>> fanning's leg tether was bitten in half by the shark but neither he nor a companion were hurt. i'm del walters. tonight if you are poor or black, you stand a greater chance of being imprisoned. does the american criminal justice system save our the privileged? critics of president obama's nuclear deal say the u.s. can't trust iran. in the panel we ask why should iran trust the u.s. last week it was the confederate flag, now it's a mountain side memorial, where do we draw the line between removing offensive imagery and wiping the past. i'm imran garda, and this is "third rail". [ ♪ ] >> he has the best justice system in the world with all the

protections for defendants that anyone anywhere could hope for. >> our legal system all too often is stacked against those who have the least power, who are the mostville nerable. >> these are statements to delegitimize the assistance. the majority in the state are not there for the simple crimes, but serious matters. >> i believe in the jury system and law and justice. >> everyone gets a little irritated. it's the best system it is. >> the united states is home to 5% of the world's population, but prisoners. >> serious questions about drug laws, mandatory sentencing and racial bias. >> we have a cal justice system we have lisa wayne, a criminal defense attorney and past president of national association of criminal defense

lawyers, and dan lungren, former republican congressman and attorney-general from california. thank you for joining us. dan, let's start with you, does the u.s. justice system favour the privileged? >> no, i don't think it does. if you look at the system with respect to the requirements for giving adequate counsel to people who cannot afford it. in my experience, those who are public defenders, those what are - provided for those that cannes pay for them are well qualified, and at least as experienced, if not more, than those who are available for pay. so we have a system of appellate review from start to bottom. perfect. any system made up of human being is imperfect. i'm one that believes we should review the system and see where improves ought to be made. if you ask me the question whether i believe it is biased against a segment of our

society, i would adamantly reject that notion. >> president obama says the system is broken and we have locked up an entire generation of black and latino men. is he wrong. >> i think he's wrong. if you look at the victim's statement, those that identify their perpetrator, in terms of identification of a person who attacked them by race, is one of the things that they use. that lines up with numbers almost precisely of what we see of those connected. >> what do you mean. are you saying they are black crimes? >> most crime in the united states is within race, black on black, hispanic on hispanic. white on white. there are exceptions. the real tragedy is why do we have violence visited against the minorities in this country, particularly young men who are

minorities in this country. that is the scandal. >> these men are committing crimes, that's why they are locked up. >> there's a come of things that dan has said. number one, these communities are policed more than upper middle class and middle class communities, the policing has more police contacts, more arrest and minorities in young people going in gaol. from nonviolent offenses to violent offenses. people who are incarcerated. we have a third of people in this country who are incarcerated, are nonviolent offenses, and they happen to be minorities and poor people. do you belief that the criminal just system in the united states of america is bias. >> absolutely. >> it's rigged. >> yes. i can tell you having been a public defender and now in private factor, there are a number who represent those kinds

of people, people with money and people without. money matters in this country, it's not so much dictated by the colour of your skin, but the resources and money you have to put on a good defense. so the public defender systems are excellent. dependent on the councilies that can fund adequate public defender systems, you can go across in the south, to missouri and the mid west, and there are public defender systems that have well intended public defenders, and lawyers who want to do right by their clients, but dolent have the mun -- do not have the money or resources to do right. >> on the first statement made by my colleagues. you have more police in the minority communities and the cities because they are requested there. the greatest complaint from attorney-generals is why don't you have more

police here, why is the crime rate high? why don't you see us until after murder has taken place >> i disagree. here is what's in those communities, and when you represent people from those communities, and you are an integral part of those communities. the issue issish policing my community. it's not community policing. it's not the police officer who knows the individuals in the community who can go to mum and dad and say johnny is acting up. that is how it used to be. new you are policing my community and are looking for crime. the broken windows and stop and frisk. people in the communicate i, not that they want more people. they don't want to be a police state. they need to respond when there's crime happening. the problem is if you look at the difference in response time, middle class or upper middle class. the response time is half of what it is in poor communities,

that's when they are saying, when i wants police in my community, but they don't want a police state. nobody does. >> nobody does. >> and i was one that lead the fight in the united states for community policing. the whole idea of having police in the communities, that is part and parcels with the broken windows. i would argue that in terms of quality of life concerns by police and the community, that has a direct relation to the crime rate increase, or the cil community. >> i want to look at the big picture. i have an interesting quote from a former senator who said either we are home in the most evil people on other, or we are doing something dramatically wrong in how we approach criminal justice. is it home to the most evil people on earth? >> i wouldn't say that. i will point this out.

in the '60s, and '70s, and my home state, we had a doubling of the crime rate. during that period of time, we had a 20% drop in the incarceration rate that is number of people incarcerated per population. we turned that around in the '80s, and had a plateauing of the crime rate. up. >> when i became attorney-general in 1991 we did support things such as three strikes and you are out to direction ourselves against career criminals. in a five year period of time, we saw the homicide rate cut in half. 50% cut. we saw an overall crime decrease, over all. violent graham of 35%. >> why did people not want the three strikes and you're out. it doesn't go to violent fernds. >> yes, it does, i wrote the

law, i can tell you what it is. the problem is the reality, people getting three strikes were nonviolence, low-level drug offenders. the population in california, the prison population exploded, quadrupled, and governor brown had to come in with a new policy. realignment. because they couldn't support offenders. >> that shows that there's a strong correlation, maybe causation between locking people up and the crime going down, do you reg that. >> absolutely, absolutely. there's so many different factor, and the studies show that the whole zero tolerance, and the 3-strike has not made crime go down. what we have seen is that we know that we are an ageing society. there's so many different factors, scientists and social scientists will say, contribute to. when you have a better economy. better policing.

>> i disagree with you. if you look at the statistics, you can say they do not follow the economy. during the'60s, '70s. when the crime rates went up, went down, and vice versa, it did not track. i was an author of three strikes. it requires you to have been convicted, not charged. of two violent felonies. the only two not violence were home burglary and arson. only if you have been convicted of those two violence felonies do you qualify. you are not in as a result of committing non violent crimes, you are in because you committed violent crimes, and they are the preda kate for consideration of the third stripe, we put in the law, and it was expanded that.

prosecutor is suj. that's the way the law leads, in the interests of justice, trike them. >> first of all, the prosecutor has complete discretion on the third strike. there's plenty that do three strikes on the non violence offense on the third strike. and the priors, remember the prior convictions also went to who was getting those convictions on the prior offenses. how were they happening, who were defense lawyers protecting those people, who were the prosecutors on that. one of the greatest studies coming out in the last couple of weeks is 97% of state prosecutors are white. you have implicit bias built in to not only the prior offenses and the convictions, and the judges on the bench, and how those people are actually defended in court, and you have the three strikes, and you have

a lot of people, nonviolent offenders that shouldn't have been there, doing the time they have been doing. >> i reject the nose of that because i'm white i'm bias. because you might be of another colour, that you are bias. >> we all have implicit bias, all of us. >> i worked as hard as i could to make sure anything i did was equally visited on anybody who worked. look at the death penally in california as attorney-general. not a single one was carried out against a minority member. it was carried out again those that are white. is that because i was bias. no. we looked at the facts and crimes and horrendousness and made the decisions. they are the only ones to qualify for the death penalty. >> you can't refute this, implicit bias is part of all of us, policing in the community, it's part of the criminal justice system. i know for a fact if i go to a

prosecutor and have a white client that resonates with the prosecutor because they can connect on lels to them, and because they -- levels to them because they can relate to who they are. that is the front end. bias. >> i understand your supposition. position. i want to ask about mandatory minimums, you were involved in writing, sponsoring, reporting laws, in the "8 '89s. >> do you know how that came up. we had cryers from the east city black community, congress men from new york, african-american, this. >> the system goes easy if you differently. >> crack cocaine was a scourge in the inner city, brought to us, tough on crack.

>> it had a devastating effect on communities. >> powder communities, middle class, wealthy, generally white. we were having a war against the people that lived in those communities, by the scourge of crack cocaine. i didn't make that up. people from those communities came to us, demanded that we do something. did we too much? perhaps so. do we revisit it. >> do you regret it? >> no. i can't make every decision that is absolutely perfect, i don't make anything perfect. you do the best you can in the circumstances. if other factors come into play that show you should amend it, sure. i would take a look and see if it was utilised in the way we first anticipated. has it been abused in some ways, if it has, we ought to cut back on it, is there an opportunity to review some sentences. that would we appropriate.

>> okay, we'll take a break. when we come back, with man prisoned for 18 years, on death row for 12. >> i have to prove i'm innocent. i was a father. i was a son, i was a brother. murderer. >> later on. whenever i have seen a monument to the confreed rahsy, i see see that is a vis are ol injury. >> we need to say that is bad. >> it should be in a museum in a field called traitors. and in field note, ali velshi say. >> we had a minder recording every conversation. we didn't go in looking to do things that were getting us in >> these are babies in prison. >> he stood in that bathroom and nobody went to help him. >> how many people have to get raped before somebody says

"whoa, we got a problem"? >> "faultlines". >> what do we want? >> al jazeera america's hard-hitting... >> today the will be arrested. >> ground-breaking... >> they're firing canisters of gas at us. >> emmy award-winning, investigative series. >> we have to get out of here.

>> now science is pursuing an organic alternative. >> these companies are trying out new technologies. >> no hormones are ever added into our tanks.

>> mmm! >> techknow's team of experts show you how the miracles of science... >> i'm standing in a tropical windstorm. >> can affect and surprise us. >> wow, some of these are amazing. >> techknow - where technology meets humanity. >> how do you end up in prison for something you never do? >> i wasn't guilty. >> innocent people go to gaol. >> it's a total system famure. >> one out of 25 people sentenced to death are innocent. >> anthony spent years on death row, convicted of capital murder. him. >> whatever you think your nightmare is, i lived that for 640 days. >> welcome back, joining us now

is anthony graves, who, as you heard, was exonerated in 2010, after spending 18.5 years at gaol, including 12 on death row. he serves on the board of the houston science center and runs the anthony graves foundation creating the awareness of criminal justice. it's a pleasure to speak to you. i have the utmost respect for you and everything you have been through. you were convicted, sent on decc people. your conviction was reversed and almost two decades later, you were released. i wonder, after everything you have been through, you had gone through. who do you blame? who put you through that. >> i blame the system. and the reason why i say i blax the system is because -- blame the system is because we have

our bias. we don't have anything in place to protect from our own biases, we have a system running amok. if you look at the systems, they are 95, 97% of prosecutors in all states, in countries that are white. i come in as a young african-american american man. they can't relate to me. he looks at me as a criminal. i have to prove that i'm incident. with the losses, incident that you are proven guilty. as a young african man, i have to prove i'm innocent, because i'm looked at as guilty. that's how they are able to convicted me, they look at me as a criminal first. i blame the system. we don't have the procedures in place that protects prosecutors from their own biases. how about, again i ask this with the utmost respect, it was a case of the perfect storm of inadequate counsel, and an

awful, really bad prosecutor, rather than a broken system. >> that will have to be in most cases. you have to say that in most cases. if you look at the statistics of young african men that have been wrongfully convicted and look on the other side of the table, it's usually by a white prosecutor. is it just that they are bad when they do that, it's the system. you have to have things in place to protect people, that's the way it is. for example, when it comes to capital murder. what does it matter if a man lives or dies. looking at the exonerations, while still alive, thankfully you look at this club. 154 members since 1973, 53% of them black. you can't defend a system like that for you. >> i can defend a system like that.

i know the system of california. every single one. who was on death row who went through execution in torge rsh was white. every one. race had nothing to do with it. i'm not saying that we are a race neutral country, we are human being. it's a question of human nature and bias in my terms. people have integrity or don't. what do we have. at least from the californian experience. if you have a case, you have to first prove beyond reasonable doubt that they have committed an unheinous crime. you go through sentencing where you weigh mitigating and aggravating circumstances, you have a judge that can override that, you have an automatic appeal to the supreme court, and a habious corpus to the supreme

court. an appeal to the federal system and habeas corpus appeal up to the supreme court. there's more protections built into that than any other aspect of criminal justice, and with that, we have mistakes. so it seems to me. you have to in many ways support programs like innocent projects that see if there has been a problem. d.n.a. has something that is not utilised to go after those that are guilty, but used to exxon guilty. >> lisa, is anthony it said case an anomaly in the united states. >> no, it's not. when we talk about making mistakes, wear talking about lives.

people that have been exxon rated, there has been evidence to make sure nothing has happened. look at all the people where there is no evidence, look at unwellable evidence that was used to convict people, that now we know 10-15 years later was not reliable. those are people killed on death row. across the country, we are doing it wrong. why we are doing it wrong, we have to look at the front end of this emplacement bias. and what's on the front-end and why are people arrested, accused, and in the system when we have this implicit bias, and one of the things we know would correct this, so it doesn't depend on who the prosecutor is, and who has integrity, and who doesn't is we have an open file discovery. that means everything the prosecutor has, the defense lawyer gets. and there's no hiding of evidence, there's no manipulating evidence, and there's no tainting evidence, because what i have, if i could

show you are guilty, i'm going to give it to you. >> this whole notion of what okay. >> they get to determine what is ex-cull battery and work prize. that is why open file. let me give you the open file, why does the prosecutor have the discretion and say i'll give you what is good and what is bad. >> can we agree the prosecutor has too much power. >> i wouldn't put it in those terms. in terms of looking at an open discovery system. in cases of capital punishment. it seems to me that would be appropriate. so it's not a dodge to keep things going, and it's open and it's presented. i took the perspective of the victims of crime. i thought the system at this point in time was too rigged against the victims. the first execution in california, i had the mother of one of the 15-year-oldways

killed, ro ert alton harris. he killed them,ate their sandwiches, made fun of them, before. he was about as evil as it gets. one of the boy assist fathers was a deputy sheriff responding to an armed robbery had a gun on the man, he had no idea. he waited 15 years for justice. his son only lived to be 15. on that night one judge in the everything even though the claims had been rejected by the court, and the supreme court did something they had never done, removed jurisdiction from any court in the country compete the united states supreme court. and i'll have to go to that mother and explain to her. he turned to me and said i'll get it. that's what the system had done to her.

while the 15-year-old and 16-year-old wanting to be hamburger. >> who is that. my mother was a victim. >> you're right. >> no one was there for my mum. >> from what i can see about your case, the prosecutor has been disbarred based on what happened in that case. >> i understand that. and the other guys, who committed the crime lied about you, right. >> the prosecutor was disbarred. does that give you hope that you opened the door for others. >> no. >> for justice. >> if my case was not highlighted, the prosecutor would still have his job. i mean things are changing. i don't want to say they are not. social media is changing things. but i can tell you the whole regime is in place. had this not been exposed to the media, the prosecutor would have his job.

they had a piece of law to pursue agreements against the prosecutor. when i was in prison, for 18.5 years, the statute of limitations ran out. >> what hurting during the most 18.5 years. >> being with my kids, my mother. i was not able to hug by mother, i had to watch my kids grow up behind the glass. never. that hurt me the most. at the end of the day, what hurt is that she called me the night i wasn't. i whereas a father, a son, a brather, but i was not a murderer. and you tried to make the whole world think i was a murderer. you gave me two execution dates. how can that be fair. my family became a victim. who was $for them. when we talk about victims, when a man is wrongfully convicted, his family is a victim. he's a victim also. there's nothing in place for

that. there's nothing in place for na. >> okay. i'm loving this. i have to wrap. thank you. all of you for joining us. thank you so much. the "third rail" panel is next. >> i'm surprised how scared people are of dip loam as any. we struck a deal, people are freaking out. people prove their dominance. >> government committees. >> they're spending money, they're not saving it. >> costing millions and getting nothing. >> it's a bogus sham. >> america tonight investigates. money for nothing. >> they've gotten away with it for years.

welcome back to "third rail," we'll follow the conversation from where they take the privilege to the lack ever diversity.

let's bring in the panel. max jobrani is an author of "i'm not a terrorist but i played one within tv", and the name of a come gi festival. brittney cooper is a professor of rutgers university. africana studies. and pete dominic host of "stand up! with pete dominick." we touched on it in the debate, the fact that 95% of prosecutors are white. is that a problem. >> anyone that says it doesn't, i would willing to listen to for a minute and a half. if you ask it another way. 95% of prosecutors were iranian, or african american women. people that don't think it's an issue. the vast majority of people in the united states are white. it plays into it. >> a vast majority of people in prison are black. i'm not saying that's why. we elect the

spokesman. you have to wonder if i can relate to britney's experience. i'm a white heterosexual male. i have not been targeted or discriminated. it will be - it will naturally be harder for me to relate. for britney's experience, and prosecutors have a trexedz amount of responsibility, whether you prosecute. how long you last for. if you think that doesn't matter, i would remind you, what if they were 95% black men. is this more about prosecutors being the sort of politicians. looking for a conviction as a score to go up the political ladder, rather than the fact that they are white men? >> i think those two things go together. we are a country on the notion that white men have political power to determine the destiny and future of other people. and so there are two cases that happened recently where we have black women prosecutors that

made a difference to the outcome of the cases. one in detroit and in wayne county. then recently you have a bolt mar prosecutor -- baltimore prosecutor that brought charges against killers of freddie gray. >> are you saying if they were white there wouldn't be charges. >> let's look at ashraf ghani, ferguson, and michael brown. there's a way that prosecutors came out and antagonized the communities. the harm that actually were perpetrated in what we considered to be crimes against these men. marlin came up with a clear statement. as soon as she confirmed something was wrong, that freddy gray didn't throw himself into a ran, people left the streets. most black people are invested in the streets. they want some indication that there is fairness, and we are

not making up ideas about people committing crimes. >> would it have been different. that said, look at the reaction of white people in baltimore, when she made that decision. she is bias, she is a black woman, she's bias. >> look, i don't just make this happens. like your panellists. he assumes he is objective. white people have a hard time believing that the whiteness makes them bias. the white nls assumes there's a neutral stand, object if. they see bias. >> i'm right here. >> you need to deal with your problem and bias. >> how dare you. a beige man or a brown man. if you two get along and become my colour, the beige is the way to go. >> beige. >> i think that i was reading

that one of the issues is that a lot of african-americans that go to law school go towards - defense attorneys want to be prosecutors. part of that is because there's probably a stigma to feeling if you are prosecuting you'll be putting away people of colour, and it reminds me of american fbi agents. so, hey, arabian community, talk to me. some say that that is a sell out. so i wonder if that would happen if we had more african-american american prosecutors, if the black community would say now you are working for the man. saying. the systematic problem is not having the prosecutors, as much as we need to look and see why do we have more african-american people in prison. there's a lot of offenses. i think that the bias exists, but i think the problem is a bigger problem. it's not saying there's a lot

of white people that will prosecute people because they are black. >> no one is not making argument that a white person - gaol, and are sending black people to gaol, there's a host that don't see them has black, but there's ranges of bias around threat, around the potential for violence, and around their potential for rehabilitation. there's nothing about the way that they are trained making that rning structure visible. >> this is a crazy number, 95%, a crazy number we learn. i don't think a lot of people knew that, i bet a lot of black folks knew it. the percentage of law enforcement that are white and matters. >> you mention statistics, the american bar association says there's a 2010 sensis, saying 5% of lawyers are black. whether defense attorneys or prosecutors down the road, should that change, don't we

need more lawyers. >> it's obvious if you have a majority of white prosecutors, you get their point of view. it reminds me of the academy awards, where they said there's no black films, who are the judges? mostly white dudes. an historical agreement between iran and six others, by the united states, has many asking can the u.s. trust iran. should it be evers said. >> rain is an anti-american sponsoring regime. >> iran is a country that must be confronted. >> iran - any. >> republican senators wrote to iranian leaders, warning them a nuclear deal would not last. >> because of policies. why should iran trust us. >> this is what we do on "third rail." let's flip the question. you know, iranians have a long history,

1953, overthrown a democratically elected prime minister. there's the islamic revolution, united states against that, supporting saddam hussein in a war against iran, so on, so forth. >> we shot a commercial jet with iranian men and women and refused to apologise. america. >> as an iranian american i don't trust myself. >> he beats himself up all the time. >> given the past and what the soisht is saying. we are not going to pass this agreement. very have a light not to trust america. that said, i feel that what has happened in the past led to a lot of iranians being conspiracy theorists. and at a certain point you stop taking part yourself. they have not a lot of choice but to trust americans, and

slowly and surely lead to a place where iran can be a member of the world conversation. and you know, like i said, like a lot of times iranians - if something happened, the americans did it or the israelis, you can only say it so many times. >> there was times when a fascination of scientists. >> they were right. >> there was the iranians and the americans. >> if it's a tooth ache, it's not americans. if you have a tooth ache, go do the dentist. >> one point i want to make, that i make on the radio, is we have to be careful the way we talk. you saw on the video, the iranians are this, the americans are this, israelis are this. i was embarrassed when our government invaded roque. many americans were-- iraq, many americans were, half were against it. the rest of the world looked at americans. maz can tell you about the iranian people, most are pro-american, it's the government. you don't hear me say anything positive. i'm critical of the israeli

government. we are all critical of our own government. we have to deal with what we are talking about. the people of the country are not representative especially in iran or by the regime. it's important to make. >> at what point will we see america is a country to gun in an imperialist way, we are interested in what makes us a superpower. pro-american. if we don't trust them, they can't trust us. the way in which we have dealt with iran is similar to iraq. that is to say we think that they have nuclear capacity, and most credible sources on the issue don't think the iranians have a massive capacity, whatever nuclear capacity they have, it's not come pairable to the amount of nuclear weapons in the u.s. and that israel scr. >> are you comfortable with the united states making a deal with iran, the supreme leader ayatollah khamenei,

actively going out. death america, chanting on a weakly basis. are you comfortable with it. >> i'm commverltable with it. i have to be comfortable with the new way of the president. maybe he's naive. it's better than what we have been doing tore 50 years. i don't trust the iranians, but i don't trust the americans either. i understand that there's a lot of verification in the deal, and i troughed the weapons inspectors and the i.a.e.a. that's important to be made. does anyone in america trust or like the leaders. it's a theocracy. >> an opayic system we don't quite understand. what about from the iranian perspective. they strike a deal and think great, we have a deal. there's a thing of congress. we don't want the dal. we talk about a deal with hassan rouhani. but the listen. isn't america as opaque.

>> absolutely. the death to america chants. it really obsessed me when people lead an article, and they show a clip and say this is the iranian people, they are burning american flags and are out to get us. that is showing a small group of iranians, or a group of iranians who support the supreme leader. there's a majority of iranians wants change. how do you explain you burning the american flag. in the comedy festival. >> i was trying to light a cigarette. it was an american flag grat. i feel we govern by fear. we want to make it that iran is out to get us. the fact is they are not. i'm surprised how crazy and upset people are and how scared people are of diplomacy. we truck a deal. people are freaking out.

you'd thing the senators br in the pockets of manufacture areas. they probably are. we tried wars. lot. >> the israelis want to talk about it. hillary clinton said is few years ago that if the iranians threatened israel, they'd obliterate them. >> under the guise of diplomacy, continue. >> there's an iranian project in the region. some call it iranian imperialism. >> this is not a defense of iran. i'm saying my job of americas is to critique both. at least they have struck a deal, let's take steps forward and see if it will bring peace and openness with wroin. and iran's -- iran, and iran's imperialism, we are all over the world, they are in their region.

the fact that got a seat at the negotiating table, the only way they postured a nuclear weapons was for a seat at the take. >> iran wants iraq. they have made the mistake. >> the na axe cp is calling for a -- n.a.a.c.p. is calling for the confederate to come down, is this the right thing to do. >> the atlanta chapter of the n.s.a. calling for the -- n.a.a.c.p. calling for the stone arriving to do.....sandblasted off the face of mountain. >> they can we sandblasted off or auctioned off. >> is that inappropriate. >> streets named after confederate soldiers and line. >> at what point is it like being the taliban, blowing up the khmer rouge and raising history no matter how ugly it

is, o offensive it is to people in a contemporary sense. >> i don't think we should spend public funds to preserve this place. i lived in atlanta, that's near stone mountain, i went there one time. i was happy that an event one had there was cancel. it was offensive to see black people in streets where named after folks that would wan them enslavened. >> any treasonous abbing. >> what is so long saying that guy is a bad guy. >> that is not what people are telling their anyone. i sigh white and black people cane. we say we should preserve the truth, but what happens is the monument sanitize history, making people comfortable. >> just like flying the flag, so

many that fly the flag on the mountain don't have a conception of the brutality. what they are flying or celebrating is a history where people wanted people to look like me. >> is this equivalent to the . >> it is, but the difference is, like you said, these are not public funds. none of these symbols - there should be no streets, the flag shouldn't fly. everyone should be able to fly a swastika off the car, out of the house. celebrate. the problem is when you have a carving in a mountain looked at something we revere. if you want us to tell our thinks it's a bad thing, they may here the message. >> half of mt rushmore, jefferson and washington owned slaves - at what point do you get into this is offensive.

>> we can't take slave owners ... >> what - here is the thing, what we are talking about is the fact we are going to make white people uncomfortable if we ask them to confront those that they revere. i experience that as a viscerale injury. when i go to research my ancestry, i can't go back, until recently, past the 1870 sensis, my ancestor is not named. there's an erasure of my history because of our celebration because of our history of enslavement. my great-grandfather, three grernations ago was born in 1866, a year after the end of slavery, that's a huge span in terms of lifetime. i want folks looking like me to matter. white folks have to understand. >> doesn't the imagery remind us

of this. i'm not saying that we should, you know, go and pay homage to it. we need to say, like you were saying, that's a bad guys, those guys did bad things, and to remember the history, otherwise we end up in a situation where... >> it's where it's displayed, how it's displaced. it should be in a museum in a room called traitors, or slave owners or bad people. >> it was 150 years ago. >> people go there and say these are who these people are, and go there for education. they take selfies. >> there is no active remembrance or calling out the fact that one of the streets is named. if there are no public funds, the street names are public property, they can and should changed. >> i want to say one of the things i thought was, a bigger thing we are missing is this guy that did the shooting had the confederate flag.

the debate is going to the confederate flag, and the images of the confederacy. i do not see the debate on gun control as being a bigger thing. i feel like we are ignoring that in this country okay. maz, britney and pete, thank you for joining us. straight ahead, reporting from a country where you don't know which question you ask might land you in prison. >> i could have conversations until i arrived them if i thought the government would be honest about the nuclear programme. >> tell me what you and your generation think is gonna to happen.

>> i've been asked to keep my voice down cause we are so close to the isil position

after 20 months of negotiations and three decades of enmity, a deal has been reached between iran and the world's major powers over the nuclear programme. ali velshi, host of the "ali velshi on target", was in iran to cover the iranian people's reaction to the last weeks of the negotiation, and joins us here in new york. great to talk to.

was it a paradoxical experience. >> it was, just in the city. the south, dusty, poor, working class, religious, the north, western, you're bane, prosperous, and that, alone, tells you where some of the tensions were. there's a lot of internal pressure. they do not feel for a deal. there's no deal that could have been a good deal. and moderates and reformists in iran, who say we've been out of the world community, this is not working for everyone. you speak to a lot of powerbrokers and did a good job looking at the stuff that came through. speaking to people on the street, what is the one thing that americans don't get about these people? >> they don't hate americans, they don't hate the west. i had a problem with a people. they said don't think that

because people like coke, and iphones, doesn't mean they like america. but they do like america, but there's a group of people that don't. it didn't seem to be most of them. people wanted to open up to me, they wanted to open up to the west. they would not get into conversation with me about what they thought about the government. they didn't want to get involved with that. i could have hardy conversations with everyone until i asked whether i thought their government was to blamed. or was it honest about the nuclear programme. that got everyone down. otherwise they are a political people. talking politics. they wanted your world. >> the man on the street, was he optimistic about the deal. >> in the two weeks they were pessimistic, everyone saying we have seen the movie before, and there were extensions but while we were there, the fact they were extended for two days or

three days meant there must be close. and there was celebration in the streets of tehran, dancing in the street which is not allowed in tehran. the police were okay. they were standing by and watching it. people are happy that the deal came. >> we were having conversations about having you from the live spot in tehran doing it segment. but we thought maybe you'd get to be a bit more open with us york city. that? >> yes, my last shot was on the top of press tv, government owned. highly secured i wouldn't want to be stuck there if they were mad at me. monitored. >> did you have a minder. conversation. i suspect we were monitored in other ways. we knew that. we didn't go in looking to do things that would get us in trouble.

we didn't talk to dissidents or journalists that were gaoled. conversation. we made requests to speak to people who opposed the government, and we did speak to some reformists who were running against the government. but people self-censored when they talked to us, and to some degree when we were on the rooftop, we self-censored too. >> was it clear as a journalist, from the west, what the red lines were. >> some are clear. you do not criticize the clergy or at all the ayatollah khamenei, and you have to be careful in your speech about those detained. you know, iran spoke about journalists, and you don't speak about their own detentions. on every level people spoke about how the government was changing and opening up. in the end it is not a liberal society, a society with personal liberties. they are pushing along the

edges, women want to go to sporting matches. women want to not be told how to dress. they'll manage, understand what islamic law is. they don't want police around them fixing their hijabs and edges. >> thank you so much. >> ali will host a one hour special. "iran, behind the deal, and see him on "ali velshi on target." thank you for joining us. that does it for this week's show. the conversation continues on the website.

i'm ali velshi, tonight an indepth special report from inside iran. i'll take you to the streets of tehran, where news of an agreement is on everyone's mind. tonight i take you behind the deal. [ ♪ ] >> today after two years of negotiations the united states has achieved something that decades of animosity has not. a comprehensive long-term deal wira