PBS NewsHour full episode August 22, 2019

PBS NewsHour full episode August 22, 2019


JUDY WOODRUFF: Good evening.
I’m Judy Woodruff.
On the “NewsHour” tonight: stopping the flow
of secrets.
South Korea revokes a key intelligence-sharing
agreement with Japan, threatening U.S. interests
in North Korea.
Then: How much is too much?
America braces for a trillion-dollar deficit
— what it means for the health of the economy,
as spending sinks deeper into the red.
Plus: when the ship comes in.
Modern luxury cruises, ancient European cities.
Are seafaring tourists helping or harming
the places they visit?
TOM BOARDLEY, Secretary-General, Cruise Lines
International Association: It’s going to create
quite a few social problems over the next
few years, particularly in areas where people
want to go and visit.
JUDY WOODRUFF: All that and more on tonight’s
“PBS NewsHour.”
(BREAK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: There is word the White House
has backed off a plan to slash more than $4
billion in U.S. foreign aid.
The about-face is being widely reported tonight.
The cuts would have included humanitarian
relief, peacekeeping and global health initiatives,
among other areas.
But lawmakers and some top Trump administration
officials warned that they could harm national
security and jeopardize budget negotiations.
The Democratic presidential candidate field is smaller by one tonight.
and there are reports that the Republican
field might grow by one.
John Yang has our campaign 2020 roundup.
GOV.
JAY INSLEE (D-WA): I’m not going to be the
president, so I’m withdrawing tonight from
the race.
JOHN YANG: Washington State Governor Jay Inslee
becomes the third Democrat to drop out of
the 2020 presidential campaign, deciding instead
to seek a third term as governor.
Inslee made fighting climate change his signature
campaign issue, and encouraged other 2020
hopefuls to adopt his far-reaching policies.
Today, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders unveiled
his own plan.
The Sanders Green New Deal declares a climate
crisis, and calls for 100 percent renewable
energy for electricity and transportation
by 2030, creating 20 million union jobs to
combat climate change, and rejoining the Paris
climate accord.
The Sanders campaign estimates the cost at
$16.3 trillion, and says it will pay for itself
in 15 years.
Meanwhile, in Colorado:
JOHN HICKENLOOPER (D), Presidential Candidate:
I have always said Washington was a lousy
place for a guy like me, who wants to get
things done.
But this is no time to walk away from the
table.
JOHN YANG: Former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper,
who ended his own presidential campaign last
week, today announced he’s running for Senate,
becoming the 14th Democrat vying to take on
GOP Senator Cory Gardner.
But as the Democratic presidential field winnows
down, the Republican side could grow.
Former GOP Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois
says he is exploring a long-shot primary challenge
against President Trump, whose support among
Republicans in polls is as high as 90 percent.
The one-term Tea Party lawmaker and now talk
radio host supported Mr. Trump in 2016, but
has now become a frequent and loud critic.
JOE WALSH (R), Former U.S. Congressman: He’s
a horrible human being.
He’s a bad, bad guy.
And every single day, every single day you,
I and everybody watching us is reminded of
how damn unfit he is.
JOHN YANG: Walsh would join former Massachusetts
Governor Bill Weld in the GOP primary.
For the “PBS NewsHour,” I’m John Yang.
JUDY WOODRUFF: In Northwestern Syria, government
airstrikes targeted Turkish forces for a second
time this week, raising the risk of open conflict
between them.
The attacks sent smoke rising near a Turkish
outpost in Idlib province, but there were
no reports of casualties.
It came as Turkey sent a convoy of reinforcements
into Idlib.
The Turks back rebels in the province.
The Syrians are trying to retake the region.
High school students in Hong Kong have joined
the call for political reforms.
Hundreds of young demonstrators held a sit-in
in a downtown square today.
They carried signs and chanted anti-government
slogans.
At the same time, university students called
for boycotting the start of classes in September.
The president of Brazil conceded today his
government lacks the resources to fight raging
wildfires.
The fires in the Amazon rain forest have increased
more than 80 percent this year, but President
Jair Bolsonaro had initially declined outside
help.
Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron
called for this weekend’s G7 summit to treat
the fires as an international emergency.
Back in this country, the White House signal
that they could propose a tax cut during next
year’s presidential campaign.
President Trump had said on Wednesday that
there’s no need for a payroll tax cut now
to ward off recession.
But, today, economic adviser Larry Kudlow
spoke officials are looking down the road.
LARRY KUDLOW, Director, National Economic
Council: The long-range project to help the
long-run growth of economy, to provide additional
tax relief to middle-income people, blue-collar
people, small business and so forth.
That’s a long-run project.
And it probably will come out during the campaign.
JUDY WOODRUFF: In a separate interview, Kudlow
said — quote — “We don’t believe in the
recession talk.”
A panel of judges in North Carolina today
cleared a mentally ill man of killing a college
student 40 years ago.
James Blackmon is now 66.
He goes free after spending most of his life
in prison.
Blackmon wore a Superman-type cape and claimed
that he was like Dracula during police interviews
in the late 1970s.
Prosecutors used his confession anyway.
The nation’s biggest phone companies are pledging
today to crack down on robo-calls.
It is part of an agreement brokered with all
50 states.
The companies said today that they will offer
free tools for consumers to block the unwanted
calls.
But they gave no timetable.
Americans get an estimated five billion robo-calls
every month.
On Wall Street, the Dow Jones industrial average
gained 49 points to close at 26252.
The Nasdaq fell nearly 29 points, and the
S&P 500 dropped one point.
And basketball legend Bob Cousy received the
nation’s highest civilian honor today, the
Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Cousy is now 91.
He won six NBA titles with the Boston Celtics
and was also known for speaking out against
racism and for his black teammates.
Still to come on the “NewsHour”: how will
South Korea’s bitter diplomatic break with
Japan affect U.S. security in the region?;
the health of the economy in the balance,
as the federal deficit slides deeper into
the red; President Trump walks back his support
for gun safety laws, but the debate over how
to protect lives continues; and much more.
The two most important U.S. allies in Northeast
Asia are engaged now in a damaging economic
confrontation, haunted by a long and painful
history.
Today, that confrontation between Japan and
South Korea moved into the national and global
security realm.
It was South Korea’s turn today in an increasingly
serious feud with Japan.
Seoul announced the end of a key intelligence-sharing
deal.
KIM YOU-GEUN, South Korean Deputy Director
of National Security (through translator):
The government has determined that maintaining
the agreement, which was signed for the purpose
of exchanging sensitive military intelligence
on security, doesn’t serve our national interests.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The general security of military
information agreement fostered direct intelligence
communication between Japan and South Korea,
including North Korean troop movements and
missile activity.
But it also helped to anchor historically
rocky relations between Tokyo and Seoul.
Those took a sharp turn for the worse this
summer.
Japan increased limits on exports to South
Korea, including on critical tech materials
used by large Korean businesses like Samsung.
YOSHIHIDE SUGA, Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary
(through translator): It is not our intention
to have this affect Japan-South Korea relations,
nor is it a countermeasure against the country.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The recent economic fight sparked
mass anti-Japan demonstrations in Seoul.
But the anger runs much deeper and is centuries’
old.
Daniel Russel served as an American diplomat
in Japan and South Korea and oversaw the Obama
administration’s negotiations that resulted
in the intelligence-sharing agreement.
DANIEL RUSSEL, Senior Fellow, Asia Society:
Talking to South Korea and Japanese, they
will quickly take you back to 1592, when the
Shogun Hideyoshi invaded South Korea.
There is a long litany of grievances.
Particularly in the last three years, there
has been steady series of events.
One slap is met by another slap between Seoul
and Tokyo.
JUDY WOODRUFF: At the root, profound Korean
national resentment of imperial Japan’s sexual
enslavement of Korean women during World War
II.
In 2015, Japan met longstanding Korean demands
for an official apology for the abuse of so-called
comfort women in an agreement with Korea’s
former President Park Geun-Hye.
But President Moon Jae-in revoked that agreement
when he came to power in 2016.
MOON JAE-IN, South Korean President (through
translator): On the issue of comfort women,
wartime crimes against humanity can’t be swept
under the rug by saying it’s over.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Aging survivors still shaken
by the trouble continue to demand more from
Japanese President Shinzo Abe.
KIM JEONG-JU, Former Forced Laborer (through
translator): In Japan, I was so hungry that
I had to eat grass from our dorm garden and
my hair fell off.
I lived like a slave there, but Abe is saying
like it was not.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Korea’s younger generation
demonstrated their outrage, too.
NOH MIN-OCK, South Korean Student (through
translator): They’re still not owning up to
the past, and instead of apologizing to the
victims of forced labor, they are engaging
in economic retaliation.
It makes me really angry.
JUDY WOODRUFF: All of this weakens a critical
alliance for Washington, and military officials
are concerned.
Marine Corps Commandant David Berger:
GEN.
DAVID BERGER, U.S. Marine Corps Commandant:
But, from a military perspective, it’s important
to be able to share information, because each
country has information that the other ones
will need.
JUDY WOODRUFF: U.S. Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo had this to say today:
MIKE POMPEO, U.S. Secretary of State: We’re
disappointed to see the decision that the
South Koreans made about that information-sharing
agreement.
And we hope each of those two countries can
begin to put that relationship back in exactly
the right place.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But the uptick in tension could
be a symptom of White House policies at a
critical moment for the Korean Peninsula.
DANIEL RUSSEL: There have been series of actions
and reactions that should have caused the
Trump administration not to mediate, but to
moderate, to remind both allies that we face
a common danger from North Korea.
The risk to American citizens is vastly increased
when there is a degradation in the networked
security alliance, faced with a threat like
North Korea.
Even as the president is weighing what he
would try doing if the U.S. economy slows
down, there are stunning new figures about
how the federal deficit is growing worse than
projected.
The news came yesterday from the nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office.
In fact, as a share of the total economy,
the deficit is now reaching its highest levels
since the end of World War II.
Lisa Desjardins takes a closer look at what
is behind the jump and how the debt could
limit some of the choices in the event of
a future downturn.
LISA DESJARDINS: That’s right, Judy.
The deficit is now expected to close in on
$1 trillion this year, and then stay over
$1 trillion for every year on the horizon.
All told, the CBO says, due to recent changes
in policy and the economy, deficits over the
next decade will be $800 billion higher than
it projected just a few months ago.
Those changes include a trio of debt-pushers.
The bipartisan budget deal is raising spending,
the Republican tax cuts are lowering revenue,
and the economy overall is slowing down.
Let’s break this down with Maya MacGuineas
of the Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget.
Maya, thank you for joining us.
I want to depict to people the long-term issue
here.
Let’s look at what the deficits are projected
to be now for the next few years.
Look at that, $1 trillion, $1 trillion, $1
trillion, as far as the eye can see, $1 trillion-and-above
deficits.
And let’s look at how this relates to GDP
and the curve historically.
You can see that high peak there is World
War II.
And we now see that we are on a path to near
those levels that we were hitting in World
War II.
I think biggest question to you, Maya, you
have said and CBO has said this level of debt
is unsustainable.
But what does that really mean to the average
American?
What will happen if we do keep on this trajectory?
MAYA MACGUINEAS, President, Committee for
a Responsible Federal Budget: Yes.
And the trajectory is a stunning one, as your
chart shows, because the fact that we are
at the debt levels that are highest they have
ever been relative to the economy, other than
just after World War II, without having fought
in a war, a world war, sort of shows you that
this is a very different situation.
This is self-imposed by a lot of policy choices.
The reason this matters to American families
is a number of issues.
First, it can have negative effects on the
economy.
It slows economic growth at a very time when
we should be thinking about how are we going
to grow the economy, both immediately, but
also in the long-term, because we have a lot
of challenges based on aging.
Secondly, it affects your overall budget.
If you’re spending money on interest payments,
you’re not spending that on important public
policies.
And we do have interest payments that, despite
very low rates, because we have so much debt,
are going to keep growing as a size of the
budget.
I think really on people’s minds right now,
though, is the fact that if and when you have
a recession, you want to use borrowing to
fight that recession.
That’s what fiscal stimulus is.
And yet, when we enter the next recession,
our debt relative to the economy will be
twice as high as when the recession of 2008
hit.
That means both monetary policy and fiscal
policy, those toolboxes are somewhat depleted,
which means fighting the next recession will
be much more challenging.
LISA DESJARDINS: You know, CBO, sometimes,
I think of them as our fiscal referee.
And they looked at some of the headline policies
that we have been talking about lately, including
the Republican tax cut.
And, briefly, they didn’t change their forecasts
that they don’t believe those tax cuts will
pay for themselves.
But they also found that, last year, corporate
tax revenues were actually lower than they
expected.
Now, they said it’s too soon to conclude if
that is directly related to the tax cuts or
not.
But, overall, Maya, how big of a deal do you
think those tax cuts are in terms of the budget
and economy in the future?
MAYA MACGUINEAS: It’s a huge deal, Lisa, for
a number of reasons.
First, when we did tax reform, which was absolutely
necessary, we should have done it in a way
that did not add to the debt, either by getting
rid of a lot of tax breaks, raising other
revenue, cutting spending, but we should have
done revenue-neutral tax reform.
The fact that we didn’t means it will have
less of a positive effect on the economy.
I think we’re already seeing that.
It also kind of poisoned the political waters.
And it makes it more difficult for us to move
forward on doing what we need to do to actually
fix the debt.
But people who were saying at the time, oh,
these tax cuts will tell from — well, these
taxes will pay for themselves, that was always
a fairy tale.
It is still a fairy tale.
And you add to that these spending increases.
This is an era of just charging everything
on the credit card, and it is going to make
the economic challenges of the future ever
so much more difficult.
LISA DESJARDINS: Another policy that CBO looked
at is trade policy and current tariffs.
And they found also interesting things there.
Among their findings, they found that the
tariffs would have — impact the economy,
bring down GDP slightly, about 0.3 percent,
but also have a bigger impact on imports.
Biggest industries affected would be agriculture
and farming.
So not too many surprising — surprises there.
But, Maya, my bigger question overall is,
this seems like an issue like climate change,
where we know it looks like there is a large
problem ahead.
It could be avoided if we take action now.
Why is it that lawmakers in Washington are
not having a serious debate about what to
do over our fiscal health?
MAYA MACGUINEAS: I do think that is the perfect
thing to liken it to.
It’s an issue where there’s no action-forcing
moment.
People are doing their best — some people
are doing their best, I should say, to pretend
that it’s not really a problem.
And you’re hearing that more and more, don’t
worry about the deficit, interest rates are
low, we should borrow so much.
This, of course, is a very dangerous path
to be taken on.
But I think it boils down in many ways right
now to, nobody is willing to make hard policy
choices.
And fixing the federal deficit requires increases
in revenues and controlling spending.
There’s no way around it.
But in this highly partisan time, where the
parties are fighting against each other, they
would rather give things away than kind of
level with the American people about what
we need to do to budget responsibly.
And this bodes so poorly for the future, both
if and when we’re hit by a recession, but
longer-term issues, everything from the changes
in technology and the work force, the need
to update our social contract, aging of the
population.
These are the issues we should be talking
about in the budget.
But, instead, I feel like we have got a competition
of kind of false promises and giveaways between
our politicians these days.
LISA DESJARDINS: We will keep looking at this.
Obviously, this will affect many generations.
Maya MacGuineas from the Committee for a Responsible
Federal Budget, thank you.
MAYA MACGUINEAS: Thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Stay with us.
Coming up on the “NewsHour”: choppy waters
for the cruise industry, as European cities
grow tired of tourists; examining the lasting
effects of slavery 400 years after the first
slaves were brought to America; plus, a Brief
But Spectacular take on autism and seeking
acceptance.
But first: It has been almost three weeks
since the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton,
and President Trump has again seemingly changed
his mind on what gun reforms he is willing
to consider.
William Brangham continues our periodic look
at some of the proposed reforms to try to
reduce the bloodshed caused by guns in America.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: We are in the midst of a
grim cycle.
A tragic mass shooting occurs.
A community, in this case, two communities
grieve the loss of innocent lives.
Thoughts and prayers turn to calls for action.
Political leaders promise to do something,
but then, in many cases, action doesn’t materialize.
We do this occasional look at the “NewsHour”
at what might be done, and whether any of
those proposed reforms would actually save
lives.
There’s talk now of universal background checks
for every single gun transaction in America.
There’s talk of more red flag laws, where
people can alert authorities of trouble with
someone who has weapons.
But we’re going to look now at the idea that
some say should be on the table, to limit
high-capacity magazines, which give a shooter
the ability to fire off more and more rounds
before they have to stop and reload.
I’m joined now by David Chipman of the Giffords
Center, the gun safety group.
Chipman spent 25 years as a special agent
at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,
and Explosives, where he focused, in part,
on gun trafficking.
Welcome to the “NewsHour.”
DAVID CHIPMAN, Senior Policy Adviser, Giffords
Center: Thanks for having me.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: For people who have not
been following this debate or don’t under
— or haven’t held firearms or don’t understand
how guns operate, tell us a little bit more.
What is a high-capacity magazine?
DAVID CHIPMAN: So, in a semiautomatic weapon,
a weapon that, every time you pull the trigger,
a round is fired, there is a metal box and
spring in which rounds of ammunition are held.
And so it is self-loading every time you pull
the trigger.
It also gives you the opportunity to reload
really quickly.
It’s almost as if you press a button, a printer
cartridge falls out and you can insert another
one.
This is very different than what the first
gun I had at ATF, which was a revolver, or
what you would see on “Westworld.”
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: It’s like an old, yes, six-shooter,
Western-style.
DAVID CHIPMAN: Yes, which you have to drop
individual rounds in.
And then, if you were in a gunfight, to actually
reload, we used to train for hours for that.
So, this is sort of the 2.0 of weapons today,
and it makes it very, very lethal.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: And high-capacity means
— what kind of numbers are we talking about?
DAVID CHIPMAN: Yes.
I think the consensus has been around 10.
And there are a number of reasons why.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, 10 and above would be
high?
DAVID CHIPMAN: Yes.
Well, I think let’s say 10 and below are OK
or reasonable.
Above would be regulated.
And I think this comes basically based on
a guess.
It’s sort of like picking a speed limit.
Should it be 55 or 65?
What we do know is, in the NYPD, they have
examined over the years how many rounds are
fired in a deadly encounter.
And even amongst police, the number is below
five on average.
So you would think twice as much of that would
allow any citizen to properly defend themselves.
When I was on ATF’s SWAT team, my sidearm
had 15 rounds, my shotgun had six.
I did have an assault rifle, which could hold
30, but I was also tracking and hunting down
the most dangerous armed Americans, which
really isn’t the job of a civilian.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Right.
So why do we care in this conversation about
high-capacity magazines, when we’re talking
about trying to limit the carnage of mass
shootings?
DAVID CHIPMAN: I think it’s like a flu shot.
And the bumper sticker that people who are
against this say, well, it won’t stop a shooting.
Actually, that might be correct.
What it might stop, though, is a killer from
transforming into a killing machine.
Just look at the assassination attempt of
my boss Gabby Giffords.
She was shot with the first or second round.
There — no capacity limit would have protected
her.
But perhaps her staffer wouldn’t have been
killed, a federal judge wouldn’t have been
killed, or a 9-year-old child wouldn’t have
been getting if that shooter did not have
a 32-round magazine, twice the size of the
magazine I had on my ATF-issued gun.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, the idea is, if you
limit the size of these magazines or the capacity
of the magazine, it’s a moment to intervene.
If a mass shooting is going on, and that person
has to stop to reload and take that magazine
out and put a new one in, that’s a moment
for the good people in that environment to
try to stop that event.
DAVID CHIPMAN: Yes.
And that’s what happened in Tucson.
Unfortunately, it happened after 32 rounds
were fired.
But, in that case, those surviving people
who were there tackled the shooter.
In law enforcement, we’re trained for that
lull in gunfire.
It allows us a tactical advance.
And the reality is, despite what you see in
“Die Hard” and other movies, it is really
hard to reload.
You have to train very hard, especially under
pressure, if you’re being shot at.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, right now, there are
magazines that go up to how big?
I mean, how — you mentioned 30 in the Tucson
shooter.
How big are magazines now?
DAVID CHIPMAN: Yes, what’s frightening is,
is, we’re seeing drum magazines at 100 now.
We saw that…
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: A hundred rounds?
DAVID CHIPMAN: A hundred rounds, which is
interesting for a rifle, because, when you
buy a box of ammunition for that kind of caliber,
they’re only 22 a box.
So this one magazine would be five boxes of
ammunition.
We first saw this in Aurora being used, and,
most recently, in Dayton, we saw it used.
Another episode was in Las Vegas.
Most of the media focused on the use of a
bump stock there, which allowed for the shooting
to happen more quickly, but, really, one of
the results and why this person was able to
kill dozens of people and wound hundreds was
the fact that he too had 80- and 100-round
magazines.
So it’s just math.
If you’re firing that many rounds downrange
and there are people there, you’re going to
hit more people.
You don’t have to aim as precisely.
And death tolls increase.
And so looking at magazines is kind of like
a flu shot.
Perhaps you don’t stop the flu in every case,
but you can prevent a lot of it.
And I think that’s what we’re trying to do
here.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, are there states right
now that are limiting magazine sales to 10?
I mean, I understand that there are probably
millions of these high-capacity magazine clips
that are already out there in the population.
But there are states now that are trying to
limit the number of these?
DAVID CHIPMAN: Yes.
And there are nine states now and the District
of Colombia that do this.
The first state that I was involved in this
conversation was right after Sandy Hook in
Colorado moved forward with regulating the
size and capacity.
And now Congressman Ted Deutch, who represents
the area of Parkland, where we had the school
shooting, he’s introduced a House bill that
would regulate the future manufacture and
sale at 10 rounds.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Now, California, as you
know, and Vermont also recently saw their
own attempts to limit high-capacity magazines
thrown out by the courts, arguing that it’s
an infringement upon the Second Amendment.
Isn’t that an obstacle to this effort?
DAVID CHIPMAN: Sure.
I mean, any policy decision or way we go has
to be satisfied in the courts.
That’s one court decision.
We will have to see if other courts address
it the same way.
But it seems to me a very reasonable approach.
I — talking to any gun owner, a 100-round
magazine is just not traditional.
It’s not normal.
And I can’t think of a purpose, beyond killing
a lot of people, for having it.
So if the debate is, should it be 10 or what
have you, it can’t be 100.
And so I think there’s room where we can have
progress, although we will not have perfection.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: David Chipman of the Giffords
Center, thank you very much.
DAVID CHIPMAN: Thanks for having me.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Some of Europe’s most beautiful
waterfront cities are joining forces to try
to reduce the impact of cruise ships.
Venice will ban larger ships from entering
the city’s historic center, a result of citizens’
protests, after a cruise liner crashed into
a pier earlier this summer.
Restrictions are being imposed in Belgium,
Croatia, and Greece, in places that are overwhelmed
when liners sends thousands of passengers
into their picturesque streets.
Special correspondent Malcolm Brabant has
been to some of the most popular destinations,
and he starts his report in Southern England.
MALCOLM BRABANT: It’s departure day in Southampton,
one of the world’s main cruise ship bases.
Thus begins a voyage of indulgence for the
multitudes on board, and gritted teeth for
many in their ports of call.
Business is booming, thanks to commercials
like these:
NARRATOR: Land ahoy, and our Mediterranean
adventure begins, but, first, of course, the
full English.
Ancient history and cultural treasures abound.
ACTOR: We’re lucky to get a seat.
NARRATOR: But we don’t overdo it.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Not overdoing it?
Many Europeans beg to differ.
The welcome in Europe is becoming increasingly
frosty.
A growing number of prime destinations are
questioning the value of hosting cruise ships,
among them, Barcelona in Spain, Venice in
Italy, Dubrovnik in Croatia, Bruges in Belgium.
Medieval Bruges is swamped daily by up to
50,000 visitors.
But the influx is being curtailed to prevent
this UNESCO World Heritage City from morphing
into Disneyland.
DIRK DE FAUW, Mayor of Bruges, Belgium: We
don’t want to be a park, a tourist park, no.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Dirk De fauw is the newly
elected mayor of Bruges.
DIRK DE FAUW: When we let everything free,
and you can do what you want, then there will
be no inhabitants in Bruges.
It will all be like a museum, a large museum.
You must work and you must live and you must
create things in the city.
It’s not only a city for amusement.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Last year, 8.3 million people
visited Bruges.
Most were half-day trippers.
Six million stayed less than three hours.
Many came from cruise ships.
At peak times, Bruges residents can be outnumbered
3-1.
Not all citizens applaud the mayor’s initiative.
At this emporium, assistant Katja Debecker
says Bruges is only just recovering from a
drop in visitor numbers after terrorist attacks
in Paris and Brussels more than three years
ago.
KATJA DEBECKER, Souvenir Store Worker: It
used to be packed in all the streets.
Not anymore, no.
So, what is he complaining about?
Maybe some of the people that live in the
center of Bruges — I do, five minutes from
here.
I don’t care.
In the evening, 6:00, everybody’s gone.
So?
I’m happy the place is full with people buying
my stuff.
MALCOLM BRABANT: This is a glimpse of Bruges’
local port that will become familiar in the
future.
No cruise ships.
Under the new edict, a maximum of two liners
will be allowed to dock each day.
Next year, the number of arrivals will fall
by about 30 percent.
That’s a hit the mayor is willing to take.
One of his major gripes, shared by other European
destinations, is that, with their all-you-can-eat
buffets, the liners discourage passengers
from spending ashore.
DIRK DE FAUW: They are not spending any euro,
maybe a little bit of chocolate, a little
bit of beer.
But they do not go to restaurants.
No, they must be as quick as possible again,
on the ship, because all is included on the
ship.
MALCOLM BRABANT: The cruise business is caught
in a vortex of conflicting forces, struggling
to meet the demand for birds at sea, but embattled
across Europe.
TOM BOARDLEY, Secretary-General, Cruise Lines
International Association: We’re really concerned.
And we want to understand what’s causing it.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Tom Boardley is the industry’s
point man in London, where a projected new
terminal is facing opposition from local residents
who share the Pan-European objections.
TOM BOARDLEY: We have got to try and address
those, and, in some cases, if necessary, modify
the way we operate in order to satisfy those
complaints.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Which means staggering arrival
times to avoid crushes like this at the Acropolis,
when several cruise groups rocked up at the
same time.
Tourists were treated like cattle as Greek
Culture Ministry guards wrangled the lines.
MAN: You’re fine.
You’re fine.
MAN: Don’t stop there.
Don’t stop there.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Pollution is another battleground.
A recent European study lamented the large
amounts of noxious particles emitted by ships’
engines in port.
Such pollutants increase the risk of cancer
and cardiovascular disease.
In Copenhagen, the Queen Elizabeth’s funnel
looked benign.
Her owners boast she’s equipped with the latest
exhaust gas cleaning system, but the environmental
group Friends of the Earth claims her air
pollution record is poor.
SIMON CALDER, Travel Expert: It is down to
the global community to start saying, OK,
well, let’s start properly taxing the emissions
that these ships are producing.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Travel expert Simon Calder
believes Amsterdam has started an important
trend by imposing a $9-a-head levy on cruise
passengers.
But he prescribes even tougher action.
SIMON CALDER: It’s up to these individual
cities to say, OK, if you going to moor a
cruise ship here, then we’re going to start
charging you port taxes of maybe $50 per person,
something which is really going to benefit
the city.
And, furthermore, it will disincentivize some
cruises, which is probably, in the long run,
a good thing.
MALCOLM BRABANT: The industry argues such
taxes will merely force ships to find friendlier
destinations.
Tom Boardley insists it’s striving to be green.
TOM BOARDLEY: We need to move to hydrogen
or biofuel or some other solution.
In terms — our solutions will be those that
the world finds.
MALCOLM BRABANT: Cruising may be increasingly
controversial, but newly engaged primary school
teacher Robyn Murphy is a huge fan.
ROBYN MURPHY, Teacher: You don’t have any
luggage restrictions.
I can take as much clothes and shoes as I
like.
And I love the fact that you can wake up in
a new city every day.
So, you wake up, explore the city, go back
to the boat, enjoy the food.
They have got theaters on there, shows on
there.
And then you go to bed and wake up in a new
city again.
So, I like the ease of being able to visit
different countries.
SIMON CALDER: I can construct an intellectual
argument which says that we are quite close
to a tipping point, where the passengers are
going to say, we don’t want to pay anymore.
We don’t want to have the miserable experience
of being the third cruise ship in town on
a Wednesday in Dubrovnik.
NARRATOR: The walled city of Dubrovnik is
one of Europe’s jewels.
SIMON CALDER: And basically being unable to
get into the old city because there are simply
too many cruise passengers, and we’re going
to take a different kind of vacation.
However, all the evidence is that the demand
is insatiable.
NARRATOR: Ah, Carnival’s new ship, the Carnival
Horizon.
MALCOLM BRABANT: The growth of the industry
is capped at about 56 percent a year, because
shipyards around the world can’t build them
quickly enough to cope with the lure of pleasure
at sea.
But if European destinations are hoping that
demand might wane and they can experience
some relief, here’s an informed prediction.
TOM BOARDLEY: Both the USA and Europe are
beginning to understand that not only is tourism
a major contributor to GDP, but it’s also
going to create quite a few social problems
over the next few years, particularly in areas
where people want to go and visit.
There’s a vast new middle class in Asia, particularly
in India and China, that is just beginning
to travel, and they have only just begun to
whet their appetite.
So the question is, how do we accommodate
more tourism in an environmentally friendly
way?
MALCOLM BRABANT: As the industry is guaranteed
a vast untapped market, more maritime conflict
may be steaming over the horizon in the future.
For the “PBS NewsHour,” I’m Malcolm Brabant
in Southampton.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Four hundred years ago this
month, in August 1619, the first African slaves
arrived in Virginia.
It is regarded by many as the beginning of
America’s long relationship with slavery.
The 400th anniversary and the ways slavery
has affected American history since then are
being commemorated.
One of the more notable efforts is The New
York Times’ 1619 Project, which is spotlighting
parts of history that are less well-known.
We are going to focus on some of the economic
legacies, including the larger connections
with modern capitalism.
Specifically, we’re going to look at how the
production of American sugar, known as white
gold, helped to fuel slavery and became ingrained
in our society.
Historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad of Harvard’s
Kennedy School wrote about that for The New
York Times.
Louisiana, he wrote, led the nation in destroying
the lives of black people in the name of economic
efficiency.
And he joins me now.
He joins me now.
Professor Muhammad, thank you very much for
being here.
Help us understand how sugar is connected
to the origins of American slavery.
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD, Harvard’s Kennedy
School: Sugar was the most dominant economic
incentive for European colonization of the
Americas.
No other crop was as abundant or successful
in drawing Europeans to these shores, and
I mean by that North America and South America,
for the purpose of cultivating sugar for a
worldwide market, and particularly for Europe,
that had already established a taste for sugar,
but would grow exponentially in terms of demand
over time.
There’s no way to really understand the significance
of the colonization of the Americas without
understanding the role of sugar in it.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And how — and explain how
slavery played such an important role from
the very beginning.
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD: Sure.
So, the origin story, of course, is that Christopher
Columbus brings some cane stalks with him
by way of the Spanish Canary Islands in 1493.
So sugar is already part of the globe, but
it has not become the commodity in bulk form
that it will become once Christopher Columbus
brings it to the New World.
As such, sugar was always an incredibly difficult
product to produce.
First, the cane itself is heavy and unwieldy.
And, secondly, to take the plant and turn
it into sugar required incredible labor and
often dangerous and difficult labor.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And you write about how, of
course, that began in the 1600s, but then
it went on literally for hundreds of years.
It changed shape.
You get closer to the Civil War, and the shape
of the sugar industry has changed, but, still,
slaves are an essential piece of it.
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD: Absolutely.
So, Louisiana doesn’t get into the business
of sugarcane cultivation until the end of
the 18th century.
As a result of the attempt to cultivate sugar,
it blossomed and bloomed, and by the top of
the 19th century, Louisiana was producing
about a quarter of the world’s cane sugar
supply.
It was a pretty miraculous turnaround.
But all of that was made possible by the enslavement
of people of African descent.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And I know I’m asking do you
skip over a lot of history here, but you move
forward to today, to the 20th and even into
the 21st century, and you write about how
the legacy of what happened in Louisiana and
other places still plays a role in the economy,
a vital role in the economy of this country.
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD: Well, if we go from
sugar to cotton, we basically explain two
crops that, in their totality, explain much
of the infrastructure of our capitalist economy
to this day.
We can explain everything, from the abundance
of land that was originally held by the indigenous,
and the labor of enslaved people, as America’s
competitive advantage.
By the 19th century, cotton, for example,
was essentially the major export of the United
States.
And that cotton export helped make possible
the wealth not only in enslaved people, but
also the wealth of banks in the North that
were responsible for financing investments
in this country that were often mortgaged
on the basis of enslaved people.
There’s no way to really understand the economic
might of America by the 19th century without
understanding the role of cotton slavery and
earlier sugar slavery in it.
JUDY WOODRUFF: One of the other writers for
these series of articles in the Sunday New
York Times, Matthew Desmond — he’s a professor
at Princeton — writes about how not only
that today’s economy has its roots in slavery,
but that modern American capitalism is as
severe as it is in its treatment of people,
and that that too has its roots in slavery.
Some people are going to look at that and
say, is that a leap too far?
How do you answer that?
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD: Well, it’s a good
question, and I can see why people would give
pause.
But if we take a step back, and we really
ask a fair question, we could ask ourselves,
has our economy been built on the notion of
personhood or profit?
And, in that sense, from slavery to the late
19th century of immigration of Europeans from
around the world, to the 20th century today,
people have been ground up in our economy
for the purpose of moneymaking.
How else would you explain the great labor
unrest of the late 19th and early 20th century
that brought us essentially our modern social
welfare system, eventually in the New Deal,
but for the fact that capitalism created misery
for people at the lowest end of the economic
totem pole?
That’s our history, whether we like it or
not.
Some people prospered in that system, but
it was a system that was often quite brutal
to workers who were responsible for doing
the heavy lifting of our economy.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Finally, why is it important,
Professor Muhammad, that Americans understand
what you have written about?
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD: Well, it’s important
because we don’t treat our past with the same
commitment to truth and honesty and accuracy
as we do, say, science and technology.
If there is a concern in this day and age
about the — questioning global warming or
climate change, if scientists are under attacks
for making things up, that’s a new phenomenon,
a product of our late 20th century.
But we have been having cultural wars about
how the interpret the American past from the
very beginning.
And the consequences of that are what drove
the editors of the 1619 Project to look closely
at the work of academic historians, just like
many people look at the work of scientists
and say, what do academic historians tell
us about the past that we have not been teaching
and we have not learned as well as we should?
JUDY WOODRUFF: Khalil Gibran Muhammad, he’s
a professor at Harvard Kennedy School, one
of the writers for this New York Times series
the 1619 Project, looking at the 400th anniversary
of the beginning of slavery, thank you very
much.
KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD: Thanks so much for
having me.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And we will be back shortly
with a Brief But Spectacular take on tackling
social anxiety ahead of the start of the school
year.
But, first, take a moment to hear from your
local PBS station.
It’s a chance to offer your support, which
helps to keep programs like ours on the air.
(Break)
JUDY WOODRUFF: For those stations staying
with us, how do you speak up and change an
abusive workplace.
Entertainment lawyer, Nina Shaw, speaks to
Steve Goldbloom about that moment when she
decided to empower others to say, “Times
up” and fight for the end of inequity based
on gender and race.
NINA SHAW: I remember being at a
meeting at 20th Century Fox many many years
ago.
Getting into a real argument with the lawyer
and he got up and he threw a file at me, I
mean it was a big, heavy file and I just ducked.
And I just remember thinking afterwards as
I was heading back to my office like, that
was like a truly screwed up thing to do, the
guy physically assaulted me.
But I didn’t think to call him out on it or
call his superiors or anything like that,
I just kind of handled it.
Because I always think like you guys are smart
and you’re good at what you do and you’re
successful, but I don’t think you could have
lived my life and still be in this room.
And I lived my life and I’m in this room and
you had every advantage in this room.
So in my mind that makes me quite frankly
a little bit better than you.
STEVE GOLDBOOM: Welcome to That Moment When,
I’m Steve Goldbloom.
Nina Shaw is an entertainment lawyer who grew
up in Harlem and the Bronx against the backdrop
of the civil rights movement.
And today represents some of the industry’s
most prominent artists from Laurence Fishburne
to Ava DuVernay.
She’s one of the key voices
in the Time’s Up movement.
We spoke about her experience in the business
and her efforts to bring equality into the
workplace.
When do you think people will realize that
that lack of safety is not just unfortunate
but unjust.
NINA SHAW: The environments I have worked
in have often been psychologically bruising,
have often been scarring in different ways.
But in my mind I don’t compare to the environments
that so many women work in where they are
actually physically unsafe.
They get to make less money, they get to have
less agency and ability to control their lives
and then as a bonus they get to be unsafe
in the process.
And that’s really what Time’s Up and my work
in the last several years in amplifying that
message is about.
I just want everyone to be safe, I want everyone
to be paid fairly and I don’t want anyone
who lives like me at the intersection of race
and gender to ever be discriminated at because
of that.
STEVE GOLDBOOM: You are a big voice in the
Time’s Up movement.
When did you realize that you needed to get
involved.
NINA SHAW: I was among the women who were
invited to the first Time’s Up meeting.
I had already been like a bit of a rabble-rouser.
You know and speaking up about something that
people didn’t want to hear.
So I spoke of the fact that if you go to your
agents office and you sit in that room and
you are the only person of color, you know
that is wrong, you know that is unacceptable
and it is your job to say that to the people
who represent you.
The New York Times ended up picking up the
speech and I think the title of the article
was something like a voice from behind the
scenes, ask tough questions.
I mean I remember I got back to my office
and immediately the word had spread and a
number of agents called me and said, I heard
you told our clients to fire us all.
But I said, no I didn’t tell your clients
to fire you.
I told you to hire someone who looks like
your clients.
We’re all fighting for the same thing which
is the end of inequities based on gender and
race.
I had a very clear sense as I was growing
up that the things that were happening to
me and the things that I could take advantage
of were all built on the
sacrifice of other people.
STEVE GOLDBOOM: Well what was it about your
upbringing that had triggered a sense of debt
and obligation to society that you feel that
you owe.
NINA SHAW: I always felt this incredible duty
and it probably was because these things were
discussed so openly in my household about
what was going on in the civil rights movement
of that era.
I always tell the story about how my mom was
doing chores.
I would sit at like the
end of an ironing board or I would sit on
a stool in the kitchen and I would read the
New York Times to her.
And people say, oh gosh your mom must have
really wanted you to know about news and all
of that.
And no, my mom just wanted to know what was
going on in the New York Times and she couldn’t
read it herself because she was doing something
else.
That’s how she fully integrated us into the
world.
I always had this sense of you have to be
a really clear advocate for yourself, because
no one else is gonna advocate for you.
STEVE GOLDBOOM: You’ve been an advocate for
a lot of people, a lot of young people of
color and a mentor.
Can you tell me about your relationship with
mentorship?
NINA SHAW: I think we all mentor.
I think that we often don’t do it in a real
formal way and that I think the patriarchal
system really exists on the premise that people
in power will take care of people who look
and are attractive to them and will bring
those people into power.
I couldn’t imagine a situation where I didn’t
reach out to or at least respond to people
who wanted to be mentored by me.
STEVE GOLDBOOM: What does it feel like to
walk into the room and be the only woman and
sometimes the only woman of color?
NINA SHAW: Unfortunately up until recently
it has felt entirely normal.
It has often felt sad and isolating and it
has always been something that I don’t want
for the people who come behind me or after
me.
STEVE GOLDBOOM: Practically speaking, what
are some of your goals for equity and safety
in the workplace?
NINA SHAW: I try often when I’m in meetings
and people ask me questions like, what can
I do to change my work environment, because
I think the easy answers are you can hire.
You can be more open to diversity and inclusion,
but I think the tougher issue is you can be
uncomfortable.
Every time you walk into a room and everyone
in that room looks just like you, you need
to squirm, you need to feel like this room
doesn’t work for me.
Because I think it’s only when we reach that
point of discomfort, when we reach that point
of feeling like, you know what, this is not
good.
It’s like I’m in a room that’s too cold or
too hot and you need to feel it the minute
you walk through the door and I think until
that happens we’re not gonna see real change.
(melodious instrumental music)
JUDY WOODRUFF: And you can find all episodes
of this series on Facebook Watch @THATMOMENTWHENSHOW
(BREAK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Back-to-school time can bring
a familiar sense of stress and excitement
for many students as they navigate social
circles and a new study workload.
In tonight’s Brief But Spectacular, we hear
from 21-year-old college student Ben Rolnick,
who suffers from severe social anxiety, an
increasingly common problem among young adults.
BEN ROLNICK, Student: I have always felt that
there was something a little different about
me.
And whenever I do or say something, it just
never really stuck with people.
I was first diagnosed when I was 3, although
I was completely oblivious to the fact that
I was autistic, until my parents told me when
I was about 11 or 12.
I’m no longer classified as it, but I felt,
because I had that diagnosis, I have always
been so far behind everybody else socially.
So, when freshman year came around, I always
felt like I had the social intelligence of
a middle schooler.
And I still sometimes to this day say random
words and phrases just to get people to remember
that I’m there, I’m physically present, like,
I’m not going anywhere.
When mom first explained it to me, she didn’t
want me to tell anybody about it, because
she thought, at the age I was learning, that
it would make me too different, and more — even
more of a reason for people to bully me.
My parents would have to help me out, you
know, arrange playdates.
I felt like I had to carry all the weight
with most of my friendships in high school
and even in middle school, because they wouldn’t
ask me to go do stuff with them.
When I had prom, I had no date for prom two
years.
I wouldn’t even really get invited to even
go with a group of people.
I would always be going by myself.
It was so rare for me to actually do stuff
with people that, when I had them, I cherished
them more than maybe an average experience
should be.
Because I feel like I’m always having to be
the one, the strong guy in the group, or having
to take a bunch of punches, whenever I come
home with my family, sometimes, I feel like
I just have to release, and I let out all
of my baggage, all of my anger, all of my
emotions.
And it’s really hard on my family.
Anxiety has been a big part of my life.
If people could just give me a chance, maybe
even two, because first impressions are hard
for a lot of people.
I would really like to broaden my friend horizons
a little bit, but it’s really hard to when
people don’t give you the chance for it.
If I make a connection with somebody, what
do I want them to see me as?
I would like them to see me as a kind, compassionate,
caring person, with a few interests that can
always be expanding.
I don’t want them just to be in my world.
I want to be in their world, too.
My name is Ben Rolnick, and this is my Brief
But Spectacular take on seeking acceptance.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And you can watch additional
Brief But Spectacular episodes on our Web
site, PBS.org/NewsHour/Brief.
And thank you, Ben.
That was remarkable.
And that is the “NewsHour” for tonight.
I’m Judy Woodruff.
Join us online and again here tomorrow evening.
For all of us at the “PBS NewsHour,” thank
you, and we’ll see you soon.

63 thoughts to “PBS NewsHour full episode August 22, 2019”

  1. Since pbs wants to block comments on there last video I’ll just post my comment from that video on this one(do better). The atf is the worst federal agency. They love killing dogs, women, and children. “High-capacity” magazine aren’t a real thing just like “assault rifles”. This is the most blatant and disgusting grab at our freedoms.

  2. Regarding the national debt ; sustained war and feeding the military industrial complex has the same effect as a world war. Throwing money down a hole what do you expect.

  3. I'm all for equal pay….BUT……I never hear women demanding that they need to register for the draft like men need to do!!!!!! am I wrong?!?!?!??!

  4. Trump is going to bankrupt this country. Republicans have been reckless with tax cuts to the superrich . It is only a matter of time . We are playing into our enemies hands.

  5. GOP debt buys missiles, bombs, & second vacation homes for rich people. DEM debt buys free stuff for liberals, gays & feminists. Good debt vs bad debt!

  6. The power and financial elites in the US have been milking the country dry … and the comment where they said they know the tax cut will not stimulate the economy —- it is treason and thievery. It is time to fix the tax system and make these people pay back their ill gotten gains, as well as cutting down the military to something reasonable. Warren is right in her wanting to institute a wealth tax … but I don't think it is enough.

  7. Why are tourist towns building hamster dams against cruise ships? If a cruise ship has hamsters, a hamster dam probably won't help!

  8. He made a very compelling case for banning high-capacity magazines. I agree, that is a good compromise to do something about these shootings.

  9. I think people calling police on suspected shooters is a good idea, but it might just play out to where police making the calls on these people end up getting attacked in some certain number of these cases.

  10. So tired!!! Of hearing about slavery being dragged into the modern era and repeatedly throwing it into the face of everyone today….NO ONE ALIVE!!! today in the U.S. had any slaves or are Currently slaves. It's done…its over…its history. Move on!

  11. Ben, you're welcome to come over to my world and become friends for more than a brief time and beyond spectacular experience. :0) HUGz

  12. Those aren't wildfires in the Amazon… They're deliberate forest clearing. And it's supported by the government of bolsonaro.

  13. See the old footage of comfort women, that’s what Korean women looked like before it became the recent plastic surgery capital of the world. They pushed ahead to become a modern society and they’ve made superficial looks the topmost priority. That’s how dumb and mindless they are. It’s all about appearances—beauty and wealth. Comparisons to their friends or coworkers on how they can get one up on them. Or idiotic Kpop and beyond melodramatic kDramas. They can’t even begin to process anything more. Why are they so proud? They can’t stand up to Japan and win. Let’s hope Japan wipes them off the face of the earth permanently next time. Good riddance, Koreans have nothing REAL to offer.

  14. Best way to fight against mass shootings: 1) Allow concealed carry everywhere! 2) Pay huge rewards for stopping the shooters!

  15. Thanks to David Chipman, for a very reasonable and helpful explanations – and a doable proposal to ban high-capacity magazines.

  16. oh the irony the united states sends americans to commit mass shootings all over the world but god forbid it happens stateside… YOU KNOW UNLESS ITS A COP SHOOTING A MINORITY!!! we should probably worry about magazine capacity and NOT that there are massive out of control wildfires worldwide that will add to global climate change which IS real.

  17. NOthing good comes from cruises. They’re vacations for absolute gluttons that don’t like to move. Just human garbage creating as much waste as possible. Just for lazy fatasses.

  18. 1592? Girl, maybe you can let that one go. My grandmother would do that. Bring up mess that happened in 1922. 1592? C'mon Korea, you are better than that. Love you JUDY! Glad you are back.

  19. Help end the duopoly control of the Democratic-Republicans in US elections. Their purple two-faced party is the true problem, and only serves to hinder progress.

  20. How about housing the homeless and feeding the hungry before considering foreign aid? A negative income tax or universal basic income is in order first, imo. How many times, and for how long, can government continue to fail those they claim to serve? It is the sole purpose for government to exist.

  21. Yes, yes, yes …… You of the "corporate journalism", Uhhh .. the increase in the deficit..bla, bla, bla … just to justify the cut on, social security and medicare!

  22. US is OK even if the agreement between South Korea and Japan, which is not much help to S.Korea in the first place while it is so much to Japan, is revoked as long as US is an ally with two countries respectively because US can still get information from two countries respectively. It was so unfair, unacceptable, furious, and humiliating to people of S.Korea when US made S.Korea kind of forcefully accept the two agreements with Japan(one for military thing and another for so called comfort women thing)

  23. We need to rise taxes on EVERYONE! We need to also cut Social Security and Medicare needs to be cut across the board! The key drives of our debt. You people don’t want to hear this because it means you will get less, but for our future these MAJOR SETS NEED TO BE TAKEN. I would be more then willing to pay higher taxes our Debts are out of control we simply cannot afford SS and MC anymore. Be glad I’m not president because I would rise your taxes and cut Social Security and Medicare before it bankrupts us!

  24. Wow, another day of unchained free speech on PBS and Youtube. They keep this up people might start thinking the left is tilting back towards supporting free speech again instead of "comments disabled" or being shouted down. Take the good when it occurs.

  25. As an American living abroad, I truly appreciate your informative episodes. Knowledge should be free for all, not just for those that have the financial stability to subscribe to newspapers. Thanks and keep up the good work, PBS.

  26. Has anybody notice that since Trump became president all these old problems have poped up . S. Korea V Japan , India V Pakistan . no american leadership in the world let old feuds pop up all over the place . Trump isn't just causing us problem , but the world !!!

  27. I don't like the focus on magazine size because it sound very beneficial to the NRA where people would bring/buy more guns to compensate for lesser capacity magazines.

  28. No matter what we do guns will still be there. I understand what is being said, but it will not stop. People are going crazy. Here's an idea. Why do these people do what they do. Depression is a good factor I think. You want a gun you should be on prozac. I know everyone that has a gun is not depressed , but what is going on? What is the answer. I don't know if there is an answer. We need to pray for God's help. This is out of control.

  29. As much as I think reparations is a ridiculous idea oh, I'm glad that I would be benefiting from it. I am 100% Irish oh, it is a matter of historical fact that the Irish were the first slaves to be brought here, they were sold for 4 times less than a black slave, and were the first to be thrown overboard when food stocks on the slave ships ran low. But the whole fight for reparations is just a racist money grab anyway so I'm sure they won't allow a white person to participate.

  30. you people are fools, if you think banning guns or high capacity magazines is gonna stop mas murder bottom line if someone wanted to kill a bunch of people they will find a way use a vehicle , fire , chemicals , home made explosives or something. A gun is your only self defense you have to protect yourself and loved ones dont be a fool and buy into the anti gun crap your being lead to the slaughterhouse if you are .

  31. First of all ATF Approved the Bump Stocks, The Second Amendment does not say only 10 round magazines….If you target practice the larger magazines make it more enjoyable…..Criminals Don't Care about Laws…The Only people affected by magazine limits are Honorable Legal Gun Owners…And Just A Thought Have You Ever Tried to Carry a Full Size Rifle With a 100 Round Magazine??? Depending on Caliber and Accessory's Could Weigh up to 40 LBS or more, With that amount of weight unless your in top shape and Fully Trained Most Couldn't hit what they might aim at making easier to Take-out any Criminal. Time to Get Rid of GUN FREE ZONES ….As Criminals Love Gun Free Zones as they Know Only Criminals Have Guns In Gun Free Zones…Over 500,000 people are Saved by Firearms EVERY Year by Honest Law Abiding Citizens Not Including How Many Law Enforcement Saved with There Guns . IF YOU TOOK ALL GUNS AWAY ….CRIMINALS will still have Weapons, Criminals wouldn't turn in there Guns, Just look at Australia and how they Failed there Citizens Taking there Ability to Protect Themselves and Violent Crime has Gone Up Since they Banned Honest Gun Owners from owning a Weapon.

  32. I moved recently from WA. state to AZ so I'm comparing with truth. Jay Inslee was a great gov. Wa. became very good for teachers and of course students thanks to Inslee's progressive platform. One more good American gone, one traitor still president while teachers in AZ stand in the sun protesting.

  33. Fox Nooze Ooze shuts down your comments if you post liberal stuff. Beware! They are controlled by a Conservative Corporate Thought Control Employee.

  34. Vulgar Money-hungry Korean thugs demand more money, apology and special treatment from Japan for what happened a century ago.
    Japan has done so many good things over the years to help Korean people but enough is enough. Today’s young Japanese are really fed up and can’t take their relentless demands anymore.

  35. the magazine or clip for a gun has nothing to do with the first amendment. any clip or magazine over 15 round's is to murder people.
    let's face it, there aren't that many animals left, and your not killing deer for your village. if you can't reload or switch gun's fast enough.. that is called natural selection. life is not a video game. the wrong Amazon Is burning and the wrong Ice is melting thanks again,
    Wonka Luv'z ya All.

  36. See that's where your thinking is wrong. "Hunting down fellow americans really isn't the job of a civilian." Ridiculous. Defending yourself with firearms isn't the job of a civilian.

  37. 30% of adults say they have a gun, so for their right to have it ALL your children have to fear going to school?????? Land of the free??? Fear is not freedom.

  38. Yeah we need to make the big banks pay back their bailout money, stop spending so much on the military and stop living beyond our means on credit. But I think it might be a really, really good idea to stop letting illegals in as well. In fact, we should have cut all immigration significantly a long time ago.

  39. These politicians on the left keep regulating law abiding citizens, that do not go around killing people. All she shooters have had mental problems, psychopaths,schizophrenics,

  40. Very good program, detailed, informative and calm. I have watched it the first time and I will watch it frequently in the future.

  41. PBS is a bunch of fake news idiots peddling an personal agenda. Please note that all of their news on YouTube concerning opioids has the comments disabled. They're spinning the news to make 76 billion "individual" pills over 7 years sound like a lot, however people with severe chronic disability pain need thousands of pills per year, per person. With 10-12 million people having the type of pain that needs medication, 76 billion "individual" pills means there aren't enough pills out there for everyone who needs them. A-holes! Self righteous people who think they know better than those that are suffering. And then disable comments on those videos? Propaganda! PBS should be boycotted!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *