Speaker 1This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.
Speaker 2We do the things we do and how to make better choices to help avoid costly mistakes. Each episode covers the latest research in behavioural science and dives into themes like the power of self-control, shaping your mindset for success, navigating new beginnings and why starting over can feel so hard. Listen to Choiceology at schwab.com slash podcast or wherever you listen. Imagine buying a toy for your kids. But it doesn't come with batteries. That sucks. But honestly, it's even worse when you buy business software. You end up with fragmented, disconnected systems that cost a fortune and don't talk to each other. Odoo completely changes that. Odoo comes fully complete with all your business apps perfectly integrated and working together seamlessly. It's everything your business needs in one place, saving you time, headaches and serious money. Stop paying for missing pieces. Go to odoo.com. That's O-D-O-O dot com to learn more.
Speaker 1Hello and welcome to NewsHour from the BBC World Service. Coming to you live from London, I'm James Kamarasamy. And later on in the programme, South Africa's police minister on the official response to the rise in women being murdered around Johannesburg, plus the vanishing Y chromosome, a little-known sign of some types of cancers in men. And. The newly unearthed recordings by the legendary Canadian singer-songwriter Joni Mitchell, which shed new light on her life and career. We begin, though, with a deal reached on Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark described as the world's largest island, which has been at the centre of arguably the largest crisis that NATO has ever faced. And that's because even before he was re-elected, Donald Trump had been talking about the United States needing Greenland, part of a fellow NATO country for its security. And once he returned to the White House, President Trump turned up the volume, even appearing to suggest he'd be prepared to annex the territory. This is what he told reporters in January.
Speaker 3I will say this about Greenland. We need Greenland from a national security situation. It's so strategic. Right now, Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place. We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security. And Denmark is not going to be able to do it, I can tell you.
Speaker 1That was shortly before Mr Trump attended the World Economic Forum in Davos. The run-up to that dominated by a fair amount of soul-searching about the future of the military alliance. And then when he was in Davos, he somewhat backed off, conceding that he wouldn't start a war over Greenland. Well, now, after months of negotiations, he, together with the Danes and the Greenlanders, have announced that the two sides have reached an agreement. So what's in it? Here's our North America chorus. Respondent Anthony Zerka.
Speaker 4We'll have to wait to see what are the details of this agreement. But the way Donald Trump describes it, it will give the United States permanent control over security and all other needs, all other needs being kind of the key part of that there, because the United States and Denmark are part of NATO. So the United States has always been involved in protecting the security of Greenland, including with a military base there. But one of the things that Trump has had his eye on with Greenland is the economic resources, the natural resources, the critical minerals that are present on the island and denying access to those to other non-NATO nations, places like China and Russia. And according to Donald Trump, this agreement will do that. It'll keep these other nations out. It'll give the United States much broader access to Greenland and the ability to even improve and expand its military presence there, without having to go to the Danish government or the people of Greenland for explicit permission. So while it's not annexation, while there's not going to be an American flag planted in Greenland, it does give Trump some of the things he wants, even if it doesn't give him that big, clear item that he had desired so much.
Speaker 1Anthony Zerka in Washington. Well, the prime ministers of Denmark and Greenland have both welcomed the agreement, which is expected to be signed at the UN General Assembly next week. Mette Frederiksen and Jens Frederik Nielsen said it strengthened their common security in the Arctic and North Atlantic, adding that it also recognised the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark and the right of the Greenlandic people to self-determination. Well, Tilly Martinsen is a Greenlander, former MP in Greenland's parliament, and joins me now on the line from Copenhagen. Welcome to NewsHour. What's your initial reaction to this?
Speaker 5Well, I don't think that anyone in Greenland has forgotten what the prep for invasion that we had to do, five days of gathering water and getting our elders and making sure that we had medicine and some heat sources that was independent of anything electrical. So I think all Greenlanders are very sceptical. Also, some of the things that you're citing, Mr. Donald Trump has been lying all through this deal and all through the communications to the world about this and that. And we have also not forgotten that both Mr. Trump and J.D. Vance have been lying all through this deal. They've been going back and forth on deals and how respectless they have been to Greenland, as well as, I might say, someone like Volodymyr Zelensky of the Ukraine. So I think everyone is pretty sceptical until we see the parts of the deal that are. What we're going to keep an eye on is the trade part. Is there something where we have to exclusively trade minerals and stuff like that with the United States? We don't want to do that. Of course, the owning of lands, it has always been said, they're not going to plant any flags, but are they actually able to do that? And then lastly, the pollution that we might get from military activities. We do have pollution still left over from 1950s and Second World War from the United States. So I don't think that people are too happy.
Speaker 1You're not cheering. You're not cheering. Your scepticism shines through. I mean, clearly, as you are suggesting, the devil will be in the details of this deal. But if it does, smooth over things between the United States and Denmark and the people of Greenland, will that in itself be a good thing?
Speaker 5Yes, it will, of course. But I mean, I don't think anyone has gone into this naive. And of course, we trust our prime minister, Jens Frederik Nielsen in Greenland. And we also trust the Danish prime minister. So as long as they're saying, look, this is a good deal. It sounds like we're cautiously optimistic, let me say it, but that we're hugely skeptical. Because it's who it is. And between now and the UN Assembly, there's a lot of days you can go back and forth on that. What we're hoping for is that we'll gain some peace. And it's probably almost the same deal as we already had since 1951, where we have had disagreements between Greenland, Denmark and the United States.
Speaker 1I wonder if we can go back to where you started this conversation, these days when you were preparing for a possible invasion by the United States. I mean, it sounds like the United States has imprinted itself on the psyche. I mean, is that something that is still there then?
Speaker 5It is. And it's the first thing out of every Greenlander's mouth I've seen on the early interviews that I've seen on TV, but also what I've heard on the radio and on social media as well. I mean, everyone is going in there. This sounds great and we're trusting our own, but do not trust the Trump administration. Just make sure that until he's out of office and his administration, that's why I was mentioning J.D. Vance, we're not trusting anything that they're saying because everyone remembers what it was like. It was unfathomable. And that's just one of my points that I want to say. We're all going, yeah, of course, and we're not going to have a war between NATO countries and there's not going to be like a wiping out and we don't have to mobilize the way that we maybe thought that we would. But look at the way he's been treating Canada. That's a pretty low bar, isn't it? Yeah, it really is. Yeah, we're not trusting it, but we're trusting our own. So let's see what the deal exactly entails. The devil really is in the details and Mr. Trump is a little bit of a devilish character, I have to say.
Speaker 1Tilly Martinison, former Greenland MP, speaking to us live from Copenhagen. Well, NATO, for its part, has welcomed the deal. A spokesperson for the alliance said it would help advance security, stability and cooperation in this vital region. Joining us now, listening to all of that, Peter Ricketts, Lord Ricketts, he's former UK permanent, representative to NATO, who's also the UK government's first national security advisor. Welcome back to NewsHour, Lord Ricketts. What are your thoughts on this deal, given that we don't know the details yet?
Speaker 6We don't. It sounds to me like a classic piece of Trump handling in that it sounds like it's a face saver for Trump, which doesn't actually change things very much on the ground at all. I mean, as your previous speaker was saying, the US has had an agreement with the US since 1951 on Greenland which was very permissive. It basically allowed the Americans to deploy any number of troops they wanted. They had 10,000 during the Cold War, an early warning radar system at Thule Air Base, which is increasingly important for safety of American airspace. And so they had all that anyway. And I suspect this deal, you know, adds one or two elements around the sides of that, some sort of ban on other countries exploiting the minerals in Greenland or having military deployments. By the way, I don't think the Danish government was ever about to agree with any of that. So I suspect the Danish government have added some elements which were no problem for them because this remains under Danish sovereignty. And Donald Trump takes a win, parades it on social media, and NATO hopes that this crisis is now behind it. But as you were hearing there, it's left people deeply shaken about the extent to which they can trust America as an ally if threats of annexation are faced. We played a clip there from
Speaker 1that moment, which seemed like a moment of real jeopardy for the alliance back in January. And I wonder to what extent the NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who's really been seen as someone who is bent over backwards to keep Donald Trump on board with the alliance, to what extent do you think he was involved in striking this deal?
Speaker 6I'm sure he was. And he was very instrumental around the time of that Davos summit. Yes, to have one ally. He was one of the most important allies in NATO, threatening to annex the territory of another NATO ally. I mean, Trump may have thought that was just a clever opening gambit in order to get something less. But NATO depends on trust. And that trust was badly shaken by Trump's antics there. And I suspect Mark Rutte has been a go-between between the administration and the Danish authorities who have in the end negotiated this. So I'm sure it's good for the alliance that that threat is removed. But as your previous speaker, I made clear there's a lot of ground to be made up in Denmark to build trust in any agreement that is signed by the Trump administration. So I suspect that Mr. Rutte's work is going to be cut out for the future. The fact that the Danish prime minister feels able to say it's a good agreement suggests that she must be pretty confident she can get it through the Danish parliament, in which case let's hope that this is one strain in the NATO alliance that can be put behind us.
Speaker 1And what do you make of the timing of this? Donald Trump, as we know, has been. There's some political difficulty. The war in Iran is unpopular at home. There are midterm elections coming up. Do you think the timing is significant?
Speaker 6Yes, you're being very diplomatic to say he's some difficulty. I think he's in really very serious trouble. The midterm elections are coming up. Inflation is high. Gas prices in the US are high. All that is very unwelcome. He's got precious little to show either on Ukraine or Iran. I think he's pretty desperate for a win. I think the timing may be related also to the UN General Assembly. Next week, I can imagine there'll be a pretty high-profile signing ceremony where Donald Trump will claim credit for a great victory, which, you know, if you look closely at the detail, it won't be. But that helps him domestically. So, yeah, I'm sure that's all playing in the timing of this.
Speaker 1Well, you've sort of touched on this already to a certain extent. But when the dust settles, then, assuming this does get through, as it sounds like it probably will through Denmark, what kind of impact will this have had in the longer term on the alliance?
Speaker 6Well, it has had the effect of shaking confidence. And it's not been the only thing. There have been threats to withdraw large numbers of US forces from Europe. There's been Trump appearing to be much more understanding of Putin than any European NATO country. But I think that the centre of gravity in American administration seems to be swinging away from trying to do a deal with Putin. And we've had the FBI. Unsealing indictments on five Russian intelligence officers for plotting assassinations in the US and around the world. And this, I think, marks, you know, a toughening of US approach to Russia. That plus a settlement of the Danish difference, I think, is good news for NATO. And so in the long term, I'm not sure it will affect things very much, as long as the Americans now stick to the deal they've done with the Danes and we have no more nonsense about annexation or military occupation.
Speaker 1Lord Ricketts, former UK permanent representative to NATO, former UK government national security advisor. Thanks very much. You're listening to NewsHour. And coming up later on in the programme, a new book about the legendary Canadian singer-songwriter Joni Mitchell, which features rare archive recordings, including the most personal interview she ever gave.
Speaker 7I reproduced myself. I made a beautiful child, a girl. But at the time, I was penniless. There was no way that I could take. She would have been. I was not the right person to raise this child.
Speaker 1We'll be speaking to the author of that book later on in the programme. Our main headlines this hour, the leaders of Denmark and Greenland have welcomed a deal agreed with the United States that Donald Trump says will give his country permanent control over security and other needs in Greenland. And the EU has spoken out against a decision by the Trump administration not to give Palestinian officials visas to attend the UN General Assembly in New York. Thank you for listening to the BBC World Service. This is NewsHour, coming to you live from London with James Kamarasamy. A study by the University of Arizona has found evidence of a loss of the Y chromosome in the tissue cells of men adjacent to cancer tumours. Although scientists have long known about the so-called loss of Y phenomenon in white blood cells, it's not known how long it's going to last. It's not known how long it's going to last. It's not previously been identified as a possible early signpost of cancer. Mark Jobling is an emeritus professor of genetics at Leicester University in England. He began by explaining what Y chromosomes are.
Speaker 8The Y chromosome is sex determining. So what that means is when an embryo is developing, if it has a Y chromosome, then it will become a male. And if it doesn't, then it will become a female. So normal females have two X chromosomes as well as the set of, of other chromosomes they get from both parents, while males have an X and a Y chromosome. So its primary role is to determine maleness.
Speaker 1And what we're talking about here is the loss of Y chromosomes. How do cells lose Y chromosomes?
Speaker 8Well, when cells divide, they have to carry out a kind of complex dance of the chromosomes to make sure that the two daughter cells inherit the right numbers of chromosomes. And sometimes, that goes wrong. And it goes increasingly wrong as we age. So as we get older, we see a phenomenon that's called genome instability developing. And that's where errors of various kinds in the genome, including this mitotic segregation, as we call it, increase. And the Y chromosome is actually the smallest chromosome we have. That may make it more vulnerable to this kind of problem.
Speaker 1And we've known about what's called the loss of Y, L-O-Y, for decades. But now research is drawing a link between that and cancers.
Speaker 8That's right. So I think in 1963 was the first observation of this. But it's become, with new technologies, it's become easier to measure this and observe it. And there have been some big studies done of tumours in men and also in normal men to see what the loss of the Y chromosome looks like. So in the general population, about 40% of men over 70 show this phenomenon. And it's not all the cells in the body that lose the Y chromosome. It's a proportion and that proportion will vary. That loss is associated with a wide range of cancers, not just male specific cancers, but these are cancers that affect both men and women. But if we look in men with these cancers, we see increasing incidence of them correlated with the loss of the Y chromosome in those men.
Speaker 1Does this knowledge, in any way, help prevent cancers? Well, it seems
Speaker 8that men who have loss of Y chromosome, their tumours may be differently sensitive to certain chemotherapeutic drugs and to radiotherapy. So it could be in the future that if a man has loss of Y chromosome, then he may be treated slightly differently. It's rather early days in that though.
Speaker 1Right. So not preventative, but it could help with treatment.
Speaker 8Exactly. Prognostic. And it's what cancer biologists call a biomarker. So it's something useful you can measure that might tell you how you should treat that particular patient.
Speaker 1But could it be identified early and patients with those biomarkers followed more closely for potential signs of cancer?
Speaker 8Well, I think as with any screening protocol, you need to justify it in terms of the cost of testing. And I think the argument wouldn't be strong to pre-test it. I think the argument wouldn't be strong to pre-test men for loss of Y, although that may change in the future as knowledge improves.
Speaker 1And is it linked to other risks beyond cancers?
Speaker 8Yes. So loss of Y chromosome is associated with increased all-cause mortality. So that's general death. It's also linked to increased risk of Alzheimer disease. Men live five years on average less than women do. So this could be the contributing factor to that.
Speaker 1Professor Mark Jobling there. Now, although we don't know for sure, we're used to listening to music digitally there's still a lot of love for old school records but there is also an older school because before sound was stored in the grooves and lumps of vinyl it was captured on a different analog medium that's wax and this week at London's Royal Academy of Music a group of guitarists created that old form or recreated that old form of recording live on stage with a stylus etching the sound vibrations onto rotating wax cylinders. The audience listened to the original music and then to a playback of the wax recording and I got to hear both versions at a rehearsal for the concert with the musicians and the musicologist who organized the event.
Speaker 9Today we are here because we are doing something very exciting and very unusual I think. My name is Inja Stanovic. I'm a senior lecturer
Speaker 10at the University of London. and right now they've been killed. And the fact that our government cannot take accountability, it makes it seem to me like they don't want to do anything. And we as a community need to come out and do protests like this because they're not doing anything.
Speaker 11I'm a mother, I'm a wife, I've got four daughters who are at the moment terrified. They don't know what is happening, what's about to happen. I think we need more of this. This is unity. This shows our people, it shows that there's strength in numbers. This is South Africa. We stand stronger together and this works. Unfortunately, this is the only time our government decides that they want to listen, that they want to respond, that they want to take action. So this is how we are going to fight. This is how we're going to get what we need from the people who are here to protect us.
Speaker 1Well, we can speak now to our South Africa correspondent, Pumza Filani, who's been to some of the demonstrations this morning. She's on the line from Johannesburg. And Pumza, were those women reflective of the mood that you picked up?
Speaker 12They certainly were, James. There's a huge sentiment here that more needs to be done from the government end. to make sure that women and children and also broadly members of society are safe. They're saying that not enough is being done to ensure that there's visible policing. That's one of the demands that that group that marched to Campton Park Police Station put forward, that there's not enough visible policing in high crime areas. They're saying that cases take too long at the investigation stage, that when somebody eventually plucks up the courage to go to a police station, the process itself can be traumatic because sometimes the police officers are hostile. They're not adequately trained to deal with victims who've experienced something traumatic. And that investigation stall and often collapse, saying it's a very long road. And sometimes success is very limitlessly guaranteed that those cases will eventually get to trial. So really, that is just the broader sense of what is felt, not just here in Johannesburg, but various communities have also. They've also landed their support here from different parts of the world using social media to call for stricter and tougher action from the government in dealing with this crisis.
Speaker 1And in terms of these recent murders, what is known about them? Are they still all unsolved?
Speaker 12They are, sadly, James. I've spoken to nine women have been found so far. I spoke to three of their families. No answers yet. The police. They still don't know if they are looking for a serial killer or they're looking for a group of men or copycats. The only similarities that they've been able to share with us so far is the gruesome nature in which these women have been killed. Some of them have been found tied, partially naked, as you mentioned there. And they think that's cause for concern, that there seem to be certain things that are similar in how these bodies have been treated. They've been found in the broader East Rand area of Johannesburg, but not within the same community. When we went to Canada, we found that they were not in the same community. When we went to Hampton Park earlier, that's where five of the women have been found. But about 30 kilometres away from there, another four have been found, spread out in different parts. But the common thing is that most of them seem to have been very violently killed.
Speaker 1Pumza Filani in Johannesburg, thanks very much. Well, Firoz Kachalia is South Africa's Minister of Police and a member of the ruling African National Congress Party. And he told my colleague, Julian Warwicka, what he knew about. The women's killings.
Speaker 13We've had one arrest so far and one person of arrest of interest. You know, I think it's premature to speculate whether we're dealing with a serial killer or separate incidents. But all of that will emerge from the investigation. We've also massively increased visible presence of the police in the identified areas of Ekuruleni. That's on the east side of Johannesburg. There are issues of service delivery. That's the responsibility of local government by law enforcement, because there clearly are areas that are not properly lit, so are unsafe for women. So we're engaging with the executive mayors in the Ekuruleni area. The president declared gender-based violence and femicide a national crisis some months ago. So we have a framework with five pillars. But the situation now calls for intensified effort.
Speaker 14So at this point, the police cannot be sure, can they, that the killings are linked? Is that true?
Speaker 13Well, I would say that it's premature to speculate in public about these matters. I have had briefings from the police. There will be preliminary hypotheses and so forth. But at this point, I certainly am not ready to comment publicly on the investigation.
Speaker 14No, fair enough. You also talked about areas that are not. not properly lit. So what's your advice to women living in these areas at the moment?
Speaker 13My own view is that we have to look much more in a determined way at surveillance technology. Obviously, that raises questions about privacy and so forth. But I think the country is ready in looking at that trade-off to prefer security over some cost to privacy. You know, the problem of gender-based violence in our country is. not confined to the eastern part of Johannesburg. It's a priority crime. It needs a lot of attention.
Speaker 14You mentioned the national crisis declared in this area by President Ramaphosa. But, I mean, the figures are stark, aren't they? Yes. South Africa has one of the highest rates of gender-based violence and femicide in the world, six times the global average. It's been high for a long time. The ANC have been in power since 1994. Why have they not been able? To tackle this issue successfully.
Speaker 13This country has made enormous strides. We have more women in parliament. Half the executive is made up of women. Our policies require the empowerment of women in senior management positions and across organizations in the private sector as well. But, unfortunately, we also have a socioeconomic situation in which there are high levels of joblessness and high levels of inequality. And so I think a lot of men have been left behind. And I think that they've lost their positions in families. I think that may be one of the factors which explains the attitude of hostility and anger that you see among men.
Speaker 14I mean, that's about saying to young men at an education level, if you are feeling angry and you're directing your anger towards women, that is plain wrong.
Speaker 13Yes, as part of the government's response, there are strong emphasis on communication, on education, on behavior change. But. The plain truth of the matter is that our efforts so far have not produced the results that we had hoped for. I think there's a lot of anger, justified anger, directed both at the perpetrators and at government. And, you know, we understand that, we accept that, and we are trying to respond as best we can.
Speaker 1That was Firoz Kachalia, South Africa's Minister of Police. He was speaking to my colleague, Julian Warwicker. It was a busy Friday for President Trump. As we heard earlier in the program, he reached a deal with Denmark on Greenland. He also signed a bill that potentially gives him broad powers to impose a new range of sanctions and tariffs on Russian individuals and institutions, as well as on countries that purchase Russian oil and gas. The bill, named after the late Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, one of Ukraine's strongest allies in Washington, has been welcomed by President Zelensky as. The important legislation. The Ukrainian leader has called on the provisions to be implemented fully and swiftly to honour Lindsey Graham's memory. Well, Keir Giles is with the Russia and Eurasia program at London's Chatham House International Affairs think tank. He's the author of American Overthrow, Moscow's Endgame in its Long War with Washington. So, how significant does he think the signing of this bill is?
Speaker 15The significance of the bill depends entirely on how much of it is going to be implemented and how it's going to be used. And whether this is actually a genuine departure from previous US administration policy and the start of some real pressure on Russia to bring a war to the end. Now, that could be what this bill could be used for. But, of course, it would be entirely dependent on how the provisions in the bill are interpreted. In particular, the waivers and the discretion that's given to the president for whether or not some of these very stringent terms that might be intended to punish Russia are actually going to be implemented or not. Russia has immediately said, well, this makes a peace agreement less likely. And there's no doubt that Russia would be distinctly upset if some of these provisions were to be put in place. The personal sanctions, for example, on a huge range of different Russian leadership and military leadership figures.
Speaker 1And how does this differ from what's in place already?
Speaker 15There are stepping up of sanctions on third parties, on third countries that import Russian energy, with the idea being, of course, that that constrains Russia's ability to make money to fuel its war machine. There are directly, personally targeted sanctions on quite a wide range of countries, and there are 500% tariffs on imports of Russian goods and materials into the United States. On the face of it, these look like pretty swinging measures. But then, of course, there are all the carve-outs, the waivers, the exemptions, and the fact that all of this is contingent on Donald Trump actually deciding that he's going to go ahead and do it.
Speaker 1Is that the big question, what his real intention is? I mean, he says, and he said it all along, that he wants a deal. What is he prepared to do to get one?
Speaker 15That's exactly it. He has said all along that he wants a deal, but the last thing he's been willing to do is actually put any pressure on Russia. And in some respects, some of the provisions of this sanction bill work directly against what his negotiators are attempting to do in Moscow. It says there should be a prohibition on any new future U.S. investment in Russia, and yet investment opportunities would be precisely what Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are chasing when they visit Moscow.
Speaker 1President Zelensky? President Zelensky has welcomed this bill. I suppose it would be difficult for him to do anything other than that, would it?
Speaker 15Zelensky has to express optimism about anything that looks like a positive set by the United States, whatever his private feelings might be about how many times we have seen optimism before that hasn't been borne out because the promises have not been met.
Speaker 1And the response from Moscow, as you say, they've said it could make a deal more difficult. And we've had, I suppose, what's now become a fairly typically belligerent response from the former president Dmitry Medvedev who's talking about the man, the late senator after whom the bill is named, Lindsey Graham, calling him a terrorist and sort of threatening vague military, potential military consequences.
Speaker 15Well, yes, that's fairly normal for Medvedev. Not many people are paying a great deal of attention to Medvedev now that he's moved on from his role as Russian official and is more a kind of court jester within the Kremlin to come out with these quotes that get a lot of airtime but don't really seem to contribute a great deal to our understanding of Russian policy. But overall, yes, it's not surprising that Russia will be keeping a close eye on this, but just like Ukraine and just like the rest of the world, we'll be watching for how much of it actually turns into reality.
Speaker 1And that was Keir Giles from the Russia and Eurasia program at Chatham House talking about the sanctions bill that Donald Trump has signed. Time for us to sign off from this edition of NewsHour. From me, James Kamara-Sami, and the rest of the team, thanks very much for listening.
Speaker 2Out of your goals or appetite for investing, Schwab has everything you need all in one place. Visit schwab.com to learn more. And as always, thanks for watching. Avoid costly mistakes. Support comes from WISE, the smart way to manage the currencies you need around the globe. Fed up with losing out to hidden fees when you send money abroad with your everyday bank? Choose the smart way. WISE. You can count on the exchange rate you'd usually find on Google. No unwelcome surprises. Plus, ditch that where's my money feeling. Most transfers arrive in under 20% in just 30 seconds. Join millions saving billions on hidden fees. Be smart. Get WISE. Download the WISE app today. T's and C's apply.
Speaker 16Food's taking forever. Ready to tang luck?
Speaker 4Tang luck? What's that?
Speaker 16The ultimate free social casino games. Huge collection of slots, instant fun, and real prizes up for grabs while we wait.
Speaker 1Count me in.
Speaker 16Join TangLuck today and let's win together. ♪ ♪
PodcastTranscript AI