tv Ronan Farrow Daily MSNBC January 16, 2015 10:00am-11:01am PST
facilities that are very hard to reach militarily accelerating advanced sen centrifuges that shorten the breakout capacity. and they would be able to maintain that the reason they ended negotiations was because the united states was operating in bad faith and blew up the deal. and there would be some sympathy to that view around the world, which means that the sanctions that we have in place now would potentially fray imposing these sanctions are a hardship around the world. they would love to buy iranian oil. the reason they've hung in there despite the economic interest is because we have shown that we are kredably trying to solve this problem and avert some sort of military showdown. in that context, there is no
good argument for us to try to undercut, undermine the negotiations until they've played themselves out. if iran ends up ultimately not being able to say yes, if they cannot provide us the kind of assurances that would lead myself and david cameron and others to conclude that they are not obtaining a nuclear weapon we'll have to explore other options and i'll be the first one to come to congress and say we need to tighten the screws. and by the way, that's not the only options that are going to be available, i've consistently said we leave all options on the tanl. but congress should be aware, if this diplomatic situation fails, the risks and likely hood that this ends up being at some sort a military confrontation, is heighten. and congress will have to own that as well. and that will have to be debated by the american people. and we may not be able to
rebuild the kind of co-alition we need in that context if the world believes that we were not serious about negotiations. so i take this very seriously. and i don't question the good faith of some folks who think it might be helpful. but it's my team that's at the table. we have steeped in this stuff day in and day out. we don't make these judgments blindly. we have been working on this for five or six or seven years. we consult closely with allies like the united kingdom in making these assessments. i'm asking congress to hold off because our negotiators, our partners and those who are most intimately involved in this assess that it will jeopardize the possibility of resolving a -- providing a diplomatic solution to one of the most difficult and long lasting national security problems that we faced in a very long time.
and congress needs to show patience. so i -- with respect to the veto i said to my democratic caucus colleagues yesterday that i will veto a bill that comes to my desk. and i will make this argument to the american people as to why i'm doing so. and i respectfully request them to hold off for a few months to see if we have the possibility of solving a big problem without resorting potentially to war. and i think that's worth -- worth doing. we'll see if how persuasive i am but if i'm not persuading congress, i promise you i'll be taking my case to the american people on this. >> i think the big picture is very clear, the sanctions that america and european union put in place have had an effect.
that has led to pressure and that pressure has led to talks and those talks at least have a prospect of success. and i would argue with the president, you know how much better is that than the other potential outcomes and that is what we should be focusing on. to answer you directly yes, i have contacted a couple of senators this morning and may speak to one or two more this afternoon. not in any way as british prime minister to tell the american senate what it should or shouldn't do. that wouldn't be right. but simply to make the point as a country that stands alongside america in these vital negotiations that it's the opinion of the united kingdom that further sanctions or further threat of sanctions at this point won't actually help to bring the talks to a successful conclusion and they could fracture the international unity there's been which has been so valuable in presenting united front to iran. i say this to someone to played quite i think -- a strong role in getting europe to sign up to
the very tough sanctions, including oil sanctions in the first place. and i would simply make this point, those sanctions have had an effect. and to those who said if you do an interim deal if you even start discussing with the iranians any of these things the sanctions will fall apart and pressure will dissipate. no one will be able to stick at it. that has common straably been shown not to be true. as the president says if the iranians say no and there's no deal let's sit down and figure out what extra sanctions to put in place. we're absolutely united in a simple thought, which is a deal that takes iran away from a nuclear weapon is better than either iran having a nuclear weapon or military action to prevent it. in the end it comes down to that simple choice and what i do what i can to help as one of the countries negotiating, sure i will --
[ inaudible ] >> the way the president put it i wouldn't disagree with. it's very hard to know what the iranian thinking is about this. i'm the first british prime minister in 35 years to meet with an iranian president and it's hard to know what their thinking is. there's a very clear offer there, which is to take iran away from a nuclear weapon and conclude an agreement with them which would be mutually beneficial. that's what should happen. i think we have a question from nick robinson of the bbc. >> prime minister with extra security being put in place today for the jewish community and also for police officers would people be right to conclude that the threat of an attack on the streets of britain is all about imminent? and mr. president, you've spoken of the threat posed by fighters coming back from syria, do you ever worry this is a legacy of the decision of the united states and united kingdom to in effect stand on the sidelines
during syria's bloody civil war? if i may briefly, if you'll forgive me on the economy, you said you agree, is he right? is it time to stick to the plan? >> first of all, look we do face a very serious islamist extremist terrorist threat in europe and america and across the world. we have to be incredibly vigilant in terms of that threat. we've got to strengthen police and security. we've got to make sure we do everything we can to keep our countries safe. and that involves an incredibly long term patient disciplined approach. there is no single simple thing that needs to be done. it means closing down the ungoverned spaces that the terrorists operate in working against isil in iraq and syria and this death cult of a narrative perverting the religion of islam and working together with our oldest and best partners should so we share
security and try to prevent terrorist atrocities from taking place. it means all of these things and it is going to be a long patient and hard struggle. i'm convinced we'll come through it and overcome it because in the end the values we hold to freedom of democracy of having open and tollrant societies, these are the strongest there could be and we will come through. it will take great discipline great patience and great hard work. you asked specifically the question about imminentance we have a joint where levels are set by the joint terrorism center and that means in their words that an attack is highly likely. if ever there is an imminent threat of attack it goes to the next level up which is critical. but it's their decision not mine. my responsibility is to make sure we marshall everything we
have as a country in order to defeat this threat. on the jewish community, it's good that the metropolitan police announced they'll step up patrols. i met with the jewish leadership council earlier this week. we already provide through their security organization the community security trust provide government money to help protect jewish schools. but i think this is -- we have to recognize in fighting terrorism as we found in britain before, you cannot simply rely on policing and security. this is a job for everyone. it is a role that we're all going to have to play in the vigilance and in making sure that we keep our communities safe. >> with respect to syria and the connection to foreign fighters there's no doubt in the chaos and the vacuum that's been created in big chunks much syria, that that's given an opportunity for foreign fighters to both come in and come back
out. and i chaired a u.n. security council meeting and we are now busy working with our partners to implement a series of actions to identify who may be traveling to syria in order to get trained, to fight or to hatch plots that would be activated upon return to their home countries. so it's a very serious problem. the notion that this is occurring because the united states or great britain or other countries stood on the sidelines, i think is first of all -- mischaracterizes our position we haven't been standing on the sidelines. it's true we did not invade syria. if the assertion is had we invaded syria, we would be less prone to terrorist attacks, you
know i'll leave it to you to play out that scenario and whether that sounds accurate. we've been very active in trying to resolve a tragic situation in syria. diplomatically through humanitarian efforts and through the removal of the chemical weapons from syria that had been so deadly. and now as isil has moved forward, we've been very active in degrading their capabilities inside of syria, even as we're working with partners to make sure that the foreign fighter situation is resolved. but i think david's point is the key one, this phenomenon of violent extremism, the ideology the networks the capacity to
recruit young people, this has me tas at a sized and penetrated communities around the world. i do not consider it an existential threat it is one we will solve. we are stronger. we are representing values that the vast majority of muslims believe in in tolerance and in working together to build rather than to destroy. and so this is a problem that causes great heart ache and traj tragedy and destruction but it is one ultimately we're going to defeat. we can't just defeat it through weapons. one of the things we spoke about
is how do we lift up those voices that represent the vast majority of the muslim world so that that counter narrative against this nilism is is put out there as aggressively and as nim bly as the messages from these fan attics. how do we make sure we're working with local communities and faith leaders and families whether in a neighborhood in london or a neighborhood in detroit, michigan? so that we are we're inoculating ourselves against this kind of ideology. that's going to be slow plotting systemic work. but it's work that i'm confident we're going to be able to accomplish particularly when we
have strong partners like the united kingdom doing it. on the economy, i would note that great britain and the united states are two economies that are standing out at a time when a lot of other countries are having problems. we must be doing something right. major garrett. >> thank you, mr. president, good afternoon prime minister. question for both of you, i want to make sure we heard what you were trying to say clearly directing a message to congress in the context of iranian negotiations, were you also sending a message to iran if the sanctions talks fail that war footing is the most likely alternative for this country and those alive with us in this common pursuit?
and atrocities in paris, and raids in netherlands and belgium, do you believe europe is at a turning point in recognition of what the threats are and only mobilization in terms of new law and security footing, larger budgets. you both talked about cyber security. there is a crucial issue for both countries, back doors encryption to protect people and also privacy. i would like your comments on that. thank you. >> i am not, repeat not, suggesting we're in immediate war footing should negotiations with iran fail. but as david put it very simply if in fact our view is that we have to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon then we have to recognize the possibility that should diplomacy fail we have to look
at other options to achieve that goal. and if you listen sometimes to the rhetoric surrounding this issue, i think there is sometimes the view that this regime cannot be trusted, that effectively negotiations with iran are pointless and since these claims are being made by individuals who see iran as a mortal threat and want as badly as we do to prevent a nuclear weapon. the question becomes, what other alternatives exactly are available? that is part of what we have to consider as to why it's so
important for us to pursue every possible avenue to see if we can get a deal. it's got to be a good deal. not a bad deal. i've already shown myself willing to walk away from a bad deal. and the p5plus 1 walked away with us. nobody is interested in some document that undermines our sanctions and gives iran the possibility of whether covertly or gradually, building up its nuclear weapons capacity. we're not going to allow that and anything that we do any deal that we arrive at, if we were to arrive at one, would be subject to scrutiny across the board, not just by members of congress but more importantly by people who actually know how the technical aspects of nuclear
programs can advance. and how we can effectively verify in the most rigorous way possible that the terms of the deal are being met. so bottom line is this we may not get there, but we have a chance to resolve the nuclear issue peacefully. i should point out also by the way, even if we get a nuclear deal, and we are assured that iran doesn't possess nuclear weapons, we've still got a whole bunch of problems with iran on state sponsored terrorism, their rhetoric towards israel their financing of hezbollah, differences with respect to syria. it's not as if suddenly we've got a great relationship with iran. it solves one particular problem that is urgent.
and it solves it better than the other alternative that's might present themselves. so, i -- my main message to congress at this point is just hold your fire. nobody around the world least of all the iranians doubt my ability to get additional sanctions passed should the negotiations fail. that's not a hard vote for me to get through congress. and so the negotiation that we need to have additional sanctions or even the possibility of sanctions hanging over their head to force them to a better deal hey, i think the iranians know that that is certainly in our back pocket if the negotiations fail. with respect to violent extremism, my impression is that europe has consistently taken this seriously during the course
of my presidency we have worked collaboratively and with great urgency and a recognition that not only do you have foreigners who may be trying to hatch plots in europe but that given large immigrant populations, it's important to reach out to and work with local communities and to have a very effective intelligence and counterterrorism cooperation between countries and between the united states and europe. there's no doubt that the most recent events has amplified those concerns. i think one of the things i've learned over the last six years is that there's always more that we can do. we can always do it better. we learn from mistakes each
incident that occurs teaches our professionals how we might be able to prevent these the next time. and, i'm confident that the very strong cooperation that already exists with europe women get that much better in the months and years to come. [ inaudible ] >> here's where i actually think that europe has particular challenges. and i said this to david. the united states has one big advantage in this whole process. and it's not that our law enforcement or our intelligence services, et cetera are so much better although ours are very very good and i think europeans would recognize we've got
capabilities others don't have. our biggest advantage, major is that our muslim populations, they feel themselves to be americans. and there is this incredible process of immigration and assimilation that is part of our tradition that that is probably our greatest strength. it doesn't mean we aren't subject to the kinds of tragedies we saw at the boston marathon. but that had been helpful. there are parts of europe in which that's not the case. and that's probably the greatest danger that europe faces. which is why as they respond as they work with us to respond to these circumstances, it's important for europe not to simply respond with a hammer and law enforcement and military
approaches to these problems but there also has to be a recognition that the stronger the ties of a north african, frenchman of north african descent to french values french republic, a sense of opportunity, that's going to be as important if not more important in over time solving this problem. i think there's a recognition that across europe and it's important we don't lose that. the last point i'll make and then i'll turn it over to david is with respect to the issue of intelligence gathering signal intelligence and encryptions, this is a challenge that we have been working on since i've been president. it was amplified when mr. snowden did what he did.
it's gone off the pages of front pages of the news but we haven't stopped working on it. we've been in dialogue with companies and have systemically worked through ways in which we can meet legitimate privacy concerns but also meet the very real concerns that david has identified and my fbi director identified. social media and the internet is the primary way in which these terrorists organizations are communicating. that's no different than anybody else but they are good at it and when we have the ability to track that in a way that is legal, conforms with due process, rule of law and presents oversight, then that's
the capability we have to preserve. the biggest damage that was done as a consequence of the snowden disclosures was i think in some cases a complete undermining of trust. some would say that was justified. i would argue that that although there are some legitimate concerns there, overall the united states government and from what i've seen the british government have operated in a xrup you house and lawful way to try to balance the security and the privacy concerns. we can do better and that's what we're doing. but we're still going to have to find ways to make sure that if an al qaeda affiliate is operating in great britain or in the united states, that we can try to prevent real tragedy.
i think the companies want to see that as well. they are patriots and have families they want to see protected. we just have to work through in many cases what are technical issues so it's not so much there's a difference in intent, but how to square the circle on these issues is difficult. we're working with partners like great britain and the united kingdom but we're going to be in dialogue with the companies to make that work. >> on the iranian issue, i won't add much to what the president said. just make this point, that i don't think you can characterize it if there's a deal then the pressure is off iran. and if there isn't a deal, new pressure has to be applied to iran. even if there is a deal the key will be transparency and verification and making sure that this country isn't developing a nuclear weapon. and that will mean repeated
pressure even after a deal is done. that's important and would back up what barack says about recognizing that in so many other ways we have some major disagreements with what the iranians have been doing. britain has suffered particularly from the apalling way our embassy and staff were treated in that country. we approach this with a huge amount of skepticism and concern but the goal of an iran without a nuclear weapon makes these talks worth while. on the issue your question is this a turning point for europe in terms of terrorism, i would argue we turned some time ago. maybe britain in particular because of the appalling attacks that took place in 2005 but there have been attacks elsewhere in europe. since i've been prime minister there's probably been at least one major plot every year quite a significant nature that we have managed to intercept and
stop and prevent. so the awareness of the scale of the challenge we face is absolutely there across government, across parliament and different political parties in the police and intelligence services. i think there's an opportunity for countries in europe who perhaps up to now have been less affected to work with them and make sure that we share knowledge and skills. because when you say have you -- the turning point is making sure your legislation is up to date making sure your police and security services have the capabilities they need making sure you've got programs that can channel extremists away and deradicalize them and better integrating your communities. it means doing all of those things. i very much agree with what barack says about the importance of building strong and integrated societies. i made a speech in munich a couple of years ago. it had been a mistake in the past when some countries treated different groups and different religious groups as sort of
separate blocks rather than trying to build a strong common home together. that is what we should be doing and what our policy is directed to. of course you need to have as i believe we are, a multiracial, multiethnic society of huge opportunity, wherein, one generation or two generations you can come to the country and be in the cabinet, serve at the highest level in the armed forces and sit on the bench as a judge. i've got in my cabinet someone just like that who in two generations his family has gone from arriving in britain to sitting -- that's vitally important as it combatting unemployment and combatting poverty. here's the really determining point. you can have tragically people who have had all of the advantages of integration and all of the economic opportunities and still get seduced by this poisonous radical death cult of a narrative. we have seen in recent weeks people who have gone to fight in
syria, may threaten us here back at home who had every opportunity and every advantage in life in terms of integration. let's never lose sight of the real enemy here which is the poisonous narrative perverting islam. that is what we have to focus on recognizing that of course we help ourselves in the struggle if with create societies of genuine opportunity and genuine integration between our communities. let's never lose sight of the real heart of the matter. as for the issue on the techniques fles ss necessary to keep us safe all i would say and the president and i had a good discussion about this earlier, i don't think either of us are trying to enunciate a new doctrine -- what? i'm sorry to disappoint you but i take a simple approach to this, ever since we've been sending letters to each other or making telephone callses to each other or mobile calls or contact
each other on the internet it has been possible in both our countries in extremists in my country by signed warrant by the home secretary to potentially listen to a call between two terrorists to stop them in their activity in your country a judicial process, we've had our own. we're not asking for back doors. we believe in very clear front doors through legal processes that should help to keep our countries safe. my only argument is as technology develops and world moves on we should try to avoitd the safe havens that could otherwise be created for terrorists to talk to each other. that's the goal that i think is so important because i'm in no doubt as having been prime minister for four and a half years, having seen how our intelligence services work i know some of these plots that prevent and lives that get saved, there's a real connection between that and the capabilities that our intelligence services within the law use to defend our people. i think final question is from
robert moore from itn. >> yes, robert moore with the british network itv news. it's clear there's a security alert under way around the jewish community in britain. can i be clear, is that based on specific intelligence? should people be concerned about doing their daily activities this weekend? and do you regard a terrorist attack on british soil as almost inevitable? mr. president, you say there's a dialogue under way with big mesh tech companies but you share the prime minister's view that the current threat environment is so severe that there does need to be a swing of pendulum from privacy towards counterterrorism and that this area of private encrypted communications is a very dangerous one potentially in terms of facilitating dialogue between terrorist groups? >> on the issue of the threat we face, as i said the level has been set at severe. that is set by an independent
expert organization. so people can have full confidence that these things are never done for any other motives other than literally to look at the evidence that is there about terrorist threats and set the level accordingly. when the level as it is at the moment is selt at severe that means that the authorities believe an attack is highly likely. if we believed it was imminent you would move to the next level which is critical. and we clearly do face a very real threat in our country in recent months as i was discussing with the president, we've had a number of potential attacks averted for instance on british police officers. so that is the threat picture. it's regularly reviewed and regularly updated. but it shouldn't be moved unless there is real evidence to do so. in terms of the protection to the jewish community and indeed other communities and indeed to police officers themselves this is based on what has happened in
france on the whole picture that we see. and it is sensible precautionary measures to make sure we do what we can to reassure those communities. communities who are aware of the threat they face, a big challenge for people holding up signs saying je suis charlie. that was incredibly moving, people want to stand together with -- other than the fact they were jewish and so i think it's very important that we speak to the standoff in the communities and give them the protection they deserve. >> obviously, our intention -- over the last six years by
extremisms are constant. david deals with them every day. i deal with them every day, professionals deal with them every day. i don't know if this is a situation which the pendulum needs to swing. we need to find a consistent framework whereby our publics have confidence that they are government can both protect them but not abuse our capacity to operate in cyber space. and because this is a whole new world as david said the laws that might have been designed for the traditional wiretap, have to be updated. how we do that needs to be debated, both here in the united
states and in the u.k. i think we're getting better at it and striking the balance better. i think that the companies in the united states at least recognize that they have a responsibility to the public but also want to make sure that they are meeting their responsibilities to their customers that are using their products. so the dialogue that we're engaged in is designed to make sure that all of us feel confident that if there is an actual threat out there, our law enforcement and our intelligence officers can identify that threat and track that threat at the same time that you're governments are not going around fishing into whatever text you
might be sending on your smartphone. and i think that's something that can be achieved. there are going to be situations where there are hard cases. but for most part those who are worried about big brother, sometimes obscure or deliberately ignore all of the legal safeguards that have been put in place to assure people's privacy and make sure that government is not abusing these powers and on the other hand there are times where law enforcement and those of us whose job it is to protect the public aren't thinking about those problems because we're trying to track and prevent a particular terrorist event from happening.
and it's useful to have civil libertarians and others tapping us on the shoulder in the midst of the process and reminding us that there are values ats stake as well. david and i welcome that type of debate. the technologies are evolving in ways that potentially make this trickier. if we get into a situation which the technologies do not allow us at all to track somebody that we're confident is a terrorist, if we find evidence of a terrorist plot somewhere in the middle east that traces directly back to london or new york we have specific information, we're confident that this individual or this network is about to activate a plot and despite knowing that information, despite having a phone number or
despite having a social media address or e-mail address, that we can't penetrate that that's a problem. and so so that's the kind of dialogue we're having with these companies. part of it is a legal issue, part is a technical question. but overall, i'm actually confident that we can balance these imperatives and we shouldn't feel as if because we've just seen such a horrific attack in paris that suddenly everything should be gone by the way side. we have unfortunately this has been a constant backdrop and i think will continue to be for any prime minister or president for some time to come. we've got to make sure that we don't overreact but that we remain vigilant and are serious about our responsibilities
there. all right. thank you very much everybody. appreciate it. thank you. >> president obama and british prime minister david cameron in a major news conference. president obama just there talking about the compromises involved in cyber surveillance to combat terrorism. we'll have much more breaking down their remarks in just a moment. we're live in atlanta, georgia, following a gathering of world leaders and economic leaders and we'll have that as well. let's dive into the press conference we've been watching. president obama and cameron just concluding remarks moments ago. cameron in washington for a two-day visit focusing on issues ranging from international trade to cyber security to mounting threats of international terrorist. peter alexander is following the cameron trip. peter, let's debrief on this presser here. what's the most significant headline? >> reporter: this is an hour long news conference where you can see a shared effort to focus on terrorism right now, the two
announcing a group focus on ways to fight extremism. you can hear the urgency in language used by the british prime minister david cameron, referred to al qaeda and isis inspired acts in europe as a poisonous cult, referred to it as a poisonous ideology and the president referring to it as this scourge. they also addressed going forward the challenge of balancing privacy with security an effort that the british prime minister is pressing upon the press to try to have better access for intelligence groups to deal with american techno logical companies like google and facebook. ronan. >> nbc news national correspondent, peter alexander. we want to bring in peter newman of kings college, and our friend and msnbc editor of large of the atlantic, steve clemens. steve, let's talk about one of the headlines out of these
remarks from president obama. he was hammered again and again on iran policy being criticized for reluctance to impose sanctions. how is that going to be play out in politics? critical for democrats for being too soft on iran? >> i think it's going to be a confusing mess in congress. but what the president did is showed what a steady hand and how vested and informed he is in the iran activities. i tweeted out i was completely impressed with the level of detail he had and how steady he was and how confident he was in his call to congress to give him the two or three more months to keep them -- if you guys don't do this war will be on your watch, and you'll be responsible for it. and to preempt that he'll make his case to the american public. i thought he was impressive with that and david cameron really shored that up in his own opening remarks where he essentially preemptively said any sanctions activity here would completely disrupt
potential and very important progress with iran. >> and peter, on the british side we heard a lot of discussion of home grown terrorism, obviously that's a big concern right now in europe europe is very on edge about sleeper cells and new kinds of terrorist threats. are you hearing concrete proposals for racheting security for the next trip? >> i'm not sure about that. it's certainly true that across europe most countries, the terrorist threat level is almost at the highest level. i wouldn't expect this to stop any time soon. there will be more arrests. the question for a lot of european governments is how to respond to that. do we need new laws? what kind of policy responses do we have to have? do we have to look at for example the internet in an entirely different way and importantly for a lot of countries, how do we integrate people better into society. as the president said.
the bottom line here is that we have a lot of european countries, descendants of muslim immigrants that have badly integrated into society and become susceptible and open to the messages of recruiters. >> terrorism expert peter neumann and steve clemones thank you. stay with us everybody at home up next an important guest, civil rights activists who worked closely with dr. martin luther king during the civil rights moment depicted in the film "selma" he'll weigh in on controversies around the film after the break.
the 2015 hope global forum here. the goal? to outline a vision for moving this country closer to economic equality. the co-chair for the hope global forum, someone well versed in fighting for equality. andrew young, very much in the news right now as pioneering work in the civil rights moment is depicted in the film "selma" just nominated as an academy awards for best picture and garnering praise and controversy. joining me now andrew young and former mayor of atlanta, and the ceo of give globally. it's exciting and i want to talk about passing the torch generationally. this forum, they are focused on economic equality. but we hear a lot of comments at economic conferences from the wealthy often, about moving towards equality. what's different about this time? what's concrete that will come out of this? >> for the most part these are poor people young people.
this is a new generation. this is the move to complete dr. king's work to redeem the souls america from the triple evils of racism, war and poverty. he was killed when he raised the issue of poverty. and yet we have never let it die and we've constantly been trying to find a way to include all of our citizens in a growing economy. the theme of this basically is how the poor can save capitalism. >> and as the leaders push towards more entrepreneurship you started this give locally.net. what was the support you had received? >> one of the things john bryant focused on entrepreneurship. >> the head of this organization operation hope? >> correct. not only identifying problems which is the easy part but coming up with solutions to make change and create it differently in our country.
>> and ambassador young, we mentioned you're in the news because you're one of the characters portrayed in the film "selma" and it received several nominations but not as many as some thought. some >> my reaction is that selma is a great film. selma is the one time when everybody got it right it seems. the president and dr. king worked together. snic and nclc they were students and different but they came together on this. and the justice department and even governor wallace came through. johnson trapped him a little bit, but he okayed the sending in of the national guard. finally after he was shot and assassinated cruelly after the march, the fbi very quickly
found at sail-- the assailants. so selma is where people ought to look at as a time when america works together and we make it right, almost anything can happen. >> and the subject of racism in hollywood? >> oh, there is racism everywhere. but more important than the races up in hollywood, is the fact that in the midst of all of this oprah winfrey and ava devurny took a small amount of money and told a gigantic story. it is probably going to be the best investment on the dollar. people are make $100 mills and losing money. they took a good story, great actors and with a small amount of money, they send a message of freedom all around the world. >> it is an important and powerful word. and as we go to break here when you look back at that legacy of
your father during human rights how do you that? >> we need to keep the same values that our parents put together and i think we need to look at the poor and those who are disenfranchised from those standpoints but we look to create opportunities for those there. >> great father-son team. stay with us. up next we'll have por from the conference here. we'll be back in a moment. or from the conference here. we'll be back in a moment. mor from the conference here. we'll be back in a moment. e from the conference here. we'll be back in a moment.
equal opportunity. let's look at the latest economic challenges they are up against on the docket today. first up today's sobering news the u.s. labor department issuing a report showing u.s. jobless claims rising to the highest since september. and next the specific kind of businesses creating jobs namely not youthful ones it appears. one of the big topics here is cultivateingeing a generation of in equality and joblessness. and the wall street journal reporting a 24 year low of young entrepreneurs in the u.s. and finally more american businesses are dying than being born. that puts the u.s. in 12th place among veped countries -- development countries, like france. and as kanye would say, enough to let you finish. i'll be tackling problems here
at the u.s. you can check back in in twitter and we'll have a web exclusive with john hope brian that is the head of convening all of these leaders later on msnbc.com. thank you for joining me on a hectic day with the president speaking. that wraps it up from here in atlanta. stay with us "the reid report" with my colleague joy reid will be up right after this break. to help protect your eye health. as you age your eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite is a vitamin made just for your eyes from the eye care experts at bausch + lomb. ocuvite has a unique formula that's just not found in any leading multivitamin. your eyes are unique so help protect your eye health with ocuvite. why do i cook? because i make the best chicken noodle soup. because i make the best chicken noodle soup. because i make the best chicken noodle soup.
for every way you make chicken noodle soup, make it delicious with swanson®. you're driving along, having a perfectly nice day, when out of nowhere a pick-up truck slams into your brand new car. one second it wasn't there and the next second... boom! you've had your first accident. now you have to make your first claim. so you talk to your insurance company and... boom! you're blindsided for a second time. they won't give you enough money to replace your brand new car. don't those people know you're already shaken up? liberty mutual's new car replacement will pay for the entire value of your car plus depreciation. call and for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch to liberty mutual insurance and you could save up to $423 dollars. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty
you'll get things like rewards bonuses on credit cards.... extra interest on a savings account... preferred pricing on merrill edge online trades and more... across your banking and investing get used to getting more. that's the power of more rewarding connections that's preferred rewards from bank of america. good afternoon, everyone. this is "the reid report." i'm joy reid. and we start with the threat of terrorism. moments ago president barack obama and british primary david cameron wrapped up a news conference in the east room of the white house. among the economy and nuclear negotiations with iran. both leaders spoke at length about the war on terror