaza. Just over a week ago, she was arrested under the UK's Terrorism Act as she returned from Pakistan. Rehiana discusses this and much more with Richie.https://x.com/Rehiana1980https://citizengo.org/en-row/oth/14880Dr. Thomas Cowan is a respected alternative medicine doctor, author and speaker, with a common-sense, holistic approach to health and wellness. He has given countless lectures and workshops throughout the U.S. on a variety of subjects in health and medicine, and is the author of six best-selling books. Tom worked in general practice for over thirty years. He tells Richie why he began to question everything he'd learned at medical school, including whether or not viruses even exist. Do not miss this show. https://x.com/drtomcowanhttps://drtomcowan.com/

As the hostilities go on between Israel and Iran we try and get beneath the "We support the right of Israel to defend itself" to why Israel decided to launch its attacks, why now , and the realities of nuclear proliferation in the region.Meanwhile a  report by the Centre For Media Monitoring has forensically examined the BBC's coverage of Gaza. The results are damning in terms of revealing BBC bias.We take a look at the spending review  not only the decisions made but especially what impact Labour's decisions may have on Scottish politics. Lesley's latest article in The National not only covers this but asks if the SNP's old attack lines are now almost gone and its claims of success belong largely to the old glory days. Will John Swinney's Scotland 2050 speech bring them back?Despite Deputy Leader Keith Brown committing to an independence convention before the Holyrood elections at the 2024 SNP Annual Conference this has now been knocked firmly on the head by Angus Robertson. Was this a mistake? The trial of Kneecap member, Mo Chara, under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act will go ahead at Westminster Magistrates' Court  tomorrow. What does this tell us about the nature of the state and its decisions on who and who not to prosecute under the Act's provisions?As per usual there's other meanderings and maybe a wee mention of the golf. ★ Support this podcast ★

Tráthnóna Dé Céadaoin, cúisíodh ball de Kneecap, Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, a sheinneann faoin ainm stáitse Mo Chara, as coir faoin Acht Sceimhlitheoireachta. Baineann an cúiseamh le líomhain go raibh bratach Hezbollah á thaispeáint aige ag ceolchoirm i Londain anuraidh. Tá Hezbollah agus tacaíocht dó mídhleathach sa Ríocht Aontaithe. Tuigtear go mbeidh an tUasal Ó hAnnaidh ag séanadh an chúisimh. Thug Kneecap “political policing” ar an gcúiseamh. Dar leo, ní hiad féin agus a bhfuil ar bun acu an scéal ach an “cinedhíothú” in Gaza. Labhair Seachtain leis an iriseoir Gearóid Ó Muilleoir faoi na castachtaí agus na himpleachtaí a bhaineann leis an scéal seo. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When west Belfast rapper Mo Chara, Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, of Kneecap allegedly displayed a Hezbollah flag on stage in London, he didn't just spark controversy – he triggered a UK terrorism investigation and has now been charged. The group says it's political policing: the UK authorities says it's national security. Dave Hanratty speaks to Enda Brady. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Issue(s): Whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.  ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases covered in this preview are listed below.Louisiana v. Callais (March 24) - Election law, Civil Rights; Issue(s): (1) Whether the majority of the three-judge district court in this case erred in finding that race predominated in the Louisiana legislature’s enactment of S.B. 8; (2) whether the majority erred in finding that S.B. 8 fails strict scrutiny; (3) whether the majority erred in subjecting S.B. 8 to the preconditions specified in Thornburg v. Gingles; and (4) whether this action is non-justiciable.Riley v. Bondi (March 24) - Immigration; Issue(s): (1) Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1)'s 30-day deadline is jurisdictional, or merely a mandatory claims-processing rule that can be waived or forfeited; and (2) whether a person can obtain review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision in a withholding-only proceeding by filing a petition within 30 days of that decision.Environmental Protection Agency v. Calumet Shreveport Refining (March 25) - Jurisdiction, Federalism & Separation of Powers; Issue(s): Whether venue for challenges by small oil refineries seeking exemptions from the requirements of the Clean Air Act’s Renewable Fuel Standard program lies exclusively in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit because the agency’s denial actions are “nationally applicable” or, alternatively, are “based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect.”Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency (March 25) - Jurisdiction, Federalism & Separation of Powers; Issue(s): Whether a final action by the Environmental Protection Agency taken pursuant to its Clean Air Act authority with respect to a single state or region may be challenged only in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit because the agency published the action in the same Federal Register notice as actions affecting other states or regions and claimed to use a consistent analysis for all states.Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research (March 26) - Federalism & Separation of Powers; Issue(s): (1) Whether Congress violated the nondelegation doctrine by authorizing the Federal Communications Commission to determine, within the limits set forth in 47 U.S.C. § 254, the amount that providers must contribute to the Universal Service Fund; (2) whether the FCC violated the nondelegation doctrine by using the financial projections of the private company appointed as the fund's administrator in computing universal service contribution rates; (3) whether the combination of Congress’s conferral of authority on the FCC and the FCC’s delegation of administrative responsibilities to the administrator violates the nondelegation doctrine; and (4) whether this case is moot in light of the challengers' failure to seek preliminary relief before the 5th Circuit.Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission (March 31) - First Amendment, Religion; Issue(s): Whether a state violates the First Amendment’s religion clauses by denying a religious organization an otherwise-available tax exemption because the organization does not meet the state’s criteria for religious behavior.Rivers v. Guerrero (March 31) - Criminal Law & Procedure; Issue(s): Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2) applies only to habeas filings made after a prisoner has exhausted appellate review of his first petition, to all second-in-time habeas filings after final judgment, or to some second-in-time filings — depending on a prisoner’s success on appeal or ability to satisfy a seven-factor test.Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization (April 1) - Due Process, Fifth Amendment; Issue(s): Whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.Kerr v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (April 2) - Medicare; Issue(s): Whether the Medicaid Act’s any-qualified-provider provision unambiguously confers a private right upon a Medicaid beneficiary to choose a specific provider. Featuring:Allison Daniel, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationErielle Davidson, Associate, Holtzman VogelJennifer B. Dickey, Deputy Chief Counsel, U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, U.S. Chamber of CommerceElizabeth A. Kiernan, Associate Attorney, Gibson, Dunn & CrutcherMorgan Ratner, Partner, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP(Moderator) Sarah Welch, Issues & Appeals Associate, Jones Day

Africa Melane sits down with award-winning legal analyst Reitumetse Benedict Phiri to unpack the state’s decision to charge Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla under the Terrorism Act.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

BEST OF: A recent video release calls into question the events of September 11, 2001, implying that Saudi Arabia was behind the attack. In 2016, the 'Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act' gave victims a right to sue the Saudi government, and soon after the the secret document known as '28 pages', which was part of a 2002 Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11, was released. But something doesn't add up on either end. One, we were told that other Arab countries were behind the attack, including Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan - within hours of the event that nobody expected to happen… reportedly. Then, the AP reported in 2002 that '15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi', the ‘men with stolen identified', and we soon found out that many were still alive. Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September, but he lived to tell the tale. As did Abdulaziz Al Omari. Talk about misdirection - it's Iraq, they're Muslims, followed by oh, they're from Saudi and oh, they're still alive, followed by official government documents released decades later reporting that Saudi really did do it, or maybe they did it. Two, there was, and remains, overwhelming evidence that Israel was at least aware, if not complicit, in the terrorism. From the 5 Dancing Israelis, to the emergency call about Palestinians in a van, to Michael Chertoff and the Patriot Act he co-authored, to 'pull it' Larry Silverstein. There is also Benjamin Netanyahu, who said "we are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack." In other words, 911 was used in concert with the satellite state of Israel to fight the PNAC wars and demonize the Muslim world. Or maybe this is an anti-semitic conspiracy theory? At least, that's what the ADL says. Good thing Mohammed Atta left an Arabic flight manual and Koran in his car, and his passport was found in the rubble of the WTC complex.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-secret-teachings-with-ryan-gable--5328407/support.

As the Medicare enrollment period gets underway again, we welcome Dr. Adam Gaffney to remind us the ways all those heavily advertised Medicare Advantage programs are ripping you off. Then we receive another house call from Dr. Marty Makary, author of Blind Spots: When Medicine Gets It Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health about the effect of medical groupthink on all kinds of accepted treatments from peanut allergies to opioid addiction. Finally, founder of Media Matters, David Brock stops by to discuss his latest book, Stench: The Making of the Thomas Court and the Unmaking of America.Dr. Adam Gaffney is a physician, writer, public health researcher, and advocate. Dr. Gaffney practices at the Cambridge Health Alliance and is an Assistant Professor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. A member of the Cambridge Health Justice Lab, his research focuses on healthcare financing, reform, and equity, and disparities in lung health. He writes about the policy, politics, and history of health care, and is the author of To Heal Humankind: The Right to Health in History.The reality is we don't need Medigap. We could plug those holes with public coverage. There's no reason to have a role for private insurers to cover a slice of our healthcare when all seniors need the same thing—which is comprehensive universal care.  There's no need for these private stopgap measures, when what we need is a public system of universal care.Dr. Adam GaffneyI do think there's growing interest among physicians in change. Their bosses are increasingly these for-profit companies whose mission is not really medicine. Their mission is money. And what we need to do is to rethink our healthcare system, so it serves communities, is owned by communities, and it returns us to the underlying reason why we went into this profession—which is to help patients, and not to pad the pockets of shareholders.Dr. Adam GaffneyDr. Marty Makary is a Johns Hopkins professor and member of the National Academy of Medicine. He is the author of two New York Times best-selling books, Unaccountable and The Price We Pay. Dr. Makary has written for the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Times, and he has published more than 250 scientific research articles. He served in leadership at the W.H.O. and has been a visiting professor at 25 medical schools. His latest book is Blind Spots: When Medicine Gets It Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health.For most of human history, doctors were respected, but maybe like you would respect your hairdresser, or maybe a clergy member in the community. And we didn't have many tools as doctors. We had a lancet, we had a saw to do amputations, we had a couple of drugs that didn't work or were counterproductive like digoxin. And then what happened in 1922 is Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin. And by the post-World War II era in the 1940s and '50s, we saw the mass production of antibiotics. That ushered in the white coat era of medicine. Doctors began to wear a white coat. They now had the power to prescribe a magical pill that could cure disease, make childbirth safe, enable surgeons to do procedures safer. And this ushered in this new unquestioned authority. And what happened was, physicians as a class took advantage of this unquestioned authority.Dr. Marty MakaryDavid Brock is a Democratic activist and founder of Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog group. Following the 2010 elections, Mr. Brock founded the Super PAC American Bridge, which works to elect Democrats. He is a New York Times best-selling author, and his books include the memoir Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative, Killing the Messenger: The Right Wing Plot to Hijack Your Government, and his latest book is Stench: The Making of the Thomas Court and the Unmaking of America.The Federalist Society was originally founded by three rightwing law students. And it was pitched as a debating society. So I don't think in the original incarnation, they had a master plan. But soon enough, they realized that membership in the Federalist Society could confer on people a certain imprimatur for appointments—and that's appointments not only to the federal judiciary, but all through the executive branch.David BrockThe scheme to overturn Roe has been going on for all these decades. There were setbacks, of course, because there were times when Republican appointees ended up being independent—Sandra Day O 'Connor, for example, David Souter, for example—and the right was defeated in their effort to overturn Roe. So it took a while and it took a lot of steadfast, patient spending of money on their crusade.David Brock[This is] a time when the Biden regime is supporting the destruction of the ancient land of Lebanon— whom he's called in prior years an ally. He's letting Netanyahu destroy Lebanon with the same tactics that Netanyahu applied to the genocide in Gaza.Ralph NaderIn Case You Haven't Heard with Francesco DeSantisNews 10/23/241. Last week, Israel announced they had killed longtime Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. As NBC put it, the footage of his death released by Israel “showed Sinwar not hiding in a tunnel surrounded by hostages — as Israeli officials often claimed he was — but aboveground and hurling a stick at a drone with his last ounce of strength.” American political leaders, such as Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders, are seeking to use Sinwar's death to argue that Israel has accomplished its mission and should therefore conclude its genocidal campaign in Gaza. Israeli leaders however have made it abundantly clear that they have no intention of pulling out of Gaza, with Benny Gantz – chairman of Israel's National Unity Party and among Prime Minister Netanyahu's chief political rivals – stating that the Israeli military “will continue to operate in the Gaza Strip for years to come,” per Al Jazeera.2. According to POLITICO, during an August 29th meeting in Washington Lise Grande, the top U.S. official working on the humanitarian situation in Gaza told the leaders of more than a dozen aid organizations that “the U.S. would not consider withholding weapons from Israel for blocking food and medicine from entering [Gaza].” It is illegal to block the delivery of humanitarian assistance under both American and international human rights law. As the paper notes, Grande's “candid assessment…raises questions about the seriousness of recent Biden administration threats to [withhold arms].” One attendee told POLITICO “[Grande] was saying that the rules don't apply to Israel.”3. Meanwhile, Israel continues its war on the United Nations mission in Lebanon. On October 20th, UNIFIL released a statement saying “Earlier today, an IDF bulldozer deliberately demolished an observation tower and perimeter fence of a UN position in Marwahin…The IDF has repeatedly demanded that UNIFIL vacate its positions along the Blue Line and has deliberately damaged UN positions. Despite the pressure being exerted on the mission and our troop-contributing countries…We will continue to undertake our mandated tasks.” UNIFIL added “Yet again, we note that breaching a UN position and damaging UN assets is a flagrant violation of international law and Security Council resolution 1701.”4. In a frankly dystopian story from the United Kingdom, British counterterrorism police “raided the home and seized several electronic devices belonging to The Electronic Intifada's associate editor Asa Winstanley,” despite the fact that Winstanley has not been charged with any offense. Electronic Intifada reports the raid was conducted under sections 1 and 2 of the 2006 “Terrorism Act,” which deal with the “encouragement of terrorism.” Human Rights Watch has previously urged the British government to repeal the repressive provisions of the 2006 act noting that “the definition of the encouragement of terrorism offense is overly broad, raising serious concerns about undue infringement on free speech.” Electronic Intifada further notes “In August, Britain's Crown Prosecution Service issued a warning to the British public to ‘think before you post' and threatening that it would prosecute anyone it deemed guilty of what it calls ‘online violence.'” Winstanley is the author of Weaponising Anti-Semitism: How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn and has been interviewed by the Capitol Hill Citizen.5. According to the Libertarian magazine Reason, Bob Woodward's new book War includes a passage about a “shockingly blunt conversation,” between President Biden and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham regarding “Biden's attempts to negotiate a ‘megadeal' between the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.” Per Reason “Graham reportedly said that only Biden could secure a U.S.-Saudi defense treaty, because it would ‘take a Democratic president to convince Democrats to vote to go to war for Saudi Arabia'” Biden's response? “Let's do it.” Furthermore, reports indicate this security pact only fell apart after October 7th, with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman seeing a prominent deal with Israel at that time as a major political liability. Reason cites an article from the Atlantic in January wherein Salman reportedly told Secretary of State Antony Blinken “Do I care personally about the Palestinian issue? I don't, but my people do…Half my advisers say that the deal is not worth the risk. I could end up getting killed because of this deal.”6. In more international news, the Cuban energy grid collapsed on Friday, under strain from Hurricane Oscar. The complete grid collapse left the entire country of 10 million without electricity, per NPR. Reuters reports that over the weekend, the grid failed three more times as authorities sought to restore power. Brasil de Fato, or BdF, a Brazilian socialist news service, reports China, Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia, Russia and Barbados are offering support to Cuba amid the total blackout. BdF further reports “The Alba Movimientos platform, which brings together more than 400 organizations from 25 countries, issued a statement...[saying] ‘No one can attribute this virtual collapse of the Cuban electricity system to a specific measure by the US government – that would be too simplistic…this is'“the result of a long strategy of planned destruction of the material and spiritual living conditions of the Cuban population…with the financial resources denied to Cuba due to the blockade policy, 18 days of accumulated damages equal the annual cost of maintaining the country's electricity system.” According to the UN, the U.S. embargo cost Cuba $13 million US dollars per day between 2022 and 2023 alone.7. A new scandal has rocked American Higher Education. Inside Higher Ed reports “Last week a lawsuit accused 40 colleges and universities, as well as the nonprofit College Board, of participating in a price-fixing conspiracy to jack up tuition rates” specifically, for children of divorced parents. The scheme itself had to do with consideration of the non-custodial parent's income, but the larger issue at stake here is the fact that the universities entered into a “cartel” in violation of antitrust laws. As this piece notes this is the “second major price-fixing antitrust lawsuit filed against highly selective universities since 2022, when 17 institutions…were accused of illegally colluding to set common financial aid formulas. So far, 10 of those institutions have settled for a combined $248 million.”8. Boeing has offered their striking machinists a new deal, which they hope will end their crippling strike. ABC reports “The new offer delivers a 35% raise over the four-year duration of the contract,” which is short of the 40% raise demanded by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers but considerably better than the aerospace titan's previous offer of 25%. ABC continues “The proposal also hikes Boeing's contribution to a 401(k) plan, but it declines to fulfill workers' call for a reinstatement of the company's defined pension.” As this piece notes, the machinists overwhelmingly rejected Boeing's previous offer last month; this week they will vote on the new proposal. Whatever the details of the final contract, this episode clearly demonstrates the power of a union, even going up against one of the most powerful corporations in America.9. A stunning CNN investigation reveals the extent of predatory fundraising by the major parties off of elderly people suffering from dementia or other forms of cognitive decline in their old age. According to “More than 1,000 reports filed with government agencies and consumer advocacy groups… deceptive political fundraisers have victimized hundreds of elderly Americans…into giving away millions of dollars.” These heartbreaking stories concern “Donors…often in their 80s and 90s…[including] retired public workers, house cleaners and veterans, widows living alone, nursing home residents…[with] money…from pensions, Social Security payments and retirement savings accounts meant to last decades.” To cite just one just one shocking example: “[an] 82-year-old woman, who wore pajamas with holes in them because she didn't want to spend money on new ones, didn't realize she had given Republicans more than $350,000 while living in a 1,000 square-foot Baltimore condo since 2020.”10. Finally, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib has sent a letter to Rodney McMullen, Chairman and CEO of Kroger, decrying the company's “decision to roll out surge pricing using facial recognition technology.” Specifically, Tlaib cites concerns about price manipulation based on external factors like supply as well as discrimination based on race, gender, and other criteria determined through facial recognition. Tlaib ends this letter with six key questions, including “Will Kroger use…facial recognition to display targeted advertisements…?…What safeguards will be in pace?…[and] Are there plans to sell data collected in the store?” among others. Grocery prices continue to be a source of everyday economic hardship for working Americans and corporations are increasingly interested in surge pricing for essential goods. There is some comfort in knowing at least one member of Congress is concerned about this dangerous combination.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

A recent video release calls into question the events of September 11, 2001, implying that Saudi Arabia was behind the attack. In 2016, the 'Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act' gave victims a right to sue the Saudi government, and soon after the the secret document known as '28 pages', which was part of a 2002 Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11, was released. But something doesn't add up on either end. One, we were told that other Arab countries were behind the attack, including Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan - within hours of the event that nobody expected to happen… reportedly. Then, the AP reported in 2002 that '15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi', the ‘men with stolen identified', and we soon found out that many were still alive. Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September, but he lived to tell the tale. As did Abdulaziz Al Omari. Talk about misdirection - it's Iraq, they're Muslims, followed by oh, they're from Saudi and oh, they're still alive, followed by official government documents released decades later reporting that Saudi really did do it, or maybe they did it. Two, there was, and remains, overwhelming evidence that Israel was at least aware, if not complicit, in the terrorism. From the 5 Dancing Israelis, to the emergency call about Palestinians in a van, to Michael Chertoff and the Patriot Act he co-authored, to 'pull it' Larry Silverstein. There is also Benjamin Netanyahu, who said "we are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack." In other words, 911 was used in concert with the satellite state of Israel to fight the PNAC wars and demonize the Muslim world. Or maybe this is an anti-semitic conspiracy theory? At least, that's what the ADL says. Good thing Mohammed Atta left an Arabic flight manual and Koran in his car, and his passport was found in the rubble of the WTC complex.-FULL ARCHIVE & RSS: https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-secret-teachings Twitter: https://twitter.com/TST___Radio Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thesecretteachings WEBSITE (BOOKS, RESUBSCRIBE for early & ad-free show access): http://thesecretteachings.info Paypal: rdgable@yahoo.com CashApp: $rdgable EMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-secret-teachings-with-ryan-gable--5328407/support.

Join Hearts of Oak for an exclusive interview with Tommy Robinson, where he delves into his ongoing legal battles and the profound impact of his activism. Robinson shares insights into his voluntary return to the UK and his subsequent detention under contentious terrorism legislation, shedding light on what he describes as a concerted effort to stifle journalistic freedom. He discusses the pivotal role of social media in amplifying alternative voices against the backdrop of mainstream media's alleged collusion with state powers. Despite facing vilification, Robinson points to a swelling tide of public support, underscoring a disconnect between the establishment's narrative and the grassroots sentiment. Tune in as he criticizes political figures for their lack of solidarity and calls for a united stand at an upcoming rally, positioning it as a critical juncture in the battle for free speech and the preservation of national identity. Connect with Tommy Robinson:

British "counterterrorism" police raided the home of Electronic Intifada editor Asa Winstanley on Thursday morning, seizing multiple electronic devices on suspicion that the journalist violated the UK's 2006 Terrorism Act with his social media activity. Reading by Tim Foley.

On this episode, we delve into the use of terrorism laws being used to silence journalists and anti-genocide activists in the US and Britain. With a focus on the British context, CODEPINK's Nuvpreet speaks with Richard Medhurst, a journalist arrested under the Terrorism Act in Britain. In the second half of the episode, member of CODEPINK's British chapter, Suzie, speaks with lawyer Daniel Furner on his work representing people criminalized under the Terrorism Act.

Sarah Wilkinson was brutally arrested and her home ransacked. Now she's under house arrest, prohibited from using phones or other devices, awaiting the possibility of further persecution under the extremely anti-democratic Section 12 of the 2000 Terrorism Act in England.   This is a song about how you can be brutally abducted and charged with ridiculous offenses right now in modern-day England, on those lovely old and occasionally still cobblestoned streets of London. Sarah is only one of a number of journalists and others to be charged under this outrageous law, by the New Labor government.

Keir Starmer's Thought Police have been raiding the homes of journalists and activists in the past few days, most recently arresting longtime organizer, journalist, and social media influencer Sarah Wilkinson, who I have known, admired, and collaborated with for many years. Sarah and others are being charged with violating Section 12 of the Terrorism Act of 2000. This is a very easy law to break, and until now, is one that has generally gone unenforced. If you are perceived to have said or posted something in praise of a group that is resisting an illegal occupation or a genocidal slaughter, and if the group you have said something positive about is on the UK's proscribed list, such as Hamas or Hezbollah, then you have broken this terrorism law and you are subject to a potential prison sentence of 14 years. In addition to an early-morning raid on her home with 12 uniformed and plainclothes officers and having this potential sentence hanging over her head, they have taken all of Sarah's electronics, and forbidden her from posting anything online. What they are obviously doing here is applying this law in an extremely selective and very political way, and it's a law that shouldn't be on the books in the first place, in any remotely democratic society. They have chosen people like Sarah to target, because, unlike the millions of other people they could be targeting for posting exactly the same sorts of things that she has posted, she has a direct following of hundreds of thousands of people on X, and many more people within her activist networks who benefit greatly from her involvement with campaigns such as the Gaza Flotilla. If the MI5 thinks I have enough of a following for them to arrest me next time I land at Heathrow, someone will probably let you know.

In speech at Democratic National Convention, Biden warns of second Trump coup / Israel continues Gaza genocide as Washington pushes “ceasefire” deal to pave way for region-wide war / Journalist Richard Medhurst arrested under Britain's Terrorism Act

Trong gần một tuần, bạo động đã nổ ra tại nhiều thành phố ở Vương Quốc Anh sau vụ một thanh niên 17 tuổi tấn công bằng dao làm thiệt mạng ba bé gái tại Southport, tây bắc nước Anh. Chính phủ của thủ tướng Keir Starmer quy trách nhiệm cho những nhóm cực hữu đứng sau các cuộc bạo loạn. Nguyên nhân sâu xa của vụ việc này là gì ? RFI Tiếng Việt đặt câu hỏi với nhà báo Nguyễn Giang, định cư lâu năm tại Anh Quốc.**********RFI Tiếng Việt : Trước hết, anh có thể giải thích rõ thêm về nguyên nhân thực sự của những vụ bạo loạn ? Phải chăng di dân luôn là vấn đề « nhạy cảm » tại Anh Quốc ?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Mười ngày bạo động, đốt phá ở chừng 10 thành phố, thị trấn của xứ Anh (England) và Bắc Ireland cho thấy có hàng loạt vấn đề trước mắt và lâu dài mà chính phủ của Công đảng phải giải quyết. Đó là sự hoạt động kín của các nhóm dùng mạng xã hội, là thái độ bài ngoại, phân biệt chủng tộc âm ỉ trong dân bản địa Anh đã lâu, là các vấn đề kinh tế khó khăn, câu chuyện di dân, người nhập cư và cả bệnh tâm thần và tệ nạn say xỉn, nghiện ngập.Đầu tiên là việc những kẻ theo phái cực hữu, dân tộc chủ nghĩa Anh nghe theo những lời kêu gọi lan truyền trong các cộng đồng mạng dùng chatapp khép kín, người không được mời không thể tham gia, để tổ chức các đợt tấn công vào khách sạn có người nhập cư, tỵ nạn được chính quyền cho tạm cư. Họ cũng nhân đó đốt phá xe cảnh sát, đập cửa tiệm, ném gạch đá vào một số ngôi đền Hồi giáo ở những vùng mà căng thẳng sắc tộc đã có sẵn.Nhắc lại đợt bạo loạn tương tự năm 2011 ở Anh, các tờ báo lớn đều cho rằng chỉ xử phạt, bỏ tù những kẻ gây rối thôi sẽ không giải quyết được gốc rễ của vấn đề tha hóa trong thanh thiếu niên thất nghiệp, sự nghèo nàn về sinh hoạt cộng đồng và các căn bệnh xã hội bấy lâu nay ở các đô thị thua thiệt trong kinh tế.Cảnh sát Anh cáo buộc nhóm cực hữu English Defence League đứng sau cuộc bạo loạn. Anh có thể cho biết rõ thêm về nhóm cực hữu này ? Chủ trương hành động của họ là gì? Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Nhóm cực hữu này đã bị cấm từ 10 năm qua, nhưng các nhà báo Anh khi đến các điểm bạo loạn thì họ nhận ra là có các thành viên cũ của English Defence League (EDL) tham gia đốt phá, hoặc đứng ngoài xem, quay video. Cựu thủ lĩnh của tổ chức này là Tommy Robinson thì không ở Anh nhưng vẫn có thể phát biểu qua mạng xã hội thúc giục những người tin theo ông ta ra tay.Cũng phải nói rằng báo chí Anh vẫn trích dẫn lời Tommy Robinson để hiểu ra vì sao ông ta và những kẻ bài ngoại nói và làm như vậy. Điều đáng chú ý là EDL không còn chính thức hoạt động, nhưng các lập luận của họ vẫn có ảnh hưởng nhất định trong một số giới. EDL cũng không phải là tổ chức công khai phân biệt chủng tộc, bài Do Thái như một số đảng cực hữu ở châu Âu.Trái lại, họ nói là văn hóa bản địa của người Anh bị đe dọa bởi hai thứ: một là làn sóng dân nhập cư quá cao, hàm ý người Hồi giáo và châu Phi, và hai là thái độ thờ ơ, bỏ mặc của tầng lớp trên ở Luân Đôn, gồm cả chính phủ và giới truyền thông.Dù bị luật chống khủng bố Terrorism Act 2000 cấm, những cựu thành viên của tổ chức này vẫn tuyên truyền trên mạng xã hội, đôi khi trả lời phỏng vấn đài báo chính thống như SkyNews. Họ có cả các nhóm thân hữu tập hợp người Do Thái, người theo đạo Sikh và LGBT.Trong vụ việc này, chính phủ thủ tướng Keir Starmer còn quy trách nhiệm cho các mạng xã hội. Thực hư cáo buộc này là gì ?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Điều đáng nói là bạo loạn nổ ra đúng 9 tháng sau khi Anh thông qua Luật An toàn mạng (Online Safety Act) nhằm ngăn chặn việc lan truyền tin giả qua các nhóm dùng mạng khép kín. Thế nhưng trong vụ việc mới đây, tin giả nói thủ phạm chém chết ba bé gái ở Southport, Anh Quốc “là người di dân vừa vào Anh bất hợp pháp” đã lan tỏa rất nhanh, thúc đẩy làn sóng bài ngoại lên cao.Sự thật là hung thủ sinh ra ở Anh chứ không phải người nhập cư, nhưng điều đó không được các nhóm phân biệt chủng tộc nghe theo. Đây là bằng chứng cho thấy trong một xã hội tự do, việc giám sát mạng xã hội rất khó và sắp tới, chính phủ của Thủ tướng Kier Starmer nói sẽ làm chặt hơn, nhưng sẽ không dễ, ví dụ như luật Anh cấm tuyên truyền kỳ thị chủng tộc, chống di dân nhưng không ai cấm cả các công ty điều tra dư luận và đài báo hỏi dân chúng về thái độ của họ đối với người nhập cư.Trên thực tế, nhiều người dân ở Anh gồm cả người không phải gốc bản địa Anh cũng lo rằng kinh tế khó khăn, nhà ở đang thiếu mà làn sóng di cư trái phép cứ tiếp tục thì gánh nặng cho chi tiêu công sẽ tăng, trực tiếp hoặc gián tiếp ảnh hưởng đến đời sống của họ. Sự thất vọng trong cuộc sống đẩy cao tâm lý nghi kỵ, bài xích người khác họ.Trong vụ việc gần nhất đây, hiện tượng người Hồi giáo ở một số vùng phải đứng ra bảo vệ cơ sở tôn giáo của họ cũng bị phe bài ngoại cho rằng cảnh sát chỉ bênh người Hồi giáo và bắt giữ toàn người gốc Anh bản địa, khiến cho tình hình thêm căng thẳng. Phải tới cuối tuần qua, số người biểu tình chống phân biệt chủng tộc, gồm rất nhiều thành phần sắc tộc, xã hội, mới tụ họp đông đảo ở Luân Đôn và các đô thị khác, nêu lên tiếng nói hòa bình của đa số, khiến tình hình giảm nhiệt đi trông thấy.Tại sao bạo động đặc biệt diễn ra dữ dội tại các thành phố Sunderland, Liverpool, Hull… , những thành phố phía bắc nước Anh ? Và đây cũng phải là lần đầu tiên những cuộc bạo loạn bài chủng tộc diễn ra ở Anh ?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Không phải ngẫu nhiên mà nơi nổ ra bạo loạn ở vùng miền Trung và Bắc nước Anh, cộng thêm một số điểm ở phía Đông Luân Đôn và ở Bắc Ireland đều là những nơi có tỷ lệ nghèo khó cao nhất nước. Ví dụ như Blackburn, Blackpool, Hartlepool, Hull, Liverpool, Manchester và Middlesbrough nằm cả trong số 10 đô thị xuống cấp, nghèo đi so với trước, theo thống kê của chính phủ trong bảng Indices of Deprivation (Hạng mục suy thoái, xuống cấp).Tại các vùng này, nơi người nhập cư từ Nam Á đã sống cạnh người Anh mấy thế hệ nhưng việc làm ít, đầu tư công bị cắt giảm khiến căng thẳng sắc tộc thường cao hơn các vùng khá giả. Không ít gia đình người Anh sống trong cảnh vất vưởng về việc làm, về cơ hội vươn lên trong khi đầu tư công, chi phí cho xây dựng cộng đồng, hỗ trợ thất nghiệp bị cắt giảm liên tục.Trong một số vụ bị xử tù tuần qua vì gây bạo loạn, người ta thấy có những ông già người Anh và có các thiếu niên 17-18 tuổi, trẻ nhất có em 14 tuổi, chứng tỏ những vấn đề nghiêm trọng đã bao phủ mấy thế hệ. Một em trai khác, 15 tuổi, thuộc dạng lêu lổng, đi từ North Lincolnshire tới Hull thăm bạn thì thấy bạo loạn nên tranh thủ hôi của, cũng bị xử tù. Đây không phải là những chuyện vui vì các tệ nạn khác trong giới trẻ người Anh như tỷ lệ bệnh tâm thần, nạn nghiện hút, rượu chè, nay vì các vụ bạo loạn cũng được nói tới.Tân chính phủ Công đảng nếu không thay đổi chính sách thì sẽ khó giúp người dân trở nên lạc quan, có thái độ tích cực hơn, thay vì tâm lý bài xích, phản kháng (anti-social attitude). Cũng ở một số địa phương đó, năm 2011 đã từng xảy ra bạo loạn tương tự và đây là dấu hiệu nhiều vấn đề sâu xa chưa được các nhiệm kỳ khác nhau của chính quyền giải quyết.Phải chăng cuộc bạo loạn đang diễn ra hiện nay minh chứng cho những gì ông David Cameron từng nói năm 2011 là chủ nghĩa đa văn hóa đã thất bại tại Anh Quốc ? Giới chính trị gia có trách nhiệm như thế nào về tình trạng hiện nay ở Anh?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Ở Anh từ lâu nay không có định nghĩa cụ thể về chủ nghĩa đa văn hóa (multiculturalism) như cách hiểu ở Đức, Pháp hay một số nước châu Âu là văn hóa người châu Âu đón nhận các dòng văn hóa của người di cư từ châu Á, Trung Đông, châu Phi tới.Lý do là lịch sử Liên hiệp Vương quốc Anh, trên danh nghĩa, đã chứa đựng yếu tố đa văn hóa của các nhóm bản địa gốc Âu từ lâu: Anh, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, sau này thêm dân Đức, Pháp, Do Thái, và Đông Âu nên người ta cho rằng việc có các văn hóa khác như Hồi giáo, văn hóa Á Đông bổ sung nào cũng không sao cả.Cũng vì thế, chính trị gia Anh nói khác nhau về chủ nghĩa đa văn hóa. Hồi năm 2011, ông David Cameron không tin vào điều này và cho rằng cần có một yêu cầu mạnh hơn buộc người nhập cư bỏ chủ nghĩa cực đoan để chấp nhận các giá trị của nước Anh, nhưng một cựu thủ tướng Anh khác của đảng Bảo thủ, Rishi Sunak, người gốc Ấn, lại cho rằng Anh đã rất thành công khi tạo ra “nền dân chủ đa văn hóa” (multicultural democracy).Điều này người ta nói tới không phải là đa văn hóa nữa, vì nó khá trừu tượng mà vấn đề di dân. Một điều tra của Viện Ipsos hồi tháng 2/2024 cho thấy 52% người được hỏi ở Anh tin rằng số người nhập cư vào là quá cao, so với 42% vào năm 2022.Trong bối cảnh này, tân chính phủ thủ tướng Keir Starmer chủ trương đường lối cứng rắn với những kẻ gây bạo loạn. Liệu thủ tướng Anh có đủ các phương tiện cũng như sự ủng hộ của người dân để thực hiện các biện pháp đó ?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Năm 2011, khi Anh nổ ra các cuộc bạo loạn lần đầu, ông Kier Starmer là trưởng công tố quốc gia và đã đích thân chỉ đạo việc xử tù những kẻ gây rối. Tuần qua, ông cũng tỏ ra cứng rắn, yêu cầu toà án, công tố viện làm việc ngày đêm để xử nhanh khoảng 150 bị cáo gây bạo loạn. Tuy thế, các báo Anh nói ở cương vị thủ tướng, ông Starmer cần có cái nhìn dài hạn và tìm giải pháp sâu rộng cho các vấn đề gốc rễ của bạo loạn tức là sự rạn nứt xã hội (social rifts). Án tù sẽ chỉ ngăn được những kẻ liều lĩnh tràn ra phố vì tức giận, nhưng không hóa giải, thuyết phục được khá nhiều người khác lo ngại về xung đột sắc tộc ở Anh.Bạo loạn nổ ra một tháng sau khi Công đảng giành được đa số tuyệt đối trong cuộc bầu cử Nghị Viện. Tuy nhiên, trong cuộc bầu cử này, lần đầu tiên một đảng cực hữu là Reform UK đã có chân trong Nghị Viện Anh. Cuộc bạo loạn này phải chăng cho thấy là cũng giống như nhiều nước châu Âu lục địa, tân chính phủ Anh đang phải đối mặt trước đà trỗi dậy của phe cực hữu ?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Công đảng thắng cử vừa qua chủ yếu là vì cử tri ở Anh chán đảng Bảo thủ cầm quyền đã lâu, sau 5 đời thủ tướng trong vòng 14 năm cả thẩy, chứ không phải vì cương lĩnh tranh cử của Công đảng quá hấp dẫn. Cùng lúc, đảng Reform UK thu được 14% tổng số phiếu bầu và về nhì ở trên 90 khu vực bầu cử trên cả nước mà chỉ có 5 ghế nghị sĩ trong Hạ viện, do hệ thống bầu cử Anh tuân theo nguyên tắc « Được ăn cả ngã về không » (first-past-the post-electorial sysem). Điều này khiến một phần phe thiên hữu trong đảng Reform UK của ông Nigel Farage và cả trong đảng Bảo thủ cảm thấy họ bị thiệt thòi và đang dùng mạng xã hội đe dọa chính phủ Công đảng là “sẽ có bạo loạn còn to hơn”.Tuy phe thiên hữu đã hiện diện công khai trong Nghị viện và có thể dùng các thủ tục lập pháp để thay đổi chính sách, nhưng họ lại thích dùng mạng xã hội để gây sức ép “ngoài luồng” lên chính phủ. Điều này đang gây đau đầu cho chính phủ Anh và cũng cho thấy phe cực hữu, thiên hữu ở Anh nói riêng và ở châu Âu nói chung ưa thích các cách đấu tranh, công kích phi truyền thống, ngoài nghị trường và các chính quyền sẽ không dễ hạn chế ảnh hưởng của họ.Nhiều đời chính phủ gần đây đã có các chính sách siết chặt di dân nhưng bất thành. Anh có thể điểm lại sơ qua các chính sách đó và cho biết thêm tân chính phủ Anh sẽ có đối sách ra sao đối với hồ sơ di dân ?Nhà báo Nguyễn Giang : Trong nhiều thập kỷ, Anh là quốc gia di cư, có dòng di dân đi nhiều hơn đến, tức là số người ở Anh đến các xứ sở khác sinh sống luôn cao hơn số người nhập cư. Nhưng từ năm 1994 thì Anh là nước nhận người nhập cư nhiều hơn số ra đi. Theo một số cơ quan nghiên cứu thì trong thập niên đầu tiên của thế kỷ 21, cụ thể là tính đến năm 2011, mỗi năm số người vào Anh làm việc, sinh sống cao hơn số ra đi tới 360 nghìn.Các chính phủ qua nhiều nhiệm kỳ coi đây là quy luật đất lành chim đậu, dân số tăng thì kinh tế tăng trưởng theo, và cũng vì dòng người tới từ Liên Hiệp Châu Âu mà Anh là thành viên có quyền tới theo nguyên tắc tự do di cư trong EU nên Luân Đôn không có chính sách gì cụ thể.Chỉ khi Brexit xảy ra thì vấn đề kiểm soát số người nhập cư mới thành vấn đề và chính phủ của đảng Bảo thủ chấp nhận trưng cầu dân ý Brexit năm 2016 một phần để tìm giải pháp tái kiểm soát biên giới, để người từ EU không thể tự do vào Anh nữa.Tuy thế, trong một năm từ tháng 3/2019 đến tháng 3/2020 thì vẫn có trên 700 nghìn người vào Anh, trừ đi gần 400 nghìn người di cư đi nơi khác thì con số ròng vẫn là khoảng 347 nghìn. Dịch Covid có làm ngưng trệ số người vào Anh và sau khi Brexit có hiệu lực từ đầu năm 2021, số dân EU sang Anh có giảm nhưng các nhóm khác vẫn vào đều, thậm chí còn tăng cao.Họ gồm cả người tỵ nạn chính đáng mà Anh đón về từ các vùng chiến sự, từ những nơi Anh có dính líu quân sự như Afghanistan, từ cả các nước như Việt Nam. Chính phủ Bảo thủ muốn chặn dòng người vào Anh bằng đường biển, nên đã ký với Rwanda thỏa thuận mở trung tâm cứu xét hồ sơ xin tỵ nạn ở nước châu Phi đó, nhằm làm di dân trái phép nản chí, không từ châu Âu sang Anh nữa, nhưng chính phủ Công đảng vừa lên đã xóa dự án Rwanda và nói sẽ tăng cường lực lượng chặn biên giới trên biển để ngăn các  thuyền phao chở di dân từ Pháp, Bỉ bơi sang.Cho đến nay chưa thấy chính sách này có hiệu lực, vì không nước châu Âu nào sẵn sàng nhận lại di dân bỏ nước họ sang Anh. Cũng không rõ tới đây chính phủ Anh sẽ làm gì với số người nhập cư lậu đã vào Anh, lên tới hàng trăm nghìn. Giả sử hàng nghìn người bị bác đơn xin tỵ nạn thì sẽ đưa họ về đâu, vì các nước xuất xứ sẽ không dễ dàng nhận.Còn về thị trường lao động, Công đảng muốn giảm việc cấp visa việc làm cho nhân công nước ngoài và mở các khóa huấn luyện tay nghề cho người ở Anh làm các việc đó. Cho tới nay còn quá sớm để biết việc này triển khai ra sao và liệu có hàng trăm nghìn người ở Anh sẵn sàng đổi việc làm để lấp chỗ trống trên thị trường lao động hay chưa.RFI Tiếng Việt xin cảm ơn nhà báo Nguyễn Giang.

AUDIO CONVERSATION BETWEEN TOMMY ROBINSON AND HIS EX-WIFE WHILE HE WAS UNDER ARRESTI can now confirm that Tommy has actually been released, he is on bail, and the police have taken his phone.I want thank everyone (as does Tommy) who have been out protesting for him today, it absolutely made a difference.Tommy has asked me to upload the conversation he had with his ex wife while he was detained for terror related offences.We will be able to update you all tomorrow.#FreeTommyRobinson#FreeTommyX Post(00:07) Introduction and Legal Context(00:37) Interrogation Details(01:17) Legal Rights and Phone Access(02:31) Journalistic Integrity and Confidentiality(05:19) Abuse of Power and Charges(07:37) Potential Consequences and Defiance(09:45) Public Support and Final Thoughts

Got a Dilemma? https://www.thenewblxck.com/dilemma Interested In Securing Shares In THE NEW BLXCK -https://app.seedlegals.com/en/pitch/c_VoSPUCwhTo/The-New-Blxck Any questions about this investment opportunity, please contact Brent@TheNewBlxck.com Join Our Discord Community: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Discord⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Email Us: TheDayAfter@THENEWBLXCK.com WhatsAPP: 07564841073 Join us in our twitter community - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Subscribe NOW to The Day After: shorturl.at/brKOX The Day After, (00:00) Intro: House keeping (36:58) Headlines: Tommy Robinson arrested under Terrorism Act after London protest, Priti Patel vows to unite Tories in leadership bid, Video shows lead-up to police airport kick incident (40:12) What You Saying? Manchester Airport Police Brutality Incident: New Footage Emerges…Does This Change Your Mind? (01:18:08) Headlines: Kamala Harris campaign 'raises $200m' in a week, Paris arson attack and opening ceremony outrage, Global leaders try to dissuade Israel from increasing attacks on Lebanon (01:35:26) Word On The Road Celine Dion's amazing comeback performance at the olympics opening ceremony  American model claims Burna Boy owes her money Grandmother of Elon Musk's kids please for him to let their mother see them Childish Gambino claims Jorja Smith had a baby in interview  TW:// video of Director, Francis Ford, kissing extras on set (01:48:42) The People's Journal: Suella Braverman pulls out of Tory leader contest, Just Stop Oil try to block departure gates at Gatwick airport, Reeves set to axe projects to plug budget 'black hole', John Lewis allowed to build homes for first time, Cineworld to shut six branches as part of restructure (01:55:46) Asking For A Friend (02:42:10) Headlines: Murder investigation after park stabbing in east London, Woman dies after being attacked while walking dog, Huge California wildfire tears through 5,000 acres every hour (02:44:48) The Reaction: Simone Biles makes dazzling return to Olympic gymnastics at Paris 2024, Canelo to defend super-middleweight titles against Edgar Berlanga, Chisora defeats Joe Joyce in a thrilling slugfest, Claressa Shields becomes four-weight world champion (02:51:29) The Rap Up #News #currentnews #sports

A recent video release calls into question the events of September 11, 2001, implying that Saudi Arabia was behind the attack. In 2016, the 'Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act' gave victims a right to sue the Saudi government, and soon after the the secret document known as '28 pages', which was part of a 2002 Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11, was released. But something doesn't add up on either end. One, we were told that other Arab countries were behind the attack, including Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan - within hours of the event that nobody expected to happen… reportedly. Then, the AP reported in 2002 that '15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi', the ‘men with stolen identified', and we soon found out that many were still alive. Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September, but he lived to tell the tale. As did Abdulaziz Al Omari. Talk about misdirection - it's Iraq, they're Muslims, followed by oh, they're from Saudi and oh, they're still alive, followed by official government documents released decades later reporting that Saudi really did do it, or maybe they did it. Two, there was, and remains, overwhelming evidence that Israel was at least aware, if not complicit, in the terrorism. From the 5 Dancing Israelis, to the emergency call about Palestinians in a van, to Michael Chertoff and the Patriot Act he co-authored, to 'pull it' Larry Silverstein. There is also Benjamin Netanyahu, who said "we are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack." In other words, 911 was used in concert with the satellite state of Israel to fight the PNAC wars and demonize the Muslim world. Or maybe this is an anti-semitic conspiracy theory? At least, that's what the ADL says. Good thing Mohammed Atta left an Arabic flight manual and Koran in his car, and his passport was found in the rubble of the WTC complex.-FREE ARCHIVE & RSS: https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-secret-teachingsTwitter: https://twitter.com/TST___RadioFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thesecretteachingsWEBSITE (BOOKS, RESUBSCRIBE for early show access): http://thesecretteachings.infoPaypal: rdgable@yahoo.comCashApp: $rdgableBuy Me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/tstradioSUBSCRIBE TO NETWORK: http://aftermath.mediaEMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.com

SkyCity could be forced to cough up millions for alleged breaches of legislation on money laundering. The Department of Internal Affairs is accusing SkyCity of violating the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act, after a company review. NZ Herald property editor Anne Gibson says SkyCity will be more concerned about the hits to their reputation, over a prospective fine. "This is quite damaging to them, it's not so much about the fine- if there is one." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Internal Affairs is taking the casino operator SkyCity to court in a civil case related to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act. Gyles Beckford has the business news.

On this Moats, George Galloway reflects on the Daily Telegraph story that says, what George has said would happen all along, Russia is on the brink of victory in the war in Ukraine. The European Union is on the brink of collapse as the leaders of europe's countries have imploded over Ukraine and Gaza and lost the trust of their people. The contempt our people feel for our leaders is becoming unhealthy, as is the role of the Police in society. Former UK ambassador Craig Murray is being investigated under the Terrorism Act. What for? He doesn't know. Why should he? Richard Medhurst gives his views as the Arab world reacts to President Putin's visit of the Middle East as the region sends a message to America they won't be dragged down by the War in Gaza and Ukraine. Professor Dan Kovalik shares what he saw during a week on the West Bank as the Palestinian people face continued bombardment from Israeli forces and mortar fire.Craig Murray: Historian, Former British Ambassador and Human Rights Activist-X: https://x.com/craigmurrayorg-Website: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/Richard Medhurst: Independent Journalist & Political Commentator -X: https://x.com/richimedhurst-YouTube: https://youtube.com/@RichardMedhurstProfessor Daniel Kovalik: Professor, Human & Labour rights Lawyer and Author- X: https://x.com/danielmkovalik Get bonus content on Patreon Become a MOATS Graduate at https://plus.acast.com/s/moatswithgorgegalloway. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How far would you go to protect a client?When Muhammad Rabbani, a human rights advocate, was stopped and interrogated on his way back to the UK after working with a high profile client, it was an experience he was familiar with. As a Muslim and an activist, he'd been stopped at the airport many times before.This time however, when he refused to give up the passwords to his personal devices, he was arrested, charged and convicted under the Terrorism Act.His fight to clear his name has been documented in the new film 'Phantom Parrot', which highlights the controversial 'Schedule 7' clause that allows police to detain and question citizens at the border without suspicion, and how it's used to gather and share intelligence with other bodies such as the FBI.This week on the Big Picture podcast, we sit down with Rabbani, who is the managing director of CAGE, to hear his story firsthand, and why he thinks it should shock and concern every British citizen.You can find out more about 'Phantom Parrot' and where to watch it here: https://phantomparrot.com/We'd love to hear your thoughts on this episode, and any guests you'd like us to have on our show. Reach us by email at mh@middleeasteye.org or find us on instagram @BigPictureMee.You can also watch all our episodes on our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMyaP73Ho1ySj3cO0OSOHZAOgD1WTDixG

On Feb. 22, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Twitter v. Taamneh, a case that deals with the liability of platforms that host or promote terrorist material. This case addresses the scope of the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, arguing that Twitter aided and abetted ISIS by hosting and promoting its content on its platform. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Under Section 2333 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, as amended by the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, U.S. nationals injured by "an act of international terrorism" that is "committed, planned, or authorized by" a designated foreign terrorist organization may sue any person who "aids and abets, by knowingly providing substantial assistance, or who conspires with the person who committed such an act of international terrorism," and recover treble damages. 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a), (d)(2). The questions presented are: 1. Whether a defendant that provides generic, widely available services to all its numerous users and "regularly" works to detect and prevent terrorists from using those services "knowingly" provided substantial assistance under Section 2333 merely because it allegedly could have taken more "meaningful" or "aggressive" action to prevent such use. 2. Whether a defendant whose generic, widely available services were not used in connection with the specific "act of international terrorism" that injured the plaintiff may be liable for aiding and abetting under Section 2333. https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-1496.html

Cover Photograph: Mr. Sparks: A Quest for Truth & Reconciliation, Copyright Nnebundo Obi 2022.Nnebundo Obi's presentation is available here. To learn more about Nagel Institute's Engaging African Realities project, please visit the following link.Show Notes:0:00 South African revolutionary Robert Sobukwe3:20 Nagel Institute Research Associate - Engaging African Realities Project Presentation from annual conference in Capetown 4:05 Slide 2 - former S. African President Nelson Mandela's cell at Robben Island4:20 history of Robben Island, see slide 25:30 escapee from Robben Island David Stuurman6:10 First female political prisoner on Robben Island, Krotoa or Eva 7:10 1961, Robben Island used as prison for non-white political activists exclusively 8:30 one letter and one visit per year for inmates at Robben Island9:25 Hard labour in the limestone quarry10:00 tour of Robben Island per Mr. Sparks, former inmate and current tour guide at Robben Island -  slide 412:40 Puzamandla: The “energy giving drink”, a hidden poison14:00 Mr. Sparks gives testimony about his suffering at Robben Island to free himself14:50 Kirstenbosch National Botanical Garden - see slide 515:00 Lion's Head, Tabletop Mountain Range - see slide 615:30 1800s creation of Van Riebeeck's Hedge to mark Dutch property, shown at slide 616:10 Boulder's Penguin Colony16:25 history of apartheid - see slide 817:20 - 1979 “total strategy” 12 point plan to crush opposition to apartheid18:20 1996 Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) established by Nelson Mandela18:45 hearings for restorative justice19:20 1977 founding of MEDU Art Ensemble 20:30 female anti-pass protestors - see slide 1022:30 1956 women's march - see slide 1123:00 Judy Sideman, member of MEDU Art Ensemble from 1980—1985  - see slide 1124:20 MEDU Art Ensemble history - see slide 1227:00 MEDU Art Ensemble posters - see slides 9, 12, 1329:00 MEDU Art Ensemble targeted by the South African defense force30:15 the power of testimony and collaboration and importance of mobilizing and gathering strength from community30:45 University of Capetown31:00 - 2015 ‘RHODES MUST FALL' movement to remove the statue of British Imperialist Cecil Rhodes at the University of Cape Town - see slide 1434:20 impact of removing statues like those of Cecil Rhodes 38:00 impact of MEDU Art Ensemble on end of apartheid39:00 Terrorism Act 39:45 MEDU's community outreach 41:45 Cohesion and single-minded vision of MEDU 42:30 Nnebundo's way of engaging with social justice issues44:20 definition of justice49:00 Netflix docu-series How To Become a Tyrant 51:00 Jan Felman's comments51:40 Stefania Salles-Bruins' comments 53:25 Jarnick Vitters' comments Please share your comments and/or questions at stephanie@warfareofartandlaw.comTo hear more episodes, please visit Warfare of Art and Law podcast's website.To view rewards for supporting the podcast, please visit Warfare's Patreon page.To leave questions or comments about this or other episodes of the podcast and/or for information about joining the 2ND Saturday discussion on art, culture and justice, please message me at stephanie@warfareofartandlaw.com. Thanks so much for listening!© Stephanie Drawdy [2022]

Robert J. Savage is a professor in the Boston College History Department and served as one of the directors of the University's Irish Studies program for close to twenty years. He has been awarded Visiting Fellowships at Trinity College, Dublin, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Galway. Savage's publications explore contemporary Irish and British history and include The BBC's Irish Troubles: Television, Conflict and Northern Ireland (2015) short listed for the Ewart-Biggs Literary Award; A Loss of Innocence? Television and Irish Society 1960-1972, (2010) winner of the James S. Donnelly Sr. Book Prize from the American Conference for Irish Studies and Sean Lemass, a biography (2014). In this interview, he discusses his new book Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain (Oxford University Press, 2022), which explores issues of censorship, paramilitary violence and British and international politics in the 1980s. Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain is a study of how the Northern Ireland conflict was presented to an increasingly global audience during the premiership of Britain's 'Iron Lady', Margaret Thatcher. It addresses the tensions that characterized the relationship between the broadcast media and the Thatcher Government throughout the 1980s. Savage explores how that tension worked its way into decisions made by managers, editors, and reporters addressing a conflict that seemed insoluble. Margaret Thatcher mistrusted the broadcast media, especially the BBC, believing it had a left-wing bias that was hostile to her interests and policies. This was especially true of the broadcast media's reporting about Northern Ireland. She regarded investigative reporting that explored the roots of republican violence in the region or coverage critical of her government's initiatives as undermining the rule of law, and thereby providing terrorists with what she termed the 'oxygen of publicity'. She followed in the footsteps of the Labour Government that proceeded her by threatening and bullying both the BBC and IBA, promising that the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act would be deployed to punish journalists that came into contact with the IRA. Although both networks continued to offer compelling news and current affairs programming, the tactics of her government produced considerable success. Wary of direct government intervention, both networks encouraged a remarkable degree of self-censorship when addressing 'the Troubles'. Regardless, by 1988, the Thatcher Government, unhappy with criticism of its policies, took the extraordinary step of imposing formal censorship on the British broadcast media. The infamous 'broadcasting ban' lasted six years, successfully silencing the voices of Irish republicans while tarnishing the reputation of the United Kingdom as a leading global democracy. Aidan Beatty is a historian at the Frederick Honors College of the University of Pittsburgh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Robert J. Savage is a professor in the Boston College History Department and served as one of the directors of the University's Irish Studies program for close to twenty years. He has been awarded Visiting Fellowships at Trinity College, Dublin, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Galway. Savage's publications explore contemporary Irish and British history and include The BBC's Irish Troubles: Television, Conflict and Northern Ireland (2015) short listed for the Ewart-Biggs Literary Award; A Loss of Innocence? Television and Irish Society 1960-1972, (2010) winner of the James S. Donnelly Sr. Book Prize from the American Conference for Irish Studies and Sean Lemass, a biography (2014). In this interview, he discusses his new book Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain (Oxford University Press, 2022), which explores issues of censorship, paramilitary violence and British and international politics in the 1980s. Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain is a study of how the Northern Ireland conflict was presented to an increasingly global audience during the premiership of Britain's 'Iron Lady', Margaret Thatcher. It addresses the tensions that characterized the relationship between the broadcast media and the Thatcher Government throughout the 1980s. Savage explores how that tension worked its way into decisions made by managers, editors, and reporters addressing a conflict that seemed insoluble. Margaret Thatcher mistrusted the broadcast media, especially the BBC, believing it had a left-wing bias that was hostile to her interests and policies. This was especially true of the broadcast media's reporting about Northern Ireland. She regarded investigative reporting that explored the roots of republican violence in the region or coverage critical of her government's initiatives as undermining the rule of law, and thereby providing terrorists with what she termed the 'oxygen of publicity'. She followed in the footsteps of the Labour Government that proceeded her by threatening and bullying both the BBC and IBA, promising that the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act would be deployed to punish journalists that came into contact with the IRA. Although both networks continued to offer compelling news and current affairs programming, the tactics of her government produced considerable success. Wary of direct government intervention, both networks encouraged a remarkable degree of self-censorship when addressing 'the Troubles'. Regardless, by 1988, the Thatcher Government, unhappy with criticism of its policies, took the extraordinary step of imposing formal censorship on the British broadcast media. The infamous 'broadcasting ban' lasted six years, successfully silencing the voices of Irish republicans while tarnishing the reputation of the United Kingdom as a leading global democracy. Aidan Beatty is a historian at the Frederick Honors College of the University of Pittsburgh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Robert J. Savage is a professor in the Boston College History Department and served as one of the directors of the University's Irish Studies program for close to twenty years. He has been awarded Visiting Fellowships at Trinity College, Dublin, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Galway. Savage's publications explore contemporary Irish and British history and include The BBC's Irish Troubles: Television, Conflict and Northern Ireland (2015) short listed for the Ewart-Biggs Literary Award; A Loss of Innocence? Television and Irish Society 1960-1972, (2010) winner of the James S. Donnelly Sr. Book Prize from the American Conference for Irish Studies and Sean Lemass, a biography (2014). In this interview, he discusses his new book Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain (Oxford University Press, 2022), which explores issues of censorship, paramilitary violence and British and international politics in the 1980s. Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain is a study of how the Northern Ireland conflict was presented to an increasingly global audience during the premiership of Britain's 'Iron Lady', Margaret Thatcher. It addresses the tensions that characterized the relationship between the broadcast media and the Thatcher Government throughout the 1980s. Savage explores how that tension worked its way into decisions made by managers, editors, and reporters addressing a conflict that seemed insoluble. Margaret Thatcher mistrusted the broadcast media, especially the BBC, believing it had a left-wing bias that was hostile to her interests and policies. This was especially true of the broadcast media's reporting about Northern Ireland. She regarded investigative reporting that explored the roots of republican violence in the region or coverage critical of her government's initiatives as undermining the rule of law, and thereby providing terrorists with what she termed the 'oxygen of publicity'. She followed in the footsteps of the Labour Government that proceeded her by threatening and bullying both the BBC and IBA, promising that the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act would be deployed to punish journalists that came into contact with the IRA. Although both networks continued to offer compelling news and current affairs programming, the tactics of her government produced considerable success. Wary of direct government intervention, both networks encouraged a remarkable degree of self-censorship when addressing 'the Troubles'. Regardless, by 1988, the Thatcher Government, unhappy with criticism of its policies, took the extraordinary step of imposing formal censorship on the British broadcast media. The infamous 'broadcasting ban' lasted six years, successfully silencing the voices of Irish republicans while tarnishing the reputation of the United Kingdom as a leading global democracy. Aidan Beatty is a historian at the Frederick Honors College of the University of Pittsburgh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert J. Savage is a professor in the Boston College History Department and served as one of the directors of the University's Irish Studies program for close to twenty years. He has been awarded Visiting Fellowships at Trinity College, Dublin, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Galway. Savage's publications explore contemporary Irish and British history and include The BBC's Irish Troubles: Television, Conflict and Northern Ireland (2015) short listed for the Ewart-Biggs Literary Award; A Loss of Innocence? Television and Irish Society 1960-1972, (2010) winner of the James S. Donnelly Sr. Book Prize from the American Conference for Irish Studies and Sean Lemass, a biography (2014). In this interview, he discusses his new book Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain (Oxford University Press, 2022), which explores issues of censorship, paramilitary violence and British and international politics in the 1980s. Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain is a study of how the Northern Ireland conflict was presented to an increasingly global audience during the premiership of Britain's 'Iron Lady', Margaret Thatcher. It addresses the tensions that characterized the relationship between the broadcast media and the Thatcher Government throughout the 1980s. Savage explores how that tension worked its way into decisions made by managers, editors, and reporters addressing a conflict that seemed insoluble. Margaret Thatcher mistrusted the broadcast media, especially the BBC, believing it had a left-wing bias that was hostile to her interests and policies. This was especially true of the broadcast media's reporting about Northern Ireland. She regarded investigative reporting that explored the roots of republican violence in the region or coverage critical of her government's initiatives as undermining the rule of law, and thereby providing terrorists with what she termed the 'oxygen of publicity'. She followed in the footsteps of the Labour Government that proceeded her by threatening and bullying both the BBC and IBA, promising that the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act would be deployed to punish journalists that came into contact with the IRA. Although both networks continued to offer compelling news and current affairs programming, the tactics of her government produced considerable success. Wary of direct government intervention, both networks encouraged a remarkable degree of self-censorship when addressing 'the Troubles'. Regardless, by 1988, the Thatcher Government, unhappy with criticism of its policies, took the extraordinary step of imposing formal censorship on the British broadcast media. The infamous 'broadcasting ban' lasted six years, successfully silencing the voices of Irish republicans while tarnishing the reputation of the United Kingdom as a leading global democracy. Aidan Beatty is a historian at the Frederick Honors College of the University of Pittsburgh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Robert J. Savage is a professor in the Boston College History Department and served as one of the directors of the University's Irish Studies program for close to twenty years. He has been awarded Visiting Fellowships at Trinity College, Dublin, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Galway. Savage's publications explore contemporary Irish and British history and include The BBC's Irish Troubles: Television, Conflict and Northern Ireland (2015) short listed for the Ewart-Biggs Literary Award; A Loss of Innocence? Television and Irish Society 1960-1972, (2010) winner of the James S. Donnelly Sr. Book Prize from the American Conference for Irish Studies and Sean Lemass, a biography (2014). In this interview, he discusses his new book Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain (Oxford University Press, 2022), which explores issues of censorship, paramilitary violence and British and international politics in the 1980s. Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain is a study of how the Northern Ireland conflict was presented to an increasingly global audience during the premiership of Britain's 'Iron Lady', Margaret Thatcher. It addresses the tensions that characterized the relationship between the broadcast media and the Thatcher Government throughout the 1980s. Savage explores how that tension worked its way into decisions made by managers, editors, and reporters addressing a conflict that seemed insoluble. Margaret Thatcher mistrusted the broadcast media, especially the BBC, believing it had a left-wing bias that was hostile to her interests and policies. This was especially true of the broadcast media's reporting about Northern Ireland. She regarded investigative reporting that explored the roots of republican violence in the region or coverage critical of her government's initiatives as undermining the rule of law, and thereby providing terrorists with what she termed the 'oxygen of publicity'. She followed in the footsteps of the Labour Government that proceeded her by threatening and bullying both the BBC and IBA, promising that the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act would be deployed to punish journalists that came into contact with the IRA. Although both networks continued to offer compelling news and current affairs programming, the tactics of her government produced considerable success. Wary of direct government intervention, both networks encouraged a remarkable degree of self-censorship when addressing 'the Troubles'. Regardless, by 1988, the Thatcher Government, unhappy with criticism of its policies, took the extraordinary step of imposing formal censorship on the British broadcast media. The infamous 'broadcasting ban' lasted six years, successfully silencing the voices of Irish republicans while tarnishing the reputation of the United Kingdom as a leading global democracy. Aidan Beatty is a historian at the Frederick Honors College of the University of Pittsburgh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/communications

Robert J. Savage is a professor in the Boston College History Department and served as one of the directors of the University's Irish Studies program for close to twenty years. He has been awarded Visiting Fellowships at Trinity College, Dublin, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Galway. Savage's publications explore contemporary Irish and British history and include The BBC's Irish Troubles: Television, Conflict and Northern Ireland (2015) short listed for the Ewart-Biggs Literary Award; A Loss of Innocence? Television and Irish Society 1960-1972, (2010) winner of the James S. Donnelly Sr. Book Prize from the American Conference for Irish Studies and Sean Lemass, a biography (2014). In this interview, he discusses his new book Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain (Oxford University Press, 2022), which explores issues of censorship, paramilitary violence and British and international politics in the 1980s. Northern Ireland, the BBC and Censorship in Thatcher's Britain is a study of how the Northern Ireland conflict was presented to an increasingly global audience during the premiership of Britain's 'Iron Lady', Margaret Thatcher. It addresses the tensions that characterized the relationship between the broadcast media and the Thatcher Government throughout the 1980s. Savage explores how that tension worked its way into decisions made by managers, editors, and reporters addressing a conflict that seemed insoluble. Margaret Thatcher mistrusted the broadcast media, especially the BBC, believing it had a left-wing bias that was hostile to her interests and policies. This was especially true of the broadcast media's reporting about Northern Ireland. She regarded investigative reporting that explored the roots of republican violence in the region or coverage critical of her government's initiatives as undermining the rule of law, and thereby providing terrorists with what she termed the 'oxygen of publicity'. She followed in the footsteps of the Labour Government that proceeded her by threatening and bullying both the BBC and IBA, promising that the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act would be deployed to punish journalists that came into contact with the IRA. Although both networks continued to offer compelling news and current affairs programming, the tactics of her government produced considerable success. Wary of direct government intervention, both networks encouraged a remarkable degree of self-censorship when addressing 'the Troubles'. Regardless, by 1988, the Thatcher Government, unhappy with criticism of its policies, took the extraordinary step of imposing formal censorship on the British broadcast media. The infamous 'broadcasting ban' lasted six years, successfully silencing the voices of Irish republicans while tarnishing the reputation of the United Kingdom as a leading global democracy. Aidan Beatty is a historian at the Frederick Honors College of the University of Pittsburgh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/journalism

An esteemed human rights lawyer from Swaziland, Sibusiso Nhlabatsi speaks to me on terrorism legislations, Swaziland's Suppression of Terrorism Act, 2008 ("the Act"), and judicial crisis. Mr Nhlabatsi is known for his fortitude and taking critical human rights cases in Swaziland - even against the machinary of government. In this episode we talk about: most terrorism legislations have been promulgated as weapons of governments to clamp down on political opponents. Swaziland Suppression of Terrorism Act is no different. The government passed it on a certificate of urgency devoid of following legislative promulgation processes. The Act violates fundamental human rights and the government has been using it to proscribe political movements as terrorist and to silence dissent. A full bench of the High Court of Swaziland, in 2016 declared some of the provisions of the Act unconstitutional. Six years later (2022) the government resuscitates its appeal at the Supreme Court and gets an unprecedented condonation for its laxity in failing to execute the appeal. Ostensibly, government's renewal of its interest to execute the appeal has been incentivized by the current political unrest. Mr. Nhlabatsi laments that the judiciary in Swaziland is in shambles. FInd Sibusiso Nhlabatsi on: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sibusiso.nhlabatsi --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mpilo-nkambule/support

The former Pakistan prime minister had made accusations against police. Also; Russia blames Ukraine for Dugina car bombing and the actor Ryan Reynolds explains his love for Wrexham FC.

Returning the favor after being on the, “Agree To Disagree Show,” Luigi and I kick things off in D.C where the Democrats are pushing for the Domestic Terrorism Act as a response to recent mass shootings— what's in the bill that's worth dissenting? Remaining on the topic of mass shootings, we discuss our respective differences on how to prevent future mass killings. We then go global, as the international leaders from the UN and WEF discuss how to further the Great Reset. Luigi later takes us back to his homeland in Canada to passionately discuss free speech—when do insults toward a political leader become problematic? We finish off the show in the Lone Star State to discuss parent's rights. Is transitioning your child within a parent's right, or is it child abuse? --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/tabootopic/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/tabootopic/support

Facts & spin for May 21 2022 top stories: Boeing successfully launches its first spacecraft, the House passes a controversial domestic terrorism act, Biden visits South Korea, Russia claims full control of Mariupol, Biden invokes the Defense Production Act to make baby formula, the January 6 Committee presses a Georgia Republican about offering Capitol tours, a 9-1-1 dispatcher allegedly hung up on a whispering caller during the Buffalo shooting, SpaceX allegedly paid $250K to settle an harassment claim against Elon Musk, and Boris Johnson won't face more fines for his Covid parties.   Sources: https://www.improvethenews.org/

The Barrett Brief - That Didn't Take Long: The Domestic Terrorism Act Is Now A Thing  Here is what is happening today in the Brief. First That Didn't Take Long: The Domestic Terrorism Act Is Now A Thing  Second The Latest Fact Checks curated by Media Bias Fact Check Next Alex Deise from FreedomWorks stops by  Third Mastercard introduces controversial biometric payments that require a face scan Also ‘Summer of Rage' over babies getting a chance at life Don't forget The Lightning Brief!  Meanwhile On Gun Talk Friday we talk "6 Things You Didn't Know Would Happen When the Police Arrive" Finally don't forget the world famous "you gotta be kidding me" Our Readers And Listeners Keep Us In Print & On The Air! Click here to subscribe to The CRUSADE Channel's Founders Pass Member Service & Gain 24/7 Access to Our Premium, New Talk Radio Service. www.crusadechannel.com/go What Is The Crusade Channel? The CRUSADE Channel, The Last LIVE! Radio Station Standing begins our LIVE programming day with our all original CRUSADE Channel News hosted by award winning,  25 year news veteran Janet Huxley. Followed by LIVE! From London, “The Early Show with Fiorella Nash & Friends. With the morning drive time beginning we bring out the heavy artillery The Mike Church Show! The longest running, continual, long form radio talk show in the world at the tender age of 30 years young! Our broadcast day progresses into lunch, hang out with The Barrett Brief Show hosted by Rick Barrett “giving you the news of the day and the narrative that will follow”. Then Kennedy Hall and The Kennedy Profession drives your afternoon by “applying Natural Law to an unnatural world”!    The CRUSADE Channel also features Reconquest with Brother André Marie, The Fiorella Files Book Review Show, The Frontlines With Joe & Joe and your favorite radio classics like Suspense! and CBS Radio Mystery Theater. We've interviewed hundreds of guests, seen Brother Andre Marie notch his 200th broadcast of Reconquest; The Mike Church Show over 1500 episodes; launched an original LIVE! News Service; written and produced 4 Feature Length original dramas including The Last Confession of Sherlock Holmes and set sail on the coolest radio product ever, the 5 Minute Mysteries series! Combined with our best in the business LIVE! Coverage of every major political/cultural event of the last 6 years including Brexit, Trump's Election, Administration events, shampeachment, the CoronaDoom™, the 2020 Election and resulting Biden Regime's Coup d;'tat, January 6th Psy-op and now the attempt to make Russia and Vladimir Putin out as the new Hitler and his Germany. "When News Breaks Out, We Break In!" because we truly are:   The Last, Live, Radio Station, Standing.