tv Breaking the Set RT January 15, 2014 6:00pm-6:31pm EST
well handled in the sense that. the the. good and toggle i'm having martin in this is breaking the set you know at this point pretty much nothing surprises me when it comes to the overly curious government entity known as the national security agency but i guess i still thought that you're at least protected from n.s.a. snoops if you want to play offline solitaire in the privacy of your own home what's not see according to new york times report the agency has planted software in almost one hundred thousand computers around the world that don't have to be connected to the internet through the city use then see it works there's something called radio frequency technology which allows the n.s.a. to use a covert radio channel to access the microchips in the machines and deliver the data to a listening post up to eight miles away but don't worry according to the n.s.a.
the only computers that are called most of those are the enemy targets but now world war everyone's presumed guilty before proven innocent aren't we all considered enemies now let's break the. the please please take the lead very hard to take a little while to get along well i have you ever had sex with her right there are those. that are like. the three. little. the little the little.
the. with the u.s. sitting just behind china iran iraq and saudi arabia and the number of state sponsored executions death penalty opponents have plenty of motivation to end capital punishment in this country and while many of these prisoners are indeed guilty of heinous crimes consider this since one thousand nine three hundred twelve people have been exonerated by d.n.a. evidence alone and of those prisoners eighteen were facing death sentences of course hundreds if not thousands of convicted prisoners have no access to d.n.a. evidence virtually ensuring that they will never be able to prove their innocence which is why the decades old case of fourteen year old george stinney is so important one hundred forty four said he became the youngest american citizen to be executed in the twentieth century for killing two white girls in south carolina this being the jim crow era self the justice system completely failed stint in the moment he told officers that had talked to the girls on the day of their deaths
without his parents or a lawyer present and he was taken into a room interrogated in according to police confessed to the crime within an hour however no written confession exists and reports at the time said that the officers offered stinney ice cream. i'm an exchange for the confession the subsequent trial was similarly a complete farce said he was represented by a tax commissioner named charles plowden who according to mark jones an author who has written extensively about the case had political aspirations and didn't want to anger the local whites if he ran for office during the trial plot and not only refused to cross-examine any of the witnesses but he also didn't bring any anyone to testify anthony's behalf the trial was over in two hours and it took only ten minutes for the jury to deliberate and sentence the fourteen year old to die fast forward to today or a group of lawyers are trying to clear his name and force the state of south carolina to admit this grave injustice attorneys steve mackenzie kent george from.
have successfully won the right to the appeals hearing on january twenty first and thinks about publicity of the cases generated several new witnesses including the man who originally found the bodies of the two girls have now come forward to offer their testimony so big shout out to mackenzie kent for senate chandler for having the courage and determination to not let a seventeen year old atrocity be swept under the rug but of course for every person trying to create a more just society in this country there are those who want nothing more than a return to the middle ages and particular wyoming state senator who just introduced a bill that would bring back firing squads for state executions because of the money it would save the state no this is not an onion article i may repeat that firing squads public and state senator bruce burns told the associated press that he introduced the bill because lethal injection drugs are becoming harder and harder to come by but in case you're wondering why you didn't want to bring back
the gas chamber instead don't worry he's got that answer covered saying quote the state of wyoming doesn't have a gas chamber currently so the procedure and expense to build one would be impractical to me i consider frankly the gas chamber to be cruel not. usual so i want the firing squads because they also have a minute or woah woah i'm not sure which part of that statement is more shocking they actually took the time to consider gas chamber execution or that utah still allows inmates to choose firing squads when to face an execution in fact as recent as two thousand and ten death row inmate ronnie lead gardner was executed in just this manner now you did ban the practice in two thousand and four but it was not retroactive it retroactively excuse me applied hopefully mean that gardner will be the last person to die at the hands in this brutal manner so thanks to state senator bruce burns for making a complete mockery of the justice system and introducing medieval legislation in the name of fiscal responsibility isn't it reassuring to know that legislators
aren't wasting their time addressing this country's addiction to capital punishment but instead are focusing their efforts on how to kill people more efficiently. and of the internet as we know it that's what some tech writers are calling yesterday's decision by the d.c. court of appeals in the case of arisan versus the federal communications commission or f.c.c. the court's decision to end what is commonly known as net neutrality abolishes f.c.c. regulations over and in giants like verizon and comcast the ruling came as a huge blow for advocates of a free and open air at sea net neutrality proponents believe internet service providers will be able to manipulate broadband speeds based on which sites pony up the most cash so to discuss what this ruling means for the general public and if
the free internet that we've come to love is truly dead for good i'm joined now by mouth wood policy director of free press thanks so much for coming out of it to be here so can you explain what exactly the f.c.c. regulations that were just looked at with this or willing. actually the regulations were designed to prevent exactly that certain websites being blocked some of them being sped up you having to pay more to get to certain sites like our t.v. is suddenly more expensive to reach them c.n.n. or m s n b c or fox news court struck those down and we don't think it's dead for good sound a little like bringing something back to life right the f.c.c. has a chance to him a chance to fix this but it going to be politically difficult and we are trying to do everything we can to get them to do that you know clearly i as peas have a lot to gain with this recent ruling how much they have to influence the ruling they have spent a ton of time and money both on capitol hill and in these legal challenges and at the f.c.c. as well seeking less and less rules fewer and fewer protections for internet users so they say trust us we won't actually do that stuff we won't block anybody we won't really try to speed anybody up but they're starting to try to find ways to
get more money out of the internet for themselves and their shareholders and trying to make sure you and i have less freedom online you know that brings me to this this article that i just read first z.d. net larry seltzer a tech writer writes the f.c.c. acted illegally when they imposed antidiscrimination rules on broadband internet service providers and doing so they struck down the open internet rules which were attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist rampant discrimination by as peace against various forms of content how do you respond to that claim that content discrimination is never a problem you just mention that they promise that it won't be in the future but has it ever been while sure it has been and it's they're trying to turn up the temperature ever so slightly and slowly boil the frog you know they've tried to be on their best behavior in some ways and not do the most flagrant things like blocking websites although that has happened across the border in canada a big guy is blocked at the union's website when it didn't like the fact that they were striking in this country we've seen eighteen t. either block or make you pay more to use something like a video chat application like apple's face time just because they have a legacy business they say we like it when you pay us for voice minutes maybe we
don't like it so much when you use a free and better alternative so it hasn't been rampant not necessarily but that's because we've had these rules in place on the f.c.c. is looking to make them last unfortunately there's a temporary pick up and they're not in place right now but we're hoping to get them . back in place before we see the internet change for good absolutely let's talk specifically about how this will affect regular users other than the fact that you just mentioned it might be more pricey i mean will the broader throttle the traffic be slower and if you like that it could yeah i mean that's the that's the fear is that once they make more money by selling you priority rather than just giving you access where you want to go and when you want to get there then they have every incentive not to build out you know they monetize that scarcity they say oh we have a fast lane so sorry your service is slow if you pay up a little extra or if you pay an extra five dollars a month you'll get faster access and that's exactly it wrong for the internet up till now it's been a pretty level playing field and we're afraid this could change that unless the f.c.c. fixes it really soon what do you say to those who say this is a free market issue and government should not be involved with regulating the
internet well how many broadband providers do we have the government has already been involved in giving those companies rights of way to build their systems and we don't have many choices for these critical infrastructure utilities really is what they are so it's a free market issue for the services that right on top of that you know there's lots of competition among web sites among apps there's very little for broadband providers and so if they say we're going to block you and then you can maybe switch to somebody else a lot of people can't make that choice plus it's not really like we would allow this in other settings you know think of your phone just because you have a wireless phone option you wouldn't say well it's ok if box my calls to certain numbers i can always switch to a variety more i can always switch to another to another carrier we think that was crazy because the communications network is supposed to be open to you and me to decide where we want to go and how we want to use it and this ruling threatens that because of these technicalities the f.c.c. has gotten wrong for the last decade i really like that analogy it makes it very clear about why this is so wrong and really quickly i think for people who totally do not trust the absence of because like every other oversight committee there and they've kind of messed up i mean how why should we trust them to really set this in
stone waiting to be when they have to get it right but the balance here is we don't want to trust the government completely and we also don't trust the corporations completely because so often especially at places like the f.c.c. or congress the corporations have all. too loud a voice and an outsized say and what those and what those entities do with those agencies do so it's not about the government controlling the internet or regulating what we say online it's about making sure that nobody neither the government nor the internet service provider can censor speech or decide what we can reach when we go onto our internet connection keep it in the hands of the people just as it should be you said it wasn't dead as we know it how can we resurrect it not well it is technicality here the f.c.c. made this mistake they said we're going to not treat broadband like a communication service will kind of think of it as something like an internet site and they really confuse the two sides what we want the f.c.c. to do is treat content as it should be leave it unregulated on line but get back to protecting people when they try to get on the network in the first place and if the f.c.c. can classify as we say down in the weeds here in d.c.
and if they can make the broadband network act like a communications network again then they can restore a lot of this authority and get back to making sure people have internet freedom not censorship handed down by horizon and people who want to at the internet for their own devices and going back to the f.c.c. you know kind of the inability to trust them and actually doing this is anything that we can do any tools that free press offers that the people can take to run yeah i think i trust that net we have an action up in the e-mail that we've sent out to more than two hundred thousand of our members and people responding quickly and saying yes we think the f.c.c. should do this and basically clean up its own mistake here and clean up its own mess there might be fights on capitol hill where we'll have to activate people to call their members of congress there might be fights on the court a lot of different things to come all sort of still breaking as that decision just came down yesterday but definitely you got free press dot net and lots of other great sites where you can tell the f.c.c. clean this up and make sure that we're protected when we get onto the internet and we're not just at the mercy of some corporation and we have about thirty seconds left but what can we expect right now i mean are we going to see them kind of taking charge of this in really seizing the power or what has to happen next i
think they want to keep their options open for now it's a new chairman mr wheeler who is a distinguished career in the industry and now he used it in the public service and we hope they'll do the right thing we have some indications that he will but there's a lot of decisions on his plate right now and basically. they said so far as we will act to protect the internet we're not sure yet if that means it will do everything we think they need to do to get this right tough decisions indeed important decisions that you so much for staying on top of them out what policy director for the president at thanks so much coming up you guys will tackle the corporate media's newest distraction bieber gate. we welcome aaron nathan abby martin to two or three coast guard two network. it's going to give you a different perspective give you one stock never i'll give you the information you make the decision don't worry about breaking the word it's a revolution of the mind it's a revolution of ideas and consciousness in the sense to the extreme right you produce would be described as angry i think in a strong you know when you're single. i. think.
everybody will be doing the job did you know the price is the only industry specifically mentioned in the constitution and. that's because a free and open press is critical to our democracy correct albus. in fact the single biggest threat facing our nation today is the corporate takeover of our government and i was proud to mco we've been hijacked by handful of transnational corporations that will profit by destroying what our founding fathers once built i'm sorry and on this show we reveal the big picture of what's actually going on in the world we go beyond identifying. rational debate and real discussion critical issues facing america if i ever feel ready to join the movement then welcome to.
you guys there's so much going on in the world right now it's hard to even know where to start now neutrality might be dead andy kaufman might be alive and scientists are now one step closer using the sun's energy at night but out of all this madness the media has had a singular focus over the last twenty four hours. what is good young man with too much money and too much time or a pop prince looking for street cred are all of the above justin bieber has found himself in trouble yet again it all started when bieber was accused of taking his neighbor's house on thursday night and that some of these times is not great however we should point out i just you can speak you know a problem a history for some time he's been driving his car fast through the neighborhood he's had a couple run ins with the neighbors they've accused the boyfriend singer of driving around recklessly just like in his music video.
yes the corporate press seems to have come down with be both and really can you blame i mean just look at that face because of course in a country where talentless musicians are treated like gods it's easy to sidestep the issues that actually matter like for example the fact that yesterday at the same time the helicopters were circling bieber's mansion the family of kelly thomas was grieving over the one of the biggest injustices in recent history their sons and murderers getting off scot free or the fact that a group of fifty nine senators are currently pushing to do you rail the peace process between washington and tehran in case you forgot for the first time in over thirty five years the presidents of both iran and the u.s. are on speaking terms and they're in the process of negotiating a stork agreement under one condition no u.s. will lift the harsh economic sanctions that have isolated iran for years and in return iran will stop its high level enrichment of uranium and be more transparent
and its nuclear ambitions but nobody got time for peace especially senators robert menendez and mark kirk of the senate foreign relations committee who are sponsoring a bill seeking to add a fresh new round of crippling sanctions melendez calls it an insurance policy in an op ed he wrote for the washington post he describes the bill as a necessary contingency in case the negotiations fail. does anyone else notice how a logical of us is unless of course menendez means an insurance policy for failure lest we forget that sanctions don't work have time and again proven to not only not hurt the regime but hurt the people instead or you wouldn't know any of this if you're watching the corporate media because they've had justin bieber music videos on loop for the last twenty four hours and you know it's bad when even t m z is back paging the bieber scandal to cover real news about us foreign policy not just covering it but breaking it yes you heard me right just this morning t.m.
bro. opened another huge scandal involving u.s. troops obsessed with desecrated dead bodies now i must warn you the following images are disturbing t.m.c. only published a handful of forty one images they were given citing that the rest were simply too graphic as you can see they depict u.s. marines burning the bodies of dead iraqis seemingly in the backyard of average homes in the city of fallujah in two thousand and four others show marines posing with human rain remains or rifling through the pockets of the dead colonel steve warren director of operations for the department of justice i'm sorry defense told him that quote the pictures appear to show us soldiers in violation of the uniform code of military justice which makes it a crime to mishandle remains not only is this completely criminal and despicable it's symbolic of the true legacy of the us as brutal decade long occupation of the country but don't hold your breath on these soldiers being held accountable after all the soldiers who were found guilty of urinating on afghan corpses and trophy
photographs walked away with nothing more than a mark on their record i mean absolutely nothing no jail no discharge but i guess bieber breaking a few a exist just too important a story to fit in a segment about war crimes what world this is professional journalists are the ones covering celebrity gossip while celebrity gossip sites are the ones doing the muckraking. the. on the heels of a poor vortex record breaking heat waves and super typhoons climate change has never been more apparent don't believe me more corn into a search of peer reviewed articles on the research database web of science out of thirteen thousand nine hundred fifty articles on climate change only four reject the notion i'm sorry twenty four but there is still
a very vocal minority that. three who say that not only climate change is not manmade but they deny that it's happening at all unfortunately that minority opinion is also expressed by powerful corporations and wealthy individuals who have used their influence to stall any progress in curbing global carbon emissions because of the inaction to address the serious problem many climate change scientists are now proposing a drastic solution known as geo engineering or the altering of the natural world by artificial means what hazardous the facts could result in the modifying of the laws of nature and how ethical is it to politicize the environment for profit to discuss this i'm joined by clive hamilton public ethics professor at. university and author of the book earth masters the dawn of the age of climate engineering thank you so much for coming on. so last time you were you were on before we didn't anything else i have to ask you again i'm not the expert but you are comfortable is there any reason to suspect that the government is sponsoring spring going on right now
because i can't tell you how many people reached out to me about this thing we have to take science seriously and that's why we're here talking about climate change and if you talk to any reputable or even disreputable cloud physicist or atmospheric camera store atmospheric scientist will tell you that there's no evidence whatsoever for these chemical trials conspiracy there are no holes in the professional journals there's no peer reviewed science it's just a conspiracy theory which is proliferating on the internet and we shouldn't take it seriously at all and let's move on to climate change because another obviously a big issue is deniers and you know it's fresh in the wake of the polar vortex i mean how do you respond to people saying that is proof that global warming isn't happening i mean look we have to listen to the scientists these are the people who are experts and yet you have politicians the senators on the hill who suddenly become ph d.'s that it's very physics and belief they can reject a mountain of scientific evidence and make their own personal judgment. i mean do
they ever ject quantum gravity because they just don't like it or it's inconsistent with their ideology climate scientists have a good explanation for the polar vortex libel warming doesn't mean that you know every year it's going to go up by half a degree consistently it means we're transforming the operation of a very complex atmospheric system and sometimes we're going to get freak event like the polar vortex which itself is explained by global warming because the because self is warming up this these are bored of cold air that constantly goes around the big easy being pushed out so you get these great white eaves of frigidaire sweeping across the united states and yet you know one snowstorm in washington new for some table is enough to obliterate decades of painstaking scientific work according to recent budget drexel university seventy five percent of all funding behind climate
change and i was actually on nick for like we cannot trace where this is coming from how we sort of fight back against the propaganda we don't even know where it's coming from. well we've got not specifically where it's coming from but we do know it is a huge amount of money that is being channeled through obscure sources and then being fed into the conservative think tanks here in washington and elsewhere in order to try to undermine the legitimacy and believability of this body of evidence on climate science and also to attack personally and often often in very vicious terms the climate scientists themselves look the truth is that this is just like the the tobacco company funded campaign against against bans on smoking in fact it's the same people often the think tanks people who campaigned against legislation to restrict smoking but now shifted over to work for the fossil fuel corporations to try to undermine the credibility of climate science in this
way lord. but they should not do what the science says they must do i was speaking enough is a man who's a guardian journalist who writes extensively about climate change and he was saying you know people like al gore other prominent politicians who are pushing a lot of the global warming rhetoric also are kind of pushing for money making schemes as a solution the carbon credits he says you know it's just kind of a money making scheme do you think that's a responsible way to fight climate change the carbon credits or climate change the ultimate collective problem and asking individuals or calling on companies to you know get behind that in itself is not going to so i mean we have to shop the greenhouse gas emissions which means that we have to shop consumption of fossil fuels end of story how do we reduce consumption of fossil fuels we need national policies that basically my fossil fuels more expensive than the alternatives to
renewable energy energy efficiency and so we must have some carbon price on carbon where that takes the form of a carbon tax or whether it takes the form of an emissions trading system in a sense it doesn't matter as long as we impose a cost on polluting the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels that's the fundamental thing on which ninety nine point nine percent of economists will agree sure but i think consumers are looking and saying why is the burden pushed on me when you have no giant meat packing industry you have twenty percent methane emissions that are heavily contributing. to the meat packing beef producers like coal fired power plants that are responsible for greenhouse gas emissions but just as you know you eat beef when you go and buy a hamburger you consume. fossil fuels when you turn the switch on in your home and in the end it's got to where you have got to pay more for using fossil. business is
in now offices that's just the bottom line i mean if people are making a lot of money out of it illegitimately then we need policies to to work on that but in the end we have to pay more for our pollution and that will encourage us to use less polluting forms of energy and less polluting forms of food agree with you and i also just think that corporate america and also you know world government should really take the lead and then you know hopefully will influence the people to follow let's talk about the solutions here. is geo engineering at the coal. well it's a big question is what you mean by geo engineering the the prominence game the most one attracting most attention and most research is called sulfite or soul sprang and the idea is to. give me atmosphere with a life cycle sulfate aerosols tiny particles and it's kind of. pollution which is the earth reduces the amount of sunlight reaching the earth and thereby
cools it now a lot of people would say there's something fundamentally wrong in installing a conduit so. that will allow somebody somewhere to have a handle on the global thermostat to reduce the temperature and of the earth and therefore affect in talk climate of the year so different with profound problems particularly if you have one country the united states or china which would invest in geo engineering for russia which is pushing quite odd for work on geo engineering and getting international except ability if you have one nation study to control the climate system. then you really do have a profoundly because situation which is why many nations of the south many poor nations astounded say hey we worried about if we want to have a say in what's going on that is a really interesting question indeed i never even thought about you know world governments actually having more control over the other of control holds
temperature in. vironment thank you so much clive hamilton for breaking down some misconceptions about geoengineering professor of public ethics at charles sturt university really appreciate your time thanks and. thanks for watching you guys join me again tomorrow to break the sound all over again. when you're followed around when you are being investigated because of the whim of someone this is the beginning of the end of your freedom. to stay in and save new teen lee intercept american citizens. text message use you know. where the calls text messages so you just see everything without my knowledge and actually basically and there's no legal absolutely legal yes when you bareback with the internet your bare back let's say you brother.
i was a new alert animation scripts scare me a little bit. there is breaking news tonight and we are continuing to follow the breaking news. alexander's family cry tears of the wife and a brave thing. that has bred dark and a court of law found alive there's a story made for that movie is playing out in real life. their real sharon has died and being given a state funeral he was called controversial and even a peacemaker by mainstream media and political plans and so many other strong we checked these descriptions on this edition of crossfire with
a simple question who was the real. welcome to london the world's capital surveillance even though the year isn't one hundred eighty four you may be forgiven for imagining big brother really is watching it i can see wanting to fix that porting being a ping hammer on the. every bit of public ground. of everything are free but also just because all the different companies different landowners have their own season t.v. cameras are everywhere everybody. in the most monitored city in the world there is one camera for every fourteen people but does this intense surveillance keep london safe i mean in a way the street like a kind of dangerous because that coveted seats.