cracking down on new protests. thousands are fighting with the police, with gas bombs, and police fought back with teargas. injuries have been reported on both sides. consider this is coming up next, i'm thomas graden in new york.

this this this can >> what can you tell us about caesar and what he tolls you? >> we found caesar to be very credible. and, in fact, i wouldn't call him a defector. he was an asset in place for the syrian resistance run by a case officer or a handler when he signaled that i had the ability to actually give you copies of these that he has taken which he did to the tune of over 55,000 photographs. >> he claimed to have photographed as many as 50 bodies a day showing signs of starvation, brutal beatings, strangulation, all sorts of

torture. this all occurred between 2011 and 2013? >> that's correct. a little short of two years. >> of the photos of these 100 -- you examined 150 individuals in detail. you had forensics experts analyzing them. you found that 62% of those bodies showed emacation. the majority of the victims were also young. were you surprised at the magnitude and the magnitude of what you saw? >> in the business of international law, you are rarely surprised but certainly horrified. it doesn't diminished the horror these people went through when this he were tortured, starved, beaten, and then subsequently execute. do you have any doubt that the

syrian government is torturing people on a large scale? >> i have no doubt in my mind that clearly, direct and convincing evidence in a court of law that he has committed crimes against humanity. >> the report explains why the photographs were taken. the reason for taking these pictures of the executed people was two-fold. first to permit a death certificate to be produced without families requiring to see the body and that would then, second to confirm the orders to execute the individuals are been carried out. families were told the cause of death was either a heart attack or breathing problems the families never got to see their families. they were buffericked without anybody being able to see what had happened to them? >> that's correct but the h horrific part of this is was that it was an affirmation by

those individuals who ordered that's poor wretches to be executed. they were going back with a written report identifying them that they had indeed been executed after being starved, tortured and beaten to death that had the assad regime has a killing machine and that this evidence is a smoking gun against assad. what is the next step? >> again, at the end of the day, it's a political decision as to decide what to do with these tyrants and thugs. we have the ability, procedure and the experience to prosecute heads of stayed and their regime and what-have-you. it's a political decision and a diplomatic decision as to how and when or if that happens. >> i guess one of the things that you will face if you -- if it does go to that point and there is a prosecution for war crimes is somehow connecting it to assad and determining whether

he was involved and directed this. do you think there will be a war crimes trial? >> i would like to think that there were. there are four options available to the international community, and we have developed a statute, creative statute which would assist them. the first would be a prosecution under syrian domestic law. syrians trying syrians for syrian crimes. the second option would be an enter allegationalized court where they would assist them to seek justice for the victims. the third would be a regional court, perhaps the arab league or a likewise organization who would provide assistance to prosecute these individuals and, of course, the fourth option would be the international criminal court. >> david crane, thank you for your time and for bringing this horror to light. >> it's good talking to you and your listeners. >> for another perspective i am

joined by yuvey. i want to start with this doorbell report and all of these pictures allegedly showing massive torture and killings by the assad government of detainees. as an advisor to the syrian opposition, you have said that the timing of this report may actually help the opposition in these talks in geneva? >> absolutely. this report is direct evidence of what we in the syrian revolution have been trying to tell the whole world for the past three years. the assad regime is directly responsible for genocide, for the worst war crimes in our generation, for the worst humanmanitarian disaster and mass killing since rwanda and it is time for the international community to rally and support our efforts to transition syria to democracy without assad so especially at this crucial time when the syrian opposition has

clearly voiced its support to a political process to transition to a syria with a government that is free of assad, free of his hershmen, that is -- henchmen and the killing machine that is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands. what these photographs and this report simple document the killi killing, systemic killing of 11,000 souls, and that is simply the tip of the iceberg. these were the discussions of individuals in one -- one area, in one area of syria, so this brings to mind the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of more cases that haven't come to light and so this time when the syrian opposition has gathered to hear in switzerland the full backing of the western -- of the western governments and the international community to push for a transition without syria, without assad. we are reminded of the absolute

urgency to get bashar al assad out of syria to save lives before even more horrific killings take place in syria. >> as you go into these talks, much as been made about the divisions within the syrian opposition. there was a substantial group that did not want to be involved in these talks. is there at least a majority in agreement about what should happen there in montro? >> absolutely. we have to move forward. prior to coming here, i sat down countless hours of discussions with representatives of the free

>> the western -- the western

government and international community have made it very clear that the assad regime must accept as part -- as conditions, as part of the condition of these discussions and the participation of these discussions, the assad regime must accept these, which assad and those with blood on their hands cannot take place. >> assad is still insisting that what should come out of this conference is a commitment to defeating terrorism. he had a long interview with the french press and he was spinning this as assad being a champion against terrorism and he kept saying that that's what needs to come out of these talks and he even talked about running again for president in a few months whenever an election date is set. so, don't have much time left. what do you make of these statements from assad? >> assad is living in a dream

land of his own concoction at a time when the free syrian army is actively campaigning against al-qaeda. sinceian 3rd -- january 3rd, five have been killed by the syrian army. the free syrian army has liberated multiple headquarters of al-qaeda in syria for which we suspect the assad regime has had direct connections with facilitiating the al-qaeda presence in syria. it's clear to the whole world, especially in these past two days as information of -- corroborated by western intelligence comes to light of the direct involvement in supporting al-qaeda elements in syria. it has become very clear to the whole world that the free syrian army is the solution to fighting extremists, empowering the opposition, empowering the local governments and supporting the syrian people's revolution against the assad regime and supporting a transition to a

democratic syria as the only ane cd ote. it. >> as always, it's great to have you on the show. please keep us up to date on your efforts. thank you. >> thank you. coming up, president obama has consistently talked about the need to address income ine quiltty, but to hisclusions miss the point? hermella argauay is tracking the top stories on the web. >> we have an update about the arch diocese of chicago. documents detailing sexual abuse cover-up to victims' attorneys and now they have been released to the public. details coming up. what do you think? join the conversation throughout the show by tweeting to us at ajconsiderthis or post on our facebook and google+ pages. own

/*win the bottom 99 percent aw

their income call your

this lots of big. your a lot is more political than economic. is it has to do with sacred cows that neither party wants to slay. >> you talked about the people at the bottom end and that we neat opportunities for them. but one of the big discussions now is whether there should be an increase in the minimum wage. the president has called for an increase on 7.25 to $9 an hour and tying it to inflations. i with a senator tom harkin has

put forward a bill that would raise it to $10 and $0.10 an hour. harkin said, and i quote, "it's the smart, substantive position, the smart humanitarian position and the smart political position. i don't think there is much doubt among the democrats who are focusing on income inequality that this is a big political issue for them. what about the minimum wage and the fact that it is really well below an inflation-adjusted dollar, well below what it has been in historical terms. >> you asked a lot of questions all at the same time. one thing, when anybody on the right or the left uses the word "smart five times, they are usually making an adhononym argument, saying it's good for you so you should do it. why are workers making so little? why won't the market provide them with more money? the answer has something to do with our immigration policies. the administration has essential

areally given a free pass to people who have not committed a crime. >> pushes down wages. more importantly, the structure of our trade agreements with china and so forth permits them to do all manner of things which steal jobs from americans. for example, they are excused from carbon loading restrictions under the doha treaty. they basically can pollute as much as they want. >> makes labor -- >> hold on. >> makes labor cheaper there and deprives us of factory jobs. likewise, they subsidize industries, rig currency. the administration has an interest in those -- hasn't addressed those things. if it did, there would be better jobs that paid better money without legislation. >> what's your solution? >> my solution is a more tough-minded trade policy, breaking up the large banks, developing domestic oil and gas which would permit us to push out imports but would also create a lot of jobs in supporting industries a so forth which we haven't done. if we actually developed our

strengths in america, if we did the things we do well, then we would have plenty of jobs to go around and it would look a lot like the 'tickets and '60s you are talking about. no era, americans had more manufacturing jobs. this administration and the bush administration has been giving those away to asia where american workers are put in a situation where they have to compete with children, where they have to compete with factories where there is pollution and unsafe standards and so forth. >> a lot to think about. peter, great to have you on the show. good to see you. thanks. >> nice to be with you. >> shifting topics from president obama's drive to reduce inequality to what some critics are calling an ongoing abuse of his constitutional powers with congressional republicans mostly opposing his programs, mr. obama has used executive orders to make changes in laws and regulations he couldn't push through capitol hill. and based on what he did said at the year's first cabinet meeting last year, the president plans to keep doing that? >> i've got a pen and i've got a phone, and i can use that pen to

sign executive orders and take executive actions and administration actions that is move the ball forward. >> for more, i am joined from washington, d.c. by david rifki it in who served in the justice department and the white house counsel's office for president reagan and george h.w. bush and joined by simon lazarus senior counsel who served on the white house domestic policy staff for president jimmie carter. it's good to have you on the show. david, i want to start with you. president obama says he can move the ball forward with executive actions and orders. should he? >> no. he should not. and this is independent of whatever you think about the policy merits of his specific proposals. let me be clear. there are a number of things the president can do utilizing his own inherent constitutional authority, particularly the case in foreign affairs and national security. you can do some -- he can do some things on his own on

domestic policy. one thing he cannot do. he cannot fundamentally rewrite or suspend duly enacted statutes. >> violates his constitutional duty to execute the laws faithfully. >> destroys separation of powers by emasclathing congress, by giving the president too much power. this president has been doing it with unprecedented frequency and, also, quite brazenly about it. so that is a very, very unfortunate development even if you like the particular policy innovations he has in mind. by the way, i don't want to get into politics here let's stipulate for a second that there are a number of things that congress has blocked the president from doing because republicans control the house. but that's what the framers intended. the two political branches can, in most instances, checkmate each other. >> that's no excuse for the president to engage in unconstitutionalt conduct. >> simon, doesn't david have a point? is president obama going too far

with his executive powers really breaking down the separation of powers by taking an end run around congress and really rewriting laws with some of these executive orders? >> well, of course, david is write that the president doesn't have the authority to rewrite the law. but, in fact, that is not at all what he has been doing. david's article has a whole litany of allegations which many others on his right side of the fence have made. none of them constitute rewriting laws. most of the them concern delays and adjustments in the implementation of the affordtable care act. but this is not suspending the law. this is phasing the law in, in a way that will make it more effective. all presidents do this, and they have do to do it, not just with the affordable care act. george w. bush did it when the prescription drug benefit of medicare which he sponsored and which was enacted in 2003 and

implemented in 2006, i believe, his secretary of health and human services said that president obama's delay of the active berman data was, quote, wise, unquote, and that was based upon his experience with the medicare prescription drug benefit which also had a very bumpy first month or longer, but now, is a very successful program. and that is exactly what president obama is doing. many others have done that. >> david, i assume you don't agree with this, and clearly, there is a role for administrative regulations, but you think that the president has gone too far? >> yes. i practice administrative law for a living. quite often, challenging what agencies do in the d.c. circuit. i understand the concept of administrative discretion. i understand the concept of administrative i am possibility

that allows the president to do, you know, or heads of agencies and departments to do some tweaks. >> that's not what the president has done. let's put obamacare aside. in some ways, what helps us here and what does not help mr. lazarus is this president has not been subtle. this president, for example, wanted to get the dream act through, which would have essentially immunized from deportation, which is required to be done under immigration actualization act. whether you think it's a good idea or bad for a particular category of young immigrants who have not committed any crime since arriving in is country. he could not get the dream act from congress. he got up and delivered a speech where he said, i am going to do this by executive order. whatever you think about this policy innovation, it is not cricket for the president to basically say, i am not going to apply immigrationnalization act in regard to a particular category of illegal aliens.

now, he could have shift his enforcement resources around to pay less attention to this and pay more attention to other types of illegal aliens but he couldn't of he could not ex elt them in wholesale fashion. as an example, part of the enforcement discretion, after 9-11, we will concentrate on terrorism. i am not that concerned about bank robberies so fbi would spends less going after bank robbers but the president cannot say i am not going to have fbi pursue bank robbers because you effectively decriminalize bank robbery, by the way, what the president has done in regard to cannabis, which has been decriminalized by two states, colorado in the lead, you can say, we are not going to spend that much time prosecuting cannabis-related offenses. you cannot say, i am going to tell all of my u.s. attorneys and my attorney general, we are not going to prosecute it at

all. it decriminalizes possession of cannabis. whatever you think about it, that's not law enforcement discretion. that's not administrative discretion. >> that's unconstitutional and alien. >> simon, your response to is that that? >> i guess it's difficult for me now to understand just what it is my friend david is hyperventilating about here what he seems to be saying is that it would be okay if the president gave a wink and a nod and said that we are not going to be making a priority of deporting the children of immigrants who are going to school or have gone to school or have served in the military, but he can't actually announce that this is a policy, and by the way, my understanding is it remains an individual in that category could still be if

his behavior behavior warranted it. this is again an exer size of description that is at the core of the president's authority to manage immigration policy. the supreme court a year and a half ago in an important decision which was written by one of the conservatives, justice kennedy and joined by chief justice roberts, said that this, that non-enforcement, the decisions to not enforce the immigration are again at the core of the president's responsibilities and authority and that he is -- it is appropriate for him to take into account humanitarian concerns when he is doing so on precisely the ground that someone who is employed and has a family is much less likely to be a threat to domestic tranquility than who

is a convicted felon. there is just no question that the president is doing what others have done before him and perhaps in a more expansionive way. iliac knowledge that. but nothing that is really qualitatively different. >> what's clear is this fight will continue. republicans in congress are moving to try to attack these in the court. there is an issue whether congress has the standing to challenge some of these. simon, david, appreciate you joining us tonight. thank you. it's time to see what's trending on al jazeera america's website. let's check in with hermela. >> an update about sexual abuse in one of the largest american diocese. thousands of documents made public reveal decades of child abuse cover-up. they offer one of the braddest look of how cardinal frances george handled allegations. the information released details how 30 priests were moved from

parish to parish where they still had contact with children. >> one thing that we know en da dangers children and protects predators is silence. >> that's what has happened for years. some of the priests were moved from ministries but not inuntil after years and sometimes decades after the church knowing they were molesting children. >> at a time church's attempts to sweep this under the rug is what's displaceful. lynn says a drop in the bucket, probably more were under reported. it's not just a catholic crime. every religion has its shame. more of the documents with the names of the victims redacted, of course, on our website, america.aj.com. >> a high-priced bid to hunt a black rhino sparks a major controversy. are critics missing the bigger

picture? the ridiculous price for the worst seat at the super bowl. how do prices to the big game get so high? the world. giving you a real global perspective like no other can. real reporting from around the world. this is what we do. al jazeera america.

>> a hunter paid $350,000 to kill a black rhino, an endangered species. it sounds despicable but what if it goes toward conservation efforts that are essential to protect rhinos. that's the question after the dallas safari club held a contest to hunt the rhino. what is the best way to ensure endangered species will exist for years to come. we are joined by wayne passelly.

good to have you with us. this issue has been in international headlines and caused a debate among our social media followers. the government gives five permits a year or up to five permits a year to hunt black why is it causing an uproar? the u.s. policy generally is to avoid trophy hunting of domestic species imports of trophies and other animal parts from species listed understand our endangered species acts really, these sort of paid to slay programs for endangered species are driven by kind of the agreed agreed of th safari hunters involved in

competitive trophy hunting all over the world. >> the nubibian government controls which can be hunted and allows for specific animals to be hunted. the dallas savafari club said: and then have that money go to help the conservation efforts of all rhinos. most are post reproductive themselves. i hope that logic isn't applied to them as well. there is no post-reproductive rhino. they are not out killing other

rhinos. this is a con drivance because people don't want to admit the reality which is they want to kill rhinos to bring the head back and bring the trophy back at the very time when the united states is demanding all over the world it's okay for us to kill animals for trophies but not to kill them for trinkets? what sort of moral message? what sort of muddled moral message are we sending? because these rich guys from dallas want to shoot one of the most endangered animals in the world. >> i understand your point. there is literature out there that says some of these older males can be post reproductive and they are aggressive. rhinos have the highest mortal combat situation within a species of any ma'am mammals. ? >> sure. >> there have been some 6.

now morning 20,000. >> has been funded since the 1960s for these old ryan owes. >> just in the year, more than a thousand rhinos have been poached in south africa. >> conservation program driven by this mentality of paying to kill wildlife as the driver is just not working. kenya generates billions of dollars of wildlife tourism and for byrd trophy hunting of these majestic animals. what is the motivation of a person who wants to shoot a black rhino? a several-ton animal, the equivalent of shooting a parked bus. >> i completely am with you on that point.

>> look at the situation. from what i have read, kenya, you know, they only have two and a half million people. some sort of conservancy and that costs money and they have been successful. from 1,000 to 27,000. their elephant population has more than doubled since 1995 and they have the only growing population of free-roaming lions, if they need the money where should they get it. there are all sorts of places action antonio. the humane society is trying to attack demands. in vietnam remember reaching chin and adults, urging them not to consume rhino products because the demand is driving the poaching.

should we be selling permits from the world's most endangered animals because somebody wants to shoot one of them? what happens when they say they want to shoot a mountain gorilla or an aidsian elephant? >> dangerous road. let me say that if these folks at the safari club are so interested, they want to contribute to the good programs, they don't need to link their contribution to the notion of killing an individual animal. give them money. >> that's what conservationists do every day. >> where do you stand on i will facts and their tusks? you just talked about the value of a rhinosaurus horns. how about elephant tusks? the counter argument is that

destroy that only serves to drive up the cost. i really only have 6r789s the vast majority support the destruction of these stock piles. having a robust trade in ivory or rhino horn will be the demise of these animals for sdmran or for a potion or form some other purpose. these are rare. we need to save the individual animals we are going to save the species. saving those. an important thing. we are all on that page. wayne, thank you very much. the sky high coast of super bowl tickets and why parking may be out of the question. they don't feature enough women?

today's data dive rings up the cost of a super bowl ticket. cheap seats are anything but cheap. tickets for the very last row of the upper section are being sold for more than $3,500 on ticket broker websites. even if you were lucky enough to pay face value, that's $500 for the last row of the stadium. on seat geek.com which aggreg gates sites including stub hub and ticket master and more, you can't get any ticket for less than $2,000. if you thought you could pool money with friends and get a luxury suite, forget about it. you would have to pay about 800 grand including a service fee of

more than 133,000 bucks. granted, that's 25 seats plus six for standing room only and a fully catered party but if you divide the total by 31, you are still paying $25,700 per person. those chicken wings better be good. it wasn't always this way. super bowl's top ticket went for $12, about $84 today. they only filled about 50% of the seats. they increased. a decade later, 175, 10 years after that, it was $400. since then, it really soared. now, the best tickets have a face value of $2,600. $1,250 they cost last year. don't ask about parking. >> will run you $150 and you can't even tailgate. this year, there are 13,000 spots for more than 80,000

ticket holders. satellite trucks and more. probably better to take a bus to the stadium. we will have a better look from our couches anyway and bank accounts will look better. gravity are major oscar contenders. what's the big test failed by them and most other nominees? we will tell you next. al jazeera america presents... award winning films telling stories... >> she doesn't wanna come as someone who was manipulative. >> revealing secrets... >> information became our most powerful weapon... >> taking chances... >> everyone that was involved in the clandestant movement, had a code name. >> each week, a new eye opening experience. >> now they're going to go to jail... >> al jazeera america presents... remarkable documentaries while you were asleep news was happening.

sglfrnls should movies include a

rating based on the number of women featured? it's called the beckdell test. it has to have two named women in it, no secretary number 1 or flight attendant number 3 allowed. second, the women need to talk with each other and, third, they need to talk about something other than a man. you would be surprised how many films including best picture nominees failed this test. let's bring in bill wyman from 15 e, a former npr arts editor. it's gotten buzz. why is it so hard to get two women in a film together having a normal conversation? >> twice ever thus. when you go back, you apply the same to the iniad, the odyssey and the interesting thing for us today is whether it's a market

issue, whether there just in fact isn't an awedous for such things, there is something subconsciously or consciously blocking it. >> let's look at some of those things. best picture nominees, more than half failed the test including 12 years a slave, captain phillips, gravity, although gravity is one of the dubious ones. her, the wolfe of wall street, american hustle and nebraska barely passed the test the. as you said, it is 2014. it may have been ever thus, as you said, it is i am precise. i don't think gravity which features a strong female character is a sexist movie. to say wolfe of wall street if he would the beck tell test is to under state the issue. a movie like her is sympathetic in an interesting way as well.

so the whole market has expanded so well. the loo the loosening of the bonds. if there is a market for it, given that there is all of these different avenues to public site these days, stockmarket. bridesmaids and the heat were huge recent hit that the featured women and an entertainment website looked at last year's 50 most successful films. it found that 17 passed the beck tell test and seven others were borderline including gravity. those 24. 2.6 billion. it would seem that maybe having in a film having women talk about something other than a man might work. >> we might see this. nashville, which is a very

female-cent rick t.v. show. gray's anatomy is underrated: on the other hand, we have seen women oriented cable channels such as lifetime and now sometimes struggle to find both ratings and both strong programming. so, it is, you can make the argument either way. i think the good thing is the way the industries are revolving, we will see different routes to public attention >> we have a social media question for you. >> on twitter, a lot of people didn't know the beck tell test existed even though it's been around for a while. now that it's gone mainstream, do you think it will be something that studios pay attention to? >> i would hope so. it's imprecise. it's not fair to use it as the strictest benchmark but a feminist analysis of what we see in movies these days is really something that was in vogue in the 70s and 80s. it has gone out of vogue a lot of ways. we are seeing really enormous

strides in various ways. we had a best actress director. excuse me. a best directo a couple of years ago action and people. 5 or 10 years from now this won't be such an issue. as far as the actual rating, a la sweeden, there are so many thinks we should rate movies for. it would be great if we started training people to think more in terms of feminist analysis on these films. wolfe of wall street, boy, there is a template for you. things happen to women in that movie? >> not necessarily good ones. >> would fail the test on a lot of different levels. bill, as always, great to have you on the show. look forward to having you back soon. >> thank you, sir. >> the show may be over, but the conversation continues on our website. aljazeera.com/considerthis, or on our facebook or going plus pages or on twitter at

ajconsiderthis. we will see you next time. check check >> face to face as we look live at the montro palace hotel where syria's government will meet opposition leaders for the first time after nearly three years of war. >> protests growing chaotic and violent by the minute. how the government is using cell phones in an attempt to control the crowd. >> texas set to execute a cop killer from