← The Monocle Daily
Loading summary
Transcript76 lines
- [00:00]
A
You're listening to the Monocle Daily, first broadcast on the 15th of December, 2025.
- [00:05]
B
On Monocle Radio, the diplomatic ramifications of Sydney's Hanukkah shooting. Why has Belarus suddenly released some of its political prisoners? And does Christmas actually make people less Scrooge like? I'm Andrew Muller, the Monocle Daily. Hello and welcome to the Monocle Daily. Coming to you from our studios here at Midori House in London. I'm Andrew Muller. My guests Marta Lorimer and John Everard will discuss the day's big stories. We'll analyze Benjamin Netanyahu's response to the Bondi shooting. And we'll have some words for the director, Rob Reiner, who has died at the age of 78. Stay tuned. All that and more coming up right here on the Monocle Daily. This is the Monocle Daily. I'm Andrew Muller. We will be hearing shortly from Marta Lorimer and John Everard. But first, Sunday's mass shooting at a Hanukkah commemoration at Bondi beach in Sydney, which left 15 people dead and dozens injured, has prompted the international expressions of sympathy and solidarity with Australia, which might be expected except from Israel, whose Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, instead chose the moment to blame his Australian counterpart, Anthony Albanese, for his recognition of Palestine and to accuse of being soft on antisemitism. Well, earlier today I spoke to Julie Norman, associate professor of politics and international relations at ucl, co author of Gaza the Dream and the Nightmare and regular Monocle Radio Voice. I began by asking if she was surprised that that was the line Netanyahu had chosen to take.
- [01:54]
C
Honestly, no. I mean, Netanyahu has not been shy with his words towards the international community in general, and I would say really towards Australia very much in particular over this last year, and was very upset Australia recognizing Palestine as a state. And so the fact that he has brought that into this moment that is already so laden with grief for so many people just shows that he is not shy about playing the politics on this one.
- [02:20]
B
I mean, Australia was not the only country that decided to choose this year to recognize Palestine. And obviously, even before this year's rash of recognizers, countries which recognized Palestine were already comfortably a majority of the United Nations. So who does Netanyahu think this really plays with? Because I think it's fair to say it's gone down quite badly in Australia.
- [02:42]
C
Yeah, I mean, I would say, I think largely to domestic audiences. I mean, this is a way for many Israelis who, I would say across much of the political spectrum who disagreed with the recognition decision by many states. It plays to that. And I think it also tries to play to those who felt that Australia was just simply not doing enough to address concerns of anti Semitism and saw this recognition of statehood as somehow linked to that. Though I think Albanese has been very clear about trying to differentiate between those things.
- [03:11]
B
I mean, just to follow that up, that bipartisan objection across Israeli society to the recognition of Palestine. And there aren't many things, as you know, about which you can say there is bipartisan consensus across Israeli society. Does that reflect rather, I guess, a hardening of attitude since October 7, 2023, that is, they're less likely to forgive countries for recognizing Palestine now than might have done it 10, 20, 30 years ago?
- [03:39]
C
I would say undoubtedly. I mean, with that said, there has never been a lot of support for that across most Israeli parties. And a lot of it's always been, you know, the timing. How could you recognize Palestine during the intifada? How could you recognize it during this? And of course, this last two years had been since October 7th. So many saw it as a sort of reward for that or a slap in the face. Though, again, I think most of the states who took that move see it actually as a way, as you know what they've said, preserving a two state solution that includes security for Israel as part of that deal.
- [04:13]
B
And has there been, though also across Israel, a concern that countries overseas have not taken anti Semitism sufficiently seriously? I mean, the line in Netanyahu's speech, and again, he's rarely shy of the dramatic analogy, but he, addressing Australia directly, he said, quote, you did nothing to curb the cancer cells that were growing inside your country. You took no action. Is that a view fail, commonly held, maybe not just about Australia, but about Western democracies generally very much.
- [04:47]
C
It's held very widely, I would say, in Israel and I would even say among many communities that I talk to here in the UK and across Europe that these concerns have not been taken seriously, that there's real bona fide anti Semitism that people just brush off as, oh, it's just people being critical of Israel and people are saying no, like this is real and there are going to be effects from this. So I do think that sentiment is very broad.
- [05:10]
B
And is there perhaps also an element of, given that Israel has been criticized fairly roundly from abroad these last few years and certainly by Australia, that this is Netanyahu sort of saying, we'll see how you like it when someone else takes a pop at you?
- [05:26]
C
Well, I guess I would say was certainly Netanyahu taking a jab when he can get it. And again, he's been upset with Australia. He doesn't like what their policies are. And again, I think he's exploiting this moment to make that point and score that point when, of course, people in Australia and, you know, I would say the Jewish community around the world is just quite horrified by what happened. And trying to link this to Australia's politics on Israel is just very, you know, I would say is very much exploiting this moment.
- [05:56]
B
And what do you make of the response of Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who certainly so far at least seems as determined as possible just not to bite.
- [06:07]
C
I think that's the best approach, honestly. I mean, and he was very, he was asked and he just said no, I don't think this was related. And I think he was wise to just not get into it. And he has other things to worry about right now domestically with the fallout from this horrific attack than to be getting into war of words with Netanyahu. And I would just say too, I mean, anytime an attack like this happens, you know, obviously we're in this moment that's laden with a rise in both anti Semitism and Islamophobia. But there's always many different kinds of reasons that inform an attack like this. And I, you know, we've heard some reports that at least one of the individuals was ISIS linked. That obviously dates back way before, you know, October 7th, much less the recognition of Palestine. So I think Albanese is aware of that and is trying to keep the focus, rightly on figuring out what caused this particular attack and not link it to these broader narratives that are so laden with politics.
- [06:58]
B
That was Julie Norman, associate professor of politics and International Relations at UCL and co author of Gaza the Dream and the Nightmare. I'll bring in now our panel, Marta Lorem, a lecturer in politics at Cardiff University. John Everard, former British ambassador to Belarus, Uruguay and North Korea. John, first of all, before we proceed with the other topics of the show, what was your thoughts upon hearing what Netanyahu said? Because it is quite unusual for a national leader at a moment of trauma for one of his country's nominal allies to sort of blame the nominal ally?
- [07:33]
D
Well, yes, but this is Bibi Netanyahu, who of course doesn't behave on the international stage in the same kind of way as most other leaders do. I think it's important to remember he's got a political base to think about. He's trying to throw them red Meet. If he had come out and said something that other leaders would consider statesmanlike, like, this is terrible, shocking loss of life. Our thoughts are with you. It makes it sound as if the Bondi massacre was a kind of act of nature. It's the kind of thing you say to a government who'd just been hit by a typhoon or floods or whatever. I think he's trying to ram home the point that this, in his view and in the view of the right wingers who support him, was an avoidable tragedy, and that to an extent, the Australian authorities, in failing to crack down on antisemitism, are partly culpable for it. It's acid. I mean, it jars with the general tone of reaction to the tragedy. But given where Netanyahu is coming from, it is entirely comprehensible.
- [08:30]
B
And from you, Marta, does it make it any more or less likely, do you think, though, that other countries, those countries which are allies of Israel especially, and Australia, has been broadly supportive, in fact, of Israel, not just over the last few years, but over the journey generally, that they might actually be more likely to behave in a way that Netanya, who thinks they should?
- [08:53]
A
I don't think this is going to help anyone. It sounds exactly like Netanyahu is speaking to a domestic audience. First and foremost. He is basically. Well, he is the leader of an ethnostate, and that is who he's speaking to. And this all feeds into his narrative that basically Israel is being unjustly persecuted for defending their own national interests. I don't think it's going to change the way that anyone behaves around him, any of Israel's international allies. And I can imagine that we'll still see growing criticism of Israel emerge, or at least actually develop, as we have seen in the last year or so.
- [09:34]
B
Well, we turn now to Berlin, where two days of further talks about Ukraine have concluded. Participants have emerged making vaguely upbeat noises about the proceedings. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz hailed productive discussions and diplomatic momentum. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that the talks had been not easy, but again used the productive word. John, always happy to have you on hand. When we have diplomatic euphemism that requires translation. In this context, what does productive mean when translated into English?
- [10:08]
D
Nothing. Whatever it means, we've been sitting around a table talking, and you don't want to come out saying, actually, we got nowhere. If you spent five hours talking and the best you come up with is productive, you're not getting very far very fast.
- [10:20]
B
I mean, is it some consolation, John, that at least no one's Calling this a full and frank exchange of views.
- [10:26]
D
Yes, that is a consolation. Nobody's actually therefore got up on the table, stamped their feet and thrown things around, at least not they're going to admit to. But it doesn't look like they're actually getting very far at all. The Ukrainians have said that they're prepared to relinquish their aspiration to join NATO, but of course, from their point of view, although, what, a year ago joining NATO was a big national desire, now that the United States commitment to NATO is in serious question, the value of NATO membership has gone right down. So that was actually quite an easy car to lay on the table, and one they know will play well with the Russians. The real difficulty, as Zelenskyy has said, is the, I think he used the word fierce exchanges over the demands that the Ukraine cede what's left of Donetsk and with it large parts of his defence line. I really don't see the Ukrainians giving any ground on that. And unless they give ground on that, I don't see the Russians agreeing to any kind of peace deal. And I think over the next few days, we're just going to see this fall apart.
- [11:25]
B
Well, let's look at that issue, which does appear to be the big one. That is territory, Marta, and we've discussed this with various other guests. The apparently irreconcilable fact is that Putin obviously needs something he can show for this absurd misadventure, which has plowed hundreds of thousands of young Russians into the fields of Ukraine. And the fact that Zelenskyy has said time and again we will not concede any territory, and it may in fact be politically impossible for him to do so, given that he would have to expl this to an army and to a people who have endured much to keep their country together. Is there any possible overlap between those two positions?
- [12:06]
A
I mean, the overlap seems to be a discussion around how you manage those territories. So can there be this. Is it a free economic area? I think was one of the discussions that was held sort of saying, look, this becomes a territory that belongs neither to Russia nor fully to Ukraine. We're going to manage this in a different way. But that just seems like a recipe for disaster, in a sense that what you're potentially creating is just space for. You have. Well, first of all, you're creating effectively a frozen conflict for a little while, and then over the long term, it's not really clear how you get out of that, apart from saying, well, you know, Putin is a man of a Certain age, and maybe that will be what ultimately gets out of that situation. So the long term, it's not really clear where they're going with this. Right. But the negotiations, they said that they agreed on 90% of things. And I don't know, I'm not the diplomat here, but my understanding is, is that usually 90% is the easy bit, the 10% is what you really, really fight over. And that seems to be precisely it. And it, it's very difficult for Ukraine to make concessions because what have they been fighting for? It's going to be very difficult for Russia to make concessions because then why did they go into this in the first place? And it's going to say, okay, well, look, Ukraine is never going to join NATO, but they're going to join the eu, going to be enough as of a cell, all that.
- [13:27]
D
And also, personally, it's very difficult for Putin to make concessions because to move away from anything that isn't presentable as total seizure of Donbas, which, remember, in his view, is Russian territory, his right wing will barbecue him. He can't do it. He's stuck.
- [13:44]
B
John, does it strike you, though? Because various models I know have been suggested or are floating around that there might be some sort of fudge available, some sort of model along the lines of perhaps East Germany, as was, or the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which everybody understands that, okay, one side might think it's a permanent arrangement, everybody else knows it isn't, really, and we will all just go along with that in the interest of a quiet life.
- [14:11]
D
I just don't see it. I mean, I recognize that a lot of these analogies are tempting and superficially seductive. The one the Ukrainians talk about, of course, is Czechoslovakia in 1948, neutralized territory, and look what happened there. For any of these solutions to work, you have to have some degree, both of mutual trust of the two warring parties and a belief in any security guarantees that are imposed. That was the case in Northern Cyprus. And for better or worse, they have held and they've held in the other examples you've mentioned, but there is no trust whatever between Kiev and Moscow. They both loathe each other and they both believe that the other side are criminals. And the security guarantees that have been put on the table, the ones that we know about at least, aren't worth a paper they're written on. I mean, you actually would need troops on the ground to keep the peace. And the Russians have made clear that that for them is a red line. No foreign troops in Donbas, and without that KF simply wouldn't sign.
- [15:14]
B
Is there a related problem there as well, Marta? That as well as obviously the mistrust that exists between Kyiv and Moscow, there is, at least as of this January, considerable mistrust between KYIV and Washington, D.C. i guess what I'm asking there was even if America agreed on paper or in words to underpin any security guarantees, how wise would Ukraine be to trust America's word for anything at the moment?
- [15:42]
A
This is exactly the crux of the issue for Ukraine right now, that they can no longer trust the United States because, and I don't think they're completely misguided in thinking so, they feel that Trump wants a deal at all costs and that he is very responsive to influence from different voices, including quite strongly, the Russians. So they don't think that they have Washington's backing, which they do need. And they also realize that and Europe's backing is not really worth it because the Europeans are also squabbling over how to actually support Ukraine nominally. There's still the idea that yes, we have to support them, but we are seeing a lot of cracks appear also within the European Union in terms of how to actually do that. So it is very, very difficult for them to basically hold it together.
- [16:40]
B
Well, to Belarus, which may appear seized by festive generosity, it has released 123the political prisoners it holds, which is to be clear, perhaps only a tenth of the total. Those freed include Nobel Peace laureate Alice Bialiatsky, aspirant presidential candidate Victor Barbarika, and well known activist Maria Kolesnikova. However, a price was solicited, some might say extorted. Belarus got a visited visit rather from US President Donald Trump's special envoy, John Cole, the lifting of US Sanctions on Belarusian potash exports and the promise of further such concessions as and when relations between Washington D.C. and Minsk may improve. John, the figure at the center of this is, of course, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko. You have seen him up close. Does it strike you that he has become suddenly an enthusiast rather of liberal pluralism and free expression?
- [17:38]
D
I can't believe you asked me that question. Well, to answer it, no, he might say that, yes, I'm predictable that way. He is as cunning and wily and closely focused as ever is. And for him, this deal is a major achievement. It's not new. I mean, one of the very first things that Trump too did was to send a delegation to Minsk to start the process that we're now seeing moving forward. So, you know, this is the first time that John Cole has been in town It's a significant move. I mean, firstly, 123 political prisoners released. That's no small thing, including the big names. I mean, I had thought that they would come sort of towards the end of this, but no, he's front loaded.
- [18:21]
B
This follows the release we should remember member of Sirita Tsikhanovsky in June, I think this year.
- [18:26]
D
That's right, yes. It's part of a series. Bieletsky has said that there are hundreds more behind bars who are less famous. He's right. And we need to bear those in mind. But I mean, Lukashenko has made a genuine concession. In return for what? In return for being seen with a US envoy. It's not clear whether Cole actually addressed him as Mr. President. That would mean the recognition of the this deeply flawed and illegitimate government by the United States. Even the Belarusian media don't quote him as having said so. He's also got a nominal, and I stress nominal Release of the U.S. sanctions on potash imports. Why nominal? Because potash is a high bulk, low value export. You need shiploads of this stuff to make any money to Belarus. Of course, it's landlocked. To turn this concession into real money, you've got to get your potash out through European ports for which you need European cooperation. And through all this, of course, we have the curious incident of the European reaction.
- [19:35]
B
Marta, this isn't the first, as John intimate attempt Lukashenko has made to essay some sort of outreach to the United States and even to Western Europe. What do we think he's up to at this point? Is he trying to look like he's a bit freer of Moscow than is generally assumed?
- [19:58]
A
I can see why it would make sense for him to. If you're sitting in a regime that is pretty much acknowledged to be an illegitimate regime, you are trying to buy yourself some street cred. And this is one way to do it. It's to show yourself as someone who is able to build diplomatic links. And where's the best place to do that but the United States, which we acknowledged to be the greatest country on the planet, if you are trying to build credibility as an international actor. What I'm still trying to work out is more the motives from the United States. Why is it that this seems to them to be a deal worth pursuing? Because there's two explanations. One of them is that they're trying to use Lukashenko as an intermediary almost in negotiations with Russia. So as some form of support, or is it that they're trying to pull him away from that sphere of interest, if you will. So I still struggle to understand the motives behind the United States decision to engage with Lukashenko at all.
- [21:03]
B
Just finally on this, John, what do you think? Is it just Trump's fairly, by now well understood, instinctive sympathy with tyrants, despots and strongmen, or does the United States think maybe we can prize Belarus offright, Russia at least to an extent?
- [21:19]
D
I think there are elements of the first, but mostly the second. You have to remember that before 2020, when he was, he messed up his elections and ended up relying on Russian help, Lukashenk was reaching out to the west, specifically to the European Union. And I think the diplomats in the State Department have remembered this and hoped to bring him back into the fold. The curious incident of the European reaction, of course, Watson, was that there was no European reaction. The silence from the European Union to what the United States is doing is deafening. And I suspect that we'll find that the Europeans weren't consulted, weren't involved in any of the talks, and that they will simply block whatever the Americans and Belarusians agree.
- [22:05]
A
Yeah, I believe there was a quick reaction by, I think Kayakallis, the EU's foreign minister, we're going to call her, did say something along the lines of the release of prisoners is great and this is all thanks to the United States, but that was the extent of the EU reaction to this.
- [22:21]
B
Well, to Chile now and an apparent demonstration of pendulum theory. The idea being that democracies will tend to be drawn to replacing leaders with a roughly proportional opposite. That is that a pendulum which swings a particular distance to the left will in due course swing back the same measure to the right. Last time Chileans chose a president. In 2021, they chose Gabriel Borich, a young, beard, denim, swaddled socialist keen on social justice and the environment. In this weekend's presidential election runoff, they have decided to replace the term limited President Borich with the man he defeated last time, Jose Antonio Cast, a middle aged, clean shaven, sharp suited, ultra conservative whose German father, not that this is necessarily any reflection on President Elect Cast, was a literal Wehrmacht officer and a member of the Nazi party. Marta, as the resident political scientist at the table, are you a fan of the pension pendulum theory idea?
- [23:18]
A
Look, it makes sense. It's not necessarily a pendulum idea, but the idea of political alternation is that you will not always have the same party and power and that it is actually a good thing because it means that no one can hold on to power for too long. You cannot really establish a dictatorship. You are going to get different social measures that are going to appeal to different parts of the population. What I think is striking about Chile is the way that they went, and this is quite a large pendulum that we're talking about, because Borich is the man who tried to institute one of the most progressive constitutions that were ever written, failed at doing so. They actually failed twice to vote a new constitution and then it has swung back to a new president that is extremely conservative in a lot of his views around migration, around security and around social issues. Really, what is really striking is almost the polarization between those positions, not so much the fact that you're moving between left and right.
- [24:23]
B
What kind of, as far as we can tell so far, John, of right winger does President Elect Cast seem? Is he comparable to any others that we might think of, Whether it's Trump or Bolsonaro or Orban or Putin? Or is he something just specifically Chilean?
- [24:39]
D
I think it's important to see this. It's specifically in the context of Chilean politics that if you strip away the electoral fireworks building a 5 meter high fence along Chile's 4,000 kilometer border, mostly.
- [24:53]
B
Mountains, are you wishing him good luck with that?
- [24:55]
D
I'm wishing him very good luck with that. And I suspect he might have a few problems and plans to repatriate over 300,000 illegal migrants, which of course isn't going to happen. The rest of Kast's programme looks very much like that of former President Sebastian Pineiera, the man whom Borich replaced. Your pendulum comes back fell because of the riots and the commotions under his presidency, where Chileans, Los de Bajos, as they say, those from underneath, rose up and complained bitterly about how badly treated they were by the elite. Bringing in Borich, whose presidency was by any measure fantastically incompetent. I mean, he actually achieved almost nothing, messed up the economy and, you know, made all kinds of rather strange speeches that no one quite understood. And Chilean simply got fed up with him. Cast is conservative. Sure, it's conservative. A cast Catholic with very conservative, small Seville like views on the family, immigration, nationality, a deep distrust of the people from what Isabel Allende called the hot jungly countries to the north who came to be coming into Chile in large numbers. But that distrust is shared by an awful lot of Chileans. I suspect that when the initial rhetoric settled down, we will have something like Bonier presidency all over the place again.
- [26:14]
B
Another overarching theory for you, Martin. I have been working on this one all afternoon. A lot of Cast's election campaigning was very much about how Much better things used to be some of his supporters even more. Make Chile great again Caps. He said on your. On winning the election that he promised that Chile will once again be free from crime, free from anguish and free from fear. Fear, which implies that there was in fact a time when Chile, apparently uniquely in human history, was actually free from all those things. So my overarching theory is are modern elections now essentially just the future versus the past?
- [26:53]
A
Oh, how much. How long have we got? This isn't nearly enough. Long enough for us to discuss this, but I think there's certainly something really interesting to be said about the politics of time and the politics of time within the radical right, which is, is it tends to have this sort of, this future nostalgia in a way. Right. Just to cite Dua Lipa, we're thinking they're thinking they're promising to go back to this idealized past. But this is also, it's very much a future oriented promise. It's something that we can go into. There's. If I'm going to plug the book of my former supervisor, he wrote a really great book called in the Long Run on the role of ideas of ideas about the future in politics. And one of the core claims that he makes in that book is that we've kind of lost, we lose democracy if we don't think about the future within it. So it's certainly something that is important. It's important to politics. And it's almost striking the way that it's almost always just radical right parties at this point that are talking about the future.
- [27:56]
B
Well, to the looming yuletide now. And yet another reminder that this is an annual boom time for dubious research disseminated via press release from attention seeking corporate entities, which it is the arguably petulant policy of this program, who refused to name even as we appropriate their talking points. It says here anyway that just over a third of British people believe themselves more likely to perform random acts of kindness over the festive period. Though we are not told infuriatingly how many people consider themselves, as Christmas approaches, more likely to perpetrate random acts of hostility. Marta, does Christmas make you a. And Well, I was going to say a kind and nicer person. I should. An even kinder, nicer person.
- [28:43]
A
I was gonna say I'm always a lovely person.
- [28:47]
B
So. So your sort of general level, mean level of loveliness does not fluctuate at Christmas?
- [28:54]
A
No, I would say that Christmas, if anything's, if anything does awaken violence in me. Just because there's only so many times I can hear all I want for Christmas is you. Without wanting to actively hurt people around.
- [29:08]
B
Me, John, I did a bit of delving into this obviously rigorous research and I discovered that one of the most popular answers for people about how they are better people at Christmas, 31% of them said supporting local businesses. I mean, that's a bit of a reach, isn't it? I mean, I go to the shops fairly regularly throughout the year. I'm not looking for a round of applause.
- [29:30]
D
Yeah, I mean, I know people who regularly go down and drink eight pints in the local pub. I mean, true self sacrifice.
- [29:37]
A
I say I partake in capitalism. Look how good I am.
- [29:41]
B
Well, yes, also well, going a bit further down the list, Marta people, 13% of people report striking up conversation at times they usually wouldn't, such as when commuting. I mean, this is monstrous behavior.
- [29:54]
A
Yeah. Again, this is very un British. Yeah, this is fundamentally un British. It should not be a done thing. Not even at Christmas.
- [30:02]
B
John, do you make a special effort at Christmas? Christmas.
- [30:05]
D
You know, I'm caught in a death loop at Christmas. I always try to reach out to my family to re establish familial bonds and sort of do hands across the sea.
- [30:16]
B
And you find they've moved again.
- [30:17]
D
No, no, it's not that. If only. After 10 minutes caught up by my family, wicked thoughts cross my mind. The desire to smash things in the immediate neighborhood and do generally things that are not compatible with yule time.
- [30:30]
B
Okay, we'll put you down as an undecided. There is also again, this seems to be my show for testing universal theories of everything. Marta. Self reported or self apportioned virtue, you should never trust it.
- [30:44]
D
Really.
- [30:45]
A
No, There are so many red flags in this poll. First of all, people are not gonna tell you no, I'm actually really evil. This is the thing.
- [30:54]
B
Especially at Christmas.
- [30:55]
A
Especially at Christmas, that's when I'm at my most evil. And then the other thing, the question is, are you better because it's Christmas and therefore you feel better, or is it just because around Christmas there's so many more opportunities where people are telling you, oh, why don't you donate? Why don't you do this? Why don't you do this? Oh, there's so. I think it's just so much easier to be nicer at Christmas because it's a lot easier to do it.
- [31:19]
B
Well, on that somewhat Scrooge like note, Marta Lorimer and John Everard, thank you both for joining us. And before we go, there are no consolations in either the fact or the manner of the death of the director Rob reiner, age aged 78, and his wife Michelle Reiner, aged 68. But Rob Reiner's cinematic legacy is a colossal catalog of supremely engaging and even deceptively profound films driven by Reiner's radiant pleasure in language. One may think reasonably of A Few Good Men, When Harry Met Sally, or Stand By Me, or any of several others, but many generations of rock musician and rock journalist will recall Rob Reiner best as a star of one of his own films. Playing the documentary or if you will, rockumentary maker Marty deburge on the road with indefatigable heavy metal has beens Spinal.
- [32:08]
E
Tap, most, most blokes. You're going to be playing at 10. You're on 10 here.
- [32:12]
D
All the way up, all the way.
- [32:13]
E
Up, all the way up. You're on 10 on your guitar. Where can you go from there?
- [32:17]
D
Where?
- [32:18]
E
I don't know where exactly. What we do is if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
- [32:24]
D
Put it up to 11.
- [32:25]
E
Exactly one.
- [32:27]
D
Why don't you just make.
- [32:27]
B
Make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number and make that a little louder.
- [32:35]
E
These count to 11.
- [32:37]
B
And that is it for this edition of the Monocle Daily. Thanks to our panelists Marta Lorimer and John Everard. Today's show was produced by Monica Lillis and researched by Joanna Moser. Our sound engineer was Elliot Greenfield. I'm Andrew Mullet here in London. The Daily is back at the same time tomorrow. Thanks for listening.
- [32:55]
D
Sam.