>> this is al jazeera america. i'm del walters in new york with a look at the top stories. ambush in downtown dallas. we now have a motive for the shooter who tried to shoot police new reports about plans to send heavy weapons to western europe as a message to russian president vladimir putin. >> that is why i am running for

president of the united states. the first major speech for democratic front-runner hillary clinton after a battle on how you should buy meat at the grocery store, a look at something dividing the nation. and a spokane of the n.a.a.c.p. accused of pretending to be black. she issues a statement tonight. we are learning more tonight about the shoot-out that filled the streets of downtown dallas this morning. >> oh my god. [ gunfire ] police say a lone gunman opened fire at the dallas police fire in the heart of the city. it led to a chase, hours long stand off, negotiation, and a fiery ending. police identified the suspect as james bullware and his family

says he suffered mental illness and he believed police had taken his son. melissa chan has more from dallas. >> we are standing in front of dallas police department and earlier we were given a tour past the yellow tape. it's incredible the the down floor lobby, the windows, and the bullet holes. there was a car in the porking lot where an explosion took place. in front of the car was gone. you do get police standoffs in major cities of this size. how often does the action start in front of the police department? >> reporter: the blaze of bullets in the night caused such chaos at first that police officers thought they had been attacked by multiple gunmen. it was one lone man who rammed his armoured vehicle into police cars.

[ gunfire ] before leading officers on a car chase. and then a standoff. >> this was an on again-off again negotiation. he would get angry during negotiations, hang up, stop talking. he would rant for a while, not really having a conversation, and rant during the conversation in hutchins. at some point negotiations ceased. at 5:07am our s.w.a.t. snipers shot at the suspect in wilma hutchins, the front windshield... >> reporter: that's the dallas police department headquarters. how often does a police department of a major city become a crime scene? we understand the gunman shot bullets through the ground floor lobby, second floor and police in vehicles. no one was hurt, including an officer seated here blitzing

through the seat and windshield >> some officers say they are lucky, i believe we are blessed that our officers survived the ordeal. there are bullet holes in swat cars where officers were sitting there are bullet holes in the front lobby where the staff was sitting. once that member walked away to get a coke. if they had of been there during the ordeal they would have been killed based on the trajectory of bullets. >> reporter: outside the police station, bomb squad looked at five suspicious packages. three were cleared, two contained explosives. one went off when moved by a police robot, the other detonated by the bomb squad: erica and jeremy live next door to police headquarters. . >> there was commotion going on police driving back and forth.

there was bullets, yelling "get inside the house", and the van shot inside the police station. >> it was something we... .. never witnessed. >>..first time we have been through that. that's the most exciting on the it was a lot of action. we had front row seats. >> like a movie deal. >> reporter: in the end a police sniper killed the gunman. it took several more hours to secure his vehicle. it had been booby-trapped with explosives. just to give you an idea. the challenges that the police faced, you know, the fiery vehicles you saw. challenges for police. they were looking at the vehicle, trying to figure out how to deal and approach the vehicle. they wanted to break the windshield, they wanted to shoot the vehicle strategically to have a clear vision of the front of the vehicle, a challenge the police faced in the last 24 hours. law enforcement officials

saying it could have been worse because of the pipe bombs the suspect planted. we spoke to a retired lieutenant with the new york city department and he says it doesn't take a lot of planning to pull off an attack like the one today. >> it's easy to conduct the pipe bomb. when we look at this incident, one of the pipe bombs was in front of the police headquarters and one of the officers accidently tripped over it it could have been blown up. pipe bombs are such to create and you can place them anywhere. here in new york you have a statement, you see something, say something. it should hold true for the course of the rest of the country. when you see a pipe or any unknown object you have to make the notification to the proper authorities to ensure the item is properly disposed of. for existence, a robot removed a pipe bomb and it exploded. as the case was investigated in

dallas and austin, the deposit signed into law a bill allowing people to carry guns anywhere. he made good on his promise. courtney kealy has more. >> reporter: governor greg abbott signed the open carry in campus bills on saturday at reds indoor gun range in texas. campus carry allows licensed gun owners in texas to carry concealed handguns on college and university campus, including inside dorms and classroom. campus carry supporters had been pushing for this legislation for several years. because of the wide opposition from top universities in texas, it gives colleges the ability to create gun-free zones. and private colleges are allowed to opt out. >> it allows people to protect themselves and those around them. i'm not saying everyone will be

a superhero with the handgun, but it gives them the opportunity to even the odds. at the university of houston, students have mixed reactions. >> it is scary to me. it's a powerful weapon you have in the backpack. you can misuse it. >> reporter: open carry allows a licensed gun owner to carry a lisences gun anywhere. some businesses can prohibit guns in their stores by posting certain signs. open carry goes in effect on jan 1st, and campus carry, australia 1st, 2016. in upstate new york, the cleveland police release results of an investigation into the death of tamir rice the 12-year-old who was carrying the pellet gun when shot and killed by police. the friend that leant rice the pellet gun warned him to be careful because the gun looked real. as for the officer, moments

after the shooting he told investigators, he had no choice. despite that there was no evidence that rice was warned or that rice was asked to raise his hands. there was an accidental shooting at the ward oval hotel. a wedding party was taking pictures, and a guest had a gun in his pocket that accidentally went off. concealed weapons are illegal in new york state. it's unclear if the opener of the gun has been arrested or faces charms. n.a.t.o. is preparing its force in the baltic sea. more than 5,000 troops are taking part in the maritime exercise known as ball-tops, and is led by the united states. >> ball-tops is about alliance unity, solidarity and security of the baltic region. the alliance comes together with 14 members, and three alliance

partners, and a special relationship with a huge flotilla of forces at sea to conduct a full spectrum of operations from air defense, mine countermeasures, anti-warfare operations and amphibious landings. it shows a strong message of resolve the training coming as the u.s. prepares a plan for n.a.t.o. providing weapons for eastern europe and the baltic state, to send a message to vladimir putin - the message that america is prepared to protect allies closer to russia. daniel lak reports. >> reporter: the pentagon confirmed the proposal exists, prepositioning. it will have to be approved by defense secretary ash carter and president obama before being sent to n.a.t.o. for a decision. it's some time off. it's a symbolic move at the moment. details, which have to be

confirmed, but are in the "new york times" and are close to accurate is something known as a brigade set. will be what is known as prepositioned in these countries. when soldiers need them, they'll be there in advance, no need to have everyone wait. the brigade in question is up to 5,000 soldiers, spread over a number of countries. in three baltic states, three or four eastern european states. the big question is how russia reacts to this. since the end of the cold war, there has been a spectacular large scale draw down of n.a.t.o. forces. we had escalations in intentions recently, what we have not seen is a deployment like this, weaponry and soldiers that could use it. that is the big question, how will russia react to the deployment of weaponry in an area not having seen n.a.t.o. weaponry for some time diplomatically, rhetorically,

let's see what else it will take a while to resolve. the plan could see 5,000 troops sent to the area. >> hillary clinton in new york city. stressing support for gay marriage income equality and regulating wall street she spoke from roosevelt island. paul beban was there. >> that is why i am running for president of the united states. >> reporter: in front of a cheering flag-waving crowd, hillary clinton made her case for winning the white house. [ chants ] >> reporter: throughout her 45 minute speech the former first lady, senator and secretary of state balanced populous promises to build a fairer america with her personal history. >> my mother taught me that everybody needs a chance. and a champion. she knew what it was like not to

have either one. her own parents abandoned her and by 14 she was out on her own working as a housemaid. >> reporter: again and again she returned to stories of drawing strength and pride from her family, especially her mother. >> she would remind me why we keep fighting even when the odds are long and opposition fierce. i can still here her saying life is not about what happens to you, it's about what you do with what happens to you. so get back out there >> reporter: it's part of her campaign's plan to reframe her personae as more of a warm, hard-working woman, and less as a cold policy warrior,

though she did vow to tackle hard issues like the climate change and financial reform. while republicans have been taking shots at her age, clinton embraced it. >> i may not be the youngest candidate in the race, but i will be the youngest woman president in the history of the united states. [ cheering ] few needed convincing that the time has come. >> thrilled to see her run for president now. we are here to see history making. >> and the idea of hilary as history maker was one with cross-generational appeal. >> are you excited to see a woman running for president? >> yes. >> do you think she can do it? >> yes. >> do you think it's important to see a woman in the white house. >> i think it would be good if a man can be in the white house, a woman can be too. >> it's a beautiful park. dedicated to franklin roosevelt's enduring vision of america. the nation we want to be, and in

a place with absolutely no ceilings. [ cheering ] up until today hillary clinton's campaign focused on smaller personal events, today you have more than 500 members of the media, and thousands crowded into a new york city landmark that on a normal day what receive a hand full of visitors. >> reporter: clinton's move to invoke fdr's economic programs may have won her more supporters. what did you think of the rally? >> i came in undecided about who to vote for. i was looking for an economic progressive. i think hillary is running the campaign for 2016 that she should have run in 2008. >> reporter: driving home the theme of family, when all was said and done, hillary was joined on stage by those who might just be the most famous first family in history

tomorrow night we take a look at political dynasties in the new york. would another bush or clinton in the white house help or hurt us. join us sunday that's in the week ahead. los angeles officially begins the process of raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. today the mayor signed the bill into law that will do so in increments in the next five years. it will hit the $15 in 2020, and increases afterwards based on the standard of living. los angeles is the largest city in the country it's an international fight over food labels. should customers know where their meat is coming from? >> why should we here put our agriculture predation at a tremendous risk. next, we look at the issue dividing nations. and later, u.n. peacekeepers under fire - accused of trading cash, clothes and goods for sex

in nations where they were sent to help. >> i know that keeps me going... >> we just have to keep doing what we have to do...

. >> it's saturday night, time to take a deeper look at your food and how it's labelled. this with the house representatives looking to repeal a law with labelling on your meat. it comes after the world health organisation warned the cool law or country of organization opened to retaliation from canada and mexico. john terrett has more. >> >> the yeas are 300, nays 131. >> reporter: this week the house voted to repeal a law containing country of origin on beef, pork and poultry, in response for billions of trade retaliation threats from canada and mexico. >> this retaliation is real, from canada and from mexico. >> america should be a leader in

creating free and fair trade around the world by focussing on removing tariff and non-tariffs, not creating our own. the label read: the labelling law was part of farm bills in 2002 and 2008, and had support from some u.s. ranchers. canada and mexico never liked the labels, fearing they'd be at a disadvantage to u.s. products. with the backing of the world trade organization they are threatening to impose $3 billion or more in tariffs on a wide range of american goods unless the labels are dropped. consumer advocates backed the labels because they help consumers understand where the food comes from. >> consumers, the american people, the people we represent want to make purchases from a trusted source. >> reporter: canada and mexico, many in the meat industry, especially those that buy cattle from north and south of the

border see it as a failed government marketing tool that drives up costs. >> we have producers that will buy calves in canada and mexico, bring them across the border, add value and market it as the united states. mandatory orgin of labelling wouldn't allow it. >> reporter: under the law canadian and mexican animals have to be segregated from those in the u.s. that's pricey. supermarkets back away from buying the expensive products. kent says if consumers want the labels. his industry will make sure they go back, but he doubts there's a need. >> for the government to drive up the cost, for a requirement that may appease some interest, but not consumers, and not deliver on a necessary goal like food safety, that's what we -- that's not something we need. >> wednesday's action by the house goes to the senate. the clock on the threat is ticking.

the move doesn't effect country of origin labelling. from other food including. including lamb, seafood, some veg and some nuts. joining us from washington d.c. to take a deep are look at the issue of labelling is chris, the director of food policy at the consumer federation of america, and colin woodal, the vice president of government affairs for the talisman beef association. thank you both for your time. i'll begin with you - why shouldn't the american public know where its meat is coming from? >> we think the american public should know where their meat is coming from. we supported this for many years. consumers want more information about the food, not less. country of origin labelling provided basic information about where the meat comes from. >> does the american public deserve to know where its meat comes from? >> the bigger question is to make sure we have a programme

give the information to them in the way we should use it. the mandatory programme provides it in small black and white type that does not reach out and grab the consumer, we have voluntary programs giving it to them in a readable fashion. right now, and it works well. >> the question was does the american public deserve to know where their meat comes from. >> the question is we have the information and programs in place now that gives them back without mandatory government of origin labelling. that's what we are trying to make sure everyone nose. you can go to the safeway or supermarket and find 100% u.s. beef under a voluntary label programme, and not under the mandatory government-run programme. we need to make sure we are keeping all the facts here as we drive towards retaliation. from canada and mexico. >> congress passed the country of origin laws in the early part of the new millennium. are they wrong then or now. mr woodal, i'll let you answer that. >> they have always been wrong. c.o.o.l. is about marketing. we don't trust the government to

do anything right, much less market the beef. we have voluntary programs in place before country of origin labelling, they exist now and in the future. they can provide the information that the consumer wants. it can be antibiotic free, hormone free, we have successful state and rebranding to give information useful to the consumer. most of the times it is not delivered in an effective way. >> mr walker. >> country of origin labelling as a mandatory program makes sure that everyone has to accept. a volunteer programme means some participate, some don't. consumers don't have action to -- access to the information on all products whenever shopping for meat. that's why mandatory is better for consumers, it provide all information across meat and poultry i want to go to the issue of why it may not be the best thing to trust government or industry when it comes to the safety of

the food supply. in the past the u.s. has banned imports because of mad cow disease. something the cattleman's association is familiar with. the outbreak reaching american shores in march 1996. british authorities found a discovery, mad cow disease - it's in 10 cases of the brain disorder. as a result 4.5 million cattle had to be destroyed. it wasn't until three years later that the ban on british beef was lifted, and in may 2003, there was a bull in canada testing positive for mad cow disease, the first confirmed case in north america, and a year later the usda announced it would test 268,000 cattle tested. bse detected a cow in california, during a routine inspection. the same year the government

banned imports of beef. with that as a backdrop, wouldn't it seem that this is not necessarily a good time to get rid of any process that safeguards the american public? >> yes, that's a great question. it's something that comes up quite often. you have to keep in mind mandatory country of origin labelling has nothing to do with food safety, it's run by the agricultural service, nothing to do with safety. we have a food safety regime in this country, to make sure that the beef that is served in the united states is healthy, it's safe, and everybody can serve it and eat it knowing that they'll have a great eating experience. now, if there's any sort of food safety issue, the system that we have in place will go forward and warn people if there is some sort of concern that they need to worry about. the simple placing of a c.o.o.l. label on the beef does not really change that. we have to make sure that everybody understands c.o.o.l. applies to beef sold in grocery

stores, not processed product, restaurant or food service. to say the consumer only has the right to know half the time they by beef is another fallacy. >> it seems that mr woodal is saying c.o.o.l. or the country of origin labelling is a waste of time and money, this is done away with because of pressure from mexico or canada. how should a u.s. citizen take that. does canada or mexico dictate u.s. policy when it comes to meat? >> canada and mexico took the government to the dto and complained the labels were discriminatory. as a result of that world trade organisation process now we are having to have this debate and conversation about the labels that consumers want. here we have pressure from canada and mexico, threats of

retaliation, resulting in a congression that has taken the vote to repeal the labels. we think it's unacceptable. if, as you say, the consumers want the labels, and congress represents the people of the united states, why did congress do away with this? >> well, congress was, i think, reacting to threats from canada and mexico about high tariffs. they were going to retaliate against the united states. and a lot of the industry, other industries as well were concerned about the tariffs. the wto process is not over. there still is a time for the wto to decide what the tariffs will be, if any, and they'll likely be smaller that the large threats that canada and mexico made. congress acted prematurely here, and got themselves involved before the process has come to a conclusion. >> if i know anything about the

cattle men, it's that they do not back down from a fight. is it about dollars and cents, or if it's safety, did the cattle men who took on oprah winfrey, of all people, did they back down because canada and mexico said they want it that way. >> we are not backing down because of country of origin labelling, because of canada and mexico's threats on retaliation, we don't support this because it's not information that the consumer can see it. the consumer needs a label that grabs their attention. that's what we want to drive, we have volunteer programs that can do it now. when you look at the organization, they don't have a financial stake here, we as beef producers pay for the programme, even the u.s.d.a.'s report said consumers are not looking for it. we know that when the retaliations come into place, regardless of how big they are,

they'll have an impact on us, up to $115 to $100 per head, money out of the producer's possibilities. possibilities -- - pockets. that is unacceptable for a programme we don't support. >> if there is a problem with the beef supply in the united states, will the cattle men point the finger at the u.s. d.a. >> no, when there's a problem with the beef supply we work together with the government and food safety inspection service. we have to keep in mind the placing of this label doesn't make a difference on the food safety, that beef is safe, it's been approved, if it comes from a foreign country, it's something everyone needs to keep in mind. if it come in from australia, with c.o.o.l. repealed, that steak will be labelled product of australia. that's been lost in a lot of wash of this debate. >> if there is a problem with the beef supply or the pork supply in this country, will they point the finger, the cattle men point the finger at the u.s.d.a., in your opinion.

>> i don't know who they'll point the finger at. i know when a problem occurs in the beef supply, that's when the consumers want to know where the food or beef is coming from. if they hear about concerns in another country or the u.s. and want to make a choice to purchase from a different country, that's the time when country of origin labelling is useful and when consumers are looking for it. it's not a food safety programme, but provide consumers with that information when they have concerns about that issue let me ask the question this way, and push back on you - why shouldn't the american public trust the people whose job it is, making sure that the food landing on the table is safe. why not trust the cattle many men'a association or the people putting the steaks on the table? >> well, this is not about

safety, it's about information, a consumer's right to know where their food comes from. the cattle men talk about voluntary programmes. it does not give consumers enough information. it doesn't cover all the products like a mandatory programme does. what consumers need and want to know is to have the information available to make an informed choice in a supermarket. >> is this about c.o.o.l. or is it about the fact that the cattlemen don't want government regulations because it costs more. if that's the case, does it help or hurt consumers? >> as you can imagine, we are not big fans of government regulation in the cattle business. this is not necessarily about the regulation hurting consumers, that's what folks need to know. we have programs in place, today, outside of mandatory c.o.o.l. that if you want to know where your steak comes from, you can find it. it's much more reliable. >> give me one of those, give me an idea of what it looks like, if i'm in a grocery store and

picking a steak off the shelf. what does it look like, how do i access it? >> a great example is safeway has a programme called ranchers reserve. when you look for the label it says it has a programme called 100% u.s. beef. you can see it, identify it. and you can make that choice. >> if i'm in a manhattan mall, i'm not going to get that. what if i'm at a small mum and pop grocery store selling beef that way. >> if you are in a small mum and pop grocery store, all you have to do is ask. you can ask the butcher. like i say, we have programs, whether it's a label or working with the local butcher, they can tell you. we have a chain that is easily identifiable. >> i think the debate will continue beyond the hour. thank you chris from the food policy director at the consumer federation of america, and colin woodal. vice president of the government affairs for the national beef

cattle association. thank you both for being with us. >> thank you they were sent to countries in need to lend a helping hand. u.n. peacekeepers standing accused of trading cash, clothes and jewellery for sex. that story next. later, the head of the spokane n.a.a.c.p. issuing a statement about accusations that she is lying about being black.

welcome back to al jazeera america, here is a look at the top stories. [ gunfire ] a violent ambush at the dallas police department ending with the suspect killed. police say he attacked the headquarters with guns and bombs after midnight before taking off in a ban. they caught with him in a dallas suburb where he was pursued.

the suspect was shot and killed. the pentagon presents n.a.t.o. with a plan to send heavy weapons to europe, to stop russia making an aggressive move to neighbours, the baltic states asking for nato protection. after russia is annexing of crimea and eastern ukraine. >> that is why i'm running for president of the united states. [ cheering ] here in new york thousands turning out to support democratic front runner hillary clinton kicking off a run for the white house. clinton continues a grassroots campaign, promising to fight for workers in america the c.i.a. released 500 pages of documents that identify some of the mistakes the agency makes. that was before the 9/11 attacks. the the inspector general's report from 2005 describes systematic problems in the structure of the agency in 2001. among the problems, the report found before 9/11 the c.i.a. did not have a comprehensive strategy to tackle the osama bin

laden threat. and lacked resources to combat al qaeda. jerry bernstein is a former c.i.a. officer, as always, thank you for being with us, joining us from tampa. up date the audience. where were you when the attacks happened? >> i was serving actually in latin america, but i served the previous years in c.i.a.'s counterterrorism center in the late 1990s, so the period in question was one in which i served as a senior member. that was in the counterterrorism center. other officers like michael shure called the report a whitewash. do you concur? >> i agree with mr shure's assessment that it's a whitewash. part of this is that the people have to recognise that cia officers in the counterterrorism center gave president clinton five opportunities to kill osama bin laden, and president bush in the eight months prior to the lead-up to the attacks didn't get a briefing from dick clark.

the head of counterterrorism. he was blocked. the president here has to take responsibility for the c.i.a., they work for the executive branch of the government here but the president has the daily briefing, the presidential daily briefing, was that daily briefing saying mr president, we are about to be attacked? >> there were several briefings that were put in front of the president, in the summer of 2001. which highlighted threats from al qaeda, the light was blinking. i was - that was in june of 2001, i was at a cos conference where kofa black, the chief of the terrorism center said we are about to have a major attack, i'm not sure where it's coming from, i know we'll be attacked. and he was doing everything possible to convince chief of stations to help him, because he knew something was coming. it was the most forceful

presentation prior to a major attack i saw in 20 years in the agency. we knew it was coming. we were desperate to stop it. but, you know, there wasn't the level of support downtown to act directly against al qaeda in an aggressive fashion to pre-empt the attack. >> one of the things the documents show is prior to 9/11 there were budget problems. that was at the c.i.a. we have gone through sequester. do the problems indicate that at that time the agency and the administration just didn't get it. now there are the same problems, at the c.i.a., which was the front page of the "the washington post" this morning. >> we had the resources to do what we needed to do. what was lacking was political will. prior to 9/11. as we are witnessing the lag of political will. in the period prior to 9/11, we had a lack of political will. i was interviewed, i sat through four hours of interviews with

the inspector general's office for the report. and i thought after reading a shortened version of the report when it was released that they didn't address the political issues, because it's not what the white house wanted to hear. >> a lot of reporters thought they'd learn more about the saudi connection to 9/11 and the -- in the documents, did they. >> no, the saudi connection has been redacted out. we knew, of course, back then, that saudi arabia had active programme of interacting with al qaeda militants. in the years after 9/11, that changed, and the saudis went to war with them. and fought them, and crushed them inside of saudi arabia. so that dynamic changed. >> why are they redacted now? >> good question. this is 15 years beyond that time period.

and i would think that an honest review for the public would be helpful, and helpful in a way that would allow academics and the public at large to make better decisions and at least encourage politicians to make better decisions going forward. a former c.i.a. officer joining us from tampa. thank you for being with us. human rights watch activists are not surprised that u.n. peacekeepers trade goods for sex, doing so in countries where they are supposed to be helping, not hurting. there are 16 peacekeeping operations around the world, most in africa and the middle east. there are about 125,000 personnel on the ground. 91,000 soldiers, military troops. according to a u.n. draft report, hundreds of claims were made against the peacekeepers. that was between 2008 and 2013. diplomatic editor james bays has more on the allegations. >> reporter: the u.n. is making no comment.

saying it's a leaked report, and can't comment on it until the report is formally published. it's a report from the office of internal oversight. that's a part of the u.n. there to investigate other parts of the united nations. clearly it's embarrassing, coming weeks after allegations of sexual abuse, by french and some african troops. they were serving there at the time, not under u.n. command, but serving in a country where the u.n. was present. they are accused of sexual abuse of young boys. we will, once the report is published, get comment from the u.n. spokesman, and also from the office of the high commissioner of human rights, prince zaid, the man who 10 years ago, last time there were allegations of abuse and exploitation of peacekeepers, conducted a review of the

whole system. his comment will be interesting. the executive director in the women's rights division for human rights watch joins us live from los angeles tonight. thank you for being with us. i want to read to you the first line in the associated press story on the problem saying this has been going on since 2003. longer according to some estimates. why are we talking about this problem, as opposed to talk about it being solved? >> i think a couple of things, one is breakdowns in the u.n. system. it has a particular role, and ultimately the responsibility for investigating or prosecuting

the cases lies with the troops-contributing countries. while there has been progress made in recognising that this is a problem, in putting in place policies to address it and strategies to present it. we see a break down in the oversight role the u.n. is supposed to have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to sexual assaults. based on the fact there was 225 women in haiti who said they traded sex for goods and services in medicine. doesn't sound like they have a zero tolerance policy. >> it's likely the figure is an under-reported number. there are barriers to reporting. if one looks at the situation in haiti, where women are poor, difficult for them to obtain service, it's likely that many were engaged in sex with u.n. peacekeepers. the u.n. is serious about the policy, we have to give them credit for undertaking an extensive review of what was happening in peacekeeping in

2003, and in 2006 not only putting in place the zero tolerance, but a range of policies intended to support it and help prevent sexual abuse. implementation of the policy and in terms of how they engage with troops in contributing companies are weak. clearly the problem continues in haiti, but your report mentioned the car. there has been a problem in the democratic republic of congo, and in other places. >> if a woman is, in a sense, raped for food or medicine, does she care about a review. you told our producer that the u.n. does not have power not to investigate or prosecute. the only thing they can do is ask for the offender to be repatriated. with that as a backdrop, is it surprising that the problem still exists. >> it's not surprising the problem still exists. the u.n., while it doesn't have the power to investigate and prosecute, it has the power to collect information. in terms of the agreement, they are supposed to provide

information to the secretary-general on a regular basis about what investigations and prosecutions have been happening. we know the response to this is relatively low. it's estimated about 50% of countries are providing that information, but we know that the u.n. is not providing aggravated information. we don't know which countries are investigating. we don't know which countries are not. one thing the u.n. could do is introduce transparency into the supporting system. the other thing they can do, and we understand the complexities of the situation, but that they could be firmer in accepting responsibility from repeat offenders. while the u.n. has limited power, there's a couple of things that it could do, that would introduce more transparency and accountability into the system. >> executive director of women's rights division of human rights watch, thank you for being with us. >> thank you very much.

a woman accused of faking her race the president of the spoken of the n.a.a.c.p. says she's black, her parents say she's not. there are more developments.

>> the cops is a legalized gang... it makes me scared for everybody >> fear and distrust in baltimore... >> they've just been pepper spraying people at very close range... >> years of tension

between the community and police erupt... >> she was on her way home to her kid, and she never made it... >> a former cop speaks out... >> if you had taken steps when a man was assaulted, maybe freddie gray didn't have to die. >> is there still a blue wall of silence in american cities? >> did somebody get shot? fault lines baltimore rising only on al jazeera america seven new cases of m.e.r.s. have been diagnosed in south korea. 145 have been sickened by the m.e.r.s. m.e.r.s. or merciful 14 -- middle eastern respiratory syndrome or m.e.r.s. it started after a seen man travelled back from saudi arabia. a south korean man was hospitalized in slovakia after being suspected of carrying the virus. there's no vaccine, no cure she says she is back. her parents say she is not. they say their daughter has been pretending to be black. now the spokane n.a.a.c.p.

leader is expected to talk to the first time on monday in a letter to her local shapter. rachel rights there are questions and assumptions swirl: allen schauffler has more from spokane. >> reporter: she runs the spoken branch. n.a.a.c.p. , is a visible and vocal advocate for the african-american community in eastern washington statement. here is rachel dolezal at a rally, describing hate male she said she received. >> it's not isolated in spokane, or just targetting me it's targetting the department. >> reporter: the police department stopped their

investigation. rachel dolezal teaches africans and is outspoken about discrimination. here she is on you tubing. >> we have older white men. what does that do to us as an image, how does it connect, of course, to doing what she loves, if you are an artist selling your art or a musician selling four music or performances. >> reporter: her claims of black her tame, as in this application for a position on a police oversight board is in question. this is also rachel dolezal, in pictures provided by her mother who described her background as german swedish and czech. her mother told a paper that it's disturbing that she is so dishonest. here is a recent facebook picture with rachel dolezal saying this is her father saying this man was coming to visit.

this is a photo showing larry dolezal out of lincoln county. this is what happened when a spokane reporter asked her about her race? >> reporter: are you african-american? >> i don't under the question. i did tell you, yes, that's my dad. and he was unable to come in january. >> reporter: are your parents white? >> rachel dolezal's parents, who adopted four african-american children younger than her say her behaviour changed about eight years ago. the national n.a.a.c.p. office released a statement saying: >> i don't think this would be a story at all if it was i'm a white woman, and i am - i am

committed through my scholarship, through my community work with african-americans. but the apparent deception in the rachel dolezal case makes this different, according to megan ming francis, who teaches a graduate course at the university of washington. she calls it positive and takes personnel expense. at some level it spills it to gestures and props. if we have a weave or a box grade. i can be black. we can transform into black people. is that offensive. >> i do find it incredibly offensive. >> allen schauffler seattle. >> reporter: the name jack cousteau brings images of splendor, next his son picks up the camera and carries on the family name.

it was a birthday fit for a queen, more than 1,000 soldiers marching military jets flying overhead to celebrate the 89th birthday of queen elizabeth ii marking the 29th time she

attended the trooping of the colour. jack cousteau's films made his family a household name. his son is carrying on his work. >> reporter: how bad was the oil spill? what is troubling john cousteau is the worst oil spill in 50 years. two weeks earlier a pipeline ruptured dumping more than 100,000 gallons of oil into the ocean and nearby beaches. what is the residual effect like we saw in santa barbara, once the visual part is cleaned up? >> it's long long term. ultimately it's affecting all marine life. crabs, shrimp lobsters, fish. it will not be over for decades. like in the gulf of mexico now we are finding shrimps that have

no eyes grabs that have no clause. you are dealing with animals like dolphins that have given birth into the oil. >> the younger cousteau calls himself a diplomat for the environment. he's travelled the globe to spread the environmental gospel. meeting with world leaders and nine u.s. presidents, and in 2002 he was the first person to represent the environment in the opening ceremony of the olympic games. like his father, he is an accomplished film-maker producing more than 80 films. his movies are more than just entertainment. but essential to raising awareness about the importance of protecting the ocean. >> i mean, i'm like a kid. i see this. my father used to say all the time, people protect what they love. i kept saying "how can you

protect what you don't understand?" >> reporter: his latest film is called "john michelle cousteau's secret ocean" filmed with cameras placed at the bottom of the sea for hours at a time. revealing marine behaviour never before seen. cousteau believes it could revolutionize our understanding of the ocean. >> what is amazing is we swim by and we don't see things. here you have the crabs, they are amazing little creatures, and the sea amownies couldn't jump. >> this never gets old. >> no. i can see the same thing 20 times, and see something different every time. thanks for joining us. i'm dell walt ertion in new

york. stay tuned, the news conditions from doha. goodnight. the desperate plea for water and peace in yemen, as monday's u.n.-led talks are thrown into doubt. rel hello, a warm welcome. on this programme - seven new cases of m.e.r.s. in south korea, taking the totals infected to 145. >> prosperity and democracy are part of your basic bargain too. >> a voice