tears. >> yes, i do. >> no matter how it's played. it's a beautiful song. i'm thomas drayton in new york. thanks for watching. 13 years after 9/11, news that the islamic state group may have tripled in seize in three months. the son of a hamas founder who switched sides to spy on the group for a decade joins us with the israeli intelligent agent who risked everything to keep him alive. hello, i'm antonio mora, welcome to "consider this". those stories and more ahead. >> it has now been 13 years...

..since the worst terror attack on u.s. soil. >> we will never forget what happened. >> we can't get rid of every trace of evil on the world. that was the case in 2012. >> it's time for the u.s. state military to go on offense. >> i will not hesitate to take action in syria and iraq. >> when an unlikely danish spy... >> one of the most dangerous terrorists in the world. >> as you send bombs, we will send you ours. >> if i made a mistake i would have been crucified. >> to collaborate with israel is the shame of thing. >> you need to make him betray his open people. >> my father was the top leader in the west bank. >> 17 new monuments. >> it shows stonehenge is not alone and never was. we begin with concerns over america's security during a week

when we remembered the 3,000 victims of the 9/11 attacks 13 years ago. president obama announced a stepped up campaign to destroy the islamic state terrorists on wednesday, and a spokesman said i.s. had more than 31,000 fighters, more than the 10,000 it was believed to have a few months ago. in saudi arabia scenario announced he -- scenario secretary of state john kerry announced he put together 10 states. but turkey is not signing on, refusing to fight the terrorists. they will not allows the u.s. to use american bases to launch air strikes. security was ordered ramped up for the 9/11 anniversary, amid the possibility of new threats. >> in new york we focus on terrorism. the concern about i.s.i.s. is adding to the work. >> thursday, relatives and

friends of 9/11 victims gathered at memorials in pennsylvania, and other monuments to read the names of those lost. >> richard edward boss call. >> my brother, hero, best friend, sal edward khyri junior. >> my mother, sandy. [ bells toll ] >> 13 years after small and hateful mines conspired to break us, america stands tall and proud. and guided by the values that sustain us, we will only grow stronger. for more on the state of our homeland security i was joineded by thomas kain, former governor of new jersey.

it's a pleasure to see you. thank you for coming in. how far have we come to secure america since the 9/11 attacks. since your report was released, you came out with a 10th anniversary report and you said in that report that the world was more dangerous than it had been in recent years. the state department said there were 43% more terrorist attacks last year than the year before. poles show that the american people thing we are less safe now. why do we note hear that from the white house, what is the case today? >> first of all, we are safer, a number of our matters have been implement implemented. friendships, the fbi, and c.i.a. talk to each other and share information. perhaps if they did that before 2011 there may not have been a 9/11. there are a lot of things that

have been reformed, many due to recommendations. it's a new threat. it's changed, not the same. not people plotting in afghanistan for three years to do a major attack in the united states. it's lone wolf terrorists, which is new, here and abroad. it's worried about things like i.s.i.s., where if it's successful people would be able to train for another two or three years and create another attack. it's diversified and al qaeda is moving to a number of different countries. so there are whole cyber security, which is somebody we didn't worry about 10 years ago. it's a maiming yore threat, a new threat. i want to address most, if not all. when you released the 10th n versery support, you were

concerned that complacency was setting in. let's listen to something that president obama had to say last night. >> we continue to face a terrorist threat. we can't erase every trace of evil from the world, and small groups of killers have the capacity to do great harm. that was the case before 9/11, and that remains true today. >> again, that's a point you made. do you think the rise of this islamic state terrorist group has woken us up again? >> to some extent. i don't worry about a threat from them to the homeland, maybe in a couple of years, but i'd worry more about the other al qaeda affiliates. put it's different and it's changed, and we said in our 9/11 report that if iraq became a failed state, it went to the top

of the list. we said that we will never again give any group a place that is safe and a time to float another attack, the severity of 9/11. >> that was a key point. no terrorist sanctuaries should be allowed to exist, given the territory that the group is controlling. don't we have that all night. >> it took two or three years to plot 9/11. by the time you trained the hijackers. it could tark that long for a major attack. doesn't mean a lone wolf attack couldn't happen. if we degrade i.s.i.s. so they don't control the territory, we are better off. the american people, the reason we worry about the american people not focussing on terrorism is because they are the ones who will discover the attacks.

it's not federal bureau of investigation agent, i don't think, or c.i.a. agent, it will be somebody like you or i who will see something unusual and report it. if you remember on times square, when you had a bomber trying to climb up times square. more police men put foot there than any other sites of the folder. but it wasn't a policeman. it was a civilian. >> isn't that alarming, given the attention you paid in the report. to the agencies not talking to each other. by the time we heard about the islamic state, they had really already established them substantially. you told the hill that it seems to me that there should be advance warning given the vast intelligence apparatus. if we have warning, it was not

made public. thee took or oil fields in fallujah. how does this happen. >> i don't under. one of two things happen. either it was an intelligence failure and hard to believe we missed something that large are there were reports internally, and people didn't act, and i don't have access. i don't know which it was. >> that brings up the junior varsity comment that president obama made referring to the islamic state terrorist. that raises an issue whether we took them seriously or not. >> unless i saw a classified document. i'm reluctance to blame the terrorist agencies. >> they do tremendous work, and the question is are we handicapping them. that's another thing you wrote

about, the need to streamline the political process of oversight, and we have about 100 committees and sub committees on capitol hill who have a level of oversight over the department of homeland security. it's incredible to believe any organization could work. it's an enormous bureaucracy. it's no oversight. if you had 94 bosses - i'm trying to tell you what to do. who do you listen to, nothing gets done. that's the homeland security departments. two republicans and democrats. every one said to me the most important thing you can do to keep the american people safe, as far as homeland security goes is to reform congressional oversight. they spend so much time preparing, giving testimony to all this huge range of committees, but are not spending

the time they should be spending worrying about safety. >> they bring up the blame to the white house, and on congress. they have, hay mopping these many committees and subcommittees, committees that get reports, and they must have got these reports about the growth of the islamic territories, and they didn't act either. >> you have got to have oversight that is functional, in terms of agriculture, environment - you can go as a reporter and listen to the testimo testimony, make up your mind and report to the people what is going on. intelligence is secret. you can't do this. the only over site that has this effect is the congress. if they are not doing it properly, there's no oversight. that was a problem before 9/11, and in the area of homeland security is a problem now. >> you brought up cyber security, and you wrote a piece

with your co-chair, lee hamilton, former congress woman. and it came out on thursday. it's called "we are at war in the ding tall world" -- in the digital world", and you wrote as they grow and become sophisticated the threat of cyber attack increases. we heard about china and now they try to penetrate american companies and the defense apparatus. and we heard a security agency say the transfer of wealth because of government secrets, it's the greatest transfer of wealth. we saw the attacks on target and home depot. a striking thing is we cannot afford to have a digital 9/11 wake us up. >> no, and one of the heads of

the intelligence agency said cyber is like the day before 9/11. we are not prepared, we are not doing anything. huge amounts of the private sector ipp gen uty is -- ingenuity is being stolen. the defense department taken. people don't like to admit that they are gone. >> they they have lost the information. >> exactly. >> no bill has been passed. the united states has not got their act together. vast amounts are going from the private sector. we have to get the n.s.a. and the private sector together to come up with a strat gip. >> great to have your perspective on this tragic anniversary. pleasure to see you. a key finding of the 9/11 commission was officials and intelligence agencies suffered a failure of imagination, unable to grasp the threat posed.

secretary of defense chuck hagel said because of i.s., america faces a greater terrorist threat. joining us is christopher dicky, the foreign editor of "the daily beast", whose recent piece is "i.s.i.s., al qaeda and our perpetual failure of imagination." good to see you. you write before 9/11 we couldn't imagine guys with box cutters could kill 3,000 americans. and you said we filed to see the group that this - that was controlling parts of syria, would overrun iraq in a short period of time. >> first of all, we worked on the assumption that basically this group that was originally called al qaeda, had been destroyed or neutralized, compressed was defeated. that's what the surge did in 2006 and 2008. into we killed their head. >> way back in 2006. we were in a situation where we said "we have won", we triumphed

over the group. we go to syria, and they regroup. still, it's only been a few months since president obama called them the junior haves itty. we didn't imagine on the basis of intelligence, that this group could move down and take over the second biggest city in iraq and talk it without firing a shot. >> we spend bill yonls, and trillions fighting terrorists, how can we not do better. >> there's a bunch of reasons. we tend to dismiss these people as crazy, or we think that they are thinking like us. and operate like us. that may be a bigger problem. because those are - they are a little like start-ups against a big corporation, eastman kodak. they are very kick to move, they are quick to reoryet themselves, especially -- re-orient

themselves, special this group, i.s., and there's not a lot of infrastructure they need to protect - not until recently. look at the department of homeland security, 240,000 employees, 22 agencies folded into that. is it. >> 100 congressional... >> yes, exactly, all that makes for a big ossified bureaucracy that is slow to move. that's homeland security. what about the defense department, the c.i.a. they cannot cope with the fast-moving imaginative terrorist groups. >> you mentioned the junior varsity comments, how we go back to jp when president obama -- to january when president obama said that. i.s. controlled big parts of syria, it had come down through iraq to the heart of iraq and taken fallujah. what point is it a crisis of imagination, a problem of imagination, when does it become

denial. >> none so blind that will not see. >> at that point they showed they had. >> there's a lot of that. there was a question of what do you do about it, what can you do about it. the minister knew that the maliki government was a disaster. so we were in the situation where obama didn't want to lock himself into a situation where you say this is the biggest threat you see on the terrorist front and not be able to do anything about it. one thing that was disingepous is something that could have been done. would the american people have been ready six months ago. i don't think so. if you look at the record a year ago, it was not the case. after the words of this being the biggest threat, you write about the footside of all of this, whether there's excessive alarmism, and you quote general john alan, head of forces in

afghanistan, saying that this could be world war iii. you talk about terrorism expert, saying it's shock and awe in reverse. do you think we are being alarmist about the guys? >> we are not being alarmist if we think there's a possibility they will, some time in the relatively near future try to carry out terrorist acts in europe and the united states. we are not being alarmist if we look at the terrorist acts and say they don't have to be 9/11 to have huge shock waves. >> before you go, something else address in the "the daily beast", the issue of the legality of the action. what do you think? >> well if you go back and read the september 2001 authorisation of the use of military force. >> specifically about al qaeda. >> it doesn't mention al qaeda, it's more specific than that, it talks about people involved with the attacks on 9/11. it's hard to make the case that that authorisation extends to

i.s.i.s. >> what do you think they'll do? do you think congress will vote, will politics get in the way. politics is getting in the way, but president obama would be wise to go to congress yeses, because he has the momentum. >> thank you for being with us. "consider this" will be right back. only on al jazeera america

>> turning to president obama's high stakes speech in which he finally detailed his strategy to what he called degreat and ultimately destroy the islamic state group. >> i want the american people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in iraq and afghanistan. they will not involve american combat troops fighting on foreign soil. this counter terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady,

relentless effort to take out isil wherever they exist using air power and hour support for partners on the ground. >> while never uttering the word, he is calling the nation to war expanding an intense air campaign in iraq to syria in a conflict the administration has been loathe to get entangled in. >> i will not hesitate to take action against isil in syria, as well as iraq. the core principle of my presidency, if you threaten america, you will find no safe haven. >> the president made the case that left unchecked the terrorists are a threat to the united states. >> while we have not yet detected specific plotting against our homeland, isil leaders have threatened america and our allies. we believe thousands are fortunes, including europeans and americans ever joined them in syria and iraq, trained and

battle hardened, they could try to return to their home countries and carry out deadly attacks. >> shortly after the speech, i spoke to george mitchell who served as president obama's essential envoy for middle east peace and he recently wrote a three part series on middle east peace that ran in the boston globe. >> a pleasure to see you. thank you for joining us on this night. this was a critical speech for the president after weeks of criticism for saying he didn't have a strategy for combating the islamic state terrorists. he wanted to drive home this was not iraq and afghanistan. he called it a counter terrorism effort, didn't call it a war. >> that's right, he did make that distinction. i think it's an appropriate one. i think that we have to be

careful not to assume that american military power alone can deal with isis or the many other issues in the region. i think a critical element, which the president referred to is a government in iraq and is not seen as sectarian as the previous iraqi government has been seen. it's not a coincidence that where isis has succeeded is in areas that are sunni dominated and where the population has been disaffected with their government, which they see as a sectarian shia government not giving sunnis a fair shake. that has to be national government there in iraq hopefully and hopefully soon. >> an important political component within iraq. normally presidents use these prime time speeches to make a case to the american people.

here, polls have shown that the american people were already there, maybe ahead of the president supporting action against the terrorists. as you know, americans don't want troops to fight another war. the president stressed there would be no boots on the ground, but is it a good idea to limit however we'll go from the on set? >> in this case, it's necessary and appropriate, americans are rightly concerned. we spent a dozen years in both iraq and afghanistan with tremendous loss of life and great deal of resources in financial terms going into those efforts. in addition, i think the american people understand, and i think they will understand more in the years ahead that this is a long process in that region. it's a degree of turbulence that will continue for sometime. there are many overlapping conflicts within islam, sunni

versus shia, sunni governments against extremist groups like isis, persians versus arabs and the historical conflict between the arabs and israelis. it's going to be turbulent. you have to understand that isis is an out growth of al-qaeda, which is an out growth of the muslim brother nd mujahadeen. >> we will be relying on coalition troops may not be up to it. when he's talking about training syrian forces to combat the forces in syria, won't that mean putting american troops on the ground? >> there will be some american forces as the president pointed out, special forces and some to conduct training, but i don't

think this is going to lead to a large-scale introduction of american combat forces to the degree that existed in both iraq and afghanistan. i think there's good reason for that. we haven't the outcome that we wanted in either place, and thereof to be others participating, and in particular, as the president noted, the muslim people themselves, particularly the sunni dominated man arckies in the gulf region have a step up and make clear their views in opposition to these extremist groups and make clear that they are prepared to undertake the effort to join in the effort with us and others, and there will be ground forces, iraqi forces, which have not performed well so far, kurdish forces, and there will be others in the region on which we can rely for intelligence, resources, assistance, logistics and so fort. the united states is the

dominant power in the world, but great as is our power, we cannot control events everywhere in the world and not every problem in the word is an exclusively american problem. we have a unique opportunity and power to influence events. that's what we're going to do here. i believe that we will succeed in degrading and defeating isis, the challenge is the more difficult one, the longer term one of helping to build responsible, reliable and what we hope tolerant and democratic states in the region. >> we'll need some unity of purpose to be able to do that. you were the top man in the senate for five years. the penalty says he has the authority to act on his own, and askedding congress for full opportunities and support. should there be a full debate about this in congress? wouldn't it have been better for the president to have gotten

full blown authorization from congress before moving forward? >> the united states is stronger both externally and internally when there is union anymore tee. that doesn't occur much anymore. there is as broader con sense for this in the country and congress and i think there will be expressions of support in congress in a variety of ways, most notably funding for the operation which has to be approved by congress. >> do you think the president can be the leader necessary to unit the country and also create that coalition that we need especially if we are not going to have troops on the ground to combat these people? the president has been described as very reluctant warrior. >> i'll tell you something, i prefer a president who is a reluctant warrior than one who's seeking combat. i think the president has been

restrained and wise interns of the use of american military power. if we engage in military combat everywhere we're asked to go, we will soon be unable to engage in that combat anywhere. there is a limit to our resources to our strength, and keep in mind that the greatest strength that the united states has in the world is our ideals. the principles under which our country was created and which have led us to the point today. military power and economic strength are important, but it is ideals that are the primary basis of influencing the world, and that means that we do believe in restraint, we don't seek out war, we are not aggressors in conflicts. i think that's consistent with the american tradition, not contrary to it. >> thank you very much for your in sight. >> thank you. >> we'll be back with more of "consider this."

>> the recent fighting in gaza killed palestinians and israelis. israel and hamas are currently abiding by a ceasefire, but uneasy alliances on both sides constantly threaten the temporary peace. at age 17, the son of a founder of hamas was on his way to a life of extremism. after arrested by israelis, he

became a spy for the internal israeli security agency. he provided high level information on hamas for more than a decade. his story was the subject of his book, son of hamas. "the green prince" is a story of a most unusual alliance. >> we called him the green prince. >> my father was the top ma'am has leader in the west bank. >> he had no clue what i was doing. >> it's like recording the son of the israeli prime minister. >> deep in my heart, i was really terrified. >> a good source needs to be with you, not against. >> you can get killed anytime. >> i really felt responsible for him as a source and a human being. >> i was on my own. >> he was really tough. >> i realized that people are dying because of this lie. >> we're joined by the man who

turned against hamas, and by his handler from the israeli intelligence agency. the film is now playing in select cities and will continue to open in more cities over the coming weeks. it's very good to have you both with us. >> thank you. >> quite a story you both have. yours is particularly amazing. you're the son of the top hamas leader in the west bank. you're already under surveillance by the israelis once you became a teenager and the israelis at one point arrest you, put you in a jail and talk to you about trying to come over to their side and help them out. what was your reaction and when did you finally say i do have to work for them? >> when i witnessed the brutality of hamas movement in prison, i raised the question about the very nature of the movement. >> because you were in an israeli prison but there was a section controlled by hamas. >> yes, inside the israeli

prisons, hamas control their own prisoners and other rival palestinian factions control their own members, so hamas basically was investigating their own members who give information to israel, and they tortured and killed suspects of collaborating with israel. now i ask myself, is the nature of the movement that my father is risking his life to found, and we, as a family, suffered a lot for the sake of that organization. this is where i start questioning the very nature of hamas, which led eventually to me not working for israel, working with israel to stop hamas madness. >> you say in the movie that this is the worst thing you possibly could have done, that this is worse than raping your mother for a hamas member. >> it's a very shameful thing and that culture is based on

shame and honor. it's not like here, everybody's based on wrong and right. basically, i knew that it was a very shameful thing, but in the meantime, it was the right thing in my opinion, to save a human life. how could you go wrong by saving a human life? that was my compass. that was my conscience. >> how did you feel when you talked to him for the first time, because you were his handler from day one. did you see that kind of moral compass he had? >> yes, i saw the moral compass, although i think it was a process that evolved over the years, and we learned each other. he saw how the agency is treating him and others, and we saw how he treats and what kind of information he brings.

he was not the only one walking and having this kind of knowing compass, knowing that he actually stopped killings. >> he may have been the most important spy you had inside hamas. >> yes, he was the most important and i think understanding he gave israel about hamas at that time was something we couldn't even imagine. >> could have saved the life of perez at one point. >> you went to incredible lengths to make sure he was not discovered, but it's difficult to believe that you did so for 10 years. you went as far as bombing his house. >> yes, people tend to think in the west bank that israel is using people, but actually, we do a lot, and we put lots of effort in keeping the safety of the people that work with us. you were mentioning, the event, we tried to arrest the green prince, the israeli army did not know that he was working with us.

they knew that they were going to arrest a big terrorist, so trying to get him, and making sure that he's not at home, they tarted his house. at the same time, he was actually hiding in different place and in that way, we kept him with a way to keep his cover. >> when i said that this was an unusual alliance, that was no understatement, your father a founder of hamas, your dad a general in the israeli army. >> right. >> at what point did you make that connection? >> not immediately. i, you know, just later on, when we started to evaluate and understand what happened, we start to think about all the circumstances that brought us together, because even fours, it's amazing, you know, i came from this background. my father was actually in charge of the west

bang, doing the first palestinian inty fad da. the guy who founded hamas is his father, but our friendship evolved without thinking about those circumstances. >> i want to get to the most important part of the friendship in a minute, but do want to ask you, you talked about the shame of collaborating with israel. you i'm sure saw the pictures of hamas operatives killing people in the streets of gaza after the recent fighting. did you think that could be me? >> i felt sorry for the people killed. back in 1996, during my imprisonment, this was what hamas was doing to people, to intimidate everybody. i think that they still use the same strategy, to intimidate an

entire society that anyone who goes against the will of the movement will be executed. the execution took place outside the mosque in a public, children witnessed that, women witnessed that, and again, this is their strategy, does not scare me and it should not scare anybody who lives in freedom. >> your bravery is incredible. you've been disowned by your dad and certainly must live under some level of threat. he finally comes to the united states, and because of his connections to hamas, they don't want to give him asylum. at this point, you decide i don't care, i'm coming to the united states and i'm speaking out in his favor. >> we don't leave a soldier behind. he was a soldier for humidity humanity. i couldn't let him meet his destiny without helping him.

in some way, i didn't have a choice. i needed to do it. it was something that my heart told me to do, and this is why i came to the united states to testify for him. >> i know you guys have called each other brothers. it's really a pleasure to see you. one can only hope that more palestinian and israelis can call each other brothers in the future. >> hopefully. >> the green prince is now open in select cities and will open in more cities in the coming weeks. "consider this" will be right back. the incredible journey continues... on the edge of eighteen only on all jazeera america

>> start with one issue education... gun control... the gap between rich and poor... job creation... climate change... tax policy... the economy... iran... healthcare... ad guests on all sides of the debate. >> this is a right we should all have... >> it's just the way it is... >> there's something seriously wrong... >> there's been acrimony... >> the conservative ideal... >> it's an urgent need... and a host willing to ask the tough questions >> how do you explain it to yourself? and you'll get... the inside story ray suarez hosts inside story weekdays at 5 eastern only on al jazeera america >> a new book looks at struggles in the last year of his life, death of a king, the real story of dr. martin luther king's, jr. final year show how his voluntary opposition of the vietnam war led to blocks of support being lost. i sat down with the book's author

tavis smiley, here's and ex10ed preview. >> this book has not been written before because it focuses on the last year of his life, april 4, 1967 to april 4, 1968. he's here in new york to give the speech beyond vietnam, comes out against the war in manhattan and refers to america as the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. that's a strong indictment from a black man to a white nation. >> created quite the backlash. >> ooh, lord god, did it. the next day, everybody and everything started to turn against him. he gives the speech where he utters that phrase and talks about the triple threat of racism, poverty and military. >>. as long as this negro was staying in the lane of civil rights, he was ok and acceptable but when he started talking about foreign policy and started saying that budgets are moral

documents and the money you're wasting over there in vietnam should be spent at home, the bombs that are dropping there are landing in the get toes and barrios of american cities and war is the enemy of the poor, they turned on martin luther king that year. >> i'm old enough to remember the accusations of him being a communist. it wasn't just white america who turned against him, although you're right about how 75% of whites thought he was irrelevant at that point, a good majority of blacks thought the same thing. part was the rise of the black panther party and young people being attracted to those more militant. >> we so deified him in death. he and johnson worked and voting rights and civil rights, the two

most important pieces of legislation in the 20t 20th century, now hes against johnson on vietnam, so the white house turned on him. the number was almost 60% in black america thought he was persona non-grata. whitney young and urban league comes out publicly against dr. king. martin must have felt like the cosmos had turned on him. >> what would he say if now, 46 years later, if he saw a black president, if he saw that there has been great progress on race issues but there continues to be race issues and discrimination in this country. >> the closest thing to him seeing a black president in his lifetime was him seeing the first plaque mayor of a major american city, carl stokes in cleveland. he spent a lot of time campaigning for him to get

elected mayor. he certainly would have involved himself in the obama campaign. they might not have asked him, because his truth is so subversive, they might not have wanted him on the campaign trail, but he certainly would have campaigned for president obama about that once elected, he would have said to him i love you, but i'm going to be your critic and push you and hold you accountable to those things in the best interests of the american people. >> before the election, where barack obama first became president of the united states, you weren't uncritical of the president. you brought up issues, and you got a lot of grief for it. in fact, you ended up changing jobs to some extent because of the fact that you had been treated harshly because you weren't toeing the party line and you were bringing up questions. how do you feel about the president today and has he done his job especially when it comes to race. in 2011, you said that he has

failed american blacks. >> i think that the president has a difficult job, and i certainly am pulling and praying for him every day. not just to be another garden variety politician, but a statesman. he could be that and missed an opportunity to be a statesman in ferguson and chose to be another garden variety politician and didn't want to get involved. >> should he have gone? >> he should have gone. >> even though martin luther king didn't go to newark or new york. >> he wasn't the president. obama is. king is a prophet, obama is the president antpresident of this country, as far as i'm concerned, black, white, republican or democratic, if there's a major crisis in this country in a major american city or a city next to a major american city like ferguson is to st. louis is on fire and the city's been militarized and the city is burning, and people are

rioting and protesting and being killed, beaten and maced, the president ought to step into that situation. i'm not going to let president obama off the hook anymore than i let george bush off the hook for not going to new orleans. i'm skeptical of the democratic party for using this issue to whip up african-american voters in the country quarterback get them to turn out for the elections. >> that brings up an interesting question, which is is there a problem with the african-american community becoming so identified with the democratic party and voting to overwhelmingly democratic, because then aren't they seeing the democrats ignore them because they take them for granted and republicans saying we are not going to get their votes anyway. home e. i'm being a little harsh, but isn't that what's happening? >> you aren't being harsh at all. the hispanic community are being

ignored by one party and isn't that the same, black or brown. it's an issue we have to take seriously. what is crazy about this is the republicans are too stuck on stupid to take at advantage of that. here you have two constituencies, black and brown in many respects both feel marginalized by their party, but you can't give them another option that is in their best interest. you cannot stop contesting their humanity with the policies you are pushing forward. that's why you need people like dr. king, willing to tell the truth no matter where the chips fall. >> that would be a good place on which to end, but i'm not going to end there. >> shoot. >> make a bit of a harsh turn here. >> i feel something coming. >> ironically, you know, here at aljazeera america, we do serious news, we don't do tabloid or

much entertainment. i suspect i am going to be the first person on this network to ever utter the follow four words, dancing with the stars. >> you might be the last. [ laughter ] >> you know what, i never thought i would utter those words either. in part, because if you'd asked me this, you know, five, 10 years ago, the answer would have been no and i told them no this year three times. the third time, they said take a meeting with us. i took a meeting. after the meeting, i sat down at the kitchen table and did pros, consist and it turned out to my surprise and my horror that the reasons for doing the show outweighed the reason for not. i'm about to turn 50. i figured i would do one last stupid, foolish ridiculous thing before i turned 50 and this is it, this is definitely it. >> was one of those pros wearing a sparkly costume. >> i will not be doing that, i guarantee you. i said i get final approval of

what i wear. we're not going out like that, on you tube with a sparkly costume on. >> i will vote for you. >> my man. >> death of a king, the real story of dr. martin luther king, jr.'s final year is out in book stores now and you can catch my full interview a week from saturday. we'll be back with more of "consider this."

ancient site last week, but a study led by the university of birmingham discovered hundreds of new features, 17 previously unknown monuments buried beneath the four square miles surrounding stonehenge. these discoveries rewriting the book of what we thought we knew about the famous prehistoric monument.

joining us now is brian fagen, author of several popular archaeology books, an emeritus professor at u.c. santa barbara. this was a big, high tech endeavor, researchers used all sorts of instruments, including ground penetrating radar, gravity and magnetic sensors to scan under the ground and discovered 17 new monuments, dozens of burial pits, even 100-foot long wooden building that is believed to have been used for a burial rituals. how is this so completely changing our understanding of stonehenge? >> archaeology has changed radically in the last 20 years. for a long, long time, people looked at stonehenge and excavated there as a stone circle, or a series of circles. has research goes back to the

17th century. now with this new technology that looks under the ground, we're begin to go realize that stonehenge was part of an norm and you say sacred landscape, and this is the exciting thing. we're now looking at the country, at the sites around it and the =phepbt 20 years are going to be very, very exciting. >> people have been studying stonehenge for centuries, there are research projects as army as the 1620's. with all this digging around the area for so long, why had none of these features been found? >> very simply because we couldn't do it. we are now in an amacing period in archaeology where for example there's a burial of an archer near stone hen where destroyeding his bones, we know he came from central europe. there was no way to do this 10 years ago. ten years ago, we certainly

couldn't have looked under the ground like now. people did their best, but they are digging a monument, not looking at landscape. >> what does this tell us about the people who built the monument? the prevailing theory is stonehenge was visited by small groups, now appears to be this enormous gathering place? it's a landscape. you've got to think of stonehenge acknowledge landscape in the context of something like westminster abbey or temple of the god in egypt, places that were sacred for hundreds of years and changed and modified. the way you've got to think about this landscape is small numbers of farmers lived there and occasionally much larger numbers of people came to celebrate rituals and the landscape changed over many, many centuries to accommodate changing beliefs. >> talking about rituals, the timber building that's quite large is believe to have been

the site of bizarre burial rituals. how do we know that that is what was going on there? >> they are making an informed guess at this point. what they will now do, they located the timbers, they will now excavate it in the next few years, i would imagine. it looks very like other buildings elsewhere, large timber structures standing by themselves. what would happen is that you would die and the people believed you were going to become an ancestor. they would expose your body in the channel house, let the bones be exposed and the flesh decompose, then gather the bones and bury them in the sale in a way as a dead person, you returned to the sale and became a revered ancestors, because ancestors were very big here. >> is there a chance we will get to see what's underground

anytime soon? >> that is a very difficult question. what they have done, and it's amazing how fast they've done it, they've exposed in electronic terms, a landscape, but to dig one of these sites would take weeks or months and enormous sums of money, so what you're looking at here is a long-term exploration of this landscape, of the channel house, of burial grounds, of pits. this is going to cost a lot of money and take a lot of time. in 50 years, our understanding of stonehenge will be completely different and much more refined than it is today. this is truly one of the most exciting archeological discoveries in generations. >> it will be a fascinating exploration. thank you for guiding us through these first steps of that exploration. pleasure to have you with us. the conversation continues on our website or on our facebook or google plus pages.

you can also find us on twitter. we'll see you next time. islamic state group releases a video that appears to show the beheading of a british aid worker. hello, welcome. you are watching al jazeera, live from doha. it's good to have your company. also on the programme. the u.s. says egypt has a key role to play in the coalition against the i.s. more fighting in eastern ukraine despite a week-long ceasefire. vladimir putin wants to take over his country, says the ukranian prime minister. >> translation: