prosecution. the sale and the use of marijuana is still illegal under federal law. those are your head lines, i am morgan radford, live from new york city, up next "consider this." and remember you can always get the latest news online at aljazerra.com. check check >> can sass could become ground skiero in the battle for -- zero in the battle for equal right. if you pay $1 million, should you get 1 million votes >> former nazis used to win the cold war? >> alcohol abuse and art - an oscar nomination. >> i'm antonio mora, welcome to "consider this". here is more on what is ahead.

. >> kansas may have one of the controversial laws giving businesses the right to refuse service to gay couples. >> supporters claim it's all about religious freedom. >> the 1% has been pummelled. >> we'll do the best we can to make sure the economy works. >> pay a million in taxes, get a million votes. >> we went and recruited people. >> many people were hard-core nazis. >> the secret project. operation paperclip. >> this is the famous poor and struggling artists. american collectors say, "it's a wonderful image, not my test." a tough fight in the senate, kansas representative charles mcsheers. he says discrimination is horrible, hurtful has no place

in civilized society and that's preciselprecisely why we're movs bill. joining us from kansas city, missouri is thomas wit with witt. thomas, good to have you with us. this bill would allow a business or a government employee to deny service on the basis of religious principles and the sponsor of the bill is pretty much saying homosexuals are not the ones facing discrimination, those who believe that marriage should only be between a man and discrimination. >> thank you for having me. that's what the sponsor of the bill is saying but in reality, this bill is designed to target gay and lesbian couples in the state and allow government officials to deny services to tax paying kansans. >> it's not just related to gay marriage.

in effect one editorialist in kansas says you could see signs that would take us back to the 1950s of heterosexuals not served here, i think that's a with it of hyperbole but from a certain standpoint that could happen. >> i agree with you, that is a bit of hyperbole. it is already perfectly legal in kansas to deny service to gay and lesbian kansans. the state statute here that protects us against descremtion does no discrimination does not protect against sexual discrimination. >> blanket lawsuits if someone does discriminate based on sexual orientation? >> yes it does.

but we can't get into court with a lawsuit based on sexual discrimination as it is. private business able to deny service is a smoke screen. private business can already deny service in the state of kansas. private workers can evict us from being gay without us having any recourse in the courts. this whole bill is geared towards one way, that's to make it legal for government employees to engage in legalized discrimination. >> right, so the bill does go further than just saying that a florist can say no to providing services to a gay wedding. but how far does this go when it comes to government clerks? could a clerk refuse to issue a driver's license if a same sex couple came in? >> well, the clerk could refuse to update somebody's name if their name change is based on their marriage. a tax -- somebody working in the state department of revenue

could refuse to process tax returns from same-sex couples. there are an endless list of possibilities that could happen should this bill become law. >> now is there any chance it will become law? because there's been an avalanche of state publicity. the senate president saying it does go too far. >> the state senate president says it does go too far. she does have a lot of influence and power in the senate but the house can still play some procedural tricks to force the senate to take a yes or no vote on this bill. whether the senate president wants that bill or not. >> there were supporters, many didn't understand the far reaching implications of the bill. some are saying it could affect women and allow discrimination against women and this was developed by a d.c. based traditional values group called american religious freedom program.

did they pretty much take what they were given from this organization and really didn't have much of a debate? >> i've seen some of the model legislation from that group and what i'll note is that the kansas version of this legislation goes a lot further than the model legislation that's being introduced in some other states, such as a similar bill that's being introduced in tennessee this week. no other legislation that we've seen goes as far as giving government officials the right to discriminate. >> now, kansas is a conservative state, it passed a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage in april of 2005. >> right. >> and a poll last year of kansas voters found that 39 thought gay marriage should be legal but 51% thought it should be illegal. what does that tell you about what the law should be, in kansas, and what's it like to be gay in kansas, if you've got that kind of opposition to gay

marriage there? >> well, ultimately it's going to be up to the u.s. supreme court to decide whether or not marriage equality is recognized in kansas. public opinion polls, that's just not how we determine who does and doesn't have civil rights in this country. and i'm looking forward to a decision from the u.s. supreme court on this issue. >> but there was of course that referendum though. >> that's right. there was a referendum. there was also a referendum in oklahoma, a referendum in utah, a referendum in is virginia. we're looking at states where federal judges are overturning constitutional bans that were enacted by those states' voters over the past decade. kansas is just another state in the union. if the supreme court says that these bans are unconstitutional it is going to fall. >> all right, thomas witt thank you for joining us, appreciate your time. >> thank you very much i appreciate it. turning to income and

equality, thomas perkins has become the unofficial spokesman for angry 1% claiming it's absurd to demonize the rich because they are the job creators. this week he made some more pro provocative comments. >> the tom perkins system is you don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes. what i really think is, it should be like a corporation. if you pay a million dollars in taxes you should get a million votes. how is that. >> joining us is phil de muth. he is a contribute at forbes magazine and a managing director of conservative wealth management which offers investment advice to high net worth individuals and their families. a piece discussing why some wealthy people have an exaggerated sense of kill the

rich sentiments. phil, tom perkins when he was asked to be pro vokative, he was. he says if you pay a million dollars in taxes you should have a million votes. he was intending to be outrageous, he might have been joking but, class warfare, because of that income equality talk. is this a tempest in a tea pot? the 1% really haven't suffered much. >> well, president obama came into his state of the union address, not having much of a legislative agenda. so the smart thing to do given the upcoming congressional elections is to rattle the caimg of thcageof the republicans. a number of people have come forward with a kind of a rather tone-deaf response, just falling precisely into the trap that president obama has laid for them. and i think that's most of of what we're listening to. >> jonathan in your piece you

pose the question why do some forecast have the exaggerated sense of being attacked and being demonized? at the same time, president obama has pretty consistently raised income inequality in virtually every speech he's gone out there and given. >> well, he's raising that as one of the issues he talks about but his remedies are not soak the rich policies. his remedy is more money for this program, more money for that program, a higher minimum wage. so the idea that what obama and the democrats are really after is some sort of major class warfare is just sort of a little silly if you listen quite a bit to what they have to say and if you watch what they actually do. >> but people are certainly upset, sam zell also a billionaire talking about how the rich work harder, how the rich should start complaining because they're better off than almost anyone in the world. listen to that.

>> we've got a country that the poverty level is wealth in 99% of the rest of the world. so we are talking about how woe is me and woe is us and my god he is making $35,000 a year. why don't you try that out in india or some countries we can't even name. something like that china, anyplace the guy is wealthy. >> phil that might be true. 35,000 goes a lot further in bolivia and he knows it than new york city. doesn't that hurt the 1% argument, isn't this shooting themselves in the foot? >> that's how it seems to me. it's not particularly persuasive because we happen to live in the united states and that's the people that we see around united us, we're used to the standards of living here, that's our benchmark. it's not what it is in north korea or zimbabwe.

>> here is wilbur roth. >> the 1% is picked open for political -- on for political reasons. >> if they want stop being part of the 99%. again jonathan how much of this is political? all this rhetoric, is this just the democrats amping it up to help themselves electorally or do you think there may be more taxes coming down the pike? >> well there certainly is an agenda for the democrats like raising minimum wage and democrats are generally concerned, there's no question about it, far to the left, very concerned about income and equality, the spread between the very rich and the rich and then the rich and everybody else. but what's happening here a lot it has to do with information flows and partisanship but we have partisan media and we have people who listen to their side, we have conservatives who listen

to fox news who listen to rush limbaugh. conservatives pull out these quotes, they don't even have, if president obama is, that's going to go over and over and over on fox news. that seems to sell well. that's what a lot of it is. >> but income taxes go up, obamacare is going ocost more, there are things that are changing for people who are relatively wealth not just the uber billionaires. >> in one direction when the republicans were in office and the other direction when the democrats were in office. but the idea that there's some sort of massive class warfare or massive soak the rich that just -- or that obama's rhetoric is mainly about you know attacking rich people, that's just not borne out by if you

listen to him all the time instead of pull out this selected quote, absolutely, there are issues here and legitimate issues on which position sides can have legitimate issues on. >> but you say income equality is a good thing. >> it can be a good thing. but you are talking about living in a preindustrial society at a subsistence level of living and nobody wants that. but once you start getting into the industrial age, once you have private property, division of labor, specialization, some are going to be richer than others. i talked to somebody two who worked at a cadillac factory once. he said, even if the communists took over the united states, somebody would be driving a cadillac. >> we've got people who are

making more than $1 billion a year in income. i remember when michael milken made a half million and the outrage. now we've got a whole bunch of hedge fund guys who are making that sort of money. shouldn't they share a little more? there are people out there suffering, especially in the years after the recession. >> they did a good job postponing the day of reckoning. my idea is it is coming. given the deficit the united states faces, the amount of money most people have, the day of reckoning is coming, the top 1/100, you have to start somewhere. >> let's listen to tom perkins one more time. >> the fear is, just more taxes, until there is no more 1%. and then that will creep down to

the 5% and then the 10%. i'm talking about economic extinction. not physical extinction. >> economic extinction, jonathan, i'm sure he was exaggerating, but there is a slippery slope there where you can tax people out of prosperity for everybody. >> i'm not a communist. i'm not going to talk about what the best tax rates are. i'm going to talk about what democrats are actually proposes which is not like -- proposing, which is not like total equality for everyone. should it be pushed to where it was in the 1950s and the was somewhat smaller? they're not talking about major efforts to force it back to the 50s, 60s and 70s. when they had the supermajority should we raise taxes a liberal -- a little bit, you

know the next step is taking, confiscating money from the rich? there's just -- that's not a democratic party that we actually have. >> phil de muth and jonathan bernstein, i'm sure this is a conversation that will continue for quite some time. it's good to have you on the show, thanks for joining us. >> thrrchtion for having me. >> coming up. who truly settled america? and finding the oldest star in the universe. we tell you why countless scientists are over the moon. and hermella aregawi, what's trending? >> congress is trying to pass a ban against shution sugary drinks. join

both my parents are journalists. my grandfathers are journalists. it's just something that's in the blood. there are so many stories out there that need to be told. we want to go in to the trenches, we want to go in the corners that are less looked at. everyone at al jazeera america is dedicated to tell the story the best way that it can be told. al jazeera america gives you the total news experience anytime, anywhere. more on every screen. digital, mobile, social. visit aljazeera.com. follow @ajam on twitter. and like aljazeera america on facebook for more stories, more access, more conversations. so you don't just stay on top of the news, go deeper and get more perspectives on every issue. al jazeera america.

>> scientists have made a genetic discovery. the remains of a child were found in the oldest-known burial place in north america. dna testing is showing a genetic link in the ancient tribes that roamed siberia. we're joined by, the co-author of the study that mapped the dna

of that ancient child. that linked him to the earliest known north american people, the clovis people. where theber the bering strait, does this settle the debate? >> we think it does. we think this is pretty much if you will the final dirt of -- shovelful of dirt of europeans coming over here and being the first ones in america. >> what is the exact finding, what did you find? >> well, the exact finding was that the baby boy that was discovered here -- that was buried 12,500 years ago, is a direct ancestor, basically his parents are direct ancestors, to 80%, roughly speaking, 80% to all the native americans on both continents and we know this

because we have dna profiles from contemporary, native american people from mexico to south america and those profiles match very closely this boy's. >> on the other hand, stephen oppenheimer, say there's only genes that can come from europe across the atlantic. what do you say to that? >> yes, that has been proposed. i don't think mr. oppenheimer, dr. oppenheimer understands that there was a malta population that came out of central asia and actually some of them went into siberia, others went into europe. the boy that was found that was tested for dna was 24,000 years old in siberia. his dna is linked to both europeans and native americans.

but when his population kept going north, the idea is that some of them went into the americas and others went into europe and that's the reason why both those populations have similar dna, is because they have a common ancestor. but that doesn't prove or even suggest, really, that europeans entered into the americas from the east. >> one of their other arguments is that the tools the clovis people used were very similar to those found in some archaeological sites in france. >> well, that's another very weak argument antonio. because really the clovis technology is very unique, there are no other clovis tools in europe or in north america. the clovis technology was to recycle spear points. so they had to be constructed in a way that even when the tips were broken on them, they could

be sharpened and refastened to a spear. we don't find that anyplace else in the world. >> the body of the boy was discovered in 1968. why did it take so long for the analysis to be done? >> well, first of all the boy's body was kept basically in state, if you will. out of anyone's hands. and no research was done to it from the years 1968 right up to the year 2000. at that point they were returned to the family here in montana. and the owner at that time began to think about doing some research. it took a while to decide, you know, if she really wanted to go forward with that, you know she consulted with some tribes beforehand. and then ultimately the process of research took a long time. as you mentioned yourself you know the technology for genome sequencing is always advancing. and in fact, this particular study really broke ground because it's the very first time

in history that low-quality dna was actually used to produce a high-quality genome. and so not only was new technology needed to even complete this study, but new techniques were needed just to solve this genome. >> a quick final question. how do native american communities feel about this discovery? >> well, you know, that's a good question. you know, i think right now most communities probably don't see a lot of relevance towards it. i think in most tribal communities we believed all along that we have been here since time immemorial, whether years. this is not really breaking waves with many native american communities. >> dr. shane doyle, thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> the oldest star ever discovered, will we be mining on

the moon, and will lasers change the way we explore and communicate in space? to discuss these issues, dr. derek pitts, it's always great to see you. australian scientists have discovered the oldest star, 13.6 billion years ago. what does it tell us about the universe? >> what it tells us is a little bit more about the early history of the universe and it helps to go a little bit of the way toont t antonio is what came first, the chicken or the egg. the galaxies are the stars, the stars this old or stars that were created so long ago, when you find that they can give us a little bit of a picture about what things were like way back then. and we find that in stars like this they're very, very low in that composition of elements beyond hydrogen and helium. and this means that they were

not really invested with lots of heavy elements from the destruction of a star in that portion of space previously, that might have exploded in such a way to provide all of those extra elements that we find in much younger stars these days. so we can look back and try to get a better understanding of how those first stars began, what the energy environment was like in those early stars, what kind of explosions they had at the end of their lives and how those explosions may or may not have contributed to the kinds of chemicals we find in the second generation stars. >> and actually, so this really wasn't one of the first stars, this would be a second generation? >> yes, and we can tell it's a second-generation star because it has in it iron. it seems to have some iron. but the interesting thing about it is that it has a very, very small amount, about 10 million times less iron in it than we would find in a star of current day, like our own sun. and that's the telltale fact here is there's so little iron.

we can look for that signature in stars that we suspect to be very old and that helps to tell us. so that very, very small amount of iron tells us that it's a second generation star because it doesn't have anything else. like the calcium or the carbon or the nitrogen or any of the other heavier elements that are currently found in stars. if we look at our own sun we can find that there are traces of every element in the periodic table of the elements. but for stars of that age we find that there's hardly anything at all except for the hydrogen and the helium. >> and i know scientists feel the first generation stars are all gone. why did it take us so long to find this star because all the elements aren't there? this is in the milky way galaxy, away. >> this is like hunting for a needle in a haystack actually. if we look at galaxies that are 350, 450 billion stars, we have to hunt through those stars to

find one that has the proper signature. we first get rid of all stars that look like our sun, any similar to our sun and start to look at those stars through a spectrum show, and from those, we pick those that have the least elements of all, that's how we get to this one, so it's stars. >> it is a huge break through from nasa scientists, lasers to communicate from the earth to the moon and the hope is that this is going to make communication much, much quicker with any spacecraft we send out to space and that we can get more information back from them? >> well, that's the real key. the key is though the transmission time might be the same between a laser signal and a radio signal which is currently being used, the radio signal, the difference is we can pack so much more information on

the laser signal. we can send lots more information out, we can get lots more information back. that's what makes the research go so much faster. the way we said it, astronauts on their way to mars will be able to look at netflix videos, because they can send so much more information on a laser signal in 20, 30 years. but it's the amount of information carried as to the time involved, that's the step forward. >> nasa is making plans to send a rover to the moon that may be able to create water there without having to send water from the earth so that could help sustain people on the moon? >> well, believe it or not antonio one of the most expensive substances to send to the moon is water. because it weighs so much. eight pounds per gallon. you have to compensate for the

fuel and the size of the vehicle to carry it. the best things to do, if nasa wants to get in the game of boots on the ground exploration of mars, we need to make use of the resources in situ, on the spot. how much raw material is on these places so that we can again create equipment that can convert the raw materials of the soil into the oxygen, the fuel, the water, all those things that we would need to live on a place like the moon or on mars. >> well, in talking about raw materials nasa is talking about working with private companies to actually try and get raw materials out -- from the pooh moon. >> yes, it's an interesting challenge actually. when you look at the plenty of elements that has in it for all sorts of materials creation. it's even been suggested in some books a few years ago that the lunar soil could be used to

create building materials to build spacecraft for deep solar system exploration. but when we think about it, we have to think about what the financial cost for this is. and is the amount of materials available for soil enough to make it financially available that we can actually afford the infrastructure that has to be created for the mining and the transportation of materials. we still have a ways to go for this but interesting. >> if you are mining on the moon you have to get that back to the earth which i imagine could be incredibly expensive but could we see a space race involving mining in outer space? >> if it turns out that the value of what we can mine from either a asteroids or surface of the moon makes it financially valuable, it's something that could turn into a real industry in space and that's exactly what people are looking for, is a way to generate real money from space exploration. >> i wonder if it will happen in our

lifetime, derek as always, good to see you. thank you for discussing all this with us. >> thank you, antonio. >> it's time to see what's trending on ndle had -- al jazeera america's website. hermella. >> sweet drinks, the label would be on the front of the container and read state of california safety warning: drinking beverages with added sugar contributes to obesity, diebts and toot diebts -- diabetes and tooth decay. cal bev released a statement saying "it is misleadings to suggest that soft drink consumption is uniquely inherent in weight gain.

we asked you what you thought of this bill and jason said good idea, it could better inform those who would not know. but assad doesn't see the point. the fact that people don't know those risks is very sad. it is just a waste of money. you can read more on the website website, considerthis.aljazeera.com. >> space program, to fight the cold war. also the fashion faw faux pas, and the tortured relationship between two artists that has blossomed into an oscar >> every sunday night, join us for excusive...

revealing... and surprising talks, with the most interesting people of our time. hip hop pioneer russell simmons talks with soledad o'brien >> i make mistakes everyday, i don't try to count them... >> about his music.... >> the artist should say what's on people's minds. >> his cause... dominion over the animals does not mean abuse... >> and his future... >> i wanna make movies and tv shows that reflect the new america. >> russell simmons up close and personal... talk to al jazeera only on al jazeera

>> no doubt about it, innovation changes our lives. opening doors ... opening possibilities. taking the impossible from lab ... to life. on techknow, our scientists bring you a sneak-peak of the future, and take you behind the scenes at our evolving world. techknow - ideas, invention, life. on al jazeera america p

>> does america owe its edge due to the nazi war criminals. part is home grown, part from nazis scientists that tried to win the war for adolf hitler. it operation paperclip explores is program that hired labourists to build a rocket. and others that used prisoners for experiments. >> i am joined by the author of "operation paperclip." such a thought-provoking book. you started at the d of world war ii, when the americans and russians are rushing towards berlin. there's a different race going on, trying to get a hold of the nazi scientists. >> we were after atomic biological and chemical weapons.

our secret intelligence programs wanted the information, and fast. >> we did a better job than the russians at getting most of them. operation paper clip was started. first, classified and president truman okayed it with a caveat. he said we shouldn't bring over nazi party members and ss members. that was ignored. >> that was the benign public face of paper clip. it was a military program, that these were good german scientists with no naas which ideology in them. that was not the case, according to my research. >> let's start with some people. one was a household name, the father of the saturn rocket, seen there with john f kennedy, very prominent and important. you point out he was in charge

of a program where a lot of people died. >> absolutely, and a member of the ss. the u.s. army and helped von brown to whitewash his path. the space race with the soviets was the key to soup rem si. there's no way the general public could swap j the idea that von brown had dark-hard programs during world war ii. thousands of people died in slave labour. it's horrible to think about it. you talk about doctors and other individuals who were involved in other experiments. one was sigfried rough, and there was a bunch of others. he said: >> he was acquitted at nuremberg. there's so much evidence that they were conducting horrible experiments on live human being,

and they were brought to the united states. >> rough was one of seven arrested for war crimes. i was able to get the pentagon to declassify a document with the help of harvard university. after all these years it showed that those men were on a wanted war crimes lift. we knew they were conducting experiments but hired them anyway. >> some american scientists objected to operation paper clip, chief among them albert einstein, saying: >> 2007 dwight eisenhower had meetings over the alarm going on, but he supported it. >> an interesting anecdote i came across, speaking of president eisenhower is the person in charge of scientists went to eisenhower to ask what

he meant, about the scientists he should be wary of and von brown was one of them. >> there were warnings about some of these people. some were scary, and it's clear that people knew that. it's amazing as we read through this. we have a social media question. >> there were interesting questions on the ask me anything form. one is: he wants to know do you blame them as much as the ones that did the killing? >> certainly you wouldn't want to generalise and say all 1600 of the scientists that came here were hard core nazis. i look at 20 in particular for specific reason, and i take you through their individual narrative, and of the 20, it's very difficult to find one who

isn't a nazi idea log. >> does the end justify the means? does accomplishment cancel out past crimes. you don't give the answer yourself. what do you think? >> i trust readers to come to that conclusion themselves, but personally i think not. science, good science, leads to good science. we have an amazing science program in the united states. i think we did not need to hire nazis to get to where we needed to go, be it the moon or a strong military that we have today. >> the reality is their contribution to american science were substantial. they were ahead of us on a lot of different levels during world war ii. many things that happened in the late "40s, "50s, stealth technology yi in airplanes is some of what they discovered, helped with our stealth bombers.

if we had not had these people, and the russians had - soviet union in those days, would it have changed history. >> if you look at the soviet program you get the same answer. the soviets had their version of paperclip. they grabbed a lot of german scientists, but they treated them as second class citizens because of the animosity from the war >> whereas we gave them big money and nice houses. >> the russians sent then home and continued. look at the results. their biochemical weapons was stronger than ours. did we need the nazis? >> i think not. >> is it fair to look back at what was going on back then through our lens today without getting ourselves in the shoes of what happened back then, and

the utter fear, once the soviets got the atomic bond. >> that's one train of thought. many will tell you that who support the program to this day. they'll say how dare you stand on the ped stall and look back. that's why i tried to have this conclusion, let it be drawn by the reader. >> it's an incredible story, it's fascinating, and a lot of credible work. >> the book is operation paperclip, the secret intelligence program bringing nazi scientists to america. >> did the u.s. speed skating lose because of fashion. the excuse next in data dive. >> alcohol and a volatile relationship. our series of oscar nominated films concludes with "beauty and the boxer." other american news channel.

find out what happened and what to expect. >> start every morning, every day, 5am to 9 eastern with al jazeera america. al jazeera america. we open up your world. >> here on america tonight, an opportunity for all of america to be heard. >> our shows explore the issues that shape our lives. >> new questions are raised about the american intervention. >> from unexpected viewpoints to live changing innovations, dollars and cents to powerful storytelling. >> we are at a tipping point in america's history! >> al jazeera america. there's more to it.

>> every sunday night, 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 >> today's data dive goes the olympics, and the speed skating team are partially complaining their clothing, complaining that the underarmour outfits slowed them down. it's one explanation for the less than stellar performance. while the world loves to watch the competition, how many play in real life? curling an a butt of jokes. it looks like a house cleaning crew on ice. the conventional wisdom that it's not popular is wrong. more than a million around the world play, there's more than 15,000 curlers in 135 clubs in

the u.s. america is home to millions of skiers, but not many ski jumpers. it started in norway, and is popular in nordic countries, not so much in the u.s. maybe not that many people want to fly into the air at high speeds. bob sledding got a boost in popularity thanks to the jamaican bob sled team portrayed in the movie "cool runnings", it's not big in the u.s. cross-country skiing struggle, and may be a reason that olympic ratings are down from vancouver. the tape delay doesn't help. most know who has won by the time it hits tv. ews.

>> the art world has a long

stormy history of mentor, tormentor relationships. jackson pol lack. but what happens when the mente rvetion and thteeand the mentor? >> while his works are exhibited across japan, american collectors often say that's a wonderful image but not my taste. >> i've had one. >> no, i -- you are so pitiful. >> i need you. >> cuetoi

cutie. >> zachary heinzer ling. let's start off with shinahara. he's been in new york for almost five decades. we saw him there the with andy warhol. >> he is a very significant artist, he's in all the history books and has pieces all over japan and museums and galleries. he's lesser known obviously in the u.s. >> but he's had major exhibitions at the u.s. >> he has had in moma. >> it is really a story of a

very stormy and interesting relationship and noriko his wife has become a significant artist in her own life. even though for a long time she was totally under his shadow. >> that makes up a lot of the narrative of the film. i was inspired by noriko's art. it started out more of a biography, and the more forthcoming of the two, but noriko's work. but it was the fire and energy between them that became so much more universal for the audience, whether you're an artist or any person that's doing anything that requires something creative or that you're passionate about and especially you know for couples that you know are in long term marriages, and certainly couples that have you know similar jobs, careers as well.

>> right, well we see this combative relationship throughout. we just saw her saying, i don't think that's good to this marvelous canvas that he had put together. and in the film also is another moment where she's at one of his exhibitions, it's she's clearly not happy because it's his exhibition and not hers. does that kind of tension work in their favor, creatively? >> i think so. noriko has told me early on in this projects, that olove is hate and hate is love and one plus one doesn't equal two. conflict can create beauty. that helps, keeps them energetic, keeps each other on their heels, one is doing something, the other is doing something and they're constantly sort of you know competitive and i think it keeps them young. if you look at them, you know, they're ageless,

ushio is now 82. he has the energy of a five-year-old. and she is beautiful. >> let's listen to noriko describing their relationship. >> sure. >> heaven or hell. but in the end, when you showed him the finished film, it wasn't relationship issues that really mattered so much. but he wanted you to reedit the film. >> yes, when i turned the tv off for the first screening his reaction was, so, this is a love story?

and i said well, yes. and he kind of grunted and clearly was disappointed that the film wasn't more about him and focused on his artwork. he was more under the impression that it was about him, and luckily enough noriko was there to combat his criticisms with an equal expression on my behalf, that he thought i should cut off the last 30 minutes of the film. >> which was about her. you also show how they struggle, is it that hard to make a living, even when you're in a fairly renown artist like him? >> it's hard to say. ushio came over in 1969. and i think you know he never really learned english. he never you know was sort of managed, i think the proper way, i mean, incredibly competitive

art field and his art is really difficult to define. it sort of fits in all of these categories of pop art, of sort of, you know, post-abstract expressionist. >> painting and sculptures. >> yeah. he almost couldn't escape the legacy of this boxing painting, pure form of action, where his body was the art and the performance was the art and it was something renowned and groundbreaking, it was hard for him to move on from those pieces which is what he wanted to do. every artist wants to reinvent himself. >> he started filming himself early on. early days in new york which makes it even more interesting, the movie's been obviously very successful, being nominated for an oscar and actually led to great things for your career. >> yeah, it's led -- it's great for everyone involved in the film, obviously great for the

artist. we had a number of excisions tidtied up with the film. >> you were working with beyonce too. >> yes, i had short films announcing release of her secret album that came out in december. really an amazing project. a mammoth project. two years of footage to kind of you know condense and sort of make sense of, been working on the album forever, working with justin husband. >> this is a massive project took you five years to shoot it and it was worth it certainly for you. cutie and the boxer is available on itunes and blue ray, we'll watch and show how it goes.

>> thank you for having it. the show may be over but the conversation continues you can find us on twitter @ajconsiderthis. we'll see you next time. >> good evening, everyone. welcome to al jazeera america. i'm john siegenthaler in new york. historic vote in the

in >> a blow to organised labour workers in the plant at tennessee rejecting word from the union. >> president obama travels to palm springs to talk with the jordanian king >> banking on pot - banks get the green light to open accounts for marijuana sellers. >> hello to you. welcome to al jazeera america. i'm morgan radford live in new york city. tennessee auto workers say no to unionizing, the defeat out of