welcome to al jazeera. here are tonight's top stories. the secretary of state and russian foreign minister are heading to geneva to talk about syria's chemical weapons. both are bringing experts with them to talk about the details of putting the weapons under international controls. five permanent members wrapped off meeting tonight the discussion to create a syrian chemical weapons draft resolution. reports say the french version would give syria 15 days to declare their weapons and make them available for information before they are destroyed. tonight in new york the annual tribute in light shines into the sky to remember and honor the more than 3,000 people who died in new york.

the day began with bells and a moment of silence, to mark the 12th anniversary. similar ceremonies were held at the possibility upon and in pennsylvania this morning. a mixed day on wall street, the dow has a third straight trigle gain day. as fears ease of a military strike in syria, those are the headlines at this hour, consider this, is coming up next, and you can get the latest news on aljazeera.com. ♪ to do about the crisis in

syria. even if the asaad regime agrees to give up its chemical weapons is the plan workable. if it is, will everyone's least favorite option end up happening. also we have heard a lot about the u.s. a. spying the nsa, in particular, but it okay for schools to monitor their students social networks? if that protects them from bullying. we will check in on the tracking of teens. as america mourns its losses one man went from hero to vail lain. was the negative coverage of the head of the company that suffered more than any other on that horrible day wrong? hello, i'm antonio mora. welcome to consider this. president obama long awaits address to the neigh was a very different speech than what he expected to give, and what the world thought it would hear. now, a brand new clock is ticking on the russian proposal for international monitors to take and destroy syria's chemical weapons.

>> it is too early to tell whether this offer will succeed. in any agreement, must verify that the asaad regime keeps its commitments. but this initiative has the poteen to believe remove the threat of chemical weapons, without the use of force. >> al jazeera courtney keeley explains the unlikely evolution of an american military poised to strike after a red line was crossed to a far from certain diplomatic proposal from syria's staunchest allies. >> the long walk to the podium. >> over the past two years what began as a series of peaceful protests against the reprezzive regime of bashar al-asaad has turned into a brutal civil war. over 100,000 people have been killed. millions have fled the country. >> the president's speech peppered with ifs. >> if we fail to act, the regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. >> as he faces down one of the biggest foreign policy crisis during his tenure. same location, dramatically different

speech, where in the sprint of 2011 the president declared victory on the war of terror amongsting the debt of osama bin laden. he was poised to announce another moment, but then came the seemingly impromptu words by secretary of state kerry. >> he could turn over his chemical weapons to the international community, in the next week, turn it over. all of it. >> the russians seized those words proposing diplomatic action. president obama has yet to ably strong arm president vladimir putin on any big policy issues. a military strike and a diplomatic deal both remain on the table. but the house and senate continues to strengthen. >> if the vote occurs, i will vote now, and encouraging my colleagues to vote no as well. >> a failure to reach a political solution to the cry is has allowed

previously unmanageable crimes according to a top u.n. official. >> the number of violations by all sides goes hand in hand with the conflict itself. ginning me to discuss the uncertain road ahead. who, withed the u.s. government on the destruction of iraqi chemical weapons after the first gulf war. he is in our studio tonight. who helped uncover saddam hussein's stock pile, he is al here this earning. today as president bashar al-asaad 48th birthday, and these are pictures celebrating after the proposal from russia and the acceptance of moving ahead on it.

was this off a big gift to al-asaad or does vita chance of working. >> well, i think you have to look at it as certainly an unexpected pit of food news for the bashar al-asaad sad al-asaad. the reality is that if there had been a military strike that strike would have not just targeted him tear weapons it would have chanted his control structure, and certainly some of his air force, which you are talking the crown jewels of his military. so from his point of you, to be able to defer a strike, to be able to talk about giving up chemical weapons, that may have very limited utility for him in the long run anyway, yeah, i think he is probably having a reasonably good day. >> you were against military intervention, syria's foreign minister has said the regime will give up the chemical weapons until now they had denied even having them. now there is a lot of

skepticism, senator john mccain, spoke to al jazeera about that today let's listen to what he had to say. >> i think that there was a significant question, in the minds of the russians and syrian and iranians as to whether the president would launch an attack or not, i think this could be a stalling tack tis. if they are for this, why can't we just have a resolution, that called for the full accounting of the chemical weapons and their removal. it isn't that complicated. >> ambassador, do you disagree with senator mccain? do you think this mite work? >> i think it might work. i think we were -- president obama and the quite was facing the prospect of a vote in congress that seemed likely to go against him. if he had gotten the vote and gone ahead with the strikes it's not clear

they would have accomplished much. but instead, and largely i would say almost entirely because of the threats that president obama made, he is on the veg of a potential major diplomatic coupe. in fact, getting them to declare their arsenal, and they say they have one, getting them to agree to put it under u.n. control, and then getting them to agree to its destruction, that really is something very significant. it's likely to accomplish the purpose there won't be more chemical weapons attacks. which is the sole purpose of the strike, so that's accomplished and something more, and regardless of the verification measures, if in fact they do ahead and use chemical weapons again, well, then the united states will be in a position to take action. the slaughter will

continue, in syria, and they will just stretch this out. both of you saw it with sudan hussein for years and years. he stretched out this whole process of chemical weapons inspectors going in and looking at whether he had them or not. >> do you think we might find ourself in that situation? >> to be clear what i saw is the people -- that sue dam hussein had gassed. but -- >> but you also saw the after math of that, for years the inspectors were stalled and all sorts of obstacles were put in front of them. >> the immediate after math is even cutting off u.s. aid to iraq was too extreme a response at that time. but that's history. these are horrific weapons. the point is all that the military strike was going to accomplish was to

deter bashar asaad from using these. if he using them again, then the door will be open to a military strike. in the meantime, there is the good prospect of a deal that will accomplish much more. that will involve a monitoring of these weapons and eventually their destruction. >> i think will be as a practical matter difficult to destroy many of them in the midst of a civil war, but the best that obama could have hoped for from a military strike was to deter their further use. and this deal seems to accomplish it. >> one more question for you, a u.s. russian relations have been at a low point, president putin has now written an ad published late wednesday night online, with he talks about insufficient communication between our societies, he pushes the weapon pros pose sal, and he takes exception with something president obama said last night, he says that i would rather disagree with the case he made on american

exceptionalism, it's what makes us exceptional. putin says it is extremely dangerous to encouraging people to see they wants as exceptional, whatever the motivation. even though he said there was growing trust between he and president obama it sure seems like some super power back exciting there. >> well i think the point is made is shared by a large part of the worlds population, that does not see the quite as the unilateral enforcer of international law. and president putin makes some other points in that ad. he says that a matter of law, a country has a right of self-defense, and that includes if there's facing an eminent attack. but otherwise you two to the security council. i can see an exception, if there is an on going again side, or if it was a case where we could shoot down planes that are dropping weapons but this proposal of a strike is different. it is a buena tiff

strike, after the fact. and the appropriate place to deal with that is the security council, and thanks to president obama's threats it looks like the russians are going to come forward a resolution that everybody will agree to. but there's another point here, one of the things i think that most vatted the russians is -- a quarter century ago, they were a super power. and since then, since the falling of the receive yet union, we have al treated them as if they are a third rate power, which her not. they are not. ten when we disregard them, then they don't cooperate, but now they are players, they have an important role, and i think this opens the door to greater cooperation. >> let's set aside the diplomacy, you kid see what happened in iraq after the first gulf war and the obstacles that sue dam kept putting in front of u. n. inspectors. let's talk about syria's stock pile.

what is their capacity to use those weapons in. >> well, almost certainly they are april the third and they are probably the as far as that goes they are probably the one that is most capable of using their weapons because number one and two, are the united states and russia, and we are in the process of disposing of ours. syria has been building an arsenal for almost 40 years. you can trace it pack to the end of the war with israel, back in 72, when at that time, bashar al-asaad was the defense minister. he began looking at that from the point of view we won't have this sort of thing happen again. his father, rather, and at the end of the day, they began investing in

chemical weapons because jesussed that along with other weapons. remember, they had a nuclear perhaps that the israelis took out in the last decade. they were pursuing other weapons as well. some suspicious they may have had biological work doing. they were looking at chemical weapons at a counter weight to israel. to turkey, and even more recently iraq. so all of which have got capabilities conventional and otherwise, that okay them pause. so they have a very large arsenal. it is very sophisticated. they have relatively small -- light artillery missles up to very heavy poms. we have heard a lot about saran in the attack last month. put there's some indication they have been dealing with more sophisticated more persistence kem scales as well. certainly, they have invested their money, and they have had access to a

lot of good technology. >> some of what we know, a pentagon study concluded that the kind of operation that would be needed to take out these chemical weapons and have them under control other than syria would take 75,000 troops and intelligence shows that the asaad regime may have as many as 42 separate sites. they say they know of 19 given that kind of massive amount of chemical weapons how doable is what is being proposed. >> well, i think this' a lot of -- there's a lot of unseasonty as to what is being suggested. so say you are going to have international inspector goss in and catalog the weapons is one thing. to say you are going to go in and take control is another. to say that you are then going to transport them and dispose of them is yet another problem. and every one of those steps, is going to

require resours. and expertise and all of this is doing to be going on in a very active war zone. certainly we have seen not only has the syrian army fought very fiercely to defend their chemical stock piles but the rebel elements have been trying to capture them as well. some of the battles, for example, in alepo. >> now, am was tor, the big question, the one thing that everybody has agreed on was that no american troops on the ground. we are still talking about a substantial number that will have to go into syria to control these weapons doesn't that mean we will have to have troops on the ground to enforce this. >> it is a big world and other countries have

troops as well. what the syrian foreign minister said is he is prepaid to turn these weapons over to russia. to others and to u.n. i doubt very much that the syrian government is going to agree to have u.s. troops on the ground. and i feel quite confident in saying that neither president obama nor the congress is doing to approve sending troops to syria. particularly in the middle of a war zone. but it doesn't mean that you can't have u. n. forces, blue berets there helping to secure some of these sites. although, as a about call matter doing this in a middle of a war is going to be extremely difficult. >> u.n. t peace keepers typically go in after the fighting is over. the problem is any troops that go in there are going to be by default a trip wire for something much more dangerous. then from we are now.

>> kyle, ambassador, i have to leaf you there, thank you for your insight and joining us ton. coming up the n super bowla comes under fire for spying on americas so why is one school district paying to monitor the social media of its students. please join the conversation on twitter at a. j. consider and on our facebook and google plus pages. we will be right back.

[we have all heard about the nsa compiling informing. but how would you feel if your kids school was monitoring your students

accounts. it will cost the school district fort thousand $500 a year. it will only look at public messages not private ones, it will track key words that will alert school officials of trouble, including cyber bullying. and it will send a daily report indicating if intervention is need. but will it feel like big brother is watching phones? joining us now from los angeles, is chris fry rich, the ceo of geolistenning and from washington, d.c., is bonnie bracey sutton, education director for wired safety.org, thank you for being with us tonight. i want to start with you, the reason why the glendale district has partnered is because last year a teen committeds is jumping from the roof of glendale's valley high school. now the parents have sued the school district, they have plameed cyber bullies for his death. how does the service work, and how would actually prevent bullying at schools.

>> thank you, antonio. basically geolistenning empowering the entire school community, that's parents and staffs and students to take up the spoonability of monitoring. so it isn't just fee owe listening doing the monitoring of social networks. we have a mobile application that empowers all of the stakeholders i mentioned, to actually report things that they experience themselves. or that they witness happening, and that is all done anonymously into the system that we have. >> what kind of red flags are you looking for. >> part of what we do, one of our methods is key words. and then there are also leading indicators to behavior that is negative for children. what do you think about this? >> do you think tracking teens social network is the way to go? it is very complicated.

kids have different ways of using social media, and once they know they are looking for that information, they will change it. and if you read the reports the kids have already said that. the second thing is yes you can do tracking but community awareness, and i like it that they have an app, but community awareness should involve teachers and counselors, and people who are sophisticated with this type of work. suicide prevention and that type of thing. i like the data analystics but who gets the informing, and how are they qualified to use it. would bit a teichner the school, would bit some school administrator. >> why don't you answer that question. >> it's a great question. we target and work with the school districts so we fit into their existing work flow. so we are not different than if a parent shows up at a print pals' always and provided them detailed information about something they were

concerned about. so each distribution, or site has designated personnel that received alerts, to let them know there's inspection available. prescriptioning to pear, the appropriate commute partners whether that's an internal counselor, health and human subpoenases or social softs. so so what is the added value that geolistenning brings? if it is only public information, why do schools need to come to you? >> so the -- well, there's such a mass, sootless this chasm that has been built in the communities where students now have ready access to technologies. and that is al available for them to be on social networks. and what ends up

happening often times is we see kid that are posting on to social networks every three minutes. they are obviously not paying attention to class, and it is just important that the districts focus on what they are really food at, and bring a partner such as us into play that allow them to stay focused. >> i think that's con desending. >> why would it with condescending. >> when i worked in super computing and the first thing i worked with those guys is they never put the screen down, the only time they ever stop working is when you say something really interesting and they stop. but i have been working with them for ten years and i have never been in a meeting where all the computers weren't out, and people weren't doing things. i don't think we should expect something different of kids. the teachers job is a lot, yes, to control and to teach. but it also is to make a personal involvement with the students so that perhaps the child can come co the teacher and

tell them something is wrong. i have been a teacher for some time, and rapes and all kinds of things have been reported to me. it take as little while, but it doesn't cost $40,000. >> if it is something that can protect some kids and possibly save some kids, and this is public inspection, what's wrong with looking for a little extra help. >> i read all of the comments to the newsletters the newspapers, the kids -- there's one kid, i can't even read what he said, because he has a new incryptic kind of thing. once the children find out, the smart ones will move it underground, and the cyber bully willing move underground, we don't want that to happen. wen't wayit to be something that can report, where they can talk about it where they can tell a trusted adult. it shouldn't just be you, your way of doing it is one way, but the community should be involved. there should be groups of people that discuss this.

there should be some way in which the community has invoice and some voice in talking about these things. >> we have a question repping to that, chris, is it monitoring students social media the parents job? >> you know, the parents have their responsibilities. and the school districts have their responsibilities. what we are doing is remembering a hand to both of those. as we mentioned there's a massive amount of information out there. it's impossible for every parent to monitor, just like it is for any stood administrator to monitor thousands of accounts when students have three and four accounts. we are being interviewed

and when we find out what we do and don't do, they are grateful we are part of the culture, because we are empowering them to take up ownership. >> you aren't hearing kids that are worried about you snooping on them. >> when people understand how we do our work, we are not snooping. we monitor public posts and if a child does post something privately, and they friend decides it is bad and should be reported, then that can be done anonymously. so maybe students should just not post bad things or violence, or anger that is misplaced. this is about improving school culture. >> the service has been proven to be successful in the past? at least the glendale superintendent believes so and he said this. >> last year we ran trial at three of the schools. i found it to be very useful and we were able to intervene. [what kind of evaluation

is that, that's one person. what are the statistics are you talking about data analystics you should have one way, using big data, that you have intervened in so many cases or something. >> that is correct. part of respecting the privacy of our students and clients is that we don't disclose very specific information. ky certainly site numerous cases where districts or schools have come back to us and shared how we have helped them intervene to help a child make a decision to not end their lives, so that students make better decisions. there are many situations where we might report there just warning signs and the administration follow back with us and let us know that it was a great learning opportunity for the student on a life scale, not just an education.

is that in a cloud, is it on the child's record, is there access to this. sometimes there's misinterpretation, if you read danna boyd's paper on mean girls sometimes kids are off the chain, because they think that's funny. how do we know, and how do you tell the difference, between acting out and serious things. criminal,ly will let you have the last word. >> thank you. every single port that is reviewed by human being. it is easy to misprep it when a student possessions they are doing to cut, they need to decide if they are cutting class or cutting themes. that data is passed to the school district, in a secure best practices and according to the industry. and then that is there

for them, if it becomes a part of the record, then that is now protected as school district data under the laws. so we protect our data as well with industry best practices to make sure this isn't going to be some of the data you see being leaked out from other agencies or other companies. >> bonnie and chris, really appreciate you being with us. just ahead, we move from monitoring kids social network feeds to corporations collecting your information to get you great sales and who knows what else. find out why so many people are fuming about the rise of wig data, that's next.

who shop at target oftens find themselves targeted for bay we gear. like many retailers and some government agencies target is using the predict of powers of big data, a powerful tool in the hands of chain stores online marketers still governments and the ns action. the identify the newly expectant target had an analystics team examine baby gift registries and gift cards and found those moms to be had ordered products included

unsented lotion in their third month, and supplements including magnesium in their fourth. by corelating that they were able to draw up a pregnancy prediction score for women that enabled the chain to send them ads and coupons for products that were appropriate for each stage of their pregnancy. to many people this may be helpful, but to others it is a serious invasion of privacy. especially when the nsa is using the same tools to sweep up millions of phone calls. data editor with the economist, and co author big data. with the electronic frontier foundation, a public interest group, great to have you with us. ken, i will start with you, how does big data work? >> it's very similar. ten there's no one definition for it, no one

technology, but typically refers to the fact that we have more data than ever before. simply knowing the what is good enough. >> and the reality is what is out there is very different -- owhat is out there is different than what there was at the turn of the millennium. you write that it was stormed in analog form, vinyl records books tapes and that ratio has changed dramatically, and that has changed everything for big data. >> what we are doing, is we are data finding more aspects of the world. we have taken thicks that have been informational, and rendered into the format of data before, now we are.

it is fairly unique to us based on our leg length and our posture, and our weight distribution, so we can create a fingerprint, just on how we are sitting and we can turn it into an antitheft wise in cars for example. ten this whole demand paragraph project that society is on, of taking things around us, whether it's our heart beat, our location, the music that we like, and turning it into data to do new things with it and extract new value is one reason why we have so much more data today than we have ever before, and it is only going to increase. and the access to that is an enormous amount of data, and it is accessible to many. or how it is being used. is that one of the biggest problems you see that we are basically clueless about how much is out there? how much big data is there. >> i say that's largely

right, but i would characterize it digitally, i think the biggest problem is is that users don't have control other they data. so not only do we not know where it is going, but as a user, i don't have the ability to control how that data is used or if it gets deleted or not, and i think any sort of regulatory frame work that evolves to meet these changing technologies needs to take that into account and expect user data. if you use g mail or facebook right now, or any of these big on line service providers none of them, will guarantee that when you delete a message, if you delete an email or a facebook message, that they will correspondingly deleten on their services. that means as a user you are powerless over your own data. >> false data, sometimes mixed into that big data, now you think it doesn't

render it useless, i check add site today that is providing by a marketing technology, and the site is called about the data. it's supposed to give consumers access to the personal information that ax i don't know gathers about you, and sells to marketers. when i went in there, it had my wrong car, it had my income was way off, my merit gang was way off, it didn't know i had children. and it took a guess as to who i voted for and they were wrong. not only is all that information very personal, it's -- it's wrong. now what does that mean for big data and the problems with it. >> well, what you did is you saw the problems of a small data universe. and what axiom has is small little data points with you in which they are trying to make very large inferences. big data, whos differently. let's take your location. gp sing is very accurate,

but it is not perfectly accurate. we will know within a meter or two where you are. that's not very food if we want just one data point as a discreet moment of time to find out exactly where you are. but if we take your patterns across every single day, and where you are at every moment, and we want to get a sense of how to make your commute more official, that sort of messiness, that inaccuracy building into the data is fine when we have a huge corpus of data. for more than we ever had before, pause the trade off is so much more appealing. when we have a langer data of body, even if it isn't as precise, knowing more allowstous do new things. ten the problem is that it is a small data universe, it is not big data. >> let's talk about intrusiveness, they have this information, and they can make these assumptions and target us. one of our prodaughters just had a terrible case of shingles can fortunately he is better

from, but he says before almost anybody knew about it he started getting emails and ads about shingles. it feels like a terrible invasion of privacy to me. >> perfect. >> i'm glad to hear he is better. >> let's let dan answer that one. i do think that there is potential the r a huge invasion of privacy. and i think again, the user choice needs to be the center piece, and as part of that transparency is important. so a company like axiom, how many persons have heard of it. on the other hand, how many americans does axiom know something about, and the lack of transparency means that users don't have the opportunity to control their data. i would double check the privacy policy on that because it isn't very good. you can also imagine that it is phenomenal.

if you are telling me that there were organizations that could tell he had shingles prime to himself knowing he had that disease, based on patterns that we may have found, in the way that he interacted with email, purchases that he was doing, things that he was looking up, things we can't even causally determine why you would imagine would be a tell tail sign, but a computer was able to determine that. that's really helpful. maybe that company instead of selling ads to a company to put before them, should sell it to a healthcare providers so they could give him the early wanting signal that in fact he is coming down with shingles. >> i we have a question -- >> i think users to know how their data is being collected. >> we have a question from social media thank you, dan, january peter alexandar on twitter wants to know, is there any protection against a big data business other than ethics and don't be

evil, and of course he is referring to googles slogan there. >> yeah. i think there is -- there are a lot of ways that people can be protected from their data being used in ways they don't like. one thing is to not use big softs like google and facebook. another is to push for companies that have better privacy policies and finally, regulation that is done intelligently, we want to regulate stupidly, and not allow value to be extracted but intelligent regulation, and legal frame works can do a long way as well. >> ken, what do you think? i know you are a fan and you think there's tremendous potential, are you concerned about abuses? yeah i'm deadly condition about ibecauses. and i think the conversation about taggerring advertisement, miss it is point of some of the greater dangers that exist in the misuse

of data and big day da in particular. so we do need to put this on a much firmer better rigorous legal frame work. so that we can exploit all the advantages that are on offer, if we adopt this new technology. >> really appreciate you joining us tonight, interesting discussion. certainly changing our world, with all this information that is out there and accessible to so many, and that has so much value, appreciate you being with us. and stick with us, we will reveal the happiest place on earth, here is the hint, mickey mouse nowhere to be found. program

don't worry, be happy. today's data vibe looks at the planned new bolder happiness report. good news for america, the u.s. is happier than

139 other countries. africa comes in last. the not so food news, we are 17 on the list and that's a drop from number 11, but we are happier than russia, china, france, and the u. k., the world's other big powers. sweden kicks off the top 5, the netherlands followed in fourth, switzerland came in third, norway, placed second. deb mark is the happiest place ornate for the second time in a row. so the top five countries are pretty close to each other, and they have pretty cold climates. does it have to be chilly to be happy? and why do people vacation where it is warm. australia is the only country in the top 10 that is not so cold. the study including everything from houghs hold income to perceptions of corruption, and how much freedom people have to make their own life choices. who is getting happier than anyone else? the u. n. looked at the past decade and found latin america and the caribbean showed the piggest improvement.

they also ha the biggest drops of corruption in their region. turned out mexico is one big fiesta, but cold canada was the only country in the americas to make the top 10. after full the tour mill the middle east and north africa, countries there had the biggest decrease. one thing that hurt the u.s. is an increase in perceived corruption. maybe the dreadful public opinion of congress, is justified after all. coming up next, the man who went from hero to villain within a week after 9/11 gets a bit of redemption, more than a decade after the attacks. negligence. next.

one of the most guy agois figures in the post 9/11 coverage. the bond market trading giant took up the top five floors oif world trade centers north tower, just above where the first plane hit. 658 people were trapped when all the escape routs were destroyed. no one survived. on september 13th he pledged to support victims families in a tear filled t.v. interview. >> there's only one reason to be in business,

is pause we have to make our company be able to take care of the families. 700 families. 700 families. it's just, i can't say. it can't say it. >> i remember watching that and being heart broken as most everyone else was, and two days later he suspended people's paychecks while they were missing, he was then vilified, but is he the villain he was maid out to be? a new documentary out of the clear blue skies tells the perspective from him and several key players. here is a look. >> now, many of the families are feeling anything but being taken care of. >> we got crushed, crushed and crushed. >> rut nick owes the country an explanation. >> and crushes again. >> why would he cry? are you suggesting he turned on the tears in. >> oh, yes. >> danielle gardner

directed out of the clear blue sky. her brother doug died in the attacks. danielle, thank you for joining us. before turning to kenneth fitzgerald and to howard, i just want to talk about the difficulty of the day even for someone like me, i lost a couple of people i knew, but it was not as obviously as close it was for you, but it's very hard for anybody, as i watch your documentary it was hard to watch. i know it is hard for you, you don't even like to go to the memorial. >> i don't like to do to the site, i never do toe the site. i was have familiar with the buildings, they were real, i remember the offices very well, one of the ways of dealing is i like to leave that as it was. >> one you talk about in the documentary, which is something unique and that somehow you are treated oddly by people. let's show some of that now. i said yeah i lost my cyster and nephew, and he turned around and said,

wow, how cool is that, i haven't met anyone. and i looked i was mortified, i was speechless. >> i just remember this one woman saying how it looks beautiful. and whether it was the towers being hit, or the towers crumbling, and i just remember thinking doesn't she get it. that maybe she shouldn't be telling this to me. >> do people not get it? >> we discuss that a lot afterwards i think -- i used to say that new york without traumatized and the circles of trauma, i felt people didn't know how to talk to us, people were so traumatized one, i felt they were very much in display of being watched sometimes people would talk to me felt like they were leaving me and tell somebody else they got closer to this or something like that, and i sort of understand that, but for us it is painful. and i also think that i don't know how confidentble are people

dealing with death, and clearly we represent that a little bit, and i al think that there's a curiosity factor. so it was multiple reasons why i think people approached us very strangely. we used to talk about that as family members i think that's why we began to turn to each over, because we understood the situation. >> let's talk about what the families had to deal with, and about how regard fitzgerald and the main people of your fascinating documentary. at first he was seen as just this incredibly sympathetic character, who had suffered more than anybody, pause of having lost so many friends and employees, but then when he decided to pull back and not pay, he was veal fied. was that wrong? >> it's a hard to say wrong. is quite how -- unusual and how kay t yoic and how heightened the

emotions were after 9/11. so i think that when he went on t.v. as a family member i wasn't expecting such a outpouring from the american public, and the media attention, and how much they really took howard in, and said he became so much a similar poll of this, and i think he was raised up very very high. and then what happened was when the paychecks it is a very complicated reason not pro to. was he correct in not doing it, he can argue he didn't have the funds and know how to billy up the pay because he lost his entire work force. why isn't he calling why aren't they doing this. >> because nobody left. >> there was nobody left, there was no offices no phone records there was no nothing. >> and they were really attacked. they were the most powerful pond trader in the business, and the stock market waited almost a week to reopen, the bond market opened in a couple of days and there were sharks going for his business, so he was -- he had his back against a wall as a businessman. >> absolutely. the question is did you

care about business after 658 people are -- at that point we had no idea, missing who knew. but i think they early on made the decision the families had to safe the company. but i think people don't realize the paychecks once taken very seriously, scare the families financially, also taken at a time when families accepted or knew if they were dead. >> so the paychecks were being pulld from people that may have been alive. >> well -- i guess it could have been the situation, i think families really believed that their families were coming back. so when howard goes on t.v. or announces that the paychecks aren't happening to the family that says howard thinks their family member is dead, and they weren't ready to hear that. >> and people got very very angry. but then things changed and at that point, he was kind of out of the media, and that's the story that hasn't gotten told is what he did afterwards. >> yeah, and i was driven to say look at how

heightened and crazy and what it is like to live through the private side of a huge event. and the swing was going from so high, and then so low, and then you just sort of soldier through it, and that becomes the story of the fill and what p has. >> and also the story of him and the families, he did create a charity, he ended up pledging 25% of the profits to the families guaranteeing healthcare for ten years. >> yep. >> so then the families now when you went out and put together this film and talked to people, did you find any families still upset. >> i haven't. i can't say i spoke to 100%, i haven't. i found that it swung so far back the other way, you go to these family meetings, and people then the families were so incredible my support i of howard, and so supportive of cantor, and they still have memorials every year there's a memorial for just the cantor families.

pause there's so many of us, and there is kind of support in being in among people in the same situation as you are. so i think that it's for me, though, as a family member, and i don't understand for me it's the trouble is what happened in the years and the months and years afterring the not a top story. he should be remembered, one out of five, almost one out of four deaths were at one company, and it isn't even known among the men public, and that seems kind of a distortion of what has p had here. so i was hoping i could draw attention and said whether he did everything correctly, he did save the company, and did help the families, and also a lot of people lost their lives here, and they should be remembered. >> we have a question from social media. >> thank you. most of new york newspapers didn't have

9/11 on their front pages, instead they focused on the local mayoral, and obama speech on syria. how, a lot of people on social media were remembering 9/11. we looked at people's tweets. how many people were tweeter about syria verses 9/11. there have been about 700,000 tweets about syria, and in comparison during the same timeframe, there have been 2.8 million tweets about 9/11. so at least on social immediate antonio 9/11, is a part of the larger conversation even if it isn't not frontal page news. >> thank you. how do you respond to that. >> i think it is fascinating. you find a lot of people saying i have seen enough, i have heard enough. i am not interesting you can't -- and i think that 9/11 has a particular hold on this nation, and it's partially because i don't know if people have completely processed i, and i don't think we have taken it all in, and i also think it is a seminole moment in this

generation -- in our generation history. >> i know some people have criticized what has happened in schools and in the newspapers and things afterwards. p uh the reality is it is still being taught in schools most places have memorials and it is very important that we remember. >> yeah. >> well, i'm not sure -- actually sometimes worry about the curriculum in schools i'm not sure it is being taught, and i'm not sure the memorial has fulfilled that goal. >> more will be done. >> i hope that actually i had hoped it become a national holiday and a day of remembrance, a day of giving back, but they didn't ask me. >> i'm sure if they see your documentary, thatly be moved very much, pause it is very powerful. we thank you for coming hered to to talk about it. >> out of the clear blue sky is in new york city at playing thursday, to learn more about.

hope to see you then.