If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. As things stand, data belonging to PayPal users will “quietly” (that is, without their knowledge or consent) start to be used by third parties. Reports explain that this “secret opt-in” is explained in the settings for the personalized shopping page. Those who happened to make it to that page could learn that this more “personalized experience” can be opted out of. The plan is to start data “sharing” in the early summer of next year, and at one point, the same page said that after this November, PayPal will be using information collected about users to “personalize your shopping.” However, 404 Media says this line was gone after they contacted PayPal on Monday. As of Tuesday, the situation around transparency remained the same – the only way for users to find out what’s coming is to (unprompted) come across the page, where they can opt out of allowing PayPal to share “products, offers, and rewards you might like with participating stores (aka, third parties).” Both old and brand new accounts behaved the same, that is, defaulted to opt-in, the publication said, citing its own tests. Another interesting new feature on PayPal is the privacy statement – both its updated content, and the fact the newest version has a different URL than the existing one, which users get if they click on “privacy statement” from other pages on the site. Where this meets the “personalized shopping” of it all is PayPal declaring examples of what users’ personal information will be “shared”: products, preferences, sizes, and, “styles we think you’ll like.” This shows that PayPal has (or is “optimizing” third parties’ “shopping experience” too – by selling them on the idea it does) access to very detailed personal data that enables such targeting. And unless expressly required so by law, this version of the privacy statement said, this is opt-in (originally, the date was after November 27). What opting-out gets users is PayPal continuing to disclose their personal information “as necessary to complete transactions you initiate, but will not disclose personal information to partners and merchant for personalized shopping experiences.” The data that does reach partners and merchants is then at the mercy of their own individual privacy policies. As of Tuesday, PayPal had no answer to 404 Media’s question whether customers would be “directly notified before November 27 that the company plans to share their data with third-party partners and merchants, and what happens to users’ data if they opt out after that date.” Looks like PayPal is literally and figuratively banking on users addicted to “convenience” and, on them rather than not knowing how “the convenience sausage” gets made. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post PayPal’s Secret Data Grab Banks on Users Staying Blissfully Unaware appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

How the Just Stop Oil Activists Who Targeted a Van Gogh Painting Wound Up in Prison

The Harris Coalition Is Bizarre

Axios: Vance Crossed Everyone Up By Being ... Human

The researchers say their work represents a "paradigm shift" for mental health disorders.

The human body is biodegradable. In a billion years, the leftovers from our burial sites might offer interstellar archaeologists some Neuralink chips which outlasted the human flesh in which they were embedded. The carbon footprint of all humans vanishes at death, irrespective of whether prior to that moment thousands of billionaires traveled on private jets and fancy yachts or billions of other humans just travelled on foot. The blow to the human ego delivered by the beginning and end of this non-negotiable contract for life-as-we-know-it, makes everything in between a temporary gift with an expiration date. Given this underlying setup, it would have made most sense for humans to cooperate and turn this short life into a fulfilling experience for everyone. Instead, many spend most of their time on toxicity and conflicts, and derive a sense of pleasure from reducing the happiness of others on social media or in the real world. It is presumptuous to imagine that aliens would be impressed if they were to find the Golden Record, a message in a bottle launched to interstellar space on the Voyager 1 & 2 spacecraft. Even if Voyager were to crash on an exoplanet in a million years, and a curious astrophysicist would recover its ruins from the ocean, the fascination of extraterrestrials with Earth would quiet down as soon as their powerful probes would reveal how badly we behave. It is difficult to gain respect from intelligent neighbors when they notice primal conflicts through the open windows of our home. From the perspective of interstellar observers, our allocation of resources to acts of aggression in terrestrial geopolitics versus peaceful space exploration could have been handled far more intelligently. If aliens are truly intelligent, they would avoid us. They know that mud-wrestling gets you dirty and chess playing is better. Fermi’s paradox suggests that we are not attractive on the interstellar dating scene. Finding partners in our cosmic neighborhood would teach us how to do better. Their space trash could be our treasure. For that reason, the Galileo Project is searching for extraterrestrial technological artifacts. The materials retrieved from the fireball site of the interstellar meteor, IM1, were analyzed over the past year and the findings were published last week in a new detailed paper. The Voyager Golden Records are two identical phonograph records which were included aboard the two Voyager spacecraft launched in 1977. The records contain sounds and images selected to portray the diversity of life and culture on Earth, and are intended for any intelligent extraterrestrial life form who may find them. The records are a time capsule. We plan another expedition in 2025 to retrieve larger pieces from IM1’s wreckage and decide whether it was a rock or a Voyager-like meteoroid. In parallel, the preliminary results from monitoring half a million aerial objects in the sky from the first Galileo Observatory at Harvard University are being summarized in a new paper that will be shared publicly soon. We plan to construct and operate two additional Galileo observatories in 2025. Why is science so thrilling? Because new data allows us to learn unexpected facts about our cosmic neighborhood rather than stay limited within the boundaries of what other humans tell us. Collecting evidence and analyzing it requires far more effort than expressing an opinion. This is why most people express an opinion on whether extraterrestrials exist rather than invest their time and money to seek the evidence. It is difficult to train an artificial intelligence (AI) system to follow the path of evidence-based reasoning on extraterrestrials, because there is very little documentation on humans following this path. The polarization between skeptics and believers discourages those who could have followed the hard work of seeking evidence. Common sense is not common on this topic. But being a scientist is a great privilege. At the opening of a podcast recording yesterday, Erik Huberman asked me for my origin story. Towards the end, he wrapped up by asking what I would have advised my younger self to do. I said that if I entered a time machine, my advice to my younger self would have been to ignore societal toxicity and stay on course in pursuing my passion. We live for such a short time and we better focus on what matters. I received an email from a teenager who wrote: “Dear Professor Loeb, I am writing to express my admiration for your work on black holes. Your research on the future of the universe has been incredibly inspiring to me, especially as an 11-year-old with a passion for astronomy. I would also be grateful if you could provide me with some advice on study tips or fun facts about your research. Sincerely, Victoria” To which I replied: “Dear Victoria, Wonderful to hear from you. I would strongly encourage you to follow your dream and become a scientist because science offers the privilege of pursuing your childhood curiosity (while being paid for that). Avi” As a poor-man’s substitute for entering a time machine, I get a kick from helping young scientists. My service in leadership roles as chair and director of half a dozen research organizations and initiatives was intended to help other scientists fulfil their passion. Science offers the privilege of staying curious from beginning to end. Yes, our brain is biodegradable but the lessons learned about the cosmos will stay forever in the minds of our followers. The unknown is unlimited and humans can pursue it forever. My mother used to say that when she watched me as a newborn in the delivery room, I was looking up in wonder about the world around me while the other babies were looking at each other. If she had lived today, she would have been proud to see that I have not stopped wondering and that I have no footprint on social media. Hey, humanity: take better care of yourself. Dress-up, put some make-up and get ready for your next encounter of the superhuman kind. The post Fermi’s Paradox Suggests that We Are Not Attractive on the Interstellar Dating Scene appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Free speech advocates to X (formerly Twitter) to voice their support for American principles and against censorship following the 2024 vice presidential debate on CBS News. Multiple free speech advocates took to X the day after the debate to call out Democratic vice presidential candidate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz for deceptive comments concerning free speech and government pressure to silence speech the left disagrees with. These reactions echoed both Sen. J.D. Vance’s defense of the First Amendment as the “most sacred right in America” and his subsequent challenge of Walz over Democrat support for censorship, particularly Vice President Kamala Harris’s part in the censorship industrial complex.  Twitter Files journalist Michael Shellenberger, MRC President Brent Bozell and MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider, Elon Musk, TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk, The Daily Signal Managing Editor Tyler O’Neil and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya were among those who spoke out. Musk predicted Walz and Kamala Harris would “absolutely implement censorship” if elected, and MRC’s Bozell predicted “maximum government censorship of free speech.” Shellenberger called out Walz for asserting a legal standard for free speech that does not exist. “Tim Walz just spread misinformation in service of making the case for government censorship. He said it’s illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater. That’s a myth. The expression refers to a *nonbinding* claim in a 1919 Supreme Court opinion that was *overturned* in 1969,” Shellenberger clarified. X owner Elon Musk commented on a Shellenberger post, “The Dem machine will absolutely implement censorship if given another four years to do so.” Highlighting the dangers of censorship, Shellenberger continued, “Tim Walz had previously claimed that it was illegal to spread misinformation about elections. It’s not. How could it be? If you let the government to censor disfavored views on elections, how would we ever know if the government stole an election?”  Echoing Shellenberger’s sentiments, MRC’s Schneider wrote that Big Tech censorship, especially in collusion with government officials, is un-American. “The vice presidential debate clarified the choice Americans have in this election: between a pro-free speech ticket and an anti-free speech ticket,” Schneider said. “Vance defended the First Amendment as sacred, while Walz justified censorship. This difference highlights the dramatic shift in the political landscape. It is no longer about Democrats versus Republicans or even liberals versus conservatives. It is about American ideas versus un-American ideas.” MRC’s Bozell criticized, “Walz’s idea of ‘democracy’ is maximum government censorship of free speech. He’s starting to sound like Putin.” The Daily Caller addressed Walz’s “fire” analogy too, but by quoting Vance’s reply. “Tim... you guys wanted to kick people off Facebook for saying  that toddlers shouldn't wear masks.” Voicing opposition to government mandates, as Vance and Daily Caller emphasized, is protected free speech. Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk slammed Walz’s self-excusing claim after Vance’s accusation that he did not “run Facebook.” Kirk stated: “FACTS: [Meta CEO] Mark Zuckerberg, in a letter to Chairman Jim Jordan and the House Judiciary Committee, wrote that he ‘regrets’ working with the Biden-Harris administration, which ‘repeatedly pressured’ Meta's teams ‘for months’ to censor COVID posts, including satire and humor, ‘I believe that government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it.’” He shared screenshots of Zuckerberg’s letter to counter Walz’s line of defense. The Daily Signal Managing Editor Tyler O’Neil likewise commented, “‘I don't run Facebook’ is an embarrassing response when the administration you're essentially running to extend engaged in a pressure campaign to force Twitter, Facebook, and other social media companies to silence people.” Meanwhile, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who sued the federal government over COVID-19 censorship, posted about Walz, “I'm still having trouble processing the fact that an actual American presidential ticket, that might actually win office, openly embraces censorship, suppression of speech, and mass violation of the first amendment. And the old civil liberties groups are fine with it.” President Joe Biden and Vice President Harris’s administration pressured and coordinated with Big Tech to crush free speech, according to the Murthy v. Missouri lawsuit, the Twitter Files and Zuckerberg’s letter. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Columbia Journalism School Dean Jelani Cobb traveled over to Comedy Central and The Daily Show on Wednesday to promote his new PBS documentary on the Electoral College. As Donald Trump may win the election despite losing the popular vote, Cobb and weekly host Michael Kosta probably felt it was important to delegitimize such a possible outcome. Kosta asked, “Why do we have it? What’s one of the big reasons we have it?” Cobb replied by giving the correct answer, “So, one of the reasons that we have it, a really fundamental reason we have it is to balance out the political power of large states and smaller states.”     However, for Cobb, “that is a generic answer,” because “the real answer is that it was a means by which slaveholders would be able to use the bodies of the people they were holding in slavery to count in the census in order to give them additional political power, because the Constitution also has the Three-Fifths Clause, which allows them to count 60 percent of the enslaved population.” Fact-check: It was the slave states that wanted slaves to count as one full person to increase their power, so the Three-Fifths Compromise actually limited their power. Kosta didn’t care to mention that. Instead, he just periodically chimed in with “right.” Cobb continued, “In 1860, that meant 2.4 million people who were enslaved were counted in the census when you determined how much Congressional representation the South would have. Now, bear in mind, this is a country that owes its existence to a war fought over the idea of no taxation without representation… But the 4 million people who are enslaved in the South are counted as part of the political system that gives the authority to Southern voters.” Kosta eventually wondered, “Is ‘contradiction’ too soft of a word?” to which Cobb replied, “I think hypocrisy is a better word.” Beyond this freak out about the Electoral College and attempt to delegitimize it is the possibility the GOP advantage in the Electoral College is waning. Either way, perhaps Democrats should try to compete in the middle of the country instead of trying to impose California-ism on states that don’t want it. Here is a transcript for the October 2 show: Comedy Central The Daily Show 10/2/2024 11:26 PM ET MICHAEL KOSTA: Why do we have it? What’s one of the big reasons we have it? JELANI COBB: So, one of the reasons that we have it, a really fundamental reason we have it is to balance out the political power of large states and smaller states. Now, that is a generic answer. KOSTA: Yes. Yes. COBB: The real answer is that it was a means by which slaveholders would be able to use the bodies of the people they were holding in slavery-- KOSTA: Right. COBB: -- to count in the census in order to give them additional political power, because the Constitution also has the Three-Fifths Clause, which allows them to count 60 percent of the enslaved population. In 1860, that meant 2.4 million people-- KOSTA: Right. COBB: -- Who were enslaved were counted in the census when you determined how much Congressional representation the South would have. Now, bear in mind, this is a country that owes its existence-- KOSTA: Right. COBB: -- to a war fought over the idea of no taxation without representation. KOSTA: Right. COBB: Slaves cannot vote. KOSTA: Right. COBB: But the 4 million people who are enslaved in the South are counted as part of the political system that gives the authority to Southern voters. KOSTA: Is "contradiction" too soft of a word? COBB: I think hypocrisy is a better word.

Between Wednesday night and Thursday morning, the major broadcast networks ABC, CBS, and NBC and their liberal cable networks CNN and MSNBC have yet to devote a single second to disturbing new allegations leveled by the Daily Mail against Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff that claim he slapped a then-girlfriend in 2012. In contrast, NewsNation has had robust coverage with 30 minutes and 50 second on the allegations reported by Daily Mail senior writer Josh Boswell (which made anonymously by three friends of the woman whom Emhoff dated) and the double standard if these claims were made against a Republican. Newsmax was the only other cable network to have touched it with 11 minutes and 29 seconds. Instead, ABC, CBS, and NBC have combined for 27 minutes (27:08) obsessing over January 6-related matters with the newest filing by Special Counsel Jack Smith against former President Trump and the Kamala Harris-Tim Walz campaign cutting a new ad about what Senator JD Vance (R-OH) said about that day during Tuesday’s vice presidential debate. NewsNation’s flagship AM show Morning in America led the way with a segment in each of its three hours. In the last hour, host Markie Martin interviewed Boswell following this table-setter: Bombshell allegations out this morning against Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff. A new Daily Mail article claiming that the Vice President's husband allegedly slapped an ex-girlfriend in the face back in 2012 while the two waited in a valet line after an event at the Cannes Film Festival in France. Now, NewsNation, of course, did reach out to the Harris campaign to respond to these allegations. So far, we have not heard back. Martin first had Boswell explain the story behind how he came to this information, but then invited him to lay out what his article alleged took place in May 2012 in Cannes (click “expand”):     BOSWELL: You've got this girlfriend who'd been dating Doug for about three months and she got some tickets to the AMFAR gala, which is, you know, a hugely high-end, A-list celebrity event in – alongside the Cannes Film Festival in May 2012. They go to this event. Everything's going fine. It’s about 3am. They – they leave. This is in the south of France. They’re waiting in line for a taxi and, Jane, the girlfriend, goes up to the valet to – to try and, you know, slip him 100 Euros to get the car faster. Doug sees her put her hand on the valet’s shoulder, thinks that he – that she’s flirting, comes up slaps her in the face so hard that she spun around. That's what the friends were telling me. MARTIN: Mmmm. BOSWELL: She then manages to get in – she slaps him back two times. She manages to get into the car, but Doug forces his way in also. She’s scared at that point, friends told me. And so, she immediately called one of them. He's a New York businessman, so he was just getting ready for bed in New York. He gets this call from her. She tells him what happened immediately afterwards and then they go back to hotel. The next day, she – she breaks up with him and Doug apparently is – complete –shows no remorse for the incident. And he instead to give some tennis metaphor. He’s into tennis, right? And he said, oh well, it’s no big deal because you got one across the court and down the line, meaning – a tennis metaphor for slapping him back. So, according to the friends, this suggests that Doug didn’t think slapping a woman was a big deal. MARTIN: Ah, well, certainly damning, if true. Martin closed with the other important question here, which is any reaction from either the Harris-Walz campaign or Biden-Harris White House. On both counts, Boswell said “[w]e've gone to them numerous times and they've not responded at all and I think this is important because the Harris campaign is putting Doug front and center” with a message of “womens safety” being “really on the ballot” and “staff funded by public money.” Here’s more from Boswell’s article (click “expand”): DailyMail.com is not naming the woman, who is a successful New York attorney, but will refer to her by the pseudonym 'Jane'. A second friend said Jane, who had been dating Emhoff for three months, also told her about the alleged violence at the time. A third friend told DailyMail.com that Jane first told her in 2014 that she had dated Emhoff, and recounted the full story of his alleged abuse in 2018, when then senator Harris was in the news after grilling Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a Senate hearing over sexual assault allegations. The friends, who all asked not to be named for fear of retaliation by Emhoff, shared with DailyMail.com pictures of him and Jane together from 2012, and other documents and communications corroborating elements of the story. Jane declined to comment. (….) One of Jane's friends, a top New York businessman, said he was at home getting ready for bed that night when he got an unexpected phone call from her. 'It was hard to hear her because she was sobbing,' he said. 'She told me she was with a guy and he hit her. 'It was very clear what she was telling me. She said she was with a guy, her date, she was at the Cannes Film Festival, and he hit her. She was in the car with the guy at the time. 'I didn't know what to do, I didn't know whether to call the French police. I couldn't get a hold of her after calling back.' He said he still had a 'vivid' memory of the troubling conversation from 12 years ago. 'In later conversations, but pretty contemporaneous with that, she told me more about the guy,' he added. Going back to the beginning of the interview, Martin asked how this story came to his attention. Boswell revealed this story took “[s]everal weeks” to pin down and vet, but “grew out of” his previous blockbuster story about Emhoff from August in which he was the first to reveal the Second Gentleman’s first marriage fell apart following an affair with the nanny and elementary school teacher of his daughters. In addition, he got the nanny pregnant, but the child did not survive. While naysayers may dismiss the Daily Mail outright, Boswell noted Emhoff himself confirmed the affair only hours after publication. After explaining his investigation turned him “documentary evidence – messages, photographs, emails that help[ed] back up” the verbal claims from his sources, Boswell answered Martin’s question about the timing of the story so close to the election. “[T]he thing that really sparked coming forward was seeing the Harris campaign present Doug Emhoff as this feminist ally. And that's what really got that backs up…[One] of the friends…finds it kind of, you know, disgusting was the word she used that they are presenting him as a feminist when, in fact, they say that, you know, he has this abusive background,” he replied. After Boswell’s retelling of the events in question he chronicled in his article and the lack of responses from both the campaign and White House, Martin tossed to a portion of a lengthy segment on Chris Cuomo’s show Wednesday night in which he invited Bill O’Reilly and Stephen A. Smith to weigh in. She noted that while they think it “may not impact the election,” this story “speaks to a larger issue in media coverage.” To see the relevant transcript from NewsNation’s Morning in America from October 3, click here.

Appearing as a guest on Tuesday's Morning Joe on MSNBC, author Ta-Nehisi Coates -- who became famous as a writer forThe Atlantic -- complained about the way Israelis treat Palestinians and compared it to Jim Crow, declaring that he wished people paid more attention to Gaza before the October 7 terrorist attack. As BBC's Katty Kay took part in asking questions to Coates as part of the show's panel, she brought up his history of criticizing Israel and his reaction to October 7: So, for this book, you also went to Israel, and you have been very critical of the Israeli -- Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. Can you put it in the context -- I'm not sure whether you went for this trip for the reporting before or after October the 7th, but put it -- put what you found in the context of those attacks. He responded: Look, my politics are the politics of nonviolence. There is nothing within that politics that can watch 1,000 people be murdered -- be massacred and be okay with that and think that that is somehow justified. The only thing I would add to that which I think -- which I will insist on and think is very, very important. I wish that this country was more interested in Gaza before October 7th. Gaza was described to me while I was over there as the largest open air jail in the world. Like I said, I did not see it for myself. I wanted to -- I was not able to. But we're part of that. We're part of the maintenance of that. We're part of the maintenance of that. And evidence of that fact was everywhere around me during my trip. MSNBC's Symone Sanders-Townsend, who was also taking part in the Morning Joe panel, pushed back: You know, people will say -- I mean, the conversation around the -- just the region prior to October 7th is that it is complicated. People say, "Oh, it's not as black and white," as folks try to make it seem complicated. There's nuance there, but you write that what you saw reminded you of the Jim Crow South. There are people who would say this is not that. Coates responded by misleadingly referring to some roads in the West Bank that only Israeli citizens are allowed to use: I would tell them to go. I would tell them to go. I would tell them, "Drive down the roads in the West Bank where you are only allowed to go certain places if you're either Palestinian or you're an Israeli settler. I would tell them to go to Hebron and watch how people whose ancestors have lived there for generations cannot walk down certain streets.... I would ask them whether they think it's okay for a state to label itself as the only democracy in the Middle East and erects citizenship for one-half of its population and for the other half to erect a kind of citizenship or a residency or a stateless status that is somehow less.I don't know how that corresponds with our definitions of what a democracy is. It was immediately familiar to me as somebody who has been raised on the tales of Jim Crow and whose parents were born into Jim Crow. He did not mention that Palestinians who are Israeli citizens are allowed to use the roads or that restrictions were introduced because terrorists were using the roads to attack Israelis. Most Arabs who actually live within Israel are either Israeli citizens or are eligible to apply for citizenship but choose not to, Coat Most Palestinian Arabs who live in the West Bank or Gaza Strip are living in disputed territory that has never been annexed by Israel, so it would not make sense to grant a right to vote in Israeli elections. These are the areas that would already be part of an Arab state if the Palestinian leadership had not repeatedly rejected two-state solution proposals by past Israeli governments. Transcript follows: MSNBC's Morning Joe October 1, 2024 7:30 a.m. Eastern- KATTY KAY: So, for this book, you also went to Israel, and you have been very critical of the Israeli -- Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. Can you put it in the context -- I'm not sure whether you went for this trip for the reporting before or after October the 7th, but put it -- put what you found in the context of those attacks. TA-NEHISI COATES: Yeah, I did. It was made 2023, and, like I said, I went to the West Bank -- I went to, you know, cities throughout Israel. I went to Haifa, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, South Hebron Hills, Ramallah. And the one thing that people told me the whole time I was there was, "You have to go to Gaza." That turned out to be a lot more difficult than I wanted. It was 10 days. And then, when I came back, I was trying to, you know, get back. I was supposed to go in October, and, you know, for obvious reasons, I, you know, I could not go. Look, my politics are the politics of nonviolence. There is nothing within that politics that can watch 1,000 people be murdered -- be massacred and be okay with that and think that that is somehow justified. The only thing I would add to that which I think -- which I will insist on and think is very, very important. I wish that this country was more interested in Gaza before October 7th. Gaza was described to me while I was over there as the largest open air jail in the world. Like I said, I did not see it for myself. I wanted to -- I was not able to. But we're part of that. We're part of the maintenance of that. We're part of the maintenance of that. And evidence of that fact was everywhere around me during my trip. SYMONE SANDERS-TOWNSEND: You know, people will say -- I mean, the conversation around the -- just the region prior to October 7th is that it is complicated. People say, "Oh, it's not as black and white," as folks try to make it seem complicated. There's nuance there, but you write that what you saw reminded you of the Jim Crow South. There are people who would say this is not that. COATES: I would tell them to go. I would tell them to go. I would tell them, "Drive down the roads in the West Bank where you are only allowed to go certain places if you're either Palestinian or you're an Israeli settler. I would tell them to go to Hebron and watch how people whose ancestors have lived there for generations cannot walk down certain streets. I would ask them to talk to Palestinians about a water system that sees Israelis with access to four times as much water as Palestinians. I would ask them whether they think it's okay for a state to label itself as the only democracy in the Middle East and erects citizenship for one-half of its population and for the other half to erect a kind of citizenship or a residency or a stateless status that is somehow less. I don't know how that corresponds with our definitions of what a democracy is. It was immediately familiar to me as somebody who has been raised on the tales of Jim Crow and whose parents were born into Jim Crow. JONATHAN LEMIRE: The complication, though -- and I'm curious to get your thoughts - of course Gaza run by Hamas, a terror group. COATES: Gaza, I would dispute the idea it is run by Hamas. [?] And the reason why I would dispute that is because there was a cordon around Gaza. You do not have freedom of movement in and out. You do not have an airport. You don't have the right to go out and fish and make a living. If your child, for instance, who needs cancer treatment, you need permits to get out to actually get that cancer treatment. They ran it within a certain context. And I need to be absolutely clear about this. This is in no way -- in no way to say Hamas is great or Hamas is good or to sympathize with Hamas, but I do think we need to be accurate about what the power dynamic is there and what the effects of that are. LEMIRE: And, again, your visit there May 2023 ahead of the October 7th attacks.