Episode 549 Global Town Hall Feb 2023

Peter Wadhams, an expert on Arctic sea ice, tells us that the Antarctic and Arctic are both losing ice at the same time instead of alternating by the seasons as usual. Alexey Prokhorenko, a Russian who fled to Poland in opposition to the war, tells us that all the Russian expatriates agree that the Russian government must be run by a strong parliament, not a strong presidency. Marilyn Krieger is concerned about the blizzards covering California now and the anxiety people feel about the mountain lions that she is trying to protect. For the video, audio podcast, transcript and comments, https://tosavetheworld.ca/episode-549-global-town-hall-feb-2023.


Alexey Prokhorenko

Peter Wadhams

Marilyn Krieger


Russia, people, inaudible, thought, Warsaw, Russians, happening, issues, climate, youth, Putin, icebergs, Russian, war, big, group, California, Georgia


Alexey Prokhorenko, Bill Leikam, Peter Wadhams, Pia Wadhams, Rose Dyson, Joanna Campe, Marilyn Krieger, Alyn Ware, Charles David Tauber, Peter Brogden, Barbara Birkett, Metta Spencer


In this discussion, participants touch upon various topics such as global warming, Arctic ice, and youth engagement in peace and climate initiatives. They highlight the importance of addressing climate change and the Arctic’s role in global warming. They also discuss the work of the Basel Peace Office, which focuses on youth engagement in peace, climate, and disarmament activities.


The Pacey Awards recognize inspiring youth projects worldwide. Three projects were awarded, including an education program in Georgia, “Adopt a Tree, Not a Gun” in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and a storytelling project in the Middle East and North Africa. The Georgia program focuses on conflict resolution in schools, helping students from different political backgrounds find common ground. The “Adopt a Tree, Not a Gun” initiative educates children in the Congo about resisting recruitment into militias, while the storytelling project addresses climate issues in the Middle East and North Africa.

The conversation then shifts to Russian and Ukrainian expatriates in Georgia. Many Russians fled their country to avoid mobilization, with around 900,000 men leaving Russia. These expatriates face challenges in obtaining visas and immigration status in other countries, leading to tension among different communities. The education program in Georgia aims to address these tensions and promote understanding among the various groups.

Alyn Ware mentions an announcement of three award winners and highlights the importance of education programs for youth, especially those focused on nuclear weapons issues and geostrategic conflicts. The Youth Hotline initiative is brought up, aiming to promote dialogue between young people from different backgrounds, including Russians who have left the country and those who remain.

Metta Spencer expresses interest in setting up a Russian language conversation on her YouTube channel to discuss political structures and changes needed in Russia after Putin’s departure.

Marilyn Krieger shares her experience dealing with mountain lions in California, noting that recent extreme weather events have contributed to increased human-wildlife interactions. She emphasizes the importance of educating people about mountain lions and addressing community concerns. Additionally, Krieger mentions that it is now illegal to shoot mountain lions in California without a deprivation permit issued by Fish and Wildlife. The discussion also touches upon the emotional reactions of people regarding mountain lion encounters and the need for a balanced approach in handling such situations.

The discussion covers various topics, including extreme weather events, melting glaciers, rising sea levels, and political issues involving Russians who have left their country. Peter Wadhams talks about unusual snowfall in California and Turin, Italy, and how sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic is decreasing. He mentions the Thwaites Glacier breaking up, which could contribute to a significant rise in global sea levels, impacting cities like New Orleans and Venice.

Metta Spencer introduces Alexey Prokhorenko, a Russian interpreter who left Russia to avoid being conscripted into the military. Alyn Ware discusses education programs for youth in Georgia, which deal with immigrants from different nationalities and backgrounds. He also mentions the Youth Fusion project, which won the Gorbachev Schultz Legacy Youth Award for engaging youth in nuclear disarmament and facilitating dialogue across political divides.

Spencer asks Prokhorenko about the extent to which Russians who have left the country continue discussing political issues with friends and family back home. Prokhorenko says that people’s attitudes vary, but he personally still tries to convince others to reject propaganda and engage in discussions. He also mentions a gathering in Warsaw attended by around 100 people, demonstrating that some political activism still occurs among Russian immigrants.

During a demonstration, Russians present could not identify themselves as Russians because Ukrainians did not want any Russians participating. However, this was considered a mistake as these Russians were not pro-Kremlin or pro-Putin. They even had a different flag, white, blue, and white, with the red removed. This flag is banned in Russia and is classified as extremist.

There is some dialogue among expatriates about how to change the Russian government, but it is not well-structured, with many groups detached from one another. A shadow parliament made up of some former Russian parliament members and opposition leaders has been meeting, but it lacks recognition from many opposition groups.

There is consensus among opposition groups that Putin must go, wars must stop, and the future Russian state should be a parliamentary republic. A strong presidential authority is believed to lead to a new incarnation of Putinism or Stalinism. Most people agree that the parliament should be the strongest center of decision-making, but there are concerns about preventing strong leaders from becoming dangerous dictators.

The conversation touches on the difficulties in identifying potential dictators and the idea that democracy is failing in many places. One suggestion is to implement a more dramatic version of democracy, like citizens’ assemblies or grassroots democracy, where a cross-section of the population is put in charge for a while and decision-making is done after deliberation and consultation.

Overall, the discussion emphasizes the need for dialogue, structured planning, and a new political system in Russia to avoid the pitfalls of the current government and to prevent the rise of dangerous dictators.

Charles David Tauber joins the conversation, discussing the challenges of dealing with war trauma, particularly among former child soldiers and refugees. He stresses the need for increased capacity to address these issues, particularly through educational groups and trauma therapy. Metta Spencer suggests that an article be written for Peace Magazine to raise awareness of Tauber’s work and to help recruit more individuals to be trained in group therapy for war trauma victims.

Rose Dyson then brings up concerns about the trends on university campuses regarding diversity, inclusion, equity, and justice, and how these may infringe on freedom of expression.

 The conversation revolves around the idea of decentralization in Russia and the autonomy of its republics. Joanna Campe mentions the need for education to replace government-controlled media, while also discussing the influence of Leopold Kohr’s “Small is Beautiful” concept on decentralization. The reconstruction of Ukraine is also addressed as a significant challenge for Russia.

The participants discuss the state of political immigration in Turkey and Warsaw, with Alexey Prokhorenko sharing his experiences in both places. He says political immigration is negligible in Turkey, while Warsaw has many Russian immigrants who arrived for political reasons.

The conversation moves on to China’s peace plan, which Alexey finds very generic and lacking in specifics. He speculates that China may be trying to emerge as a global power and make a claim to that role. Rose Dyson brings up the idea of soft power, and how commentators have said that Putin has not used soft power effectively.

The group also discusses the use of non-lethal weaponry, such as disinformation and election interference, which Metta Spencer agrees Putin has effectively used. The conversation concludes with the mention of billions of dollars spent on bribing the Ukrainian elite, and the corruption within the system.

The panelists note that corruption is a shared legacy in many post-Soviet countries, manifested not only financially but also in the habit of creating a false image of reality. This practice dates back to the Soviet era, when fake statistics were reported to make an area or republic appear more productive than it was.

Regarding disinformation, panelists expressed concerns about how to combat such tactics without infringing on freedom of speech. They noted that traditional rules of international relations and warfare do not apply in this context.

The conversation also touched on climate migration and climate change issues that have been discussed for decades. A BBC documentary was mentioned, featuring American Vietnam War veterans moving to Vietnam to do volunteer work and participate in local society, possibly as a way to atone for their guilt. The documentary highlighted the interesting phenomenon of these veterans revisiting the country they once fought against.

Lastly, Charles David Tauber mentioned the formation of groups in Kyiv, Lviv, and possibly Warsaw, focused on peace and psychology. He also noted the existence of a conscientious objectors group in Kyiv.


This is a machine-made transcript, so it will contain errors. Don’t cite it without checking it against the video for mistakes.

Metta Spencer  00:00

This is February 26, 2023. And this is the Global Town Hall, and we have a meeting every month to open conversation about whatever’s on people’s minds around the world, especially activists. So I’m about to open the door and let in the floodgates of all these people who want to talk about various global issues. Hello, Joanne.

Joanna Campe  00:30

Hey. Thank you.

Metta Spencer  00:32

I am glad you are here, and here and here comes Peter Wadhams, and I think Peter.

Peter Brogden  00:38


Metta Spencer  00:39

Hello, Peter Brogdon. How are you? It’s good to see you. Here’s Peter Wadham, hi Peter.

Peter Wadhams  00:45

Hi. Hi.

Metta Spencer  00:47

I said hello to Joanna already. And here’s Pia. Hello Pia.

Pia Wadhams  00:50

Hello, just come back from Vienna. There was an Arctic science summit week. And I spent a week in Vienna and I just got into Turin about one minute ago.

Metta Spencer  01:05

Okay, well, give me give him a good hug because you’ve been away a week, you need to get caught up. He told me last time I talked to him. He told me that you were in Vienna. And I thought, Well, you’re a lucky girl.

Pia Wadhams  01:18

Yeah, it was a long. It was a long conference. Actually.

Peter Wadhams  01:23

I wasn’t in Vienna, I was stuck here.

Pia Wadhams  01:26

Peter was in Scotland before that.

Metta Spencer  01:28

So, why? Why are you in different places? I wouldn’t think that that anyplace. Arctic in nature would would appeal to both of you.

Peter Wadhams  01:38

Yeah. Yeah.

Pia Wadhams  01:40

But Peter didn’t come to that me to this meeting. And I went in my role as president of polar educators International. So we had things there. So Peter,…

Metta Spencer  01:53

You can at least bring him up to date and inform him what he missed.

Peter Wadhams  01:58


Pia Wadhams  01:58

I know. Yeah, quite a lot. Not really, I mean, it wasn’t really highly, scientifically wasn’t a top meeting. So that’s why Peter didn’t [inaudible]. But it was nice to network with people. That was good.

Metta Spencer  02:14

Why don’t you go to a different computer. So you can sit down both of you?

Pia Wadhams  02:19

Well, because I just come in, and I had to,because I had to write a poster for a conference in Japan. And I’m meeting with three people now. Anyway enjoy, nice to see you looking so well.

Metta Spencer  02:35

Thank you. Okay. All right. So we have a whole nest of people here already. I should tell everybody else that Peter Wadhams is, I think the leading expert on Arctic sea ice anywhere of course I…

Peter Wadhams  02:52

[Inaudible] work protects.

Metta Spencer  02:56

If I could distributed credentials, you will get the number one. But I’m not the person deciding this, this hierarchy. But anyway, Piais his wife, Maria Pia. And as she has been off to, she’s also a specialist on the Arctic, but more the social end of things. So she’s been at a conference in Vienna. So anyway, the rest of you are already here. And I see also, Bill Leikam the fox guy, hello Bill Leikam how are you?

Bill Leikam  03:29

I’m doing well. You know I was thinking about something Metta. Here we are discussing the state of the world, if you will. But in my field of work, we are up against something that is even bigger than any war that you could imagine. And that has to do with this seriousness of global warming. And its impact upon us. If we don’t get our act together very, very soon. We could face extinction ourselves.

Metta Spencer  03:30

You bet.  Yeah. Yeah. And Peter Wadhams is the man to talk to because I think I’m not you know, who am I to say, but I think the the Arctic and the the threat of methane explosions and, and even the more gradual leaking of methane from permafrost and, you know, the Arctic Ocean, all of those things are the scariest aspect of,of global warming. And and Peter, you know, you you answer Bill, because here I am talking and Peter you should be doing that.

Bill Leikam  03:45


Peter Wadhams  04:51

Yeah, I’m afraid. You’re right. So that’s the, the rate of warming is increasing all the time, when we’re not the idea that we might be beating it or doing something about it is completely false, where we’re simply accepting that because, because later emissions is increasing, and the world is in a mess, because of the, the war and COVID, we’re just giving up. And we’ve given up and giving up at this time means that very soon there’s going to be a really catastrophic change in in why the world is not doing anything about it, because we, we prefer to worry about COVID and Ukraine and so on.

Bill Leikam  05:54


Metta Spencer  05:55

And then out of those are real problems. I want to greet a couple of other people though, Marilyn  Krieger is a pal of Bill Leikam’s because they’re both naturalists working on animal critters in California mostly. And Alyn Ware is I think you’re in Prague aren’t you dear? It’s good to see you.

Alyn Ware  06:15

Yes that’s right, hello from Prague, everyone.

Metta Spencer  06:17

Well Joanna say a bit about yourself?

Joanna Campe  06:20

Okay, so I am the founder and executive director of remineralize the earth. And for decades, we’ve been advocating re mineralization, utilizing rock dusts applied to soils, for agriculture to regenerate forests and to store carbon and stabilize the climate and enhanced weathering has come along to, to, you know, bring it much more into the mainstream. I think in terms of being in a realistic strategy. There are some differences between remineralization and enhanced weathering, but they overlap. And so yeah.

Metta Spencer  07:04

All right. So we have a show about that a while back. And it’s a very important part of the armamentarium to combat global warming, as well as improve the nutritional value and quality of our soil. I’m going to ask, I’m going to ask Alan to start us off. Is still happening to children in the Congo?

Alyn Ware  07:26

Recently, things that we’ll be working on. So I’m working with the Basel Peace Office, and we highlight youth engagement and peace, climate and disarmament activities. And we just gave award last month, or three awards, actually. It’s called Pacey, peace, nuclear abolition and climate engaged youth awards. And we had, I think it was like 85 really inspiring youth projects from around the world nominated for the award. This was more than twice from the previous year, we’re very lucky, we had three donors, so we could give three awards or 5000 euro each. And it was just really inspiring, seeing the incredible activities that young people are doing smart using a range of different tools, storytelling, digital methods, you know, various various ways of communicating messages and engaging youth and these critical issues for humanity. So we had out of the 80, we had to whittle it down to nine finalists, and the nine finalists all came online, it was an online event, we had nearly 300 people participating from around the world. And the nine finalists presented their projects, and then everybody who was a participant could then vote on which were the top three. And that’s how we ended up with the three finalists. And they were a an education program in Georgia, which is dealing with a lot of young people who have come from other countries. From Ukraine, you’re not escaping the war from Russia. And this sort of tensions between the youth because of the different political perspectives that they’ve come from. And this was a conflict resolution program in the schools and it was just having wonderful success, and helping break down the animosities between youth that they inherit, you know, from the political places they are from so that was one, the other another one that one was adopt a tree, not a gun, and that was in the Democratic Republic of Congo. And this was an interim basic role plays for young for children, whose children are recruited into militias in the Congo. And in order to educate the children how to resist and how to respond … It’s still happening, they’re still happening. Yeah.

Metta Spencer  10:00

At what age?

Alyn Ware  10:01

Yeah, so this is normally from round about sort of like eight through 12, you know, young ones, you know, recruited into the military gangs and child soldiers. So starting with education really, you know, in the schools is really important. And this project was saying, don’t take, pick up a gun plant a tree instead. So it was providing an alternative, and using interactive theater. And then the third one was, um, storytelling in Middle Eastern North African countries, on climate issues and how that’s impacting and, and how that’s impacting. And it was, it was bringing a range of young people from the Middle East and North African countries together, the storytelling. So for me, this was really inspiring that you had so these are just the three [inaudible] winners, the finalists of so many incredible youth projects. And that gives me a lot of hope and inspiration that even when there are horrible things happening, there are still young people who are responding to the challenge and taking forward projects. And we’re doing them a bit of a help along.

Metta Spencer  11:06

And I want to ask you about these, the Russians and Ukrainians who came from Georgia, I hope we’ll have an article about the expatriate Russians in Georgia who fled into Georgia in the next issue of Peace magazine, but I’m not sure of it yet. But what I do hope we will have on this show is a Russian himself, who himself fled from Russia to avoid being mobilized, as they call it, we’d say drafted, but they use the word draft to refer to in Russia to the annual call up of all the 18 year olds for training or something. But they’re not really permanently turned into soldiers. But this mobilization would be where they were calling up 300,000 men to go fight. And more than that, something like 900,000 men actually left the country, rather than, than do so. And as I understand it, there are issues for them problems for them to find, visas or to be admitted as immigrants to other countries. And there’s, there’s tension. So tell me about the interaction that you mentioned, of these, these people in Georgia, the the Georgians, the Ukrainians, and the Russians who come into Georgia.

Alyn Ware  12:44

So I’ve put in the chat box, a link to the announcement of the three winners for our award. So if anyone wants to want to follow up in sort of click on there and find out more information about any of those projects. Personally, I’m not an expert on what’s happening in Georgia. But it’s from you the the analysis that the project was giving us and the reason for doing this education program. It wasn’t just you know, Russians who are escaping conscription, there is also in Georgia. Russians were there previously, and some of them very supportive of Putin’s policies, and seeing Georgia as part of the bigger, you know, Russian Empire. And so, and some of them, you know, like, refused to speak Georgian in Georgia, they’ll speak Russian and expect that, you know, Georgia, which used to be part of this bigger Soviet empire, things should still be speaking, Russian. So you’ve got these. It’s mixed. There’s not just, you know, there’s not one Russian perspective from people who are there, there are different backgrounds, and there’s tensions amongst those. So having the education programs for youth is really important. This is not just the only one we for this Pacey project, we did it in cooperation with youth fusion, which is a really interesting, youth led youth initiated network of all the young people working mostly on the nuclear weapons issue. But with the Russia invasion of Ukraine, it makes it very obvious that you can’t just work on nuclear issues in a vacuum. You know, the threats of nuclear weapons are part of this geostrategic struggle and conflicts. And youth fusion started a program, which is called the Youth hotline. And some of the people who helped me set it up are actually young Russians who have left Russia because otherwise they’d be conscripted. But they want to keep dialogue going with those who are still in Russia. And they say the dialogue and contact are still really, really important. And some people choose to stay. Some people choose to leave they’re in very different situations. We can’t cut down the dialogue and so youth, the youth hotline is to set up to try and make that possible, more possible, more dialogue between young people, some who are still in Russia, those who have left Russia, those who may be from other countries, and keep the dialogue going of young people, you know, in a respectful environment, to be able to, again, break down these barriers that have been not created by the wall, but [inaudible] reinforced.

Metta Spencer  15:26

Oh, I’m so glad you mentioned that, please tell us it put put some information in the chat box about that hotline, because I have not heard of it before. And it sounds like exactly the kind of thing that I’m trying to encourage or not even do more than encourage, I want to start something comparable, on the channel that we are using now the project, save the world’s channel, on YouTube, because I would like to set up a conversation in Russian, hosted by a Russian speaker, a political scientist, or somebody who’s really knowledgeable about political structures and so on, to to have the expatriate Russians be in conversation about the kinds of changes that they need to make in the government system in Russia, once they get rid of Putin. Because you know, the people in Russia are not in a position to talk about it very well. They can go to jail, or they can be certainly repressed for even bringing up the subject. And but people outside the country can call home, and they do. But as I understand that most many of the people living outside the country have just given up hope of talking intelligently with their parents, let’s say and back home, because they don’t get along. I mean, I know one young woman I just talked to this week, who has lived now in in Canada, about eight or 10 years. And, and she says that they avoid, she calls her parents, but they don’t talk about the war, because they think that she’s been brainwashed, because she doesn’t support the war. So a lot of people are apparently cautious about bringing up a subject that is so fraught,anybody else on this issue?

Alyn Ware  17:34

I had a quick follow up on that Metta. And thanks for raising this. So I put in the chat box, the link to the youth fusion network, they are at the moment setting up this youth hotline. So it’s not there’s not nothing online about this yet. But you’ve had a lot of experience in your past with engagement and dialogue with Russia. And I just wondering whether, you know, I could suggest that one or two of them join one of these townhall meetings. And, and you could share your experience, I think they would learn from it. And they can give it a little update on on how they’re going with this project.

Metta Spencer  18:12

Or I can do a straight to talk show with him specifically about their issue. Because for one thing as, as young people that they may not want to be on the same show with people, I don’t know how what people you’re talking about these young people that there are, you know, close to a million or maybe over a million men who fled the country. After September they whatever it was when he announced this mobilization, and within days, they fled the country. And these these people, I think that the challenge is to overcome whatever. I don’t know what it is, but Russians, by and large, have not been big protesters. And, and not they’ve not been sufficiently critical over the last 10-15-20 years of Putin. But, you know, getting getting, getting them engaged politically with the responsibility to change the structure of their their governance is, is going to be very important and, and I think holding certain kinds of meetings online will be productive. So I’ll definitely think in terms of setting up a specific conversation with these young people about what they have in mind. Yeah.

Alyn Ware  19:42

I’ll introduce you to them by email after this call.

Metta Spencer  19:46

Okay, excellent.

Alyn Ware  19:47

Good, thanks Metta.

Metta Spencer  19:49

Yeah, now who else has something to say? Marilyn you want to bring us up to date on your cats?

Alyn Ware  19:55

Sorry, what was that about cats?

Metta Spencer  19:57

She’s a naturalist who looks after various kinds of wild cats in California and in the wild.

Marilyn Krieger  20:04

Right now I’m at my mountain home. And it’s i’ll tell you the weather talking about the environment which Bill was mentioning. It is the snow here. We’ve had such unbelievable snow. We’ve had floods, we had all sorts of things. We had tornadoes. It’s just been ridiculous, awful.

Metta Spencer  20:30

I’m sorry is this all over California, or you’re in Northern California right?

Marilyn Krieger  20:34

No, it’s it’s all over California. But where I am, we got hit particularly hard in this little I, my, this house is in a very small, insular community, which is not near any large towns. And so the roads are blocked. And there have been, you know, landslides and snow slides and trees down. It’s lightning strikes right near me at one of my neighbors who’s about two miles away. You know, it is unbelievable what’s been going on here. And as far as the what’s going on in as with our mountain lions, are local. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of pushback from people. And we, my group is trying to educate or is educating people about the importance of them that they’re not going to hurt them, the people. And what’s happened is that, for instance, a mountain lion, supposedly, I’m not absolutely sure because the woman’s tail it her story keeps changing whenever she talks to me, said that a mountain lion took a dog, right from, first she sent her arms, then she said a leash, then she said in her backyard, you know, it goes on and on, we don’t know. But what’s happened is that she’s now saying that my group, fish and wildlife, and another group is purposely dumping mountain lions and having it’s it’s gotten to be quite controversial. So next weekend, we’re having a big panel, it’s going to have to be by zoom for mostly safety reason. Where we are answering all the community’s questions and saying, Well, this is, you know, there’s really only 40 to 60 in the whole Santa Cruz Mountains, that people are seeing the same ones over and over again. So it’s gotten very difficult right now, it’s very difficult. And hopefully, that see, I’m part of a wildlife mitigation group. So hopefully, we’ll be able to using telling them facts and, you know, answering their questions and listening to their concerns, hopefully, we’ll be able to kind of calm everyone down. But it’s the weather has a lot to do with this. The fact the fact that we’re building into their habitats, and making trails into their habitat, all these things are influencing all the wildlife.

Metta Spencer  23:17

So they come into your habitat as a result in retaliation, is that what’s happening? I mean, do they are they more aggressive or more expansive in their in their domain? Then they used to be.

Marilyn Krieger  23:33

The people or the animals?

Metta Spencer  23:35

I’m thinking about the animals, have people are people wounded? Or do they have a basis for worrying that they’re being? That? That the animals gonna get him?

Marilyn Krieger  23:48

Yes, there is. There is some poaching. Correct. And now, I understand the concerns of some of the ranch of the ranchers, because although it’s not just mountain lions, it’s taking out their livestock, it’s also coyotes. They do a lot of this to everybody they all have to eat. And unfortunately, a lot of the blame has been put on the mountain lions even though they’re not responsible, necessarily they are for some.of course, there are things people can do to protect their livestock, whether they’re doing it or not something else, so, but unfortunately, right now the mountain lions are becoming kind of a target for everybody to you know, take their angst out on and there is some poaching also fish and wildlife…

Metta Spencer  24:45

Tell me what you mean by poaching I think of people…

Marilyn Krieger  24:49

Yeah, so…

Metta Spencer  24:49

If people killing animals, or you, poaching is animals killing people?

Marilyn Krieger  24:55

In California, it is now illegal to shoot mountain lions, unless you have a deprivation permit issued by fish and wildlife. The only reason suppose in theory that they would issue that, is if if they can prove that a lion has taken out livestock, or as a threat to people has, you know, gone after dogs or whatever, then, you know, repeatedly but they look at, they’re supposed to look at the whole situation. So for instance, are the animals outside in in the evening, at night? Are they protected? Or, you know, there are lots of things to look at how close to the animals coming and to if people are threatened, people feeling threatened or whatever. But that’s the only time that supposedly, they’re supposed to be able to kill a mountain lion. And that’s through a deprivation permit issued by fish and wildlife.

Metta Spencer  24:56

And there are more more occasions where people have reason to apply for such a permit now, is that right or not?

Marilyn Krieger  26:16

I’m sorry, say that again Metta?

Metta Spencer  26:17

Okay, there are more occasions where the animals have attacked than there used to be? Is that right?

Marilyn Krieger  26:24

Is there more?

Metta Spencer  26:25

More times? Are there more animals attacking wildlife or dogs? Or?

Marilyn Krieger  26:31

Not? Really? No.

Metta Spencer  26:32

No, It’s just I mean, we’re worried about it, neurotically, is that it?

Marilyn Krieger  26:38

I, we haven’t seen more. But the thing is, is that people are so emotional about it. So for instance, one rancher posted, which he blamed not, it was so bizarre reading this thing. He blamed all of it, his chickens, his everything that have died, he blamed on mountain lions, of course, the [scouts], you know, will take them out, take out chicks. And then he also sent her other and I wasn’t able, it was a classic email, he somehow or other tied the drug cartels into it. So this is the kind of, so it’s all very strange. So at that point, we decided maybe it’s better if we have the meeting on Zoom.

Metta Spencer  27:29

Oh yeah. Okay, good for you.

Marilyn Krieger  27:34

So, that’s what’s going on in California.

Metta Spencer  27:38

Okay, well, you and Bill, work together and keep me posted next time on, and how you’re meeting whether you have straightened people out. Peter Wadhams can you explain why it’s snowing in California, all over California? I didn’t. I knew it was a little bit, but I didn’t know it was everywhere.

Peter Wadhams  27:58

It’s snowing in in Turin at the moment. That’s unusual.

Metta Spencer  28:03

In Italy. Wow. And that’s rare, huh.

Peter Wadhams  28:09

Well, it is yes. This time you bet the big cause the big thing that’s been going on has been the the sea ice in the Arctic retreating rapidly in the same direction as the sea ice in the Antarctic is retreating, which they should be working in anti phase. And when one gets, when one increases, the other decreases, but in fact, they’re both decreasing together at the moment. And…

Metta Spencer  28:37

So what’s your theory? Why would that happen? Well,

Peter Wadhams  28:40

Well there is there isn’t a theory. Just why the hell is this going on is the theory. But whatever it is, it’s in fact causing very large, large amounts of water to be lost to into the ocean and increase the rate of sea level rise.

Metta Spencer  29:05

Yeah, okay, well, now you got to theorize because we’re depending on you. It was some reason for this to be happening. Now. Let’s see, this would be a time when it should be mounting Antarctica and freezing the North Pole, but it’s the opposite. It’s doing both.

Peter Wadhams  29:29

Doing both at the same time, yes.

Metta Spencer  29:33

And you have no idea what the so the pub puzzle would be why, the northern hemisphere would be freezing. I mean warming down. Now, do you think the warming of the sea ice could have any bearing on why it’s snowing in unusual places? Like California?

Peter Wadhams  29:56

No, I think that’s one of these extreme weather events where you can’t, you can’t simply explain it, but the, the, the the sea ice increasing at this time of year in the Arctic, is it that seasonally what it should be doing? Perhaps the sea ice increasing. Sorry, so the increase the decreasing should is should be what it’s doing it’s spring comes along but in the Antarctic the areas should be increasing and in fact it’s decreasing that’s because some fairly vital glassy as like the Thwaites Glaciers are actually breaking up and beginning to disappear. So that’s making a big contribution to see global, global sea level rise. And so we have to really watch, watch the Antarctic now as being the place where some drastic things might likely happen.

Metta Spencer  31:01

That Thwaites, tell us if you will I have forgotten this Thwaites Glacier is is the crucial, something crucial about that because if that is it’s Is that the one that’s out over the water, it’s kind of, kind of sticking out over the water and the water is kind of underneath undermining it? And it’s going to be a whopper and it’s going to raise our sea level by a lot.

Peter Wadhams  31:26


Metta Spencer  31:29

How much would how much of a rise in sea sea level would occur if that Thwaite, Glacier breaks off?

Peter Wadhams  31:39

Well, of course people are not prepared to say especially people who work for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but it would be something like up to a meter of loss if if all of the, if all of the ice on the in the ice shelf breaks up and and drifts away. You could get out a meter which is a big, that’s a meter, that’s big. That’s globally which is a large chunk of extra sea level rise for all citizens of the planet and all of the everything on the planet is suddenly is going to have…

Metta Spencer  32:24

Would that be enough to to make New York City you know the streets full of water?

Peter Wadhams  32:31

Well it would make for instance some places I mean habitable like New Orleans, it would make other places be flooded when they shouldn’t be like Venice. In Italy we’re really worried about Venice because the the amount of of extra water that would come from the Thwaites glass here, breaking up would, would really mess up mess up the high water in Venice just at a time when they finally got the the system to get the gate system working which is supposed to prevent flooding from high water at high tide. It is it is taken several years to build with corruption and so on. Now it’s finally actually being connected up together. It’s, it’s at a time when when you’re getting this big effect which it might not be able to cope with.

Metta Spencer  33:43

Oh, okay, here comes my friend Alexey say hello, Alexey Prokhorenko.

Alexey Prokhorenko  33:47


Metta Spencer  33:48

Oh, very good to see you.

Alexey Prokhorenko  33:50

Hello, Metta. Hello, hello, dear Franz.

Metta Spencer  33:54

Yes, I wanted to introduce you to Alyn Ware because in a way we’ve been talking about your, your situation already. And we may have another person who’s also fled from Russia to avoid being conscripted and that is Konstantin Samoilov. I don’t know whether he’s going to join us or not. He’s up against his own time frames. But Alyn Ware is in Prague and and we’ve been talking a little bit about a meeting that he held with young people who were concerned about warfare, especially nuclear warfare and and people from Georgia. Alyn, you and Alexey explain to to him because Alexey is a Russian interpreter, who, who left as soon as they were going to catch him and make him go to war. And he’s he went to Istanbul for a couple of months. then went to Warsaw, and is living in Poland now. And, Alyn, why don’t you tell him what, what happened with regard to the disputes and conversations that you had with Russians in Georgia? And versus if I can say the word versus Georgians and Ukrainians in Georgia?

Alyn Ware  33:58

Well, hello, Alexey nice to meet you.

Metta Spencer  35:20

Hello.Thank you. Thank you.

Alyn Ware  35:35

Education program for youth in Georgia, which is dealing very much with Ukrainian and Russian immigrants and young people from, you know, various nationalities and backgrounds, and some of the conflicts that happened with the youth because of the conflicts that have happened, you know, at the political level. And the second one I mentioned, is a cooperation we have with youth fusion, which is set up by young people. And they are engaged very much in the nuclear disarmament field, as Metta mentioned, and youth fusion, I didn’t mention this earlier Metta, youth fusion last year, won the Gorbachev Schultz legacy Youth Award, which was set up, you know, because, you know, Gorbachev and Schultz crossed, you know, the barriers and the Cold War, and started dialogue and started building respect, you know, between those who wanted to move forward, you know, both in the Soviet Union and in the United States, and had some success, and helped you very much pave the way for the Reykjavik Summit, for example. Anyway, there is an award that set up in the honor and use Fusion has gone up last year for the work that they’re doing for engaging youth on these issues. And including across the barriers, although the political divides. So one of the projects that we’re working on at the moment is not set up yet, though developing it, but it’s led by a young graduate student who has just left Russia, because, because it’s too difficult to go back, you could be could end up in the army. Plus some others not from Russia is called the other youth hotline. And it’s sort of based on the idea of that communication hotline between the Soviet Union and United States was continued for a while between Russia and the US. I’m not sure if it’s still in existence now. So those are a couple of projects. And as I said, you know, if you’re interested at all, then we can share contacts. And what I mentioned to Metta is that she might be interested in having a conversation with with the young people who are from youth fusion, who were setting up the youth hotline, project, because [inaudible]has also got a lot of good experience in dialogue, you know, across the barriers across the globe.

Metta Spencer  37:52

Now one of the things that I’m occupied with Alexey, you can sort of give your impression is to what extent when people leave the country leave Russia, and they stay in touch with their families and their friends? To what extent do they continue the argument, if you will. The people are I mean, the people I know, basically, say, I’ve given up trying to convince anybody, and they just they just don’t argue anymore, they just talk about the weather or what they’re eating or something. To what how much is that the prevailing attitude of people, in your situation, people who have had to leave the country?

Alexey Prokhorenko  38:37

Well, it’s all different people are different. I’m still trying to convince people whenever I can. I spend a lot of time, my spare time, in discussions in trying to really get that propaganda out of people be it in chats in forums. online, offline. I mean, mostly online, of course, because here I have meant I haven’t met anyone with pro war views. Actually, we Yeah, but some people were really, people I know here. They who those who were active, they keep being active, those who were more who are more into their own business to be to work, to be journalist being something else. They keep being the same. So it’s more or less the continuation of what used to be in the home country.

Metta Spencer  39:43

That figures I suppose it does. Okay, well, thank you.

Alexey Prokhorenko  39:47

But people do people do, do, do some work here yesterday. We had it was Saturday on Saturday. So it was February 25. One day after the first anniversary of the beginning of the outbreak of the war. We had a gathering in Warsaw. There were some 100 people, which is which is not not too little, for a place like Warsaw, because most immigrants, most Russian immigrants went to Belize to Yerevan to Tashkent and…

Metta Spencer  40:23

Oh really? So there are not as many in Warsaw as your your your [inaudible] I didn’t, I didn’t. I’m surprised. Are you any less welcome there than you wouldn’t be in Belize lets say?

Alexey Prokhorenko  40:39

Not at all. Not at all. Oh, so the meeting was the meeting had the full support the product had full support from the government. The police was there the police was watching it was guarding the protesters, like it would be would have been guarding Belarusian, Ukrainians or whoever else. We had posters, we had microphone and loudspeakers. We could deliver speeches. Poland, Polish people, Polish dissidents joined us, some of them spoken Polish, but most spoke in Russian. The other words of support to Russian protesters to Ukraine to Belarus, likewise. But a I think, in that meeting, some people could have been Ukrainians. Some could have been Belarusian, but mostly they were Russians. Because the Ukrainians have had their own march their own protest the day before on the very date on February 24. So, so it’s not it’s not it’s not too little.

Metta Spencer  42:00

Any, who joined them? Or did they not ask for anybody who wasn’t a Ukrainian to participate in their demonstration?

Alexey Prokhorenko  42:11

There were some Russians in the in that demonstration. But during that meeting yesterday, it was mentioned that there was a problem. Russians could not Russians during the demonstration on Friday, they could not identify themselves as Russians in the Ukrainian demonstration in the Ukrainian march. Because the Ukrainians didn’t want any Russians whatsoever. Which you, a day later say yesterday, which, which was mentioned as a mistake, because these Russians are not pro Russian is not not pro Kremlin, not pro Putin. Even the flag is different. It’s not white, blue, red, it’s white, blue, white, it’s the new flag. The red is removed from that flag.

Metta Spencer  43:06


Alexey Prokhorenko  43:06

Yeah, it’s a new flag.

Metta Spencer  43:08

Who cooked that up? That’s an interesting idea. And and what group of people would dare do something like that?

Alexey Prokhorenko  43:18

Well, I didn’t, I don’t remember who was the author of the flag. But the fact is that the flag is banned in Russia. So you can’t, you can get problems that you with the police say with the law, if you display that flag in Russia, it’s officially it’s classified as extremist flag. But, but it’s an it’s a much needed rebranding of the country. If we’re ever to build a new country, which seems more, more and more a necessity.

Metta Spencer  43:54

Well, how much of a dialogue is there about exactly that, that’s what I think is so important is to, to get people really planning because you know, what happens? When it’s so often, like, for example, what happened with the Arab Spring, you have these big demonstrations, and, and all of a sudden, they said, okay, here are the keys, you take over. And they so these guys were in charge all of a sudden, and they hadn’t a clue, they hadn’t prepared what they wanted to do once they got power. So I think it’s really important to, to think it through, and and to have this kind of dialogue going on right now. But I wonder, I’m not aware that there is that much, is, would you say that there is a lot of conversation about specifics of how to change the Russian government?

Alexey Prokhorenko  44:48

Well, there is some dialogue, but it’s not as structured and there are groups detached from each other who are engaging in that dialogue. For example, here In Warsaw, there is there is a village near Warsaw where the so called Russian Parliament free Russian parliament has met recently in February for the for the second time, the first time was in, in early November. The so called [inaudible], that’s the name of the village. But that Parliament, which includes some former members of Russian parliament, in in previous times, in, in the Democratic times in, in the 90s. Some other prominent opposition leaders, this parliament, we could say shadow parliament, it lacks recognition from from many of the opposition leaders many of the other opposition groups because of the WHO ARE YOU question? So, no one, no one really has elected those people to be representatives of either the opposition movement ,movement, or the country itself. So, of course, most of them have reputation as dissidents as prominent opposition figures, but there’s always lots of discussion on, not on the subject matter of how we could build a new country from, from scratch or from, from a certain point, but who those people are, who entitled them to be representatives who entitled them to sit on the parliament. That’s what consumes lots of a lot of energy.

Metta Spencer  46:44

Yeah, okay. Well, I could see where, you know, but it’s good to have any conversation going. I guess the question for me is there must be clusters of different leaders or different different groups of oppositionists who don’t, don’t fuse don’t mix together don’t, don’t amalgamate. Now, some of them would be I imagine people who were followers of Navalny. Some of them I know that Khodorkovsky probably has some followers. I know that Garry Kasparov has some followers, these different clusters of opposition, or is it organized are the cleavages between different groups based on particular issues or controversial topics rather than the names of their leaders?

Alexey Prokhorenko  47:43

Now the cleavages are not too big and not too deep. They’re not deep at all, because the consensus is that there are well there are several points of consensus several important points. Of course, one of them well, one of them is that Putin must go. And that’s the wars must, must stop. But one more important consensus, which is not the against type, but it’s “for” type. It’s a consensus over the parliamentarian nature of the force of the coming Russia, the Russia of the future Russian state should be a parliamentarian Republic. No more, there is little discussion on the point because it’s kind of an accepted, very widely accepted fact that a present presidential republic, strong presidential authority, inevitably would lead to a new incarnation of Putinism, Stalinism or whatever. So that, that was, the idea was, I think introduced by Khodorkovsky. But then, in one of his articles, Alexei Navalny also supported the idea. And now most of the people subscribed to the fact that the parliament should be the strongest center of decision making. However, there are opposite voices and that’s good. Who the voices that recall us that for example, the Nazis were elected in the parliamentarian Republic. And the mechanisms of how this could be done should be carefully studied. Actually, I would like to, to a little bit unveil my my future article, which I would like to publish

Metta Spencer  49:48

In Peace magazine.

Alexey Prokhorenko  49:50

Yeah, yeah. I’m trying to hone that hone the idea to like make it more with a bit more, a bit more have well articulated. How we could prepare, how we could identify a prospective Putin or prospective Stalin and prevent him from prevent a strong leader with strong trends from really becoming a, a dangerous dictator. Where is the point of no return?

Metta Spencer  50:24

Aha! So interesting when you’re gonna give them a test or something?

Alexey Prokhorenko  50:32

I’m trying to, I’m trying to bring this into a little bit of a system. A little bit of a, I’m trying to give it some wording, because it’s really important.

Metta Spencer  50:45

It’s really important but, I mean, I’m not sure that I don’t know what it can be done. I mean, would, you know, a lot of people thought that Putin was just terrific when he first came in, you know, he certainly didn’t look like the guy he’s become. And even, you know, democratic minded people thought that he was he was going to do he was a big improvement. So he wouldn’t have been spotted. I don’t think Yeah.

Alexey Prokhorenko  51:14

Under certain conditions, I think it depends very much on the conditions because many people who have predisposition to are predisposed to, like not listening to the opinions of others are not. Who, who like to make decisions on their own. Like, if the system does not put any checks on them, or any balances on them. They’re in a big danger of becoming authoritarian leaders. And ultimately, the when they when they’re long enough in power, this is a risky situation, which could bring us to a war. There’s no check on them.

Metta Spencer  52:02

Yeah, but it sounds to me like you’re making it a personality issue. Do they have certain psychological traits that would predispose them to becoming dictators.

Alexey Prokhorenko  52:12

Of course.

Metta Spencer  52:12

Actually. many of the very traits that would predispose them, maybe to becoming dictators, would would, in certain circumstances, be regarded as the most admirable traits? For example, I’m thinking about Aung San Suu Kyi, who, when he, you know, the first part of her career, she was a saint, I am sure, I glorified her, and thought she was absolutely magnificent, because she did have the courage to do things like when, when there was a group of military people threatening her, she walked in the road, right, straight to them talking to them.

Alexey Prokhorenko  52:34


Metta Spencer  52:43

And you know, I mean, that kind of courage. And strength is, you know, what made her glorious. But then, you know, when she got into power, and or felt she had to, she had an opportunity to persecute some Muslims. And some of the Rohingya and God knows who else, you know, her, her strength of character and becomes quite, quite personal quality. Maybe some of the other people here among us, maybe have some ideas, how you would sort out potential leaders and identify the ones that you should want to bring to power. Does anybody else have an idea about how to solve that problem? No, Peter Brogdan is shaking his head, and let me let me put this on gallery view. So those of you who may think you have something to say on the subject can put up your hand or speak. I think it’s an interesting question. But let me Yes, Peter.

Peter Wadhams  53:54

Yeah I was just thinking of what what you’d said, initially, that a parliamentary system is the only way to go. And that’s in order to avoid sort of thugs and dictators taking over so I mean maybe that, that is the answer, although [inaudible] we have a parliamentary system in Britain, do we, not particularly?

Metta Spencer  54:20

That’s right.

Peter Wadhams  54:22

But it should act as a protection against a takeover by totalitarian systems. And you can do that and bring by the court, can you do that in, in Russia, I mean, given and is, has it gone too far, towards a sort of dictatorship type system to go back to something finally parliamentary, which it never really was in the first place.

Metta Spencer  55:01

You could ask, of course, do the Russians ever really want democracy? And then there’s another question, which is one that haunts me. And I don’t know whether I want to bring it up here, which is that I think democracy is failing in a lot of places. Exactly. You know, you mentioned Brexit. And you mentioned, you know, the other thing. So in Britain, and we’d have, we’ve had Trump and there are lots of democratic countries that I see, the people are disenchanted and disappointed in what is really still a democracy. I mean, it was legitimate, that, you know that Brexit happened, there was a real, real vote, and Trump really was elected, and so on. So, democracy doesn’t always work very well nowadays. And I’m much more in favor of doing something like a citizens assembly, a much more dramatic version of democracy, something that we haven’t had very much of since, since Athens, or is Greek city states where they actually took what it’d be like selecting juries today, where you just take a by, by lottery or something, you draw the names of ordinary citizens, and put them in charge for a while. And so their decision making is done by a cross section of the population, but they have plenty of opportunity to discuss and debate and, and get advice and so on before they make decisions, as opposed to something like a referendum where people so immediately go to the voting booth and make their decision without having done any any foresight. I mean, that kind of grassroots democracy where there’s no deliberation in advance of voting, I think it’s not working. And I do believe that the election of politicians to Congress or, or Parliament nowadays, it’s fallen under control of big money and other forces.

Alexey Prokhorenko  57:10


Metta Spencer  57:11

So a lot of the decisions are simply so complicated, that the people elected Congress don’t know enough and make you know, no better decisions than somebody in the street. So here I am, fulminating, make me shut up please, somebody.

Peter Brogden  57:29

Go back to the occasion when Alexey joined us. Wadhams was talking about the Thwaites Glacier. And I just wonder about following thought here. But I’ve recently read a paper that was really confirming the way in which Lake Agassiz has entered itself into the Arctic Ocean, and brought about the cold spell. The Younger Dryas cold spell. Just sort of a thought again, how big would a Lake Agassiz have been compared to the Thwaites Glacier,I think it must have been quite enormous, hasn’t it? Wouldn’t it have been?

Peter Wadhams  58:12

Yes. It was huge. And in fact, what we’ve been talking about so on another topic here has been and we, can we preserve the the ice in, in Hudson Bay, and it goes Hudson Bay, is used to be where Lake Agassiz was so…[inaudible].

Peter Brogden  58:43

Which Lake Agassiz draining out, which must have happened over quite a long time, had such a big effect on a lot of the world’s weather. And now we’re thinking, what is the Thwaites Glacier likely to do and it’s going to be very different because the whole business of and as you’ve said, recognizing the, the effects of the causes of melting ice, can change the weather and also the unique ways such as producing heat spells in northern Ontario. snowstorms in California, Southern California too.

Peter Wadhams  59:23

Yes, that’s that’s the frightening thing with the situation at the moment is that you, you have a [inaudible], a change going in one direction. And everybody’s not happy with it, but they realize that it’s it’s, it’s nasty, but it’s leading in a particular way. And one of this was the, the loss of sea ice in the Arctic. That’s been going down all the time. We’ve got in fact, data showing how much is lost each year and it’s a steady decrease in in, in sea ice extent. So we will know when it’s likely to disappear and give us a blue, a blues planet. That’s that’s, that’s all what it’s not cut and dried but we know how it’s going and how the direction is going. But then suddenly the Thwaites Glacier starts to disintegrate. And that’s always completely unexpected. And the, we don’t know how fast that’s going to go, how whether, there’s going to be a kind of a huge amount of broken up ice going into the ocean and it’s suddenly an Arctic sea ice situation gets even worse and unexpected and happening at the other end of the world, and happening at the wrong time of year. So there’s suddenly the, the ice world has become a mess, from being something that was more or less predictable. So we…

Peter Brogden  1:01:18

Sort of like world politics too isn’t it?

Peter Wadhams  1:01:22

Well, yes. And so all of our attention in in study of ice should be looking at the unexpected changes. And that’s this change in in the Antarctic in the Thwaites Glacier and destruction of that floating ice sheet.

Metta Spencer  1:01:44

Alyn Ware you have your hand up, are you saying goodbye? Are you

Alyn Ware  1:01:49

Sorry, such interesting conversations and wonderful people, but I’m sorry I have to leave, but I look forward to keeping conversation going, I will follow up by email with you, Aleksey, and send you the contacts for youth fusion people Metta. Thanks so much. And see you again.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:02:03

Thank you very much.

Bill Leikam  1:02:05


Metta Spencer  1:02:07


Peter Wadhams  1:02:09

Yeah, it’s just that things that are happening now are unexpected, and are potentially leading to very serious consequences, which could involve large rapid changes in sea level. But weren’t, weren’t predictable. Whereas the retreated Arctic sea ice was predictable. And it wasn’t properly predicted by the government, governmental body, but it but we, the scientists were studying it knew what was going on and knew how fast it was happening. And we suddenly got blindsided by the other pole doing doing the same thing or doing a similar thing. Which, which we didn’t expect.

Peter Brogden  1:03:04

It’s still to me, amazing to contemplate the fact that the draining of Lake Agassiz has by bringing all that fresh water to the surface of the Arctic Ocean and just changing the way the North Atlantic [inaudible], these are the big changes that can happen in the world climates. And of course, we’ve got the conversation seem to be going with the big changes that can happen in world politics which is one of the reasons I’ve been concentrating on what you said. And listening to Alexey and talk about what might happen. What we hope might happen to change the set of worlds politicians that we have at the moment.

Peter Wadhams  1:03:56

We have to do we still have to be careful about understanding because the when Lake Agassiz the meaning of that was first studied. There was a physicist who studied it first, whose name I’m desperately trying to remember, except he was world famous and he’s now dead. He said, well, all of that. Ice came out of Lake Agassiz is as a as a an armada of icebergs. And he gained, he’s got the ice like as he’s broke up and into icebergs, and then all the icebergs sort of came out together, like, like going down the drain. And that was a tremendous impact on the world. So this amount of icebergs, the person who, who thought it up Wally Wally Broecker, yeah, he was very, very famous. But he was also very, very self opinionated. And this amount of icebergs turned out not to have existed. And he was dramatic, dramatic thought, you know, suddenly, Baffin Bay is full of 1000s and 1000s of icebergs, so they’re all coming out together and, and causing mayhem. But, in fact, that didn’t happen, at least as far as we know.

Metta Spencer  1:05:32

What was the effect done some other way? Just fresh water rushing out? Or if there were no, was no amount of icebergs? What did happen?

Peter Wadhams  1:05:43

Well, it sort of something like it happened. But even more decorous way Catastrophic.

Metta Spencer  1:05:56

Well, okay, I want to greet Charles Charles Tauber who’s in Vukovar, Croatia, I presume that’s where you hang out. Hows everything and Vukovar girls?

Charles David Tauber  1:06:09

Well, we’re kind of going crazy, to put it mildly. I think Alexey can between Congo, Nigeria, Liberia, Ukraine, Turkey. I think we’re, we don’t know where to start. All the reports we have to write and all the groups we’re trying to get together. I’m on the verge of writing a letter to people I know, in Turkey and north Syria, and all of that stuff, to try and get some training groups going, I would really like to do that. And if anybody here knows anybody, please write to me. And we will write them a letter because the amount of trauma there is incredible. And we’re going to have to, we have to, we really have to increase capacity there to deal with it. Especially with with all the refugees in southern Turkey. That precisely where the earthquake hit is an area where there are huge numbers of Syrian and Afghani refugees. So…

Metta Spencer  1:07:31

We should explainI mean, for anybody who hasn’t been listening, in previous shows that you’re a psychiatrist working, doing group therapy for people who’ve been through war, trauma. And

Charles David Tauber  1:07:44

Most important, the most important thing we’re doing is educational groups. On how to deal with it, and then we’re faced with, well, where do I start? I mean, Congo, the street kids, huge numbers of children coming onto the streets. Their parents are throwing them out. They were former child soldiers, nobody wants them. It’s extremely sad and extremely worrying. And this is going to go on to a new generation, we know the transmission is going to occur. So this is, we’re dealing with a couple of groups in Congo and Burundi. We don’t have the money really to do it. I’m doing what I can. I’m having groups and groups and groups. We’re dealing with, on top of that, we’re dealing with a group of Liberian drug drug addicts. This is second generation after the Civil War. And they they’re the result of the transition, transmission of trauma. Nigeria, you heard about the elections this weekend, and all that stuff that’s going on. So I’m not getting to write the manuals that I want to write. We still haven’t written our annual report for 21, let alone 22. Well, in short, we’re going quite out of our heads here. Also, this place is exploding slightly. Nobody hears about it, but I was in a restaurant on Friday. And this, in this particular restaurant, a lot of there are a lot of war veterans from 30 years ago. And, they were talking very loudly so I had my earphones on. And when I took my earphones off, I heard aha this is why you’re screaming and you’re drinking as much alcohol as you’re drinking, because they are traumatized and nobody has done anything about it. It’s worse in Bosnia. So the whole world is going bleeding out of its head, and there’s no capacity to deal with it. And we’re, my colleague, Sondra and I are going absolutely,…

Metta Spencer  1:10:22

You know what I’d suggest? Why don’t you get Sondra or somebody, don’t spend spend your own precious time on this because there’s somebody else who could do it for you write an article like 600 words about the, the their project, that we’ll put it in the next issue a Peace magazine in right people who want to be trained to do group therapy with such people, trauma, victims of war, to get in touch with you to be trained, and that we might be able to stir up some. I mean, some of you people right today may want to join, but it’s more likely that we can do it by circulating an article in Peace magazine. Get somebodyto write it within the next two weeks for me.

Charles David Tauber  1:11:14

I will do.

Metta Spencer  1:11:15

600 words good. Okay.

Charles David Tauber  1:11:19

Writing a 600 word article is not the problem.

Metta Spencer  1:11:22

It’s okay. Sure.

Charles David Tauber  1:11:24

That’s easy enough. Easy, but…

Metta Spencer  1:11:27

Okay, good. And, you know, we just had a conversation with with Alyn Ware before you came in which he said, I asked him, he was referring to the children who have been child soldiers. And you know, who are no longer welcome by their parents, you know? I asked him, do you mean they’re still training people? Training? Yes. They’re still doing it. It’s not a past thing. It’s current too.

Charles David Tauber  1:12:00

Yeah. And not only that, but the parents are afraid of the kids. And a lot of the NGOs are afraid of the kids because they’ve been taught to kill. And so they go back in and they don’t like something and they kill young kids, [inaudible] tragic. absolutely tragic.

Metta Spencer  1:12:28

It reminds me of the other thing I’ve been hearing about this Wagner group, you know, the Russian soldiers who are 90% of them are convicts that were take this guy Prigozhin went to the prisons and said, I’ll let you out if you fight for them. When I when they get home, now they’ve got weapons, and, and they then are really going to be a more, a worse threat in society, because they’ve been imprisoned and also armed, or at least they’ve had some better access to weapons. Same story, different people.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:13:07

That’s sad.

Metta Spencer  1:13:08


Charles David Tauber  1:13:09

And the kids. Nobody knows how to deal with them. Nobody’s giving them love. Nobody’s giving them positive attention. And that, to my mind is precisely what they need because they’ve been kidnapped. They’ve escaped because the family situations are so bad, and the families can’t support them in terms of food or in terms of anything else. They’re not getting educated. And I can go on for another half hour, like that with all the problems. And the point is that the NGOs simply don’t know how to deal with them. Nobody knows how to deal with them.

Metta Spencer  1:13:53

Well, would you? I mean, if you were meeting these kids, I mean, if the only, I wouldn’t know what to do.

Charles David Tauber  1:14:01

The only thing that I’m suggesting is that you use a kind of a behavioral approach. And you use an approach that these kids haven’t had in the past, where they get positive attention. And when they do something good, they get positive attention. And you invite them in, not to kill or not to do things. But to get a little bit of education or to play chess or to end to get their negative feelings out. It’s crucial that they get their feelings out, because they all have very strong feelings. And if I’m looking at Alexey, the same thing is true that Ukrainian kids are going through very similar things because Ukrainian kids are all extremely highly traumatized. And so we’ve got to do something and not only with the kids but with the adults. Because here, as I said, I was sitting in this restaurant 30 years after this war. There’s still nobody’s doing anything with the psychological son, and they’re all getting drunk. And they’re all screaming and escaping from their own horrors. And they were talking in this restaurant about some of the horrors they’ve been through. And, of course, I’ve heard the stories 1000s of times, literally. But nobody’s doing anything. So instead of spending the money on the weapons, we could easily spend it on training, on training behaviour therapists and on getting this stuff into communities. But the political will is precisely the opposite. Political will is to keep this war, because that’s what you get votes for.

Metta Spencer  1:16:01

I think it has to be a matter of reaching enough people who’d be willing to do therapy if they knew that, that’s a real option. And let’s just make it more you need more publicity. I’ll be your publicity. Somebody else want to be his publicity agent. Let everybody know that this is something he can offer training and then you can sit at home, and instead of watching CNN, you could turn on your you know, your computer and do therapy for people in another part of the world.

Charles David Tauber  1:16:39

That’s exactly what we’re doing.

Metta Spencer  1:16:41

Yeah. I think there are a lot of people would like to do that instead of playing bridge, we just told them. So let’s get…

Charles David Tauber  1:16:53

I’ll write the 600 words.

Metta Spencer  1:16:56

Okay, I want to say hi to Rose Dyson, and Barbara Birkett who’ve joined us recently. Hello, Rose, how have you been?

Rose Dyson  1:17:04

I’ve been fine, and I’ve been playing too much bridge. Or perhaps a you would determine me as playing too much bridge. But otherwise, I’m still busy with the Friends of Egerton Ryerson and concerning myself with publicity as I read it recently, in The Economist, the trends on university campuses toward diversity, inclusion, equity and justice and how these are distorted value systems that are being so strongly emphasized that there are those who worry that this is an infringement on freedom of expression. I suppose this is a very tough, frivolous topic compared to what you’ve just been covering. But that’s the sort of thing that’s preoccupied me of late

Metta Spencer  1:18:05

Well, we’ve been we’ve, I kind of share your attitude. We had an article about that by Robin Collins in one of the recent, not the current but a previous issue I believe of Peace magazine because I think there is something to that point. This wokeness does have a you can overreact to it but it’s also something that we, I can see being concerned about anybody on this topic is wokeness

Rose Dyson  1:18:38

I read I actually printed out and I have distributed copies of Robins article and quoted it in some of my writing.

Metta Spencer  1:18:47

Okay. Anybody else want to join in on that conversation? You all know about wokeness? Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Rose and hello Barbara. How are you? What’s up?

Barbara Birkett  1:19:05

Fine, I’m sorry I’m late but I was at a church vestry, annual church vestry meeting and, and then so mostly busy with the Hiroshima Nagasaki day coalition.

Metta Spencer  1:19:21

Okay, so now here we are in February, you’re already planning the Hiroshima Nagasaki day for August.

Barbara Birkett  1:19:28

That’s right. We’re running late than our planning this year.

Metta Spencer  1:19:32

Really? Why? I mean, I didn’t think that was late. It shouldn’t take that long.

Barbara Birkett  1:19:38

Some of the people we like to attract have crowded schedules, so …

Metta Spencer  1:19:44

Oh yeah.

Barbara Birkett  1:19:46

Well, we’ve had a couple of,  Mike Nevin, who are. Some of you may know, our long time Secretary Treasurer died.

Metta Spencer  1:20:00

Mike Nevin died?

Barbara Birkett  1:20:01

Yes. Yeah.

Metta Spencer  1:20:05

He used to be on that Peace magazine editorial board.

Barbara Birkett  1:20:09


Metta Spencer  1:20:10

Yeah, I didn’t know that.

Barbara Birkett  1:20:12

So that’s we have to be reassigning roles and so on. And Rosemarie Canan’s mother died. You know, people have been preoccupied with other things.

Metta Spencer  1:20:33

Okay, fine, who has something more you want to share now? Somebody, anybody? Maybe Joanna.

Joanna Campe  1:20:44

I wanted very much to respond to Alexey at one point, just because I feel I do, like many people really obsess about the war and spend a lot of time reading news and being on YouTube and Timothy Snyder and all these different views trying to, you know, to take it in. And one of the things that came up to me when you were talking about, you know, the parliamentary aspect, and what are the alternatives? I remember when the war began, there was something I saw YouTube of all the republics, like this atlas, of all the republics that talked about this might lead to actual decentralization. And one of the things that just came to my mind, and coming out of my background of bio regionalism was decentralization. And, you know,

Metta Spencer  1:21:40

I’m sorry you are thinking of decentralization of Russia, is that what you’re referring to?

Joanna Campe  1:21:45

Yeah, thinking about all of the Republic’s, you know, the possibility of autonomy, for example, and what that would look like, you know, not just in the West, but also in the East, in the other republics. And also, I thought, I spent a lot of time way too much time on YouTube, watching young Russian YouTubers, some of them, you know, in Russia, some of them leaving in the last few months or whatever having to leave. But the surveying constantly on the street, the different people, whether it was in rural Russia, or whether it’s in Moscow. The different perspectives that are there, and the enormous amount of education that will need to take place to replace the television, you know, the television and newspapers of the government. You know, that’s not the only source of news at this, at this point, or a mentor of mine has been Leopold Kohr, who was very much an advocate of small is beautiful. He was the first person. Schumacher was very much influenced by him the idea of smallest and autonomy, more more autonomy, kind of the opposite of what Russia has experienced, but also the tremendous educational, the tremendous amount of education that will need to take place, very carefully. And that sense that it wasn’t like just what they would think of as brainwashing from the west. In terms of their own self determination, and the future, of course, they’re gonna have just an incredible amount to deal with, with the reconstruction of the Ukraine. I mean, just all the what does leave where this leaves Russia economically, and it will leave it in so many ways. But anyway, I just wanted to thank you, Alexey, I just just to be here for the discussion. I feel you know, I was really happy to be here for that. And also, I wanted to mention to Peter..

Metta Spencer  1:24:06

Which Peter?

Joanna Campe  1:24:07

Wadhams, talking about the Thwaite Glaciers and all the things that we read about all the time, I might read myself in Washington Post or the New York Times on the climate, and just, you know, all the things that are basically disempowering because, you know, it’s hard to think about, you know, that kind of sea level rise that could actually happen unexpectedly way before we imagined that those things can happen. A lot of people like to put them way off in their mind, you know, way off into the future. And the tremendous amount of, well, immigration, there’s already emigration taking place to do with climate change. Whether it’s people live in California or Miami, and to other states, and so on that will become even, you know, just so much more dramatic. So I guess what I’m left with when I’m hearing it is just to say, that possibility of empowering people in terms of participation, you know, in stabilizing the climate and and that comes back down to remineralization for your garden, you know, growing your own food, growing nutrient dense food, you know, projects, which allow you the steps to participate, I think, you know, like the youth protests as well, for climate change, sort of thing that was also mentioned. So we have these different ends of the spectrum of catastrophe to what can I do, you know, what can I as an individual do, and I see within your network, all the extraordinary your network, which I’m not too familiar with of Pugwash of people who are engaged. You know, the things that they can be passionate about. And you know, what it means to kind of love those visions into reality, because that’s what we need to do. That’s the kind of action that’s where it needs to come from.

Metta Spencer  1:26:30

Thank you.

Rose Dyson  1:26:31

I am a little late coming in. But I would be very interested in hearing Alexey maybe repeat himself in terms of his take on what’s happening with the Russian Ukrainian conflict right now.

Metta Spencer  1:26:45

I’d be interested in knowing more about what is happening in Warsaw in response, you know, how people are holding up and how much commitment there is, or how much fragmentation there is among different perspectives in Warsaw So what’s, what’s the climate like, politically there now?

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:27:07

You mean, in the Russian diaspora, or…

Metta Spencer  1:27:09

About the war, all the different people speaking about the war?

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:27:15

Well, I really see that there is lots lot of alignment between different groups. At least the Russian speaking groups, I mean, Poles I’ve met with only positive perception of like my own path of my, of the way I’ve come here. So people, people, really, people really are very friendly. And I see that there is no, there is no quarrel, no, no real conflict, which is typical of any discussions of that kind in Russia, as I said, the Russians lack a certain culture of discussion. Sometimes, it seems, a certain obstacle to parliamentarianism to a really civilized way of, of collective thinking. Because all, most discussions, even at some lower level, boil down to some petty conflicts, trying to, trying to understand who the opponent is, what background he has to say so ourselves. So it diverts the attention from really meaningful things. And maybe that was, this is one of the sad legacies, legacies of the Soviet Union. I don’t know, but here people are, people are, people are friendly, people are constructive. And yesterday at yesterday’s event, they were Poles, there were Russians, Belausian’s speaking together, standing together, shoulder to shoulder, and at least people are prepared to discuss things in a civilized way. Maybe it’s just the new generation came to came into being, which didn’t have the experience of the Soviet time, I don’t know. But it starts to bring some fruits, hopefully.

Metta Spencer  1:29:36

So you spent two months or so in Istanbul before you went to Warsaw. And I wonder how you would compare the, you know, the public spirit in Istanbul with with Warsaw.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:29:51

Well, suffice it to say that yesterday there or better said from Friday to Sunday, over these three days on one of the days, there was an event dedicated to opposition to the war in let me think, some 120 cities all around the world, but not in Turkey. Not in Turkey, not in Istanbul, not in Ankara, which means that that the any meaningful diaspora, any meaningful political immigration is virtually absent from the from Turkey.

Metta Spencer  1:30:29

Well, they let you guys in. So that was a good sign. But they don’t let you organize while you’re there is that the general idea or they oppose what you’re trying to organize in favor of?

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:30:43

It might be, it might be that the government is opposing? Because it’s again, it’s a it’s kind of an authoritarian government? Probably not to the degree that Putin is authoritarian, but still still, Turks are, the Turkish Government is very much in favor of certain, not in favor of free speech, not in favor of gatherings. Anyway, they’re they have their own problems with that. Probably, that’s one of the reasons. The other reason, which comes to my mind, is that political life, I mean, political immigration is very negligible, negligible in Turkey. I mean, politically.

Metta Spencer  1:31:31

Really, I thought there were a whole bunch of you guys, when you were there. You were, I’ve heard that there are Russians all over the place. It’ss not comparable to Warsaw?

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:31:38

No, I think in Warsaw, in Warsaw, there are lots of Russian immigrants who came here for political reasons. But in Istanbul, I am sorry for if I’m wrong, I’m sorry if I offend someone, but I have the opinion that people just come there to Istanbul for mere fear. And some of them are opportunistic, they don’t really, they don’t really want to engage in politics, and Istanbul is not the best place for that. And maybe that’s the other reason why. One reason is that it is that the Turkish Government is not willing to give opportunities to those people. And the other reason that the people are just not the sort, who would not the sort of dissidents who would just be willing to organize something in Turkey?

Metta Spencer  1:32:37

That’s, that’s interesting. Also, I would, I would think, you know, Erdogan has tried to be the kind of a mediator early on, I don’t know whether he’s still trying it. Same…

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:32:51

I don’t either.

Metta Spencer  1:32:51

…with with Israel. So you know, there’s this effort to see Turkey and Israel as trying to mediate or be on good terms with Russia. So maybe that’s, that’s part of it. I wonder. I don’t even know about whether that’s still the case in Israel. Everybody’s so concerned in Israel now about the, you know, the downfall of, of democracy and of what Netanyahu is trying to do with the justice system. But I, so I haven’t heard about what any effort to try to mediate. Does anybody know about either Turkey or, or now China? You know, now China’s saying they have a peace plan. Have you read their peace plan? I mean, I, actually some of the people I know.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:33:45

It’s very generic.

Metta Spencer  1:33:46

But are not totally in this agreement. They think there’s good stuff in it. I haven’t read it.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:33:52

It’s very generic actually. I’ve read it, but I found it very, like for all the good things against all the bad things. Nothing, nothing particular. Nothing really. Nothing really meaningful, nothing, which nothing specific about the situation. Okay, let’s respect, let’s respect the national recognized borders of states. What does it mean in this case? Shall, shall the Russians withdraw? So they just just big words, without really any particular details behind them?

Metta Spencer  1:34:34

Well, as long as they don’t actually provide more ammunition to Putin, which it looks like they may.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:34:39


Metta Spencer  1:34:41

They just want to talk that’s okay with me. Who else on this, some of you may have thoughts about China, Turkey or Israel.

Rose Dyson  1:34:52

What do you think the purpose of the China resolution has been mostly for diplomatic appearance purposes and, and nothing more.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:35:05

Maybe it’s like an emerging Empire, which wants to play a more pivotal role in global affairs. That’s what it seems to be like. Like a riff being a referee, probably trying to trying to, because China has always historically has mostly pursued the policy of self restraint, just the just the way the United States had done in the 19th century, they didn’t. They didn’t really mess with affairs anywhere else other than their own borders. China used to do the same thing but now I think they’re trying to emerge as a global power. They’re trying to make a claim to that. I think they are wrong.

Metta Spencer  1:35:57

Well, there’s room for a new leadership in the world. I don’t know, I just assumed that not be one nation, but an international coalition of people. You know…

Rose Dyson  1:36:15

Well there has been some emphasis on, or coverage on CNN anyway, on China’s interest in developing and exercising what they perceive to be the same kind of soft power that the United States has used over the years to spread its influence around the globe. I think I’ve mentioned this, on a previous occasion, there’s been a book written by a journalist based in California called The Red Carpet. And it there’s a lot of focus on the extent to which Chinese are investing in Hollywood productions of one kind or another, because these then get distribution globally. And that’s with a lot of editing, I suppose, in terms of the script and so on. But there’s also been commentators on the subject of how soft power has not been exercised enough in terms of Putin’s ambitions. That’s something that seems to have evaded him entirely.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:37:32

At a certain point, yes.

Metta Spencer  1:37:34

You’re thinking that Putin should have used soft power more is that the argument?

Rose Dyson  1:37:38

Well, that was. that perceived as I understand it, as the approach to influence in the world today, with the technology being what it is and so on. And here he is using heavy handed, sent decades old forms of artillery and everything in other words, that is so much yesterday’s approach to aggression, if you like not that aggression is a particularly good thing, but it’s it’s really a throwback to well, you know, you’ve heard all kinds of news commentators refer to this as as a war that speaks not unlike the World War One in the way it’s been fought.  Well he doesn’t, I agree he hasn’t used soft power in the sense of a buttering up other countries by by playing nicely with them, but are flattering them or anything like that. He’s so paranoid, he can’t do that. But he certainly has used non lethal weaponry in the form of disinformation, and, you know,  Election interference.

Metta Spencer  1:38:51

Election interference, and trolls and trying to stir up conflict in other countries. He’s good at that. And I would say that scares me.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:39:02

In fact, what happens in Ukraine, the expense, like lots of billions of dollars on spending, spending billions of dollars into what was perceived to be Ukrainian elite, bribing the Ukrainian elite. The FSB, so the KGB successor was deceiving him taking up the taking the money because the system is corrupt. And they were and they were reporting to him that everything is ready. People will,, willl just If only your tanks, across the border people will be will be welcoming with them with flowers. You won’t have to fight. You won’t have to use any violence you just be, people are waiting for you, man. And so lots of and he chose to listen to the voices that kind of fit into this concert of voices, all the opposing voices, he told them I know better. And that’s, that was the result he was the corrupt system led to the corruption in the system lead to complete misinformation and complete the failure of convening that a disaster would happen.

Rose Dyson  1:40:31

So in other words, that’s one of the reasons Kyiv didn’t fall in four days as he anticipated.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:40:36

Exactly, exactly.

Rose Dyson  1:40:39

Now, what what do you make of the corruption that has been addressed by Vladimir Zelensky, the Ukrainian Prime Minister, more lately means that that’s been I think, referred to as a throwback to a Soviet influences that haven’t been completely cleansed from the system, so to speak. But are those some of the elements you’re talking about?

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:41:10

Well, there is, yes, I think I think it would be fair to say that it’s a shared legacy of many post Soviet countries, corruption at many levels and kind of corruption, not only in terms of in financial terms, but also in terms of the habit of creating a false image of all reality. As, for example, in the Soviet Union, there was a there was planned economy, and there was a tradition of reporting fake numbers of cattle, of crops, of goods that have been produced in a certain Republic in a certain area. And because if you reported bigger amount of crops or goods or harvests, you got promoted. And so the the, the statistics was completely was completely unreal. And that tradition of Soviet times probably played out, leading to paving the way to the war. Because the tradition of the officials is to create a fake picture of the reality.

Rose Dyson  1:42:27


Metta Spencer  1:42:32

But when it comes to Soviet efforts to create the sense that we’re just dissension really conflict, and that’s actually created so as to weaken and cause trouble in another country, which apparently that is, you know, really a policy practice that was deliberately practiced by, by, by Russia. Maybe, maybe still is, I don’t know. How would you I don’t even have know how you would fight back against that kind of thing? Do you retaliate in kind? Do you how do you defend yourself against it without infringing on freedom of speech or other kinds of public discourse? I just think, that to me, that is a whole new ballgame, a whole different ballgame. And one where the rules of international relations and, and warfare, that we sort of understand, are not even relevant.

Charles David Tauber  1:43:37

To answer Joanna. And I wanted to say that we were talking about this stuff 50 years ago, but we were talking about this in the late 60s. About and we’re talking not only about climate migration, California, but all islands in the South Seas are now having to be evacuated because of climate because of climate change. BBC is making this very clear on some of their programs, it’s come out. And I remember demonstrations in the late 60s When I was a teenager, where we were talking about precisely these kinds of issues. And Greenpeace was talking about this in the early 70s. That’s one thing I wanted to bring up. So yeah, what can I say? Second thing, which I think will interest people from here, have a look at BB again BBC, on the Americans who participated in the Vietnam War, who are now moving to Vietnam. There is a documentary on [inaudible] service about this [inaudible].

Metta Spencer  1:45:03

I haven’t heard of that. What’s the idea what’s going on?

Charles David Tauber  1:45:06

What’s going on for about the past 10 or 15 years apparently, Americans who participated in the Vietnam War as soldiers are now moving to Vietnam to do volunteer work, and to take part in their society.

Metta Spencer  1:45:24

Is this an expiation for their guilt?

Charles David Tauber  1:45:28

Some that, some of it Yeah. Some of the because they didn’t, they found out at the end of the war that they didn’t believe in it, in the war. And now they’re now in their retirement, they began to come back, and to go back to Vietnam.

Metta Spencer  1:45:47


Charles David Tauber  1:45:48

Very interesting documentary.

Metta Spencer  1:45:51

I had never heard of it. How many folks are we talking about?

Charles David Tauber  1:45:55

A couple 100? At least.

Metta Spencer  1:46:00

Wow. Good for them. It takes that that takes? That’s a real measure of character, isn’t it? To say?

Charles David Tauber  1:46:11

It sure is.

Metta Spencer  1:46:13

I’m not sure that the US as a whole has gone through any kind of soul searching about the culpability for so many of these invasions and things. There’s a lot there to answer for.

Charles David Tauber  1:46:30

Yeah, this is, as I say it was it’s a very interesting documentary, from lots of standpoints, so please do listen to it. It’s online…

Metta Spencer  1:46:40

Put it on the chat if you can. So we can, I should, I should tell people that it takes me a little while to edit these two hour shows because they’re longer than the others. But I’ll put them on on our website tosavetheworld.ca as probably within a week, and then I will put up the chat in the comments column. If you scroll down when you go to tosavetheworld.ca look for global townhall, February 2023. And it was in the search bar, and it’ll take you to the edited version of this, which won’t be that different, but trim it out a little bit. And then after a few finished watching it through, scroll down to a little place that says if you want to make a comment push this button, and it’ll take you someplace to a comment column. So put in your heading on the comments column that is you’re speaking about the conversations that took place on this particular show. The Global Warming I mean global town hall of, of February 2023, that’s your title, and then put whatever you want to say there, you can have a long conversation, there. Going back and forth, you can reply to each other [inaudible]. So I will put the chat box information there. So everybody, if you want look for references to something like this, this documentary that he’s he’s going to post, you’ll see the link to it, you can do that. You have access to it, Charles? I, I do somewhere. I have to go. But I want you to make one more comment, Alexey.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:48:37


Charles David Tauber  1:48:37

If you get it. First of all, it seems like we’re gonna get a group. There’s somebody in the States, who has great contacts in Kyiv and Lviv with peace groups. And she wants to get a group together. If you know, we also may get a group in Warsaw together if you have people in Warsaw we’d like to have an educational group on psychology to contact me. You have my [inaudible].okay.

Alexey Prokhorenko  1:49:10

Okay, we’ll talk, we’ll talk about it.

Charles David Tauber  1:49:12

We should talk about it, you and I because I would really, this is going to be very big. And this is something we love very much. And oh, something very interesting. There was a guy in Kyiv, who joined another group of mine who is for conscientious objectors in the Ukraine. guy called Juri.

Metta Spencer  1:49:48

Starts with an S. right?

Charles David Tauber  1:49:50

No starts with a K.

Metta Spencer  1:49:51

Then I don’t know.

Charles David Tauber  1:49:54

[Inaudible], who’s younger I’m not sure I can look it up but There is a conscientious objectors group in Kyiv remarkably.

Metta Spencer  1:50:06

It’s been a real pleasure to be with you again, I just love you all and appreciate what you’re doing. So carry on and we’ll see you soon. Project save the world produces these shows, and this is episode number 549. You can watch them or listen to them as audio podcasts on our website tosavetheworld.ca people share information there about six global issues. To find a particular talk show. Enter its title or episode number in the search bar, or the name of one of the guest speakers. Project Save the World also produces a quarterly online publication peace magazine. You can subscribe for $20 Canadian per year. Just go to pressreader.com on your browser. And in the search bar. Enter the word peace. You’ll see buttons to click to subscribe.


Select the Videos from Right

We produce several one-hour-long Zoom conversations each week about various aspects of six issues we address. You can watch them live and send a question to the speakers or watch the edited version later here or on our Youtube channel.