Chapo Trap House - 604 - The Quiz That Makes You Old feat. Srećko Horvat (2/21/22)

Episode Date: February 22, 2022

The boys take a quiz that makes you old. Then, Will talks to Croatian philosopher Srećko Horvat about the upcoming Belmarsh Tribunal, an attempt to hold U.S. and U.K. governments accountable for war crimes and wrongful imprisonments done in the name of the War on Terror. They discuss imprisonments of whistleblowers, extra-judicial surveillance, breaking mass media blackout of reporting on western war crimes and more. All you need to know about the Belmarsh Tribunal here: https://progressive.international/ Tickets for our southern tour still on sale here: chapotraphouse.com/live

🎵 All right. Okay. Let's go. Greetings, friends. It's Chapo, Monday, February 21st. In just a little bit, I will be speaking with Srecho Horvat, a philosopher and member of the Progressive International about this week's upcoming Belmarsh Tribunal in New York City

about basically all the war crimes that the United States and UK governments have committed over the last couple decades and the fact that the only people in jail for them

are those who blew the whistle. So just in a little bit, I'll be having a conversation about that. But until then, joining me as always, Matt and Felix. Hello, friends. How are you? Hey. Hey.

Well, okay. I guess just kick things off on Monday. Boy, oh boy, does it look like tensions continue to mount between Ukraine and Russia. We're being told once again, it didn't happen last week, but I'm being told now that war is definitely going to happen this week. Fellas, who you got? You know,

people are talking Russia a lot. The one history fact they know, because it's the one thing that they ever learned in an American high school. Dude, this is Donovan, Russia an american high school we get it that's the that's the one thing you you picked up um but i don't think really russia or ukraine want it badly enough i think uh if there's one country that is shown that they want it it's belarus i mean i guess like i mean the only news here is that, you know, Putin says that they're going to recognize the breakaway republics. I don't know. I mean, it's just we I mean, it's just like we spent all last week with people saying that, like, it's going to happen Wednesday, 530 p.m. And now it's been like kicked off to this week. But it's definitely going to happen this week.

kicked off to this week, but it's definitely going to happen this week. Like I said, I don't know much to say about it other than I would prefer it if a war didn't happen, but you know, what, what, what can you do?

What can you say? Let me, let me actually, let me ask you guys about this back to a favorite topic of ours. Did you happen to see the clips from this weekend? 60 minutes expose on Havana syndrome, where they revealed the Havana syndrome noise. This former official, who we agreed not to name, recorded the sound at his home in Havana. Before we play it, understand that the sound does not cause the

injury. It is a byproduct, like the sound of a gun, which is not what does the harm. Here's what he recorded. The injured officials we spoke with said the sound, or a feeling of pressure, came from one direction and focused in one location. pressure came from one direction and focused in one location. It was a continuous sound and one that only changed based on my locations. They left, it dissipated. They returned, it recurred. I didn't listen because I was afraid of getting it.

Well, they assured you that just like listening to the noise, asott pelly said listening to the noise is like listening to the to a gunshot you know the sound of the gun doesn't hurt you it's the bullet going into you so listening to the sounds of what i don't know to me sounds exactly like crickets um i actually can't harm you it's not like crickets i have to say well it's it's weird it's like listening to the noise on 60 minutes presents no no risk to your brain getting fried. But listening to them in real life, that same sound, if you're like a CIA agent or whatever,

like that's deadly. Or at least just gives you a headache or whatever. It gives you a tummy ache. It gives you the swimmies. It gives you the Sunday scaries. It gives you imposter syndrome. All that good shit. But yeah, I mean, it it sounded exactly like crickets.

It's it sounded like these people were just like left D.C. for the first time and heard or heard, you know, outdoor noises. I mean, this is this is indoor kids. They're suffering now because they heard, you know, like a coyote, the lonesome whale of a coyote wafting across the plains. And it gave them just, yeah, brain, brain attack.

They heard God's judgment whispering in the wind and it, it made them feel nauseous. And they decided to blame it on, I guess at this point is, I don't even know if they have a theory as to where the hell it comes from. Right. Because it can't just be the Cubans. I guess like the Cubans and the Russians together doing it everywhere.

Because apparently now they're saying it's happening here too in the U.S. It's spreading. Can these guys just like make like most people that God talks to and kill themselves? Because I'm so sick of hearing about this. I'm so sick of it. Their tummies hurt, Felix. I mean, welcome to my reality you know where's my parade and it's funny i mean the uh i'm i said this earlier but um the the 60 minutes report

about havana syndrome uh they talk to all these uh whistleblowers like they do but um curiously did not talk to a single uh doctor or scientist um so it was just these people like telling their accounts and i all i gotta say is i just happened by like luck of the draw i watched michael man's the insider this weekend and man oh man what a prophetic movie that is i mean fucking 60 minutes man yeah good journalism i don't know what you're talking about all right now here we go this is uh this is what i wanted to read in the the first half of the show here today this is this is an op-ed in the washington post that um uh came out in all right fuck this is no good uh i'm sorry gang i'm i'm i'm uh i mean i did i did this interview but i i uh i don't know what to talk about today other than this interview here so

fuck i mean can we give me like 10 minutes to throw something together here i mean like i just feel like i got my dick in my hand right now all right uh the aarp weekly news quiz okay all right all right uh thanks so uh it's come to my attention that um the minimum age of this show is 63 years old it's the age of the youngest member me i was born in 1963 all these other gentlemen they met in the korean war 75 years young we're all 75 years young we were all the inspiration for tom finland's amazing drawings uh we all met in the Merchant Marine and started a little thing called Chapo Trap House.

But with age comes changes, comes responsibilities, and it's high time that we drop the DSA or PSL memberships and we join the real vanguard of leftism in America, the ideology of leftism, the AARP. I have found the AARP weekly news quiz, and I will be administering it to my fellow seniors. All right. I just need to take my centrum senior first. Hold on.

Hold on. My balls are caught in my graphmatic. If I have trouble answering any of these questions, it's only because I have a mouthful of Werther's Originals that I couldn't pawn off on my selfish grandchildren. I have Werther's 3. They have hydrocodone in them. Okay. We recently reported about portable medical order forms

that give the seriously ill more control over their care. What are those forms called? DAF forms? P-O-L-S-T forms? ICD-10 forms? Or C-27 forms? I don't know. C-27.

That sounds right. That's got a good feeling for me. I'm going with the D-46. All right. D-46 forms. That was not an answer, but we're going to see. Matt was first. It was P-O-L-S-T-P-O-L-S-T.

So the slash pull forms, the base forms. The title is an acronym for Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment. Ah, damn it. That's encouraging. Okay. True or false? Hearing loss is three times as common in people with diabetes than in people the same age without the disease.

I'm saying true. Yeah, that sounds true. Makes sense. Yeah. This is clearly a question for people to mention because it's like, why would you phrase it that way if that was false? Yeah. Okay. False. It's actually twice as common. it this is so fucking hard ah curse you aarp

remember remember the new york times end of the year quiz that we did that was like for fucking babies it was just like how many states are in amer Yeah. We're getting roasted by these old fucks. God damn it. Yeah. The New York Times quiz was like, you know, how many how many states are there in America? And it was a multiple choice. Yeah. What color is this? Yeah.

This is like actually this is like giving me flashbacks to failing bio. So wait a second. So if you're diabetic, you're not at any greater risk of going deaf no it's twice as much not three that's the trick oh they got you oh okay i i got it all right damn it i was i was getting ready to just you know not worry about that as i turned 76 more than three quarters of this atlanta area church's congregation were fully vaccinated as of mid february thanks in parts to its efforts, as we reported in a recent article. Is it the Grace Place Church of God by Faith? I hope it's that one because I really like the name of that.

It's Grace Place Church by God. It's like, you know, Mark Jacobs by Mark in collaboration with Mark Jacobs. The God Collection. New Covenant Church. That's pretty boring. That sucks. know mark jacobs by mark in collaboration with mark jacobs the god collection uh new covenant church that's pretty boring that sucks get a better name uh victory church better than loser church certainly oh you're well you're gonna love you're gonna love this final one this is like um this is a church where your pastor like uh where is abercrombie uh resonate church resonate church is that the show is that the is that the one justin bieber goes to yeah i sounds like it i know that i know the church where no one's vaccinated and it's resonate church no one is

no one has got you get kicked out of resonate if you get the shot yeah okay i'm saying that your vibes are off and you're excommunicated. I'm saying it's, it's, it's God's place. Okay. Okay. Matt,

uh, the first one, God's place, place, church, God by faith, God, faith by God in collaboration with God.

All right. Let's, let's see. Ooh. All right. Our first correct answer. It's faith place. Hell yeah.

Place. All right. All right. So what's, what's the story there? They got their parishioners vaccinated? The church is located in Clayton County, Georgia where fewer than 44% of the

residents were fully vaccinated. That's mid-February. I know what we're doing on our off day in Atlanta. We're going to the Grace Place. Yeah, we're sucking the vaccine out. Now they all got to go to hell. Congratulations to them. Enjoy roasting for eternity for failing to have faith and taking Satan's number. got to go to hell. Congratulations to them. Enjoy roasting for eternity for failing to have faith and taking

Satan's number. Way to go. They've got the mark of the beast. The cool thing about the mark of the beast, though, is it means that you can buy and sell anything. It's true. You can be on your grind. Yeah, your Bitcoin wallet is always accessible. The recent films, The Tragedy of Macbeth, Malcolm

and Marie, and Belfast are very different, but they do have this in common. They're all black and white. They're all black and white. Yes. Okay. Well, that's one of the... Should I just pick that?

Yeah. Okay. What are the other options, though? Well, the other options were Zendaya stars and all of them that they were produced for Netflix and their soundtracks were nominated for an Oscar. Well, I know Zendaya is not in all of those movies. She's not Macbeth. That's really playing on the confusion

of the usual people taking this test where they think most actresses are Zendaya now. Yeah. They were shot in black and white. We have two correct answers. Hell yes. Killing it now. All right. Now is when. We have two correct answers. Hell yes. Killing it now. All right.

Now, now is when they start fucking with you. Longtime foster mother, Linda Owens of Hayward, California, had nurtured this many children as of mid-February, according to our profile of her. Nurtured them? What does that mean? I think like grew them like they were on a towel. Sort of like grew out. Is it 37? is it 52 83 or 104 okay i just think like by the uh sort of like the way the way the answers are given because like the first one 37 i'm like holy shit that's a lot of kids but i think they're i think they're

they're faking you out i I think the actual number is 104. Yeah, my instinct is always to go with the highest and these kind of things. Yeah, because nurtured, if adopted, would be one thing, right? Because nurturing, like, big deal. Like, give somebody a fucking Valentine's card. I could nurture someone that I see, like, twice in a decade. Yeah. I could nurture from long distance.

Like, I could do could do like tactical sniping style uh nurturings 500 yards away i'm playing catch with all of my foster kids in the metaverse they don't live with me but i am nurturing them i'm gonna check this answer it's 83 ah okay so we we aim too high because like you know 104 that's a ludicrous number but 83 realistic so who is this person and how do they nurture all these kids well they only have a quote from her here i'm gonna google her in a second uh being able to care for these babies is a gift from god and i will do it as long as god gives me the will and the strength and the help to do it she told the aarp still not how it's happening yeah okay so

this is a foster mom okay and there are like a lot of local news articles about her where they're like the nicest woman in the world she looks as you would expect like the nicest foster mom in the world to look yeah she has like um you know sort of like cat glasses she's very grandmotherly um i don't really have anything bad to say about her yeah keep it up she's doing her work you know in in group dms she's getting torched but you know here i'm nice to her okay uh worker is 65 and older this is us uh with qualifying incomes have recently been made eligible for the earned income tax credit. Ooh. Which of these statements about the EITC is true?

It reduces the tax you owe dollar for dollar. Some states have their own version of the EITC. This is a one year change as of now or all of the above. All of the above. I'm going to go with all of the above. All of the above. It's got to be all of the above. All of the above. I'm going to go with all of the above. All of the above. It's got to be all of the above. Yeah.

Boom. Correct. You will never fucking trick us with that, motherfuckers. It's always all of the above. You will never get us on the all of the above. It's always all of the above. Those of you out there who are taking the ACTs or whatever you take now, it's probably a new thing. They probably make you play Digimon against an anti-racism instructor.

But if any of the Digimon cards say all of the above, play that one. Yes. Did you guys take the ACTs or the SATs? ACTs. ACTs for me as well. Oh, wow. I think the SATs.

I don't know. Someone told me the ACTs were swagger. No, that's the one they give you in the Midwest. Yeah. That might be different now. Yeah, Catherine took the ACTs. Yeah. Well, the ACTs had likeagger. No, that's the one they give you in the Midwest. That might be different now. Catherine took the ACTs. The ACTs had a writing portion. If you were an artistic,

expressive child like me, you went crazy on that. Do you remember what the writing portion was? What the essay question you had to respond to was? Actually, no. Imagine that. I don't remember either. I saw an adult on twitter bragging about getting a 32 on their ac2s wow that's cool yeah that's awesome that's

i mean i do not remember what i got on them do not remember the essay that i wrote which i'm sure is one of the best essays in the history of the ACT. But this person remembered, you know, good for them. I got a mediocre score on the ACT, and then I just took it again without doing anything in the interim to, like, study or specifically try to improve my score, and I got the exact same score. Yeah, because, like, try hard. Yeah, I mean, like, I think, like, in general,

you do better at things you don't care about or can convince yourself you don't care about. Yeah, it's like getting girls. It's like attracting ladies. Yeah. The most out-of-my-league girls I've ever gotten, I did the same thing I did when I did great on the ACT. I walked in there and I said,

I don't care if I go to college. You're disgusting. Looked at the proctor and said, you're disgusting. You're repulsive. I would not touch you. And the proctor of that test was actually Alexandra Daddario. And I smoked her out and I got a 37 on my ACTs. And I aced the writing portion.

Okay. True or false. According to a driving safety expert you shouldn't use cruise control when driving in the rain true true sounds good you should I learned in driver's ed you need to you should always drive the speed that the conditions allow for so I mean like you know like going uh 65 70 if it's pouring rain, you may be driving the speed limit, but you're not actually driving the car in a safe manner. So I'd imagine, you know, even, you know, your open highway cruise control, you think you may zone out. I would say

that it is incorrect to use cruise control that insouciantly in the middle of a rain or hailstorm. Yeah. Cruise control is really only and you learn this in any driving safety class especially one for seniors like we all take only for when you're drunk let's a true dude good work good work guys i was not gonna knock that one out of the park i never i never i never used cruise control i think i think it's i think it's the tool of the devil it's for lazy people yeah no i mean it seems like something for truck drivers which of these is not among the symptoms of a brain tumor that we listed in a recent oh boy okay uh new or unusual headache i'm just going have i experienced these things in the last month. Unusual dry or flaky skin.

Oh, fuck. Confusion or loss of awareness. God damn it. I'm just checking every box going down. Yeah, these all sound pretty brain tumory. At least the first and the third one certainly do. I don't know about the flaky skin. Personality changes.

So only one of these is? No, it is not. It's not? Oh, the skin one, obviously. Yeah, it's the skin one. That's too easy. All right. Yeah. Okay. Which symptom that is not. It's not? Oh, the skin one, obviously. Yeah, it's the skin one. That's too easy. All right. Yeah.

Okay. Which symptom that is not involves your brain? The doy. Well, I'm glad to find this out because, you know, I have dry flaky skin and I was getting ready to, you know, basically write a will. Yeah. My personality has completely changed in the last week, but I don't have any of the others. Okay. Score 63%. has completely changed in the last week but uh i don't have any of the others okay score 63 you answered five out of eight questions correctly so we did pretty good honestly that's a passing grade

i mean considering that we're not in the aarp that's really good does it have it should have like which type of old person you are based on your score like yeah i don't know why they don't do that yeah it should like if you're like 80 to 100 you're clint yeah if you're 60 to 80 you're joe i don't know what the lower the failing ranks of old people are presumably presumably you like you this is tough because like if you fail it you either have dementia which like makes you very old, or you're just not an old head at all. You're not reading the AARP magazine. So it really could go either way. But I think I'm pretty happy we passed.

This is like going into an AP class and passing the end of year test. Yeah. We're going to have so many parties at the AARP frats. Oh, my. Yeah. I'm an AARP frats. Oh, my gosh. I'm an AARP pike. I can't wait to celebrate this by getting drunk and driving my Villages-style golf cart on cruise control in the rain.

I think the AARP guys are like, yeah, you kind of have to respect them as like, you know, do we still use this term, the best special interest lobby in America? They're always getting shit for old people. That's true. Old people stay getting their bag, thanks to the AARP. It's why Social Security is the third rail of American politics.

And did you know that actually there was like a right-wing alternative to the AARP that cropped up? It was a new lobbying group that was like for seniors, but who wanted to cut social security benefits. It didn't take off, as you might imagine. That's tough. The AARP is clouded because, you know, if you're an old person that's still alive, like

if you made it to old age, you're a voting ass guy. You're one voting ass guy or girl. And that's why this news quiz was very specific because ARP, that's a big crossover with news heads. Yeah. If you're old, you're a voter, you're a news head, and you're an old head. You're that old head that's always coming around

and going to the porch and being like, hey, youngsters, true or false, you should drive with cruise control in the rain. Well, there you go. Thank you for administering the test, Felix. We have passed. We are officially old people. I would like my AARP starter jacket

to be sent to me in the mail, along with my Teamsters jacket. Still waiting on that one. But we need some swag from the AARP. Or I think maybe they have a sponsorship that they could do with us. I mean, they got to start advertising to younger members now.

Yeah, they got to get people ready. Like, hey, all you millennials, pretty soon you're going to have to be gumming your avocado toast. So get ready for it. Yeah, the youngest millennial. They should offer Supreme branded adult diapers. Yeah, I mean, it's time. Like, the youngest millennial they should offer supreme branded adult diapers yeah i mean it's time like the youngest millennial is 49 years old yeah um if you were you know want to feel old if

you were born in 1990 you just turned uh 72 yeah it's time all right uh gang gang um all right let's let's let's transition into my interview for this week. It is, as I mentioned at the top of the show, of Sreco Horvat, who is putting together the Belmarsh Tribunal, which kicks off on Friday in New York City. It's basically an attempt by many thinkers, activists, and political figures, including a friend of the show, Stephen Donziger, who was intentionally sent to hold to account and put on trial at sort of a people's tribunal.

All of the war criminals responsible for Guantanamo Bay, the war in Iraq, the ongoing imprisonment of Julian Assange and other whistleblowers like him. It was an interesting interview and I think an important cause. So yeah, let's move into that. Sreco Horvat of the Progressive International and the Belmarsh Tribunal. So let's go there. Joining me today is philosopher and member of the Progressive International, Sreco Horvat,

who is here to talk about the Belmarsh Tribunal. Srećo, thanks for joining us. Thank you for having me. So, I guess, could you just introduce the Belmarsh Tribunal and when it's happening and what it's all about? Yeah, I mean, maybe we could perhaps start from the very name, Belmarsh Tribunal. What the fuck does it mean? You know, what is Belmarsh? I think Guantanamo, of course, or Abu Ghraib are much more famous or infamous, to be more precise, all across the world. But Belmarsh is a prison in the United Kingdom, in Southeast London. And it's a prison which is being called the British Guantanamo, namely because of its severe conditions and also because some of the detainees are there for an indefinite period of time after

the 9-11 anti-terror laws. But it's also at the same time the prison where the WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange is being held. So we decided two years ago at the Progressive International to found a people's tribunal, which would take the name of the prison where Julian Assange is being held, in order to turn the tables, to put the mirror to actually to the real criminals, to the real war criminals, and to speak and to examine the war crimes which were revealed by Julian Assange, namely the war crimes in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Guantanamo, and in many, many other places.

So on the 25th of February, on Friday, we are coming to New York City, where we are having a new session of the Belmarsh Tribunal. We will be joined by former Guantanamo detainees, for instance, Mohamed Oualslahi. Perhaps he might be now more famous because of the movie Mauritanian, you know, with Jodie Foster, which is about him and Nancy Hollander, the courageous lawyer who defended him, who will also be in New York. Stephen Donziger, Roger Waters, Yanis Varoufakis, Cornel West, many, many, many other people. And this was sort of inspired by a tribunal that was originally convened during the Vietnam War by Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre?

Precisely. So we and also many other tribunals all across the world were inspired by this courageous tribunal founded by two philosophers, one from Britain and the other one from France, as you said, Russell and Sartre, which was founded in 1966 with an attempt to put the United States government on trial because of the war crimes in Vietnam. And it included very famous, important people of the 20th century. Besides Sartre and Russell, it was Simone de Beauvoir, Tariq Ali, Isaac Deutscher, Vladimir Dedier from Yugoslavia, Peter Weiss from Germany, many others. They had a few sessions. the first one was in Stockholm in 1967. The second one was in Copenhagen or near Copenhagen the year after.

And it was under a lot of pressure, actually, we have to say, from the secret intelligence of the United States, like CIA or Rand Corporation. They were regularly following what the members of the Russell Tribunal were doing. At one moment, there was even a geopolitical scandal, diplomatic scandal, because the co-chair of the Russell Tribunal, Vladimir Tedier, wasn't admitted to France at that time, which was very, very interesting because the goal at that time was actually against the war in Vietnam. So after that, they tried to do their tribunal in Britain, where the Labour government blocked it.

And in the end, they did it in Sweden. So this is the legacy of the Ras Asarte tribunal. And I think 50 years later today, what we have to do is to speak about the crimes of the early 20th century. You know, it's very interesting. Recently, there was a recent report published on the price of the global war on terror, which was, you know, initiated by George W. Bush

after 9-11 in 2001. And the price, according to this report of the war on terror, is 38 million displaced people, 38 million displaced people, which is the biggest number since the Second World War of displaced people in the world. And all these people are displaced because the United States government had its fingers in eight different countries in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, the Philippines, Libya, and Syria. And you know, no one has ended up in prison because of this crime. No one has ended up in prison because of this crime. No one has ended up in prison because of the torture in Abu Ghraib in Guantanamo. No one has ended up in prison because of the WikiLeaks revelations about the crimes which were committed.

And this is the main idea of the tribunal, which will happen in New York City. Yeah, I mean, this to me seems to be the central question here is that, you know, what do we do as, you know, citizens of, I guess, like nominally democratic countries? I mean, what do we do with a situation in which the United States and the governments of the United States and Great Britain have more or less openly committed war crimes for decades now, and certainly before that, but, you know, you're talking about indefinite detention, torture, murder, wars of aggression. And then, like, the reality is the only people, but you're talking about indefinite detention, torture, murder, wars of aggression. And then the reality is the only people,

as you mentioned, who have been sent to jail over these crimes are people who blew the whistle, like Julian Assange, like Chelsea Manning, and others like the Mauritanian who was just caught up in this dragnet post-war on terror. So obviously we can't rely on the government itself or the media because they're complicit as well. So what are some of the charges that are going

to be presented here? Yeah, I mean, that's a very good question. And exactly, unfortunately, as you said, those who are in prison or who disappeared or who are being slowly killed are precisely the whistleblowers, are precisely the truth-tellers. From Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Daniel Hale, Stephen Donziger, I mean, the list is pretty long. But what you have in the United States, and that's one of the reasons why the Progressive International is coming to the United States is a sort of cynicism. You know, how often has the liberal United States media spoken about Navalny, for instance? You know, how often can you these days, for instance, hear about the impending invasion of Russia into Ukraine? You know, it's tomorrow.

No, no, no. It's at 2 p.m. next day. No, it's at midnight. You know, constantly they're speaking about the invasion. But come on, shouldn't we speak about the invasion of the United States into Afghanistan, Iran, if you go back into history, which actually, you know, also in Afghanistan previously.

It's very interesting that the Mauritanian, whom you mentioned, Mohammed Walsh, he was actually fighting on the side of the United States against the Soviets. And so they imprisoned this guy later and they put him through torture, which was, of course, approved by Donald Rumsfeld, which is, you know,

waterboarding, sleep deprivation, isolation, sexual accumulation, and he stays in Guantanamo for 15 years without charges. Julian Assange is already free for three years in the British Guantanamo without charges. He has been for six, seven years at the Ecuadorian embassy because he has revealed his crimes. So your question, what can the public do? What can we do is a pertinent question. And what we are trying to do is to shed light on actually what those individuals, but also people who are in a way united or getting united, what these people actually revealed.

And I think that's very important. Of course, we don't think that we have the capacity to sentence the accused. And that's not our ambition. That also wasn't the ambition of the Russell Sartre Tribunal to sentence the accused. And that's not our ambition. That also wasn't the ambition of the Russell Sartre Tribunal to sentence the accused. What we want to do is actually to create a sort of tribunal which can shed light on the crimes, which can provoke a public debate, which can provoke political pressure,

not just in the United States, but across the world. Because I think, you know, as the RandAND Corporation said in some of their leaked documents, which were recently declassified, they said that the Russell Sartre Tribunal was an embarrassment for the United States because it showed what kind of crimes the United States committed.

And in that way, I also think the Belmarsh Tribunal is a sort of embarrassment for the United States. But that's just the first step. What we hope to provoke is a bigger coalition, is a bigger pressure of people and movements who are not just from the United States, but from all across the world. I want to return again to the title of the tribunal named after Belmarsh Prison, which, as you described it, is probably the most notorious prison in the UK. You've described it as Britain's Guantanamo.

It is currently where Julian Assange is being held, awaiting extradition to the United States. What are the charges and sort of arguments advanced by the British state to justify imprisoning him? And what is the reason the United States is demanding that he be extradited and charged under the Espionage Act? the United States is demanding that he be extradited and charged under the Espionage Act. Yeah, I mean, it also shows a scandal in the legal system, but also politics of the United Kingdom. Because, you know, it's not just the United States. It's United Kingdom, it's Australia, it was Ecuador. And it's, of course, then the United States, which were complicit in silencing and isolating Julian Assange. You know, what was recently revealed was that the CIA had secret plans to kidnap him from the Ecuadorian embassy

at the time when he was still there, also to murder him there. And the United Kingdom, on the basis of Julian Assange skipping bail in 2012. In 2012, skipping bail, you know, because he was at house arrest at that time for the very same reasons as he is in prison today, trying to escape the extradition to the United States because that actually means a death sentence for him. And he skipped bail.

And that's basically the legal reason, the legal basis why the United Kingdom is keeping him at the British Guantanamo. At the same time, the United States wants him for the United States government, of course. It's not the American people who want him in a high security prison. It's the United States government

wants Assange in a high security prison, supermax prison, for violating the Espionage Act, which is also completely ridiculous. Because first of all, he's an Australian citizen. Second, he wasn't a whistleblower. He's a publisher. So he leaked material which was provided to him. And the things which he provided to the public

is something which is so valuable, especially for the citizens of the United States, because it shows how the United States government violated the law. And if the United States government can violate the law like that, or if they can put Julian Assange in prison and then extradite him to the United States, then no journalist is safe. No dissident is safe. No one who criticizes the capitalist system. Take Steven Donziger. That's another recent case where you can see that someone who is fighting against Chevron, destroying the Amazon, also faces persecution, isolation, and silence. This issue about Assange being a publisher, I think, is very critical because, for instance, what arguments would say the New York Times make as to why what they do as a function of their institutional purpose is fundamentally different from what Julian Assange did and is being charged with espionage for? And like speaking more broadly, I mean, like you talked about a little bit, like what are the implications for if Assange were able to be convicted under the

Espionage Act for doing espionage against the United States of America, a country he's not even a citizen of? Yeah, I mean, the effects of this legal precedent, but also political, it's a political case, would be that any journalist of the New York Times, of Washington Post, but also a podcaster, could end up in prison. And not just podcasters or journalists from American soil, but from wherever, you know, from France, from Spain, from Latin America, from Africa, from Asia,

they could face the same fate as Julian Assange. And of course, Julian is not the first one. I mean, we've seen what happened to Edward Snowden, who, of course, wasn't a publisher in the sense of Julian Assange. He was a whistleblower. But it's also a case where you have someone actually contributing to democracy, contributing to the citizens knowing what kinds of crimes are going on, not only against other countries, but against the citizens themselves.

Just remember what kind of surveillance programs Edward Snowden revealed, or also WikiLeaks in the World 7 leaks, which was about the CIA surveillance program, you know. So it is something which concerns all of us. And I think if Julian Assange is extradited to the United States, we will live in very dark times. We already live in very dark times. The Belmarsh Tribunal is happening at the 20th anniversary of Guantanamo. Guantanamo is still open. We can see all the war machine of the United States preparing invasions or already invading the Pacific,

for instance. You know, I can just read about the Russian invasion. What about the ongoing U.S. invasion in the Pacific? Immediately after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when the United States government started nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands, not to mention today in which way you have this kind of Cold War between the United States and China on the one hand and Russia on the other hand, which I think is very dangerous. And it is something which concerns us in Europe a lot because many countries in Europe from the

north to the south are in the middle of these geopolitical games, which can bring only more suffering and more instability to the world. You mentioned Guantanamo Bay and the fact that, like, you know, this is now the anniversary of how long this sort of, you know, indefinite detention and torture facility has been opened in Cuba and operated by the U.S. government. I mean, here in America, it does seem like the, as far as the mainstream press and just general public at large is concerned, the war on terrorism has really faded from the public imagination. And, you know, you mentioned the example of Russia and Ukraine.

Now we're being treated to, you know, that that's the new threat that we all have to be worried about. But like in the background, the machinery of the war on terror continues to just clock along pretty much unabated. And many of the people who were sent there back in 2002 without trial or charges are still there right now. Exactly. It's just like the Belmar Tribunal is like, I guess, I don't know, reminding people that all this stuff is not a settled issue just because the press or the public at large doesn't seem to really care about it anymore. Exactly. But it's not just reminding people, it's also

putting political pressure in the belly of the beast. This is not just another Zoom, just another online meeting. It's a physical but also hybrid meeting of very influential people like lawyers and attorneys like Margaret Kunstler, Deborah Herbeck, Nancy Hollander, but also intellectuals such as Cornel West, Noam Chomsky. Tom Morello from the Rage Against the Machine is here who will give a testimony how the music of Rage Against the Machine was used in Guantanamo for torture, which is amazing in a bad sense. And it was the song Killing in Guantanamo for torture, you know, which is amazing, amazing in a bad sense, you know, and it was the song Killing in the Name of.

Anyone who knows what's the meaning of Killing in the Name of and then knowing that it was used in Guantanamo shouldn't just be shocked but angered, you know, and we will also have many other people. I already mentioned Steven Donziger, but there will also be Mohamed Walslachi from Guantanamo, Elise Walker, Baltazar Garson, many others. So I think it's not just reminding, it's a bit more than just reminding that

currently you still have 39 detainees in Guantanamo who are still there. Julian Assange is still in prison. Many other whistleblowers or publishers are facing persecution as we speak. And the war machine, as you said, is ongoing. You know, I mean, the war on terror never ended.

The war on terror is still taking place. And actually, even, you know, if you watch one of those Batmans, you could see that surveillance system, how in which way it is used, you know, advocating democracy. And this actually, this narrative started with 9-11, you know, in order to preserve democracy, we will invade and penetrate your personal lives. And today, it's, I would say, also much more than the war machine, because you have Silicon Valley. I would say also much more than the war machine because you have Silicon Valley and very often these companies from Palantir to Google to Facebook are actually very often cooperating

with the dark, deep state, to put it like that, with the secret services. They were cooperating, Google, for instance, in Syria. So today, I would say 20 years after opening Vantanamo, we are in a much more dangerous situation. I mean, it's like, you know, the question is the implication of all of this. Because once you take on the reality of what the United States and the UK government not just has done, but continues to do every day. It's just like the way in which the mainstream press is able to sort of metabolize a part of that truth, but never follow up the logical conclusion, which would be that many people

who are in jail right now need to be out of jail. And many people who are currently walking around free and being interviewed on television need to be put in prison for what they did. Exactly. That's why I think that your work is so important and the kind of media you present because I think the mainstream media is always aligned with what Noam Chomsky famously called manufacturing consent. Today, it's also not just the mainstream media anymore. It's the social networks, which are very often manipulating, pre-programming your desire. You know, it's not just about the political economy today. I would say philosophically, to put it philosophically, it's also about the libidinal economy,

in which ways new technologies, which were very often developed actually by the military industrial complex or NSA and so on, in which way these technologies are actually capturing our innermost thoughts, our innermost hopes, desires, fears, and in which way they can be manipulated also. So no wonder that everyone today speaks about just about Russia and Ukraine, while at the same time, you know a collision between the climate crisis and nuclear threat. So I think that's our big duty and also a big challenge for all of us to dive deeper into this and to shed the light on the real problems. I'm not saying the tensions in Russia and Ukraine are not real. I'm not saying they are not worrying me.

But this is certainly not the only worrying thing in the world today. And it's certainly not the only pending invasion while we have ongoing invasions already all over the world. Yeah. I mean, they concern me too. But I mean, just from what I'm experiencing here in America is like, at least as it regards Russia and Ukraine right now, this seems to me like in the media and political class, there seems to be this frustration with the public that they're not, you know, getting out in the streets and marching against Russian intervention in

Ukraine. When these very same people either ignored or slandered the people marching against a U S intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it seems to be this, this, this idea that it's your duty to speak out against the actions of other countries that you are not a citizen of. But the conduct of your own government

and the politicians you theoretically vote for are subject to you, ideally, is not of your concern. And in fact, by you singling them out, you're ignoring these more serious problems. You're not a serious person in some way. Yeah, it reminds me of a famous line by the German playwright Bertolt Brecht, who in one of his poems said that the government didn't like how the people voted, so they decided

to change the people. decided to change the people. So actually, you know, that's what's happening in so-called representative parliamentary democracies and also in the United States, but also all over Europe, you know, that elected governments

don't have any kind of commitment or responsibility to the citizens themselves. And when the citizens criticize the acts or crimes of their own governments, then those citizens, or even those who are not citizens, like Julian Assange, become dissidents. So I would say that, you know, reading or following the American media, not just the American media, you have it also in the European liberal media, or censure media, not just the American media, you have it also in the European liberal media

or censure media, you always have this kind of cynicism, I would say, and always talking about the dissidents of China, the dissidents of Russia, of Saudi Arabia, or I don't know whom, but rarely are people like Snowden, Assange, Daniel Hale, Chelsea Manning actually called dissidents, you know, dissidents in the sense that they are the real patriots. They're the real patriots in the sense that some of them, like Snowden, they took the Constitution more seriously than the government of the United States. And that's the reason why he ended up extradited, in a way, from the United States.

Why not extradited, but in a a way why he had to escape the United States and get a political asylum. Not because he loves the weather in Russia. It's pretty cold in Russia. So, as we know. So, I think that's the true problem. So, and I think the Belmarsh Tribunal, but also all the people who are in one way or the other way, and it's many, many people already involved in the tribunal or the allies of the progressive international different movements. What we are trying to do is to try to save some of those people if we can. We know very well from our historic experience that these struggles take years or sometimes decades. How many years

did Nelson Mandela need to get free? Of course, I don't want Julian Assange to stay in prison for so long because, as you might probably know, at the last hearing in October, he had a stroke in prison because this guy already suffered so much for the last 10, 11 years. He was without son in complete isolation for the last three years in isolation at the embassy. For what? For revealing war crimes.

And I think we should insist and reiterate the point that this is about the crimes and war crimes of not just the United States government, governments, but also its allies. And that most of those people, you know, Tony Blair, George Bush, many others are still alive, still free, while the whistleblowers and the dissidents are in prison, or others will also end up in prison. And you know, while it was going on, I think people had an idea of what Assange's situation was like when he was, you know, stuck in the Ecuadorian embassy. But now that he's been removed from there and in custody,

it's sort of like that was the point of it, because his name and the conditions he's facing has dropped out of public view. I mean, we talked about Belmar's prison and how notorious it is. Like, of what do we know of the conditions that Assange is currently existing in British custody and what he will face theoretically when extradited to America for espionage? Yeah, I mean, I had the luck to visit him several times at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and I also visited him. And that was the first and last time that I saw him at the Belmarsh prison in early

November 2019. And so I can compare the situation, you know, at the Ecuadorian embassy at that time when I was visiting, he at least had the internet until Lenin Moreno cut the internet because of a deal with the IMF and with the United States. So he was then already, the last months before he was kicked out in that brutal way from the Ecuadorian embassy, although he had political asylum until that moment, you know, before those months he didn't have internet, he was completely isolated. But at the Ecuadorian embassy during those months, he didn't have internet.

He was completely isolated. But at the Ecuadorian embassy during those six, seven years, he could at least have visitors. He could use the internet. As you know, Wikileaks was publishing leaks, which were annoying a lot of people, of course. So even more people hated him because of the character assassination, which was taking place since the so-called Swedish case.

I mean, there is a great book by Nils Melzer, the UN Special Repertory on Torture, which was just published, called The Trial of Julian Assange was a demon, that he was a monster. They actually believed what the intelligence services were putting through different mainstream media or social networks. But to come to your question, at the Ecuadorian embassy, the conditions were still, although they were really bad, they were still human in a way. Although he couldn't move out of this tiny space, he didn't see the sun for seven years, and he was under constant pressure. But compared to Belmarsh prison, it's very difficult to compare it. I visited Belmarsh prison. It's not that exotic in a way as Guantanamo, that far away or on an island, on Cuba, which, by the way, was also occupied and is still occupied. But this Belmarsh, Guantanamo, is in southeast London.

You can reach it by tube and train and you come there and it's one of the most secure prisons in the United Kingdom. He's quite isolated there, basically in solitary confinement. And the kind of pressure he's undergoing was shown precisely last year when he had a stroke. But compared to Belmarsh prison, I think a US highsecurity prison would be a death sentence for him. And this is what his lawyers are saying. This is why they are appealing. This is something what many people and organizations around the world,

from Amnesty International to Courage Foundation to many Nobel Prize winners, politicians all across Europe are also seeing and claiming that extraditing him to the United States would be a death sentence. And what they already succeeded is to silence the man. And whether you like him or not, his voice was one of the most important voices of the early 21st century. We learned so much through WikiLeaks. You know, it's a library of not just war crimes, but of diplomacy, of politics. You know, if you read Wikileaks, you can actually understand how politics or the cooperative sector functions.

So I think we should really cherish and value that. I mean, like leaving aside what you may or may not think about Julian Assange, the man, like I remember when Wikileaks was happening at like while the, you know, Iraq war was going on and I would follow all this and I would lose my mind about, you know, nothing the media says or does seems to move the needle but like the what what wiki leaks put out there was a bait just about the only thing that made

the u.s and uk governments during the height of the war on terror uh afraid at all or that bothered them because nothing else the media covered or reported on couldn't be metabolized or then like reinterpreted. Whereas WikiLeaks was something that was genuinely a break with the kind of consensual reality that they manage and govern. Yeah, thanks for saying that. I completely agree with you. And unfortunately, the Belmarsh tribunal is mainly dealing with the United States this time because we are coming to New York City.

But Wikileaks, for instance, revealed many important documents about secret trade agreements, the so-called TTIP. They also revealed things about the International Monetary Fund, about Putin, about Assad. International Monetary Fund, about Putin, about Assad, although, you know, people were people. I mean, not people, but different politicians and secret intelligence wanted to portray Julian as a Russian spy or whatever, you know. But WikiLeaks also revealed stuff about secret documents about Russia or from Russia, from Syria, about Libya, about many

countries, about Frontex, about, you know, how the European Union is dealing with the refugee question in the Mediterranean, which is, in a way, a consequence of all our invasions. I'm not saying it's your invasions, Americans. It's also ours, European, you know. It's, take Libya, you know, the role of France and Nicolas Sarkozy in Libya, but also the role of Hillary Clinton in Libya, you know, and then take the numbers of people who are fleeing these countries because of our invasions. And then, in the end, you have a situation of rising extreme right-wing extremism,

for instance, nationalism all across Europe, building walls and so on, because these peoples are coming to our countries. Of course, they are coming to our countries because we destroyed their countries. Where else should they go? Yeah. I mean, what would you do in that situation? I mean, I guess just thinking about all this, these states, whether it's the United States or the United Kingdom, certainly can provide all these examples of the things that will happen to you the way the war the reasons our wars are actually fought and the people who actually died in them or suffered in them this is what will happen to you and i guess like my last thought here is like for the belmarsh tribunal i mean uh just like like how do you how do you take on i don't know that responsibility or just the weight of like providing the the counter example to the example of of what these states will do to you if you fuck with them.

Yeah, I think the counterexample is exactly the tribunal. If you look at the range of people, members of the tribunal who are taking part in it now for already two years, it now for already two years, you know, from Roger Waters to Chomsky, from Edward Snowden to former Guantanamo detainees to artists like Milo Rau and others. I think you should just pose the question, would you rather be in the company of Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush, or would you rather be in the company of Roger Waters and some of the clearest and most interesting minds of our century and activists who have some of them like Tariq Ali. He was actually part of the Russell Tribunal. He traveled to Vietnam.

He was traveling there, collecting evidence for six weeks under the bombs. You know, would there be in the company of courageous people than the company of the war criminals? And I think this is a big choice. I know that many people cannot make that choice. Many people are forced to put their head down until they end up in shit. But to put your head, even if you can face consequences, is one of the most beautiful things in the world. I think that's a great place to leave it. Shresho, thank you so much. The Belmarsh Tri-Munal kicks off on February 25th

in New York City. For our listeners, if they're interested in it, if they want to attend, if they want to contribute in some way, what should they do? They should go to the website of the Progressive International, which is progressive.international, and then there they will find more

information. They could also connect via some of our partners, which is DiEM25, The Intercept, People's Dispatch, The People's Forum, where it's actually happening, and many other organizations who are part of it. But check out progressive.international. You can register. You will get a live stream link on Friday. And let's kick this off.

Thanks a lot for the conversation. Thank you. And the links will be in the show description. The links will be in the episode description on your website. All right. Thank you so much for all you've done. Yeah. Thanks a lot. And see you soon. All right. Bye. so much for all you've done. Yeah. Thanks a lot

and see you soon. All right. Bye. Thank you for your time. Bye-bye.