golden lion here. >> phil lavell in venice. thanks for joining us, thomas drayton, in new york. "consider this" starts now. have a safe night. the threat from islamic state terrorists, head of the c.i.a. and a former 4-star general discuss options. i'm antonio mora, welcome to "consider this", we'll have that and more straight ahead. >> a video posted online claims to show the beheading of a second journalist by the islamic state group. >> we are sickened by this brutal act. >> it is game over for atlantic city's casino. >> two more casinos expected to

close, leaving 8,000 unemployed. >> the federal bureau of investigation is on the case of nude photos stolen from several hollywood celebrities. >> private information, there's civil and criminal consequences. >> professor dumpster has sweated it out inside his tiny steel home or six months. >> i'm a proud home owner in austin. >> what we do is a calling. >> joan rivers died at the age of 81. joo we begin with a second journalist brutally beheaded by an islamic state group. it shows the decapitation of steven sotloff, who grew up in miami and was known for his

heart-felt videos. in the video he says he's paying the price of america's acts. >> we have dedicated resources to rescue steven sotloff. our thoughts with prayers are with mr steven sotloff and his family and those that worked with him. steven sotloff's killing comes two weeks after the execution of james foley. in that video is threatened steven sotloff would be next if the u.s. launched air strikes against them in iraq. steven sotloff's mother recorded an emotional video plea asking is to release her son. >> i ask you to please release my child. as a mother i ask your justice to be merciful, and not publish my son for matters he has no control over. >> since james foley's execution, the u.s. conditioned air strikes, paving the way for gains by iraqi forces.

strikes around amerli, 100 miles north of baghdad helped to avert a looming humanitarian crisis. is identified david haines, british aid worker if other governments join the u.s. fighting against them. joining us from washington d.c. is ambassador james wol si, former director of central intelligence from 1993 to 1995, and ambassador for negotiation on conventional armed forces in vienna, and the chairman for the foundation of defense for democracies. pleasure to have you with us. >> good to be with you. >> two americans murdered on camera in two weeks. a british citizen threatened. the state department says other americans could be hostages. is there anything the u.s. should do to prevent horrific executions of americans and other westerners? . >> one a person is captured by

i.s.i.s., their option, i think, are to try to escape. if that is impossible, to pray. because this is a group not of just thugs or robbers, these are theocratic totalitarian imperialists. they are establishing an empire, a caliphate. anyone that is part of it, living within its borders, that do not convert to their view of religion, they kill. horribly, by burying families alive or by crews fiction. i think that -- crews fiction. i think the first thing we have to do is acknowledge that we are at war, we've been attacked by a totalitarian regime, we have to deal with them. >> you said before, and you said now, that we are at war with the

terrorist. the president said last year that the global war on terror was over. was he wrong, how do we conduct the war when we have terrorists in pakistan, yemen, iraq, syria, afghanistan and who knows where else? >> well, i think the president m mistook osama bin laden for an overall victory over a major movement. we don't have terrorists that we are dealing with here. some are terrorists. when we talk about the is, we are talking about a major movement with members forming military units and carrying out some kind of sentence for people that they capture, that will not sign on to their religion. something we have to take seriously, as we eventually took

major wars. so far i think the president and the u.s. as a whole basically have been behaving like the europeans in the 1930s, between 1933 and "39. back just before world war ii. we are being positively chamberlain esque. >> appeasing the is group. what needs to be done. we have chuck hagel, secretary of defense, and secretary of state john kerry talking very aggressively about having to destroy the group, but the white house seems to not take the same position. >> i don't know why president obama drew a red line in the sand about syria's use of weapons, and after they crossed the line, shrugged.

i don't know why he told dmitry medvedev, who was russian president, that once he had been reelected, he could be more flexible in dealing with putin. this is not the way you behave in dealing with people like these enemies. there are other things we need to do. we need to help the kurds, and with military capability, not just with food or night googles and so forth. we need to be tough with the qataris about their wealthy individuals sending weapons and funny mainly to is. we need to help figure out how to pull the sunni tribes together and to into a coherent group, the way we did back in '07/'08, when we put the surge

together. i think we need to do all of this without putting big american units in, but a few c.i.a. people, special forces people to help the people who are with us get organised. i think we could do that. >> does that include syria? as you know, they have a lot of land, they hold a lot of land in syria. they have taken over syrian army bases, they have oil fields. do we go in there? is that a case if we do go in against the is terrorists, are we hapelping bashar al-assad, w we do not want to help? >> it's a big dilemma, we had a similar dilemma at the beginning of world war ii. we decided to aline with stalin against hitler. it's a good thing we did. as awful as stalin was, we pulled out a victory in world

war ii because we worked with him for a time. i am not saying we should work together with bashar al-assad, but if we happen to be going against the same people or some of the same groups, such as i.s.i.l. or others, then i think that's just the way the dice fall on that particular play. >> on a broader - for a broader perspective, we launched drone strikes in somalia, targetting al-shabab terrorists there. is that where our focus should be, or do we have no choice, we have the taliban, boko haram in nigeria, al qaeda in pakistan, possibly in yemen and afghanistan. do we need to go after all of them? >> not ourselves. we need to work with allies. the kurds are a good example in one part of the world.

and to move effectively with them and by that i mean helping supply them with weapons, quickly, supply them with intelligence, supply them with cruise missiles and drones. there are a number of things we can do to help without putting a handful of boots on the ground ourselves. where we can, some of the terrorist groups of the sort you described ought to be dealt with by our allies. we shouldn't have to do all of this. we need to pull things together, and by what the president once called leading from behind, it's difficult to pull things together. >> a quick final question for you. you were the head of the c.i.a. soon after the soviet union disintegrated. as you see what is happening in ukraine, did you think we'd be back at this point in a confrontation with an ex-pagesist -- expansionist russia. it brings back memories of the

cold war. >> it does, i headed of a convention of armed forces it europe in 1991, which had a treaty with russia - that all of europe signed - among other things it would have kept and did keep people from one country - troops from one county outside the borders of another unless they had permission. we had legal instruments and the rest that we negotiated to keep europe secure and stable. but russia is completely ignoring them. they are not close to going along with the basics of these treaties. i think we have to begin to think of russia much the way we thought of them during the cold war. putin is behaving very much, except there's no holocaust, the way hitler did between 1933 and

1939. he's grabbing europe a bit at a time, which is what the nazis did. >> strong words from ambassador wallsy, former head of the c.i.a. joining us in new york is general anthony zenny,former commander in chief of zentcom. retired as a 4-star general and co-author of "before the first shots are fired - how america can win or lose off the battlefield." the main theme of the book is that we need to put more thought into what we are doing before we use force around the world. we say too many times we've not had enough sound analysis and we moved too quickly. a question as to what is going on in iraq and syria - are we moving too slowly? >> i do think we are moving slowly. there's time and space, where we see the beheadings and

atrocities near genocide, my big concern is is may get into baghdad, they can infill freight and cause -- infiltrate and cause chaos, giving the iraqs and kurds a chance to reform, and give space for the new government which has to demonstrate they are more inclusive. it's hearts and mines, we want them to reject the form of extremism that i.s.i.s.... >> you need the sunni tribes to rise up against them. >> that's right. >> you said the battle is ongoing, and you said you could put a couple of brigades, but you know that the american public does not have much willingness to have fighters in iraq or anyone else at this point. it's something you address with

the book. you raise the concern about american isolationism. when do we find the right balance as to when we do use the force you are talking about? >> that's the job of a president. the power of the bullied paul pit. we had the beirut disaster, advisors said not to go no grenada. i spoke to an aid saying regan asked a question "are americans in danger?", they said "we have medical students that could be in danger." he said there was no question, he wouldn't play into the politics, sensitivity and made the case to the american people. we know from the fdr talks, the fireside chats, it was a difficult war. we'd been attacked. that was the job of the president. he has to explain and make the hard choices. >> you mention in the fireside chats you write about it in your book and talk about franklin roosevelt and say:

what kind of emotion do we want in our presidents. we don't want them to react solely out of emotion but do want them to reflect the passion we feel. iraq, is that perceived lack of passion one of the problems that has led to this kind of -- these multiple international crises? >> i believe so. we want to see in our president someone firm, but isn't rash, someone who makes the case pointedly and simply, tells the american people where our interests lie. i want to say one thing that's more important, to express the strategy. i would take you back to the gulf war, the first gulf war and president hw bush. james baker, we go to the united nations, get a resolution authorizing the use of force. we build two coalitions, one with

the islamic countries. we were able to get the turkish base to say operate, cooperation in the area. you saw the whole of government involved, a strategy that wasn't just the military piece of this. you saw a strategy that brought in diplomacy, cooperation, the ability to get international legitimacy. >> you think that's one of the issues now, we around getting the saudis and others to do as much as you think they should he? >> i just saw a release from the ambassador from the united states to saying willing to stand up and be part of a coalition. it's our job to structure this. i go back to desert storm, desert shield, where we structured, helped structure it. they need international support, legitimacy, a u.n. resolution gives them that. they need to know the world is with them. they need to understand the plan, what the strategy is, what we're trying to do. these countries have seen us

stand up to iran, they join us and then see us back off, draw a red line in syria and then back off. they're confused where we stand. >> clarity one of the big issues here? we're seeing the secretary of defense, secretary of state, vice president joe biden very forcefully talk about i.s. on wednesday, but then the president said degrade and destroy, but oh well, a manageable problem. >> those are the wrong words, this is the enemy. i honestly believe you are not going to totally destroy isis as a movement. you can damage them significantly, degrade them, if you will, but, you know, we watched two americans be beheaded. the threat to take other americans and potential tourists, embassy employees and others around the world. there needs to be a sense of outrage and you need to see the power and might of america applied pretty forcibly and directly and pretty soon. >> a final question on slightly different topic that you address in the book.

you are not happy with the whole con kept of the pivot to the pacific, you think that is a mistake that we need to focus on other parts of the world, but what about the chinese, the expansionism. you've seen exchanges with american air force planes. the chinese are playing a dangerous game. >> you can't think regionally anymore. we're globalized. you can't look at china and say they just exist within its borders. china's trade interests, areas of influence, ability to stretch around the world, if you map that out geographically, you would see its tentacles all over the world. we are now in a world that's shrunk significantly. it's a smaller world. we're interconnected, cyberspace, space, the sea lanes, communications that are vital to us. borders and geography aren't that significant anymore. my complaint is we need to global strategy, not a regional one.

i'd ask the president how does this pivot work right now? i see europe, i see the middle east, i see our own southern hemisphere of greater importance right now. >> thought provoking questions that you raise in the book. the book is before the first shots are fired, how america can win or lose off the battlefield. thank you for being here, appreciate it. >> "consider this" will be right the real issues facing american teens on, the edge of eighteen only on aljazeera america

hey, jennar fuzz mike troober munny sling... awwwwww scram!

i'm crust mike jubby roll bond chow gonna lean up an kiss bet. peas charty get town down. [laughter] ♪ borf a liver tute face stummy wag ♪ pow pam sha-beeps stella nerf berms. saxa-nay nay? badumps a head. temexiss gurrin. juppa left. fluppa jown! brone a brood. what? catch up on what everyone's talking about with the x1 entertainment operating system. preloaded with the latest episodes of the top 100 shows. only from xfinity. >> more bad news for atlantic city's badly wounded gambling industry. tuesday morning, two years after opening, the newest resort closed its doors. that follows the shuttering of the legendary new orleans themed casino show boat, open since 1987. up next, the trump plaza ceases operations in two weeks. that's 7,000 lost jobs in just a few months. many fear that could be a

critical blow to the city's already shaky status as a gambling destination. for more, we're joined from southfield michigan, by the editor in chief of casino city, a website dedicated to gaming, as well as a publisher of trades on the gaming industry. there were 12 casinos in atlantic city at the start of the year, four are closing. 2006, gaming revenues were $5.2 billion, 2011, they'd fallen to $3 billion. gaming revenues nationwide are going up to $37.3 billion in 2012. what's wrong in atlantic city? >> you had competition rising a

you will over the place. since 2004, 26 new casinos have been built in the mid atlantic in the new england area. about 20-25 within within hour's drive, our and a half drive itself, that's a lot of competition. so what's happened is the feeder markets to atlantic city have been cut, so pennsylvania's now a billion dollars casino market in its own right, maryland is becoming a casino market in its own right. >> the aqueduct racetrack there, the racing there, you've got a bunch of new competition, gamblers who have role alternatives. you have the fact that atlantic city has never been good at figuring how to get people to come to atlantic city.

>> that's a big issue. vegas has figured out how to do it. it's become a resort destination, but it also has nearby competition now. they've got indian casinos in california, elsewhere in they have perfect, so there's competition for vegas, too. we saw what atlantic city did try to do with this revel casino. it was pretty spectacular. it was a pretty nice resort. they expected that to follow in vegas's footsteps. what went wrong there? >> well, this is completely a problem of execution. if you look at lotvasion, the strip right now, you have a 50-50 split between gaming revenue and non-gaming revenue on the strip. on weekends, the nightclubs in las vegas make more money per square foot than the casino floor. you have high end restaurants, retail, all sorts of things and reasons for people to go to vegas beyond gaming. atlantic city failed to diversify in that mix.

rebel was supposed to be the solution, have the great restaurants, the great nightclub, and they were supposed to have the great hotel. they were supposed to have that mix. the problem was they never delivered on the execution. if you went to rebel, the restaurants were terrible. they didn't have very good shopping. there wasn't a reason to go back. that's a failure have execution. it goes into a wide are failure for atlantic city. atlantic city has failed to diversify. they've known what they needed to do but haven't done it. it's a failure at the political level, the casino level. the local governance, they failed in everything they needed to do to make this a resort casino. >> what does this mean for the broader world of gaming. it has changed dramatically. 23 states have commercial casinos. there's some type of gambling. lottery in all states at this point, how long can it last, much money is out there for

people to spend on gambling especially at these commercial casinos. the important thing to remember is this isn't a battle for the casino dollar, this is for the entertainment dollar. everyone in the united states lives within a couple hours drive of a commercial casino. going to a casino to gamble is just normal entertainment, as normal as going to the movies or out to a restaurant to eat. this is a battle for the entertainment dollar. take the mid atlantic. since 2004, gaming revenue overall is up 40%. there's a demand for casinos and gaming. the money's going into different places. casinos have to learn to compete. it's a healthy market. the other thing we learned over the last 10 years, because gaming is now an entertainment dollar, this isn't recession proof anymore. they have to compete. when the economy took a hit, so

did gaming revenue. because it's entertainment money now, not just gaming money. the more casinos focus on the idea that this is entertainment money and fighting for discretionary income, that's the way it's going to be. >> thank you very much. >> turning now to dozens of hollywood stars who have been victimized by a computer hacker who stole nude pictures and posted the photos on line, more than 70 were hacked. many of the photos were stolen from apple's i cloud. the f.b.i. is on the case of what is a theft and maybe a sex crime. a digital marketing executive counsel's major corporations around the world. his latest book comes out in january, called zombie loyalist, using great service to create rabid fans. it's always good to have you on the show.

calm it what it is, 21s 21st century theft. we've got 20th century laws to deal with crime. how different is this really from somebody breaking into your house and stealing your jewelry? >> it's different. the f.b.i. does have an incredibly smart cyber crime unit. they are on top of this. the bigger picture is really what is this as a crime. it is not a leak, it is a crime. someone toll information and stole things that did not belong to them and that were private and owned by someone else and they were stolen. there's no question that this was a crime by a perpetrator or group of perpetrators. >> there are ways to hide in the digital world. you are convinced the f.b.i. will find them? >> i believe so, yeah. in 2010, scarlett johansson had the same thing found to her and the that person was found and sentenced to 10 years in prison. they will find this ring. >> when you think about the

scarlett johansson case and others involved in that, mila kunis and christina aguilera, 10 years in jail for putting these pictures on the internet, you think that would be a deterrent. are the laws not strong enough, not clear enough around the country. >> it's several things. if you look at crime, look at the people who base jump building, they knew it was a crime, they could go to jail for it, but it's never been done before. it's the concept of getting no one else has ever seen and they want. i don't condone it. why do you rob banks? that's where the money is. there's always someone that wants to get something that doesn't belong to them, they want to be the first person to do. the there's a reason people try to hack the most unhackable computer systems, why people were trying to get free calls by taking a pepsi can lid and touching a public telephone. it doesn't change, because the mentality always says it's something that's there.

>> this has caused controversy. theres a series of tweets from the star of girls, and she wrote the way in which you share your body must be a choice. support these women and do not look at these pictures. she wrote remember when you look at these pictures, you are violating these women again and again. it's not ok. third tweet, seriously, do not forget that the person who stole these pictures and leaked them is not a hacker, they're a sex offender. >> legally, that's a difficult case to make, sex offender, there was no physical interaction in that reward. i don't in any way think this was the fault of the victims. this was not there, no way should they be blamed, if you don't want it don't take the pictures. i disagree. someone made the choice to steal those feats, that person should go to jail. legally, it's probably a stretch to call that person a sex offender, but that person is a chive and should pay for it, that person committed a crime.

>> ricky injury vase said celebrities, make it hard tore get pics from you by not putting nude pics of yourself on your computer. the backlash, he was blaming the victim. let's go to your digital expertise. if someone wants to take pictures that they don't want people to see, what should they do? >> you have to stop thinking of your phone as a camera and phone. your phone is a camera and an insecure server. that's really what it is. anytime you take a photo, the default setting for the iphone, droid, to back up data. the logic being if you drop your phone in the toilet, lose it, you still have your data. the second that photo is taken and lees your phone and goes to the cloud, wherever it's stored, there's another copy of it. you don't have control over that. when you took a picture on your

camera 20 years ago, you had the film, you controlled and owned the negatives. that doesn't exist anymore. it's within the right of everyone to do it. shut off the auto backup for the time you are taking those. take the photos, take them off the phone, store them not connected to the internet, a drive, somewhere in in our house. understand anytime you take those pictures with something connected to the web, the ability for them to be shared gets that much easier with or without your permission. >> all right, great to have you with us. thanks. we'll be back with more of "consider this."

>> can we talk? sadly, we will never hear joan rivers speak her signature words again. the trailblazer comedy legend known for her cowsistic sense of humor died with her trademark raspy voice and no holds barred approach, she was a master of invention who never stopped making us laugh in a career that lasted more than 50 years. joining us now is dick cavett. he hosted his own talk show and is an author. dick, very good to see you

again. i know you'd been friends with joan for many years. i want to extend my condolences. there aren't many of you in that club of late night talk show hosts and you know her from working comedy clubs in new york in the 1960's. sheryl was an original. >> yes, and i obviously never expected this to happen. just about everything else happened to joan. the sad part of this, the sad ancillary part of this is that we will never hear what she would have said about her misadventure and her illness had she recovered. i must say, i didn't expect her to, the bulletins and comments weren't very encouraging ever, were they, it all had an ominous ring to it, that things are not

going great. but yeah, we played little dinky clubs in the village. there was one very small club, and even though we were totally unknown, they put names out front. one night coming in to work for free, as joan was, we heard a guy and his girlfriend looking at the two names and said joanne rivers and dick cavett, and they moved on. >> i'm sure they never made that mistake again in the future. sheryl was a trailblazer. let's listen to her on the tonight show. >> don't you think men really like intelligence more? >> please, are we going to go back to that. >> it's a brain, a caring person. >> no man ever put his hands up a woman's dress looking for a library card. >> sheryl was one of the first fee fail comedians to do stand

up with the boys especially that tough talking no one had done until she did. >> she was a girl in the trade, she really, really pounded it out there and she survived some of the worst nights, and so did i, in our small clubs, but i think she survived better. she almost, i don't know, she almost seemed to seek adversity in her work and in her life perhaps because she enjoyed how well she survived each time and came back for more. >> i want to play a quick equip about her career and being a comedian. >> you want a real job, honey, there are a million things you can do, but what we do is not a job. sounds so stupid. what we do is a calling, like

yeah, we make people happy. it's a calling. >> now, she really lived those ups and downs from exploding in popularity as johnny carson's substitute host, her own talk show, but then the failure of her show and suicide of her husband, she did not have a smooth, all success kind of life. >> joan didn't have it easy. i used to talk to her about things backstage while we waited for maybe four or five people to come see us that night, and i said when are you happiest? she said i kind of have to admit it, it's when i'm out there, showbiz or on stage. that's true of a hell of a lot of people in the business, including i would say, johnny carson, her great supporter and then nemeses, really, who i think was only happy on stage. i saw him closely and knew what was going on in his life and worked for him.

job had that, i think she escaped into the spotlight maybe more than is healthy or pleasant, but she sure did a hell of a job. i had got some orchids from her about six months ago. i had come to her defense in a public protest about jokes she had done about supposedly subjects you don't joke about, like the holocaust and some other things. i wrote to the people who made these remarks in a magazine, it would become great news to many people that there's any subject you can't do humor about, it would come to news at mark twain, stewart and colbert and chaplain. it's just a silly argument. >> some criticized her for being

too harsh. she argued back that was talking about the truth. the reality is despite what she said about intelligence o on the johnny carson show is you cannot succeed with the biting humor she had unless you are tremendously intelligent. >> yeah, i guess there aren't very many dumb people like her. she was nobody's fool, and a lot of people will say she's harsh and hurt people's feelings like elizabeth taylor, but so what, she was dealing in comedy. she said i am what i am, she gave as good as she got when she was criticized, and i was all for her in that reward. >> she managed to really appeal to all generations. my kids love her, loved her on fashion police. it's a real shame. i got to hope that she gets her

wish, what she wrote in her book about her funeral, she wants a fan blowing in her hair so she looks like beyonce and wants a big hollywood blowout and wants meryl streep crying in five different accents, so dick, again, my condolences, thanks. >> there was a very warm sweet person under there, which surprised many people who met her. she was a good kid underneath it all. >> all right. thank you, dick. good to see you. >> "consider this" will be right back.

there's more to finical news than the ups and downs of the dow. for instance, can fracking change what you pay for water each month? have you thought about how climate change can effect your grocery bill? could rare minerals in china effect your cell phone bill? or, how a hospital in texas could drive up your health care

premium. i'll make the connections from the news to your money real. >> today's data dive looks at a critical issue for women. more women are having double mastectomies than ever. that option does not give women a higher cancer survival rate than less aggressive options. the records were pad of all women in california diagnosed with early stage breast cancer from 1998 to 2011. that's 190,000 women. those who had a double mastectomy showed an 81% survival rate, two percentage points low are than patients who just had a lumpectomy followed by radiation treatment.

women who underwent a single mastectomy had a 79.9 survival rate. women need to consider all factors choosing their treatment. the percentage of women with an early cancer diagnosis who chose to have both breasts removed shot up from just 2% to more than 12% over the course of the study. among women younger than 40, the number jumped from less than 25 to less in three. angelina gee lee brought a new level to the treatment when she wrote about having the double mastectomy. she carried the gene increasing the risk of breast cancer up to 65%. what is now called the angelina effect has led to an increase in genetic testing and hope we will have fewer cases of breast cancer. >> on tech know, imagine getting the chance to view the world. >> the brain is re-learning

how it sees again >> after decades in the dark, >> i couldn't get around on my own >> a miraculous bionic eye... >> i'm seeing flashes >> great >> tech know, every saturday go where science meets humanity. >> this is some of the best driving i've every done, even though i can't see. >> tech know. >> we're here in the vortex. only on al jazeera america.

>> there was a time when only the most sophisticated government agencies could track someone in the ways that we see in the movies. >> we've got vertical movement here. elevator, easy in an elevator! >> we're losing our tracking. anybody got a visual? >> we need to move location and get a better signal. >> new surveillance systems that use your cell phone are making that scene from enemy of the state easy to replicate, so easy that virtually anyone with enough money can buy a system to track people anywhere in the world. that has security experts and privacy advocates very worried. joining us now from washington, d.c. is the former white house scientific advisor and chief

technologies for the f.c.c., now a professor at carnegie melon university. let's start with how these new surveillance systems work. my understanding is they exploit the basic system that allows cell phone carriers to connect with other carriers. me calling anyone else requires knowing where a cell phone is at all tiles. my question is why should anyone other than the carriers have access to that information? >> well, they shouldn't. this is a system, your cell phone carrier needs to know where you are at any given time, but under these systems, somebody can make a request to your cell phone carrier and say where is that phone right now, and even though the pepper making that request has no right whatsoever to have that information, your cell phone carrier may provide the information. >> why? >> well, that's a good question. the system should not work that

way, and it's being exploited for, you know, there were features built in for perfectly good reasons, but they're being exploited now for inappropriate reasons and for some reason, the carriers are not able to extinguish or not doing enough to extinguish a legitimate request from one that should be denied. >> when you're talking about a request, you're basically talking about and correct me if i'm wrong, some sort of communication, that it's as if i were calling you, and that my phone in order to connect to you has to go through this system, and so that is basically asking that system to let me know where you are? >> this request, there's not a human involved. this request is a message sent from a computer, perhaps anywhere in the world and going into your cell phone company, and your cell phone company's computer there is responding to that request. >> so how do you protect against that, then? you think that cell phone

carriers have an obligation to protect their customers, but if they don't know somebody is illegally, if it is illegal, illegally trying to get that information, what can they really do? >> that is a very good question. cell phone carriers do have a legal obligation to protect that information, and in fact, if i were to call my cell carrier and say where is my phone this morning and they didn't verify i was me, didn't ask for a password. they would be violating f.c.c. regulations. the question is did the cellar carrier know this was request they shouldn't answer, what did they do to find out. we don't know the answer to those questions or there is no public information to tell us what carriers did to protect themselves. >> in the extent what they can figure out, they can find you in

a car and figure out what speed you're going at, so what is the f.c.c. doing? >> this particular system won't give that you level of accuracy, but in a city could tell you where you are to within say a few hundred yards, in a rural area, it would be further. so far, i haven't heard that the f.c.c. is doing anything. this is, of course, there's a new report, this has just come forward now. i am hoping that the federal communications commission is going to step forward and look at what the companies are doing, look at why the vulnerability is there, what they can do to fix it in the future and whether or not they have followed the regulations, which require protection of this information. >> do we have any idea who's using the systems, how much they cost, and, you know, also what it means to the average person? >> we don't know who is using the system or at least again from

publicly available information. i have seen some marketing information from some of the companies that provide this, and they seem to be marketing to government agencies, but you never who else they are marketing to and there are companies all around the world. we don't know who is using this. >> it is 198430 years later, isn't it? unfortunately, thank you for bringing this information to us and trying to explain it to us. thanks. >> thank you. >> have you ever wanted to give it all away and go live a simpler life. just how simple would you be willing to go, would you live in a dumpster? that's what one scientist did. he has lived in this tiny 36 square home since february. his goal, to prove people can live with 1% of the water, energy and waste of the average american. joining us again six months

after he joined us just before he moved into the dumpster is professor jeff wilson, associate professor of environmental sciences and dean of the university college, joins us from austin, texas. good to see you again. i need to know how you've survived. i know the temperature's hit 120 degrees in the dumpster during the summer. >> that's right. actually, up north of 130, and i can tell what you, that air conditioning came at about the right time at that six month point. >> you started that phase, too, added electricity, an air conditioner, running water, appliances. now i guess the phase, you calm it a studio dumpster, but how in the world are you going to handle a bathroom in that kind of space? >> right, so it is a sort of it rative experiment. the air conditioning was first in the texas summer. we're going to have to figure a

way to expand the dumpster or strap this right outside of it. >> so you strap it right outside, so you won't have anything inside the room then. >> right, so there's going to be a few things that are going to be a real challenge to get inside the dumpster and those two things are the shower and toilet. i can say right now, the thing that i missed the most is that toilet, because middle of the night, 30 second sprints are not anybody's idea of a good time. >> now that you're start to go plug in the water, the electricity, are you still confident that you can keep to that 1% goal that you only use 1% of the water energy and waste of an average american? >> we're defendant. it is a stretch goal, sort of an audacious goal. we're going to install normal equipment. we had a good

old home depot air conditioner, we're measuring energy. the final face, we move to solar and the more efficient shower heads and l.e.d. lights. >> how much time are you spending in there? are you cleaning most nights? >> i'm in there probably five notes out of the week when i'm in town. there's a long list of students now that would like to stay in the studio apartment, now that it's decked out with a dream catcher and has an air conditioner. we give them that experience of living on a bit less, maybe one or two nights a week. >> there's an educational aspect, signing up to spend the night in there, you don't spend the night when they are there, but you're also bringing all sorts of educational things, including you have to weather station there. >> that's right. we've got a weather station. i actually just checked the weather and it was 97.4 degrees in the dumpster, so obviously, i

have the a.c. off right now. they'll be able to test different types of insulation terse and monitor how that takes to heat and cool the dumpster, right now, it's just an empty tin can. >> you were concerned about your girlfriend and her reaction. is she still with you? >> as far as i can tell, she's still here. she's not spending many nights in the dumpster, but she's still around. >> your parents, i know you went to harvard, i can only imagine what they must think about you living in a dumpster. professor, i hope you'll join us again when phase three comes around. >> i'm always at your disposal. >> the conversation continues on our website, aljazeera.com/consider this. you can find us on twitter and you can tweet me. we'll see you next 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.

ceasefire in eastern ukraine - a government checkpoint comes under fire. hello, welcome. you're watching al jazeera, live from doha. good to have your company. also ahead - kurdish forces retake a strategic hill top from the islamic state group near the iraqi city of mosul. u.s. president obama delays his immigration reform. >> the pigeon sat on a branch, reflecting on existence. and a