to i took the spear obscene these people up nor sold through with, with planes, the priestess shouldn't report sex crimes against children. if that revealed during confession get the top french bishop summoned by the interior minister, we speak to a victim of child sexual abuse by the clergy. full moment to let this childhood trauma is engraved in my memory. very precise details. one cannot commit crimes and simply say, i'm ashamed of the crimes that have committed domestic terrorists, parents in the u. s. are branded that an face a probe. after criticizing critical race theory and schools, we hear from one mother about it later in the program. and showing

a shakespeare classic to a class sees one american college lecturer lose his job. after students were apparently outraged over the lead actor wearing black face to portray the main character in the 1960 s movie of a fellow. ah, i live on worldwide. they says to our team from moscow, my name is collin bray with the world news this out. good, happy with us. first, a france then where the top bishops and hot water after claims the priests should not report sex crimes against miners. if the offense is revealed during confession is due to meet the countries interior minister who's against the idea of church rules taking precedence over french law. we've been speaking to the founder of a victims association who suffered sexual abuse at the hands of clergy. donna, all health halls. when we came to france, i was 8 or 9 years old. my parents wanted me to join this scouts group. so i spent

almost 2 years there until i was sexually assaulted by burnup renata. i found myself alone with him and the door was closed. he hugged me, he lost it around 15 minutes and he was saying something i couldn't understand. i didn't understand what was happening. and i remember having my head completely crushed. i was completely crushed against his belly and i remember seeing fiber of the fabric and the color of his shirt, his smell, this childhood trauma is engraved in my memory, very precise details. he kissed beyond the mouth of that i went home and i told my parents immediately or i according to a french commission to report on sex abuse by the clergy and the silencing of victims that have been nearly 3000 perpetrators among church workers since the 1950s, more than 300000 minors were abused by the clergy with boys aged 10 to 13, making up most of the victims. the overwhelming majority of the crimes mentioned in the report of passed the statute of limitation. they can be prosecuted. francois devereaux says that the claims that the policy of the french catholic church is to

conceal these atrocities or shortish in wages. hoster, i told my parents about the incident, they took me out of the scout group, but then they were harassed by the whole local community and on catholic neighborhood. her queues by parents of harming the church. they protected me from this. they tried to get the priest to leave and they succeeded after 8 months of fighting. but i had to live with the reality that this had happened. i couldn't hide it from my family. i couldn't wool myself in when i understood the magnitude of it. i told myself that they would come on. i could confront this evil force and kill it, and that i would not miss the opportunity because i am certain these atrocious crimes, their organization and concealment are evil. and we have in front of us the vatican with all its power. my strength is that my opponents of understood that nothing will stop me and i have nothing to lose. the investigator commission must fulfill its responsibilities. pope francis expressed his great sorrow and called the report, a moment of shame for the whole catholic church and to him personally. but france, whatever insists the pope should do more for the thousands of victims. plough onto

this hidden bus is crazy. what is shameful is not apologizing for an atrocity committed in catholic institutions on hundreds of children. the pope has never ever sent a single message. never tried to contact us, but it's his responsibility we're talking about. it's not about his shame. we don't care about his shame on cannot commit crimes and simply say, i am ashamed for the crimes i have committed. it doesn't work like that. the pope received cardinal barbarian, but he did not receive the victims. he did not receive the victim's associations despite the media coverage. divine justice is based on the statutes of limitations for sex crimes against minors. is that your religion? is that what you are explaining to us? you are a shipwreck of spirituality and a source of shame for humanity. pope frances, that's what i said to you. domestic terrorists is how some american parents are being branded by the u. s. school bold association. the organization filed a lawsuit against those who they say asked too many questions about the highly controversial critical race theory course, which set

a teaches children about inequality and discrimination. one mother claims that she was bullied by her daughter school for even requesting information about the program. dmitri polk has the details. if you think you should have a say in your child's education, then congratulations. you now might be investigated by the f, b i and labeled the domestic terrorist or just get a lawsuit like this mother from rhode island. i just wanted to enroll, enroll my daughter in kindergarten, and know what she was learning. and i asked the principal whether they were going to learn critical race area and gender theory. and it turns out they would be, they said that they don't call kids boys and girls. they don't use gender terminology than the 1st thanksgiving. they asked kids what could have been done differently on thanksgiving, and they teach kids a certain line and thinking about history and every grade. and when i asked my questions about, what does this mean, why don't you call kids boys and girls? and how exactly are you teaching american history? they told me to submit hobbling records requests. and when i did submit public

records request, my school been threatened to sue me because they thought that i submitted too many requests re i had too many were too many question. so my school bullied and harassed me in a public meeting. they treated me like i was having a show trial, but the law sued could soon become the lease of her worries. a lobbying group called the national school board association, sent a letter to the biden administration, asking to prosecute dissenting parents, which it says are essentially threatening violence against teachers and education board members. and literally equating these parents to domestic extremists. the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes as such, national school boards association who quest a joint expedited reviewed by the u. s. department of justice education and homeland security. additionally, it's asking the u. s. government to use against parents all tools at his disposal,

even the patriot act intended to prevent international terrorism by, you know, actual terrorists. now, so my thing that all this is a bit over the top, you know, considering most of the lobby groups, complaints are about parents, quote, threats of harassment. it's in other words, just mothers and fathers disagreeing. however, it seems, the justice department didn't have to think twice in just 5 days after the letter was sent to us attorney general merritt garland ordered the f b i to investigate the parents and seek ways to prosecute them and stop this quote, disturbing trend the department takes these incident seriously, and it's committed to using it so thought a tune, resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate. i'm direct them. yes. be i work with each us attorney to convene meetings with federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days of the issuance of this memorandum. right? because apparently who cares about organized crime, drug trafficking,

skyrocketing murder rates, and so on. the f b, i needs to focus on the stuff that really poses a threat to society, school board meetings, and complaining parents. needless to say, the parents trying to exercise their right to free speech shows, sorry, the domestic terrorists have been appalled by this move. they now want to intimidate us into silence by putting out this memo nationally saying that we might be federally investigated. we advocate you hard for our can the attorney general merrick garland. he is a lying propagandist, he should resign. this is in a courageous abuse of power. he is attacking parents where the pillars of society. we are waiving our children to be in the next americans. and now the department of justice use us as an enemy. this is part of a larger colonial purge of ideological county. and the outrage over the attorney

general's decision doesn't stop with the parents. many are already seeing this move as basically confirmation that the biden administration is ready to go to extreme lengths to silence descent. even if it means putting people on a blacklist, i have a feeling and a fear that the left has become more authoritarian than we can really even imagine, be afraid of your government. and that's a sad thing from someone in the government to say, is it domestic extremism for a parent advocate for their child's best interests every day brings new reports about this administration, weaponized the federal bureaucracy to go after political opponents. frankly, i don't think we've ever seen anything like it in american history may for those of us who missed the mccarthy era, i guess this president is intent on bringing it to us, but with new force and new power and new urgency. unlike anything we've ever seen, debates and protests are supposed to be the cornerstone of american democracy. however, lately, it seems that simply shutting up the other side is becoming the preferred method,

especially for those who feel threatened by dissenting opinions. o, christopher harris of the rights group on hyphenated america, says teaching has turned into indoctrination. it's almost laughable if it weren't so tragic. this is something that is definitely an oversight of a massive overstep by the, by the administration to get involved in something that is purely a local school matter. that is not the purview in any way. stretcher form of the federal government. i call it the educational industrial complex. they do not want the kid, the parents seeing what they're teaching their kids. that's the problem. and you should be very concerned about school teachers, administrators who don't want you as a parent to know what your team, what, what's being taught to your kids. 6 to 8 hours a day for teachers to a day are indoctrinated. they're not educators. i was educated to work,

educate me. they helped draw from with in these are indoctrinated. they're trying to tell kids what to think. instead of trying to help kids learn how to think us music professors lost his job for showing the 965 oscar winning film a fellow. it's off to some students, expressed outrage over the lead actor wearing black face to portray the main character in the shakespearian adaptation. whoa, culture has gotten so out of control on university campuses that now even professors who themselves are statistically speaking, unlikely to be conservative or being targeted by students for failing to be politically correct enough. right. shane was a professor of composition at the university of michigan school of music theater, and dance. and he had been with the university for over 26 years. that is until he dared to offend the sensibilities of one freshman class, shang show his class. the 1965 film, a fellow starring lawrence, olivia as delete. now that film a fellow did receive 8 different oscar nominations at the time that it was released

. so i'm sure that most of us wouldn't think twice about seeing, included as part of a university class. but the problem you see at least according to some of shanks former students, is that as the morse king lawrence olivier, actually dance black faced throughout the entire film. remember shang was showing this film specifically to focus on the musical aspects. but it wasn't long after the screening ended that some students took it upon themselves to file complaints against shane. i was stunned in a school that preaches diversity that makes sure students understand the history of people of color and america. i was shocked. shang would show something like this in what is supposed to be a safe space. the classical interpretation of university in academia as a whole, used to be a place where you would go to have your ideas challenged and probed and to be introduced to other opinions. some of which, yes, you might even find distasteful. and frankly, it does seem like a sad state of affairs that now students are seemingly so fragile that they can't even watch a film that offends them even without being asked to engage directly with the

offensive material in question. without breaking down, professor shang did eventually come forth and apologize for showing the film. however, after that, some students still felt that shank had not done enough to make retribution. and so one week later he issued another apology and a classroom. i'm a teacher representing the university i'm i should have thought of this whole diligently, fundamentally, i apologize of the sanction was offensive and has made you angry. it also has made me lose your trust shang then when, as far to actually mentioned specific times in his career where he had collaborated with people of color despite the fact that he himself is a person of color just to illustrate that he bears no ill will to people of different races, this grovelling was still not enough to appease these social justice activists who had apparently been so hurt by the showing of this film. in fact, 40 different students and staff from the university banded together to write a formal note addressing the department, asking for shank to be removed from his position. and so for the moment,

at least she has in fact, stepped down from his teaching role. and as frustrating as this story is the sad truth is that this is far from the 1st time that students have been bullying their professors for failing to be woke enough for their standards. for example, recently a u. c l a professor came under fire for refusing to grade black students more lenient leave than white students in the wake of george floyd's death. and just last month, dr. peter berg, ocean of portland state university publicly resigned, criticizing his former university's failure to accept any ideas that go against social justice. passionate students may be a good thing, but at a certain point, universities are going to need to enforce the fact that students ultimately are there to learn, not to teach themselves, and certainly not to bully or shakespeare plays. of course related rouse before, including being dropped from the u. s. curriculum on allegations of promoting racism and the sojourning me while london's globe fit is launched. a project of the colonized his work with academics finding a midsummer night's dream,

problematic for linking whiteness to beauty. x to night, online discussions, i've long been known to descend into digital mosh pits. sometimes i guess get a bit, rowdy, other times they can perhaps get to offensive. now twitter thinks it's got an answer. it's trying out a new feature that warns uses about to enter an online chat and thread that it could get quite heated without some of the conversations being flagged in the trial have been met with a bit of amusement. oh gosh. what's this about twitter cyclic? she whoa, there are intense conversation about the weather bro. seriously, this is the lamest one yet. to return. what's intense about this conversation? come believe this is happening on it under intense conversations. dear twitter, i'm a generation x. it's gonna take more than an intense conversation to bother me. wondering

about the criteria for twitter labeling tweets with this. it gets applied to my tweets about ted lasso, but not those about vaccination in my o. corditis. all right, so how does it work if a twitter spots a chat thread with opposing views being thrashed out and somebody wants to join in a notice pops up saying heads up. conversations like this can be intense. it's not clear though, whether twitter is scanning for contentious subject matter or whether the actual content of a conversation is being monitored. it sets out that the new feature aims to better support healthy conversation. so i have one of those now, then show we, let's discuss it with carrie harrison. host of harrison's reality. shackles are just him. robert young. who's the house the politics politics politic. falco gentlemen. good to have you with us, just in 1st of all, this sound like a noble idea that's doomed to fail because if it's moderated by humans, it's open to claims of subjectivity if it's algorithms. well, we'll know how they can't really understand the nuances of language and discussion

kind of work. no, no, is the very simple answer there and it doesn't even have to be a heated conversation. it's not a noble idea, but yes indeed, it is doomed to fail. twitter is a very, very, very fascinating social experiment in that much of social media and really much of american culture. specifically because of how much the press is involved in it is driven through twitter conversations. and yet twitter itself has no idea how to moderate it and winds up getting the vast brunt of some of the most insane arguments that bubble up on that site. so they long ago lost control of their product. this is just another laughable way that they're yelling into the breeze for a horse that has long ago left the bard. carrie does this with the billions of tweets being posted every day. is it gonna be just to panicky reaction to perfectly innocuous conversations as i will, you suspect might happen?

well, i think so and hats off to you by the way, for referring to it as a digital mosh pit. that's a 1st that was excellent. this is no booboo. oops, mistake. twitter is not fumbling the ball. they're not somehow incapable of managing their audience. it is going exactly as planned. imagine the idea. when you watch television learning, we're the world. you get a disclaimer. the following contains lipstick. children be advised, do you want to watch it? yes, you do. the 2nd, they put up a warning saying whatever you do, don't touch that. dia, whatever you do. don't push the red button. i'm going to be the 1st in line along with millions of others to push the red button. this is the perfect brand new bait hook in the cheek off we go. just in do you think that there's a danger that certain topics might end up algorithmically? if that even is indeed a would end up being on the wrong side of the the, the selection process. i'm just thinking about

a contentious subject matter that my crop up a couple of examples that we've seen at julian sand. his weiss was label with a heads up, no notification. you can imagine the discussions about donald trump are likely to raise a warning sign even before and he set to as even got in place. is there a danger that there are certain people, certain company, certain subjects, they're gonna fall foul be judged before any, or do barges even taken place? i to, to baxley back up my panel made here. absolutely. if, if they this is already algorithmically put to the top of the queue, it's already algorithmically fed to everybody because there is at the base level, no difference between intense content and profitable content. the content that people want to engage with that stay on the site longer, and therefore give twitter more opportunity to serve ads in between everything else . will there be people that will be labeled as intense that aren't necessarily intense? who knows, it really depends on how we even define that at the unmasking of algorithms to

something that we have talked about a lot in our modern political culture. and even a seemingly silly one. like this probably should have some kind of of understanding because how long does somebody have to have an intense conversation to be label just an intense account and have everything labeled like that? terry, do you think it could be opening the door to being up even though don't was being banned? no was being friend with being taken off here. it's literally a warning for others to say, buyer beware, enter at your own peril. but it could be an indirect black mark that could build up over time. well, she ha, which, you know, it would be intellectually honest for us to remember that it is a free platform like facebook, a free platform. they make all the money you get to play on their front yard. they on the lawn, they can kick you off. they could put up signs. they can throw pumpkins at you.

it's their lawn, they own it, they pay for it. we just go crazy on it. so pretending like it's a phone call where you have an implied o privacy interaction is folly. the fact is we're guests there at somebody else's dinner table and they keep throwing hand grenades and the super turns in the soup, if you will. and we love this one else is better in life and sword fighting, multi 1000000000 dollar business. the aims that are filled with blocked and delicious violence. yet you can't see a dead body on tv was died of covered. all of this is completely manufactured and we're suckers. we're even debating this. it is a reasonable debate, but we're debating it. that's exactly what they want. how many more people are going to go on twitter tomorrow, just to see if they get a warning. we'll find out and then just in it, if there is this unplanned unfair playing field and does carry points out, there are certain things we can't do on television, visuals of that for a reason,

of course. and when you make a phone call, i mean, you do have a contract with a phone company that says if you use a legally, you've done something wrong. but just in, in terms of twitter, it is a private company. so it is entitled to their what it wants, it's that to make money, but it's also that to stay in business. presumably it has to get its own house in order before governments move it in the u. k. they're looking at an online abuse bill. presumably these companies want to regulate themselves before governments get in i wouldn't necessarily say that's the case i, i believe that a lot of these companies in facebook is really at the forefront of it have been begging for regulation. in fact, i buy, i think that the companies that are power players now were desperately love for the idea for there to be a fairly high bar of regulation. one that would require maybe tens if not hundreds of thousands of or millions of dollars annually. and lawyer fees, just so they could regulatory capture the market. i think that though there is one big thing about twitter that we should remember here. twitter is not a massive platform, at least to the level that youtube and facebook are of youtube,

of course, owned by google. it is relatively smaller than in the big thing that twitter has is influence because there is no other platform for which is a fascination of the media like twitter is. and so any thing that they do will always be casting a much larger shadow because the modern scribes of our time are here looking for content and that's what's going to be there for them carry when the free speech advocates like this, let's face it, they can be the noisy or end of the digital conversation currently because no one's getting bad, no one's getting thrown off. the conversation is still allowed to happen. that's a good thing, isn't. well, in my opinion, it is the united states. i mean, this is enshrined in our constitution. it's not a maybe if it's not even a debate, it isn't shrine and constitution enumerated even as number one, not number 10. so it's important and you know what,

what's offensive to you is not offensive to me. and who's to say what is offensive? so that's why it's again, again, it's private property. so we do have these issues and problems. think of the beauty, though. if you're a politician, you can do horrible things. you can stand up and say, i'm going to defend little timmy was not even born yet for something that may offend him, and i'm to squelch conversation to put up warning flags and all the what b s. meanwhile, what they physically do, or legislative leave do, or to a policy is truly offensive, and there's no warning for that. it just happens. and then we all get caught. so all of this is a delicious or willy, an orgasm, a massive huxley on a roller coaster ride and we keep playing like it's real. i know this is very, very abstract. what i'm saying, but the whole thing is abstract. it's an algorithm,

algorithmic lunatic asylum. and they're winning dad, just as there is a bit late to the path, isn't there and being so socially responsible digitally. because if, if we were in a bar and we got a bit lively, we'd be told off by the landlord if it was happening in a school yard, the teachers would get involved. none of this has been happening online and it's been allowed to go relatively unchecked for a generational most. it's a bit too late to do anything about it. should the others start looking at measures like this? you mentioned which is relative site compared to organizations like facebook. they all the wild west of digital conversation, other they are all dealing with and i don't want to skip over this as much as we like to monday morning quarterback. what happens on the social media platforms? none of these problems are easy to solve. i do think that they don't want these headaches, any of the social media platforms. what they want is engagement. and they want everybody to engage with these ad so they can continue doing what they have done for the past 10 years, which is totally erode and reshape, display advertising as

a market worldwide. they don't want the, your kids are, are believing that they're ugly and they're closer to suicide. they don't want the, we are eroding democracy, conversation around them, because it's quite simply that's bad for business. what they want is massive engagement. i think their problem that they are hitting is the fact that they have no idea how to get one and not the other. that they know that the more engage when you get the more rancor and the more engage when you get the more ads. but also you get more of a discourse on why there shouldn't be rancor. so twitter is, is, is to me the most incompetent of, of the people doing it because they are the most scared of their audience. but then again, if i worked at twitter, i'd probably be the most scared of my audience to considering the absolute lunatics that reside on twitter 247 gentlemen. they could all learn from both. thanks for keeping a dignified decorum throughout this particular thread of really appreciated. corey

harrison has of harrison's reality. jack and justin rover young host of politics, politics, politics, really good to have you on healthy. and i thank you and that's we're going to wrap things up for you on this fall as alyssa, thanks for watching. after the next half an hour, short thomas will be here to update you again. a little bit. stories were across here at hearty international from moscow. ah, well, the panoramic no, certainly no borders line to nationalities and you various as a merge, we don't have a therapy. we don't on the back seat. the whole world needs to take action and be ready. people are judgment. 2 common crisis with we can do better,

we should be better. everyone is contributing each in their own way. but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is great, the response has been massive. so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we are in it together with oh, the rescheduled ocean with on what it says i middle of august will still it'll cover 1000000000 slogan noise in the vehicle with fresh, which don't don't love. who did they got that would because if that's something you would get them with the cool got that's 90 percent of our your properties was for what fin he bought on with a feel for years. right. what that to the what like you with luck

with nice seems to them often when he's got though wife, when, according so we'll do some post them for phillip keeps them from the, from the news. ok. i live with us. that's the same. i was given your cisco web logo slippery news. i will continue to 11 little scared, little squiggly with john prove it, but are one. why do you think that us them, i mean, on i besides in that we still do . ah, what do i see a brother now, but let us stay at the court. got him the yard and then when he was wanted to see what's still with me in blythewood. by

agreeing with fewer governments, written the statement by mister base, the talking pub owens, particular by gender progressions that i wasn't born research, what i see it, but also so much as you go crazy or what do i see him? why didn't you get the corporate in many of the national immigrant nauseous daughter near the back st. bezels cathedral is always the center of attention. but of course it's seen in a special way by artists who never looks.