Skip to main content

tv   Consider This  Al Jazeera  October 15, 2013 10:00am-11:01am EDT

10:00 am
this is al jazeera america coming to you live from new york city. i'm del walters with a look at today's top stories. a suspect in the deadly bombings of those two u.s. embassies is to be arraigned today in new york city court. he is facing federal charges for his aledged role in the bombings in 1998. the government shutdown nearing its deadline. senate leaders move closer to raising the debt ceiling and ending the government shutdown. police in london are confirming the arrest of four suspects under british
10:01 am
anti-terrorism laws. surveillance video on sunday shows one of the suspects, a 28-year-old british man taken into custody. he is originally from [ inaudible ]. it is one of three such raids across the city that were planned and overseen by british intelligence. and police in myanmar on high alert have a bomb exploded in an up scale hotel. those are your headlines. "consider this" is next. and for updates throughout the day go to ♪ ♪ as the budget crisis looms larger and the threat of default
10:02 am
draws near, the imf and world leaders tell the u.s. to get its act together. "consider this," what happens next if america blows through its debt ceiling what will the aftershocks be around the globe and for you at home? also, is iran really ready to negotiate on its nuclear program? as fresh talks begins secretary of state kerry says no deal is better than a bad deal. and what happened to all of those claims of transparency in an obama white house? a scathing new report from the committee to protect journalists, includes a quote from a veteran reporter calling the white house the most closed, control freak administration he's ever covered. hello, i am antonio mora welcome to "consider this." we begin with the countdown. only days left before a potential default and senate leaders are saying that they are closing in on ideal to reopen the government and extend the debt ceiling until early next year. as al jazerra's courtney keeley reports, the news comes as the u.s. takes a scolding from financial leaders for putting the global economy at risk.
10:03 am
>> it would mean massive disruption the world over. >> reporter: international leaders are urging the u.s. to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling or risk profound worldwide repercussions. the issue dominated this weekend's meetings of the international monetary fund and the world bank in washington. >> private investment is confident, we don't get clear resolution, on the u.s. fiscal deficit and the debt issue, it's going to be hard to see how that connie it defense is going to come back. >> reporter: with only a few days left before the debt ceiling deadline, leaders pressed both treasury secretary jacob and federal i federal rese chairman ben bernanke. >> i urge u.s. policy makers to quickly come to a resolution before they reach the debt ceiling deadline. the closer we get to the deadline the greater the impact will be for the developing world. inaction could result in interest rates rising, confidence falling and growth slowing.
10:04 am
if this comes to pass it ca coud be a disa dissass truss disastrous events for the developing world. >> reporter: the gains made since the 2008 financial chance could be wiped out by a self-inflicted u.s. crisis. not all intimate national economists agree a debt default would be catastrophic but the most scathing of criticism came from kind at largest holder of u.s. debt. an op ed published monday proposed the creation of a new international reserve currency to replace the reliance on the u.s. dollar. and to prevent american bumbling from further affecting the world. strong words as another day passes without ideal. courtney keeley, al jazerra new york. >> joining me now to look at the warnings from around the worlds that the u.s. must raise the debt ceiling and what this all means for our economy, is alley veshi
10:05 am
the host of "well money." and joining us from austin james. i want to start with you, james; the alarms are going off around the world, china, japan, saudi arabia, germany, singapore. they have all plead today for a speedy resolution to the debt crisis. the japanese are worried that after 20 years of economic stagnation that this is going to stop their recovery. the chinese are being more aggressive, calling us reckless and here say quote from their state news agency, it says: >> the state agency also mocked our dysfunctional democracy. but the chinese do have reason to worry, james, about what a default on our debt would mean for them. >> no, i don't think they have much reason to worry. they know very well, and the world knows very well, that this is a
10:06 am
political dispute in the united states brought on by the fact that an extreme faction has taken control of the house of representatives. and they know very well that the resolution of this dispute will leave them completely whole. in their holdings of u.s. treasury bills and bonds. >> that, of course, assumes that -- >> they know this with certainty. it's not layman brothers where the debts were worth nothing. it's not argentina where or greece where they are written down. this goes at most a disruption in a flow of payments which will be treated on their books as having accrued in any event. so there is -- there may be some financial disruptions associated with the worst scenario here, but those are, i think, the least of the difficulties that will arise. and they are imminently manageable with the tools that the federal reserve and other
10:07 am
authorities have. so while the chinese, yes, are talking i don't think they face any -- the kind of calamity that is being spoken of in these meetings. understand what's happening -- >> but everybody if -- >> i understand what's happening -- >> even if we are not talking about calamity, though, economists will tell you the chinese economy is more fragile than it's been, it used to be growing hands over fist and it's not. and something like this could disrupt that growth. >> no, it couldn't. the chinese economy is entirely driven by its internal decisions about credit extension for construction programs. it is to some extent driven, of course, by exports but the u.s. economy -- what could affect china would be if there is a full cut off of payments by the u.s. government to all of its obligees and that might be a legal interpretation that the white house and fresh we rhode islantreasury wouldtake for a cf time if the congress -- if the
10:08 am
house does not yield. but even that is not likely to go on very long because the public understands very well who in the final analysis is responsible. >> do you agree -- >> james, alley veshi here, i get your point about the chinese economic situation being a creep our of their own design, but back in 2008, when the american consumer was weakened to the degree that they were by a u.s. created recession, the chinese had to close a great deal of factories. because of that export. i think you might be under stating the degree to which an american slow down could actually have an impact on the chinese. i think you are completely right, that there is [inaudible] the financial payments will be met very comfortably. the issue is i think the world is more concerned that america has taken us in to one major recession and stands o on the precipice of doing it again. nonotwithstanding your analysis that it was a small faction in congress and it was last time
10:09 am
too. >> oh, no, it wasn't. what happened last time was a massive wave o wave of collapsel street based upon the collapse of the housing finance sector affecting millions of american households followed by an enormous wave of deleveraging. you are looking at a situation here which is -- where the risk in the worst case is that somehow the treasury stops payment on a wide range of checks that are due to be sent out over the next few weeks. i am not sure that it can even legally do that. but even if it could, everybody knows that those payments will be made in a reason period of time. so the whole psychological effect of this, while it may cause a lot of noise and dust is entirely different from 2008-2009. >> talking about some of that noise we heard from the heads of the imf and world bank warning of catastrophes. big bankers are letting it rip also. let's listen.
10:10 am
>> you get close doerr it the panic will set in and something will happen. the real question i have is what you don't want to have happened happen is somehow we cause a global reex, once you miss payment on u.s. treasury debt. i don't want to use horrible medical analogies, this would be a very rapidly spreading fatal disease. >> the so ali, rapidly spreading disease, let's not talk china now let's talk about the rest of the world. what kind of impact would there be if the u.s. defaults even for a few days? >> i would say, i defer from james in that last time he said this isn't lehman brother, lehman brothers was the last remaining of the weakest investment bank after bear sterns and shouldn't have triggered a global recession. the government of america missing payments is i think substantially more serious than lehman brothers. there were a bunch people in a room on september 14th, 2008, ben enter knack i.henry paulson, tim geithner who were smart people who thought the failure of lehman brothers wouldn't have
10:11 am
a particular impact and it froze credit around the world and sent us in to a major recession. i think it's dangerous and james knows much more about economics than i do, but i think it's dangerous to put out there that this is just not of any particular major consequence. we just don't know that it is or isn't. why don't we say that it could be so downtown do that. we don't know if you run in to the middle the street you are going to get hi hit by a car but that doesn't mean you run in the streets you prevents yourself from doing. >> even last time when we flirted with default poor countries saw their borrowing rates go up. i mean, this could have a pretty substantial impact because the world economy is sort of beginning its recovery and weren't they looking at the u.s. to be the engine that really motored things along? >> the u.s. has been a very strong stabilizing engine over the last five years. but, look, the financial markets so far agree with me. the stock market was up today. interest rates on long-term u.s. treasuries have not budged at
10:12 am
all. there has been a little movement at the very shortened of the spectrum due to money market fund managers arranging their portfolios so they don't get caught short in the next few weeks. that's been it as far as the true final effect. >> but isn't that because -- [speaking at the same time] >> i am not saying it's not a serious matter but what i am saying is that it is i think the pressure that is being brought upon the u.s. administration to compromise on the core political issues with the extremists in the house, is something that the administration will and should properly resist. because the resolution of this should be a clean, concurrent resolution and a clean increase in the debt ceiling so that we can go on and get -- put this past us and not have this kind of hostage taking be part of american politics again. and that i think is the way it will be resolved, if it the administration stands firm, which i hope and trust they will. >> but in the end, the reason the markets haven't really moved
10:13 am
very much, is because they did move when there was an optimism a couple of weeks ago, it seems that the markets have moved back, you. >> these are adjustments, this could be written off as the fact that the s & p was up 18% a month ago and some people are readjusting and you give them any reason to sale a bit and take profits and they might do so. i am not sure that we have lost about three, 4% on the market in the last month, typically that's very unusual. but i think, james, i think you agree with me we are not clear on that just could be people taking their money out. i will say that i think if we do breach this new date october 17th. there might be a stronger reaction in the market. that said every time we have had something that's had a strong reaction in the market we have made up for it. the recession was the worst but we did actually make up for it. so i don't know that investors should be all that fearful about the immediate future, but i do think that there are serious messages to be taken. and i think , james, i agree with you on this, the deal is not to compromise with a small faction of congress, these governments
10:14 am
around the world know one thing, this isn't republicans who control congress, not able to do something about this, if clear minded republicans and democrats vote together, we'll get this continuing resolution a budget and an increase in the debt ceiling. >> one final global question for you, james, the deal they are talking about now is an extension in to early next year, another kick-the-can kind of approach. how will that be received? >> well, i think it will just be accepted as a political expedient and the issue will then be deferred for another six months. the tragedy here is that by allowing it to go on and be replied again, is that the whole issue gets in the way of dealing with every other major problem that the country faces. but would it have significant financial consequences? no. because you would recognize, and i think the world would recognize, that this was a
10:15 am
concession by the republicans that they can't get major political concessions by holding the debt ceiling or the funding of the government hostage. and that the next instance will be resolved sensually in the same way. - essentially in the same way. so while you may get another flurry of news stories the expectation of disaster would diminish if we get a six-month extension. >> ali, what about the average guy, what do they have to worry about on main street? >> as james points out, yields, interest rates on bonds have not gone uma pressurebly as a result of this. they didn't go up in 2011 appreciably even though we are downgraded in some instances they won't down in the short-term afterwards. >> i remember that. >> however, this is, again, uncharted territory we don't know whether there are some large lenders to the united states who will get frustrated and say, you know, i don't want to go through this mess again i will move my money in to other places. if you have a lot of money in the u.s. treasuries like china does, like japan does, that option doesn't exist for you because there isn't another
10:16 am
reserve currency that's big enough. you can invest in canadian dollars, you can invest in australian dollars but there aren't enough out there to actually substitute for the united states. but there is some danger that interest rates could start to increase, they have already done that. [speaking at the same time] >> you could see a weaker dollar and more expensive exports. >> all of those things could have an effect. so there is real tangible effect on american households if congress does this. which is unfortunate, because the economy sort of is plugging along on its own steam thanks to the federal reserve. we don't need man-made manipulated disasters like this. it would just be better if congress wouldn't fiddle with the economy the way they are doing. >> let's hope -- >> i fully agree with that. i think the danger for american households is those who are really relying on cash payments from the federal government are at risk. if social security checks don't come on time, if medicare reimbursements don't come on time, then you will see people who are -- who are hit by this, particularly if it should go for
10:17 am
a while. >> particularly in the foreseeable few termite not be a danger? >> we don't know what will get paid. >> depends on what they decide to pay -- >> no, the point is the treasury makes 100 million payments every month and i don't believe there is any capacity either legal or operational -- >> logistic there they can't do did. >> do distinguish between what they pay and don't. >> there is argument that they have the ability to prioritize -- the issue is say you issued 20 payments this week and didn't have money for some of them, you can't necessarily control who presents it to the bank and what gets cashed. >> exactly. >> that's the problem that you could have. >> it's all automated sh so we don't. >> income tax refunds are not going out because of the shutdown. as james said, people on the margins could get affected. >> ali, james, really appreciate it. let's hope they get ideal done and we don't have to worry about this at least until next time which looks like it might be in a few months again. thank you both. real money airs weeknights at
10:18 am
7:00 p.m. eastern and coming up, iran continues to sound as if its open to international negotiations about its nuclear program. but is there hope for a real deal? what do you think? our social media produce ser fielding your questions, she will bring them to us, pleas joint the conversation on twitter @at @ajconsiderthis and our facebook and google pages, this is the 900-page document we call obamacare. my staff has read the entire thing. can congress say the same?
10:19 am
on august 20th,
10:20 am
to deal or not to deal on tuesday, iranian negotiators will open talks in geneva on iran's nuclear program with what they describe as a new proposal that will show the world how their secretive program is entirely peaceful. with economic sanctions crippling iran's economy. the leaders began a public relations drive with last month's u.n. speak by the president hassan rouhani who said peace was within reach and that iran's nuclear facilitieses
10:21 am
did not threat he end the world, five powers will be at the table tuesday, john kerry told them the pro israel lobby on sunday that, quote, words must be matched with actions. and i believe firmly that no deal is better than a bat deal . for mo on this i am joined by jim walsh a research associate at m.i.t.'s security studies program and with us from washington, d.c. that reason hunter from georgetown university and a distinguished scholar with the carnegie course of no, i want to start with you, there has not been any real deal between the u.s. and iran for a railroad long very long time. iran has caused us lots of problems in iraq, iran remains steadfast enemy of israel. it backs hezbollah and lebanon and assad in syria. do you think secretary kerry is on the right track when he says publicly a couple of days before these meet that goes no deal is
10:22 am
better than a bat one? >> i think that obviously if you want to have ideal it has to be something that both sides feel is going to improve the current conditions and will satisfy their basic concerns. although at the moment talk is really focused only on the nuclear issue and all of these other regional other issues are not going to be discussed, it's quite yours that if, indeed, u.s. and iran reach some kind of agreement on the nuclear issue and then this leads to hopefully greater contacts and so on, that iran will also have to, shall we say, that to revisit some of its regional policies and probably adopt a more cooperative approach towards a anybody of issues. >> and that's something that you have been very concerned about. you have written and talked
10:23 am
about the fact that gio politically our estrangement from iran has caused us all sorts of different problems. >> that's right. i think that to begin with, particularly in certain areas, because, for example, in pakistan, if afghanistan, basically we have made ourselves by not dealing with iran, which also has common borders with afghanistan, for example, we made ourselves literally a prisoner of pakistan. and they continued, for example, supporting the taliban while taking our money and pretending that they are fighting it. some of the issues regarding oil and gas projects and pipelines and so on, it has only served to enhance russia's role in this area. and to put basically europe much more dependent on russia in the resolution of some of the issues also. i think if we had in the past perhaps reacted a bit more
10:24 am
positively to some of iran's efforts to reach out, object do obviously they always fell short of the ideal, but i think that we may not have faced, for instance, the currents situation let's say in syria or even on the arab israeli, iranian position might have changed in a more positive direction. >> jim, president rouhani's u.n. speech, we have talked about it before, it was received very positively, he had a series of interviews and meetings, including one with you, that have been described as a charm offensive, he's social certaina better spokesman for his predecessor who we see here posing with some of iran's nuclear centrifuges, the big question, of course, is now that yoyou ever seen what's happenedn the weeks afterwards, is it a change in substance with rouhani or just a change in presentation? >> two things antoine
10:25 am
antonio, number one, shireen knows more about iran than anyone i know, so where she does agrees with me, she's right and i am wrong, i want to say that right off. number two, you know, i think this is a legitimate question. is it charm, a talk, cheap talk, or is it for real? you know, i have spent four hours now with president luja re happen and i more time with his foreign minister and chief of staff. >> they come cross to me, as someone who has done this a loss for 10 years, as serious and confident and the deal is they got elected sorts of like obama got elect odd this notion of hope and change. you know, things are not great in iran, they got this big surprise election now the burden is on them to come back and deliver. to say, look, hope and change works. because you voted for change, we've got a different outcome. >> what will that --
10:26 am
>> i think they will be serious. i do. >> what will that take. iran's foreign minister told iranian media here say quote that: >> for us this happens when sanctions are lifted. so -- >> yeah. >> again, yes, he says they want to build trust but what are they go going give . >> iran have covere offered, di- wanted diamonds in return for peanuts, they have wanted a lot and offered little. here is what iran is offering, they currently enrich at 20%, that's a big deal to people like me who worry about nonproliferation, we don't want them enriching at all ideally. but we certainly don't want them enriching at 20%, so they are going to stop doing that. they'll cap it at 3 to 5%, you
10:27 am
can't make a nuclear weapon with 3 to 5% enriched our rain yum, that's not the entire issue there are other things to discuss, but that's a big deal to us and both sides wants a small deal. so i think -- [speaking at the same time] >> 20% is a big deal. but they need partial, partial sanctions relief in return of that. both sides need something. >> let's if he can out that 20%, shireen. iran has facilities scattered around the country. one plant was built in secret and according to the international atomic energy agency, iran used centrifuges there and in another facility, producing the enriched uranium that jim was talking about, the 20%, about 186 key lows and that sets up that uranium that can be enriched fairly quickly and gotten -- taken to the point where it could be used in nuclear weapons. given what we know, how close is iran to being able to break out and make that nuclear bomb?
10:28 am
>> well, i think that, you know, obviously the problem here is that whether we give any credence that they have, secret plan somewhere underground that we don't know about it. but if we say that, okay, they don't have, and basically we know most of their activities, i feel that still there is quite a long way away before iran reaches the breakout capacity. but more importantly, i think ultimately the question of cooperation is a political problem. it's not a technical problem. you know, why countries go the route of proliferation, i think this is something that we have not been able to talk. we have made it in to kind of a technical thing. but in essence, this is a political thing. iran januaries for whatever reason, i believe, and i think that i believe in this one have decided at this point they don't want twant to go to the road of weaponization
10:29 am
in part even if they had the capacity to build, you know, dirty bomb or any -- having the kind of very rudimentary nuclear capacity from a security perspective makes you actually more vulnerable to prevent preemptive reactions. and i think iranians are not quite as stupid to think that, you know, the whole world is going to let them do what they want. they know that they are not pakistan, they know -- >> certainly the sanctions will stay in place if they don't -- >> exactly. [speaking at the same time] >> the sanctions are hurting. we have a social media -- >> we have a question if a viewer. >> it's not just the sanctions it's a question that the military attacks will become even much more viable. >> raoeurbgts they have the threat of a military attack existing too. >> exactly. and the whole thing frankly if you really look it's been at least since 1993, certainly people have been saying ryan is iran is two years away from a bomb. it's been already 20 years since then, seems to me that, you
10:30 am
know, we also have to look at the claims of the other side and to see how much of this is really fear mongering and how much of it is based on real concerns and real things about iran's program. >> on that front, with iran insisting that its nuclear program is peaceful and against its islamic principles to build weapons of mass destruction, jim, it also is refusing, and this is one of the things that people expect the group of five plus one, the five members of the security council in germany will meet with iran starting on tuesday, they do not want to send back to get that enriched -- that 20% uranium out of the country even though it's something that they had agreed to do in part before talks broke down last time. is there something to be concerned about there, jim? >> i hear you on this loud and clear. and there is no doubt that there is, you know, both sides have reasonable grounds to suspect the other.
10:31 am
the u.s. has reason to suspects iran. you know, they had secret facilities. this enrichment program is way too big for the domestic needs. i don't think there is anyone that would challenge that. and, of course, iran has reasons to be suspicious of the u.s., to think that we are about regime change, sure, we talk about nuclear now, later it's something else, whatever. it's always going to be sanctions, it's just a game, we are just going after them and there are reasons, you know, why they would think that. i don't think it's true, but i don't blame them for thinking that. but your points is about the 20%. here. you know, in my discussion with his the president, with the foreign minister, and with others, i think iran -- following shireen's excellent point, iran realize fist it sort of makes a dash for the bomb, number one, it will be discovered. because there are iaea inspectors there every week. so if they do it, we'll find out. if they do it, and this is what they said to me, if they go down that path, they know that other
10:32 am
folks in the region that hate them. the saudis hate them. others hate them they will get countries that will go for their own nuclear bomb. the question is can we come up with a deal where we -- they are not going to go for the bomb, but that we can have confidence because of better inspection that they are not doing that. that's what this talk -- these talks in geneva are about and they are crucial. antonio, not in decades have we had an opportunity to like this. this is huge. it puts a lot of pressure the players. the players are already under pressure. for iran to deliver, for the u.s. to deliver. but this is a big deal right now. i mean, you know, i know we are focused on d.c. and the shutdown and the deal there, but this -- these next couple of days are critical to the u.s.-iran relationship and what happens in the ring. >> unon many different levels let's hope they can come up with a deal that works for every. jim, shireen really appreciate your time tonight. >> of course. >> thank you antonio. >> coming up next the obama
10:33 am
white house coming under fire accused of being control freaks and overly sensitive by a report from the committee to protect journalists. is the pledge of an era of
10:34 am
al jazeera america - a new voice in american journalism - >> introduces america tonight. >> in egypt, police fired teargas at supporters of the ... >> a fresh take on the stories that connect to you. [[voiceover]] they risk never returning to the united states. >> grounded. >> real. >> unconventional. [[voiceover]] we spent time with some members of the gangster disciples. >> an escape from the expected. >> i'm a cancer survivor. not only cancer, but brain cancer. america tonight 9 eastern on al jazeera america
10:35 am
some might being shocked at the actions of president obama when it comes to government transparency. during the 2008 campaign, the illinois senator college pledge today run the most transparent administration in history. but in the past five years the white house has gone off whistle blowers, seized the phone records of the associatedded president, reviewed e-mails of a fox news correspond end and could possibly jail a new york times report today for not revealing a source. quoting the new york times public editor as saying it is turning out to be the administration of unprecedented secrecy and unprecedented attacks on a free press. others say their sources are, quote, scared to death to come forward as a result. david rode is a pure lister price running journalist and a columnist for righters and karen bringer director of center of national security at fordham law school and both join us to talk about this. great to have you back. >> thanks for asking us. >> new york times chief correspond earth david sanger
10:36 am
wrote that this is the most closed, control freak administrative ever covered. david, every white house press cory am sure complains about whatever administration they are covering. what's different here? >> what's different is a sort of breath of this report and across the board journalists in washington saying they have never seen this kind of aggressive push back against leakers and then against the reporters they are speaking to. david sanger the person you just quoted has got sources saying, do not e-mail me. please don't call me. you know, you are radioactive because there is an ongoing investigate to his work. >> all that is being reviewed. bob of cbs news said what i am asked what is the most manipulative and secretive administration i am covering i say it's the one in offers now . do you agree with that? >> i think it's actually worse for this administration, karen and i were talking about it earlier, she agrees that it's --
10:37 am
there is qualitative something different. and worse in this administration. >> one thing that this administration has, karen, is something they call the insider threat program. which pretty much is institutionalized tattling, and as a cuban-american it reminds me of what they have in cuba, the committees for defense of the revolution, neighbors tattle on each other. it seems almost owe toe tal attorney vinnie and toe tal tape vinnie and 9084ish. >> they would say they are trying to distinguish what i whistle blower is and a leaker is, they don't wants leaks of national security secrets, this administration has had two grants stealing, you know, steals of national security secrets, first with bradley manning and then edward snowden. and so they are on the defensive, and they want to make sure that that doesn't happen
10:38 am
and in a way they have overreacted. it's not that they started with a policy of excessive control but they have grown in to it. the report talks about: so, again, from a legal standpoint, where do you draw the line? >> well, this is not a legal question the way the obama administration has drawn it, which is if you criticize their policies, the nature of their policies, the funding of their policies, then you are considered to be a leaker as oppose it had a whistle blower and this is contended in the courts because whistle blowers have some protections that leak hleakers do not have. it's an important distinction to make and nobody is really making it well. >> they have really immaterial ted it so much. david, we did ask for comment from the white house, we didn't get anybody who wanted to be
10:39 am
interviewed on the show. we also were not able to get even a statement from them about this report. you know, as we said, it's gone after the a.p. records, after james rosen, james rise en, it's done quite a lot and as mentioned david sanger being concerned -- or his sources being concerned about communicating with him. what kind of chilling effect is this having on journalism especially in washington. >> what's amazing one of the big sections of the report is that the administration doesn't answer questions. there is a policy of refusing to respond to questions and that there is a real fear among people in the administration to say anything. to be completely honest i received an e-mail for from someone and i was think of quoting them and they said are you kidding me, you will get me fired. it's different from past administrations, one of the person quoted is ann compton. >> an olds friends of mine from abc news, she.
10:40 am
>> she said she that is never seen this level of everything closed mouthed, close to the vest. >> she's been at the white house as long as anybody has, she has seen the difference. now, what's interesting, too is the committee to protect journal i haves has mostly focused its efforts to protecting journalists abroad. something you are very familiar with, having been kidnapped and held hostage by the taliban for a long time. so what does is say that they have dedicated the time to come up with this very, very extensive report and focused domestically on the administration? >> i think it's a sense just that it's an unprecedented as mutt fear in washington that never existed before. len downing the author of the report was the editor of the washington post says this is remarkable and a basic argument from the c. p.j. is that we are an example for the rest of the world and when this kind of situation exists, it does lead to these charges of hypocrisy towards the american government, really basic example of this it's a little bit reflect on the
10:41 am
report are drone strikes where w carrying out killings on the world but not releasing details about what is happening. and people clearly are actions are not matching our ideals. >> coming out in drivens and drabs. >> yes. i have looks in to it. it's coming out it's hard to get information in these drone strikes and the rationales particularly in killing american citizens. >> the other sides of the equation is national security which is one of the things the obama administration brings enough defending itself in in of its actions. but isn't that fair? you don't want people leaking classified information. >> no, you don't . you watch a government to keep it's he secrets. you want a level of trust. and this trust was destroyed by the bush administration. the obama administration has not done enough to reestablish it. until you do that you can't have a equitable conversation about what the standards are, this is basically a state of virtual
10:42 am
warfare where, you know, they are name calling of each other in the name of national security. it's too much of what we have heard before. >> james, you defended the white house spoke spokesperson -- jay carney, excuse me, defended the administration by saying, giving the example that information had leaked out when they started talking about going in to syria or not going in to syria. all of a sudden within a matter of hours, we had unbelievably detailed information about how the military action might take place. again, but isn't there a point? >> yeah, i think the administration and the white house does have a point. but though give a little bit on the other side of it. when you are so much in control, that even things that don't make sense are withheld, then reporters go as far as they can. because, again, they are in a combative situation, this is not a college al situation. >> ironically people are criticizing last week saying the press core didn't press the
10:43 am
president very much either . interesting there is the argument that the press core hasn't been as tough as they should be. >> it's a very hard polarizing situation. opponents of the president won't be happy. the key issue is is this information that's being released endangering national security or just politically embarrassing to the white house. one of the other trends talks about in the report is over classification . huge amounts of massive information are declared classified and the government, people are again afraid of retaliation, again a very controlling white house that when there is a leak or a bad story people are punished if to. so are people making it classified to cover up mistakes that have happened that has nothing to do with national security. i absolutely agree with karen, you don't want secrets coming out that endanger the lives of american military, you know, people in intelligence operatives and others, that's legitimate.
10:44 am
>> what about the obama administration defense that they have given more freedom of information act requests than, you know, responded to more than any other administration. that president obama has given more interviews than gorge bush and bill clinton both did combined within his first term. it clearly doesn't make much of a difference to you. >> no, it does make a difference but you have to make a distinct between quality and quantity. quantity of materials that they give yo out, great. quality mat, we don't have, referring to the president tore drone, targeted killings program we don't have the memo. not even a redacted memo. so i think they have a long way to go in sort of covering that base and giving what people are asking for much of which is legitimate. people are not asking for state secrets, nuclear secrets, they are not asking for things for the most part that are dangerous to the nation. >> we have a viewer question that just came in. hermela.
10:45 am
>> thanks, antonio. david, viewer season all singer wrote in and said some leakers used to be known by another name. journalists how would you respond. >> leakers as journalists. i mean, the line is i guess blurred now with all of the technological change and anyone can post anything they want online. wiki leaks was an interesting case katie where it is thousands of cables came out i am bias because i am a journalist. i credit the information that they redacts names of sources, particularly afghans providing information to the u.s. military. wiki links released it out without retacting. we have to listen to government and have a conversation about a store if i there is a legitimate case for withholding information, we should do that. >> where do you come down on whether the releases of information like wiki leaks are journalists or not? >> i -- this is a good question. i honestly don't know. i think that i know, they deserve protection as whistle blowers or as journalists, that
10:46 am
both groups should have protections. you know, the line gets blurred now and then and it, you know, it just important that people not get punished for exposing wrongdoing. >> david, karen, good to have you both here. thanks. straight ahead, the surprising numbers on older americans and retirement. why calling it quits isn't as easy as it once was, that's next. on inside story, we bring together unexpected voices closest to the story, invite hard-hitting debate and desenting views and always explore issues relevant to you.
10:47 am
what happens when social media uncovers unheard, fascinating news stories? >> they share it on the stream. >> social media isn't an after-thought, it drives discussion across america. >> al jazeera america's social media community, on tv and online.
10:48 am
>> this is your outlet for those conversations. >> post, upload and interact. >> every night share undiscovered stories. today amounts data dive may help put off the thoughts of retirement. but for our younger viewers it may be inspiration to start putting money away for the future. more than four out of five americans age 50 or older say they are at least somewhat likely to work for pay during retirement. the study comes from the associated press and the national opinion research center for public affairs research. 47% of working respondents expect to call it quits later than they thought they were when they were 40. the great recession had a big impact. those who retired before things went south, left the workforce at an average age of 57. the average for those who quit after the recession went up five years to 62. a lot of people aren't ready for that rainy day either. half of those polled who are 50 and older have less than
10:49 am
$100,000 saved. not including their pensions or houses. 20 power first have put away less than $10,000. another issue, about one in five say they have experienced age discrimination on the job since they turned 50. a person's line of work affects how they see their age in the workplace. for example, more than a quarter of those in professional services saw age as an asset. while just 3% of people in manufacturing saw it as a positive. it also helps to have a boss who is older than you. workers with an older superior were less likely to reduce their hours than those with a younger boss. finally, they all had a lot to say about social security. 61% want to raise the cap for income that is subject to social security taxes opening that will make social security safer. makes session the average retiree depends on social security for more than 70% of his or her income. the longer you wait to start collecting, the bigger your monthly check will be, if you
10:50 am
are young, save. without action the social social security system could be insolvent less than 20 years from now it. coming up the military goes hollywood. we'll see how the iron men and women of the i'm lil' look more this is the 900-page document we call obamacare. my staff has read the entire thing. can congress say the same? (vo) friday
10:51 am
fighting for the u.s. army. the defense department has commissioned a suit that will supply soldiers with night vision, enhanced strength and protection from gunfire.
10:52 am
the goal is full-body ballistic protection. it's called tal owes, for tactical assault light operator suit and truth be told it looks more like the suits from starship troopers than what tony starks wears but only one of the many new inventions being worked on for our soldiers before we know it, science fiction my become real. joining us now from portland, oregon is dr. julie carpenter, a human robot interaction field robotics researcher and consultants. great to have you with us tonight, dr. carpenter. i want to go down the attributes of this suit. according to the u.s. i'm, this suit will give you superhuman strength with greater ballistic protection. how does it give you more strength? >> well, the robotic exoskeletonexoskeletons typicalk where the person wears it like a suit as you said, sorts of like an ironman suit, and through the system of the robot itself and the way
10:53 am
it's constructed it gives you different leverage, different strengths, it gives you the strength of the row above. you are essentially wearing the robot if you think like medieval suit of armor, it's like that, except it has all the attributes i've robot on top of it. >> it also will have censors that can detect injuries and then they can apply a wound-sealing foam. how is that going to work? >> well, you know, i think as far as i understand it, that the u.s. special operations commands right now has put out basically a call for proposals among, you know, wide-spread throughout industry and academic i can't and among individuals and have declared sort of a wish list of things that they would like. i don't know natural first iterations of the robot is going to have that . a few jeers ago they developed a foam that would stop bleeding temporarily that would be
10:54 am
applied by a human med being. i don't know how they would implement it in the suit. i don't think that special operations command knows exactly exactly how it will work that's why they ever sends out the calls for proposals. >> they are talking about 360-degree cameras that have night vision also provide basic life support functions including heat, air, oxygen. the question becomes how much of this can put in a suit? >> they are looking to sort of putting together and integrating a bunch of complex systems in to this suit. so some things might already be sort of current off the shelf that need to be adapted to be put in to a suit and some things have yet to be invented. >> one thing that has -- well, it's been invented in certain ways, but i am not sure that there is any chance of getting to the ironman level with the flying, do you think that is ever something we will see any
10:55 am
time in the near future. >> not in the near future. i don't think so. >> do you think the other proposals, the other things they are talking about, will they manage to integrate all of those in to what they are talking about? >> oh, i think that that's definitely possible. i mean, exoskeletons have been something that the department of defense has been looking in to for over 10 years now. and they have missioned exoskeletons in the past. so this is just really a much more complex and dynamic set of systems integrated in to a robotic exoskeleton that somebody would wear. i think that they could achieve their wish list in maybe five to seven years, i think that there could be a first working mod until two or three years. and you know , they definitely could be fielded soon. >> lock heed there are minute has been work would go a exoskeleton called the hulk which would ease the stress of walking and allow use toers carry weight over long distajs
10:56 am
without getting tired and another lab working on another exoskeleton suit that would allow soldier to his lift and carry up to 200 pounds without strain. everybody the suit will be heavy so he that will be part of the process. they need something to help them move this a long. they are talking about a liquid polymer so it wouldn't be that expensive. the question is why don't these companies all work together and get this all done? >> well, you know, that's where this sort of a project is going to be beneficial to the technology that will eventually trickle down to industries like health care, and for first responders to use every day. you know, why don't they work together? there are all sorts of reasons. people have very highly specialized areas that they focus on, whether it's artificial intelligence or working on the battery power, whether it's working outta jilt of a robot. things
10:57 am
like patents that people keep very close to the vest in industry and in academia. and just a general lack of communication that goes across disciplines. the thing is is that robotics is really beyond just engineering it's very interdisciplinary and i think, you know, we are sort of still figuring all of this out how to work together. how to get out of these information silos if you will. and learn to work together as an interim disciplinary group. >> we have a viewer questions for you, let's go hermela for that. >> thanks antonio. dr. carpenter, on twitter u.s. army plans ironman armor, why can't they develop this in a medical or charitable field? >> well, actually they have. there is different it's vagues. i know that china, there was i believe it was called ryman that was being worked on several years ago . other companies have as well.
10:58 am
bionics that will help -- that people can wear as forms of prosthetics that can help people that have issues with mobility. and there are also exoskeletons that eventually nurses and other aids can wear to help lift patients and move them when they lack their own mobility. so these -- it is being worked on in health care and there are some robots that are, you know, in the early stages. >> and there are all sorts of robots out there that are being planned or used to help the military. we have one called the wildcat which can move very quickly. and another one called the cheetah that can also move very quickly, we are looking at the wildcat right now. one of the things that you have studied and we have only have 45 seconds or so is you have studied the interaction of military men and women with these robots and really found some very interesting things about their relationships.
10:59 am
>> yeah, i asked some explosive ordinance disposal personnel to tell me their stories and their experiences working with robots they are in a situation where they rely on robots, work with robots closely every day and one thing that has come up repeatedly is that they have an extension in to the robot. it will be interesting to see with an exoskeleton, something that's worn if there is that same feeling that the robot is an extension or part of yourself and how that affects operator decision making. you know, they named this robot the talos, smith logically depends your interpretation of the story, talos's down fall was his belief in his own inning fallingbility or that he went crazy either way you believe the interpretation that's hig human error. >> thank you very much for joining us tonight. and the show may be over the but the conversation continues on our website we'll see you next
11:00 am
>> welcome to al jazeera america. i'm del walters. here are the stories we are following for you right now. >> the our way or the highway mind set must stop. the challenges we face as a nation require bipartisan solutions. ceased by u.s. forces in libya, a terror suspect now facing a judge in new york. and an earthquake leaves dozens dead in the philippines. ♪ call itns


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on