tv World Apart With Oxana Boyko RT September 7, 2017 2:29pm-3:01pm EDT
in effect once in the rope shoots in a conflict or stop shooting to help a boy who is hit by moments of drop the camera and helps him get out of the conflict area in scenes like this so stop being a photographer and become a human being he was also feeding the media a pitiful story of his childhood which included a battle with leukemia and being abused while growing up both of which he managed to overcome and use as inspiration for war photography he also claimed he was working for and in geo children safe drinking water which must have been easy to fact check but no one did but now the cat's out of the bag the b.b.c. confirms that this was indeed a car man whose photos unfortunately they've used while promising to better their verification process the fraudster whose identity is still unknown as the lead of the photos and accounts associated with them leaving only an unpleasant remnant for the major media system he managed to trick into showing something it was entirely fake media francis and thiago r.t.
media analyst lionel say's news organizations have a duty as professionals to thoroughly check sources how many times do you hear people because if you really want to get deep on this if you really want to go deep how many times do we hear in past years on t.v. how many times do we hear somebody claiming to be attacks on something finance global warming climate change the law sports who in fact knows nothing how many times are we led to believe something and the next question is is it right is it normal is it customary to expect these news organizations to vet. every story it comes across i would say yes don't also be surprised if for some particular reason people in the mainstream media don't exactly jump on this because this calls into question what they are doing to combat this
particular problem. ok more r.t. programs right ahead and i'll be back on exactly how far is time with more global news to be. done not ones out. on the flues off not done one but it's nighttime the definitions and i'm back and the. ones you king i need south. and. take in the equal city just. to get the camera and then you're going to bring. how is that kind. of movie he might not be. going to the well not beach yet the saudis out. to do this just kill him if one means a leftist i know the deep but let me say this one tokyo find it he's going to go.
pyongyang was capable of but over the past year or two things changed north korea god new technology and the united states god and your president but all the bluster about the nuclear blast is the status quo is still sustainable for everybody involved to discuss that i'm now joined by donald a former u.s. congressman and current president of the korea economic institute of america mr menzel it's great to talk to you thank you for your time it's nice to talk to you thank you for inviting me now the korean problem has long had a tendency of heating up every two to three years but this time around the north koreans indeed have a far more sophisticated technology to back up of their threats and the united states seems to have a march shorter fuse which of these two factors do you find more troubling. questions here. first of all the the the fuse is now with the
united states to fuse is with north korea north korea has continued to violate numerous u.n. . modest fences to not continuing with this nuclear capability they have broken several agreements with the united states they have continued to test. no other six tests for nuclear bomb apparently they've developed the hydrogen bomb in a period they have the i.c.b.m. and so it's not a question of just exposes the growth of the nuclear weapon system in north korea was saying that the united states has a short fuse i'm not sure i understand where you're going to miss them and so if it's not really surprising for anyone to see that north korea continues to violate international law there is no distance disagreement on that i think internationally but i think we have never have an american president who would express he. his
displeasure over that in such an abrasive way i'm put the military option so squarely on the table doesn't that make you a little bit worried i'm always worried whenever somebody is about to become a new nuclear power. but there's been no us president who has ever been the position of having an i.c.b.m. lobbed across. lob across mainland of japan and then been threatened in the most. horrible way with saying with it come to noone saying that the us really is the enemy of north korea and the north korea is going to destroy it if you want to talk about bellicose words first you have to start with can general and in effect when president trumps the use of language that he did. in the language is quite clear it's fire in theory there are three prominent americans who found nothing wrong with that language former senator lieberman he
said look at he said the language was not in to north korea was in but china and nicholas burns who would have been the secretary of state under president clinton said sure his words were not churchillian they were not the greatest and diplomatic languages but they were aimed at china and then gordon chang also if i were president i wouldn't use those words but i would do well on i would want more of what north korea is doing that on two words that were said spontaneously by the president the united states mr mims the way you quoted that mr burns and mr burns was also extremely critical of i don't know triumph or essentially trying to blame to blame a south korea for what mr trump called and he's the talk of appeasement with the north also adding that they meaning the north only understand one thing what could that one thing being in your view that's not what i'm talking about. the reference
that i had. was that in the words the words on fire and fury of those words were aimed at china to get china involvement this thing i'm not going to do all on on words that one particular president doesn't use or does use and i can hear him talk about north korea and the threat that it has to the mr mansell my point was that mr trump employs very unconventional language not only with regards to north korea but also concerning the united states' closest ally south korea which interest i'm sure i'm very close to your hardon chief find dot kind of language to rob a question and bone here's the president states if i were president i would use different language mr mandela to draw you back to the question i posed before that with president trump he said that they meaning the north koreans only understand
one thing what do you think he could mean by one thing. no he said he said that everything is on the table so you can rule out anything when you say everything is on the table you do not marry down to one thoughts on a doornail asked me to get inside the mind of donald trump because i don't i'm not capable of doing that you wrote an article just last month in the national interest laying out the possible consequences of a preventative military strike by the united states i think you'll find you you find these possibility quite worrying you also referred time and time again to the u.s. allies who in your view have to be consulted on this but judging again from the language of mr mr trompette he's not very course here still with south korea how was it how how is that kind of language taken in salt in i'm i'm not i didn't come here to talk about the president trumps language and added i don't want to argue with you
but i but the world is innocent very difficult situation let me talk about my article ok and talk about and talk about north korea the reason why i would oppose it so a so called. the can prevent of strikes serve the call and call them what you want unless you know a missile with a warhead is on its way you don't go ahead and launch countermeasures and the problem with the symptom of a preventive strike is the fact that in most people forget the fact that north korea has a presently has in place artillery. aimed at south korea. that has hundreds of thousands of rounds that has been there for years and they could just use unconventional warfare and kill tens of thousands of people. in the northern part of of south korea and then to try to go in there and do some type of a preventive strike. to take out the capability something on that nature is
it. it just would not work and so the time that the military option could be used is if in fact. we know for sure one hundred percent verifiable with the rockets warming up that there is ready to be a launch or that a launch is in progress with a nuclear warhead could hit any part of the world or rather that could hit any of our allies including the united states as well a missile. you know intelligence is not always reliable in this day and age and i think we learned hard way through the course of several conflicts but since you you mentioned something about south korea it seems that the language that is coming out of seoul has also been changing south korean national security advisor recently sad that's not south korea would not be against using most powerful strategic assets in order to quote unquote neutralize the p.r.
case in nuclear facilities so it seems that even seoul now is talking about a preventative strike. doesn't doc make you concerned and i disagree they're not talking about a preventative strike soul knows more than anybody the fact that of any type of ruin of the strike would bring about a media retaliation. not even including a missile but with regard to the. defense artillery that have been in place for years song you don't know who's the young man who is the defense minister and the look of the quotes are saying the possibility a referring to ted to coal nuclear weapons but he said he really didn't mean to to talk about that in terms of the actual deployment of the tactical nuclear weapons that were there were removed in one nine hundred ninety one and the. foreign minister said well. we definitely have no plans to bring back tech or nuclear
weapons because the whole goal is to have occurred. peninsula that is free of nuclear weapons and of career brings back to tech or nuclear weapons then they've lost the moral high ground in terms of any possible agreement negotiated with north korea missile months or there are still the south korean officials i'm still talking about neutralizing d.p. our case nukes or nuclear facilities and something tells me that there may be interpreted as extremely provocative in pyongyang in fact i've heard a number of russian diplomats say over the last week or so that in asian countries in particular. public pressure especially in the forms of ultimatums is almost always counterproductive simply because it leaves the other side with no recourse but to ask a late don't you think that came to space for maneuver is now extremely limited far more limited than that of washington and seoul don't you think that that kind of
language it could be could be provoke of if that's the case then russia should not be objecting to the to the installation of the rest of the of the. anti-missile projectiles if you're talking about a provocation if you're talking about the sense that they're going to have to wonder why russia and china are both opposed to south korea defended itself with your new defense of. project tells calls well i think you you know the answer to that question because you know that both china and russia and russia have their own strategic and security interest in the region and non of them wants to see south and north korea as a nuclear power but they don't don't want to see american and south korean military exercises in the region the i'm sure you're well aware of that as well on the world the fact also but. president putin also said the only thing that is left is years of words that he just simply quote to you with president putin said in to
a certain degree of. approve of what he said he said the of the us going to north korean crisis could cause a quote planetary catastrophe and huge loss of life ramping up military asturian such conditions and senseless is a dead end he told reporters in china that could lead to global planetary catastrophe and huge loss of human life there is no other would assault the north korean nuclear issue save that of peaceful dialogue well that's fine but where's the peaceful dialogue mr mann so i don't i don't think you quoted mr putin. to the fullest extent of his remarks because he also said that it would be foolish to expound on to expect from the north koreans to abandon the what is essentially their only security guarantee which is this nascent nuclear program nobody is approving of it but it is also if you consider that from every out politic point of view and if you take into account recent american invasions of farris countries
wouldn't that be logical that north korea would be on path and adamant in developing in its nuclear program as the only protection against possible american strike. you have to listen very carefully to what you just said the. america has no desire to occupy north korea. to go in there in to take out the the president of north. america had no desire to take over libya and yet they did that if they ever do the country and the into care as it had no desire to occupy iraq or afghanistan that you can get it did so you know why should that north korea be an exception axon i came here to talk about north korea not about other countries in which russia is involved or the united states is involved the issue here is that the president putin has called for teams for dialogue to resolve the issue of north korea everybody agrees. with that
you know peaceful dialogue is taking place so what do you do with this was for so that's that's what's going on do you just sit by and continue to see can join and develop the there's nuclear capabilities which could really in danger both china and russia in the event that there is a mistake take place or there's an accident involving a country developing nuclear weapons that has no history of thought to handle a nuclear weapons or do you get involved in sanctions or what do you do it is so everybody's trying to come up with it with a way hopefully that would that would bring kim jong un to his knees and say look at you know i'm an imposition now with the whole world is against what i'm doing such as what would people with the nations did in indian effort to tighten south africa well mr mandela we have to take
a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments. for my guide to financial survival this is a device used by professionals to earn money. that's right these assholes are simply not accountable and we're just. totally destabilize the global economy you need to protect yourself and get informed as are. welcome back to worlds apart bit donald months old president of the career economic
institute of america and this amends. north korea has been under a very strict sanction regime for quite some time all right that clearly didn't change that behavior what makes you believe that but yet they're not this route of sanctions is going to change anything they're not strict sanctions that's that's the problem is that you have to do a couple of things in both russia and china could really help a russia sends refined. petroleum to. north korea. and china sends unrefined petroleum to the only refinery that north korea has you choke off the energy and then you then you work with china say look at it you've got to stop using your banks as a method of of cleansing the money that's going back to north korea through their trade that gives them the hard currency that gives them the ability to buy all
these different parts of the weaponry that they that they presently have. i mean it's a plan but it will take every nation in the world especially china and russia to agree upon a play and to stop in the words of of of of president plume the planetary catastrophe of well mr months away again russia and china are extremely concerned about the problem but they're not there to do the american bidding refill all due respect speaking about this is not american bidding this is the world between trying to stop another nuclear power is not the united states alone and neither china nor russia as have been threatened with annihilation by a country developing a nuclear weapon china and russia should be very much concerned while china and russia are absolutely concerned that may miss some of the i don't want to read to read the same point over and over again i think what i find questionable is this
how big of the part of the united states speech has been activated under the submit . station to issue commands to the rest of the wallop you cannot encourage those negotiations that you still want to see just by tweeting out of the united states wants to lead the world in this effort organize talks bring and talk to the same tweet for six times i'm here to talk about the big picture of what we're of what we're going to do i don't know the mind of donald trump i don't know why he tweets if i was advisor i would advise him to give up to give up his twitter come on i do so if he does good diplomacy i think you have a situation where you have a new president in south korea who is doing who's doing his best to bring about his country to get everybody on the same page in that country to resent to them the actual threat that's going on who's leading his country to to get the rest of said installed and to do everything he can with both offensive weapons and with the open door of negotiations to bring about
a peaceful resolution obviously that's something that the russians should be achieved in favor of it russia has absolutely no disagreements with south korea this is actually what mr putin said a couple of months ago when he does russia does have a problem with south korea because south korea wants to defend itself what the thing and system. plans to them is also supplied by one of the by another country to be sure russia has problems but so i'm not sure that whether the root cause here is the south korean relationship or then there is a leg work comes from of korea develop its own thing and system russia would still be opposed to it well because russia fears that doc would strengthen the american influence in the region if the united states wants to discuss that constructively i'm sure both russia and china would be on board i really oxana i totally i totally disagree with your premise this isn't about strength in american influence this is about keeping a nuclear war from breaking out there would hurt everybody including russia
everybody has the same goal and that is. that in there is world peace the difference is that both china and russia pearlie are willing to stand by and see korea develop a nuclear weapon and then try to contain it were as were as the rest of the world in mississauga korea doesn't really think that's the best strategy while i'm mr mansell i think from a from this vantage point the problem with ensuring global peace is you know senseless invasions of countries time and time again and i think that is also part of the equation with north korea but. rather than arguing about the same things you mentioned that i referred to the same twit five or six times i want to bring in another tweet by mr trump in which he said that he was considering the suspension of trade with the countries that do business with north korea which puts china at the forefront as both beyond hands and washington's largest trade partner do you
think the united states can realistically afford to pin allies china in such a way without first kerching itself and also more generally aren't you concerned that this war of words between beijing and washington is also going to draw between pyongyang and washington is also going to draw in beijing and not so constructive manner well first of all nobody wants to see a trade war is the only way to stop the thermal nuclear war is to get involved in a secondary boycott. which would be doing business with any nation doing business with north korea there could be an option that's on the table that's not the preferred one but i think the reason president mentioned that is the fact that we are the is that the whole world is so concerned. with north korea becoming
a new nuclear power that is willing to use any peaceful method in order to bring that in order to see that that doesn't happen and one of those unfortunate tactics a would be involved in a. in a big trade dispute or in the sec what's called a secondary boycott no one wants to see that but but at times that may be the only option that's on the table we don't know him but he brought that up as simply being an option on the tape well but you know mr trump's words have perceived. sometimes you have dissed distress in various capitals around the world and i'm sure actually even if north korea if south korea are still considers itself the closest american ally i'm pretty sure many south korean officials are also quite concerned that i want to ask you about. mr trump's and not our idea and this time about walking out of our free trade agreement with saul he sad that this may happen as early as this
week and i'm sure you would actually disagree with the rationale of such a move but why do you think such an urgency in. twenty minutes for us to get an area to get to an area of agreement but that's ok it's a very tense world and i appreciate your passion the it would be a mistake for us to pull out of chorus f t a for several reasons first of all. national security advisor and the secretary of defense but masters and the medals both said that this is not the time with everything's so tense about north korea. etc this is not the time to bring in to open up another area to distract from the area of of of security and to bring in this whole area opening up chorus a second of all the united states is really a beneficiary of chorus because as to those items that are that are on the chorus schedule the. one sees actually has an increase in exports it's
a true agreement that really of personifies with president truman was true true and the present trump was talked about so i agree with you it be a very bad idea to withdraw from chorus ok let me see gears a little bit here because i think what we are actually talking about is not so much again there the threat posed by north korea i think everybody agrees on that but really the no i don't i don't think russia agrees on the threat i wouldn't i wouldn't i would disagree with you i know the spokesman for donald trump of the a spokesman for russia so you would know what their what their where russia stands on south korea on the on that because i came here to talk about north korea and not about donald trump but let me just say that the president president putin of he just says that he said sanctions won't work three useless. oh that's interesting that takes a peaceful tool off the table. and he says are useless that doesn't do any good and
he's trying to you know that's a peaceful method of trying to solve something is so if you take that off the table then he says whoa although this is a peaceful dialogue but if north korea is unwilling to come to the table and get involved in a dialogue but all we have now in this appears to be a hopeful on the scene is that apparently president putin is going to be having a conversation or meeting with president assad in moon very shortly and you know i have the i have hope that perhaps something that president putin says to the two of them that maybe the three countries can can talk about the appropriate dialogue appropriate things to do so maybe maybe president putin can play a role here in bringing about a peaceful dialogue and the peninsula well i'm sure he will try to divest of his ability but i think one other option that's still be mains on the table is essentially recognizing north korea as
a nuclear power and proceeding from that has sought this status for quite some time why not give it to it you know that's what they want the people say well what is what is north korea one would north korea wants is to be recognized as a valid nuclear power. and then will the if that comes if that comes to pass then so will be you know if that's the case then send in the inspectors of sign the the point to none under the nonproliferation agreement live by the rules that the other nuclear powers do but i mean that's that's something down the line but at this point i don't think anybody is really ready to see the fact that north korea's indeed a nuclear power on the order of russia china or the united states well i miss them until they unfortunately we have to leave it there i really appreciate your time and also your passion on this day you are. well a preacher
a preacher in your parish you do you do the good job and i also encourage our viewers to share that comments are now it's way to facebook and you tube pages i hope to see you again same place same time here on worlds apart. the united nations and the security council in particular should be it should not be a place full. of it as an excuse they should be a place you should be a place. which is a. form its main responsibility to maintain security.
for headline stories this hour a top north korean official i q's is the u.s. of hindering efforts to end the simmering hostilities on the korean peninsula the comment was made in a rare interview at a regional economic forum in russia also. dozens are injured in clashes with police inside korea in protest they can spin the point of u.s. missile launchers. syrian government forces.