parliament voiced their anger at the french president over the action taken against the. government. over its role in the strikes. policy of this country the president. of the producers of a documentary in the execution is shot to. death penalty as a racial undertone. wednesday morning here in moscow thanks for joining us on r.t. international we have your top worldwide headlines for this hour. experts from the o.p.c. w a chemical weapons watchdog are expected to arrive in the syrian town of duma in the next few hours the long awaited probe or look into the allegations of
a chemical attack that have most on april. meanwhile more doubts of been raised over this footage filmed by the white helmets group in a local hospital the video claims to show the aftermath of the chemical. visited that very hospital and talked with doctors and locals as well they describe what happened on the seventh of april claiming they saw no toxic agents being used . people from the white helmets told us about the use of chemical weapons but we saw no sign of that if chemical weapons were used against those people our medical stuff would have also been affected.
people poured water heads were getting that we had been attacked with chemical weapons and somebody from outside shouting about a chemical attack don't know who that was we heard an explosion and somebody said it was a chemical weapon we ran to where the noise came from and the started pouring the water over the people but they seemed to be ok and then walked away without any help but. confused somebody started pouring water over people's heads saying there had been a chemical attack but i was at the spot with my wife and daughter but none of us experienced any symptoms of chemical poisoning the u.s. britain and france chose not to wait for the official probe before launching air raids against syria and the early hours of saturday a u.s. state department spokesperson and how the now it said washington is just station not to wait was justified. the o.p.c.
view is something that we've back strongly but it can also take quite a bit of time for the o.p.c. of you to gather its information and compile the report so i would ask you should the united states and her allies wait around for bashar al assad to use more chemical substances honest people should we wait around for that formal investigation that could take months and months this is you know actually scandalous that the u.s. has launched a strike based on insurgent tied social media sources well this is exactly what defense secretary jim mattis said at a briefing several days ago where he didn't have solid intelligence on any chemical attack and do know what he did have were social media reports people saying stuff on the internet and who were those people the same people that state department spokes person who are now it's referring to there the syrian white helmets which has been funded to the tune of at least twenty three million dollars by the state
department. the luck of concrete proof that the top took place has been raised by some officials and i condemn excess but such questions are often dismissed by the media as russian propaganda for example have a look at this b.b.c. interview. if he has used chemical weapons it's absolutely right to rafa crosses knuckles but i just wonder you know we have had some bad experiences on intelligence given that we're in an information war with russia on so many fronts to you think perhaps it's inadvisable to be stating this so publicly given your your position and your profile isn't there a danger that you're muddying the water. that was a retired senior officer of the royal navy allen west are questioning whether there was enough intelligence for the west to claim assad was using chemical weapons but the b.b.c. presenter suggested such comments shouldn't be made publicly because they fall into line with the official position of moscow we've requested a comment from the channel and we'll bring you any response but it's not just the
b.b.c. the times newspapers publish an article labeling those who have questioned the evidence of the attack as apologists artie's east our league has been taking a closer look. one of the people pointed out or singled out in the times article is louis all day the times said that he had written a tweet calling into question the account of previous chemical attacks mr all day has since gone on twitter and shown that he never sent the tweet and has demanded an apology from the times another example is tim hayward he's another academic here in the u.k. and he's been seen as being guilty of association because he's written for. publication called twenty first century wire whose deputy editor has also come in for criticism by the times her name is vanessa beatty so all of these kind of
examples showing that to stray from the dominant narrative all of the war in syria will lead you to being accused of being an ass that apology apologise that's been the criticism of some here in the u.k. and there are those who say that this current environment again resembling somewhat of a witch hunt isn't conducive to free speech and to free investigation an inquiry over the events of not just the weekend but the past seven years of the u.k.'s policy towards syria and its support of the opposition groups there international politics lecturer dr tara mccormick reveals what it's like to be one of the academics on the receiving end of the times attack. well i mean it's not ridiculous you know within the working group we have a range of different opinions oh and international relations and so probably have tweeted various things about alleged chemical attack tweeting to snopes signifie
necessarily and to us that's also a different thing from academic research that it exists or to bizarro i tend to smear guilt by association piece social media. ridiculous attempt simply to shut down the working group that presumably may be asking questions that the times doesn't think should be. all in all it's all right to british journalism and threats academic freedom and free speech and when you carry the. british prime minister to resign my french president emanuel have come under heavy criticism from u.k. and the e.u. lawmakers after the decision to strike syria without consulting the national parliaments for example these are members of the european parliament during president speech that many of them held up signs calling for an end to military action in syria. and there are two to reports about the backlash the leaders are
receiving. what phrase or touch of only three countries have been to v for the honor of the international community in a legitimates multilateral framework you know it's all gets a. least a marker and speech was a monument of political cynicism. and when we want without any approval. of the polls months why have we hidden the fact that the area of eastern ghouta where the alleged chemical attack took place is controlled by radical islamists not jewish shop or you'd be there it's been done already in iraq and libya why should we be aired in syria to the list but there has been a backlash for him for a manual on the fact that he didn't ask for policy permission i know people have not necessary decisions going forward but he was actually grilled in parliament on monday these strikes demonstrate the irresponsible behavior of the three global
powers that yet again gave into the temptation to play the role of world's policeman now over in the u.k. theresa may the u.k.'s prime minister has also faced a group of parliamentary is led by the opposition leader jeremy corbyn that was a bit of table tennis it went on for over eight hours on day one and pretty similar day to the parliament should have as an absolute minimum age try and in law the opportunity to ask questions before the government can order planned military action the elected representatives in this house should be able to debate the deployment of british military forces into combat but that does not mean it is always appropriate the executive must be the servant of parliament not the other way round the members of this house seem to have less say in foreign policy of this country than president trump that no one in this house be in any doubt that neither i nor this government take instructions from any pressure
was. despite terrorism as far remarks in her defense we gave her reaction on the streets of london where people seem to think parliament should have been consulted. it was an emergency situation where there was no room for maneuver. but this is not an urgent it could have waited two days more. i don't think it's something she should have made a decision based on her general principle about going to war it should be. i think in this particular instance it was in a war situation. so you discuss it you know you're coming you know take it anywhere and much more consideration. when it's important decisions like this everyone should have a say like i do. represent everybody that you actually discussing doing it.
to me this is not a constitutional. democracy. so i don't want to. be on it. meanwhile the mayor. has spoken out against his city allowing a u.s. nuclear powered submarine to dock the submarine was later used to shoot missiles on syria. several days ago we received a note from the port authority informing us of the presence of the american nuclear powered something we passed a resolution in twenty fifteen which he does ignite at the ports of naples as a denuclearized area so vessels that nuclear power will carry nuclear weapons have no right to be here we are city of peace we are against nuclear weapons we want to mediterranean sea in a state of peace not war you know. following the weekend bombing raids in syria a bipartisan group of u.s. senators has unveiled new legislation to limit the white house's power to continue
its global war on terror. for too long congress has given presidents a blank check to wage war we've let the nine eleven iraq war authorizations get strange to justify was against multiple terrorist groups and over a dozen countries from nigeria to the philippines a proposal finally repeals those authorizations inmates congress do its job by weighing in on where when and with who we are at war their proposed legislation would require the president to give congress forty eight hours notice ahead of any new minutes reaction congress would then have sixty days to review that move and doesn't set a limit for any military action however it includes a congressional review every four years another proposal also expands the president's authority to take action against al qaeda isis or the taliban but not a state where the current war powers have been in place since well since nine eleven and have been used nearly forty times in fourteen countries we discussed the
proposed overhaul with former u.s. congressman and presidential candidate ron paul. absolutely and i have to say that i voted the i voted for that resolution it gives the authority to the president to go after the people responsible for nine eleven so they've used that ever since they claim they have to rewrite it we don't believe there's anybody even living today hardly there had a thing to do with the nine eleven attacks. it more or less is defining things slightly differently but one slow up i think the effort to go to war i don't think it really repeals their war powers resolution but it does say the congress gives the president authority to go to war against radical violent groups like al qaida and i says and maybe taleban but they say not a country. i really don't think it's going to pass. we'll see
i only welcome the debate but i think they'll wake up and find out it's not doing anything and that when they pass these resolutions most of the time things hit worse so this whole idea that you can fight radicals any place in the world that's what they're doing already it just gives more authority to the type of policy that we've been following and getting us into trouble. are still to come here on the international reports that the us administration has held direct talks with kim jong il north korea details shortly.
but politicians do something to. put themselves on the line to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president. or somehow want to listen. to the right to be close this is like the local tree in the morning can't be good. i'm interested always in the waters in the. city. and it's good to have you with us today thanks for joining us
a new documentary cold in the execution as shadow pulls back the curtain on the subject of capital punishment through three different stories claiming race is at the heart of decision making when it comes to the death penalty in the united states. my team members take pride. in this person brady. had looked was a wanted to know who. said he didn't mean for. the thing that i didn't give him. even do anything. you don't know because you want my shoes. recent figures rafale black people make up around forty two percent of those on death row but comprise only about thirteen percent of the u.s.
population in addition they are far more likely to be given death sentences in cases of interracial killings we spoke to those behind the film the racial application of the death penalty is that an act. that not to look so much at skin color the perpetrator to skin color of the victim if the if the murder victim is white. then the prosecuting attorney is four to eleven times more likely to seek a death penalty and if the victim were black and so what message is the justice system send to society one way that can be interpreted is that white life is worth more than black wife we're going to punish people who kill a white person. more severely and we are. going to have their more black forever nine executions there is one exoneration so for every nine inmates executed one
person is found innocent i think that's the most startling in the in the context of the innocence and how angry just this could be and as our executioner. the jury givens are the former executioner of the state of virginia states one of the things that i think is really. something that he expresses so well in the film and is this idea that it's it's an imperfect system works human we make errors and there are errors being made in the criminal justice system and as long as that straight we should not be executing people. a self-styled amateur journalist in the u.k. is claiming police are not doing enough over death threats she's received online. english is known to have posted hateful comments such as islam is worse than cancer and such posts have provoked an aggressive reaction but according to police haven't
taken her complaints about it seriously for example this was an e-mail allegedly received by june i have from the greater manchester police in it she's warned of consequences resulting from comments she's made online. was also told to consider the freedom of expression of others and without any details of those said to be harassing her there would be no investigation in the end she was advised not to post anything likely to cause offense. we are the greater manchester police for comment and. is under review and hopes to contact shortly so we invited guests to debate the issues around this case well actually i know personally and i see your ass questioned sometimes there on comparable questions sometimes they're questions people don't particularly want to answer and i don't i'm an atheist i criticize christianity critize judaism i criticize islam criticize any faith but
it's only when islam is criticized suddenly it's hate speech we have rules about freedom of expression freedom of belief and freedom of conscience however there are limits to those rules and it's very dangerous to draw some kind of moral equivalence between people who are fascists or near nazis are spreading and inciting violence or hate preaching when people behave like that they should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law so everybody has to suffer the consequences of freedom of speech means yes sometimes somebody might say something that could offend you she has a right to an opinion nobody and i mean nobody has the right to put a death threat on anybody for any reason because an offended because they were offended by an opinion do you agree if somebody speech tell you bear with me if you agree that do you agree that if somebody speech crosses the line into hatred inciting hatred or harrison or is racist or sexist or anti semitic do you
agree that these people should be do you agree that these people should be prosecuted to the absolute maximum extent of the law and is against british and english values i believe in free speech including yours even though i don't agree with your opinion on the question will. do i think you crossed the line yes i do i think you should be prosecuted because of your opinion now i don't death threats on. every except it will never excuse you are now far worse than any mean work it's because words don't kill actions day and deaf rates can be carried out. a seventeen year old school student in central russia has attacked his class and tried to set it on fire in the town of mark according to investigators he stabbed one of his classmates and a teacher before dousing the room in a flammable liquid and setting it to light the fire alarm then went off in the
building was evacuated he's since been charged with attempted murder in fact the attacker also stabbed himself in an apparent suicide attempt it's being reported the youth had learning difficulties and all those injured have been taken to hospital including the perpetrator himself. so he's are due to hold the president and face to face talks with north korea's leader later this year but donald trump appeared to suggest they've already been talking. during a press briefing with the japanese prime minister said discussions with north korea at almost the highest level although the white house later clarified saying the administration was in direct talks with kim jong un not the us president himself
comes as reports claim the cia director mike peo paid a secret visit to north korea over easter human rights attorney eric's a rock and believes it doesn't really matter who's been talking to pyongyang as long as the intentions are good. you know at this point in time there is a lot of optimism and the optimism that they will talk the optimism that they see this as a legacy issue for him while undergoing incredible screwed scrutiny and tough times here in the states and so with that in mind we don't know quite what can come about with this what we do know is there have been talks at the highest level whether you believe the washington post story and the cia director visiting north korea but we do know that they're laying the groundwork groundwork for talks but we don't know is how sincere they are in bending in. mutual compromises in the
context of international agreements and that has yet to be seen this is aleksey international thanks for joining us on this wednesday we were toying with more at the top of the hour. this is a piece it is. angeles when the u.s. military moved out the six tourists moved in. and now a whole generation of fatherless children is growing up here. dad and. uncle. my big day is a gem like you like. son . sorry it isn't the first time thanks to the
t.v. crew you see orange and takes you were in won't answer is a problem that no one but it's through your. bedsit that i do what my god did. they know that. you can take a gilet above it you can take the burden of guilt. free no woman you know. oh i love doing it i did it you could get it if you. would lol make this manufacture consent instinctive public wells. in the room in clusters and protect themselves. with the fine merry
go round me the one percent. we can all middle of the room sick. the real news group. welcome to max kaiser financial survival guide. looking forward to your pension account. yanks this is what happens to pensions in britain. watched kaiser report. this is boom bust broadcasting around the world from washington d.c.
i'm bart chilton coming up today some banks up announce their first quarter profits as markets continue this season told us to c.e.o. of scroll mark the report which will weigh in and it's tax day in the united states and if you drive a car they'll tax the street if you try to sit they'll tax your seat if you get to call the tax thing eat you take a walk they'll tax your feet george harrison we miss you r t correspondent ashley banks report from ground zero on taxes is turning revenue service headquarters right here in washington and she's back lauren fix the car coach talks of global autos and trade and gives us her you on some of the new developments in the auto industry plus there's media and merger news as the federal communications commission decides not to investigate sinclair media but there's another investigation that some members of congress see as sinclair tries to buy tribune media collins cook posted the big picture here on r.g.p.
america gives us his learned take on the media all that ahead but first let's get to some headlines. it is tax day and the supreme court is hearing arguments about if states should be allowed to collect taxes from online purchases states cannot currently require online retailer retailers like amazon for example to collect and then return those taxes to states from residents who order them online unless the retailer does have a physical presence in the state in question the case south dakota versus wayfair incorporated is expected to be decided by the supreme in june. according to the. wall street journal the demand for lithium what has been referred to as white petroleum since it's so valuable is gaining rekindled traction in europe particularly in germany and the czech republic where there are still areas to be mined as opposed to australia and south america where it is said that chinese companies have already secured rights to the large majority of mining areas lithium
with with it's very light weight is used in batteries for everything from phones to electric vehicles according to a report in two thousand and by two thousand and twenty five the lithium ion battery market will be worth more than ninety billion dollars and earlier this month reported that serve martin sorrell the c.e.o. of giant advertising and p.r. firm w p p was being internally investigated for misuse of company funds as a result of concerns of the w p p board well now serve martin is resigning and two longtime w p p executives mark reed and andrew scott will fill his shoes the investigation is not yet complete answer martin continues to deny any wrongdoing also have notes or martin does not have a no compete cause in his arrangement with w p p so at least theoretically he could start a competitive advertising and.