>> on al jazeera america >> technology...it's a vital part of who we are... >>they had some dynamic fire behavior... >> and what we do... don't try this at home! >> tech know where technology meets humanity... only on al jazeera america in tonight's debate billions >> in tonight's debate, billions are believers but we ask does religion do more harm than good. and should washington imoiz war time censorship on the internet around is president obama trading long standing ties in the middle east, with iran, i'm i'm "the guardian", and this is

"third rail" -- i'm imran garda and this is "third rail." >> there'll never be peace or compromise. children... >> what astonishes me is how many problems are the direct result of what people believe about god. >> in any holy book, you can see anything. skyscrapers. >> it's hard to find anything other than religion causing a things. >> a world but religion gave us others. >> that's the way we are wired. >> if you want to find a system encouraging people to be better. worldwide, consistently, the only one we have is religion.

>> we have atheist department of transportation, and larry alex taunton, executive director of the christian based fixed point foundation as our guests thank you for joining us. larry alex taunton, does religion do more harm than good? >> depends on the religion, it's a bread question. christianity, i believe, brings much good to the table. >> like what? >> the data suggests the average evangelical, for instance, gives 10 times the amount of money and time as the average atheist. i am sure that dan is well up the list on that. but they bring a lot of good ben ef lens to a culture. >> so ben esso lens to a culture, religion does more good than harm. particularly larry alex taunton's religion. daniel dennett? >> i believe christianity does a lot of good for many people.

many need it. we should honour and try to preserve that. it does harm, christianity as well. i think the harm these days - don't look at the past, that's atrocious - but if you look at christianity today, to me the big problem with it is the systematic hypocrisy, the way in which it encourages people, obliges them to lie, and it valorizes hypocrisy, and irrationality in a way that is really detrimental. >> how? >> well, when people use faith as an excuse for not thinking, and it seems to me that faith is a gold-plated excuse not to think. problems are difficult, and the answers from your faith is simple, and it's wrong. >> larry alex taunton, in the atlantic you wrote that atheists fascinate you - i'm glad you do,

you have one next to you - but you said you consider their philosophy potentially in my viewee and dangerous. dan is dangerous. >> i don't think dan is dangerous. dangerous. but when i look on the 20th century, an experiment in secular government. what i see is 130 million dead at the hands of secular regimes, suggesting that it is, indeed, dangerous. it's more than all religious wars in all centuries combined. >> the 20th century needed more religion, daniel dennett, not secularism. >> the regime spoken of took their lessons from religion, and turned to stalin and hitler. to call them aith yist regimes is a little much. they basically put forward

r.e.m.ageous doc prince -- religious doctrines and cut their followers, enraptured by rhetoric. >> they had idea yoingies. -- idea yoingies. >> it was different from the atheist that i am or the new atheist movement. we are not ideologues we believe in rationality and imperial evidence. >> what about taking larry's point and applying it to, say, china today, right, where the tibetans face cultural destruction. >> yes. >> wiger mousse limbs face destructions, you wouldn't justify that? >> no, i wouldn't. >> satisfied. >> i would put it that which, of the two world fuse, aith yist and christian world few, which

restrains impulses and which exacerbates them. as a christian i'm oblige said to treat you as people made in the way of god. >> whether we want to be viewed that way or not? >> yes, regardless whether you are a member of my community. >> atheists are moral people, they don't need a scripture to come from. >> where does it come from? >> from us, people. who are better judges of what is right and wrong than we, the people. some book says that something that. >> mao was of the opinion that killing 40,000 to 70,000, because he didn't belief there was a god in the next life to judge him for his actions. >> that's not why he did what he did, i am sure. i don't see a relationship

between mao's rein of terror, and his disbelief. >> larry alex taunton, let's have a look at some contemporary trends, if you like, evangelicals in places like uyanda, treading homophobia. is that just final. politics. >> it's not about that, it's americans spreading their role on the take of christianity to places like uganda. >> i can't speak to what dose gone in uganda... >> is it right or wrong. >> christians take scriptures seriously and it speaks about homosexuality. the way in which that is played out in uganda i can't say. >> persecuting homosexuals is okay because... >> no, i didn't say that. it's the teaching of christ,

that we treat etch, regardless of -- everyone, regardless of whether or not they agree with us, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual as an infinite value individual. >> superceding the text that says you may need to persecute them. persecution. >> is it wrong? someone. >> is it wrong to happen in places like uganda. >> i don't know what is going on there. i think it's wrong to persecute. to your general point, it's wrong to persecute in the name of jesus christ. >> is this some of what you are talking about? >> it is, and i have to say the eadvantage illists, how they move into africa and other countries, it's like tobacco countries, now they are wise to products...

>> but tobacco countries don't build schools. >> that's true. but spreading religion to people cell. >> reporter: they do a lot of good work in africa to fight g h.i.v., aids, orphanages. >> let's add up the good and sub tract the value. do. >> i admit they do a lot of good. they can do the same good whout prophetizing, and i think that's unfortunate. >> don't ath exists prophetize as well. the billboards, book sales, if you like. >> we don't tell anybody that they are going to hell if they don't join us. >> right. >> we don't make it a condition of anything, that they believe us. we lay out our reasons and let them decide. >> i want to ask the question is it only about other problems of fundamentalism.

from rotten apples, cherry-picked interpretations of itself? >> i think religion itself lays a foundation for that. this is by encouraging and respecting a certain amount of irrationality. and certain claims beyond criticism, and making it a moral obligation not to criticize the doctrines, not to question them creates an atmosphere that makes fundamentalism possible. i think that is - i would lay that at the doorstep of every religion. in fact, one of the painful paradoxes for good, wise, liberal human community religion in america is that the people that give religion a good name have to recognise it, in doing it that they provide

colourizition for the bad solution. and as i said, if the mafia built schools and hospital we'd organization. >> is religion the mafia. >> bad religion, yes. >> what about within this county, in europe and this country, perhaps we might not have seen the abolition of slavery if it wasn't for fundamentalist christians, quakers and others. >> perhaps not. >> civil rights movement. >> yes, but you have to remember, for all the good that the churches did in furthering civil rights. they were fighting against christian churches in the south segregation. >> that doesn't undo the fact that every meaningful reformed movement in the west has been motivated by judeo christian world few...

>> every movement. >> meaningful reform movement. >> yes. >> throughout the world. >> i said in the we were world. has judeo christian world few with abolitionism and throe. >> how about gay marriage. >> i don't consider that to be a legitimate civil right. >> there we go. >> evangelical christians - of course they are going to get on bard with something like that, because it's counter to what they believe marriage, defined a particular way from millennia, dan, is. so christians have been driving known. >> pause it here, you don't right. >> i do not belief in - i don't believe in gay marriage. do i believe someone can have the right. they can choose to have any union they like. do i believe, however, that that is a moral rite?

as an evangelical christian, i'm not of the view that homosexuality is right in the eyes of god. so, no. position. >> yes. transportation... >> absolutely -- the evidence, daniel dennett... >> absolutely. people. >> absolutely. it shows for hundreds of years people have been kicking and screaming by secular movements. >> that is not so. it is out of a christian world view that your science is born. it's out of a christian world view that the government is born or ethics or morality. >> wouldn't aristotle, plato or that. >> they may well. >> you don't think a judeo

christian world view is fundamental to western culture. >> historically it played an important role. i'll give you this much. religion served as a nurse crop. stability. >> i'll take a break now. coming up, we ask if islam does more harm than the other religions do. stay with us. >> people can point to verses in the koran, these verses are the reason we i.s.i.s. >> are they reading text. >> maybe it's because there was an iraq. >> later on. >> there are some extremist right wing jews calling for websites. i go on websites and stand up against them. >> if i go on to a radical website. i'll get on a watch list. >>

and in the third rail we find what it's like to be a refugee at sea. >> authorities didn't want us to spam to them. >> libya is easy, they have no problem killing people, that's why all of us came here.

>> tomorrow. the fastest internet in the country. >> it's the next generation internet. >> but why isn't it in your town? >> our internet's half the speed of dial-up. >> could big cable be controlling your access to

the web? >> it's not even gonna play. >> your right to access knowledge is being limited. >> techknow's team of experts show you how the miracles of science... >> i'm standing in a tropical wind storm. >> can affect and surprise us. >> wow! some of these are amazing. >> "techknow", where technology meets humanity. tomorrow, 6:30 eastern. only on al jazeera america. religion. >> it's built on prejudice, injustice and inhumanity. >> when you watch the room, it's not christian terrorists. >> al qaeda, boko haram, hezbollah, hamas. >> all in name of religion, you put it in the name of our religion. the western press puts it in the name of our religion. >> islam does not just avoid violence, but lays a foundation for a profound societal peace. welcome back. let's bring in

imam zaid shakir founder of zaytuna college. the first liberal arts college in the united states. thank you for joining us. is violence in the name of religion more prevalent in islam in this day and age. >> depends how you define islam. people that fly a plane into a building can claim they are muslim and do it in the name of islam. i recall in the introof this programme mentioning that islam encourages suicide bombing. suicide and murder, the cause in the consequence of the suicide bombing, the suicide and the murder are vehemently forbidden in islam. people can perceive on the one hand or claim on the other hand

that their motive or islam particularly, but we need to step back and analyse the true motivations. humans are motivated in any action by a complicated formula. in many instances religion might be part of that value. >> for al-qaeda ore i.s.i.l., it's a main value, they are religious. >> they claim to be reliageo, i would say they are more ido logs, and the claims to religion are a religion that doesn't accommodate for the religion, including islam, that they have promoted, such as patiently and dignity enduring oppression. working through common shared values, such as the sanctity of innocent life, to solve your problems in ways that are governed by certain parameters.

>> like christianity has a bloody history, islam has, it's not just a 21st history. >> i would say it's not true. inquisition. >> i would be delighted to go through all of these, the spanish inquisition is not christian. in much that i here violence being done in the name of islam is not consistent, as i understand him with truize lambic teaching. jesus christ -- true islamic teaching. jesus christ teaching was against violence. >> you guys are not in agreement. >> i say if i reach across the table and hit you and say i'm a christian, it's not done in jesus christ's name.

>> you can look at actions, we say religion plays a part. islam plays a part. people can point to verses in the koran. that's the reason we have i.s.i.s. the verses were in the koran throughout the 20th century, modern history, it doesn't prevent muslims, christians, jews in various places from living together. >> i.s.i.l. is reading their text too closely. >> maybe it's because there was an invasion, an occupation of the iraq that tore apart the social fabric of that county, and in the ensuing hell, something hellic like i.s.i.s. emerged. i'm not saying u.s. performed policy alone, but i'm saying these things don't occur in a vacuum. you can't say i.s.i.s., all of a sudden they woke up and discovered the violent versus in out. >> bear with me for a second.

a couple of days ago another secular blogger was hacked to death in blank, there was no -- policy. >> i don't think there's a sane muslim that would endorse or prove it. islam. >> a lot of things are done in the name of muslim. like i said, i don't think a sane muslim on this planet would encourage, endorse or approve that action. >> to me it seems the main problem with religion can be simply illustrated. if larry here decided i'd convinced him and he announced he was no longer a christian, he'd break hearts in his family, but he wouldn't fear for his life. on the other hand, if you, as an imam said "i lost my faith, i'm no longer a muslim", you would not. >> i don't think i would be in any more danger. >> really.

>> tomorrow if i did that than i was yesterday. >> it's interesting that muslims around the world are afraid .... >> can a muslim change his religion. >> i'm not a muslim around the world, i'm a muslim in the united states of america, and you are talking to me here in the united states of america. putting the situation in context is important. i can do it in malaysia, turkey, i could probably do it in most places, not all places and... ..a lot of times they are sensationalized individual case, and are role. >> there are countries where apostizeies are punishable by death. size. >> how often would they if they didn't know they'd be killed? >> it's well known.

these are usually highly sensational cases. >> i want to ask you about the context. we see in a place like myanmar, the country coming out. and we see people who are considered the most peaceful on earth. buddhist monks, attacking a minority who happen to be a muslim. doesn't it suggest that they are on to something. if they put the right kind of raw materials materials in there, the issues, and stir it around, you can extract violence out of anyone, even the buddhist system. >> i suppose there are conditions when almost anyone could be made intoxicated enough by something, so they commit acts of violence, it's just that religion has a monopoly. >> it has an monopoly, if anything an atheist does can be attributed to religion, if

that's the way we approach things, yes. religion has a monopoly. when it is rely imious, because we want to protect the good name and image ofated yix. -- image of aith yix. >> in 2050, looking ahead, there's a pew poll saying that muslims will be equal to christians in terms of numbers globally. they may be slightly more, if the plummeting rates of christians leaving the religion conditions. -- continues. how does it make you feel? >> i don't have a response. bad. i'm not particularly alarmed by the data as it relates to this. in many instances, islam is growing at the points of a gun. >> where? >> well, i think i.s.i.l. is making is great men converts in this way.

i don't think this is a manner in which christianity is it spread. so i'm not particularly concerned. again you are forgetting about the crusades. >> i'm not sure what your point is about the crusades. >> the spread of christianity, domination of lands. >> i suggest it's the hijacking of religion. >> sanctioned by the highest authorities at the time. >> in what way, shape or form was it christian, or consistent with the teaching of christ? not at all. >> let me give larry encouragement. for every one person i.s.i.s. might force into islam at the point of a gun, it chases 40, 50 or 100 muslims out of islam because of a repugnant approach to life. >> i'm delighted to hear that. >> i think you are right about that, and i think the pugh study extrapolates into the future.

and i am sure that they are making one big mistake. the new transparency in the world means that muslims all over the world, they are raising muslim children, but they are not going to raise the muslim children the way they've been raised in the past. themselves. >> that sounds almost like a fate-based hope that you have. >> no, we are seeing it everywhere. >> i have to wrap. we have run out of time. i have to wrap. thank you. and a handshake out of it as well. thank you so much gentlemen. executive director of the christian based fixed point foundation. daniel dennett co-director for zaytuna college, zaid shakir. larry alex taunton from fixed point foundation. thank you all. "third rail" panel is next. >> he managed to succeed and alienate every country. no one likes the middle east

except the iranians. >> they don't like each other.

welcome back to "third rail." we debate whether religion does more harm than good. let's broaden out the conversation to the presidential elections with travis smiley, most and managed tore on pbs, his latest back "my journey with mia", about a poet. faiza patel, from the liberty and national security programme, and an al jazeera contributors, and professor alan dershowitz, a boston globe contributor, and author of "terror tunnels." why is it that u.s. presidential candidates have to be religious christians or claim to be religious christians and play the came to be collected. >> one, you are assuming it's a

choice. >> is it a faith of choice? >> for most it is, numbers bar it out. having said that there's ag nostizism in a bit of all of us, we all have questions. i don't think it's a game. i think they play politics with our fate in campaigns. most of these persons running for office are persons of faith. >> there's a pew poll finding 50" of americans are less likely to vote. that means more americans support sun who never had office. is gay, in their '70s, or all of the above. what does that tell you? >> that america has been rooted in cristiology, that means for the average american, that assist something about this that the candidate can believe in, trust, that roots or grounds them at their best. i don't believe that is the case for all people, because they say their christians, but there's

something about the notion that appeals to the better anning else on all of us. >> rooted in cristiology, is and person. >> before we get to the first amendment, a substantive limitation is no religious text will be applied. for office upped the united states -- under the united states. to vote for a person based on religion or non-religion is fundamentally un-american. >> but it happens. >> of course, because we love hypocrites, we want people to be hypocrites, to proclaim their devotion to religion, we don't care - we are a little fearful religious. game. >> i think it's a game. it's a game in which hypocrisy rules, and it's a dangerous game. it's like the administrations process to harvard law school. to get in you have to say you

want to be a public were lawyer, when everyone knows you are going to be a commercial lawyer. the first thing we ask students at harvard to do is lie, and i presidents. >> i'm not sure. i was looking at the poll, coming back to president obama, who, as you know, has been dogged by stories that he is a closet muslim. at one point polling showed 18% of americans thought he was muslim. what is interesting is more than a third of americans don't demo what religion president obama is, yet he's been elect president twice. that tells you something a little different. >> we don't know the religion, but we know the church. that was a bad thing. i have to tell you. it's for me what tipped the balance against him, and for hillary clinton, when i supported her. i don't believe that you can willingly sit at the feet of a bigot

like reverend wright, listen to him, have your children listen to him year after year and not have that have some impact on an evaluation of you. that's a bad thing to have done. >> i don't want to get into a debate about jeremiah wright much the last thing america needs. i will say i disagree that he is a bigot. having said that. the question becomes when someone is running for office, if they don't but the faith out front, declare that they are connected to something bigger than themselves. what we crave and need this america - we talked about dr king before we came on the set - if one craves moral leadership, one can argue whether there's political leadership in washington. if you diplomat put your faith out front, how do you convince voters that you believe in something that life is bigger

than you and the presidency, and leadership. >> i think religion is more than belief. when someone says "i'm jewish, who knows what that means. it's part of an ethnicity, culture, and i think christianity is part of a culture too. one of the reasons that people suspected president obama is because he didn't seem - no one questioned his faith. >> they certain did. 18% of americans thought he was muslim, for god's sake. >> i understand that, they were thinking that he has kenyan roots, family that was muslim, and for many, religion is not what you believe, but what you were brought up in, what your parents were. it's beyond theology. america is not a particularly theo logical country. the christianity of america is a civic religion. >> it gets back to your question

about the gamesmanship. i don't believe that most americans in their heart of hearts that heard the president say repeatedly, look in the camera saying i'm a christian. whether you agree that jeremiah wright sat in the same church, married a christian. this is where the game comes in, if you can put the label on him, you can distract voters. moving on, the foiled attack in gallen texas featured two muslims encouraged by i.s.i.l. over social media, sending many to wonder if the government is doing enough to stop i.s.i.l. online propaganda. >> i.s.i.l. claims to gain influence in the united states. >> online magazines, use of social media, designed to target youth online. >> hundreds of thousands of terrorists were recruited over the internet. >> gunmen contacted a member of

al-shabab via twitter much. >> it raises questions as to what can be done at home. faiza patel, should the u.s. government put a stop to this, some of this, and cutting the cord to social media incitement, propaganda. >> there's a couple of things you are talking about when you say stop i.s.i.l. propaganda. >> twitter accounts, shut them down. >> exactly. shut down accounts, twitter, take posts off facebook - that's some of the things people say. i don't think they should do that. it's ipp effective. anyone you talk to who deals with the technologies or platforms. the minute you take one off. there'll be another one. >> whaka moll. >> exactly. it's not a useful way for the government to inspected its time. each though it's not useful

governments spend time doing it, they don't talk about it. there are complaint mechanisms available. >> al qaeda's magazine is called "in spire", people are inspired. they were foiled. what if someone gets inspired by i.s.i.l. accounts and blows something up? >> i have no down there's direct causal relation between what is on social media and some people. free speech is not free. it's very, very expensive. it takes an enormous toll. we have to do a better job combatting it. we have to get on social media. >> who is we? >> the private sector, folks that feel strongly about freedom of speech and hate the idea of terrorism. and, i think, reasonable moderate muslims have to be

on muslim websites showing an alternative. i do that. there's jews calling for voim. i go on -- violence. i go on, i go on and beat them in debates. >> here is the dips between you and me. if i go on to a radical muslim website. i'll get on a watch list. >> why. geller is on a watch list. >> i don't know about geller, i list. >> you mean an american watch list. >> yes. anti-person. >> that we can change. if we made sure you never cotton a watch list, would you go on the islamic website and would you make the argument against i.s.i.s. and irrelevant

religious... >> i'm effective in going against i.s.i.s., and so are many muslims in the country. the idea that we are suddenly going to empower moderate muslims, when you don't know what the websites are, they don't know what to say in response to those people. feeds. >> how is it twitter mainstream. >> it's an interesting point you made, alan dershowitz, you mentioned pamela get geller, speech. >> that's not a close question, whether we support what she says is a ditch issue. >> you got stick for using her name and mlk's name. >> i said it deliberately. i don't make a moral comparison between her and martin luther king, but martin luther king

chose cities that he knew his march holding hands with a white woman or man would provoke reactions. rehabilitation. >> it provoke's people to blow things up. >> it stops the people blowing them um, not from provoking. >> let me add two things, if i can. one, the professor is right. we have to be diligent and vigilant about what we need to do as americans. it is not lost to me that one of these people were on the watch list back in 2006. and the fact this they lost touch with this person from 2006 until now, underscores a failure of u.s. intelligence, people not doing their work. it's a simply point that needs to be made. >> it's interesting to me, about how we love hypocrites. we were not having - i remember this distinctly. we were not having the conversation about whether or

not the government ought to shut down twitter accounts. examples. >> social media. >> social media was around, some guys were online facebook, saying what they would do. we were not having the conversation. when it come again to islam, muslims, we want to have a conversation about how far the government ought to go, but it was not existent a few years ago. >> federal agents said social media would make it tougher to track i.s.i.l. internet traffic can be useful. it's an interesting story. some years ago there was a website. saying how many people can you kill in the holocaust. it appeals to the neo-nazis. many civil rights organizations say it's terrible. according to the story, it was

put out by the mossad, bringing them in, destroying their record. you never know if it's a good thing. it's both good and bad, like religion. it's like religion. let's shift to religion, is america risking partnerships with key allies over a deal with iran. repercussions. >> the new king of saudi arabia a no show at president obama... leaders... >> president obama calls a meeting to discuss concerns with neighbour iran. >> some see it as a key message of an ally upset with president obama's poll sits. >> binyamin netanyahu upset about what he hearse about a nuclear deal with iran. >> is it worth burning relationships in the middle east with allies over a deal with iran alan dershowitz, do you think president obama is destroying existing

relationships by this deal. >> yes, i think it's the worst foreign policy blunder. what he is doing is endangering strong alliances in the middle east, the saudis, emirates, jordan, egypt, israel on a speculation, a bet, that may be he can bring iran in from the cold. the likely result is nuclear proliferation,al the saudi arabia counties getting nuclear weapons, more guns, weapons, planes in the middle east and more risk, and for what. the answer is there's no alternative. if he doesn't take the deal sanctions will fail. he's right, he put us in that position. it's not the choice we have now, but how we got to that choice. >> he's talking to them. this is how it happens. >> that's what happened when chamberlain talked to the nazis. >> that's god win's law invoking

the nazis. >> you invoke history or look at north korea, or pakistan. >> you are worried about proliferation and violence. you wrote a book justifying israel, the fourth largest military in the world. nuclear armed, justifying their killing of 1,500 civilians, you wrote a book justifying that. no i didn't justify the killing of since. hamas that want to see civilians die. they have what's cawmentd the called the dead baby strategy. they put their civilians in harm's way not firing and having their own civilians in danger or firing and killing multiple civilians. that's what i justified hobson's choice. >> you know what alan dershowitz stands on this debate.

>> whether that's right or wrong, there could be a whole other conversation -- >> is president obama hurting alliances by a potential deal with iran. >> king once said, it is either nonviolence co-existence or violent co-annihilation. i always come down on prodemocracy. who else do you make peace with other than your enemies? >> i agree. >> you got to talk with these people. >> i agree. >> you got find a way to solve this crisis. the middle east, richard hoos haas he calls, the error of disorder. in the middle east we are living in an era of disorder. every decision we make is going to offend somebody in that area. >> to alan dershowitz's point the others would like nuclear energy and possibly nuclear weapons if you like. saudi arabia the country that beheads people for witchcraft

and sorcery any deal iran has we want and maybe a little bit more. isn't i a little bit right here? >> professor dershowitz is right here. any other country in the region has to be the answer to this particular crisis. >> i agree. >> and any decision we make is going to offend somebody in that region. but that ought not allow us to abrogate our responsibility. >> managed to succeed in alienating every single country in the middle east. the palestinians don't like him the israelis don't like him the jordannians don't like him. >> and france is getting in there now. >> i think it's an age of disorder. we have to accept there's an age of disorder in the middle east, you have always had an

authoritarian region, authoritarian regimes don't go well the idea you're going to flip a switch and it will be springtime in the arab world i think is a little bit naive. now it's obviously that some of the united states allies disagree that this is a good deal. now does that mean that we're not going to talk to egypt anymore? does that mean we're not going to talk to israel anymore? >> of course we will. >> does that mean we're not going to be friends with the saudis? of course not. where we have strategic alliances we're going to work with them. >> maybe on camera i certainly will, u.s. foreign policy is schizophrenic and to your phrase, strategic alliances they shift like the wind and any given year with any given administration these alliances these relationships shift so what conversation today cannot be disconnected with a conversation yesterday or a few days to go. >> we got to wrap, tavis smiley

faiza patel and alan dershowitz. still ahead. desperate for rescue from a sinking ship. i'll talk to a reporter who got their stories in a field semghts coming up. >> you realize the incredible long journey these people make and how difficult. i was seeing them disembarking it was an incredibly powerful moment for the whole team.

>> it has been called a colossal humanitarian catastrophe by enzo bianchi the high commissioner for italy. mediterranean sea from north africa to europe. more than 1800 of them have perished along the way. each week "third rail" will catch up with an al jazeera correspondent wherever they may be to share their experience that you rarely get to hear. stefanie dekker has been in the area you have been reporting on the migrant crisis for quite some time now hundreds of migrants losing their life, what has stood out for you the most, given all this death, given all

this pain that you've seen? >> reporter: i think it's the determination of the people. they all will tell you that they would do it again. and of course there's the situation on the other side in libya is absolutely terrible for them. when i arrived here, i came to a straight alive at midnight. during the next couple of days we heard rescue after rescue after rescue, that's great news but what happens to them when they get here? we have been following up on those stories in the last few weeks and it's difficult incredibly difficult. as journalists we report the facts, the numbers you talk to individuals you learn their names you learn their stories and of course everyone is seeking asylum, those who decide to stay here, young men here, 18 19, early 20s want better life the better opportunity that you have i have so many

have had, who is to judge why one of these men or women isn't allowed to get a better education to provide for their families that so many have had. >> stefanie, you got to interview a family who had a harrowing rescue at sea.let's listen. >> the dinghy is taking in water, people are panicking. many can't swim. it's hard to confirm how many died and how many bodies were recovered. what some here tell us is as many as 40 people could have lost their lives in the panic. even now safely in port they tell us they all came from libya. >> translator: libya isn't easy, they have no problem killing people. they have no law there. that's why we have come here.

even though we don't know what will happen, at least there are laws. >> those who had died had died before the rescue operation had actually occurred. was that a different story to what you had heard from the migrants themselves? >> reporter: that's right. we got there having heard that story having spoken to an aid worker having spoken to them. then once we managed to talk to a couple of them, it's not easy to get access to the migrants, authorities don't want you to speak to them, but we managed we heard the story that people were rescued fell out of the boat, one man was telling us how a rope came down, they grabbed that rope, the rope was supposed to tie to the boat, they pulled on it, it was an absolutely horrible story. the interesting line, we went back to the hotel i sent it for script approval and i got a

story from the news bureau, and there was this horrible rescue video, i said hold on a second this is exactly what the man was telling us, the man was telling us the latter that came down the rope that came down. they we saw his words came to life through the picture absolutely horrendous. even a rescue can cause death. the question was that merchant ship massive ship are they actually equipped to rescue people. >> at thestefanie you have covered other places in north africa, when you are across the mediterranean in a place like sicily, and you are talking to these survivors does it feel like you're covering the same story from the other side now? >> yeah, it's interesting you asked me that. because one of the first stories

i covered when i got here, 900 migrants, it was a tugboat, they came in at night and the back of the boat was open. we saw these silhouettes of hundreds and hundreds of people they were standing still as they came into port, it was dead silent it was incredibly powerful for team. as the sun was up there was a family towards the end of the boat and i heard them speaking arabic i have pigeon arabic. i was talking to one of the girls asking her where are you from. one of the men approached me, again the authorities don't want you to speak. he said to me we're from yarmouk camp in syria. i felt that emotionally i had covered one of the most recent problems there. this is a palestinian camp that has gone through an absolutely horrendous situation for the last few years.

i looked at him and said yarmouk, i said welcome. all of a sudden you realized the incredibly long journey these folks make, how difficult i see them disembark in sicily, the sea was quiet just that whole back-story, it does bring home the challenges, the dangers the determination these people have, to try and get out and look for something different. so yes that was -- i felt that emotionally, certainly having covered that side and having seen one family from there disembark here in italy. >> like a trickle displacement of these people. stefanie dekker, thanks for joining us. that does it for this show. the conversation continues on our website aljazeera.com/thirdrail. i'm imran garda good night.

♪ after isil takes control of ramadi the u.s. says it's confident despite the setback. >> hello. i am darren jordan here in doha. also on the program: supporters of macedonia's prime minister promise a show of strength after protesters dig in and demand his resignation. >> the prime minister appear peels for more aid. we look at the task his plugs are facing in rebuilding trust. >> angry and