he. in the wake of wednesday's terror attack and. defends itself against claims is fueling extremism. is in serious crisis stricken province with government forces on the russian propelling an offensive but rebels look at what's at stake for the external powers involved in the conflict. and residents of a central ukrainian town clashed with police as the authorities attempt to place evacuees from china. to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus.
thanks for joining us in our to internationals and i'm daniel hawkins welcome to the program. a leading politicians in germany have bitterly criticized the anti modern day of the party in the wake of wednesday's racially motivated mass shooting in which left 9 people dead. haven't established a direct link between the attack on the party. has helped for mend an atmosphere of xenophobia and hatred. but that at 1st glance it looks like it was a lone wolf but sadly the one man the girl on the outside but they were those who had provided him with this i mean mission and the da is definitely mom gifted and germany struggles to come to terms with the events of this week's tragic slayings we've seen politicians from the christian democratic union the social democrats
they are part of the ruling coalition as well as the left party and the greens as well coming out and accusing alternative media if they are funding the flames of far right extremism in the country of course there's a direct connection between the growing strength of the f.d.a. and the increase in right wing violence citizens of foreign descent are being denied their human dignity it's so dangerous because it brings some to a point where they commit a crime here we have a fatal disinhibited at work and the f. d. bears responsibility for that too 9 people were killed this week 2 shooting incidents at 2 separate she should bars in the city of homs now all of those that were killed were from an immigrant background most of them were young people as well we heard from one i witnessed he described for us the scenes of that night down condom on the man came in and started shooting at a kiosk then he came to us he shot the 1st person in the head then shot of the 2nd
person we'll drop down to the ground i pretended to be dead we all pretended to be dead we all fell down and he the shooter had emptied his magazine and by then and just run away. from my eyes i was ok i was still alive but i just didn't want to believe it was real i asked unit everything was ok he groaned he got me he got me there was a hole in his neck i shouted the other guy to ask if he was ok he hadn't seen a bullet in the shoulder yet he didn't see the blood as he was wearing a coat he said jamiroquai i stood up and saw interest lying is brother nothing it was dad and the others were lying there too so i went out and peeped into the key. ask the people in their route out i didn't know what to do i just couldn't believe it was happening or police have confirmed that the main suspect had killed himself his body was found alongside one of the 7 the mother the 42 year old own and 2 weapons legally the handgun that he used to carry out the attack had been modified
to allow it to release bullets quicker than alongside calls for tighter security and more surveillance of far right to vittie in germany there are also calls for tougher gun laws in the country as a bit strong as they have to use foreign policy speech in the bundestag he told us why he believes the party's coming in for so much criticism. killer was 'd a paranoid he was suits because of franek and the police said it very soon on. this guy had not connection to any any political group to any a ride to extremists to any right wing groups and what does what is terrible is the situation that the the all political parties are trying to stick it somehow to the a.f.p. this is the only way how can they manage to fight against us because they have no real political arguments and pull in the political discussion so therefore they are
always just trying to push us into a ride too in corner so that the people are afraid even to talk to ours to listen to our political arguments we are we are living in the in the very heavy political oppression in my mind we are not free. to express what we want our people are permanently under a tag of left extremist and. you know what what happened now is that we are putting in the corner where we don't belong. with tensions running high in syria's war torn italy province the leaders of turkey and russia held a phone call on friday to discuss ways of resolving the crisis both lot of protein and the red bird and said they remain committed to previous deescalation agreements a conversation comes a day after turkish forces and allied rebel fighters launched an offensive against
syrian government positions near the town of al let up. with an estimated 100000 people displaced by the violence to give us lawmakers a call for secretary of state to take diplomatic action against syria and russia at the same time the american military officials have also acknowledged the complexity of the situation in. admitting the province has become a haven for extremist factions. and seems to be a magnet for terrorist groups especially because it is an ungoverned space in many ways the rev wright of groups there all of them are a nuisance a menace in a threat to hundreds of thousands of civilians who are just trying to make it through the winter. it was a lot of takes a closer look now at how it has become a key flashpoint in the syrian conflict drawing in competing international policy.
pushes coming to shove in syria turkey and the us russia israel and multiple militant factions all skirmishing in the country and previous motives for warring fading into oblivion. it's time for assad to get out of the way. we have won against isis we've beaten them and we've beaten them badly all that is
a thing of the past now as new goals vividly take shape the latest fighting in ad lib is a mere accessory to the geopolitical connotation is global and regional superpower sparring with each other for dominance ideological and moral borders are blurred with turkey a nato country teaming up with terrorists to push syrians out of their own province. the operation is imminent in particular we will not leave it to the regime which is not yet understood our country's determination on this issue and those who are encouraging it but if you miss its making it live a safe place for both and the people of the region at all costs militants shamelessly boasting turkey provided a.p.c.'s coming on mars. covered by turkish artillery fire russia's air force joins the party together with the syrians
repairing the onslaught as moscow officially asks ankara to hold its fire and so it does to prevent militants from moving deeper into syria into su $24.00 aircraft of the russian air force at the request of the syrian command have carried out as strikes against the terror groups this allow the syrian troops to successful the ripple all attacks but turkey is not alone in this fight while jihadi groups are doing the bloody bidding on the ground washington cheers from over the atlantic that a very good job or say shit with president her why the fact is that he's fighting on it led he doesn't want people to be killed by the thousands and hundreds of thousands the united states will continue to coordinate with turkey on diplomatic approach is to restore a cease fire to the it led deescalation zone and achieve a pullback of assad regime forces to the 2800 so she ceasefire lines the
u.s. has its own stake in the syria war and it hasn't signed on very particular and well predictable prizes from geo political dominance to well oiled we did leave so just because we're keeping the oil we may have to fight for the oil that's ok i like the oil and there's yet another act in this conflict israeli jets routinely hit targets on syrian soil it's clear what israel wants to to weaken iran's influence yet another power playing its hand and this massive and messy political gamble unfortunately for the people of syria since 2011 their country has been used as a chessboard on which the syrians appear as pawns and it's somebody else's geo strategic chess board. in particular the united states and its allies basically tore syria apart partly designed to topple the secular legitimate government in
syria the sovereign government the government recognized by the united nations partly to topple that government and partly to claim different parts of syria for themselves syria has an important place in geo strategic we in geographically in this resource rich region of the middle east it also has. so yes what we've seen the tragedy of syria the tragedy of the so-called civil war it's actually a proxy war by international players using the syrian country the syrian battlefield as a proxy battlefield. the united nations has sharply criticized the rises in central ukraine off they attacked of bus taking evacuees from china to a quarantine facility during the spread of the new coronavirus thousands of locals who normally sons are you demonstrate that against the arrival of 45 nationals and 27 foreigners from the city at the epicenter of the.
you. know the flight from the chinese city of on where tens of thousands of people have been infected landed in the ukrainian city of caulk off on thursday the clashes left none police officers and one civilian engines cool to has the story. say some new people moved into the neighborhood they came from the epicenter of the deadly coronavirus pandemic perhaps you'd be worried or angry but it would be hard to match the anger brewing in ukraine to just that situation. oh. cool.
for the past several days ukraine has seen violent clashes across the country scores of policemen have been injured by locals throwing bricks riot police have been called in to disperse angry mobs and it's all because the ukrainian authorities tried to do a good deed for the international community they accepted with open arms a number of their countrymen and foreigners trying to flee by plane assuring the public the passengers were 100 percent coronavirus clean an important detail when ukraine itself has yet to see a case of the disease a quarantine zone was even set up at a health center in poltava just to be sure but the protesters did all they could to stop that plane from landing and when that failed they started blocking roads until riot police removed them by force. cooper.
the number of. the buses made it to their destination in the end but there on welcome reception wasn't exactly what kiev expected presidency lansky even called out the protesters for showing the uglier side of their humanity it's a shame the not all of us can be proud of the humane reaction the efforts to show funny ways to. spittles not to let ukrainians back to ukraine we're not demonstrating the best of our character here especially given the majority of the passengers are under 30 to most diverse they are almost children children are not ukraine's protesters don't seem to be up for a game of russian roulette with the coronavirus. the new york times has provoked a storm of controversy by publishing an opinion piece by the deputy leader of the
taliban in afghanistan while the article calls for a lasting peace agreement with the us it fails to mention the author's brutal past and history of alleged war crimes. when our representatives started negotiating with the united states in $28.00 in our confidence of the talks would yield results was close to 0 we do not trust american intentions after 18 years of war and several previous attempts in negotiation that had proof futile everyone has lost somebody they loved everyone is tired of war i'm convinced of the killing and the maiming must stop. well the author is among the world's most wanted men of the f.b.i. office $5000000.00 for any information that could lead to his arrest shows you doing carney who's a designated terrorist in the united states is the scryer by the agency's website is armed and dangerous the afghan government has also criticized the new york times the surgeon to give him a platform it is the new york times has given the platform to an individual who is
on a designated terrorist list he and his network are behind ruthless attacks against some foreigners or the u.s. doesn't view the taliban itself the afghan taliban itself rather as a terror group only its pakistan based branch that distinction though seems the volute america's top diplomat has been involved in trying to broker a peace deal. on the ground road now trying to negotiate. in afghanistan trying to find a way to go to. war. after the backlash new york times defended the decision to publish the article it says it's essential to represent all viewpoints on the conflict particularly given the progress being made in the talks we can go live now to get or so lauren legal editor of sparks online and stephen morris from the english democrats thanks both for joining us gentlemen great to have you both on the program today. if i can start with you perhaps i mean ultimately this is a decision that is with the new york times with the publisher to publish or not to
publish to give the platform to were designated terrorist on the platform is this the right decision. i think it's an extraordinary decision i think the editorial team of the new york times or to think very carefully about the decision i think they should think about whether they would publish an article for example by a far right terrorist and question whether or not they would apply their principles universally but nonetheless i think it's a defensible decision hakani is certainly a terrorist he's the head of the colony network who led terroristic attacks against afghanistan the civilians for years bombings in villages civilians calls completely indiscriminate violence he even targeted one of the new york times' own journalists took him hostage so he's a very dangerous individual and his article i think is not credible really it's a piece of opinion that has been thrown open to scrutiny from all angles in america
you know the idea that it's the taliban that have been brokering for peace that everyone is tired of war etc all of that's been held open to a lot of scrutiny but nonetheless the bottom line has to be editorial freedom and editorial judgment and i think the way that we combat this i think what i've been very worried about is the tendency to say that it was entirely wrong to publish it and therefore the. new york times should be censored in some way i think all editorial judgment should be questioned and i think this one is defensible on the basis that this is an individual who is engaged in a conflict he's a nasty individual but perhaps his his writing can bring some insight and is worthy of discussion so i think on the on fundamentally it's a defendable decision but one that should be debated and discussed stephen is not something i'd agree with the editorial freedom showing all sides and showing a point of view of somebody who's involved in these negotiations would you agree with that. actually on the basis that the it's all about free speech
being open to debate and discussion and just like your guest said we've got to be able to hear the views points of everybody and open debate and obviously in the u.k. we know that our thoughts of negotiations and discussions with groups in northern ireland now without them talks going on behind closed doors or in secret would we have actually had peace in northern ireland the political wing has now because it's because i got the largest vote in southern ireland in the elections so things can change but you've got to be open and you've got to be able to listen to it and discuss everything and if people don't like what the new york times you say then go get some of the media you know you've always got the freedom to choose and the freedom to choose somewhere to get your news if you wish but you have to debate all of what we're for free speech i mean. obviously talks with fame with other
terrorist groups at the time on closed doors but it's not a bit different to actually publishing his opinions in an opinion piece of an article i mean you quite rightly mention a new york times journalist was actually held hostage there surely that's a slap in the face too to their employee. yeah i think i actually think the form of this was slightly unusual the idea that it was presented neutrally as an opinion piece. i think may well into course be reflected on as an editorial misjudgment i think it has caused some consternation because obviously people work extremely hard to be opinion writers for the new york times it's not a position usually that's adopted by outliers like carney and you know while he is a participant in this you know most of the world recognizes that he is currently engaged in terroristic activities against afghan civilians so i think that the decision to present it as an opinion piece was an unusual one and one that should be open to question but i do think fundamentally the new york times should be entitled to publish what they choose. stephen. you know quite rightly that
the entire month of the new york times to publish what is shoes but be open to critique and debate and judgment on that i suppose the question is where would you draw the line here i mean the taliban the afghanistan branches that actually listed as a terrorist organization this individual is i mean many people are going to say what's next you know publishing articles by you know isis leaders or you know people along those lines where is the line here between freedom of speech as we say and you know publishing hate speech. well it's freedom of speech in that so you can soon as you start to limit what can or can't be said then you no longer freedom of speech then you start to what level do you set out to set in that levels the idea is that you have that freedom to say you have that and then people have the freedom to question that view and we've seen many once politicians have been questioned on a particular view it shown to be a ridiculous point but if you keep this is really
a no platform situation with them if you keep no platform and then people get the wrong view of them soon as you open it up debate to find out how. in the eyes of the public then it becomes more obvious but at the moment just no platform of stopping the free speech nobody's really going to question and. obviously we would look at the free speech or of extended then we then open it up to can we talk about the issues in england with particularly with religious groups in rochdale manchester leicester and all these a lot without getting the same kind of vilified for raising the points so yes let's our freedom of speech let it all be out there let's debate it. and then move forward you know if you don't like the debate then go somewhere else and listen to some of the news. yes sorry what
what i would say is this like qualified that perhaps of course were absolute freedom of speech but i think the decision to publish this as an op-ed perhaps cannot be understated you know the new york times is arguably one of the most wolk newspapers in the world and i think there is something extraordinary about the decision to publish this almost without question a piece which is largely without much journalistic merrit i would say you know the piece itself is basically propaganda for the taliban so i think we do have to question you know why is it that they are so willing to publish the leader of an islamic terror organization so openly as though they were right for their own stuff and why they don't embrace you know why is it this particular individual who is free to be published as though they were watching the new york times i think there is a legitimate questions to be asked there and i think something about it is related to the kind of woke atmosphere we live in now that almost. is a mysterious or less bad than other kinds of terrorists that exist in the world i
think that's something that should probably be open to interrogation and i think if you know as i said previously we would question the judgment of the new york times if they publish an article by this brave as though it were some piece you know the far right terrorist who killed hundreds of citizens in norway if we published him as though he were any other individual the new york times star would open up to serious question and i think the same should be asked of carney the decision with respect to how carney we should ask why is it this particular terrorist who manages to make his way into the new york times pages with almost without question it does seem to be extraordinary editorial decision. well let's take it back a little bit in the u.k. if we take about it wasn't so but the leader of a organization the leader of the once he was given a platform on the question time in the u.k. it was shown how daft position walls and himself was and then the be impeached to collapse. so once the support from the on the platform and the
debated with it was shown to be ridiculous and that was form of the collapse now yes the new york times we don't know what's going on in the background is this a form of link between the afghanistan taliban and the new york times to the u.s. government to try and open some form of dialogue why and we just don't know and that may be the reason why it's been done the way hearts we don't know like we say with northern ireland which is our closest competitor we can use is the world's winds of communication open door to the provisional. to bring the actual peace now some of them people did later become politicians and leaders of political parties in that group even the how to. a violent background but sometimes the dialogue has to be opened in some direction and this may just be that. which may be out the norm but it may just be looking at how important do you
think the context of this publication was in the sense that you mentioned you know under sporadic there for comparison if an article by him was published that the taliban is involved in in negotiations with america and you know people have to see i guess their point of view to see how the peace process is going do you think this article is published given the circumstance of the negotiations where as an article by a far right extremist breivik a that example would have an entirely different context here. it's very difficult to know whether carney has direct access to the internal machinations of these negotiations it's very difficult to know whether his reporting of those negotiations is a tool accurately claims that they are on the brink of achieving what they apparently set out to do which was achieve the withdrawal of u.s. troops from afghanistan they claim that everyone. moving towards that goal we have
no idea where this represents an accurate portrayal and in fact it could do more damage to the negotiations long term if the american administration see this as exposing a vulnerability in their lives and then that could throw up its own difficulties so i think the question as to whether or not it was a good editorial decision is an open one of course the new york times should be able to take that decision but nonetheless it's an extra as i say it's an extraordinary decision the should be questioned and open to judgment i think the context is important but i think only time will tell what the effect of publishing this piece will be roger the. legal editor of spot magazine and democrats thanks both so much for coming on today great to get both points of view. britain's largest defense and aerospace company systems as receive the barrel of criticism on line after its chief executive boasted the film the firm made
a bumper profits last year. $29.00 seems a good year for the company we grew sales by 7 percent. and that enabled us to grow our dividend by 4 and a half percent which is the greatest increase we've had of dividends in the past 8 years. systems is the largest defense contractor in europe on the 4th largest in the worlds among its most lucrative markets is saudi arabia which accounts for 15 percent of its annual group earnings the company's dealings with the riyadh have been repeatedly called into question though over accusations the gulf kingdom has committed numerous war crimes in yemen. where saudi arabia became involved in the conflict there in 2015 as it had to feed in support of the internationally
recognized government in its fight against things the rebels since then the war has claimed over 100000 lives many more people have been displaced be has always insisted it's come but it's complies with the on was licensing regulations but that's not stopping the criticism online. so glad killing people has brought you a nice dividend manufacturing weapons of death and sell them to questionable states to murder kids but well done. systems profits more than just financial killing knives didn't at the expense of human lives murderers and just myth as a media coordinator for the campaign against the arm straight told us earlier their governments need to take a far more stringent approach to weapon sales. criticism of he has to be that it is arming and supporting some of the digital age oppressive regimes and while just as
putting an end to the war zone in yemen which is make the situation in measurably worse because great no thanks to jets which are made by the system and are flying over yemen they're firing missiles which you need by. missile company which has one vote on the systems blog about what is going on for more we have profiteered because we're every bit as war and conflict there will always be major arms companies trying to profit from it because the problem isn't just the companies that will become pleased to have responsibility of a problem arbet governments who are taking such a relaxed approach to arms that the arms control and are actively arming and supporting human rights abusing regimes dictatorships in war zones around its bat's lead is about level of political support for the arms industry which really needs which needs to stop immediately up next the latest pot and deal for going to science should more democratic debates in the united states as well as other news on what's in a lot.