Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel

Summary

AMANPOUR PODCAST SUMMARY
Episode: "Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel"
Date: July 28, 2026
Host: Christiane Amanpour
Guests: Rahm Emanuel, Bill McKibben, Emily Wilson

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Christiane Amanpour hosts a wide-ranging discussion on three central topics in global affairs and culture. First, Rahm Emanuel, former White House Chief of Staff and U.S. Ambassador, examines the rapidly deteriorating relationship between the U.S. and Israel amid ongoing Middle East conflicts and shifting Democratic Party perspectives. The show then pivots to a climate emergency in Europe, with environmentalist Bill McKibben analyzing the geopolitical and technological responses to intensifying wildfires and the global climate crisis. Finally, Emily Wilson, acclaimed translator of Homer’s Odyssey, delves into the modern significance of the ancient Greek epic, connected to the release of a new film adaptation.

---

1. U.S.–Israel Relations at a Crossroads

Guest: Rahm Emanuel
Segment Start: [03:14]

Key Points

• Growing U.S.–Israel Tension:

  • Christiane Amanpour frames Netanyahu’s Washington visit as occurring at a point of “maximum peril” for the U.S.–Israel relationship, citing declining American support and fracturing of bipartisan consensus over Israel’s conduct, especially regarding the Gaza War. ([01:15–02:45])
  • J Street’s statement: “The bipartisan consensus Prime Minister Netanyahu once claimed to have built has been fractured, not despite his policies, but because of them.” ([02:38])

• Rahm Emanuel’s Perspective:

  • Affirms the crisis angle: “It is a maximum peril...we're at a breaking point.” ([03:14])
  • Advocates ending unconditional U.S. military aid: “Israel can buy weapons like any other ally, pay full price. It just won’t receive U.S. taxpayer support.” ([03:20])
  • Points to past Israeli officials and calls for a reorientation of U.S. policy away from automatic support. Emerson outlines proposals:
    • “A 23 state peace solution.”
    • “India, Middle East, Europe economic corridor.”
  • Emphasizes U.S. interest: “I'm not looking for a third war... We're at a tipping point in recalibrating what this alliance is about.” ([03:55])

Blame for the Iran War

Responsibility Debate:

• Amanpour asks if President Trump or Netanyahu is more responsible for the war against Iran, referencing claims of faulty intelligence. ([04:38])
• Emanuel is unequivocal: “I never give a president of the United States a pass... Prime Minister Netanyahu...was told no by four presidents. President Trump doesn't get a pass…He has the agency as the commander in chief.” ([05:21])
• Contrasts Trump’s war policy with Obama’s JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal), arguing the deal was imperfect but preferable.
  • “Today the uranium is in Iran. Third, the uranium was down to 3% purity. Today it's at 60% purity.” ([06:41]; see Amanpour fact-check at [08:08])
  • “The President of the United States has now got the United States in a war with Iran...a mistake then and it's a mistake now.” ([07:42])

Emanuel’s Critique of Israeli Policy

• Recounts direct confrontations with Netanyahu since 2009 over settlements and the two-state solution.
• On U.S. policy: “For too long…[we] blindly stood behind your government, without conditions, without demands, without consequences. Even when we disagreed. That has been our mistake.” ([09:29])
• Cites consistent opposition to West Bank settlement expansions and calls Israel a “territorial pariah.” ([09:43])
• Reflects on being called a "self-loathing Jew" by Netanyahu for his stance.

Moral Clarity on Violence

• Harsh condemnation of October 7 attacks and any celebration thereof: “Those people who were celebrating October 8th are morally bankrupt.” ([13:54], [14:32])
• Criticizes both Israeli settler violence and Palestinian leadership: “What the Israeli settlers are doing on the West Bank...is morally empty.” ([14:48], [14:54])
• Reiterates: “I've been consistent for 18 years. I'm sorry, everybody else is a little late catching up.” ([14:12])

Policy Recommendations for U.S. and Israel

• Cites growing dissent from within Israel’s own security establishment against current policy. ([15:49])
• “The settler violence is not in Israel's security interests...” ([15:56])
• Urges U.S. leadership to pressure Israel into halting West Bank violence and to leverage diplomatic opportunities with Syria and Lebanon for regional stability.
• Addresses the influence of far-right elements in Israel’s government: “The very, very far right wing elements of his government are controlling him and it's detrimental to Israel's security.” ([17:45])

Notable Quotes

• “Prime Minister Netanyahu has been talking to four different presidents who rejected this idea. President Trump doesn't get a pass... Did Netanyahu finally get him to say yes? He did say yes. And that's on the President.” – Rahm Emanuel [05:21]
• “You have to work on these [regional security] for Israel, but more importantly also for the security of the United States. And we will be your partner going shoulder to shoulder. But we're not going to go off on some journey.” – Rahm Emanuel [18:37]

---

2. Europe's Wildfires & Global Climate Crisis

Guest: Bill McKibben
Segment Start: [21:24]

Wildfires as a Climate Turning Point

• Amanpour describes catastrophic wildfires across France and Spain as their leaders warn of an unprecedented crisis ([21:24]).
• Bill McKibben agrees: “We’re living out this story in place after place...It's going to get worse before it gets better.” ([22:06])
• Cites extreme weather’s immediate impact, including Vermont’s wildfire haze.

The El Niño Factor and the Emerging New Reality

• McKibben warns: “This is the appetizer, and we're headed for the very main course over the next 12 months...We will set new records for the hottest year in human history...[we may] for a month or two go past that 2.0 degrees Celsius mark that the Paris conference was supposed to keep us away from.” ([23:12])
• “We're going to get a foretaste over the next year of what the weather from 2035 or 2040 will be like.” ([23:53])

Policy Responses: Europe vs. U.S.

• “Europeans are going too slowly, but at least they're moving in the right direction. America is making a concerted effort to make the problem worse as fast as it possibly can.” ([24:55])
• Critiques recent U.S. rolling back of green energy policy, contrasted with China and Asia’s “unmistakable” leadership in adopting clean technology ([25:36]).

Renewable Energy Success Stories

• Australia:
  “All Australians, solar panels or not, can now get free electricity from noon to 3...By next year, it'll be the entire country.” ([26:27])

• Pakistan:
  “Pakistan...has built the equivalent of half the country's national electric grid in 18 months” by importing and installing affordable Chinese solar panels. ([28:35])

• Global Progress:
  “In 2025, all new electricity demands around the world were met by green power.” ([27:53])

Obstacles and Opportunities

• U.S. invented the solar panel but is “ceding all of that advantage to our theoretical chief adversary”, China ([34:10]).
• Fundamental point: “We’re not going to stop global warming. Too late for that. But we’re not too late to start shaving tenths of a degree off how hot the planet eventually gets. Every tenth of a degree moves 100 million people from a safe to a dangerous climate zone.” ([27:29])

On Cost and Feasibility

• “Five years ago we passed an invisible line…cheaper to produce energy from the sun and wind than from fossil fuel…Once you have [the panel], then the energy is delivered for free every morning.” ([32:38])
• Fossil fuel industries are “terrified” and “working so hard and so corruptly to game the system.” ([33:11])

Historical Reflection

• President Carter’s forward-thinking solar initiatives in the 1970s were reversed by Reagan, leading to decades of lost progress ([33:41]).
• “America is going to be the caboose for a while here, but we need to join that train—and fast.” ([35:18])

Notable Quotes

• “None of those miles [of sunlight] go through the Strait of Hormuz.” – Bill McKibben [25:53]
• “No one's going to fight a war over sunshine, Christiane.” – Bill McKibben [30:07]

---

3. The Enduring Power of Homer’s Odyssey

Guest: Emily Wilson (interviewed by Walter Isaacson)
Segment Start: [37:08]

Translating the Odyssey for Today

• The Opening Lines:
  • Wilson recites and translates the first lines of the Odyssey:
    “Tell me about a complicated man, muse. Tell me how he wandered and was lost when he had wrecked the holy town of Troy.”
    ([38:06])
• She opted for “complicated man” instead of traditional “man of twists and turns” to evoke the breadth of Odysseus’s character and the text’s ambiguity ([39:11]).
  • “It also has a gesture towards...I don't know exactly in which way this character or this poem or this journey will be complicated...an enticement, as I think the original Polutropon is an enticement to keep listening.” ([39:25])

The Nature of Heroism and Fame

• Odysseus seeks “eternal fame by these very paradoxical means, by his ability to inhabit spaces very different from the battlefield.” ([41:34])
• The Odyssey is set during a period of Greek expansion and reflects anxieties about strangers and technology as well as heroism. ([42:44])

Translator’s Cultural Lens

• Wilson contends every translation is shaped by its time and translator’s questions, such as social hierarchy, gender, and slavery; contrasts her approach with previous translators like Chapman and Pope ([44:09–44:43]).

The Odyssey’s Modern Relevance

• On Xenia (“hospitality”):
  “Xenia in Greek...is in Homer understood to be ratified and blessed by Zeus. Zeus takes a particular interest in the needs of strangers and in the relationship between those who are not related by kin.” ([47:39])

• The Odyssey’s exploration of what it means to be a guest or host remains relevant to contemporary questions of immigration, migration, and the treatment of foreigners ([49:52]).

• “The poem is more truthful...insofar as it shows us how the same person can be both [host and guest].” ([50:49])

• The theme that “we are the people from the sea”—the fear of the stranger ultimately reflecting fear of ourselves—resonates with today’s society ([51:27]).

Notable Quotes

• “Translation in general is impossible...a word such as polutropos...has multiple meanings...How exactly can we do that in a single word in English...” – Emily Wilson [39:11]
• “Maybe this is a journey from war to peace, but maybe not. Maybe it's a journey from war to war.” – Emily Wilson [52:11]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Rahm Emanuel on the U.S.–Israel Divide: [03:14–19:10]
• Bill McKibben on Wildfires and Climate Solutions: [21:24–35:37]
• Emily Wilson & Walter Isaacson on the Odyssey: [37:08–52:25]

---

Memorable Moments

• Rahm Emanuel’s consistent, outspoken critique of Netanyahu’s policies and the dangers of unconditional U.S. support, delivered with both candor and frustration ([09:43], [10:37]).
• Bill McKibben’s sharp contrast between U.S. policy and global progress, and his pointed hope: “No one's going to fight a war over sunshine.” ([30:10])
• Emily Wilson’s reflection that translation is “like democracy...the worst possible political system, except for all the others.” ([40:47])
• Wilson’s insight into hospitality and foreignness: “The Odyssey is constantly reminding us that in most cases, people are not just one thing or the other.” ([50:49])

---

Summary

This episode of Amanpour captures global turning points in politics, climate, and culture. Rahm Emanuel calls for a landmark recalibration of the U.S.–Israel relationship, with frank assessments of leadership failures and moral responsibilities on all sides of the conflict. Bill McKibben warns that the smoke-choked skies above Europe and North America are only harbingers, but offers hope through grassroots and technological revolutions, particularly where political leadership fails. Emily Wilson explores why Homer’s Odyssey, in her new translation and in film, remains so powerfully relevant today, reflecting on themes of complicated identity, hospitality, and migration.

This episode is a snapshot of three major inflection points—each inviting a reassessment of how we confront our greatest collective challenges and how we understand the stories we tell ourselves, both ancient and modern.

Transcript

[Christiane Amanpour]

Hello everyone and welcome to Amanpur. Here's what's coming up.

[Bill McKibben]

Frankly, we're being very nice to a lot of countries that would not survive without us. And you know who wouldn't survive without us?

[Emily Wilson]

Israel.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Netanyahu meets an aggravated Trump in Washington. Is this a low point for the U. S. Israel relationship? I asked Rahm Emanuel as he weighs up political ambitions for 2028.

[Bill McKibben]

Then the situation we are dealing with today is the most severe we have ever recorded, the toughest since the Second World War.

[Christiane Amanpour]

France says it's at war with devastating wildfires. They rage in Spain too. Its capital, Madrid is under threat. Renowned environmentalist Bill McKibben joins me.

[Emily Wilson]

Plaz One of the many reasons why the Odyssey is having a moment in the 21st century is the fact that it is the original poem is so much concerned with these questions about what does it mean to be a good host and what does it mean to be a good guest.

[Christiane Amanpour]

The Odyssey still capturing imaginations 3,000 years later. Walter Isaacson speaks to Emily Wilson, the first woman and the latest to translate the epic into English. Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. Two high stakes meetings at the White House today as President Trump met with Ukraine's President Zelensky and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, both in town for Senator Lindsey Graham's funeral. For the Israeli leader, though, the Washington reception of today will be very different than to the last one. Polling now consistently shows a huge drop in support for Israel over the past few years. In reaction to the Gaza war and increasing attacks in the occupied west bank, the Jewish advocacy group J Street issued a statement that, quote, the bipartisan consensus Prime Minister Netanyahu once claimed to have built has been fractured, not despite his policies, but because of them. And he no longer speaks for millions of us. Now the relationship with Israel is also emerging as a new litmus test for the Democrats. Rahm Emanuel, formerly a US Ambassador to Japan, a White House chief of staff and a congressman, has been a longtime supporter of Israel. He himself volunteered to serve in the idf. But he now says the US should not provide its long term ally with unconditional military aid, arguing Israel should be treated like any other country. And Rahm Emanuel is joining me now from Chicago. Welcome back to our program. We've got a huge delay so I'm not going to wait for you to say hi back. But let me ask you this. Do you agree with how I framed my introduction to you that Netanyahu comes to Washington at a time of Maximum, let's say, peril for relationships between Israel and the United States.

[Rahm Emanuel]

The truth is yes and no. It is a maximum peril. From that perspective. What I said was, and I've always believed Israel can buy weapons like any other ally, not any other country, that with the same rules, same restrictions and same requirements as any other, pay full price. It just won't receive U.S. taxpayer support. As I said in my speech, it will maintain its qualitative edge. Third, which is very important for the context in 2021, Michael Oren, the Israeli ambassador of the United States, came out for this same position. Now the Prime Minister has adopted it. So that was a piece of it. And then I laid out a 23 state peace solution and also the India, Middle East, Europe economic corridor. So there was a way of breaking out of Israel's isolation. And I said it also as an American patriot. The final point that I think is important, America has fought two very stupid wars that have cost us thousands of lives, trillions of dollars in the region. I'm not looking for a third war. And as a principal ally, that means we have to have an understanding, because we're at a breaking point. As I said in the speech, we're at a tipping point in recalibrating what this alliance is about and what we have to do to secure Israel's sovereignty and security, but not at the expense also of America's interest. It has to be complementary.

[Christiane Amanpour]

So. So now that you've laid out that table, that's good to know. I want to know what you think, because there's been a lot of back and forth about who was really responsible, who is the father of the war on Iran. President Trump says it was me. I'm the leader of the free world. It's not Netanyahu. Others believe that it's Netanyahu who had convinced him with what turns out to be faulty intelligence, that it would be an easy way. Once in a lifetime, once in a generation, slam dunk. What do you think and what do you think? We haven't had all the details yet from the meeting with President Trump, but what do you think President Trump is and should be saying to Netanyahu now?

[Rahm Emanuel]

Yeah. Well, one is, look, I never give a president of the United States a pass. I know one thing. Having been served two presidents in the Oval Office, spent eight years in and out of it, the only decisions you get in the Oval Office, like a mayor of a big city, are bad and worse. And you have to have the judgment to distinguish bad and worse. Prime Minister Netanyahu has been talking to four different presidents who rejected this idea. President Bush 43, President Obama, President Trump 1.0 and President Biden all said no to this. So President Trump doesn't get a pass. Did Netanyahu finally get him to say yes? He did say yes. And that's on the President. The President of the United States is required as a commander in chief to secure America's national security interests and also the men and women who serve that interest and look out for them. So I don't give a pass to the President of the United States. Now, I also believe if you put this war up against President Obama's JCPOA for all the goods and bads, here's how you juxtapose it. China and Russia were enforcing with the United States Iran's ending of its nuclear or limiting of its nuclear capacity. Today they're funding Iran and supplying Iran in its war against the United States. Killing Americans to the JCPOA had the uranium out of Iran. Today the uranium is in Iran. Third, the uranium was down to 3% purity. Today it's at 90% purity. Fourth, the Strait of Hormuz was open today it is closed. And fifth, the world was part of isolating Iran and making realize the cost of that nuclear project versus then nothing in politics is perfect. Go to another profession if you want perfect in the balance of equities. The JCPOA was the right decision versus this decision. The President United States has now got the United States in a war with Iran that has not only he doesn't have leverage. You now having replaced the proxies, Iran's using the Strait of Hormuz as its leverage on the world and trying to achieve its ultimate goal, push America out of the region, which is why it's bringing the cost to the Gulf countries from Kuwait, uae, Bahrain, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Iraq to be too burdensome and Qatar too burdensome to have the United States. So to me, this was on the President. He has the agency as the commander in chief of the United States of America and the responsibility. Prime Minister Netanyahu sold that to four presidents. And all of them said not buying. This is the President that bought it. And it was a mistake then and it's a mistake now.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Yeah, and clearly you can see the dramatic loss of public support even from the beginning. Very rarely in the United States do wars not have public support at the beginning. Not this one. And the oil prices keep rising and the Republicans are in a bit of a tizzy over all of this. I just want to correct you just because it's a fact Iran has 60% enriched uranium because 90% is actually over the top. So I know you meant 60%. I'm just going to make it clear that it's 60%.

[Rahm Emanuel]

That's fine.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Thank you. Thank you for the confrontation.

[Rahm Emanuel]

But let's OK for it was under the jcpoa. It was three.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I know, I know. It's nuts. I know. So let me ask you this, going back to Israel, because this has now become a big deal in the United States and politicians are sort of kind of trying to be on what they consider the right side of this issue, particularly for future political ambitions. Now I want to go back to your speech that you gave in Tel Aviv where you actually called Israel. I mean there's plenty of context, but a territorial pariah. You warned again about unconditional US support and you proposed sanctioning those Israelis who attacked Palestinian civilians. Here is a piece of your speech that I'm going to play and then you can describe it.

[Rahm Emanuel]

The prime minister and his government have led Israel into a dead end. For too long, American policy towards Israel operated under the assumption that the best thing Washington to do for Jerusalem is to blindly to silently stand behind your government without conditions, without demands, without consequences. Even when we disagreed. That has been our mistake and it's been not a favor to you.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Rahm Emanuel, you know that the leading Jewish elected politician in the United States, the, you know, the Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer back in 2024 made a similar plea from the floor of the Senate. Please Israel, don't do this because you are going to alienate America. And, and, and, and you need America for your security, etc. What do you do you think more politicians should have taken that up, that rallying cry back then?

[Rahm Emanuel]

Well, hold on Christian. When I was President Obama's chief of staff in 2009, 18 years ago, I confronted the Prime Minister directly that I said that the housing what you're doing in the west bank is not only against a two state solution, it is not in Israel's interest. It will lead to its isolation and perpetual conflict. If there was a prediction I wanted to be wrong on 18 years ago, that was it. Now that's what led him to publicly call me a self loathing Jew. I was there 18 years ago. Everybody else caught on. I didn't need the Gaza war to realize that the policies vis a vis in the west bank and specifically the housing and settlement were going to be provocative and lead to something like this moment. And I said it not to the behind the Prime Minister's back to his face. Which is why he attacked me not only publicly but also in his book number two. I also, and I want to repeat this, many members of the Israeli security establishment and members of the Prime Minister's government who joined after October 7th quit because there was no day after plan in Gaza. You've never used the military to then create strategic opportunities and fill them with political persuasion, diplomatic success, economic statecraft or cultural attraction. The other tools of your national security toolbox. So you know, I happen to not only also said that to the Prime Minister, I was, I think a persuasive voice of President Obama to fund the Iron Dome because it's protected Israeli citizens from missiles targeting citizens, not military targets. And I have no room for anybody that on October 8th was celebrating the death of 1200 people, the sexual violence to those people, the taking of 250 people. In that same speech that you just cited, I called those people who were celebrating October 8th morally bankrupt. And I think they're morally bankrupt. I also criticized the Palestinian leadership for its corruption, for turning down three times 98% of what they wanted and responding with violence. I got the cynicism. But to break out of what I call the Israel that was once known as a startup nation that has now wanted to by the Prime Minister's own term become Sparta. A policy of a 23 state solution which was the Arab League's offer in 2013. Saudi Arabia was the principal backer. They need the comfort of numbers. Today they will give full recognition to the State of Israel for coming to an agreement on sovereignty and security. Israel wants the comfort of numbers because they break out of their pariah status. The Palestinians people get the sovereignty they need and America has would have brought together the stability the Arab world requires, the security that Israel requires and the sovereignty that the Palestinian people require that makes the politics work towards the policy. And I don't think the United States was doing any favors by being so silent when it was against our interest and our purpose. And it was so not only the Prime Minister called me, you can read about it in former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's book. The most vocal voice against the housing policies on the west bank was myself as President Obama's chief of staff. So I've been consistent for 18 years. I'm sorry, everybody else is a little late catching up.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Regarding what you said about October 7, I think most right thinking people would agree with you on how to reflect on what happened on October 8th.

[Rahm Emanuel]

I want to call this. I know Look, I know Christian. No, no, I'm not. I'm not going to let you get past on this. No, no. There is a lot of people in public life in America.

[Christiane Amanpour]

There are.

[Rahm Emanuel]

And around the world.

[Christiane Amanpour]

You're right.

[Rahm Emanuel]

Who were cheering on October 8th after 1200 people died.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I know.

[Rahm Emanuel]

Well, now, the thing is, that's why I'm agreeing with you. I'm not giving it a pass. Correct. It's morally bankrupt.

[Christiane Amanpour]

No, you're right, it's morally bankrupt, as

[Rahm Emanuel]

is what the Israeli settlers are doing on the west bank and is what the Israeli. I'll take. That's right.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Okay, so let's move to that. Now.

[Rahm Emanuel]

The Israeli settlers are doing right now the violence. That is morally empty.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Okay, so let me ask you this. We've got an Israeli election coming up on October 27th. I want to ask you that how you think that could change this view on October 27th. But in the meantime, some 600, I think they're former Israeli, you know, military, IDF, intelligence, and all the rest of it have written an open letter saying that only the President of the United States or the United States can tell Netanyahu to stop what's happening on the west bank right now and possibly also in Gaza. What would you advise President Trump to say to Netanyahu about what you've just raised? The settler violence, the other government enabled violence on the west bank right now?

[Rahm Emanuel]

Yeah, to some elements of the Jewish community that criticized my speech. I said, look, man, there is 100 Israeli IDF generals and members of the Shin Bet leadership who said the same thing. What do you know that they don't know about Israel's security, that the settler violence is not in Israel's security interests. And you're going to get perpetuated a type of conflict. This is not in Israel's interest. You said 600. About a month ago, it was 100 names. So to all the people that again, getting back to the core tape you put being silent about something we disagree with. Remember, there are voices inside the security establishment in Israel, Generals who held the highest position in Israel, who believed in the security, have criticized this decision. Second thing I would say to Israel, you have a president in Syria, not an Assad, which has been a leader. The family has been a leader for over 40 years. He has called for a security agreement with Israel, Not a peace, but security. You have a peace with Jordan, you have a peace with Syria, you get Syria worked out, that's a major security plank. Europe would be part of that. France for sure, and others would be supportive of that. And you have now basically taken the country that Iran used as Route 66 to Hezbollah's weapons. You would take them out of the commission of being that route. And that is in Israel's both Golan northern Galilee security as well as eliminating the route that Iran has used to get Hezbollah the weapons. Let's work on that and make that a public part of Israel's profile to the world. Working on peace in Lebanon. We now have a unique partnership and a capability. We have an oil agreement in the Mediterranean. Now they want to take over squeezing Hezbollah out. So making sure Israel's northern border and the people living in Kirat Shmona and other parts are secure, we're going to make that a priority. And I would tell the prime minister, you have to work on these as part of the security for Israel, but more importantly also for the security of the United States. And we will be your partner going shoulder to shoulder. But we're not going to go off on some journey. And as it relates to western the settlements right now, those are cease to desist. You made a pledge not to undermine the West Bank. You made that pledge as part of the Abraham Accords with the uae, with Bahrain and you are undermining them. And the other thing that's part of this, Cristian is the prime minister when he first got elected said, you know, I'm going to control my government because of his political standing. The right, very, very far right wing elements of his government are controlling him and it's detrimental to Israel's security. That's why those 600 generals, former generals, wrote a very public letter and nothing I ever said measures up to the criticism they have said of this prime minister and his government.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Yeah, I may have misspoken on the 600. You're right on the hundreds of. Nonetheless, I think it's hundred.

[Rahm Emanuel]

Yeah, I was going to say that. Really? Gre. Yeah, we're both standing corrected on two different things.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Yeah, we do. All right. Rahm Emanuel, thank you for being with us. And we'll keep following this conversation and stay with CNN because we'll be right back after the break.

[Derek Van Dam]

Finding a source you can trust for weather forecasts should be easy, right? This is CNN meteorologist Derek Van Dam thrilled to introduce the new CNN weather app. Check your daily forecast to plan your day, the weekly forecast to see what's on the way and prepare for any major storm with our robust real time video coverage. The app is stunning. And if you're a weather nerd like me, you'll love our in depth stories and the photo of the day. Download the CNN weather app on iOS today.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I'm Adi Cornish.

[Ari Shapiro]

I'm Ari Shapiro. And it's Engagement Party and we get to talk about what we're obsessed with, what we're engaged with, what we need to process with a friend. There is a specific nostalgia for the 90s, the denim, the music, the TV shows. And I also think there is a slightly separate nostalgia for an analog life.

[Christiane Amanpour]

The analog life. I think it's a social media thing because this is a generation that's like, remember when my every move, the choice was mine.

[Ari Shapiro]

Yeah, but that's not specific to the 90s per se. So, like Instagram didn't debut until well into the 2000s. Almost a decade into the 2000s.

[Derek Van Dam]

Yes, I was.

[Ari Shapiro]

People are buying vinyl, they're buying records. What's interesting to me is that a lot of the nostalgia is aimed towards and being talked about by Gen Z who were not alive.

[Jake Larson]

Yeah.

[Ari Shapiro]

Follow Engagement Party wherever you get your podcasts.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Now to Europe burning. Hundreds of thousands of people across France and Spain have been evacuated from their homes in recent days as wildfires across those countries have continued to blaze. Temperatures will soon soar in both countries. This week with no rain in sight. Most of France is now suffering from poor air quality, too. Listen to the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and the French President, Emmanuel Macron.

[Walter Isaacson]

This is no longer an exception. It is the new reality.

[Bill McKibben]

Summers are becoming increasingly difficult, destructive, and therefore deadly. The situation we are dealing with today is the most severe we have ever recorded, the toughest since the Second World war. More than 160,000 hectares have already burned and the season is far from over.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Now, Bill McKibben is a globally recognized author and environmentalist. His latest book is called Here Comes the Sun and he's joining me from Vermont. Bill McKibben, welcome back to the program. Just a reaction to what Prime Minister Sanchez and Emmanuel Macron said. I mean, I was really horrified when I heard Macron say they're facing the worst crisis since World War II.

[Bill McKibben]

Well, of course he's correct and he's joined by leaders by now in virtually every part of the world. We're living out this story in place after place after place where we live here in Vermont. We spent the last week with our air just turned orange by record fires in Ontario pouring smoke down upon us. It's going to get worse before it gets better. But the only way out of it is the way that, ironically, Spain has been starting to pioneer the rapid adoption of clean energy technology that gives us some hope of staunching the flow of carbon into the atmosphere from fossil fuels.

[Christiane Amanpour]

So that's what I want to talk to you about, because you have a lot of amazing facts and experiences for us to look at from countries and others that are actually doing the right thing on trying to mitigate climate change. But first, I want to ask you, because the next big event, I think, is going to be El Nino. Tell us what that is and what that will affect after this summer of wildfires.

[Bill McKibben]

Yes, I'm afraid this is the appetizer, and we're headed for the very main course over the next 12 months. The heat now building in the Pacific, which is what an El Nino is, will be expressed into the atmosphere over the next year. And it's almost certain now that we will set new records for the hottest year in human history. And in fact, there's increasing speculation, studies yesterday that show we may for a month or two go past that 2.0 degrees Celsius mark that the Paris conference of 2015 was supposed to do everything to keep us away from. We're going to get a foretaste over the next year of what the weather from 2035 or 2040 will be like. And I'm afraid what it'll be like is even more chaos on the scale that we're seeing in France, in Spain, in so many places right now.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Again, before I get to some of the solutions, let's just point it out that right now is what actually matters. In February of this year, the EU science advisers said that the EU's current efforts to adapt to these rising temperatures are, quote, insufficient, largely incremental, and often coming too late. And in the United states, paradoxically, some 61% of American voters believe that extreme weather is getting more frequent. But many of them, according to another study, think that they're alone in their concern that it's not, you know, generally accepted as a major issue that has to be dealt with. Talk us just a little bit through European and US policies and politics on this.

[Bill McKibben]

I think you could say that the Europeans are going too slowly, but at least they're more moving in the right direction. And I think you could say that America is making a concerted effort to make the problem worse as fast as it possibly can. Donald Trump has explained that he thinks global warming is a hoax, a scam. And we've shut down wind farms that are 90% finished off the Atlantic seaboard, put the federal land off limits to solar panels, done every possible thing we could touch, buck up, 18th century energy technology, new subsidies for coal. Instead of joining the future being led now unmistakably by China and increasingly Christiane, by the rest of Asia. You've talked a lot about all the different ramifications of the war in Iran. One of the most important of them is going to turn out to be the realization from leaders everywhere that those sunlight has to travel 93 million miles to reach the Earth to. And none of those miles go through the Strait of Hormuz.

[Christiane Amanpour]

That's a really good way of putting it. So now I want to ask you, you mentioned Asia. Obviously Australia is all the way over there. And you have talked about how Australia is really doing it, right, in that they have renewables, the sun, and that they have a lot of hours of the day where all their electricity and power is free. Tell us how they figured that out.

[Bill McKibben]

So Australia, let's begin by saying, is somewhat schizoid in this regard. They're importing, exporting huge amounts of climate wrecking coal and gas to the rest of the world. But domestically, they have decided that the sun is the way to go. They've put up so many solar panels, 40% of Australian solar houses have panels on the roof, that they now have a great excess of electricity at parts of the day. All Australians, solar panels or not, can now get free electricity from noon to 3. It's half the country right now. And by next year it'll be the entire country. This thing, energy that humans have worked hard to pay for for hundreds of thousands of years, whether it's the time spent gathering firewood or the time spent working to pay the power bill, all of a sudden the sun is delivering this extraordinary bounty, if only we will take it, and in the process giving us the only escape route we have from the climate crisis that we're in. We're not going to stop global warming. Too late for that. But we're not too late to start shaving tenths of a degree off how hot the planet eventually gets. And at this point, every tenth of a degree that we raise the temperature moves 100 million human beings from a relatively safe climate zone to a relatively dangerous one. It's the biggest task that humans have in front of them.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And so, you know, when we read and when I research for this interview, there is obviously good news. And I think it's really important to put the good news out so that people can see exactly what you're saying, that there are methods to actually keep it under control even if we can't stop it. And I was really taken by the report that in 2025, all new electricity demands around the world were met by green power. That's pretty amazing. I don't think many people know that. And I just wonder, you know, what you think about or how you think. For instance, the United States, could they have this solar powered, free electricity for most of most of the daylight hours.

[Bill McKibben]

The US is where we invented solar panels 1954, at Bell Labs in New Jersey. We could, of course, be doing this. We're just not. Because as candidate Trump said to the oil industry during his campaign, give me a billion dollars in donations and I'll give you anything you want. What they wanted was to get rid of Joe Biden's efforts to build out clean green technology. But the rest of the world is moving in different speeds in the right direction. And some of the stories are remarkable. Look at Pakistan, a poor country that suffered grievously from climate change, but has the geographic advantage of a border with China. And no government program, just individual Pakistanis importing cheap Chinese solar panels and going on YouTube to figure out how to put them together. They've built the equivalent of half the country's national electric grid in 18 months. I mean, it is amazing what this technology is capable of. If we really got behind it and pushed. We have an obvious group project as a world, if we chose to adopt it, and that is to in very short order build out sun and wind and batteries such that the planet runs on something other than coal and gas and oil. And A, we can begin to ameliorate the climate crisis, and B, we can stop fighting some of these stupid wars. No one's going to fight a war over sunshine, Christian.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Mm, let's hope not. Let's hope not. But, Bill McKibben, how do you create? I mean, it takes political leadership. I know you mentioned the sort of grassroots, you know, work in Pakistan with people taking matters into their own hand, but if we go to China, for instance, you've explained how they essentially, I think this is what you were saying in your podcast with Ezra Klein, that they created. They spent a lot of political capital and time and energy creating a market, a domestic market for these amazing, you know, climate mitigation technologies. And the United States tends to do exactly the opposite. It hasn't created the market, but it has the technology, after all. Tell me about what China did.

[Bill McKibben]

Well, I mean, China's its own story. China decided early on what they were going to do, and they put all the force of a command and control economy behind it. The US And Europe are Obviously going to be different in degrees here in America. Even with the federal government in the firm control of anti environmental zealots. My colleagues and I at Third act, our organization that organizes old people like me for action on climate and democracy. We managed to get 10American states this spring to approve the legislation to allow residents of those states to put up the balcony solar or plug in solar schemes that you've seen across Europe. These are small, inexpensive solar panels that just plug directly into the wall and provide 20% of the power an apartment uses. That's not everything, but it's not nothing. And we've been able, even in the face of determined resistance from the fossil fuel industry, to really get ahead of steam here. That's because people love solar power. People across the political spectrum understand that this is the future. We need to do that kind of organizing in order to give it the chance that it requires.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And for a long time, renewables seem to be more cumbersome, required more, quote, sacrifice to use, may have been more expensive than good old, you know, fossil fuels. What is the reality of the price right now? People who use renewables as much as they can, are they paying more for their energy or less?

[Bill McKibben]

5 years ago or so we passed some invisible line on this planet where it became cheaper to produce energy from the sun and the wind than from fossil fuel. Now the cost of renewable energy is all up front. You have to buy the solar panel, but once you have, then the energy is delivered for free every morning when the sun rises above the horizon. And now we have cheap battery technology to allow us to store the afternoon away and use it at night. So that's what's been so transformative. And frankly, that's why the fossil fuel industry is so terrified and why they're working so hard and so corruptly to game the system to keep it from getting even more of a foothold.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Tell me your story about President Carter. Back in the 70s, there was the oil crisis there and he did all sorts of things, including putting solar panels on the roof of the White House. What did he tell people back then? Tell the American people?

[Bill McKibben]

What he told people was that the sun was in fact the future. And in his last budget he put aside enough RD money that the plan was for America to be producing 20% of its power from the sun by the year 2000. Had we done that, we would live in a very different world today, a much cooler one, because this renewable revolution would have been pushed forward several decades. Instead, of course, Ronald Reagan was elected over Mr. Carter and he took down those solar panels from the White House roof. More importantly, he took that money out of the budget and locked us into this cycle of endless drilling for more oil that's come to define not only America's economy, but America's politics. As you know, Donald Trump has said his plan is to exert energy dominance across the earth by America's control of oil and gas. I don't think that's going to work, but I do think it runs the very strong risk of turning America into a kind of theme park of internal combustion. While the rest of the world gets its act together very quickly, we're being left behind. And I'm not sure there's ever been a kind of act of national economic self sabotage to compare with the last 18 months. The country that invented the solar panel and the industrial wind turbine and the lithium ion battery is now the country ceding all of that advantage to our theoretical chief adversary.

[Christiane Amanpour]

But just to be clear, it's not too late to stop and take the right path.

[Bill McKibben]

Not at all. We're obviously wasting time now, but we can and should be building out renewable energy in all the places that are possible. America is going to be the caboose for a while here, but we need to join that train and fast.

[Jake Larson]

Yeah.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Okay. Bill McKibben, thank you so much for being with us. And we'll be right back after this short break. Now, Christopher Nolan's cinematic rendition of the Odyssey is a massive box office hit. Let's take a quick look because King is coming back.

[Walter Isaacson]

No, he's not.

[Emily Wilson]

What would he do if he came

[Walter Isaacson]

back here to find all these suitors in his house? You're pining for a daddy you didn't even know, like some sniveling bastard

[Emily Wilson]

who's

[Walter Isaacson]

looking after your wife and son. Do you see? My dad is coming home, bringing vengeance,

[Rahm Emanuel]

bringing it all.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Now, she's not a movie director, but our next guest has spent much of her career with the original text of Homer's great poem. She even wrote the English translation that influenced Nolan's film and has now sold over 1 million copies. Emily Wilson is a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania, and she's joining Walter Isaacson to discuss how her translation differs from others, including Nolan's telling of the tale.

[Walter Isaacson]

Thank you. Chris, John and Emily Wilson, welcome to the show.

[Emily Wilson]

Thank you so much for having me. It's great to be here.

[Walter Isaacson]

So you have this great translation of the Odyssey. It's becoming a bestseller again because of you. And it's, of course, the movie. But let's start at the beginning, the opening of Homer's epic. You know, I'm old enough that I got to study it under Robert Fitzgerald, who did a great translation of it. And he would read it to class. And he begins with singing. Me, muse, and through me tell the story of that man skilled in all ways of contending. And then probably up until you, the most popular was the Robert Fagel's translation for people. And he says, sing to me of the man, muse, the man of twists and turns. Why don't you tell me. Say for me those Greek lines and why you picked a translation different from that.

[Emily Wilson]

Sure. So I'll just do the first two lines of the Greek, and then I'll do my version of those lines, and then we can talk about it. So this is the Greek. It's in dactylic hexameter, so I hope people will be able to hear that there's a regular metrical rhythm to it. So this is the beginning of the poem in Greek. Andra moi enepe mussa polutropon hos malapola Planck thereon tolieto nepesse. So my version of those two lines is, tell me about a complicated man, muse. Tell me how he wandered and was lost when he had wrecked the holy town of Troy.

[Walter Isaacson]

Yeah. The big issue on your translation, if you've written about it in Crossing the Line, dark sea, is that word complicated man not just a man of twists and turns. It comes from the Pali that you quoted in Greek. But that seems like an internal emotional feeling. You're saying, why did you pick the word complicated man, which seems so modern to us.

[Emily Wilson]

Yes. I mean, I think it's impossible. Really. Translation in general is impossible. A word such as polutropos, which clearly has multiple different meanings, as well as referring to Odysseus, multiplicity, his many turns, his many disguises, and also his multiplicity of wanderings and the many turns that the poem itself will take in the course of its narrative. How exactly can we do that in a single a word in English that will also fit the traditional meter that I'm using in my translation to echo the traditional meter of the original? It's inevitably tempting, I think, to do what many translators have done and translate a single word of the Greek by a phrase rather than a single word. A man of twists and turns, which to me sounds less pellucid in terms of. It actually sounds like it means something. I think I know in some ways what complicated means, but it also has a gesture towards. I don't know exactly in which way this character or this poem or this journey will be complicated. And so it's, I hope, an enticement, as I think the original Polutropon is an enticement to keep listening because we're going to learn things we didn't already know about these layers and twists and turns in the protagonist and his story. I mean, to me, it doesn't necessarily seem internal. A situation can be complicated, A story can be complicated. A political issue can be complicated. Complicated.

[Walter Isaacson]

Wait, let me stop you there, because in your Crossing the Wine Dark Sea, you say you worried that it did seem like it would be too.

[Emily Wilson]

Yes, but I also. That I think it's definitely been a concern of mine. But I also tend to think that with so many compromises in so many areas of life, but including translation, it's like how democracy is the worst possible political system, except for all the others, I think. I think complicated is not the ideal choice. It's not exactly the same as the original, but I also think it's quite a lot closer to the original than, say, resourceful is, which doesn't actually convey anything about the twists and turns and layers, which is what's conveyed by the metaphor of the many turns, the many twists, the many layers of polu tropos in the Odyssey.

[Walter Isaacson]

What do you think are the emotions driving this complicated man?

[Emily Wilson]

I mean, I personally think that the primary desire of Odysseus in the Odyssey is the same as the primary desire, desire of Achilles and the Iliad is to generate eternal chaos, eternal fame. But this is paradox about Odysseus, because whereas in the Iliad, the warriors are generating eternal fame by risking their lives in warfare, Odysseus generates eternal fame by these very paradoxical means, by his ability to inhabit spaces that are very, very different from the battlefield, to interact with giants and goddesses and even the enslaved members of his household, suitors who have been hitting on his wife for the last however many years. So he has this capacity to find fame in strange places. But I think that desire to generate fame through a long period of being nameless or being named, no man, is the primary narrative of the poem.

[Walter Isaacson]

You say it came together in the 7th century BCE when they started putting it down. That's a golden age of Greek expansion. How did that affect the poem?

[Emily Wilson]

Yeah, that's a really good point. So these poems, the Iliad and the Odyssey, were drawing on much, much, much older myths, older stories about the fall of Troy, the age of heroes, the times gone by, which in a way were folk memories of the Mycenaean civilization, which people will be talking about a lot because of the movie. But they're not composed in the Mycenaean age. They're composed in this archaic period, which, as you say, was a time of massive expansion of Greek speakers all across the Mediterrane, A time of Greek colonization, migration. And of course, the Odyssey itself is engaged with those themes of how do Greek speakers engage with those who are not Greek? What's the relationship between strangers and friends? How do Greek speakers either band together or battle against one another? And also, what's the role of technology and new kinds of technology, new kinds of cleverness in this new age? Odysseus is a sort of culture hero who crosses time from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age.

[Walter Isaacson]

And you talk about the culture of the time in which it was composed, helping shape what it is. But let me ask you the question about you. To what extent does the culture of the time of the translator, whether. Go back to, you know, Chapman, you know, the great poetical in, I guess, 16 something. 16. 16 to today, how does the culture of a translator affect the poem?

[Emily Wilson]

I think it inevitably affects the poem, even if you're trying to evoke this very, very different time from your own, which, of course, to be a responsible translator of a very ancient text. I want in some ways to offer the reader something like a time machine, where you're going back over 2000 years to this very ancient, very alien cultural representation. And yet, at the same time, the questions that modern Homerists or modern translators of Homer are bringing to. To the text are inevitably informed by our own culture.

[Walter Isaacson]

As you said, give me an example for yourself.

[Emily Wilson]

So for me, I would say that like many of my colleagues, I approach the Homeric poems with much more questions about how do these poems represent social hierarchies and social inequalities, and how do they think about things like enslavement and the relationships between male and female characters? I don't approach the poems in quite the same way as, say, George Chapman, the first translator of the poems, who's coming to the Odyssey with a sense of this must be a bit like a Christian journey or pilgrimage towards redemption and grace. And I don't approach them with quite the same approach as Alexander Pope, whose wonderful first translations from the 18th century are bringing ideas about enlightenment to how he thinks about the Odyssey. So I think much more about these modern 21st century ideas about society. And I'm also informed by an awareness that Homer is protodramatic and this links to an awareness of these are poems that are rich in what they say about society. All of the characters, in my opinion, have their own perspectives. And the narrative flips around through different perspectives. That applies to scenes where there's a female character speaking to a male character. I don't assume ahead of time one of these characters will be interesting and the female one won't be. But I also don't think Homer thinks that either. But I also bring that same perspective if it's two male characters. I actually don't think that my primary focus is on women. Characters have got to somehow be amped up. I think that would actually be irresponsible.

[Walter Isaacson]

I saw the movie, which I really liked, but it's been caught up in the culture wars. Both your translation now, of course, the movie. What do you make of that?

[Emily Wilson]

I mean, Homer has always been about culture, about society. I mean, what we said before about how this is a poem that is drawing on very, very ancient pre existing myth, but also engaging with its own society. People also love to have culture wars. And in some ways I want to try to celebrate people are coming together over this movie and over this poem, Even if they're coming together in ways that sometimes involve, in my opinion, pretty simplistic kinds of conversations. At least there's a common cultural ground for people to talk about. So I'm trying to turn my frown upside down about culture wars, but I do think quite a lot of it is really not based on a very serious reading of Homer.

[Walter Isaacson]

One of the themes in the movie is Zeus's law, which seems to be causing the complexities to the extent that are there in the movie for Odysseus. I think the word you use in the poem is Xenia, which is more like hospitality. Explain to me whether Homer has Zeus's law in his epic poem and how you would describe the concept of Xenia as you've seen both in the poem and in the movie.

[Emily Wilson]

Yes, great question. So Xenia in Greek. So that's the abstract noun. The whole concept of the relationship between guests, hosts, strangers. And then there are nouns referring to an actual stranger that are cognate with that.

[Walter Isaacson]

The.

[Emily Wilson]

That whole social institution of Xenia is in Homer, understood to be ratified and blessed by Zeus. Zeus takes a particular interest in the needs of strangers and in the relationship between those who are not related to each other by kin. The Odyssey in the original is all about exploring the what does it mean for Xenia to go right? And also what does it mean for Zinnia to go wrong? Odysseus in his wanderings, is constantly encountering all of these bad hosts. The kind of host who eats the guest, you're supposed to actually give the guest food. The kind of host who doesn't let the guest go. Like Calypso, she's great at everything else. But you're supposed to let the guest go on his way. Cynia in archaic Greece is a way for elite men to form long standing relationships with each other beyond the bounds of kinship. So again, it relates to this time period when Greeks were expanding beyond their own little villages to have relationships with those who are not like them, including other Greeks, but also including non Greeks. In the movie, it seems to be very much reinterpreted within. I mean, I would say within the norms of American ideas about charity and philanthropy. So it's about being kind to beggars and the poor, who we have always with us. And also about being nice about who you give gifts to. G Giving is certainly a part of Xenia, but I don't think the movie has that sense of. Xenia is about forming lasting, multi generational relationships.

[Walter Isaacson]

You talk about Xenia and you talk about being about foreigners, people coming from the sea. And that seems to resonate with some of our issues today, which is how do we treat people who come to our home from the sea? What duties do they owe us? What dangers do they bring us? What duties do we owe them? Did that resonate with you at all?

[Emily Wilson]

Yes. I think that's one of the many reasons why the Odyssey is having a moment in the 21st century, is the fact that it is. The original poem is so much concerned with these questions about what does it mean to be a good host and what does it mean to be a good guest. That it explores both sides of these complex political, social questions about immigration and about immigration law, immigration, attitudes towards immigrants, towards the migrations of peoples from one place to another. Because it focuses on one man who is both a guest and a host. And the Odyssey is constantly reminding us that in most cases, people are not just one thing or the other. I think we tend in the more simplistic kinds of modern discourse to sort of imagine there are some people who are always the host and some people who are always the guest or the stranger. But of course, actually, I think the poem is more truthful than that insofar as it shows us how the same person can be both.

[Walter Isaacson]

One of the lines that hit me in the movie is we are the people from the sea. In other words, they're worried about the people from the sea coming in. And they realize that, oh, it's us. We're our own worst enemy. In some ways, the threat to our society comes from within, not necessarily from without. We are the people from the sea. And that in some ways, seems very resonant to today as well. Is that part of what Homer is trying to say? And do you feel that in the poem?

[Emily Wilson]

Yeah. I mean, that hit me as one of the many relentlessly expository elements in the dialogue of this film. But I'm gonna be very kind about it. I think it's really a very interesting issue, both in modern culture and also in the poem. Insofar as Odysseus is presented as a warrior who's coming back from tr, having sacked the holy citadel of Troy, as we learn in those first two lines. And then when he comes back to Ithaca, on some level, he's coming back as the husband of Penelope, the father of Telemachus, the householder, the king. But the final moments of the poem, he comes back as a warrior. He's going to start a whole new war back on Ithaca. So insofar as the poem may partly lead us to think, maybe this is a journey from war to peace, but maybe not. Maybe it's a journey from war to war.

[Walter Isaacson]

Emily Wilson, thank you so much for joining us.

[Emily Wilson]

Thank you so much.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And finally, it may not be Ithaca, but it is Normandy. And it's remembered as one of the most consequential battle sites in European history. June 6, 1944, D Day marked the pivotal turning point in the Allied fight against the Nazis. And now UNESCO has designated the beaches and surrounding memorials as a World Heritage Site, recognizing the, quote, exceptional cultural landscape that was shaped by this war and how we remember it now. Back in 2019, I spoke with the late US veteran Jake Larson in the American cemetery there in Normandy. He was one of the many brave Allied soldiers who fought in that campaign. Here's what he told me about that day.

[Jake Larson]

Well, I remember when I hit the beach, machine guns were opening up and firing at me. And I found this little, what I call a berm of sand, kind of limestone that sits in a powder. And it was about 60, 80 inches high. And it was a protection from those machine guns. So I lay behind it thinking, how am I going to get out of this thing without being shot at me?

[Christiane Amanpour]

Jake Larson, coming up to his hundredth year. He's now no longer with us, but, boy, are his memories incredibly important for us to all always, always savor. That's it for now. If you ever miss our show. You can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. Remember, you can always catch us online, on our website and all over social media. Thank you for watching and goodbye from London.

[Bill McKibben]

Go inside the sports moments that brought us together and made history. From the underdogs to the rivalries and the miracles. The new CF CNN original series, Decades in Sports Watch Back to Back premieres August 2nd on CNN and next day on the CNN app.