Despite a low turnout (28% abstention), French President Emmanuel Macron was re-elected on April 24, 2022, beating second-round competitor Marine Le Pen by a margin of 58.6% to 41.4 %. Macron’s victory was the first re-election [without prior cohabitation] of a French president in two decades. In 2017, the dark horse Macron won a major victory over Marine Le Pen.

During his first term, Macron reduced unemployment, well questioned for his competent handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. and was praised for his diplomatic efforts in the current crisis of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He met Russian President Putin in Moscow and was in constant telephone contact with Ukrainian President Zelensky. French voters appear to support efforts by the NATO alliance to arm Ukraine to repel unprovoked attacks on a sovereign nation aspiring to EU membership. Macron is the current rotating president of the European Union.

Le Pen had tried to airbrush her “extremist” positions and distance herself from her anti-Semitic father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, founder of the National Front. She changed the name of her custom party to Rassemblement National (NR). Le Pen, like populists Eric Zemmour on the far right and Jean-Luc Mélenchon on the far left, have agreed to step down as commander of NATO’s joint force. The outgoing president accused Le Pen of promoting a disguised Frexit and maintaining a close alliance with Putin’s Russia. The NR owes more than 9 million euros to a Russian-Hungarian bank. We’ll ask our Parisian colleague what she thinks of the claim by some British and American media that Le Pen actually won a victory while losing.

Macron has another “campaign” ahead, as he seeks a majority for the La République En Marche party in the June legislative elections. The trio of populist contenders, Le Pen and Zemmour on the far right and Jean-Luc Mélenchon on the far left, will try to take control of the National Assembly and thwart Macron’s second term agenda.

Macron now has the politically daunting task of appealing to a wide range of French regional voters who are likely to support populist agendas.

In this context, we held our seventh in a series of discussions with an American expat in Paris, contributor to  New English Review  , which provides English-language media resumes for  Tribune Juive  . We explore the implications of the French presidential election, the populist stance on the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, Israel’s need to turn a blind eye to Russia in Syria, Russia’s gas blackmail, and even more…

Jerry Gordon:  I’m Jerry Gordon, editor of  The New English Review  . And here we are with Nidra Poller reporting an interesting development with the second round of the French presidential elections. Nidra, what were the preliminary results of the second round?

Nidra Poller:  The results reported tonight are approximately: Macron 58%, Le Pen 42%. That might change slightly when the final results come in for major cities.

Jerry Gordon:  How does this compare to the 2017 election?

Nidra Poller: The difference was greater. It’s basically because Marine Le Pen, after losing miserably in 2017, did some sort of political Botox. She smoothed over her real agenda, her real intentions, and walked around with a big smile. By the end of the campaign, she was selling herself as “the mother of the nation.” This blunted the previous backlash that the far right should not be allowed to win. But, as you know, what I mean is that it would have been better if the commentators had shown it populist and explained populism. In any case, I am proud that France did not elect a populist. That’s the first thing. I wasn’t particularly impressed with Macron before, but he’s the president now, and that’s where I live, and I want him to succeed.

Interestingly, the losers did not give decent Democratic kudos. Well, I call them losers. Marine Le Pen lost to Macron. She phoned, as it should, to congratulate him. And then gave a speech that was a short version of his campaign, with insults and accusations, and blaming this and that, they didn’t treat her well, they won’t treat the French right, and so on. And then the candidates who didn’t even make it to the second round also had to put their face in front of us. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, whose bright new idea is that he should be elected Prime Minister, (I will explain later), and Zemmour, who says he will unite the right. It was really very sad. They just rehearsed…mumbling…just rehearsed their campaign pitches.

When candidates lose, they claim to love the country and the people. It’s sad to see them making a speech, basically saying that what the French want is what they had proposed. But the French have just voted, right? If people didn’t vote for them, stayed home saying how wonderful they are, the fact is they didn’t vote for them. You know, that’s the focus of my thinking right now: what we’re going through now is an uphill battle between democracy and tyranny. This is being played out in Ukraine with horrific brutality and suffering. And that is played out in our democracies, with elections and, sometimes, this refusal to accept the verdict. I have a lot of hope. I believe that the courage of Ukrainians in the defense of democracy will play an important role in strengthening democracy in what we called the free world. So, as I said,

But the idea that any intelligent and serious person can vote for Marine Le Pen, while the tyrant of tyrants is on the run in Europe, and we are witnessing unprecedented violence since the end of the Second World War. This violence has global repercussions. The idea that you could put a thoughtless, incompetent person, who walks around saying, “I’ve changed. I changed”… It looks like an alcoholic! “I’ve changed, I won’t do that again.” You cannot have a person without stature as President of France! France is very important in Europe. You know better than anyone that France is the strongest military power in Europe.

Jerry Gordon:  Yes.

Nidra Poller:  With Britain, right?

Jerry Gordon:  Yes.

Nidra Poller:  At a time when suddenly we know we have to defend ourselves, we can’t have… I mean, it would have been a terrible disaster for Europe if she had been elected. And I hope that Americans will wake up and pay tribute to us, as Europeans, for this choice.

Jerry Gordon:  I have to tell you that if you read the American press as the second round approached, it was: Oh, please, dire consequences, inflation will rise, NATO and the problems in Ukraine. And this result just confirms what you just talked about. This is, of course, a reaction against a rather reprehensible type of populism.

Nidra Poller:  Yes. And when you have a country as powerful as the United States that elects an incompetent populist president who has no sense of international relations… When Marine Le Pen spoke of international relations, it was laughable… if not tragic . It’s time people got serious. You cannot elect incompetent people on a whim. So, as I said, this is a lesson for the free world. And I think that’s a relief. I didn’t have time to read the  New York Times article  you sent me, “Marine Le Pen Has Already Wo”. … Isn’t this a magnificent victory? When losers say they’ve won. Well, I’m glad they lost, because their sense of reality isn’t very strong.

Jerry Gordon:  What was curious to me was that the author of that  New York Times article  was Rachel Donadio, a Parisian contributor to  The Atlantic  and former Rome bureau chief and European culture correspondent for  the New York Times  .

Nidra Poller:  What strikes me when I read about French politics in the American or Anglophone press is the lack of precise information given there. Sometimes, when I submitted articles to the American media, they said that there were too many details, the readers could not find their way. But if you don’t give specific details, there’s no way to figure out what’s at play here. What are we trying to do in our monthly conversation  , right  ?

Jerry Gordon:  Does this send another message to people similar to Marine Le Pen who had become Putin’s ally in the EU? And I’m talking about Victor Orban, who has just been re-elected in Hungary.

Nidra Poller:  Yes. As you see with their previous statements… In the past, when people lied, it was not easy to find proof of what they said. Today they lie, and two seconds later the video appears and the truth is out. Marine Le Pen was tripping over herself to say the invasion was terrible, and she doesn’t approve. But she had previously printed campaign posters showing herself shaking hands with Putin. So she had to throw them away. But everyone knows.

Jerry Gordon:  Do the French people, domestic concerns notwithstanding, be it inflation or some other excuse, support Macron’s position on the defense of Ukraine?

Nidra Poller: Yes, and they do it the French way. For example, the idea that the French can talk to everyone, and that it was good that Macron could talk to Putin. And they appreciate his refusal to use the term “genocide”. This pleases the French. But another point we will keep an eye on is that the legislative elections are approaching in June. And my prediction is that Macron’s party will get the majority. Tonight, the sore losers immediately put on their combat gear and took an aggressive stance: “Well, he won the election, but we’re going to give it to him, because we’ll win the parliamentary election.” I do not think so. Then, as the president says, he will have to consider all votes against him, right and left. This is what is expected of a president. Bad losers rack their brains saying how much they love France, and love the French. But when it comes to defending Europe against Putin’s aggression, we realize that these are empty words. Because they wouldn’t dare stand up to a dictator attacking us. What he does in Ukraine, he would do anywhere else. And, deep down, they won’t resist.

Jerry Gordon:  Where does that place Mr. Zemmour, whom some in the American press had said was the wind behind Marine Le Pen’s sails?

Nidra Poller: Yes and no. He acted so badly that she got to do that Botox. At first he said she couldn’t win. It inspired her to prove she could. This way he made her look good. On the other hand, if you do the arithmetic, you might figure out that he stopped her from winning. After the first round, they did polls to see where his voters would go in the second. They went massively to Marine Le Pen. So, if they agree with Marine Le Pen, why didn’t they vote for her in the first round? She would have had a much better result. Fortunately, they didn’t. This evening, there were the three grumpy ones, Marine Le Pen, Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Zemmour. They did not have the dignity to say that Macron won, he is our President, we will continue to express our positions, but he is our President and we want him to succeed. Zemmour gave a speech, he looked dejected and he said he was going to unite the right. It’s funny.

Jerry Gordon:  Nidra, you wrote an incisive article – and I mean incisive in a positive sense – for  Tribune Juive  , dealing effectively with the whole problem of populism. What was the reaction of those who read it in France?

Nidra Poller:  I have to talk to my editor to find out how people react to what I write, because TJ is not a site that attracts dozens and dozens of comments. Which is good, because most of the time they are not very enlightened and often they are quite cruel. Only one person has posted a reaction to this text. She ignored all the arguments I had given to show that populism is no more for the people than communism is for the sharing of wealth. She just made the same populist arguments: Macron is for the elite; ordinary people are ignored. And they’re fed up with it all. She said she was going to vote for Marine Le Pen because of my article. I hope, by the end of the year, to publish a collection of these chronicles that I write for Tribune Juive , because there is another dimension when you read them one after the other and see how they are linked. That’s what I did in the early 2000s. And maybe I’ll try to do an English version of those essays. In the column to which you refer, I said that they are populists and false nationalists. Populists never keep what they promise. Why do people believe them? They never deliver what they promise. They cling to a big social problem that no one can solve: immigration, drug trafficking, violence against women, and… What else…

Jerry Gordon:  Inflation?

Nidra Poller: Yes, the cost of living. And Islamic jihad in all its ramifications. Populists click on really problematic things that no one can fix. Their line is this: you elected one government after another and none of them solved these problems. I will do it. In fact, they have no experience to be judged. You remember: “We are going to build this wall and Mexico will pay for it. What they offer is a pie in the sky. I am proud and relieved that French voters did not get caught. If Putin’s Russia had not invaded Ukraine, the dangers we face would have remained theoretical. Russia has been getting a pass for 20 years. But the danger has now materialized, and it is obvious that we must have good leadership and responsible citizens. We don’t play on social media. Its a question of life or death.

Jerry Gordon:  Nidra, did the Franco-Jewish organization support Macron.

Nidra Poller:  No. That’s not what happened.

Jerry Gordon:  None?

Nidra Poller:  No. It was very controversial. Leaders of several organizations issued a warning: “Do not vote for the extremists, Zemmour, Le Pen or Mélenchon. For many Jews, people I respect, it was the unacceptable mixture of religion and politics. French Jews vote as French citizens. They shouldn’t be told how to vote.

Jerry Gordon:  Okay.

Nidra Poller:  But I see this warning as similar to what I wrote in the Tribune Juive article  you referred to. I find it appropriate that Jewish leaders speak out and educate Jews about the dangers of populism. And don’t forget, Marine Le Pen seriously intended, if elected, to ban kosher slaughter.

Jerry Gordon:  Right.

Nidra Poller:  I have to leave you now, because I’m going to listen to Emmanuel Macron’s speech at the Champ de Mars.

Jerry Gordon:  And I want to thank you for your comments on what seemed like a resounding victory for President Macron.

Nidra Poller:  Well, Marine Le Pen thinks it was a resounding victory for herself, but it was a resounding victory for democracy. And, as I said in that article you mentioned, now everything remains to be done.

Jerry Gordon:  So if I had to have a lead for this discussion, is it Macron’s victory over populism?

Nidra Poller:  I think it’s the victory of French voters against populism. Now Macron has to pull through. He’s very smart, he knows it’s not a resounding victory for him. It is a victory against the danger of electing an incompetent and dishonest person to the presidency of France in one of the most dangerous periods of modern times. People on the right are going to be angry when he does things to please voters on the left and vice versa. But that’s what he must do, rule. So we’ll follow it from there.

Jerry Gordon:  Nidra, following Macron’s victory, the French Jewish community organization CRIF applauded the result, but expressed concerns about the populist minority vote. What does this tell us about the fact that divisions in France are a threat to democracy?

©Jerry Gordon and Nidra Poller. All rights reserved.

A number of bioethicists advocate ‘moral enhancement’ — by tinkering with people’s brains or by giving them pharmaceuticals.

Imagine this scenario: the US Army captures a fanatical soldier of the Islamic State who has been responsible for the deaths of several Americans. What comes next? Execute him immediately? Illegal. Imprison him until he is no longer dangerous? He could be there for the rest of his life. Disarm him and release him? Too dangerous – he will kill again.

A bioethicist from the University of Massachusetts Lowell, Blake Hereth, suggests another option in the journal Neuroethics: forced moral neuroenhancement. Hereth argues that this is entirely legitimate for “for prisoners of war (POWs) fighting unjustly”.

Whether it is even possible to force people to act virtuously by tinkering with their brains with implants or chemicals is highly speculative. But let’s assume for the moment that it is. Hereth contends that it could be morally obligatory because it would both keep the terrorist from being killed and would keep him from killing others.

Of course, this appears to ignore a key point in the Geneva Conventions:

… no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental, or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

But Hereth responds that moral enhancement is in his interest: he will become a better human being. He will become a “just combatant” or a “harmless civilian”. “The unfortunate fact,” he writes, “is that states will pursue wars irrespective of their inability to know whether those wars are just. When they do that, morally improving enemy combatants is less bad than killing them.”

What if the other side, the bad guys, attempt to use moral enhancement to “turn” soldiers on our side, the good guys. Hereth has a solution to that – an “Advance Directive Implant” which would kill the good guy when his superiors discovered that he has been captured.

For Hereth, the use of moral enhancement in war is a test case. If it works, the techniques and the theory could be used in other situations.

This proposal raises a host of ethical questions.

An obvious one is – who determines whether a cause is just or unjust? ISIS believed that their cause was so obviously just that it permitted them to violate human rights.

Back in 2015  terrorists killed 130 people in the  Bataclan theatre in Paris. They were high on Captagon, a black-market amphetamine. Witnesses said that the killers were almost zombie-like. “I saw a man shoot,” one witness told French TV. “I saw a man who was peaceful, composed, with a face that was almost serene, contemplative, advance towards the bar. He sprayed the terrace [with bullets] as anyone else would spray their lawn with a garden hose.” That was moral bioenhancement, of sorts, even if bioethicists would disavow it.

Moral enhancement is a hot topic in contemporary bioethics. It has been advocated for psychopaths, for unruly teenagers, for sex offenders, for people who don’t believe in climate change, etc. Some bioethicists believe that it should be compulsory in the light of the destructive power of modern technology. Freedom is just too risky. As American bioethicist Parker Crutchfield argued a couple of years ago:

Where it used to require an extraordinarily coordinated effort to cause ultimate harm, now, or in the near future, it only takes one person. Thus, moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory for everyone.

During the Cold War era, they had another name for moral enhancement – brainwashing. The horror of brainwashing, as people imagined it in the 1950s, was that it destroyed a person’s freedom, the characteristic which most fully defines what a human being is. That fear lingers on in the public’s revulsion at what the LGBT lobby calls “gay conversion therapy”. But there is a sound reason for that fear: people are made to be free.

If moral enhancement were ever taken seriously outside the Ivory Tower, it would signal a complete break with two thousand years of moral culture. In the Judeao-Christian tradition, God created Adam and Eve as the only morally free agents on earth. A risk was involved – that they would make bad, morally culpable choices. But a human being without freedom is less than human.

Unlike God, bioethicists in favour of moral enhancement are not prepared to take a bet on human dignity. Better a world without freedom than a world without safety.

State of The Republic

The Significance of Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter and the Biden regime going full Orwell.

By Jason A. Brown

Elon Musk purchases Twitter for 44 Billion dollars.  Let the explosion of Democrats’ heads commence as Elon vows to bring free speech back to Twitter.  We have already seen changes on Twitter’s board that seem to be for the better.  Now the FTC has opened an investigation into Elon and his businesses.  Isn’t that just the go to response to everything when things don’t go the way that the DC criminals want it to?  Cross Uncle Sam, get federal law enforcement and federal regulatory agencies to crawl up your rectum with a microscope.

The feds say, probable cause, what is that?  The Washington cabal now goes after anyone that does not follow the narrative, especially those with influence, like Musk.  But this did not start under Biden, this started with the Obama regime.  Oh yes, who can forget Lois Lerner and the IRS withholding tax exempt status from conservative leaning non-profits?  Who can forget the Bureau of Land Management, who held the acronym BLM before Black Lives Matter?  An armed BLM at the Bundy Ranch, killing Cliven Bundy’s cattle and attempting to arrest him and his sons.  Armed patriots showed up from all over the US and took pointed their weapons at agents of a federal agency.  The BLM eventually backed down but the events had the potential to be a bloodbath if one shot would have been fired.  One of Cliven Bundy’s sons was hit with a taser used by the feds though.  After the standoff was over, and patriots returned home, the FBI started arresting people that were at the ranch to help the Bundys apparently using facial recognition to establish their identities.  Those that were there were getting rounded up by federal law enforcement.  Does this sound similar to January 6th protesters?

When someone asks me why I think Obama was such a terrible president I don’t refer to specific policies, I just point out that he was the first president to weaponize the federal government and its bureaucracy against American citizens.  More specifically, citizens that were regarded as political opposition, or dissenters.  This was the precedent that was set by Obama and his administration.  We are now seeing this weaponization of the federal government on steroids.  Twitter was such a major component of the progressive machine as it provided them a non-government entity to control speech.  The 1st amendment protects free speech from government censorship.  Twitter was their lap dog that censored unwanted opinions, and even legit news stories that were not acceptable to the DC establishment at a given time (Hunter’s Laptop).

Now Musk is going to clean house and now Uncle Sam has decided that they need to form but another government agency to decide what is true and what misinformation is.  That’s right, under the DHS umbrella, Biden is forming the equivalent of 1984’s Ministry of Truth, to determining what is acceptable when it comes to speech and ideas, and prohibit speech that the regime deems toxic.  This is straight up Orwellian, in a very literal sense.  The formation of this new agency to bring in a new era of government censorship, and they are not even trying to hide their intentions anymore.  This turn of events illustrates just how significant Musk’s purchase of this social media platform is.  How is this new regulatory arm of the government going to be used?  Will it be combined with E/S/G scores and the great reset?  This is definitely a real possibility.

More and more people are waking up to the corruption that has taken over our country, as Biden’s approval numbers tank. We are in a dangerous time right now but if we keep the pressure on the criminal scum that is trying to make us all slaves, we may just win this in the end. I will keep a close eye on this situation and will have updates as events unfold. Now is a good time to subscribe if you haven’t already. It’s free! In the meantime, stay vigilant and keep close watch over your kids. We have sick, twisted, perverts that are sanctioned and funded by the government, that are looking for ways to groom your children. 4 words, “NOT ON MY WATCH”.

©Jason A Brown. All rights reserved.

Despite the statements coming out of the most corrupt and embarrassing White House administration, the Biden/ Harris plan is not working.

Today I was asked by an obvious libtard how I could say that neither Biden or any single member of his administration had actually done anything good or worthy. I took the question seriously and gave it some thought but came up with nothing. Zero. All I could think of was the harm that they had done to my beloved country. Not only domestically but internationally. Every disaster was deliberate, patiently thought out and designed to bring America to its knees. The work this administration has performed in my mind is not only evil but treasonous. Satanic.

I listen to his press secretary etc. as they claim tremendous victories for the DemonRats over Covid, the economy, employment, internationally and domestically. They claim the Biden/Harris plan is working!

Let’s look briefly at his non-achievements. ( There are no positive achievements) The economy is in a tail spin. The first quarter sees the GDP ( Gross Domestic Product ) shrinking 1.4%. They had been predicting a 1.1% gain. This is the worse performance by our economy since the spring of 2020 at the height of the China Virus fraud.

Next illegal immigration. Our southern border is porous. Open to all. 42 illegals on the terrorist watch list or no flight list were apprehended but the Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has no idea if they have been released or are wondering around our country. When you look at the continuing massive influx of criminal illegals crossing unchecked into America, do not try and think these 42 are the only terrorist elements that have sneaked into our country. There are hundreds if not thousands. It is no wonder Republicans are calling for Alejandro Mayorkas to resign or be impeached. In fact at hearings today he was rightly called a traitor by Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colorado, who compared him to traitor Benedict Arnold.

Inflation. The cruelest tax of all was up 8.5% last month and I expect to see an increase this month. That figure doesn’t include gas or food prices which are removed, I believe, wrongly. I also believe that we are in the early stages of hyper inflation and about to enter a recession due to the Biden/ Harris plan of spend, spend, spend. I do not think the interest rates increased by the Federal Reserve will have the normal result of dropping inflation. We will see probably at least 4 or more half point increases this year and more next year. As families are hard pressed to pay bills, buy gas or food, the use of credit cards becomes more prevalent and the increase in interest rates will hurt them even more.

When things looked like they were going wrong originally Biden blamed President Trump, even going as far as to say they had inherited a broken immigration system and an economy about to collapse. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing.

Then when the idiot Biden worked out that we didn’t believe him, he began to blame Putin for gas increases and inflation as well as for the shortage of goods. This despite the fact that both gas prices and inflation were roaring upwards long before the Russia/Ukraine conflict. In fact practically from day one of the usurpers illegal takeover of our country by fraud and crookery.

I remember how Biden promised he would restore respect for America on the international stage despite the fact that we had never been more respected while President Trump had been in office. Peace prevailed in the Middle East and NATO members were finally paying their share. Sanctions on China, Iran etc. were working and our military was greatly strengthened. Law and Order was strong. Crime in red states down. Biden said finally grown ups were in charge with his party being in charge. But – what do we see? Russia saw our weakness under Biden and struck Ukraine. China wants Taiwan and is on the verge of attacking them. Iran is on the cusp of developing nuclear weapons and North Korea is developing missiles that can reach our country. OPEC is mocking us and we see state leaders refusing to even take Bidens calls. Even that French fool, President Emmanuel Macron, did not take Bidens call after his French election victory. Saudi Arabia even portrays Biden mockingly on a Saturday Night Live show.

Employment. Let’s be honest. It could only ever go upwards from the lows of the China virus scam that destroyed businesses and jobs. The economy had to get better as we went back to work. It was nothing to do with Biden. Nothing.

Our military. An embarrassment to our nation. Led by leftist political whores like General Mark Milley who are more concerned with training a WOKE military rather than an elite fighting force. He truthful is a traitor. A disgrace to our country and our once proud military. I am a firm believer in capital punishment for acts of treason and Milley is at or near the top of my list. Anyone think Afghanistan?

Law and Order. What can I say? Crime is up massively especially in blue states and cities where the Defund the police movement has really bitten them in the rear!! Cops are hated, shot at, assaulted and wrongly held to absolutely insane standards. They risk all every time they go to work.

My libtard who asked me the original question suggested that wages had gone up under Biden. ( Not sure if that was his best example ) Yes they have but like any good socialist government what they give they take away. The increases in wages have long since been fully eroded by inflation. People are worse off. Minorities are worse off. Savings are almost depleted and most families are living paycheck to paycheck. The very social groups that the DemonRats say they best represent are the very groups that are suffering most. Minorities.

So, if anyone out there wants to let me know what good decisions Biden has made that actually benefit America, please let me know.

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

Last week, former President Barack Obama declared that government needs to start regulating free speech on social media platforms because their “content management” efforts are failing to keep rhetorical “raw sewage out of the public square.”

This week, billionaire Elon Musk bought one of the most influential of such platforms, Twitter, with the pledge to restore free speech – an apparent repudiation of what is not so much about managing content as it is the suppression of information and opinion politically intolerable to radical leftists like Obama.

Time will tell whether these were coincidental developments or, for that matter, whether Mr. Musk will really enable freedom of expression on Twitter. What is clear already is that the fight for that fundamental liberty has never been more necessary – and the emergence of a formidable man professing to be its champion more welcome.

This is Frank Gaffney.

The Secure Freedom Minute – the most interesting, informative and life-saving 60 seconds of your day.

AUTHOR

Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Founder and Executive Chairman of the Center for Security Policy.

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy podcast is republished with permission. All rights reserved.