there is a chance of being bitten in the ocean, and that's a chance that the government says they need to do something about. >> thank you for watching al jazeera america. i'm del walters in new york. "the stream" is next. ♪ hi, i'm lisa fletcher, and you in "the stream." are some of the secrets of the no-fly list about to be revealed? for the first time a judge orders one person taken off of the list. does that open the door to more transparency? ♪ our digital producer wajahat

ali is here, bringing in all of your live feedback throughout the show. it is very easy of people to be critical of the no-fly list, but when i tweeted out could or should america get rid of its no-fly list, nobody responded in the affirmative. >> yeah, our community seems to be very critical of the plan in place, but some have taken extreme measures . . . on the flip side, lisa, eric says . . . >> all right. well follow along with me here for a minute. you're about to fly somewhere on a trip. you get to the airport, rush through the crowd, wait through the horrendously long lines only to be told you can't get on your

flight, not now nor ever. airport officials neither confirm nor deny that you have been put on the no-fly list, but will tell you will not be allowed on a plane. it's estimated that more than 21,000 people are on the no-fly list. some no doubt should be there. but there is increasing frustration that thousands on the list shouldn't be. the problem is they have no way of knowing how they got on the list or how to get off of it. but that may change. for the first time a judge has ruled that the government mistakenly put someone on the list. but that decision, in favor of a professor from malaysia came after an eight-year legal battle and $4.1 million in court and attorney fees. she is not the only one who probably never should have been put on the list. others include ted kennedy,

nelson mandela, and even toddlers. so will this ground breaking case change the manner in which people are put on and removed from the list? here to talk more about this is a staff attorney with care, the council on american-islamic relations. joining us from question tar is the former head of the fbi terrorist monitoring center. and the lead attorney for the woman who just won her no fly case. elizabeth her casing went on for more than eight years cost more than $4 million, and required 11,000 hours of work on the part of attorneys. your firm handled this pro bono. why get involved in this case? >> because it was the right

thing to do. when we found out what had happened to the doctor, we saw the injustice and felt the need to take this on. >> let's get the lay of the land here. marty talk to us about why the no-fly list was created and when it was created. >> sure. no-fly list was created in 2003 by a presidential directive. it was the result of what hand at 9/11. prior to 9/11, there were 11 different agencies that maintained their own version of a. watch list. most of those watch lists had no interoperability. one agency could not determine what was on another agency's watch list without actually calling them up and running the name. it -- it did not work. all thes notable, local and state police agencies had no access whatsoever to any of those watch lists.

>> how does a person get on the no-fly list? you represent a lot of folks trying to get off. what are the criteria? the >> the criteria are that they are known or suspected terrorists. what we found in practice is it targets predominantly the muslim community, especially the somali community. but and it also targets activists, the activist that -- the journalist that is working with greenwald about the snowden revelations is on the same terrorist screen database that the no-fly list is a subset of. >> marty racial profiling? >> no. >> not at all? >> um -- you know -- sanctioned

by the u.s. government? no. does it happen? yes, it happens. is it sanctioned? no. it does not predominantly target american muslims. and i'll say in, the no-fly list, the public source numbers is roughly 20,000 people are on there, less than 5% are americans or resident aliens in the united states. >> we have community tweeting about that. but we have a former flight attendant who says . . . but going to your point, we have a iranian-american muslim filmmaker who tweeted in . . .

elizabeth going to you with this, who actually is on this list? >> nobody knows. the government has claimed secrecy over all of the information about who is on this list or why they are on this list. it is a secret blacklist, and it is almost impossible to find out why you are on there, or whether -- how you can be taken off. >> well, at least one person outside of government circles has seen the no-fly list. joe is a journalist. >> the list i had was from 2005-2006, and it was obtained through an industry source which showed you that the security around the no-fly list is basically a joke. the list we got in 2005-6 had heads of state on it.

it was absurd. and people routinely allowed to fly to the united states who were on the list. the list is really something to comfort the public, to make us feel better, but it is really meaningless. >> marty is this an effective, meaningless list? >> no, it works. >> how do you know that it works? >> i'm personally involved in it for a pretty significant part of it with the fbi and at the end of my career at the terrorist screen center. yes, there have been heads of state on the list, but these were states that sponsor and support terrorism. that's why they are on there. >> marty, our community tweeted this about effectiveness . . .

>> speaking about letting terrorists go, we know that omar the nigerian underwear bomber wasn't on the list, the pakistanian-american time square bomber wasn't on the list, so speaking about effectiveness, how did they not get on this list? >> it's not a product of the watch list not being robust enough or failing the individual in this instance. but the process itself is a fool'sfool errand. if the law enforcement finds evidence, actual evidence, then they should be charged with a crime. but we shouldn't be able to

punish people for life by preventing them from flying. >> what resource does someone have if they are put on the list? >> well, in the doctor's case it took eight years and a huge court battle for her to get recourse. the government tells you that you can file a form, and somehow get off of the list, but bottom line is, the government gives you no information about any actions that they take if you filed this claim form called the trip form. so it's a very opaque process, and the doctor is the first person who has successfully challenged this list in court, which tells you how effective the redress is. >> when we come back, will her case make a difference? will it make recourse easier. and you'll meet a student who found himself stranded outside of the u.s. and then found he

had been placed on this list. you'll hear his story when we come back. >> no doubt about it, innovation changes our lives.

good afternoon, i'm del . walters in new york, we continue to follow the events coming out of switzerland. world leaders there trying to find common ground concerning the syrian bloody civil war. this is u.s. secretary of state john kerry speaking now. >> government resistance, opposition resistance. different factions, different

groups. a real tug of war, so to speak within the war, but finally the global community through the force of the geneva 1 communique, and through the force of diplomacy and insistence on the political solution being the only viable long-term solution, finally people came together. no one should doubt, no one is trying to gloss this over, that this is the beginning of a tough and complicated process. but the truth is that today i think what leapt out from more than 40 countries and organizations in articulate, well thought out presentations from more ministers than i have seen assembled in one room at anytime other than at the united nations itself, a very

significant gathering of ministers who took the time to come, and all suggest together how this must end; that it has to have an inclusive syria, where every citizen can live in dignity, lead by a government that the people of syria empower with their consent. so the fact that 40 countries and organizations came here from near and far, from asia, from south central asia, from europe, america, from the north american can't tent, from latin america, africa, north and south, all came, united in support of the syrian people, in support of their hopes for the future of syria, and in support of the geneva communique which does one thing that is of great

significance. it recognizes that a political transition is the only way to go, and that the political transition required under geneva 12 is a transition government with full executive authority by mutual consent. every entity here today with one exception talked about that, and embraced the geneva 1 communique. it is significant that all of the other countries, but that one, came here to endorse the geneva 1 communique, understanding from the outset that the invitation sent by secretary general ban ki-moon made it clear that was the purpose of gathering here today, and that is the purpose of the negotiations that will begin a day after tomorrow in geneva.

now, i believe that this gathering today, which we all know is only a beginning, and we have said so from the start, actually created a moment of special focus on the nature of this tragic conflict. today people can more clearly understand how alone assad is in standing up for himself. not for syria. and the resolution to this crisis cannot be about one man's insistence or one family's insistence about clinging power. this needs to be about empowering all of the syrian people. the international community expressed a united vision for syria that respects its citizens and protects the rights of every group, every sect, every faith,

mr mrurallism where all people are represented. a nation in which all syrians can peacefully consult their government without fear of retribution, fear of imprisonment, fear of death. a syria that works closely with its neighbors, but also can exist peacefully as a sovereign, independent, and democratic state. these are the syrian people's hopes for the future of their coup try and, and we support them. now, let me emphasize, as i said earlier in my comments today, what happened in syria began in the wake of the transformation that began to break out, throughout the middle east, and

everybody knows the events that began in libya and tunisia and egypt. eventually, young people in syria stood up for change. and some young kids with graffiti cans arrested. when their parents came out to protest the arrest of their young children, 120 of them were killed. that's the beginning of this. not a religious revolution. not terrorists. no terrorists were there then. this was people looking for change peacefully in their country, and they were met by bullets and violence and death. it's no secret that getting to where we are now has, as i have said been difficult and peace

and stability will not arrive overnight, but it is about the that this process is now in place. it is important that the government and the opposition will sit down over these next days, and we don't expect a sudden break through. what we do expect is a crystalizing of the difference. who stands for what? who is really fighting for what? whose arguments are based on truth? whose arguments are based on facts? and this is what all of you will have an opportunity to be able to measure and judge in the days to come. let me reiterate what the united states, the syrian opposition, and many others said this morning. no one should think for a moment that in the future of syria, there can be a place for a man who has turned on his own people, permitted the death of

130,000 of them through -- many of them by his choice of weapons and others by his choice of their mission, because some of those deaths are obviously soldiers. but the fact is, that innocent students and doctors have been killed by scud missiles. thosing aren't terrorists. those are the people of syria, trying to serve the people of syria, or trying to have a future by going to school in sir ia, and they have been killed, children in schoolyard, death by napalm. you have all reported on it. you have seen it. gas, not once, but many times, but once so egregious and provable that it was sufficient to bring to the international community and to actually get a

regime that one day earlier denied they even had the weapons, the next day they were ready to move the weapons out of syria. what kind of credibility is there left in that? this is a regime backed by iran and by a terrorist organization that has crossed over from lebanon into syria in order to fight. there is no one who has done more to make syria a magnet for terrorists than bashar al-assad. he is the single greatest magnet for terrorism that there is in the region, and he has long since because of his choice of weapons, because of what he has done, lost any legitimacy. who would imagine that tomorrow or in a week or a month you could suddenly say, oh, okay, it's all right. you can lead syria.

i think everybody here understands, as we have come to understand, that people in the region who support the opposition will never stop because of what he has done, and how he has done it. you cannot have peace. you cannot have stability. you cannot restore syria. you cannot save syria from d disintegration as long as bashar al-assad remains in power. so this is what is at steak here, and as we continue to pursue -- we know the latest charges are charges with photographs and documentation of mass torture, with bodies with numbers on them and designations written on them, and -- and the questions raised by this require an answer. i can't tell you exactly what all of it is, except that i know there are people who have

suffered' egregious torture and death. the opposition called for the united nations to investigate these allegations, and we join with them in demanding that there be a thorough investigation of these charges. as we continue to pursue a political solution that will enable the syrian people to better realize the future they seek, we cannot over these next days turn a blind eye to the crisis that syrians live with every single day. and that's why the united states is proud to have con attributed more than any other country to support the refugees within syria, and refugees in lebanon, jordan and elsewhere. the united states will continue to press for local ceasefires, and we will work with the

international community to press for increased humanitarian access to the hardest-hit areas. this is what human dignity at its most basic demands, and it is what security in the region and the fight against extremism requires. we will keep pushing for improved humanitarian access and for the return of journalist a aid workers who are held hostage, and as we proceed towards a political transition, we will continue to demand an end to the regime's scud missiles, barrel bombs and horrific weapons that have been used against civilians, including the weapon of starvation. we are joined by the international community in calling for assad to stop using these tactics, and today you heard a universal condemnation

of assad's violent assaults, and his use of starvation as a weapon of war, which is, by the way, a war crime. in the coming days, our team, including ambassador ford and his team will travel to geneva to support the more intensive discussions that will follow f. and lead by the un these talks will continue. we all know the process ahead will be difficult, but what i would like on behalf of president obama and the american people for the syrian people to know, is that we will continue to support the people of syria, broodly spoken, every step of the way as they fight for freedom and for the dignity and stability and security in the future that they deserve. i would be happy to take a few questions. i think jen -- >> one at a time, please. the first question will be from

margaret brennan. >> reporter: thank you very much. diplomacy diply works when there is a parallel pressure track. should increase be a consequence? and what assurances do you have that the syrian opposition will still participate given today that the syrian foreign minister said that assad's exit is not an option? did that surprise you? >> no, that was fully what we frankly expected, and, you know, opening positions are opening positions. who knows where they decide to go as this goes on. but the bottom line is that the support for the opposition is already augmenting. it is growing.

it is continuing from many different sources of support that exist for it. and i'm confident that that will continue in the days ahead. now there are still other possibilities of ways to be able to bring pressure and to try to work a solution to this. foreign minister lavrov and i talked -- our presidents talked yesterday. president obama and president putin talked in some length about this. and they both instructed the foreign minister lavrov and me to continue our efforts, which we will do. we'll continue to talk, and there are a number of things that we believe we can engage in, that may or may not be able to have an impact. but i can tell you this, what you see in the direct talks

between the opposition and the assad regime will not be the full measure of effort being expended in order to try to find a solution here. and so without going into any further detail, i will just say to you that lots of different avenues will be pursued, including continued support to the opposition and augmented support to the opposition. >> the next question will be from havey buza of orient tv. >> reporter: thank you secretary kerry, my question is there is some fears from secretary lavrov's speech that they are going to try to use the geneva talks to use more time, and to -- you know, spend more time. is there going to be any time

table to deliver results? and what is after geneva? what is the alternative solution if the geneva talks don't work? thank you. >> we're not going to talk about after geneva on think first day that geneva starts. geneva today is the opening statements, and the beginning of the negotiation is on friday. i expect that there will be a first round, maybe second round. look, negotiations to end wars particularly complicated difficult confrontations and conflicts like this, sometimes take a long time. you can go back and look at bosnia, kosovo. you can look at other open conflicts. you can look at -- go back as far as vietnam, and think of all of the hours spent just deciding the shape of the table.

i think a wholele year, before they even began to talk. so talk takes a while. none of us are satisfied with leaving syria to the kind of horrendous acts that have engaged in, which is why i said there will be parallel efforts being made while the talks are going on in order to try to find different pressure points and different ways of finding a solution, but my sense is that -- this is already one of the worst catastrophes of humanitarian crises in the world today. you have upwards of 9 million people displaced. the burden on jordan is growing and significant. the burden on lebanon is growing and significant. the increase of the numr