there's more to finical news than the ups and downs of the dow. for instance, could striking workers in greece delay your retirement? i'm here to make the connections to your money real. >> world leaders gather in france for d-day celebrations while a delicate diplomatic dance keeps president obama away from vladimir putin. a district attorney trying to help america kick an addiction to pain-killers by going to court. extreme silence - stark realities of climate change and braving deadly risks. a bad report may hold n.a.s.a. back from its mission to mars.

i'm antonio mora, welcome to "consider this". here is more on what is ahead. >> the world's top economic powers sent a warning to russia - pull out of ukraine or face more sanctions. >> president putin must recognise the legitimate election of petero poroshenko. >> we suspended russia from the g8 making it the first g7 held without russia in seven years. >> the decision to release the prisoners put our country in jeopardy. >> we had a prisoner of war, we saw an opportunity and we seized it. i make no apology for that. >> these five were the crown jew else. >> i would say these five are not the worst of the worst. >> it's a make - climate change is 100% of people's story a diplomatic dance was underway in paris on thursday

following a g7 meeting in brussels, it used to be the g8. russia's leader was not invited for the first time in two decades. vladimir putin as not invited to dipper with president obama and francis hollande. because of the international tensions francis hollandate twice. sitting for dinner with putin, after a meal with president obama. earlier in the day russia's bullying of ukraine was a big issue of the g7. president obama warned moscow it had a month to end intervention there or face sanctions. >> our nations continue to stand united in our support and assistance to the ukranian people. >> but if you listen to secretary of state john kerry and russian foreign minister lavrov there are no issues, because moscow and the g7 agree on what is needed. >> to try to make a ukraine that is strong economically, whose sovereignty and independence is

respected, but is not the pawn in a tug of war between other nations. >> i can subscribe towards what secretary of state john kerry said. pro-russian separatists fortified positions in ukraine's east, looting weapons from a border control post seized on wednesday. for more on the diplomatic dance between moscow and its allies, and what if anything this can achieve, i'm joined by ambassador william courtney, who served as ambassador to kazakhstan and special assistant to russia, ukraine and er-asia\. i'm joined by deputy assistant state for european and eurasian affairs and the executive director of the mccain institute for international leadership. good to have you both on the show. you are both diplomats. i'll give the first word to ambassador courtney. what is knoiping on - two -- going on. two dinners to the president and

vladimir putin don't see each other. >> it looks like the russians insisted equal treatment to vladimir putin as obama. the dinner with vladimir putin will be a light supper. others say that the restaurant, where the obama dinner takes place, is better than the food at the presidential palace where vladimir putin will le eating. >> you are making the point that it seems tireless, ambassador volker, these are two of the most powerful nations on earth. can't they figure out a way to talk. >> i think you made the point it is child ib and we ought to look at the real issues. russia is violating all the european norms built up, invading neighbours, occupying territory, annexing territory. the easy decision should have been to not invite vladimir putin, this is celebrating the d-day invasion.

russia was not part of the d-day invasion. even though we chose to as a gesture to russia. it's been easy for the french to avoid a diplomatic mess, and do something more serious, sending a signal to russia saying "you're not invited this time." vladimir putin seems to go out of his way to be insulting. calling hillary clinton not graceful in her statements, he called her weak and added insult to injury saying weak may not be bad for a woman. >> it's indescreate for vladimir putin, seeing vladimir putin can be the next u.s. president. the secretary of state - she was firm with russia. i think surprisingly firm from the russian perspective. so i believe they are quite concerned if she becomes president, u.s. russian relations would be difficult for a while. the real issue are the issues in the relationship. if russia is going to act in an

imperialistic way, then they are going to be frictions between the east and the west. >> on the other hand, could the two dinners and what francis hollande is doing be a go between, between the u.s. and russia tonight? >> no. no. is the answer. we do not need a go between between u.s. and russia. france is an ally, we share similar view, and we need to be united in our approach in sending a signal to russia, that their behaviour is completely unacceptable. i don't think that francis hollande will have a diplomatic breakthrough. vladimir putin is the one that profits from this visibility that he gets by attending the d-day ceremonies. talking about ukraine, the u.s. - it has been deeply divided. brussels, the president and

british prime minister put clear conditions on russia, threatening sanctions if russia doesn't recognise the new president or stop moving arms through the ukranian border and doesn't stop supporting these pro-russian separatists in the east. so then what do we make of this kerry-lavrov moment where the russian foreign minister says he subscribes to secretary kerry's view on ukraine. ambassador courtney? >> i think the president obama comments are the guiding comments here. this is a serious situation. he has threatened sanctions if matters get worse. angela merkel threatened sanctions. there's nor unity between the u.s. and europeans. what russians have done is overreach, if you will, threatening a military invasion, realising that that was too hard and they are trying to use

paramilitary forces to keep the eastern ukrainians off balance. if that conditions, and there's another assault, several hundred russian soldiers, paramilitary forces on the border post in ukraine, that justifies increased sanctions. there's no reason to wait. >> if there is that unity, why, when president obama is threatening sanctions, president francis hollande says he'll go ahead and he'll sell helicopter carriers to russia, and vladimir putin says there could be more deals with france. who has the diplomatic edge in europe? >> as you say, i think the west has not shown as much unity as it should. you are right to highlight the french sale of the ships that ought to be cancelled, and i echo what mr courtney said. we don't need to see more from russia, it invaded neighbours,

we move the goal posts away from russia saying "if you do something else we may impose sanctions", or "now if you do something on top of that", we'll impose sanctions. it's time for the west to pull together, put him out now. as it is, i think russia feels it has a green light. >> president obama is expected to come face to face, despite avoiding each other on thursday. they should see each other at the commemoration of the d-day landings, the 70th anniversary on friday. vladimir putin said on thursday, in the end, it's his choice, and i'm always ready for dialogue. if they see each other, ambassador courtney, can dialogue aecom flish anything. >> probably not. conditions now - it says that

russia is involved against ukraine. it's useful to look back when president kennedy has a meeting with the russian president. there'd been problems with cuba, berlin and lagos. kennedy was perceived as week and started building the berlin wall, isolating east and west berlin. having meetings at inopportune times can have destabilizing results. >> would you agree a handshake shows goodwill, and may help. >> i agree with ambassador courtney. i think actions matter, and russia has been more adept at using words to create centrifuge, confusion to advance strategic goals. they have been more adept at that. this make like diplomacy, talking at a press conference is

actually empowering the russians to do the opposite on the ground. >> we'll need to see some push-back from us in order to take seriously the differences of view, and our determination to not see ukraine chopped up in this way. >> interesting diplomatic times. pleasure always to have you on the show. thank you. >> each in brussels president obama couldn't escape questions about the controversy surrounding the exchange of the captured u.s. soldier bowe bergdahl for five leading taliban prisoners held prisoner at guantanamo bay. >> we had a prisoner of war whose health had deteriorated. and we were deeply concerned about. and we saw an opportunity and we seized it. and i make no apologies for that. what does the release of these prisoners many for the future of guantanamo bay, as a detention facility for terrorists and inurge ents.

i'm joined by the senior u.s. military attorney of the southern command responsible for operations at guantanamo, and the senior lawyer for u.s. coalition forces in afghanistan. good to see you colonel. president obama promised in this year's state of the union that he would close the president. how do you think the controversy surrounding the exchange for sergeant bowe bergdahl may affect that? >> i don't believe this incident involving the release of these five detainees is really going have much of an impact on the future of guantanamo. the future of guantanamo depends on other factors, not the least of which is u.s. domestic politics and the u.s. congress. >> some reports say that it is a shot across the bow, an indication that the white house wants to move forward and close the base, not the base, but the

detention facility at the base. >> right. well, going back to the bush administration there were desires to shut down detention operations at guantanamo, in that a number of people at both administrations and the pentagon believe that painting the detention operations at guantanamo was a net negative for the united states national security. >> if the president can release detainees by notifying congress, can the president for all practical purposes reduce the population to a minimal presence. it was 770 at its peek, and is down to 149. >> right. throughout the entire operations of the detention there at guantanamo, there have been many, many detainees that have been released. at this point, the criteria is essentially - you have to keep

in mind there are two categories of people at guantanamo held, i believe, close to about 150. some of them are al-qaeda or co-belligerent terrorists affiliated with al qaeda, transnational operating people who pose a national security interest threat to the united states, and taliban who are insurgents in afghanistan, fighting for control of afghanistan. and could potentially be a threat to american forces in afghanistan. with - when the united states comes to the conclusion that any particular detainee no longer poses a reasonable threat to the united states, that's why we had hundreds of them released in the past. the thing with the release of the detainees though is they should be going. it's repatriated to their

nation. if their nation - if the united states suspects or believes, has reason to believe the nation that received them, their home nation would commit mistreatment against the detainees. they have to find a third nation that would be willing to suspect the detainees. for years, under both administrations. in fact very senior levels at the state department, and other places there have been quiet diplomacy, in fact, to repatriate or release some of these folks to other countries. >> you make the important distinction between the kinds of prisoners there. what should happen to the different class, especially the ones clearly terrorists, the plottize mike khalid sheikh mohammed, who is there, tried by a military court. some reports show as many as 30% of the people released may have

gone back to involvement in insurgencies and terrorists. >> right, well. there are some folks there that are prosecuted by the military process. that's a small number of the total. there are other folks where we don't have the evidence because there's insufficient evidence to prosecute beyond a right-hand, or because the evidence gathered would make it inadmissible. we are getting to the number now. every day we get closer to a group of people who we cannot prosecute successfully, and yet who we believe are still - would pose a threat to u.s. national

security interests if released. >> no solution, it's a political hot potato more than a decade later. we'll stay on top of this and see where it goes. always a pleasure to have you on the show. thank you. >> thank you. now an update on the trial of our colleagues and cairo. the prosecution rested its case. defense began. lawyers for peter greste, mohamed fadel fahmy and baher mohamed criticised the prosecution. the defense says prosecutors failed to prove any of the al jazeera reporting was by asked that it aided the muslim brotherhood or threatened egyptian national security and said their clients are part of a show trial. the prosecution claimed the three defendants used "selective filming to unfairly portray a process on june 30th." none of the journalists were in

egypt at the time. the prosecution subjected irrelevant items, a pop video, fake photographs and videos from outside egypt on an animal hospital. an al jazeera journalist abdullah al-shami has been detained since last august without charge, his family visited him in maximum security on wednesday. they said he has been on a hunger strike since january. al jazeera maintains the innocence of all four and strongly rejects all charges. the network continues to demand their immediate release. now for more of what is happening around the world. we begin in michigan where general motors c.e.o. mary barra released an investigation into the dedefective gm vehicles linked to at least 13 deaths in 47 crashes. >> this situation was a pattern

of incompetence and neglect. let me be clear. this should have never happened. it is unacceptable. >> thursday barra announced the firing of 15 people and the disciplining of five more. barra insisted there was no cover up. next to venezuela, gaoled opposition leader leopoldo lopez has been ordered to stand trial for instigating protests in february. his supporters called for his release since he turned himself in, arguing his detention and charms are political -- charges are political. leopoldo lopez's popular party took to twitter to say: and we end up over the skies of france where 89-year-old world war ii paratrooper jock hutton commemorated the 70th anniversary of d-day, by jumping

into the same field where he landed on a fateful day 70 years ago. he liberated the first village. >> we trained for months and landed for one purpose, to liberate the town. we did, before first light. >> that is some of what is happening around the world. coming up, a district attorney taking on america's overwhelming addiction to pain-killers, by taking drug companies to court. and we hear from a scientist that took a trip to the end of the earth to investigate an underreported impact of climate change. and what do you think - join the conversation on twitter and facebook and google+. this is what we do. al jazeera america.

in 2010, 254 million painkiller prescriptions were filled in the u.s., enough to medicate every american adult around the clock for one month. the f.d.a. took action to limit prescriptio prescriptions. the numbers show the use of opioid pain-killers soared

leading to addicts and prescription drug overdoses. two counties are suing drug companies alleging they lied about the pills, duping doctors into believing the pills were safer than they are. orange county distribute attorney joins us. in his lawsuit against drug makers it says they violated californian laws against false advertising, unfair business practices and creating a public nuisance and seeks damn acknowledges for the toll it is taking on california. good to have you with us. your main focus is opioid pain-killers. their use quadrupled in the first decade of the century, and you allege that five of the largest drug companies engaged in a campaign of deception much you say they knew the pain-killers were as addictive to heroin.

we market the drugs beyond use, which was for chronic cancer pain. >> that's right. the f.d.a. actually did approve of these drugs for such treatment of severe cancer pain and palliative care, meaning pd of life care, that sort of thing. that gives the companies a narrow band in terms of the market, and what they have done is goes on a major campaign to deceive doctors and patients into believing that the trucks are less harmful than they really are. for example, they claim that they are rarely addictive. they are addictive all the time. >> how widely are they misused. the complaint i know says 87% of the painkiller prescriptions are for symptoms considered inappropriate. aren't some of those for

short-term pain for a broken bone. just a few pills to deal with a problem. is that an issue. the major issue is using or prescribing the drugs over a longer term for chronic pain. that's the real issue. with respect to the other kinds of pain that we are talking about, like post operative pain, that sort of thing, what we want to do is make sure that these drug companies are clear, that they come clean with what the drugs really are, so that nobody takes them without the eyes being open. they know they are addicted if used over time. some of the drugs, oxicotton can become addictive in a short time period. >> as you said, they are doing intense marketing with beautiful pamphlets that, effect say it's

fine to take opioids for all sorts of pain and arguing that they are rarely addictive. that is not the case. >> correct, correct. what you are saying is right. they are even marketing these drugs for the kinds of things that people take iby proppen for. the sales of the normal pain-killing drugs are going down, the over the counter things are going down to people can pain the stronger opioids. >> they are marketing in the pamphlets to senior citizens, saying it will help you with back pain and things like that. it's your biggest concern. you think that overprescription is leading to abuse and addiction for the pills. and in cases where people have gotten addiction, people turned to heroin when they can't get

the pain kills prescribed for themselves. heroin is cheaper. that's right. heroin is - i don't know, it's like a quarter of the price of most of these open i said. what happened is people become addicted and they have to continue using the drugs and the drugs have another atry beaut that the doctors don't give them a lot of credit for. which is the more time you use the drug, the more it takes to get the therapeutic effect. people are turning to heroin. we have overdose deaths in orange county and heroin deaths in a similar pattern, it's really an epidemic here. >> i saw a pamphlet, and how much is needed and it's

downplayed. it's not often and small increases over time. the reality is, as i said earlier, sales quadrupled between 1999 and 2010. it correlated to overdoses, in the same period they quadrupled. thousands overdosed on the drugs every year. >> like i say, it's a huge epidemic. and it's been downplayed by these companies to - i mean, it's more than just downplayed, it's ludicrous the way they are advertising them. the addictive nature of the drug causes them to need more and more drugs, which, of course, contributes to the profits of these pharmaceutical companies. >> we attempted to get comment from all five. the only one that issued a statement is farmsuit calls saying that:.

>> i know you and chicago use consumer protection laws as the basis for your legal arguments. that was ultimately successful against the tobacco industry. >> well, i think what we'll do is start preceding to trial, and start - we filed the complaint. we go through the discovery process and move towards trial. certainly i expect, and i think we all expect a very prolific defense. big companies like these defend with major law firms, and so we expect there to be a lot of litigation. in the end, i think we are going to - we are making an impact and will change the conduct of the companies, so that they will tell the truth about the drugs to the patients and the doctors,

and correct some of the wrongdoing. >> it's an enormous market. more than $11 billion in sales. orange county district attorney, appreciate you joining us on the show. hope you keep us updated on where this all goes. >> thank you. >> you don't want to be on the side that said "i had a chance and i didn't do anything." that's a power of the cry you hear from conservationists about climate change. the showtime series " years of living dangerously" vetted real-world -- investigated real-world impacts and separated fact from fiction. our next guest travelled up the andes with a glaziologist. >> climate can change far more quickly than we imagined. >> everybody believed, including me that the climate system operated solely. we saw tremendous changes, many degrees farenheit, in some cases

less than a year, and staying at the level for hundreds of years. abrupt change was born. we realised the system can change quickly. >> what are we talking about. are we talking about disaster moving quickly. >> for some parts of the planet, yes. >> doesn't it the terrify you? >> yes. >> we have a correspondent of the show, executive vice president and a senior scientist. the season finale - this is quite the episode. as we say, you go up 20,000 feet. there's a volcano, the point is to get up there and drill into the ice that's been there for thousands of years, because by doing that, pulling up ice from below, literally going into the past you can see how human activity, pollution, affected the ice. >> both human and natural activities affected the atmosphere. so ice traps little bubbles of

air. when you get an ice coup freed air - same thing, you drill down, collect the air, and they are like a time capsule into the past. the deep are you go, the further back in time you tell. >> what story does it tell. >> what paul's work does is he studies wind. it tells you the composition of the atmosphere. how much rain fall was in the wind, whether it was blowing from the ocean. atmospheric conditions like pollutants, natural volcanos, event like that. >> it's an interesting peace. etch thinks about temperature and precipitation. he studies wind and his conclusion is that the wind shifts, it's game over. >> why? >> because a small shift in wind can dramatically affect local

weather patterns and climate patterns, we shaw this last year when the jet stream shifted and you had the gold whether that sat over new york for a long time. the same thing happened in europe. that's the phenomena. >> this happened in the past, where there has been massive changes in temperature in little as a year. so is there anything we can do. is there anything we are going to change the winds? >> the key thing is we know climate changed in the past, there's no disputing long before humans showed up. humans are adding an element that are driving it. war yours are doing it fast, really fast. the wees we need to get out of the eanythings is hutch we are contributing. >> that is the question. >> we can't stop volcanos blowing up. we can system the emissions on

impact. >> this was incredible, as you look at this episode. it was, to say the least, challenging. >> the show is called years of living dangerously. i lived a dangerous two weeks. who knew climate scientists did this thing. >> he's the indiana jones of climate change. this guy goes to the ends of the earth. i didn't realise you could get killed. >> and a bunch of evil didn't make it. >> four people didn't make it to the top. one wh to get evacuated out. we had a person break the shoulder on a horse. there were boulders, big boulders coming down the mountain. >> incredible pictures. the whole thing seemed like science fiction, the way they are drilling into the ice and pulling it out. it's fascinating to watch. >> 20,000 feet. when you came up there, i can

pairly breathe. another part of this episode didn't involve you it involved michael c hall. he worked in bangladesh. there may be no other place in the world where it's obvious that changes - whether it's climate or the rising, it's the rising of the seas, whatever caused that, created an ongoing catastrophe, because much farmable land where people live is gone. it's one of the most densely populated places in the world. if the waters rise, who knows what will happen. >> 17% of bangladesh is likely to go under water. it's suffering the impacts. people are living in every square inch of the country. there's a small see level rise floods large amounts of land. he's looking at the conflict there.

there's big news this week from his proposed e.p.a. changes in the u.s. to reduce 30% of emissions. to reduce emissions by 2030. is it a step in the right direction? >> it's a good step, important, but not enough. we have to think about how we increase efficiencies, and think about nature-based adaptation. how do we use nature to buffer us from big storms. replanting trees. all of that is going to be important to contributing to a comprehensive package. having gone through the episodes of this show, are you more optimistic or less optimistic about what is happening to what is happening. >> when i came away from the show, real people today, in america and around the world, are feeling the impacts of climate change. this is not an issue for the future. it's an issue for us now, today. >> and now, today, there'll be a

part of that show will be an interview tom freedman does with president obama. >> yes. >> about what is happening today. that will be part of the show. >> i have not seen that episode. i mean, i haven't seen that segment. but it's one of the first sit-down indepth interviews that president obama has done on change. i'm eager to watch it. >> again, the season finale of years of living dangerously premieres monday on showtime, and as always, good to have you on the show. a quick programming note. this weekend "the stream" hosts a world cup edition. lisa fletcher talks about the impact of social politics on the field. straight ahead from o.j. simpson to casey anthony. an inside act of acquittals.

we may or may not see a tripple crown winner. we tell you about a stunt based on the front runner's nose. >> and n.a.s.a.'s journey to put people on mars got longer. big plans crashing down to earth.

few things have changed the landscape of the american legal system as drastically as o.j. simpson, drove his white ford bronco down the los angeles highway. it began an era of high court cases, how they talked about the media and the public. as a result american justice has become a complicated product of the interaction, and a trial by jury is far from the expression of democracy our founding fathers contended. richard gabriel is a renown

attorney that worked on infamous cases including o.j. simpson, phil specter and casey anthony and is the author of a new book. great to have you with us, richard. fascinating book. let's start with o.j. simpson, a trial that thrust the courtroom on to tvs, across the nation. you talk about the reach that went into deciding who would be on the jury. it's absolutely staggering, and the point you make is in effect that the trial was won the day the jury was selected. >> i'm not sure it was won, but i think we had a great audience. the truth is the case you are giving is only as good as the outside yeps you have. if you -- audience you have. if you get a good audience, you have a better listening for the case. when we get the research done, it gave us an advantage of going into the trial itself. >> a big advantage, because it

seemed like you had a much better hold on what the people who were in that jury pool, or how they would rule, what was going to effect them, than what the prosecution did. >> we understood clearly that those people with those experiences would be respective to the police mishandling of evidence, tampering. we knew johnny from the beginning - that the only way to take this was to take an offensive approach. he was not shy about going after the police. the truth is we wanted a jury saying there was tampering and mishandling and misdirection and misrepresentation. johnny was keen on that. we needed to get an audience for that theme. >> the public has been fascinated by high profile cases going back to fatty ar buckle in the "20, and in the '30s.

you wrote that the case is different. it reinvented the way media covered the cases and the american justice system. how? >> this is the first time we had the advantage of having cameras almost 24/7. the interest was so high that everything o.j. was game. instant celebrities - so you had entertainment shows full of stories, "national inquirer" filled with stories, and the media became almost another party in the courtroom. this desire drove both the witness testimony, some of the political pressures on the prosecution, and drove even some of the jury to have a different understanding of what was going to be presented in court. >> talking about entertainment, you talk about production value, you need to borrow from theatre, film making, visual arts. the art of advocacy requires

that every trial be a thee attical production where attorneys tell the best story they can. you think it was the production values that help you get a hung jury in phil expecter's -- spectre's first trial. >> yes. science was the big advantage. the science that we had to show was lana clarkson was holding the gun. you can drone on and have a lot of dry scientific testimony about it or show the jury. we know from the psychology of juries that the more you show them, that they experience them, the more they retain it. >> then you talk about casey anthony. the public was furious. you predicted the verdict. conducted mock trials identifying weakness in the prosecution case, the lack of da evidence. questioning other scientific issues, and your mock trial

revealed what would happen. is there a big disadvantage. do high profile clients end up having an advantage more resources effect than the prosecution, and you guys basically end up being smarter than the prosecution. >> no, it's the other way around. in almost all case, the prosecution has vastly more resources, more experts available, more laboratories, they can go to the fbi in grantee coe, get ex -- quantico. they have the availability and have availed themselves of jury consultants in the o.j. case and in phil spectre's case. they have a level playing field and a significant advantage when it comes to resources. >> certainly the state resources. it seems like a lot of high-profile clients had good representation. you know, throughout the book you talk about this other issue. how all of this does seem to take us away from idealistic notions of a fair trial.

you know is there something wrong with a system that can be manipulated by figuring out where a jury will go. >> no, because the truth is our system of advocacy relies on the prosecution and the defense being the strongest advocate for the clients, trying, as it were to manipulate the jury towards a verdict. it's part of the system of advocacy. we have a pure notion of fairness that essentially everything will happen, and that's not the way human judgment is, we rely on experiences to decide the cases. if we better understand that, that is our system. >> whoever better understands where it works seems to win the trials. a lot of fascinating questions raised by the book. it's called acquittal on sale.

a pleasure to have you with us. thanks for being here. >> n.a.s.a.'s mission to farce takes a detour. whoever said there's no such thing as bad publicity should look back at history, we bring you a train wreck that turned into - well, a train wreck of an event. data dive is next. >> i'm joe berlinger this is the system people want to believe that the justice system works. people wanna believe that prosecutors and police do the right thing. i think every american needs to be concerned about that. we do have the best justice system in the world, in theory... the problem is, it's run by human beings... human beings make mistakes... i'd like to think of this show as a watch dog about the system... to make sure justice is being served.

wrongful convictions happen, we need to be vigilant. with our personal liberties taken away from us, it better be done the right way. is justice really for all?

today's data dive looks at pr stunts. california chrome is going for horse racing's tripple ground in more than 35 years in the belmont states and is using a nasal strip to help. the flare equine nasal strip helps the force breathe easier,

breathe right is cosponsoring the race giving out 50,000 human nasal strips for people in attendance to wear during the race. pr stunts ls like this have bee around for longer than you think. in 1896 the missouri kansas and texas railroad tried to promote itself with a staged train crash. why you would want to promote your trains with a crash is beyond me. people watched for free, food served, politicians gave speeches and music was composed for the event. they didn't give enough thought for safety. when the traipse collided -- trains collided the boilers exploded. sending steel flying through the air killing three, and wounding six. other pr stunts went better. the massey's thanksgiving parade made a debut as a promotion for the store. macey's employees walked along

broadway with zoo animals. it's an annual tradition watched by million on person and on tv. floats replaced the animals. in 1989 hands across america involved a coast to coast human chain with 6.5 million holding hands for 15 minutes. many reserved a spot in line with a $10 election to charities, fighting hunger and homelessness. president regan joined in. oprah's you get a car episode backfired. the recipients had to pay taxes on the gift. the next time the queen of talk gave away cars, her production company covered the taxes. some pr stunts are out of this world. felix became the first to break the sound barrier. red bull turned into a super bowl commercial, it was the

ultimate product placement. coming up, we are staying in space. why n.a.s.a.'s big plans to send people to mars may have to go back to the drawing board.

a smarter start to your day. mornings on al jazeera america landing an astronaut on mars has long been a dream. n.a.s.a. has been ramping up the excitement about the next giant leap for mankind. a sweeping review for n.a.s.a.'s human space flight offered a brutal reality check for those hoping to get to the red planet. derek pitts, from the franklin institute science museum, what happened, good to see you. n.a.s.a. said it wanted to send a human to mars within the next couple of decades. what is going on now? >> the national research council came back after an 18 month study in which they spent $3 million, looking at what

n.a.s.a. has in line for this and said, with apologies to paul simon, you need a new plan, stan. and said the money is funny, and that there are safety issues that need to be dealt with. i think the major word that is important, the key word is that if you think of this, like taking giant steps to make the trip, to put together the plan to acomplish the goal, what the nrc said we are all about the goal that smells great. we think you need to make incremental steps and progress. right now the way it looks is there's a big idea about harnessing or lass suing an asteroid and a few years later a plan about sending astronauts to mars, and a thought is that it needs to be like the apollo era programme, where there was mercury and gemini and the test for the apollo flight to the

moon before doing the flight to the mon. that was one of the biggest thinks they pointed out. >> let's break this down. they don't like the plan of grabbing the asteroid or landing the astronaut, they want us to go back to the moon, which is something that president obama doesn't want to dom. >> it's right. it's having. when - in 2010 when president obama made this announcement it was a national research council that said that they needed a different plan and recommended that that be done. what they see is that the way the plan is currently laid out, especially with the funding problems that n.a.s.a. has, trying to accomplish that by 2030 is not going to work. they need the smaller plan allowing them to go back to the moon and use it as a practice target so that the astronauts can build up their skills mission by mission, rather than

having three or four mission, you know, gapped by two or three years in which all he skills can be lost. funding problems is a big thing raised, basically saying there's not enough money, n.a.s.a. is not getting enough money to seriously do this. what do you think about the report. do you gree with the nrc, do you think the road n.a.s.a. was going down was the right one? >> i thought the moon needs to be a major factor in this plan. i believe in the incremental approach. it's daring to think about going to grab an asteroid and use it as a target practice, but one of the things that made apollo successful is the incremental approach. using the moon as a pace for practice is practical, nation sense even though there are differences between the moon and mars that need to be accounted for just the same. we need that practice. we need the boots on the ground practice of working at a place that is not far from earth.

the nrc made a good call. it's important to look at this plant over and over again to make sewer it's done right. there's nothing wrong with reviewing over again. >> the call for cooperation with china didn't talk about what is going on with private spacecraft with commercial flights. that's another issue. before we go, i want to talk about the spectacular pictures. amazing images, shots, of 10,000 galaxies estimated from the hubble space telescope. it's a beautiful picture showing the galaxies of shapes and forms. what do you see here? >> well, this is a landmark issue, a landmark image that many people have known over time, except there's one piece of information missing, and that is this is a visual light image, the ultra violent information coming from young stars and galaxies were never included

before. over the last 8-10 years n.a.s.a. has been gathering up that ultra-violet information, adding it in, and this is a really stunning issue. sorry, image. it's a stunning image. it is beautiful. the 10,000 galaxies are gorgeous. the colours give you an idea of which galaxies are closer, different, older, younger. it's a stunning image providing information that we didn't have before. that is key and important. >> different colours, sizes and shapes. it's spectacular. to think each one has thousands upon thousands of stars and planets. it boggles the imagination. dr derrick pitts, great to see you. >> friday, we'll look back at the big red one, and its little known role in the invasion of normandy and the impact america's legalization of pot had in drug cartels. the show may be over, but the

conversation continues on the website. aljazeera.com or facebook or google+. you can find it on twitter. we see you next time. hi everyone. this is al jazeera america. i'm john seigenthaler in new york. 11 in the east, eight out west. you are watching the only live national news cast of this hour history of failures deaths and recalls and gm's report on a growing scandal. no apologies. a deal to free bowe bergdahl. secrets in space, making history for america. living a secret life for years, the astonishing story of the