Podcasts about treaties

In the tenth episode of the Voices of JHIL Podcast, we are joined by Kate Parlett, who is a barrister at Twenty Essex in London and specializes in public international law and international arbitration. Together we discuss her 2008 article, “The PCIJ's Opinion in Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig. Individual Rights under Treaties,” published in JHIL 10(1) 2008, 119–145. Analyzing the advisory opinion given by the PCIJ in the Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig in 1928, Parlett explores some of the conflicting interpretations it has brought to the fore. Join in as we debate the ways in which the international legal system engages with the rights and obligations of individuals and how it adapts in response to specific issues.Guest:Kate ParlettBarrister at Twenty Essex, London, specializing in public international law and international arbitrationhttps://www.twentyessex.com/people/kate-parlett/Host:Dr. Raphael Schäferhttps://www.mpil.de/en/pub/institute/personnel/academic-staff/rschaefe.cfmMusic: Serge Quadrado Music – Cinematic JazzLesFM – Acoustic Guitar Indie Background Music for VideosSamuelFrancisJohnson – Lifting GuitarMr Pleasure – BurnishedBronzeFind us on Social Media: https://linktr.ee/jhil_rhdi 

What did the earliest Independence Day celebrations look like in South Dakota? On this episode of History 605, we dive into the archives to explore a fascinating era, which brought together a diverse cast of historical figures. Long before they shaped the future of the state.

Send us Fan MailThere was a lot of methods that the forefathers of colonization used to reduce Indigenous rights and to take control of the land. ReferencesBryce, P.H. (1907). “Report on the Indian Schools of Manitoba and the Northwest Territories.” Government Printing Bureau, Ottawa. Long, John S. (2010). Treaty No.9: Making the Agreement to Share the Land in Far Northern Ontario in 1905. McGill-Queens University Press. Rogers, E.S. (1962). “The Round Lake Ojibwa.” Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/roundlakeojibwa00roge/page/n21/mode/2upSFXThe Dark Knight Rises " You think darkness is your ally..." 300 | Spartan Law (4K) Patsy Cline - Crazy (1961) Stolen Children | Residential School survivors speak out Support the show

Eirik Bjorge - The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties by Audiovisual Library of International Law

According to the "Handbook on Federal Indian Law", Native people came under US authority by force and by treaty. They would have been more honest if it had said by force and by fraud! 

Starting from the 2020 conflict surrounding La Boquilla Dam, this episode traces the hidden workings of the 1944 water treaty between the United States and Mexico. In the Río Conchos basin, water is not simply scarce: it is made scarce. As farmers face empty canals and mounting pressure to meet cross-border water deliveries, a deeper fracture comes into view, between water as a means of survival and water as a debt to be repaid. Written by Toka Elsayed, Laila Kouta, Alexia Lara, Lucy White. Narrated by Lucy White. Edited by Stella De Luca. Post-production and sound design by Giorgio Mattina. The series was developed within the course Conflict Management and Resolution (2025–2026), taught by Carolina Pacchi and Giancarlo Vecchi at Politecnico di Milano. This episode was produced for educational and research purposes. Portions of third-party audio materials may be included for commentary, analysis, and critique. All rights remain with their respective owners. Audio credits  CBS Mornings (Year). Locals in rural Mexican town fault Coca-Cola for depleting water resources. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPzie3gsdUA Colectivo Testigo Ocular (2020). Boquilla, de la sequía al saqueo. [Documentary]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1wjoeMe05M&t=5286s @gracielaacosta8399 (2020). Boquilla 8 Sep. [Video]. YouTube Shorts. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3hyn1W1uz9k KSAT 12 (2024). Texas' only sugar mill to close permanently after 51 years. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMXbebDCnQw Lyla Mehta (2025). Urban Dialogue, 24th Triennale Milano International Exhibition, curated by Politecnico di Milano. [Audio recording, unpublished]. Monica De La Cruz (2024). Mexico's Violation of 1944 Water Treaty Threatens 500 Jobs and US Food Security – Biden Must Act Now. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7J3sjwbty0 

Pastor Jack sits down with author and speaker Bill Federer to discuss the rise of Islam in Western culture and in political positions of power. William J. Federer is a nationally known speaker, best-selling author, and president of American Minute, Inc. Bill has written or contributed to over 30 books and is a frequent guest on television, radio, and podcasts. He produces the "How We Got Here" video series for TurningPointEd.com. And his AMERICAN MINUTE feature is broadcast daily on the radio and the internet. (00:00) Introduction to the Jack Hibbs Podcast(02:05) Introducing Bill Federer and the Rise of Political Islam(02:50) Muhammad’s Life and the Origins of Islam(06:10) Muhammad’s Spiritual Encounter and Early Teachings(08:10) Medina, Victimhood, and the Shift Toward Militancy(11:20) “Immigrate, Increase, Eliminate”(13:40) Islam in America, Mosques, and Sharia Influence(16:30) Moderate Islam, Fundamental Islam, and Submission(21:30) Islamic Expansion Across Christian Lands(27:30) Persia, the Islamic Golden Age, and the Turks(31:00) The Crusades and the Fall of Constantinople(35:00) Barbary Pirates, Thomas Jefferson, and America’s Early Conflict with Islam(38:00) Treaties, Iran, and the Concept of Huda(42:30) Jesus, Muhammad, Sharia, and the Gospel ContrastCONNECT WITH BILL FEDERER:Website: https://americanminute.com/ CONNECT WITH PASTOR JACK:Get Updates via Text:  https://text.whisp.io/jack-hibbs-podcast Website: https://jackhibbs.com/Instagram: http://bit.ly/2FCyXpOFacebook: https://bit.ly/2WZBWV0 YouTube: https://bit.ly/437xMHnTwitter/X: https://x.com/RealJackHibbs CALLED TO TAKE A BOLD STAND:https://boldstand.org/ DAZE OF DECEPTION:https://jackhibbs.com/daze-of-deception/ Did you know we have a Real Life Network? Sign up for free today for more exclusive content:https://www.reallifenetwork.com/  

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has sworn to appeal a recent Alberta courts decision to rule the Alberta Separation referendum unconstitutional due to neglecting the province's duty to consult Indigenous peoples of Treaties 7 and 8. Almost all of Alberta's land mass is treaty land and owned by First Nations. Let's talk about Danielle Smith's anti-democratic response and sworn oath to waste even more taxpayer money.Tune into Episode 451 of The Bill Kelly Podcast for daily Canadian news updates.This news update was recorded on May 15, 2026.WATCH THIS EPISODE and subscribe to our channel: https://youtu.be/KI-eFfi6P7MJoin Bill's LIVESTREAM every Thursday at 7 pm ET/4 pm PT! Watch last week's Livecast here: https://youtube.com/live/CjSRCr00waA?feature=shareWATCH A RELATED EPISODE: Does Pierre Poilievre Think Canadians Are As ‘Gullible' As Americans?https://youtu.be/u5d62j7pZ9IFURTHER READINGJudge quashes Alberta separation petition in favour of First Nationshttps://globalnews.ca/news/11848163/alberta-judge-quashes-separation-petition-in-favour-of-first-nations/Danielle Smith rejects Alberta judge's ruling against separation petition as ‘anti-democratic'https://globalnews.ca/news/11848377/alberta-premier-court-ruling-separation-petition-anti-democratic/ This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit billkelly.substack.com/subscribe

1 Kings 20-22New King James Version:https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings%2020%3A1%20-%2022%3A53&version=NKJV

Our study in Joshua brings us to the Gibeonites who deceived the Israelis into making a treaty with them. This makes us think about whether we take God's will into account.

4/16: John Yoo details organized attempts to intimidate the Supreme Court through leaks and threats. He also explains the President's constitutional authority to unilaterally terminate international treaties like the NATO alliance.15851

Clarance Thomas speech; Comparing to Leviticus 10; Defining "progressivism"; Political and social reform?; Government; Police powers; FORCE; vs Kingdom of God; Equity; Where your rights come from; One purse; "Socialism"; Defining "religion"; Love requires sacrifice; Priests; Freewill offerings; Power in the hands of the people; Waiting for election day?; Commentary on Iran; Babylon?; Nonsense; Rome's progressivism; Stealing from the wealthy; Is poverty a virtue?; Weakening the poor; Equity in outcome; Cursing your children; Not to be like the governments of the gentiles; Anti-Christ; Forceful reform?; Nimrod the "hunter" or provider; Idolatry; Gen 10:9; Human resources; Right to own?; Cities of blood; Abimelech; King as father; Desiring benefits at expense of neighbor; Bismark source of progressivism; Voluntarism; Knowing your neighbors; Breaking commandments; Economy dependent on corruption; Legalizing private religion; Being ready; Moses in the desert; Sacrificing for others; Federal Reserve; The ways of Christ; Strengthening society; Colossians 3:5; Children of disobedience; Speculating on Donald Trump; Abimelech; Legal Charity; Christ's solution; Q from Kat: Is Russia socialist government?; Dangerous doing business in Russia?; Legislating morality?; Treaties; "We The People"; Making everyone successful; Sweden's socialism; Having the heart of Christ; "IOR" - Vatican bank?; What would Christ do?; Q from Kat: Moneychangers collecting taxes?; Porters of the Temple; Saul's forced offering; Turning the world upside-down; Christ's ordination; Q from Kat: "Overthrew"?; Voluntary associations; False messiah?; Understanding Altars; American socialists; Biting your neighbor; The seed of Abraham; Show up for others.

3 webinars in one morning

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

В данном подкасте мы обсудим независимость Альберты с точки зрения финансов и свободы. Обсуждаемые вопросы: Архитектура Конституции Канады — что это такое? Спорные кейсы в Канаде. Как нефть формирует экономику Альберты? Договоры о земле (Treaties) — это только про землю или нечто большее? Yuliya Cherednichenko (далее…) ————————————————- The content of this site and our podcasts are for information only. Everybody's financial situation is different and the thoughts we provide here may not be applicable to you. We can't be held responsible for the consequences if you pursue an unsuitable course of action. Сообщение Обзор независимости Альберты с точки зрения финансов и свободы | 330 появились сначала на Moneyinside.ca-самый популярный финансовый подкаст в Канаде!.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, an interview with the inspirational Michael Morpurgo; and David Horspool discusses the Second World War with Tim Bouverie, the winner of this year's Pol Roger Duff Cooper Prize.'The Line to Legend Land', with an introduction by Michael Morpurgo'Black Beauty: A retelling', by Michael Morpurgo'Allies at war: The politics of defeating Hitler', by Tim BouverieProduced by Charlotte Pardy Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With both separatism and racism on the rise, particularly with First Nations leading the charge against the separatist movement including a non-confidence vote in the UCP government, we had the privilege of sitting down with MLA Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse, who is the first First Nations woman to be elected to the ALberta Legislature and who witnessed the treatment of First Nations Chiefs inside and outside of the Alberta Legislature this week. Not only that, we also get into the complexities of development and the importance of honoring the Treaties for all Albertans peace and economic security!If you're able to support our legal defense fund to fight back against the $6 Million lawsuit against us by Sam Mraiche, the man who imported Vanch masks and the Turkish Tylenot as well as who hosted MLA's and Ministers in his skybox as he had business with the government...You can do that at www.savethebreakdownab.ca!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're looking for our new merch lineup, you can find that at www.thebreakdownabmerch.comIf you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Substack, Bluesky, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

Could Treaties have prevented the aboriginal title disputes? Unlike other Canadian provinces, B.C. largely ignored treaty-making for the past 150 years. The Middle East military conflict is raising fears of disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz, which carries around 20% of the world's seaborne oil and LNG supply. How pricey are things going to get? This summer, in partnership with the city of vancouver, The Downtown Vancouver BIA will be transforming Granville Street into a vibrant pedestrian zone. What is this going to look like? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Following five years of research and consultations, the ICRC published a new, updated Commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV) of 1949 in October 2025. GC IV is the cornerstone of protection for civilians in international armed conflict and occupation – protections that remain urgently relevant amid patterns of urban warfare, strikes on essential services, and persistent harm to people who are not, or are no longer, taking part in hostilities. The 2025 Commentary, following the interpretive methodology outlined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, consolidates seven decades of practice, jurisprudence, and operational experience into a practical guide to applying GC IV's safeguards effectively today. Over the coming weeks, we are delighted to co-host a joint symposium with the editors of Just Security and EJIL:Talk!, sharing expert contributions on selected topics addressed in the updated ICRC Commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention. We hope this analysis will help shed light on important aspects of the Fourth Convention that are explored in depth in the updated Commentary, outline developments in law, technology and language since 1949, and give readers an idea of what has changed since the initial ICRC Commentary on this Convention was published in 1958. As Jean-Marie Henckaerts highlights below, a good faith interpretation and application of the Fourth Convention is indispensable: “it keeps interpretation anchored in the Conventions' object and purpose, ensuring that their protective spirit prevails over technical evasions.” His following post, initially published on 21 October 2025, serves as an introduction both to the updated Commentary and to this symposium.

Protecting tribal sovereignty is a top discussion at the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) 2026 Executive Council Winter Session, which is taking place this week in Washington, DC. NCAI President Mark Macarro (Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians) highlighted the importance of tribal sovereignty in his State of Indian Nations address. Macarro says before there was a U.S., there were sovereign tribal nations. “Our sovereignty was not created by treaties, nor granted by Congress. It is inherent and existed before colonization. Treaties did not give us sovereignty. They recognized it. The Constitution did not define us it acknowledged us. Federal laws did not create our rights, it memorialized them. And yet for centuries, our sovereignty has been attacked and attempts continue to constrain and diminish it. Yet our nations continue to govern, continue to lead, to teach, to resist, and to rise.” Macarro says recent attacks include calls by Gov. Kevin Stitt (Cherokee/R-OK) to limit tribal sovereignty, which Macarro says is appalling. Tribal leaders in Oklahoma agree with Macarro’s sentiment. Reggie Wassana is governor of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. “This day and age, we shouldn’t have to ask why tribes have a sovereignty. We shouldn’t have to ask what the tribe’s capabilities are, how they can function, how they can prosper, and who are tribes.” Wassana and Macarro say tribal leaders are often educating elected officials about American Indian history, tribal sovereignty and the U.S. government's trust and treaty responsibilities. Before every census, the federal government picks several test sites, focusing on hard-to-reach areas, but the bureau has cancelled that testing at four of the six regions, including two that cover Arizona tribal lands. As KJZZ's Gabriel Pietrorazio reports, this is not the first time the Census has changed course with Indian Country. In fact, this also happened in 2016 when two reservations in Washington and South Dakota were nixed, citing budget uncertainty and funding shortages. Census consultant Saundra Mitrovich (Berry Creek Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California), co-leads the Natives Count Coalition. “In the last two decennials, not only have we had the undercount, but we've had this cancellation of test sites for tribal areas twice.” Mitrovich says one concern is that the Trump administration is considering to use postal service staff to replace temporary census workers to conduct the count and cut down on costs. “A lot of the households are left invisible to the census, and they also have non-traditional addresses.” In 2020, the nonprofit Native American Rights Fund reported that more than 80% of all registered Indigenous voters in Arizona – outside of metro Phoenix and Tucson – rely solely on P.O. boxes. This time around, San Carlos and White Mountain Apache homes in Arizona as well as Cherokee households in North Carolina are being left out. The Census Bureau would not say why. “How are we gonna say that we're going to carry out this fair and full representation that the survey is supposed to provide of the country?” And on this day in 1978, the “Longest Walk” by Native activists began. A start-up ceremony took place on Alcatraz Island, where the group then proceeded to travel by foot from Sacramento to Washington D.C. to build awareness of treaty rights and injustice. Get National Native News delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up for our daily newsletter today. Download our NV1 Android or iOs App for breaking news alerts. Check out today’s Native America Calling episode Wednesday, February 11, 2026 – Route 66 changed tribes' connections and culture

Over the past several years, US national investment in challenges of climate change and ocean policy has collapsed. This week on World Ocean Radio we lay out an incomplete and ever-growing list of unilateral actions taken to disengage from relationships, leases, treaties, and to turn away from alternative conservation-based invention. What can one person do? Tune in this week to learn more. About World Ocean Radio World Ocean Radio is a weekly series of five-minute audio essays available for syndicated use at no cost by college and community radio stations worldwide. Celebrating 16 years in 2026, providing coverage of a broad spectrum of ocean issues from science and education to advocacy and exemplary projects. Episodes of World Ocean Radio offer perspectives on global ocean issues and viable solutions, and celebrate exemplary projects.World Ocean Radio: 5-minute weekly insights in ocean science, advocacy, education, global ocean issues, marine science, policy, challenges, and solutions. Hosted by Peter Neill, Founder of W2O. Learn more at worldoceanobservatory.org

Discover how nations can foster peaceful coexistence by acknowledging treaty violations and honoring international agreements. Learn the importance of diplomacy and mutual respect in global relations. Acknowledging violations of international treaties. Nations can break free from the covenant-breaking spirit by first acknowledging any violation of international treaties, agreements or promises made to the other nation. People, nations are breaking their promises all the time too.

Guests: Gordon Chang and Peter Huessy. China reportedly conducted secret underground nuclear tests to develop battlefield weapons for coercion, ignoring arms control treaties while the U.S. struggles to modernize its own deterrents.1954

Henry Sokolski notes amidst expired treaties, the US reintroduces extended deterrence language and recommits to the NPT, though non-proliferation enforcement remains inconsistent and challenging against determined adversaries.DECEMBER 1956

In this episode of The President's Daily Brief: U.S. forces enter direct military contact with Iran after shooting down an Iranian drone approaching a U.S. aircraft carrier, followed by a second tense encounter in the Strait of Hormuz involving a U.S.-flagged merchant vessel. Ukraine agrees to a new multi-tiered ceasefire enforcement plan with Europe and the United States, even as Russia continues to hammer Ukraine's energy infrastructure with drones and missiles. The last remaining nuclear arms control treaty between the United States and Russia is set to expire, raising new questions about the future of nuclear limits and strategic stability. And in today's Back of the Brief—the partial U.S. government shutdown comes to an end, with long-term funding for the Department of Homeland Security still unresolved. To listen to the show ad-free, become a premium member of The President's Daily Brief by visiting https://PDBPremium.com. Please remember to subscribe if you enjoyed this episode of The President's Daily Brief. YouTube: youtube.com/@presidentsdailybrief Goldbelly: Discover iconic meals from legendary restaurants delivered nationwide with Goldbelly—get 20% off your first order at https://Goldbelly.com with promo code PDB. American Financing: Call American Financing today to find out how customers are saving an avg of $800/mo. NMLS 182334, https://nmlsconsumeraccess.org APR for rates in the 5s start at 6.196% for well qualified borrowers. Call 866-885-1881 for details about credit costs and terms. Visit http://www.AmericanFinancing.net/PDB  Ridge Wallet: Upgrade your wallet today! Get 10% Off @Ridge with code PDB at https://www.Ridge.com/PDB #Ridgepod Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back to The Cinedicate. On today's episode, we're diving into the groundbreaking documentary The Age of Disclosure, where the secrets of UFOs and government cover-ups finally come into the spotlight.Joined by Todd of WSTR: Galactic Public Access, we dissect how director Dan Farah pulled together 34 high-level insiders—from military pilots to senators like Marco Rubio—to lay out a case for not only hidden crash retrieval programs, but a shadowy arms race that may have shaped the last century of secrecy.Whether you're a longtime alien enthusiast or just starting to investigate the mysteries behind black budgets and reverse-engineered technology, join us as we navigate congressional hearings, declassified footage, and philosophical questions about humanity's place in the universe—all inspired by the The Age of Disclosure, here on The Cinedicate.What to expect from the episode:A deep dive into the documentary "Age of Disclosure," exploring government cover-ups, whistleblower testimonies, and the decades-long struggle for UFO transparencySpirited discussion on theories of non-human intelligence, ranging from extraterrestrial and interdimensional visitors to secret terrestrial civilizations and ancient biblical connectionsCritical reflection on the implications of alleged alien technology for society, government spending, and the challenges ahead for public disclosure and accountabilityEpisode Chapters00:00:00 - Introduction and The Age of Disclosure00:02:01 - First Impressions00:04:02 - Government Whistleblowers and Congress00:05:19 - UAPs: Key Scenes and Scientific Breakdown00:09:17 - Terrestrial vs. Extraterrestrial Hypotheses00:11:03 - Government Experiments and Disinformation00:13:28 - UAP Technology Explained00:15:11 - Secrecy, Black Budgets, and a Shadowy Arms Race00:18:10 - The Moon, Ancient Civilizations, and Lost History00:23:24 - Disclosure and Push for Transparency00:30:27 - Multiple Alien Races, Treaties, and Reverse Engineering00:44:04 - Ancient Bodies, Media Fakery, and Pop Culture00:46:02 - Philosophical and Spiritual Interpretations00:57:00 - Will Major Disclosure Happen Soon?Listen to Todd on his podcast, WSTR: Galactic Public Access. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Greg Brady spoke to Heidi Petracek, Atlantic Correspondent for Global National about Trump's Greenland framework sounds a lot like an already existing 1951 deal. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe world is continually paying the [CB]s more and more of their hard earned labor. In Germany the people are taxed 42%, almost half of their income. Fed inflation indicator reports no inflation, Truinflation reports inflation is at 1.2%.BoA and Citibank are in talks to offer 10% credit card. Trump says US will the crypto capital of the world. Globalism/[CB] system has failed, the power will return to the people. The patriots are sending a message, DOJ 2.0 is not like DOJ 1.0, same with the FBI, you commit a crime you will be arrested. The message is clear, the protection from these agencies are gone. Bondi arrest the Church rioters. Trump’s message at DAVOS is clear, the [DS] power and agenda is no more. Trump is now in control and the world will begin to move in a different direction, either you are on board or you will be left behind. The power belongs to the people.   Economy https://twitter.com/WallStreetMav/status/2014289396112011443?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Fed’s Favorite Inflation Indicator Refuses To Show Any Signs Of Runaway ‘Trump Tariff’ Costs The Fed’s favorite inflation indicator – Core PCE – rose 0.2% MoM (as expected), which leave it up 2.8% YoY (as expected), slightly lower than September’s +2.9%…   Bear in mind that this morning’s third look at Q3 GDP printed a +2.9% YoY for Core PCE. Under the hood, the biggest driver of Core PCE remains Services costs – not tariff-driven Goods prices…   In fact, on a MoM basis, Non-durable goods prices saw deflation for the second month in a row…   Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/truflation/status/2014322072286302619?s=20 – Food – mostly Eggs – Household durables – particularly housekeeping supplies – Alcohol & tobacco – mostly alcoholic beverages Our number is derived by aggregating millions of real-time price data points every day to calculate a year-over-year CPI % rate. It is comparable but not identical to the survey-based official headline inflation released monthly by the BLS, which was 2.7% for December. Bank Of America, Citigroup May Launch Credit Cards With 10% Rate Two weeks after Trump shocked the world by demanding lenders cap credit card interest rates at 10% for one year, Bank of America and Citigroup are exploring options to do just that in an attempt to placate the president.  Bloomberg reports that both banks are mulling offering cards with a 10% rate cap as one potential solution.  Earlier this week, Trump said he would ask Congress to implement the proposal, giving the financial firms more clarity about what exact path he's pursuing. Bank executives have repeatedly decried the uniform cap, saying it'll cause lenders to have to pull credit lines for consumers.  Source: zerohedge.com Trump sues JPMorgan Chase and CEO Jamie Dimon for $5B over alleged ‘political’ debanking The lawsuit claims JPMorgan’s decision ‘came about as a result of political and social motivations’ to ‘distance itself’ Trump and his ‘conservative political views’  President Donald Trump is suing JPMorgan Chase and its CEO Jamie Dimon in a $5 billion lawsuit filed Thursday, accusing the financial institution of debanking him for political reasons. The president's attorney, Alejandro Brito, filed the lawsuit Thursday morning in Florida state court in Miami on behalf of the president and several of his hospitality companies.  “ Source: foxnews.com https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2013984082640658888?s=20  WEF Finance/Banking Panel – If Independent National Economies Continue Rising, Global Trade Drops and We Lose Control Globalism in its economic construct is a series of dependencies. If those dependencies are severed, if each country has the ability to feed, produce and innovate independently, then the entire dependency model around globalism collapses. Within the globalism model that was historically created there was a group of people, western nations, banks, finance and various government leaders, who controlled the organization and rules of the trade dependencies.  The action being taken for self-sufficiency, in combination with the approach promoted by President Trump that each nation state should generate their own needs, then the rules-based order that has existed for global trade will collapse. If nations are no longer dependent, they become sovereign – able to exist without the need for support from other nations and systems. If nations are indeed sovereign, then globalism is no longer needed and a threat of the unknown rises. How will nations engage with each other if there is no governing body of western elites to make the rules for engagement?  The need for control is a reaction to fear, and it is the fear of self-reliance that permeates the elitist class within the control structures.   If each nation of the world is operating according to its individual best interests, the position of Donald Trump, then what happens to the governing elite who set up the system of interdependencies. This is the core of their fear. If each nation can suddenly grow tea, what happens to the East India Tea Company.  Who then sets the price for the tea, and worse still an entire distribution system (ships, ports, exchanges, banks, etc.) becomes functionally obsolescent. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com  Political/Rights TWO-TIERED JUSTICE: Conservative Journalist Kaitlin Bennett Charged and Fined for Interviewing Democrats in Public — While Don Lemon Storms Churches With Zero Consequences The United States now operates under a blatantly two-tiered justice system, where conservative journalists are criminally charged for speech in public spaces, while left-wing media figures face zero consequences for harassing Americans and disrupting religious services. Conservative journalist Kaitlin Bennett revealed this week that she was charged with a federal crime and fined by the National Park Service in St. Augustine for the so-called offense of asking Democrats questions on public property. According to Bennett, federal agents targeted her while she was conducting on-the-street interviews, a form of journalism protected by the First Amendment. Despite being on public land, Bennett says she was cited and punished simply for engaging in political speech that the Left finds inconvenient. Bennett addressed the incident directly in a post on X, writing: https://twitter.com/KaitMarieox/status/2014174254799958148?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2014174254799958148%7Ctwgr%5Ef4a6650cd0c60d38edfea018c5665c2cc2fe5199%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Ftwo-tier-justice-conservative-journalist-kaitlin-bennett-charged%2F When asked by another local journalist exactly what “lawful order” Bennett had disobeyed, the ranger reportedly could not provide a straight answer. WATCH: Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2014322865848406370?s=20   Alexander Conejo Arias, fled on foot—abandoning his child. For the child's safety, one of our ICE officers remained with the child while the other officers apprehended Conejo Arias.   Parents are asked if they want to be removed with their children, or ICE will place the children with a safe person the parent designates. This is consistent with past administration's immigration enforcement. Parents can take control of their departure and receive a free flight and $2,600 with the CBP Home app. By using the CBP Home app illegal aliens reserve the chance to come back the right legal way. https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2014049440911303019?s=20   inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or cohabitant. An immigration judge issued him a final order of removal in 2019. In a dangerous attempt to evade arrest, this criminal illegal alien weaponized his vehicle and rammed law enforcement. Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired defensive shots. The criminal illegal alien was not hit and attempted to flee on foot. He was successfully apprehended by law enforcement. The illegal alien was not injured, but a CBP officer was injured.  These dangerous attempts to evade arrest have surged since sanctuary politicians, including Governor Newsom, have encouraged illegal aliens to evade arrest and provided guides advising illegal aliens how to recognize ICE, block entry, and defy arrest. Our officers are now facing a 3,200% increase in vehicle attacks. This situation is evolving, and more information is forthcoming.   https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2014063905413177637?s=20  CNN Panelist Issues Retraction and Apology After Going Too Far in On-Air Trump Attack    footage of CNN's “Newsnight with Abby Phillip” was posted to social media platform X featuring 25-year-old leftist activist Cameron Kasky alongside panel mainstay Scott Jennings. A moment between the two went viral when Kasky casually declared that President Donald Trump had been involved in an international sex trafficking ring. Jennings wasn't going to let that remark go unchallenged by host John Berman. The topic of conversation had been Trump's interest in Greenland and the Nobel Peace Prize, but Kasky threw in a jab at Trump with an allusion to the president's relationship with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — an allusion Kasky's now trying to walk back. “I would love it if he was more transparent about the human sex trafficking network that he was a part of, but you can't win 'em all,” he blurted out. https://twitter.com/overton_news/status/2013455047288377517?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2013455047288377517%7Ctwgr%5E20edbbd712c7076d1aafdac2d1e39d7eb8307263%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fcnn-panelist-issues-retraction-apology-going-far-air%2F   Berman asked Jennings a follow-up question about Greenland, but instead of addressing that, Jennings circled back to Kasky's remark. “You're gonna let that sit?” Jennings asked Berman. “Are we going to claim here on CNN that the president is part of a global sex trafficking ring or …?” After assuring Jennings that he would do the fact-checking, Berman asked Kasky to repeat what he'd said about the global sex-trafficking ring. “That Donald Trump was … probably … very involved with it,” the arrogant young man replied, with perhaps a touch less confidence. To Berman's credit, and the CNN legal team's, he immediately said, “Donald Trump has never been charged with any crimes in relation to Jeffrey Epstein.” https://twitter.com/camkasky/status/2013760245298864477?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2013760245298864477%7Ctwgr%5E20edbbd712c7076d1aafdac2d1e39d7eb8307263%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fcnn-panelist-issues-retraction-apology-going-far-air%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2014189561002291385?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/brentdsadler/status/2014311942119137584?s=20  important as these agreements cover the entirety of the Chagos group of islands/features. Critical as future third party presence in those areas proximate Diego Garcia could in practical terms render those U.S. military facilities operationally impractical (ie useless). The current deal under consideration in the UK parliament in a rushed vote as soon as 2 February is ill advised. And it likely would break the decades long understanding with the U.S. government. See: Active U.S. treaties: https://state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Treaties-in-Force-2025-FINAL.pdf 1966 Foundational Understanding: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20603/volume-603-I-8737-English.pdf 1972 Understanding regarding new facilities on Diego Garcia: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20866/volume-866-I-8737-English.pdf 1976 Understanding and concurrence on new communications facilities on Diego Garcia and references as foundational the 1966 Understanding: https://treaties.fcdo.gov.uk/data/Library2/pdf/1976-TS0019.pdf?utm_source https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/2014150131247874267?s=20 The EU-Mercosur deal is a major free trade agreement between the European Union and the Mercosur bloc (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay). Negotiated for over 25 years, it aims to create one of the world’s largest free trade zones, covering more than 700 million people and reducing tariffs on goods like cars, machinery, pharmaceuticals, and agricultural products.  It includes commitments on sustainability, labor rights, and environmental protections, but critics argue these are insufficient to address issues like Amazon deforestation and unfair competition for European farmers. The agreement was politically finalized in 2019 but faced delays due to environmental concerns and opposition from countries like France and Austria. It was formally signed on January 17, 2026, after EU member states (with a qualified majority, despite opposition from five countries including France) greenlit it on January 9.  The Stupidity of Davos Explained Using an Example of Their Own Creation China is manufacturing a product to create a carbon credit certificate in response to the demand for carbon credits from all the world auto-makers.  Any nation that has a penalty or fine attached to their climate goals is a customer. Those are nations with fines or quotas associated with the production of gasoline powered engines if the auto company doesn't hit the legislated target for sales of electric vehicles. In essence, EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car companies buy Chinese car company carbon credits, to avoid the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN fines.  The Chinese then use the carbon credit revenue to subsidize even lower priced Chinese EVs to the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car markets, thereby undercutting the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car companies that also produce EVs. China brilliantly exploits the ridiculous pontificating climate scam and has an interest in perpetuating -even emphasizing- the need for the EU/AU/RU/ASEAN countries to keep pushing their climate agenda.  China even goes so far as to fund alarmism research about climate change because they are making money selling carbon credit certificates on the back end of the scam to the western fear mongers.  This is friggin' brilliant.   The climate change alarmists are helping China's economy by pushing ever escalating fear of climate change.  You just cannot make this stuff up. What does the outcome look like? Well, in this example we see hundreds of thousands of unsold BYDs piling up in countries that emphasize climate regulations with no restrictions on the import of EVs (which most don't even manufacture), which is almost every country.  Big Panda doesn't care about the car itself; they care about generating the carbon credit certificate to sell in the various carbon exchanges. Put this context to the recent announcement by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney about his new trade deal with China to accept 49,000 EVs this year. Prime Minister Carney bragged about getting the Chinese to agree to only super low prices for the Canadian market.  Mark Carney was very proud of his accomplishment to get much lower priced vehicles for Canadian EV purchasers.   No doubt Big Panda left the room laughing as soon as Carney made his grand announcement. 1. China sells EV's in Canada, creating credits available on the carbon exchange scheme. Europe et al will purchase the carbon credits because Bussels has fines against EU car companies. 2. With a foothold already established in Europe, China will then take the money generated by the carbon credit purchases and lower the prices of the Chinese EV cars sold in Canada. It's gets funnier. 3. Carney bragged about forcing China to only sell low price EV's as part of the trade agreement. The low price of the EV's in Canada will be subsidized by Europe. China doesn't pay or lose a dime. But wait…. 4. Carney can't do anything about the scheme he has just enmeshed Canada into, because Canada has a Carbon Credit exchange in law.

What if the biggest mistake in AI safety is believing that laws, treaties, and regulations will save us?In this episode of For Humanity, John sits down with Peter Sparber, a former architect of Big Tobacco's successful war against regulation, to confront a deeply uncomfortable truth: the AI industry is using the exact same playbook—and it's working. Drawing on decades of experience inside Washington's most effective lobbying operations, Peter explains why regulation almost always fails against powerful industries, how AI companies are already neutralizing political pressure, and why real change will never come from lawmakers alone. Instead, he argues that the only path to meaningful AI safety is making unsafe AI bad for business—by injecting risk, liability, and uncertainty directly into boardrooms and C-suites. Peter reveals why AI doesn't need to outsmart humanity to defeat regulation, it only needs money, time, and political cover. By exposing how industries evade oversight, delay enforcement, and co-opt regulators, this conversation re-frames AI safety around power, incentives, and accountability.Together, they explore:* Why laws, treaties, and regulations repeatedly fail against powerful industries* How Big AI is following Big Tobacco's exact regulatory playbook * Why public outrage rarely translates into effective policy * How companies neutralize enforcement without breaking the law * Why third-party standards may matter more than legislation* How local resistance, liability, and investor pressure can change behavior* Why making unsafe AI bad for business is the only strategy with teeth

The Supreme Court has ruled that capital gains from Tiger Global's 2018 exit from Flipkart are taxable in India, even though the investment was routed through Mauritius and backed by a tax treaty. In this video, ThePrint explains why the court held that the offshore structure lacked real commercial substance, how India's General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) overrides treaty protection, and what this means for foreign investors, private equity funds, and cross-border M&A deals.

On today's episode, Andy & DJ discuss the ICE agent who fatally shot Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis, Trump taking the U.S. out of 66 globalist organizations & treaties, and Kennedy's revamped food pyramid calling for less processed food.

PREVIEW FOR LATER TONIGHT THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY IN THE RHINELAND Colleague Charles Spicer. In 1936, Hitler violated treaties by moving troops into the Rhineland. Despite prior warnings, London and Parisfailed to react due to prevailing pacifist sentiment. Spicer explains that because Hitler's soldiers lacked live ammunition, standing up to this aggression could have easily prevented the tragedy of World War II. 1945-46 NUREMBERG TRIBUNAL.

In 2022, countries agreed to negotiate an international treaty to end plastics pollution. They gave themselves a two-year deadline to finalize the treaty text — and needless to say, that deadline has not been met. The conventional wisdom is that these treaty negotiations are hopelessly gridlocked, with some countries pushing for a wide-ranging agreement while others insist on something far more narrow. But according to my guest today, Maria Ivanova, there is a potential path forward. Maria Ivanova is one of the world's leading experts on international environmental treaties. She is the Director of the School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University and Co-Director of the Plastics Center at Northeastern. We kick off discussing the fundamentally global nature of plastics pollution — and why this treaty process was launched when it was in 2022. We then turn to a longer conversation about the key geopolitical divisions that have stymied progress, before Maria Ivanova explains how countries might move beyond seemingly intractable positions and finally kickstart progress toward a binding international treaty on plastics pollution.  

In 1998, 120 countries came together to adopt the Rome Statute, creating what would become the International Criminal Court. Four years later, that treaty entered into force, and the ICC officially opened its doors as a permanent court tasked with prosecuting individuals accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Now, looking around the world today, it's clear the ICC has not put an end to war crimes or crimes against humanity. But even so, the court—and the treaty that created it—have profoundly shaped international politics in ways that are often overlooked. My guest today is Mark Kersten. He's a Senior Consultant with the Wayamo Foundation and an Assistant Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of the Fraser Valley in British Columbia. We start with a brief history of the ICC, and then dig into how the court has influenced not just legal definitions of war crimes and crimes against humanity, but how states themselves behave. When we spoke, Mark had just returned from the ICC's annual Assembly of States Parties—the court's main governing body. He explains why that meeting offers a window into some of the biggest challenges the ICC now faces, including the very real possibility of U.S. sanctions—not just against individual court officials, but against the institution itself. This episode is produced in partnership with Lex International Fund, a philanthropic initiative dedicated to strengthening international law to solve global challenges. It's part of our ongoing series highlighting the real-world impact of treaties on state behavior, called "When Treaties Work."  

Visit www.worldministries.org  

The conspiracy charge, borrowed from Nuremberg, was awkward given the rivalries within the splintered Japanese government. The legal foundation for Class A (aggressive war) relied on treaties like the Kellogg-Briand Pact. This 1928 pact made aggressive war illegal but failed to establish individual criminal responsibility or penalties. All surviving defendants were convicted of at least one charge, receiving mixed verdicts.

In this dense and thought-provoking episode of The No Treason Podcast, Jonathan Drake dives straight into Lysander Spooner's dismantling of government legitimacy. Jonathan walks listeners through Spooner's shift from exposing the Constitution's fatal contradictions to identifying the true structure of modern slavery—beginning with treaties and government debt. He breaks down why treaties fail every standard of natural law, why no agent of government can prove lawful consent to enter them, and how these agreements entangle millions of people in obligations they never accepted. Jonathan then tackles Spooner's devastating critique of national debt—showing how a “secret band” of unaccountable agents borrows in darkness, uses criminal purposes as justification, and binds future generations through coercion, taxation, and fraud. Alongside Spooner's logic, Jonathan explores apophatic reasoning, natural law, anarcho-capitalist debates, election secrecy, and the moral implications of political power itself. Sponsors, live-chat reflections, and Jonathan's signature philosophical clarity round out a rigorous exploration of consent, sovereignty, and the machinery that keeps citizens trapped in manufactured obligations.

2025 marks 50 years of the Biological Weapons Convention. Back in 1975, the treaty entered into force, and by banning biological weapons worldwide, it became the first global treaty to prohibit a particular weapon of war. The Biological Weapons Convention is widely adopted — 189 States Parties have pledged to never develop, produce, stockpile, or use biological weapons. And thankfully, these weapons have not featured much in modern conflict. But over the last 50 years, profound advances in the life sciences and bio research have emerged which, according to my guest today, pose a distinct challenge to this treaty. Jaime Yassif is the Vice President for Global Biological Policy and Programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a nonprofit global security organization focused on reducing nuclear, biological, and emerging technology threats. We kick off by discussing the history of this treaty, including why the time was right 50 years ago for it to come together. We spend most of our conversation, though, exploring the ways in which this treaty might be strengthened to adapt to a changing landscape of potential biological weapons risks today. This episode is produced in partnership with Lex International Fund, a philanthropic initiative dedicated to strengthening international law to solve global challenges. It's part of our ongoing series highlighting the real-world impact of treaties on state behavior, called "When Treaties Work."

If you break out of jail...are you getting caught in ATLANTA?! Amongst other things...

As we commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Locarno Treaties of 1925, this episode explores the treaties' place in the "long 20th century," examining how leaders like Gustav Stresemann, Aristide Briand, and Austen Chamberlain sought a new European order in a transformed Atlantic and global setting after the First World War. Professor Patrick O. Cohrs explains the Treaties' significance, strengths, weaknesses, and wider global echoes, and considers what the Locarno spirit can teach today's leaders about diplomacy, learning, and collective security. Patrick O. Cohrs is Professor of International History at the University of Florence. He specialises in the history of modern international politics. His work focuses on war and peace and the transformation of the transatlantic and global order in the long twentieth century. He is the author of The Unfinished Peace after World War I (Cambridge University Press, 2006). His second book, The New Atlantic Order. The Transformation of International Politics, 1860–1933 (Cambridge University Press, 2022) won the 2023 Prose Award in World History. Resources: https://archives.ungeneva.org/ Where to listen to this episode  Apple podcasts:  https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-next-page/id1469021154 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/10fp8ROoVdve0el88KyFLy YouTube: https://youtu.be/ Content    Guest: Professor Patrick O. Cohrs Host, production and editing: Amy Smith, UN Library & Archives Geneva Recorded & produced at the United Nations Library & Archives Geneva 

On September 16th, Morocco became the 60th country to ratify the High Seas Treaty, triggering a countdown to January, when the treaty will officially enter into force. The High Seas Treaty establishes a kind of “rules of the road” for international waters that lie beyond the jurisdiction of any single country—particularly around conservation and the preservation of ocean biodiversity. At the core of the High Seas Treaty is the creation of Marine Protected Areas—think of them as national parks for the high seas. And even though the treaty has not yet entered into force, it is already influencing ocean conservation efforts, according to my guest today, Nichola Clark, a senior officer for ocean governance at the Pew Charitable Trusts. We begin by discussing why the international community felt the need for a High Seas Treaty in the first place, and then trace the story of how this agreement came to life. We wrap up with a conversation about what the treaty has already accomplished—and what it may achieve in the near future. This episode is produced in partnership with Lex International Fund, a philanthropic initiative dedicated to strengthening international law to solve global challenges. It's part of our ongoing series highlighting the real-world impact of treaties on state behavior, called “When Treaties Work.”

In the aftermath of the shipwreck, France was scandalized by what had happened as the details emerged. And artist Théodore Géricault became obsessed with it. Research: Amigo, Ignacio. “How a biologist turned amateur sleuth to solve a century-old art riddle.” The Guardian. Oct. 23, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/oct/27/how-a-biologist-turned-amateur-sleuth-to-solve-a-century-old-art-riddle Barran, Julian. “Théodore Géricault, Illustrations to Alexandre Corréard’s ‘Le Naufrage de La Méduse.’” The Burlington Magazine, vol. 119, no. 889, 1977, pp. 311–310. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/878824 Baudelaire, Charles. “WHAT IS ROMANTICISM?” The Salon of 1848. https://writing.upenn.edu/library/Baudelaire-Salon-1848.pdf Burgos, Javier S. “A new portrait by Géricault.” The Lancet Neurology, Volume 20, Issue 2, 90 – 91. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422(20)30479-8/fulltext Burgos, Javier. S. “In search of Théodore Géricault’s lost monomanias.” Metode. June 3, 2024. https://metode.org/issues/article-revistes/in-search-of-theodore-gericaults-lost-monomanias.html Dard, Charlotte Adelaide Picard. “The sufferings of the Picard family after the shipwreck of the Medusa, in the year 1816.” Constable and Co. Edinburgh, Scotland. 1827. Accessed online: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/22792/22792-h/22792-h.htm Dione, Babacar and Mark Banchereau. “France withdraws from Senegal, ending its permanent military presence in West Africa.” AP. July 17, 2025. https://apnews.com/article/senegal-france-military-withdrawal-57d150687e18cd20ac6a6d7194821208 The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Treaties of Paris". Encyclopedia Britannica, 23 May. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/event/Treaties-of-Paris-1814-1815 “The Frigate Medusa … “ The Raleigh Minerva. Nov. 4, 1816. https://www.newspapers.com/image/58081420/?match=1&terms=medusa “Gericault.” The Illustrated Magazine of Art, Vol. 2, No. 11 (1853), pp. 282-283 Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20538136 Géricault, Théodore. “Cuirassier blessé, quittant le feu.” 1814. Louvre. https://collections.louvre.fr/ark:/53355/cl010059200 Géricault, Théodore. “Race of the Riderless Horses.” 1817. Getty Museum. https://www.getty.edu/art/collection/object/103RH8 Géricault, Théodore. “Race of the Riderless Horses at Rome, Study.” 1817. The Met. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/665793 Huet, Marie-Hélène. “The Face of Disaster.” Yale French Studies, no. 111, 2007, pp. 7–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20479368 “Loss of the French Frigate Medusa.” Hartford Courant. Oct. 29, 1816. https://www.newspapers.com/image/1105494685/?match=1&terms=medusa Miles, Jonathan. “The Wreck of the Medusa.” Atlantic Monthly Press. 2007. Savigny, Jean Baptiste Henri, and Alexandre Correard. “Narrative of the Voyage to Senegal.” London : Printed for Henry Colburn. 1818. https://archive.org/details/narrativeofvoyag00savirich/page/xiv/mode/2up Smith, Roberta. “Art Review: Oui, Art Tips From Perfidious Albion.” New York Times. Oct. 10, 2003. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/10/arts/art-review-oui-art-tips-from-perfidious-albion.html See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hello Youtube Members, Patreons and Pacific War week by week listeners. Yes this was intended to be an exclusive episode to join the 29 others over on my Youtube Membership and Patreon, but since we are drawing to the end of the Pacific War week by week series, I felt compelled to make some special episodes to answer some of the bigger questions.   Hey before I begin I just want to thank all of you who have joined the patreon, you guys are awesome. Please let me know what other figures, events or other things you want to hear about in the future and I will try to make it happen.   So as you can see the title of this episode is, Why did the Japanese perform so many Atrocities during the Pacific War. Phewww, its honestly a difficult one to tackle, for there are countless reasons. I had a university professor who taught; ancient and modern Japanese history, history of the Japanese empire and the Pacific War. He actually answered this very question in a single lecture and in many ways I found it to be one of the most illuminating things I ever learnt about the Pacific War. To truly understand the reasons why they did such horrible things, you actually need to learn the general history of Japan, particularly the changes from Tokugawa, to Meiji, to Showa. I am going to do my very best, but I know many of you might be asking “what were the worst things they did?”, not everyone takes a special interest into such a niche part of history. May I recommend for those with strong stomachs “the knights of Bushido” by Edward Russel that covers pretty much all the atrocities of the Asia-Pacific War. For those of you who like darker things, check out Unit 731: Japan's Secret Biological Warfare in World War II by David Wallace and Peter Williams, absolute nightmare fuel.   I can't go through the entire history of Japan, but I think it's important to start off with the first Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. This was the first time the Empire of Japan fought a true war with a foreign nation, that being the Qing dynasty. At this point in time, there really emerged a sort of, to be blunt, race war. The Chinese had historically referred to the Japanese as “woren”, a racist term meaning dwarf. Now historically the Japanese had always revered the Chinese, kind of like in the way a little brother looks up to his big brother. In tokugawa Japan they would learn from the Chinese, but as the Meiji restoration began this dramatically changed. Japan watched as the Chinese were humiliating and abused by the western powers and failed to modernize. Meanwhile Japan emulated the best of the west, to modernize and become a great power themselves. In many ways, Japan saw itself become big brother and now China was little brother. The Meiji restoration had an element of nationalism built into it that would explode come the Show era. Japan for its entire history had this belief they were the “Yamato Race” dating back to the 6th century. Now while the Meiji restoration sought to emulate the west, they also emulated racism and propaganda, which in the 19th century was kind of a big deal. The Japanese government gradually began a long term campaign promoting the idea the Japanese, or Yamato people were superior to that of the other asian races. Who was the next big asian boy on the block? China, so it was inevitable they would direct a lot of racist attitudes towards the Chinese. During the first sino-japanese war, the Chinese, particularly Manchu had a habit of performing atrocities upon the Japanese. They would often cut off body parts of Japanese soldiers in grotesque manners and leave them to be found by their comrades. This was honestly a pretty typical thing of war in the region, but it did also have a racist element to it, the Chinese certainly saw the Japanese as lesser people. Just before the battle of Port Arthur, the Japanese found mutilated remains of the comrades, here is a passage from Makio Okabe who was there:   As we entered the town of Port Arthur, we saw the head of a Japanese soldier displayed on a wooden stake. This filled us with rage and a desire to crush any Chinese soldier. Anyone we saw in the town, we killed. The streets were filled with corpses, so many they blocked our way. We killed people in their homes; by and large, there wasn't a single house without from three to six dead. Blood was flowing and the smell was awful. We sent out search parties. We shot some, hacked at others. The Chinese troops just dropped their arms and fled. Firing and slashing, it was unbounded joy. At this time, our artillery troops were at the rear, giving three cheers [banzai] for the emperor.   The Japanese performed a massacre at Port Arthur, butchering perhaps up to 3000 Chinese civilians, some claim 10's of thousands and in full few of western war correspondents. It became a huge controversy that destroyed the image of the IJA internationally and hurt the Japanese governments efforts at riding themselves of unequal treaties with the western powers. The Japanese learnt a hell of a lesson and an Imperial Proclamation was made in 1894 stating that Japanese soldiers should make every effort to win the war without violating international laws. According to Japanese historian Yuki Tanaka, Japanese forces during the First Sino-Japanese War released 1,790 Chinese prisoners without harm, once they signed an agreement not to take up arms against Japan if they were released.   During the next major war the Japanese performed a dramatic 180, well at least to their enemy. During the Russo-Japanese War, over 80,000 Russian POWs were held by the IJA who were treated in accordance with the Hague conventions of 1899. The Japanese paid them for labor, housed them in conventional POW camps, made sure they received good medical treatment, ironically better than the Russians were capable of. The Japanese did all of this, making sure the foreign war correspondents wrote about it. It was a massive PR stunt in many ways. The Japanese were emulating how a world power should act, because they sought to be one. Meanwhile the Japanese swallowed their pride at being called yellow monkeys, as the prevalent Yellow Peril ideology was being pushed by Kaiser Wilhehelm and Tsar Nicholas II heavily. The Japanese treated the entire war like gentlemen and suffered horrific higher casualties than necessary because of it. But something many people don't take much notice of, because the IJA made sure of it, was they horrible treatment of the Chinese during the war.   Now the Russians in Manchuria looted, killed and raped many Chinese, pushed quite a bit by the Yellow Peril. The Chinese, certainly the Honghuzi bandits were working for the Japanese to attack them, so its not like they had no reasons. The IJA was more professional and had orders not to molest the Chinese, as they were helping the war effort, but this did not prevent it. The Japanese also looted, killed and raped Chinese. The Japanese would often wave it off as reprisals against potential spies. I only bring this up as it was very apparent, the Japanese treated the Russians much different than the chinese.   Fast forward to WW1, the Japanese had a battle against the Germans and Austro-Hungarians known in the west as the Siege of Tsingtau. The Japanese took up an identical methodology to the Russo-Japanese war with their approach to the Germans, but even took it a step further. After winning the siege, the Japanese seized nearly 5000 German POW's who were treated with a surreal amount of respect. They were brought back to Japan and housed for the rest of the war in 12 cities around Tokyo and Kumamoto. The POW's enjoyed humane treatment and a rather famous event occurred at the Bando camp where a large orchestra was formed of German POW's who toured the nation performing 100 concerts, lectures and plays. Evidence the Germans were treated well can be seen in the fact 170 prisoners never left Japan and sought wives and lives there. Now is this all a feel good love story, no, just like during the Russo-Japanese War, Japan was playing up the PR, for during WW1 they wanted official recognition as a world power and that of being racially equal to the whites.    Japan was officially recognized as a world power during the treaty of Versailles, but when Japan gave its racial equality proposal, President Woodrow Wilson of the US and Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes refused to allow it to pass, even though they received majority votes. Now The Japanese had been for a lack of better words, fucked over, during the first sino-japanese war when the triple intervention of France, Germany and Russia stole away their war earning of the Liaodong peninsula. During the Russo-Japanese war, Theodore Roosevelt limited the Japanese war gains and now here after WW1 the Japanese received another humiliation. To the Japanese, it was the last straw and it was a major reason they went to war with the west, who they viewed, and honestly rightfully so, would never see them as equals.   Ompf, lot of history there, but now we come to the Showa era, which was molded by the feelings of the past decades.   In 1937 Japan and China enter an unofficial war that saw one of the worst wartime atrocities in human history, the rape of Nanjing. It began on December 13th of 1937, lasting 6 or so weeks seeing the murder of possibly 300,000 civilians and pows, the mass rape of 20,000 and untold hardship upon the Chinese people. The Japanese followed this up with numerous other massacres in China such as the Changjiao Massacre claiming possibly 30,000 Chinese civilian lives, the Alexandra Hospital Massacre killing 200 patients and medical staff in Hong Kong, the Laha Massacre on Ambon island where 300 members of the Gull force were executed, the Bangka island massacre where 60 Australian and British soldiers and 22 Australian nurses were murdered, the Parit Sulong massacre in Malay where 150 wounded Australian and Indian POW's were executed, the Bataan Death march where negligence and brutality took the lives of 650 Americans and perhaps a possible 18,000 Filipinos, the Manila massacres claiming the lives of perhaps 54,000 filipinos including women and children in the Philippines, the Balikpapan massacre in the dutch east indies taking the lives of 78 Dutch Civilians, I can keep going and going. Where the Japanese went, massacres and horrors occurred.    Again if you really want to delve into these stories check out “the knights of Bushido”.   The Japanese also had the infamous special units like 731, who conducted horrifying experiments on civilians and POWs like vivisectioning live people without anesthesia, testing biological and chemical weapons on live people, the freezing peoples to study frostbite treatment and giving people sexually transmitted diseases to study. Lt General Shiro Ishii's unit 731 deployed plague infested fleas, cholera, bubonic plague and other nasty weapons upon Chinese civilians killing perhaps up to 500,000. This was seen during the battle of Changde and famously during operation Sei-go also known as the Zhejiang-Jiangxi campaign.    The Japanese also enacted the infamous “Sanko Sakusen / three all's policy : kill all, urn all, loot all” in retaliation to the Chinese communists Hundred regiments offensive in December of 1940. Sanctioned by Hirohito personally, it is thought this act resulted in the death of 2.7 million Chinese civilians. According to author Werner Gruhl 8 million Chinese civilian deaths could be attributable to the Japanese.     So then we come back to the big question, why? So now that I've covered the loose history for coherency sake I want to list here the largest reasons for the atrocities and by no means is this official categories or even all of them, I am simply stating kind of my top ones I guess you can say:   Treaties signed or not signed War strategy and indoctrination  Ultra-Nationalism and Racism Surrender & the Bastardization of the Bushido code The Brutality of the Japanese military Treaties signed or not signed   Yes its time to talk about treaties, yawn. Now I said previously Japan did sign the Hague Conventions of 1899 and would ratify them in 1907. The Hague conventions did contain laws for prisoners of war, protection of civilians. Alongside this, in 1894 an imperial proclamation was made stating Japanese soldiers should make every effort to win a war without violating international laws. More significantly Japan “signed” but unlike the majority of other world powers did not ratify the Geneva convention of 1929. Why? To be blunt, the geneva conventions did not really benefit the Japanese military from their point of view.   First the Japanese had a very specific perspective on surrendering, they simply did not do it, so they did not expect many of their soldiers to ever become POW's, so how would it benefit them to ratify such a thing? If they are not going to have many POW's, why would they burden themselves with upholding all the conventional laws for POW's they would obtain during war?  Another glaring reason involved aerial bombing. Many Japanese leaders, like Kanji Ishiwara, believed the home islands would be subjected to massive aerial bombing if a global war broke out. If Japan was subjected to aerial bombing and ratified the geneva convention, this meant they would have to take the pilots who were caught prisoner. The Japanese believed this would encourage further bombing. Lastly the convention had rules for POW treatment that literally contradicted how Japanese soldiers were treated by their own superiors. More about that in the last part about the military's brutality, but summarized, the Japanese army were abusive as hell and to sign such a thing would literally contradict how they did things.   Emperor Hirohito personally ratified a decision to remove certain constraints of the Hague Conventions when it came to the treatment of Chinese POW's in the directive of 5 August 1937. This notification advised staff officers to simply stop using the term "prisoners of war". They would refer to their enemy as bandits, guerillas and such, anything but soldiers so they would not have to take any prisoners, though they typically did not leave anyone alive in China regardless. The Geneva Convention exempted POWs of sergeant rank or higher from manual labor, and stipulated that prisoners performing work should be provided with extra rations and other essentials. The Japanese in the later half of the war would be starved of provisions and resources, thus its to no surprise they could not meet these demands, even if they sought to uphold them. I will note in 1942, Japan indicated they would “follow” the Geneva rules and would observe the Hague Convention of 1907 outlining the laws and customs of war. Yet this is like a verbal confirmation, it had no legal basis, something the Japanese particularly loved to do during the war.   According to Dr. William Skelton III, who produced a document entitled American Ex Prisoners of War for the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs, more POWs died at the hands of the Japanese in the Pacific theater and specifically in the Philippines than in any other conflict to date. For example in Germany, POWs died at a rate 1.2%. In the Pacific theater the rate was 37%. In the Philippines, POWs died at a rate of 40%.    Now these pieces of paper that were signed or not signed, what does this really matter when it comes to war, its obvious they were not upholding certain rules, but how did this quote en quote make them more brutal and perform more atrocities? Well here is the sticky thing, if you are part of the Japanese military and you know your nation did not ratify certain rules of war, this meant your enemy had no supposed legal basis to follow said rules against you either.    So I want you to think of two aspects of this. If your nation did not sign or ratify certain treaties, then you could not expect the enemy to respect such rules when it comes to you. But more importantly, what if the leader of your nation…just told you to believe that?    In early 1942, Great Britain, the United States of America and other great powers did officially let the Japanese know that they would, on their  part, observe all the provisions of the Convention and requested reciprocity. Japanese foreign minister at the time, Hideki Tojo gave a formal assurance that although Japan was not bound by the Geneva convention, the Japanese would apply it “mutatis mutandis” towards the Americans, British, Canadians, Australians and New Zealander POW's, note he most definitely did not extend this to the asiatic groups, nor the Dutch whom I guess he just forgot about. But this did morally bind Japan to comply with the convention. However the top brass of the Japanese military, notably Hideki Tojo in these cases, went out of his way to instill beliefs within the military as to what they should expect from the enemy. As you will see in the next points, this was basically a type of indoctrination.   War strategy and indoctrination    The leaders of Japan knew full well how unmatched they were in terms of resources and productivity before they began the war with the west. How could they possibly win the war? The IJN was dead set on a decisive naval battle, but for the IJA to compensate for their lack of resources, they believed their “spirit” would overcome the enemy. In many ways this spirit meant going above and beyond normal human endurance, to literally outperform the allies and notably to conduct the war with absolutely zero mercy. Once Japan lost the initiative in the war, after Guadalcanal, the IJA were forced to fight a war of attrition. Now they would prolong and exact maximum casualties upon the allies hoping to force them to the peace table. The idea was quite simple, the IJA would do everything possible to make the allies believe they would never give up and it would far too costly to defeat them. How does one go about achieving these aims? Well the IJA officers would tell you “by steeling your hearts”. To achieve all of this required extreme indoctrination.    Japanese children grew up in regimentation, they were desensitized to violence through tales of martial glory, and were taught that their purpose in life was to serve the emperor. Upon entering  military service, they were trained out of any individualistic spirit, and taught that compassion was a weakness and had no place in the field of war. The soldier's motto was faith equaled strength.  Faith being devotion to duty and service to the Divine Emperor. Apart from ideology and spiritual toughening, training in the Japanese Imperial Army was also extremely harsh and violent. This was not even particularly a special aspect of Showa Japan, it went all the way back to the Meiji era. From a young age children's education directed them, like a pipeline for military duty.   Now at the offset of the war, Hideki Tojo released the “Senjinkun” “instructions for the battlefield”. This was basically a manual for soldiers on how to conduct war. The document was used to establish standards of behavior for Japanese troops and improve discipline and morale within the Army, it also included things like a prohibition against being taken prisoner. It stated if you were captured by the enemy, because Japan did not sign or ratify certain treaties, you would be killed or tortured by the allies, and if you survived you and your family would face shame back home, and punishment resulting typically in 6 months of prison.   Here is a small excerpt from the document Those who know shame are weak. Always think of [preserving] the honor of your community and be a credit to yourself and your family. Redouble your efforts and respond to their expectations. Never live to experience shame as a prisoner. By dying you will avoid leaving a stain on your honor.   The purpose was basically psychological warfare, against their own army. Those like Hideki Tojo believed Japan could only defeat the resource rich Americans with spirit. Thus the manuals like Senjinkun demanded the forces not ever surrender, because the allies would do horrible things, it was shameful to do so and there were disciplinary actions for any who did. In 1942 the Army amended its criminal code to specify that officers who surrendered soldiers under their command faced at least six months imprisonment, regardless of the circumstances in which the surrender took place. This change attracted little attention, however, as the Senjinkun imposed more severe consequences and had greater moral force.   In a report dated June 1945, the U.S. Office of War Information noted that 84 percent of one group of interrogated Japanese prisoners, many of whom had been injured or unconscious when captured stated that they had expected to be killed or tortured by the Allies if taken prisoner. The OWI analysts described this as being typical, and concluded that fear of the consequences of surrender, “rather than Bushido,” was the motivation for many Japanese battle deaths in hopeless circumstances–as much as, and probably more than, the other two major considerations: fear of disgrace at home, and “the positive desire to die for one's nation, ancestors, and god-emperor.”   Something barely talked about in the west, was during the Pacific War, the Americans had a habit of taking human trophies. Human trophies were Japanese skulls, gold teeth, finger bones and such. The famous novel “With the Old Breed” by Eugene Sledge spoke of his personal accounts of these actions, its a rather gruesome and dark part of the war. Now some of these actions were publicized, despite the US military's efforts to quell and hush it down. Time magazine famously had an iconic photo of a woman whose enlisted boyfriend sent her home a Japanese skull. FDR also famously was given a letter opener carved out of Japanese bones. These stories were seized up greedily by the Japanese government who used them as propaganda to prove to their soldiers what would happen if they were captured. It had a profound effect as you can imagine. And this was not limited to Japanese soldiers. The propaganda machine would contribute at the end of the war to mass civilian suicides on Okinawa and Saipan.   Back to the POW subject. When it came to the treatment of POW's, Hideki Tojo began submitting in May of 1942 a series of memorandum, basic orders as to how POW's should be treated. “Prisoners of war can be used for the enlargement of our production and as military labor, white prisoners of war will be confined successively in Korea, Formosa and Manchuria. Superior technicians and high ranking officers -- Colonels and above -- will be included among the prisoners of war confined in Formosa. Those who are not suitable for use in enlargement of our production will be confined in prisoner of war camps which will be built immediately on the spot.Although the working of prisoner of war officers and warrant officers is forbidden by the Regulations of 1903, the policy of the control authorities is that under the situation of our country where not one person now eats without working they want them to set to work. It is desired that you give proper orders on this.The present situation of affairs in this country does not permit anyone to lie idle doing nothing but eating freely. With that in view, in dealing with prisoners of war, I hope you will see that they may be usefully employed. In Japan, we have our own ideology concerning prisoners of war, which should naturally make their treatment more or less different from that in Europe and America. In dealing with them, you should, of course, observe the various Regulations concerned, aim at an adequate application of them . . . At the same time, you must not allow them to lie idle doing nothing but eating freely for even a single day. Their labor and technical skill should be fully utilized for the replenishment of production, and contribution rendered toward the prosecution of the Greater East Asiatic War for which no effort ought to be spared."   Thus in the end as a grunt in the IJA you were led to believe: if I am captured I will be tortured, killed maybe turned into a letter opener, or someone will place my skull on their mantle. If I surrender and survive and make it back home, I will be severely punished and worst of all me and my family will be shamed. I could not expect any humanity from the enemy, because my nation did not sign or ratify treaties like the Geneva convention. More so, because my armies conduct was so unbelievably barbaric, I could only expect the very same from my enemy. It was a vicious cycle. You perform atrocities, expecting the enemy to do the same, and thus it just keeps perpetuating itself. Ultra-Nationalism and Racism   Now we spoke a little bit about the concept of the Yamato race, the Japanese were indoctrinated to believe they were a superior race and that their emperor was something akin to a living god. Until this war, the Japanese empire was on a hell of a winning streak going all the way back to the Meiji Era. For the first half of the Pacific war, the Japanese won nearly every battle. This led to something historians called “victory disease” that made them become somewhat arrogant and cocky, but it also made them feel “superhuman”. The allies' news reporting at the beginning of the war began to frantically refer to the Japanese as “supermen”or  “super jungle fighters”. Particularly because of the Malay campaign, the Japanese soldier just seemed to be tougher, could survive harsher jungle climates, even doing so with less food or war materials. The Japanese read the allied news reports and came to the conclusion that had been driven down their throats by their government, indeed the Japanese spirit was winning the war. The Japanese public ate this up in their propaganda and it perpetuated their ultra-nationalistic beliefs. The Japanese truly came to believe they were destined to rule the asia-pacific. Look at the results in China for example. Within a short amount of time they conquered much of China, though the public really had no idea how bad the China was bottled down by 1940. Then came the greater east asia co-prosperity sphere propaganda, which is an excellent example of their megalomania.    Yet alongside their ultra-nationalism, seen more strongly perpetuated against other Asian groups, the Japanese also indoctrinated their public with racism against them. The Yellow Peril of the 19th century and anti-japanese or anti-asian racism fueled the Japanese soldiers. The Japanese as a people had faced brutal racist hardships historically at the hands of the west, particularly from their point of view from America. There was the slights against them during the first sino-japanese war, the infamous triple intervention of france, germany and Russia stealing away their prize that was the liaodong peninsula. Then during the Boxer rebellion they faced racism, not being allowed to lead mutli national army formations, despite them being the lionshare of said military force. The Russo-Japanese war saw from their point of view, America stealing their war prizes. Last but not least, after WW1 they were told to their faces that they were a world power, but not racially equal. The Japanese faced anti-Japanese and anti-asian immigration laws when it came to America in the form of the gentleman's agreement and Australia's “great white Australia policy”. During the war, the American propaganda machine began pumping out racist caricatures of Japanese as rats, goggle eyed  bucktooth people, literal yellow monkey's.   For the IJA the pacific war in many was a holy war directed at the arrogant whites who had abused them for so long. This will probably sound controversial, but indeed, the pacific war was very much a race war. If you are not convinced of that, I recommend reading “War without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War” by John Dower. The human trophy taking, anti-japanese bucktooth, rat people cartoon propaganda, history of racial abuse like the japanese concentration camps, the gentleman's agreement, the stealing of victories during the first sino-japanese war, russo-japanese war and ww1 all plagued the mind of a Japanese soldier. To them in many ways, the “whites had it coming”. Which is rather ironic given how the Japanese would treat the other asian racial groups they came into contact with. But such is the contradictory nature of the Imperial Japanese military.    The Japanese also held racist beliefs about the westerners. The Japanese soldiers were taught the allies were akin to demons or beasts. They were described often as “the hairy ones” or “anglo-American demons”. Taught these men would rape women and girls, stample upon the civilians they captured with the treads of their tanks. The marines were especially dreaded.  According to a story circulated widely among the Japanese on Saipan, all Marine Corps recruits were compelled to murder their own parents before being inducted into service. It was said that Japanese soldiers taken prisoner would suffer hideous tortures—their ears, noses, and limbs would be cut off; they would be blinded and castrated; they could also be cooked and fed to dogs. As silly as this may sound, do remember the Americans were taking human trophies so the Japanese propaganda machine had its evidence. Tons of photos of skulls atop american tanks for example were displayed to the Japanese public. Another famous one was the cartoon appearing in an American servicemen's magazine, which was later reproduced and translated in the Japanese press. It suggested the existence of “Japanese hunting licenses, promising open season on the enemy, complete with free ammunition and equipment—with pay!    In terms of how the Japanese exacted their own racism towards their fellow asians. During the War the Japanese dragged into forced labor, Koreans, Chinese and southeast asians. 670,000 Koreans were brought to Japan to work mines and heavy industry, around 60,000 of them died to harsh conditions. Between April 1943 to May 1945, 41,862 Chinese were sent to Japan to work, 2800 died before even reaching the home islands. 6872 died in the work sites again from brutal conditions. When it comes to southeast asian numbers are hard to pinpoint but its safe to say at least 300,000 Javanese, Malay, Burmese, Tamil and other groups were mobilized to construct the Burma-Siam railroad between October 1942 to november 1943 and 60,000 perished. This all went for the men, for the women, all those racial groups would face the horrors of becoming comfort women, historians estimate there could have been 50-200,000 pressed into it. But for the Japanese, believing their were superior to these other asiatic groups, groups whom they would publicly say were like children, they as the father figure would guide, well they simply abused them.   So in a contradictive fashion, the Japanese believed they were superior and could do horrible things to their Asian neighbors while simultaneously decrying the racism cast towards them by western powers as justification for their brutal actions against them. These types of feelings and perspectives molded the mind of the average Japanese soldier, dehumanizing others has always been a standard military practice afterall.    Surrender & the Bastardization of the Bushido code   I think this is one the vast majority of WW2 history buffs know, the Japanese perspective on surrender and the bushido code. In the book “military trials of war criminals in the Netherlands east indies 1946-1949” Fred Borch had this to say about the variable of bushido for the brutality   As Japan continued its modernization in the early 20th century, her armed forces became convinced that success in battle would be assured if Japanese soldiers, sailors, and airmen had the "spirit" of Bushido. ... The result was that the Bushido code of behavior "was inculcated into the Japanese soldier as part of his basic training." Each soldier was indoctrinated to accept that it was the greatest honor to die for the Emperor and it was cowardly to surrender to the enemy. ... Bushido therefore explains why the Japanese soldiers who were stationed in the NEI so mistreated POWs in their custody. Those who had surrendered to the Japanese—regardless of how courageously or honorably they had fought—merited nothing but contempt; they had forfeited all honor and literally deserved nothing. Consequently, when the Japanese murdered POWs by shooting, beheading, and drowning, these acts were excused since they involved the killing of men who had forfeited all rights to be treated with dignity or respect. While civilian internees were certainly in a different category from POWs, it is reasonable to think that there was a "spill-over" effect from the tenets of Bushido.   It is very true, the Japanese soldiers and sailors were taught Japan was a sacred nation. Traditional samurai values of bushido were merged with modern training and weaponry. The government propagandized the figure of the Emperor as a living god who embodied the Japanese state, the Kokutai. Emperor Hirohito and his family were the spiritual essence of Japan. To even show your back to the enemy let alone surrender was deemed cowardly and brought dishonor upon your family. As written by Inouye Jukichi in 1910, something read by many Japanese “The Japanese warriors looked upon it as shame to themselves not to die when their Lord was hard pressed . . . their own shame was the shame upon their parents, their family, their house and their whole clan, and with this idea deeply impressed upon their minds, the Samurai, no matter of what rank, held their lives light as feathers when compared with the weight they attached to the maintenance of a spotless name”.    Young men of Japan were taught that "The greatest honor is to die for the Emperor" Additionally precept the Japanese were taught that it is an ignominy to surrender to the enemy. The combined effect of these two precepts was to inculcate in the Japanese soldier a spirit of contempt for Allied soldiers who surrendered, which, in defiance of the rules of war, was demonstrated in their ill-treatment of prisoners. They made no distinction between the soldier who fought honorably and courageously up to an inevitable surrender, and the soldier who surrendered without a fight. All enemy soldiers who surrendered under any circumstance were to be regarded as being disgraced and entitled to live only by the tolerance of their captors.   Surrender was unforgivable under their code, drilled into them through the Imperial Japanese education system and military. When the Japanese would come across vast swathes of the enemy surrendering, particularly if the enemy used up all their ammunition killing their comrades and then surrendered, well it added fuel to their brutality. One only needs to look at the deaths due to Banzai charges, take for example the incredibly massive one at the battle of Saipan seeing around 4000 dead Japanese. IJA officers brought ancestral katana's to the war, the Japanese cut off the heads of the enemies as it was seen to be honorable. When faced with death, many chose to commit seppuku, the bushido propaganda was intense.    A brutal practice emerged in the Pacific island hopping campaign, whereupon wounded Japanese would pretend to be dead or surrender only to explode grenades upon allied forces coming closer. This began to be noticed by US marines during the battle of Guadalcanal and Australians in New Guinea. This began a vicious cycle . There were of course Japanese who would surrender. Hell the Koreans forced into service often did try to surrender, but they would all be hampered by something. Because of the actions of those Japanese feinted death and taking down allied soldiers with them, the allied soldiers gradually began a practice of not bothering to accept surrender. It became a self fulfilling prophecy. Many Japanese made the allies believe all they could expect was a grenade death, thus the allies became more brutal to them. This simply led the Japanese to conclude their government was accurate about how the allies would treat them, so more and more did not surrender. An absolutely horrible cycle that went on to the very end of the war, though the allies did figure out means to get Japanese to surrender more in the last year.    The Brutality of the Japanese military   I think this is probably one of the most important factors, and its also one the “normies” would not know as much about. The Imperial Japanese military, more so the Army, had what I can only describe as a built in system of abuse. As described to me by the same university professor I keep bringing up in podcasts, picture a literal pecking order. Going from the highest ranked general to the very bottom grunt. Imagine each one who is higher than the other, routinely physically abuses them. For example, it was very typical for a colonel to slap a major across the face, the major would then strike one of his captains, and the abuse would continue through the ranks to the grunts who would have no one to abuse, thus they turned to POW's or civilian populations. This was not just an accepted part of the Japanese Imperial Army it was indoctrinated.    From day one of basic training, IJA officers taught their men, races like the Chinese were their blood enemies and racially inferior. These were people the Japanese would rule over one day. The trainers would toss the boys into rigorous training activities involving physical violence towards another alongside the notion any orders given by a higher ranking officer was infallible and to be treated as if the divine emperor himself, the living god was giving it.    The Japanese army even taught methods of torture that would be employed in all areas they occupied. Among these tortures were the water treatment, burning, electric shocks, the knee spread, suspension, kneeling on sharp instruments and flogging. The Kempetai, were the ones doing the lionshare of these tortures. Other Army and Navy units, however, used the same methods as the Kempetai. Camp guards performed similar methods, local police forces organized by the Kempetai in the occupied territories also applied the same methods of torture. The Kempetai were administered by the War Ministry, trained at specialized schools who were maintained and operated by the War Ministry in Japan. Thus the conduct of Kempetai and the camp guards directly reflected the policy of the War Ministry.    The Japanese army leadership made sure recruits were physically and mentally abused, they were given strenuously duty tasks and pushed to their absolute limit. During the war given where they were deployed, take guadalcanal for example, the Japanese soldiers would be facing starvation as well. Being half starved, beaten and suffering the effects of war would drive anyone to perform horrifying acts. The life of a Japanese solider was simply at the whims of an extremely toxic management culture. The lowest ranking echelons received the lionshare of abuse and they took out their frustration with whomever they could find deemed lower than them, ie: POW's, civilians, etc.   All of these variables combined contributed to the creation of a military willing to perform just about any atrocity they thought necessary to win the war. It was a war they could not hope to win, but many of them went to their deaths trying to defeat the hands of fate. There are countless other reasons of course for the atrocities committed in cold or hot blood. Countless books have been written on this subject, please do check out the few I mentioned. With that again, a big thanks to you patreons, you guys are awesome. Please let me know what you think in the comments, and what you want to hear more about in the future. This has been the pacific war channel over and out.

The first episode of this two-parter covers the French mission to Senegal that the frigate Medusa led in 1816. Soon, the mission fell disastrously apart. Research: Amigo, Ignacio. “How a biologist turned amateur sleuth to solve a century-old art riddle.” The Guardian. Oct. 23, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/oct/27/how-a-biologist-turned-amateur-sleuth-to-solve-a-century-old-art-riddle Barran, Julian. “Théodore Géricault, Illustrations to Alexandre Corréard’s ‘Le Naufrage de La Méduse.’” The Burlington Magazine, vol. 119, no. 889, 1977, pp. 311–310. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/878824 Baudelaire, Charles. “WHAT IS ROMANTICISM?” The Salon of 1848. https://writing.upenn.edu/library/Baudelaire-Salon-1848.pdf Burgos, Javier S. “A new portrait by Géricault.” The Lancet Neurology, Volume 20, Issue 2, 90 – 91. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422(20)30479-8/fulltext Burgos, Javier. S. “In search of Théodore Géricault’s lost monomanias.” Metode. June 3, 2024. https://metode.org/issues/article-revistes/in-search-of-theodore-gericaults-lost-monomanias.html Dard, Charlotte Adelaide Picard. “The sufferings of the Picard family after the shipwreck of the Medusa, in the year 1816.” Constable and Co. Edinburgh, Scotland. 1827. Accessed online: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/22792/22792-h/22792-h.htm Dione, Babacar and Mark Banchereau. “France withdraws from Senegal, ending its permanent military presence in West Africa.” AP. July 17, 2025. https://apnews.com/article/senegal-france-military-withdrawal-57d150687e18cd20ac6a6d7194821208 The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Treaties of Paris". Encyclopedia Britannica, 23 May. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/event/Treaties-of-Paris-1814-1815 “The Frigate Medusa … “ The Raleigh Minerva. Nov. 4, 1816. https://www.newspapers.com/image/58081420/?match=1&terms=medusa “Gericault.” The Illustrated Magazine of Art, Vol. 2, No. 11 (1853), pp. 282-283 Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20538136 Géricault, Théodore. “Cuirassier blessé, quittant le feu.” 1814. Louvre. https://collections.louvre.fr/ark:/53355/cl010059200 Géricault, Théodore. “Race of the Riderless Horses.” 1817. Getty Museum. https://www.getty.edu/art/collection/object/103RH8 Géricault, Théodore. “Race of the Riderless Horses at Rome, Study.” 1817. The Met. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/665793 Huet, Marie-Hélène. “The Face of Disaster.” Yale French Studies, no. 111, 2007, pp. 7–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20479368 “Loss of the French Frigate Medusa.” Hartford Courant. Oct. 29, 1816. https://www.newspapers.com/image/1105494685/?match=1&terms=medusa Miles, Jonathan. “The Wreck of the Medusa.” Atlantic Monthly Press. 2007. Savigny, Jean Baptiste Henri, and Alexandre Correard. “Narrative of the Voyage to Senegal.” London : Printed for Henry Colburn. 1818. https://archive.org/details/narrativeofvoyag00savirich/page/xiv/mode/2up Smith, Roberta. “Art Review: Oui, Art Tips From Perfidious Albion.” New York Times. Oct. 10, 2003. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/10/arts/art-review-oui-art-tips-from-perfidious-albion.html See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this week's episode, Andy talks with Glenn Chafetz, former CIA analyst and expert on strategic culture and national security. They discuss the evolution of nuclear weapons policy, the role of trust and treaties in international relations, and how changing global alliances are affecting stability. Glenn draws on his experience to provide context on nuclear proliferation and its implications for the future of global security. Change Agents is an IRONCLAD Original Sponsors:  Firecracker Farm Use code IRONCLAD to get 15% off your first order at https://firecracker.farm/ AmmoSquared Visit https://ammosquared.com/ today for a special offer and keep yourself fully stocked. With over 100,000 members and thousands of 5-star ratings, Your readiness is their mission. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Crow Tribe is marking the 200th anniversary of their treaty with the United States. It is a document whose limits have been tested over that time, but still defines the tribe's relationship with the federal government. This year also marks 170 years since the treaty ratifying the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indians' official relationship with the U.S. We'll examine these important historical and legal milestones and how they fit in with the extensive and complicated history of treaties.

Can somebody really enforce any space treaties and do they make any sense? What's a better future, colonies on Mars or on giant rotating spaceships? What's India's space program been up to lately? And in Q&A+, would I take a one-way ticket to Mars?

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss Korea's brief but significant period as an empire as it moved from the 500-year-old dynastic Joseon monarchy towards modernity. It was in October 1897 that King Gojong declared himself Emperor, seizing his chance when the once-dominant China lost to Japan in the First Sino-Japanese War. The king wanted to have the same status as the neighbouring Russian, Chinese and Japanese Emperors, to shore up a bid for Korean independence and sovereignty when the world's major powers either wanted to open Korea up to trade or to colonise it. The Korean Empire lasted only thirteen years, yet it was a time of great transformation for this state and the whole region with lasting consequences in the next century…With Nuri Kim Associate Professor in Korean Studies at the faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Cambridge and Fellow of Wolfson CollegeHolly Stephens Lecturer in Japanese and Korean Studies at the University of EdinburghAnd Derek Kramer Lecturer in Korean Studies at the University of SheffieldProducer: Simon TillotsonReading list:Isabella Bird Bishop, Korea and her Neighbors: A Narrative of Travel, With an Account of the Recent Vicissitudes and Present Position of the Country (first published 1898; Forgotten Books, 2019)Vipan Chandra, Imperialism, Resistance and Reform in Late Nineteenth-Century Korea: Enlightenment and the Independence Club (University of California, Institute of East Asian Studies, 1988)Peter Duus, The Abacus and the Sword: The Japanese Penetration of Korea, 1859-1910 (University of California Press, 1995)Carter J. Eckert, Offspring of Empire: The Koch'ang Kims and the Colonial Origins of Korean Capitalism, 1876–1910 (University of Washington Press, 1991)George L. Kallander, Salvation through Dissent: Tonghak Heterodoxy and Early Modern Korea (University of Hawaii Press, 2013)Kim Dong-no, John B. Duncan and Kim Do-hyung (eds.), Reform and Modernity in the Taehan Empire (Jimoondang, 2006)Kirk W. Larsen, Tradition, Treaties, and Trade: Qing Imperialism and Chosŏn Korea, 1850-1910 (Harvard University Asia Center, 2008)Yumi Moon, Populist Collaborators: The Ilchinhoe and the Japanese Colonization of Korea, 1896-1910 (Cornell University Press, 2013)Sung-Deuk Oak, The Making of Korean Christianity: Protestant Encounters with Korean Religions, 1876-1915 (Baylor University Press, 2013)Eugene T. Park, A Family of No Prominence: The Descendants of Pak Tŏkhwa and the Birth of Modern Korea (Stanford University Press, 2020)Michael E. Robinson, Korea's Twentieth-Century Odyssey: A Short History (University of Hawaii Press, 2007)Andre Schmid, Korea Between Empires, 1895-1919 (Columbia University Press, 2002)Vladimir Tikhonov, Social Darwinism and Nationalism in Korea: The Beginnings, 1880s-1910s (Brill, 2010)In Our Time is a BBC Studios Audio Production

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss Korea's brief but significant period as an empire as it moved from the 500-year-old dynastic Joseon monarchy towards modernity. It was in October 1897 that King Gojong declared himself Emperor, seizing his chance when the once-dominant China lost to Japan in the First Sino-Japanese War. The king wanted to have the same status as the neighbouring Russian, Chinese and Japanese Emperors, to shore up a bid for Korean independence and sovereignty when the world's major powers either wanted to open Korea up to trade or to colonise it. The Korean Empire lasted only thirteen years, yet it was a time of great transformation for this state and the whole region with lasting consequences in the next century…With Nuri Kim Associate Professor in Korean Studies at the faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Cambridge and Fellow of Wolfson CollegeHolly Stephens Lecturer in Japanese and Korean Studies at the University of EdinburghAnd Derek Kramer Lecturer in Korean Studies at the University of SheffieldProducer: Simon TillotsonReading list:Isabella Bird Bishop, Korea and her Neighbors: A Narrative of Travel, With an Account of the Recent Vicissitudes and Present Position of the Country (first published 1898; Forgotten Books, 2019)Vipan Chandra, Imperialism, Resistance and Reform in Late Nineteenth-Century Korea: Enlightenment and the Independence Club (University of California, Institute of East Asian Studies, 1988)Peter Duus, The Abacus and the Sword: The Japanese Penetration of Korea, 1859-1910 (University of California Press, 1995)Carter J. Eckert, Offspring of Empire: The Koch'ang Kims and the Colonial Origins of Korean Capitalism, 1876–1910 (University of Washington Press, 1991)George L. Kallander, Salvation through Dissent: Tonghak Heterodoxy and Early Modern Korea (University of Hawaii Press, 2013)Kim Dong-no, John B. Duncan and Kim Do-hyung (eds.), Reform and Modernity in the Taehan Empire (Jimoondang, 2006)Kirk W. Larsen, Tradition, Treaties, and Trade: Qing Imperialism and Chosŏn Korea, 1850-1910 (Harvard University Asia Center, 2008)Yumi Moon, Populist Collaborators: The Ilchinhoe and the Japanese Colonization of Korea, 1896-1910 (Cornell University Press, 2013)Sung-Deuk Oak, The Making of Korean Christianity: Protestant Encounters with Korean Religions, 1876-1915 (Baylor University Press, 2013)Eugene T. Park, A Family of No Prominence: The Descendants of Pak Tŏkhwa and the Birth of Modern Korea (Stanford University Press, 2020)Michael E. Robinson, Korea's Twentieth-Century Odyssey: A Short History (University of Hawaii Press, 2007)Andre Schmid, Korea Between Empires, 1895-1919 (Columbia University Press, 2002)Vladimir Tikhonov, Social Darwinism and Nationalism in Korea: The Beginnings, 1880s-1910s (Brill, 2010)In Our Time is a BBC Studios Audio Production