>> hello and welcome to al jazeera america. same receive sigh. another shooting at fort hood military post in texas, an army specialist identified bay congressman at ivan lopez, shot and killed three people on wednesday before killing himself. 16 otherwise were injured. >> five years ago, another gunman opened fire at fort hood, killing 13. >> at a hearing on capitol hill this morning, the secretary of the army spoke about the situation at fort hood and gave condolences to the victims. >> the u.s. government was reportedly behind a social media platform aimed at encouraging dissent in cuba. the associated press said the government secretly funded an

app for cell phones similar to twitter, hope to go create an uprising against the communist regime. >> chili hit by a huge after shock, triggering a tsunami alert and coastal evacuations in peru. the after shock comes one day after an 8.2 earthquake hit the region. six people were killed in tuesday's quake. >> anti-government clashes in february in egypt will have a report released today. >> a federal declaration for help in washington from the mudslides will help with the clean up. eye consider this" is next. >> combative testimony on

capitol hill - we'll go inside the c.i.a. as is paces fire on two fronts. opposition leaders claim they are the victim of america media bias. will a sharply divided supreme court decision on campaign finance give the wealthy more say over who gets elected. >> did a convict rapist escape a sentence because he's rich. i'm more antonio mora, here is more on what is ahead. >> lashing out at white house , police. >> after two months of protests, there's no sign they will stop.

>> we did not downplay the role of terrorists. some students are opting out. >> settling for a status quo shouldn't be the answer. >> a wealthy heir to the du pont pleaded guilty admitting he performed sex acts on his 3-year-old daughter. >> the sentence, community service. >> criticism has sit the c.i.a. the duet ni director was grill deputy director was grilled whether he received reports that there was no protest before the deadly terror attack. >> we did not deliberately downplay the role of terrorists in the ben gassy attack in the analysis or talking points. >> in

comes as senator dianne fienstein blasted the organization that it tracked the intelligence agency. c.i.a. director denies it, the feud is not going away soon. >> if i did something wrong, i'll go to the president and explain to him what i did and what the findings were. he is the one who can ask me to stay or go. >> on thursday a senate committee will vote, showing that the c.i.a. mislead on using torture on detain ears. >> we are joined by mark mazetti, the author of "the way of the knife - the c.i.a., a secret army and a war at the ends of the earth", out in paper back. good to have you with us. mike moral and his testimony on wednesday. he basically said he ignored

guidance on the c.i.a. officer on the ground when grafting the talking points arguing the attack was the result of protests over a film. as we heard, he insists that he did not downplay the fact that it was a terrorist attack. what happened, was it an issue of incompetence, ignoring a c.i.a. station chief there and telling you what was going on? >> morrell certainly admitted that the talking points were inartfully crafted and said they should have been written better. he denied a strategy to downplay the role of terrorist. he refuted the idea that he was carrying water. the issue does not go away, and will not go away because it's a political issue in the political bloodstream. it will be an issue if hillary

runs for president. benghaz. >> is with us for a while. morrell tried to take his role out of it. >> you have been covering the c.i.a. for a long time. why do you think it played out ? >> for the reason you have a deadly attack that killed an american ambassador and three other americans. it was a tragedy and an important moment in the conflict of terrorism. you have this real political story where republicans are charging a cover up. i think some of the administration would admit that the early days were not handled well after the benghazi attack. that, of course, is more chum in the water for republicans who want to keep the story going. >> let's talk about the senate report. the senate's investigation into

the c.i.a. you wrote on wednesday that it was unsparing in the criticism of the c.i.a.'s brutal interrogation methods. what's the worst of it, lying about the methods and how much was used? >> we have been trying for a year to get to the bottom of what is in the report. it remains classified. we get pieces and some details. i think in the end, again, this is some degree of speculation that the real significance of the report will be this - these conclusions and the explanation of sort of how the c.i.a. systematically was inflating the value of the program. it will be less, you know, new details about specific interrogations. it will be the legacy of the program, and that there had been a systematic effort to sell the program, to sell the value of

the program, not only to the white house, but to congress and the american people. >> and to hide the extent of it and the black sites. yes, and for instance, there has been repeated associations by c.i.a. officials that only three people were waterboarded under the c.i.a. program. what we don't know is were there other freelance efforts and interrogations that included methods similar to water board and whether it was not officially sanctioned. that is what we are trying to find out. there's so many years later a lot more to be learnt about the period of history. >> the senate intelligence committee votes on thursday. there's little doubt that they will vote to declassify the summary of this report, thousands much beiges. not likely that we'll see this soon. well as you said, the vote thursday, and that will go

president obama for declassification. president obama has said that he will push to declassify it. it could take weeks, months, or days if president obama really decides to push it. i do think that there is a recognition that politically this has dragged on too long. it hurt the president and it's making him look like it's covering up something that he has. the white house recognises that they would like to get this out sooner rather than later. >> what about the spy versus spy situation. the c.i.a. being under the microscope, whether the c.i.a. spied on the senate intelligence committee. whether the committee had documents they shouldn't have gotten, and you write about dianne fienstein, who has been a supporter of the c.i.a. she says you write about what she calls a defining moment for the oversight of the spy

agencies, saying that for an intelligence committee, buffeted. the rupture with dianne fienstein, one of its closest congressional allies could have brode ramifications, what do you see happening? >> that was extraordinary, is that as part of the fight between the committee and the c.i.a. over the legacy of this program, you have accusations of each side spying on each other. it's now with the justice department. to sort out whether crimes were committed. i don't think the justice department will take up the investigation in the sense that they'll charge anyone with crimes. it has real effects. one is the constitutional issue of separation of powers. the c.i.a. monitoring the people. secondly, you have the political story, which is - you know, it's not a good why the for the c.i.a. to cross the intelligence

committee, who are the funders and overseers, and when, for the most part. dianne fienstein has been vigorous in its defense of c.i.a. and its programsment >> we see what the the justice review comes up with. if people are interested in looking at the c.i.a. and what their role is in wars around the world, including afghanistan, drone wars, and osama bin laden, you should read marks book: >> a pleasure to have you. >> now to the supreme court which reversed nearly four decades of campaign spending caps, depending on who you speak to, the 5:4 decision may blow out a fire wall of corruption. just johnson wrote:

justice briar wrote: >> let's bring in jeffrey stone from chicago, he's written a number of books on constitutional law, and a professor at the chicago law school. he got back speaking at the n.s.a. where he made surprising comments about the intelligent agencies role. we'll start with the campaign finance ruling. good to see you. one thing both sides agrees on is this furthers the citizen united ruling striking down limits on campaign spending. it does not increase the amount an individual can contribute to a candidate. it gives individuals a chance to contribute to as many candidates as they want. >> correct. it continues the process that the current 5-member majority

has been moving towards. eviserating restrictions on the ability of individuals to use larges payments of money. in the name of freedom of speech, what they are doing is basically undermining the fundamental democracy that the freedom of speech reserves. >> the center from responsive politics found 6 million people reached the maximum that you could contribute to a series of candidates. how big a deal is it if that few contributions. >> it's a big deal. if everyone could afford it, it's less of a problem. only a small number of americans have the capacity to impact this process. it puts political candidates in the pockets of these wealthy billion airs and that's not the way the democratic process should work. it's a serious threat to democracy in the united states.

these are bad decisions. >> justice roberts wrote if the first amendment protects flag burning, funeral protests and nazi parades, despite the offense they cause, it surely protects political campaign speech despite popular i suppose, and it's there. a gall ip pole found 8 of 10 americans want to limit the amounts to the house. why the disconnect. >> justice roberts use of the anal anies is problematic. the core protection of the first amendment is against the government telling people what they can and cannot say. the examples of nazis were flag burning, the government prevent people engaging because it does not like the ms age. it's not the case. the government can say that people can't use loud speakers at 2 o'clock in the morning. that's a regulation of the means of expression, those regulations

have been upheld under the first amendment. to anal guise the finance rules, not about content, they are about volume to the circumstances in which the government's regulated the ideas that people can save is a falls analogy. a better is that we allow people to regulate the use of loud speakers. how many 80% of the american people disagree with the supreme court on this. this is an instance where 8% of american people have good sense, they understand that money can deeply and seriously corrupt the political process. >> let's move on to the n.s.a. you were part of the review group that appointed the president. you made a bunch of recommendations. you wrote about it saying there's no doubt that the n.s.a. thwarted terrorist plots and has a high degree of integrity.

>> one of the things i learnt, which policed me, because i came to the review group responsibility. pretty well-known civil libertarian was that, in fact, the n.s.a. operates with a high degree of integrity and care, and does, in fact, make a consheen somehows effort to stay within the bounds of the law. many of the authorities, i think, were excessive and inappropriate. the responsibility for that rests not with the n.s.a., but with the congress, president and the foreign intelligence surveillance. intention should be placed. my sense is the n.s.a. is not the bad guy, it's exercising authorities. rather to the congress and the president and the judiciary which, i think, have been not sufficiently careful about restraining the authorities. i came to have a deal of respect for the n.s.a. and its employees, and i think it's

important to turn attention to belongs. >> your concern is it has too much power, and despite the positives you found, you think that we should not trust the n.s.a. i don't think it should trust government with a large degree of power, it's a predicate with the constitutional system. the reason we have powers, the house on the senate. the separation of powers, checks and balances, they are designed because we are not supposed to trust government, nor the n.s.a. more than we should trust the senate intelligence committee. the fact is that in the recent past the n.s.a. acted with a high degree of responsibility, that doesn't mean we should trust them in the future, but focus on entities that it made the mistakes here. >> two important top ucks. us. >> thank you for having me. >> coming up, venezuela leaders

says u.s. media is distorting the protest of his regime, the day after he tear gassed his opposition. >> fighting core testing at schools. how parents are having their kids boycott the tests. social producer harmela aregawi is tracking stories on the web. >> let us know what you thing on: >> everyday, someone leaves their home, searching for a better life. >> two hours in, you come up on a body. >> now, in a breakthough television event, al jazeera america takes you beyond the debate. experience first hand the tragic journey of these migrents. >> a lot of people don't have a clue, what goes on when you live near the border. >> six strangers, with different

points of view. >> i don't believe in borders... >> our government is allowing a invasion >> get to experience illegal immigration, up close and personal. >> it's very overwhelming to see this many people that have perished. >> a lot of families taht don't know where their babies went >> i wanna make sure that her life, it's remembered... >> what happens when lost lives are re-lived? >> the only way to find out is to see it yourselves. on borderland only on al jazeera america >> hey guys, wanna come to the united states? >> scared as hell... >> as american troops prepare to leave afghanistan get a first hand look at what life is really like under the taliban. >> we're going to be taken to a place, where they're going to make plans for an attack. >> the only thing i know is, that they say they're not going to withdraw. >> then, immediately after, an america tonight special edition for more inside and analysis. >> why did you decide to go... >> it's extremly important for the western audience to know why these people

keep on fighting... ...it's so seldom you get that access to the other side. >> faultlines: on the front lines with the taliban then an america tonight: special edition only on al jazeera america

his regime, this time in the pages. "new york times". he accused the foreign media of disstarting my reality. and protests seeing 49 killed and prominent politicians arrested and gailed. nicolas maduro wrote that his government reduced poverty and inequality and blamed the protests on the 1% that sought to reverse the gains by the majority of people. on opposition congress woman was greeted by tear gas and police when trying to take her streets. she was stripped of her seat when addresses a united states audience.

for more on the crisis and nicolas maduro's defense, let's go to washington d.c. and harold menkoulis, from the brookings institute. nicolas maduro's oped is entitled "a call for peace", do the actions of gassing opposition leader, gaoling opposition leader leopoldo lopez, and mayors, does that demonstrate an interest in having a dialogue for peace? >> it's a pleasure to join you. i think that you are pointing out one of the inherent contradictions in the government's message. the calls for dialogue in venezuela from the government has been relatively recent in - in response to growing international pressure, growing international por trails of the violence in venezuela -- portrayals of the violence in

venezuela, there's a duel message between calls for peace. >> in fact, the conference of catholic bishops are calling for peace in venezuela. these are the bishops in venezuela. they talked about the brutal repress against a dissident that is going on. nicolas maduro writes in his peace that there has been a change in poverty, that power and resources became equitably disrupted. venezuela has cut poverty in half since his mentor chavez took power back in 1999. how does venezuela's effort on that front, how do they compare to the rest of latin america. >> venezuela made progress in reducing poverty and increasing social inclusion. it's been fitted from a

windful revenue of oil sales dwarfing previous oil boom the country experienced. the government put some of the revenue into social programs and other parts of increased oil revenue. venezuela ranks similarly to other countries in the region such as brazil and chile that made progress on reducing poverty. this is part of the general boom in commodity exports that the region benefitted from. none of the countries had the boom that the venezuelans would have. oil prices have gone from $19 to sometimes $150 per barrel. venezuela had a massive increase in income, but the poverty has not declined in numbers. >> the windful oil revenues

dwarf anything the rest of the area experiences. some are equivalent to 25 to 30% of g.d.p. during the past decade. >> a terrible economic crisis led to this, aside from the terrible increase in crime. it's probably the third highest murder rate in the world, highest inflation in the world. there's wide-spread scarcity of how does nicolas maduro survive that kind of pressure. the argument is that this is reaching all parts of venezuela society, not just the rich. >> no, that's correct. nicolas maduro administration realising that it has to begin making adjustments of the economic model. we have seen the government since the last fall taking efforts to reduce consumption. it was greatly outstripping the supply of oil income.

>> he claims in his peace the anti-government protests carried out by the people in the wealthy areas of society, is that silly. we see massive demonstration, hundreds of thousands of people in marches. the associated say the bar yours have spread throughout the county country, especially in poor neighbour hoods in caracas. >> it has spread across the national territory. they started in the western city. that's an unusual pattern in venezuela politics, a lot of politics is centered around the capital city of caracas. we are seeing a broader array of protesters participating in the efforts to call attention to economic problems, scarcity and country.

>> how does it play out. he was elected democratically, whatever you may think of the power of the government in an election, and the size of the federal government is massive in venezuela, nothing compared to our federal government here, people complain about how big that is. they control the media, they control the aspects of, you know, all powers, all the different branches of government. what happens? can there be a recall election next year. do you think anything will happen before that? >> i think the recall election may be problematic. the venezuelan experience with recall in the past was that the signatures needed to conn vene the recall, 20% of the registered voters, the lists were used to per cent cute or punish people calling for the recall of president chavez in the previous administration. what is likely is that the one window of opportunity my be the

possibility of dialogue. supported by international mediation, or perhaps the vatican made offers in this area, and greater attention to the constitutional mechanisms in venezuela's system, leading to the renewal of the supreme court, the national electoral council, the attorney-general , and the national ombudsman. >> there's hope that the vatican, brazil will be involved. they were speaking to the senate there on wednesday. we'll say on top of the story. it's good of you to join us, thank you. >> turning to education - thousands of parents in new york are pulling their children out of the common core tests which began on monday. three schools in brooklyn had 70% of students opting out. it's happening across the country with parents and kids taking a stand against similar tests in their state. >> joining us in new york is a 20 year

veteran of the education sector, a teacher and curriculum and safety expert in new york, and a mother whose 8-year-old opted out of the standardized exams. let's start with your son, 8 years old, third grader. that's an objection. you don't think the tests are age appropriate. >> they absolutely are not appropriate for 8-year-olds or 10-year-olds. i'll start by saying i taught third grade. and there was nothing i needed seven hours over six days to find out what my child now in reading or maths. the tests go on for so long. why do you need so much time? >> and they are feeling the >>. >> absolutely. one parent said her daughter pencil. >> is your option just to the itself.

>> it's to high stake testing. i'm not opposed to testing children to find out what they know, because we use tests to kach. tees are high stakes. the results come out over the summer, after the schoolier ended, so no one can use the information, it's the number. parent get into information. stakes. >> you don't have a problem with standards involved in common core, and what they are trying to teach, what they profess or are trying to do is make sure that all children have a certain level of education and graduate. >> there's nothing wrong with standards, and high quality schools had standards, but they are set by experts in the field, teachers, administration, community who can reflect what we know children need to learn and do. it's fine to have a conversation

about standards, it's silly to attach funding and attach qualifications to one test. >> as you know, all the studies of where america ranks, we are doing terrible. >> we are. >> so if we do implement common core as expected in new york, adopting it early, spreading to the country, how do you figure out whether it's working or not if we don't have the tests. countries. >> i've been talking to sweden and finland, where they invest in education - unlike the united states. we need to address poverty, unequal access to high-quality schools. we can't test our way that high standards or high academic achievement. it doesn't work. >> you are concerned that

test. >> absolutely. learning. >> absolutely. i mean, you would teach to the test if you were going to be judged based on your children's performance. commonsense. children are not getting science, trips, or learning how to talk to each other and problem sold. i don't want to live in a nation where people can't figure out how to communicate and do art, music, science in addition to music and maths. >> the testing and all this is leading to important subject being ignored. >> they are completely being ignored, cut out, and children are getting the sense that they are not important. the other tst is the pressure to do well on the test is being pushed down to children younger and younger. we have kinder gart ners talking about tests, afraid they will not cut it. kindergarten is the new first

grade, you chuckle, but it is ridiculous. children are five in kindergarten, we need to treat them as such. >> it is incredible that 8-year-olds are concerned about this. they are terrified, stressed. we heard reports of children vomiting. associated. >> parents should educate themselves, go to change-the-station.org. there's a lot of information. we try to make it accessible. there's a great video where parents talk about children. diane ravage on her blog has so much information. there are more dots to be connected, and i urge parents to do the work, and find out so that you can children. >> time to see what is trending on the website. >> a new study says living in densely populated areas is good

for you. the report by the national institute of health and smart growth america says people in metro areas tend to walk more and spend less time in their cars. rer thinner with lower blood pressure and rates of diabetes. the longer that people live, this is due to a lower risk of fatal collision. enough upside is mobility. the studies lead researcher says if they are raised in a densely populate area, a child born in the bottom 20 has a better chance of rising to the top 20% of the income scale by age 30. he added:

you cap read more at the website aljazeera.com. let us know what you think of the findings at twitter. >> ahead - an heir to the dooup on the fortune -- du pont fortune pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting his 3-year-old daughter but did not get any gaol time. >> audiences are intelligent and they know that their needs are not being met by american tv news today. >> entire media culture is driven by something that's very very fast... >> there has been a lack of fact based, in depth, serious journalism, and we fill that void... >> there is a huge opportunity for al jazeera america to change

the way people look at news. >> we just don't parachute in on a story...quickly talk to a couple of experts and leave... >> one producer may spend 3 or 4 months, digging into a single story... >> at al jazeera, there are resources to alow us as journalists to go in depth and produce the kind of films... the people that you don't see anywhere else on television. >> we intend to reach out to the people who aren't being heard. >>we wanna see the people who are actually effected by the news of the day... >> it's digging deeper it's asking that second, that third question, finding that person no one spoken to yet... >> you can't tell the stories of the people if you don't get their voices out there, and al jazeera america is doing just that.

kz >> is our legal system rigged in favour of the rich when they

break the law. there's new outrage about affluenza over the case of robert richard iv an unemployed heir to the du pont fortune, pleating guilty -- pleading guilty to sexually assaulting his daughter saying, "he want fare well in prison", there was outrage in the case of ethan couch, killing four people, injuring two others whilst driving drunk. his lawyers argued he had been so spoilt by his parents and wealth that he didn't realise his actions had contributions. we are joined by jamie flied. this case of richards came up because his ex-wife is suing him in a civil case about the abuse of his son and daughter. this sparks outrage.

this is a man, 6 foot 4, 260 pounds and a judge said he wouldn't fare well in prison. >> the case goes back several years, it was a plea deal. he pleaded guilty, and prosecutors dropped the felony rape such that he wouldn't have to spend any time in prison. that's what the outrage is about, the lack of gaol time. the question is whether or not this plea deal look like others, whether or not a different defendant would have gotten the same deal. chances are know. what did you see a regular defender have, a public defender, an overworked lawyer with hundreds of cases or an appointed lawyer with 50 cases in his or her bag. this guy had rich lawyers, former states attorneys, good lawyers. does that mean he got a special benefit - yes, the benefit of his wealth and privilege.

lady advise has two scales, it tips this way for the prosecution, the police. he tipped them this way with his considerable resources. the justice system is broken. >> that's basically what t the legal system is rigged in favour of the rich because they can afford lawyers focussed on the defense of the client, while poor people have to deal with case. >> it's rigged. in favour of who - whichever side has more resources. that's police prosecutors, and whoever wants to bring all the the resources to bear in court. advantage. >> i think the state has the advantage, and the poor person with a single public defender will lose, that's why most plead out before getting to trial. rich famous guy, he wins and victim loses out. >> let's talk about the case. the prosecutors, as you said, dropped the first degree rape charges to fourth degree,

carrying a recommended sentence from zero probation to 2.5 years, and erases the question. maybe this was a case that might have been difficult to prove. there was a 3-year-old victim, it was a few years before the case was brought. do you think there might have been inpropriety. >> there's no evidence of impropriety. it's a small state. it's a big family, probably the biggest richest family in the state. there's no evidence of impropriety. we have to think about a victim any time there's a sexual assault case. we don't want a victim to have to testify, even in closed quarters. you want to make it go away. i am sure that's what prosecutors were thinking about, or the mother. let's make the case go away. >> but the judge gives him minimum, probation, he doesn't

spend a day in gaol and rationalizes it saying he wouldn't fare well in prison, who does. >> no one, least of all child sexual offenders. consideration? >> no, that was a heartless thing to say. questions should be asked about why the defendant fare thissed way, especially at the sentence phase. once the deal is cut. the sentence is attached. once the charge is cut, that's the sentence that goes with a fourth degree felony. the system is broken. unfortunately so much of it has to do with resources, limited resources on both sides, the system overworked. it's about who can bring more resources to bear. >> nothing we can do? >> not in this case or others. we have seen so many cases of celebrity justice where the celebrity can bring considerable resources to bear. >> nothing we can do, because

the only hope is to fund public defender offices. >> that's what we need to do. >> i say to people when they are outraged when the celebrity offender walks. talk about the cases where you have a non-celebrity up against a considerable prosecutor's office and a major jurisdiction, the burreder then have -- burden they have to bear. >> it raises important issues. good to have you with us. >> my pleasure. >> overworked and overwhelmed. are we too busy to properly love and play. >> everyday, someone leaves their home, searching for a better life. >> two hours in, you come up on a body. >> now, in a breakthough television event, al jazeera america takes you beyond the debate.

experience first hand the tragic journey of these migrents. >> a lot of people don't have a clue, what goes on when you live near the border. >> six strangers, with different points of view. >> i don't believe in borders... >> our government is allowing a invasion >> get to experience illegal immigration, up close and personal. >> it's very overwhelming to see this many people that have perished. >> a lot of families taht don't know where their babies went >> i wanna make sure that her life, it's remembered... >> what happens when lost lives are re-lived? >> the only way to find out is to see it yourselves. on borderland only on al jazeera america >> hey guys, wanna come to the united states?

stripes are perfect why width. >> elephants are a great champ of evolutions impact. scientists believe they evolve from an aquatic animal, spending hours underwater, using the trunk as a snorkel.

african elephants develop big ears, flapping to cool themselves. they develop an intricate web of blood vessels below the surface of their skin. when they are hot, the hot blood is pumped into the veins, allowing the heat to escape into the air. giraffes may be an extreme example of evolution. they live in afghanistan ricka, their necks are longer to let them graze on fruit and trees that wouldn't be reachable. the fore legs are longer than the hind legs to make it easier. it can work in the opposite direction. medium ground finches have seen their beaks shrink. the reason - larger finches arrived and muscled them out for larger nuts so the smaller birds need to go after the smaller nuts requiring a smaller beak.

science and nature never cease to amaze. >> americans are overworked and overwhelmed.

>> politicians and pundits once predicted the 21st century americans would be kicking back and enjoying a life of leisure around now. instead, working hours in the 24/7 high-tech world increased. many professionals worked more than 50 hours a week, less well-off americans work two jobs to provide. jobs are scattered and skimpy. as tough as men may thing they have it, working mums may be worse off, trapped between a culture celebrating a culture with no attachments, and a standard of motherly affection that few if any can meet. we go to staff writer at "the washington post", author of:

>> good to have you with us. people are so overwhelmed that you modified the verb, turn overwhelmed. >> i did, i felt a sense of everything all at once. i describe it as a feeling of burning the candle of both ends. it's pervasive. there's a strong pressure on mothers. it's everybody, with long work hours, technology coming at us, and the sense that businessiness is how we show our status, rather than take a long leisurely weekend. >> we talk about how busy we are, making us feel better. one thing you found was the overwhelmed can change our

brains and behaviour for the worst. i really wanted to underwhy should we care in people are overwhelmed. we often dismiss it "we have to work hard, this is what the economy requires." i found a couple of things. we have known how much stress affects the body, leading to cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer. at the yale stress center i found neuroscientists looking at the stress, the bath of stress, what it is doing to our brains, and they find if you have been through stressful events and have the perception that you are stressed out, your prefrontal cortex is smaller, it shrinks. that's the part of the brain where you need to think, learn. the very part of the brain you need the most is taxed. >> it's fright thing.

anyone can beoverwhelmed. another interesting thing that you bring up is that even though many more mothers work today than back in the '60s, that mothers today are suspending more time today with their kids. >> that was surprising. i felt guilty as a working mother. culture seemed to say that i was selfish or abandoning my children and not doing the right thing. when i looked at the time studies, finding working mothers are spending as much or more time, the important thing is it's high-quality interactive time. that is a huge pressure. you are trying to be this ideal worker and mother, and both of those standards have risen for everybody. kind of out of proportion to decades. >> fathers too, because they are sharing more time with the kids

chores. >> absolutely. that was interesting. i looked at women and mothers and discovered you can't look at women without looking at men, or anyone in a vacuum. you can't look at leisure without looking at work or what is happening at home. with younger men more involved at home, being more than the fun dad or helper parent. they are feeling the same work-life conflict that mothers felt 30 years ago. now you have surveys coming out saying fathers are stressed out, more stressed out than mothers. you bring up how we have it bad in thest, and a review of the back in englands "the guardian" had a funny but not so funny line, saying people in europe should be happy, because america hates its citizens and wants them to be unhappy. what she referred to was when american workers had few rights when it came to vacation and paid paternity leave.

>> it surprises a lot of people. part of the reason why is we haven't had a national conversation about how we work and live. >> it's not been seen as a priority since the 1970s. at that point all debate was cut off. we had a policies passing republican and democratic support that was taken off the table and we have not talked about how to support working families. we have one family-friendly policy. it took 10 years to pass and doesn't cover 40% of the workplace. you contrast it with many other countries. paid vacation policies. we are at the bottom of the barrel. it's not just about the overwhelmed but integrating love and play into our lives. we have about 30 seconds left. what do you say.

if anybody had to do one or two things, what should they do. recognise how important it is to play and have leisure time. flip the to-do list, stop being terronized by all the stuff you have to do. let the stuff happen later. the book is overwhelmed: thanks. >> thank you for having mean. >> the show may be over, the conversation continues on the website aljazeera.com/consider aljazeera.com/considerthis or >> everyday, someone leaves their home, searching for a better life. >> two hours in, you come up on a body. >> now, in a breakthough television event, al jazeera america takes you beyond the debate.

experience first hand the tragic journey of these migrents. >> a lot of people don't have a clue, what goes on when you live near the border. >> six strangers, with different points of view. >> i don't believe in borders... >> our government is allowing a invasion >> get to experience illegal immigration, up close and personal. >> it's very overwhelming to see this many people that have perished. >> a lot of families taht don't know where their babies went >> i wanna make sure that her life, it's remembered... >> what happens when lost lives are re-lived? >> the only way to find out is to see it yourselves. on borderland only on al jazeera america >> hey guys, wanna come to the united states? >> al jazeera america is a straight-forward news channel. >> its the most exciting thing to happen to american journalism in decades. >> we believe in digging deep. >> its unbiased, fact-based, in-depth journalism. >> you give them the facts, dispense with the fluff and get

straight to the point. >> i'm on the ground every day finding stories that matter to you. >> in new orleans... >> seattle bureau... >> washington... >> detroit... >> chicago... >> nashville... >> los angeles... >> san francisco... >> al jazeera america, take a new look at news. >> welcome to aljazeera america. i'm stephanie sy. >> we'll be with those families and survivors. >> in the aftermath of another deadly shooting at fort hood, a question of security at u.s. military bases, and left behind. the u.s. in afghanistan, now some of the interpreters are coming to america as promised. and the earthquake in