president trump. conflict would mean the official end of the run while president rouhani says his country has no interest in going to war and is ready for a crisis. president bush says he has urged iran to stick to the 2015 nuclear agreement despite the u.s. withdrawal. and tech giants unveiled new rules to crack down on violent content after criticism of their handling of the christ church mosque attacks. but if this was an actual real live stream of child pornography nobody would be even debating the. technology. these videos.
this is our international i'm. glad. the us president has issued yet another warning to iran tweeting that if you're wrong wants to fight then it will be the official end of iran this is despite an offer from president hassan rouhani to hold crisis talks to resolve the ongoing standoff in the persian gulf. mine look we welcome to go we do not negotiate with a party that behaves like a bully and takes a knife out of his pocket and forces and. we do not hold such negotiations with anybody their neighbors are spreading stability everywhere we go in the middle east a. major destabilizing influence in the middle east spread death destruction and the leaders of iran are. the world's largest financier of international terrorism
behind every problem is a wreck and we've been trying to do is get it wrong to behave like an old patient. the us has been waging what it calls a maximum pressure campaign against iran since withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal last year washington has imposed several rounds of sanctions and earlier this month tehran responded by saying it could scale up its uranium enrichment with more on the dispute here is what he's done your home. seems now although hostilities have reached new heights the u.s. has issued a security alert all its non-emergency personnel in iraq asking them to immediately depart from the u.s. embassy in baghdad and from the consulate bill that's an order that relates to all non-emergency personnel why the sudden panic well this security alert mentions no specific threats or reasons nevertheless though officials haven't explained these
recent developments and how any sort of iranian threat would actually manifest itself to harm u.s. personnel tensions were wrapped up last week when the u.s. deployed an aircraft carrier group complete with bombers to the region iran is the squad all such moves are psychological warfare. stating that they're not looking for confrontation or war but they would respond to anything made viewed as u.s. aggression that some. view of that echoed by washington as well now the root of all of these recent troubles this reason this glacial was of course troops withdraw from iran nuclear treaty that was criticized roundly by the other signatories party to that agreement it was followed by threats of sanctions saber rattling and rhetoric on all sides certainly things are not slowing down and concerns globally are growing of just how far things can be pushed to the brink and you see this type of high you can't help it but you remember what the united states did when they wanted to attack iraq in 2003 come and go the. bogus intelligence.
issues that really is something that should be taken seriously at the same people john bolton. working work for the u.s. government that gives us national security. and he wrote an article in march of 2015 calling for a military strike on iran iran is not interested in a mirror to confrontation with the united states so when you look at the u.s. history you see false flag operations you see different types of initiatives when the u.s. wants to attack a country they come up with excuses so i hope we are not seeing a repeat of this. iran was a key focus of the discussions between the top diplomats of russia and the u.s. this weekend in the black sea resort of sochi the russian president was there as well and urged tehran to stick to the 2015 nuclear deal despite the u.s.
pointing out. american solution to go a little americans have withdrawn from the iran nuclear deal so the deal is coming apart european countries can't do anything to save it and can't really cooperate with iran to compensate their economic losses but as soon as iran makes its 1st steps in responding and announces its withdrawal everyone will immediately forget that it was the us who initiated the collapse and everyone will end up blaming it all on iran russia saying that it believes the iranian nuclear deal of 2015 is the best option going forward it's a system a platform a framework that's already established that will guarantee to the international community that iran is in pursuing nuclear weapons the united states agreeing to disagree the united states will continue to apply pressure to the regime in tehran until its leadership is prepared to return to the ranks of responsible nations that
do not threaten their neighbors or spread instability or terror or mouse and we have many disagreements on iran now but the fact that we've started talking on this issue gives us hope that we will be able to achieve agreements if both sides show willingness to do that nevertheless both sides have said that you know they will continue to work together on coming up with some sort of solution along with the other signatories of the iran iranian nuclear deal. and venezuela we have disagreement i urge my russian colleagues to support the venezuelan people as they return democracy to their country. the united states and more than 50 other nations agree that the time has come for nicolas maduro to go he's brought nothing but misery to the venezuelan people. and we hope that the russians support form a durable will and the markets are still in use them a democracy can be imposed by force the threats coming both from u.s.
officials and the opposition leader. who's always reminding us of the possibility of military intervention have nothing to do with democracy. what booth countries seem to agree on is that it's very well and that should decide what happens to their country they've managed to talk about all their differences and they've managed to say to each other we disagree on this this is how we see it. 5 internet giants have committed to combating violent content online after world leaders urge them to do so at a summit in paris on wednesday this follows the recent terrorist attack in christchurch new zealand which was live streamed on facebook and widely shared on other platforms terrorism and violent extremism a complex societal problems that required all of society response for the commitments we are making today will further strengthen the partnership the government society on the technology industry must have to address these threats. well the tech firms including google and microsoft have agreed to ban anyone who
shares violent or extremist content they've also pledged to follow up on material flagged as terrorist propaganda more promptly while the new rules for live streams will be implemented in new zealand 10 people have been charged for sharing the video of the christ church massacre reminder in march this year a gunman killed $51.00 people in 2 mosques the video was uploaded more than a 1000000 times on facebook after the live stream. we discussed the leads to efforts to stamp out extremist content with privacy act was bill new media analyst lionel and rights attorney jennifer britt. you have an army not just with facebook but with twitter there's an army of contractors employees and other people who are there to immediately get it off right away as has been stated this happens with people that espouse certain political opinions and other ideologies and so now we're talking about you know we're talking about getting off far more egregious
things monitoring or moderating in real time what these videos are and what we come to and is funding some research to try and improve their ability to detect this in real time with sort of automated means which is absolutely necessary given the volume of content but the technology simply isn't up to it yet the idea of somebody actually showing in broadcasting real time the slaughter of human beings i make it even simpler what if this was an actual real time live stream of child pornography nobody would be even debating this i would say you've got to fix this technology and now this is nothing to do with freedom of expression nothing to do with the dissemination of ideas in no way does it violate and by the way very quickly safe book has the most incredible celerity what it comes to shutting down and immediately knocking somebody off who are spouses a poll a little opinion just by merely supporting somebody you need to recognize the fact
that a 1000000 copies were taken down effectively and we need to actually take it off to facebook the fact that it did take down so many different gopi there would have been any number of different videos being all being shot 17 you slowly and i say dealing with all those in real time would be almost impossible but those were the perpetrators do you punish them is that report told do you allow that what about people who are filming atrocities in miami they're doing genuine reports do you allow that if it appears. to be atrocious attacks therefore we actually have to be slightly more realistic than saying oh the technology could do it come on get you move get a move over there it's a formal complicated challenge and they have i do believe and i know that they have this technology not only do they have that they have hundreds upon thousands of employees of contractors of people whose jobs it is to sit there and to see what's coming up and the moment something that is violent that is agree just that is horrific the horrific thing about this is that we are now given social media giants
like facebook and twitter a very very severe amount of power that was supposed to only be a spouse of the us government federal government and state governments under the 1st amendment and now it's as if social media giants and platforms like facebook or twitter have taken over the you know what you guys have your 1st amendment governments you can't do anything we're the ones who dictate your speech now that's dangerous and that's something that needs to be consistently watched i don't want to hear anybody tell me that the technology is not there or there's no way to monitor this because let me tell you something if this war is something that was contrary to the zuckerberg world view it would be awful for anybody even thought it so they're dragging their feet it's nonsense and they know exactly what has to be done and they're simply not doing it. the pentagon has reportedly developed a secret weapon nicknamed a ninja bomb it is a missile with blades designed to improve the accuracy of drone strikes or to scale
up in house. drone warfare has long been part of the u.s. government's war on terror and it's gotten ugly on more than one occasion. killing. drones basically sitting on a screen and eliminating people. dehumanizing them treating them. as if you know from some other planet not giving them a basic right of proving their innocence i mean it it but. norms of justice on top of that it's all classified so leaking the methodology behind what human rights groups have called a method for extrajudicial executions can get you in
a lot of trouble for daniel hale and n.s.a. officer and now suspected whistleblower that could mean up to 15 years in jail now to be fair u.s. leaders have long talked about their deep conviction over civilian deaths the architecture of the legal texture around the use of drone strikes or other committed strikes wasn't as precise as it should have been and there's no doubt that civilians were killed but shouldn't have been apparently it was u.s. president barack obama who ordered the creation of a new missile device that would increase the percentage in accuracy of these predator drone strikes and minimize civilian casualties it's apparently called the ninja bomb now it may be the pentagon's worst kept secret they have not officially confirmed it but so far several military officials have said that it's being used it's argued that the new missile might enhance the image of the united states in the countries that are already subject to u.s. military drone strike operations unlike
a regular missile it doesn't explode instead it deploys 6 blades that fan out of its casing moments before impact blades are so sharp they can cut through vehicles and slice their target into pieces so we've got blades flinging through the air in order to reduce civilian casualties sounds plausible enough apparently the new ninja bomb has already been used in iraq libya syria somalia and yemen so is this new missile the answer will it improve the image. the drone strike program in the eyes of the american public what do you think of the drone strike program. i'm ok with it i know nothing about it it's pretty awful actually we have this thing now called the bomb right and what it is is it and when it detonates it sends blades through the air and the idea is this will minimize civilian casualties we can pick the terrorist we want to kill send the ninja bomb and fewer civilians will be killed you know that the blades kill the. terrorists and not the civilians it
doesn't seem like that you can target maybe specific people with that seems like you'll just. spread out a lot of. a lot of damage i think that's also did a pretty good program number limit civilian casualties are going to do not that's not happening i think if somebody suggested that that. i had i don't think that is even real i don't think it really. will reduce who actually is i think this is a. pretty sick propaganda whatever you want to put it that way to make people look there's a kinder gentler way of killing people point of fact this is true assassination which well it's very rational. you my declaration of human rights kind of person that you're talking about. this is social you know also a hole in the notion of assassination whether precise or generalized is so totally unacceptable. we are sick of the pentagon to comment on the reports and we'll let
you know if we get a reply. united nations is urging u.k. not to grant amnesty to soldiers accused of war crimes this follows a proposal from the defense secretary to shield personnel from investigations into offenses dating back more than 10 years penny more dance plans have also been condemned by rights groups. it would be utterly disingenuous to have a presumption of non-prosecution for abuse yet at the same time claim justice is being solved british soldiers who break the law must face just like everyone else these proposals potentially set a dangerous precedent. anymore than to add to the controversy by saying that she would look like to extend the protections to troops who served in northern ireland with more on the story. the new boss in here has proposed a new law one that would presume soldiers innocent of any offenses committed throughout the course of a broad more than 10 years ago although that rule could have exceptions for example
if new evidence of alleged crimes were to come to light it is high time that we change the system and provide divide legal protections to make sure the decisions how service personnel taken the battlefield will not lead to repeated or unfair investigations down the line for the new defense secretary the new legislation is about making the system fairer and preventing what she called law fare repeated and unfair investigations against former soldiers this is no surprise at preventing someone who's committed a crime from facing justice this is about stopping an industry that surrounds these processes which is not about the pursuit of justice i had the iraq historic allegations team spent 7 years trolling through allegations of murder torture wrongdoing at a cost of 60000000 pounds to the taxpayer none of the claims resulted in
a prosecution and in 2016 the unit was shot down speaker i competed 2nd term as you know or with the infantry or associated units i lost many men. and i was involved in fatality shootings i was investigated along with others. the investigations were. aggressive a bloody awful to go through so well former soldiers and members of the military say that the amnesty doesn't go far enough that it needs to include northern ireland 2 human rights groups a concern that the government's desire to better protect its former and current servicemen and women will effectively place them above the law it's reported that there are around $150.00 investigations looking into alleged abuses by british soldiers in iraq and afghanistan the question is how the victims of those alleged
abuses will ever get justice if these new proposals become law because so many detained so many killed the troops are the reason for the total destruction of the fate of those detained by them remains unknown. and of course some against an amnesty because of the systematic killing some of the blood they said since no one cares and we have to demand our rides through international courts because we're just simple people who just can't go by as selves to get our voices heard because there is grave concern here that the crimes will be forgotten many people haven't received any compensation for the damage those who lost their homes or became disabled what they're trying to do is create an exemption from european human rights or for soldiers or fighters on the battlefield that's obviously really dangerous because obviously the back of the is one place that there's lots of very wonderful people civilians armed others who might not be after that whose human
rights need to get those soldiers should have understood what they need to say just sr if you committed you resolutions you get punished if you haven't you don't so there shouldn't be a blanket amnesty or exemption for anyone anywhere the government couldn't find an easy way to say that we will now bring all of these veterans back into the court and this will be our intention from the. if you between the philippines and canada over ways to disposal has escalated with manila recalling its ambassador and staff on wednesday that is after canada refused to take back 100 shipping containers of household waste it sent to the philippines back in 2013. that he. shows that we are. very serious and asking them to get back their garbage otherwise. severe relations with them it was later
discovered the waste had been mislabeled containing recyclable plastic in 2016 according to the philippines or the canadian company to take the waste to back but it continues to languish a landfill site last month the outspoken filipino president gave canada a stark warning after more than a year of waiting for the canadian prime minister to get things moving will declare war against canada we can take them down i'll return the trash just wait and see i will advice canada is on the way prepare a grand reception eat it if you want to it is theoretically possible to get it back but there's still a number of questions around who will pay for it where the financial responsibility is where the consequences are. however your foreign affairs analyst we spoke to in manila says justin has failed to make good on those earlier promises. very long time to fill them in size being unfortunately the recipient of top seek ways including nuclear waste all from the united states in software western allies so
discussion has been lingering for quite long time it canadian one of those however being a summer point for for the philippines part of your present road to go to terror there because with no plans or just entered the us here in the last 2 years to go for the odyssey and saw meet you promised that they were going to take back the price of garbage top see the car was left here lingered since 2030 and it to your scheme does not happen i mean you can even go over to say that this was a private deal between a canadian company and if filippi to conquer part of the 1st get it is also good say that you know it's not only can they get spoiled is also whoever was able to accept these back in 2013 the philippines this is the greatest diplomatic priciest president to long term holidays philippines and canada. the gas pipeline it being built from russia germany has passed a key milestone 50 percent of nord stream 2 has now been completed r t cellular
trying to gain exclusive access to one of the vessels the laying of the pipeline along the baltic sea bed. there you have it what's probably going to be the longest spaghetti strength in the world is making its way through the seawater and the cake is white say. a lot. so we're protected from germany we're protecting the french were perfect although the special and the numerous countries go out and make a pipeline here we're going. to be honest with run up to think it over i mean we
have probably all over the world political groups shouldn't really be a member of the un to the d.m.v. if you will not supply you someone else will still work if you get. now that does a from i'll be back with more the weekly and let's say 36 minutes you're talking to art international. those who they're supporting cost and they have they don't care about the mayor they don't care about this the beneath you know libya. if you think it is about their own agendas and so we might be bugged here for a long time to can be really a civil war that continues for for a long time. you know
world of big partisan movies a lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the back and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the troops the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks.
on the welcome to all the parties the just the solution may still be been manch in international circles but it's increasingly hollow and deceitful promise for these release and palestinians alike according to polls the majority on both sides find it either on. arable unfeasable thomas more of the status quo will it take to finally change tack well to discuss that i'm now joined by. professor of political science at the university of pennsylvania professor list it's good to talk to you thank you very much for your time glad to be here now i know that you personally started out as a supporter of the 2 state solution but then you changed your mind completely and i think for the majority of of our audience the state's between the river and the sea still seems like the most optimal and the fairest option why do you think it's good in theory and not so good in practice i put it this way you're correct back in need late 1600970 s.
i was i began to be interested in a 2 state solution and became very active both as an activist and as a scholar and studying it and i believed until maybe about 10 years ago that it was not only the prettiest picture of the future that i could imagine as plausible but also one that could be achieved through negotiations but as a result of the processes that i and others have been warning about for decades of de facto annexation of the west bank in the credible ization of the entire process polarisation and so on i no longer think that it's an achievable picture so is that there is one thing to discuss what's the best solution as far as well what would the prettiest picture of the future that you can imagine be the fairest one the prettiest one the most attractive but if you can't figure out a way to get there then it's not really a solution it's just a picture so i'm not really saying any of that there is a one state pretty picture either yet but i can tell you that there is no way to
get to a negotiated 2 state solution from where we are now and the continued attempt to do so is is retarding the process of actually making progress toward a demo. pratik solution for all the people who live between the sea in the river now about 2 years ago soon after president trumps inauguration you rode that by ending this almost obligatory fixation on the 2 state solution tom maybe all pointing at door for something more realistic do you still feel that way by accident i am reluctant to give credit to the president trying for just about anything but as the saying goes are broken watch is right twice a day and by accident away when he said at the beginning of his presidency that he'd be open to a 21 state or a 2 state solution whatever the is royson a ballot is going to agree on i think that was actually a smart thing to say and it recognized and in
a way the position of the white house that the 2 state solution is no longer achievable through negotiation is correct there is no way to given the legacy of american folsom support for israel the expansion essentially over the decades given the kind of political culture and political system that israel has developed there really isn't a way to negotiate something between palestinians and israelis on the other hand there are what i don't like about the question or trump plan and what is left out by the administration is that going forward when you think about alternatives to a 2 state solution or alternatives to the endless diplomatic merry go round it never leads to it you've got to focus on the idea of equal political rights for all people who are controlled by the same government palestinians in the west bank and effectively in gaza as well are controlled by the israeli government just as much
as the people who live within the green line and all of them should have the same rights to participate in the government that rules their lives that standard looking at equal rights for all is another way to end the occupation other than withdraw all now can i ask you one more. question about trump because i think what's interesting about your analysis is that you seem to be suggesting that trump despite professing himself as the biggest friend of israel is the 1st american president to accidentally or not question logic that you just mentioned of this merry go round unproductive negotiations that have become a bit of a ritual for every incoming american president and the ultimate with argue play into israel's hands i use saying that indirectly perhaps trumps approach may be more challenging for israel than let's say.