national day. a military parade has been made in doha, crowds that included the emir. qatar declared its independence from britain in 1971. i'll ask a democratic member on the house homeland security committee. on the panel is there a right way to respond to mass shooting, and why fear is great business for the n.r.a. this is third. >> americans fear fresh attacks from i.s.i.l. after the massacre in san bernardino. republicans say efforts by democrats to restrict gun sales will not make the country safer. >> not one of the proposals of this administration would have stopped the killings in

colorado, in organ at the community college, or at san bernardino. this body ought to be about doing things that make a show. >> can blocking people on the no-fly list from buying guns stop mass shootings? how about keeping all muslims crossing borders. >> donald j trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states. until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. joining he is sheila jack san lee, representing texas 18th district and a member of the house homeland committee, thank you for joining. >> my pleasure to be with you. >> are you encouraged by the worldwide condemnation of donald trump's

islamaphobia. >> dick cheney and others criticized trump on this. >> i'm encouraged that america has voices from both sides of the aisle. republicans and democrats, that realise that the response should be deliberative, thoughtful and embracing, and our values by no means would support the horrific and nonsensical comments of the presidential candidate. and this unified condemnation should lead to solutions, and so after condemnation, where are the solutions. >> the condemnation is not unified. 65% of likely republican voters support donald trump's call to ban muslims from entering the country. how much does that worry you? >> frankly i believe those are isolated voters in the republican primary.

i believe that the american people is a broader group than that, and we have the responsibility to answer not to the national rifle association, but answer the gentlemen's question on the floor as i listen to the video of his statement. we can make a difference in a comprehensive approach to gun safety and security. what will be the excuse. what is his reason for being able to have these two automatic weapons - is he a gun collector, is he about to leave for the war front. these are simple questions that i can't imagine that the family of those in columbine, those in connecticut, those in san bernardino, and the idea of a radicalizing of these two individuals. this is what we owe the american people, not, if you will, hype eshly and hysteria and closing the borders to muslim, absolutely not. that is the most atrocious

time. >> the administration is calling for tougher safety laws, but your fellow congress person from texas, republican louie goma - he said none of the proposals would have stopped recent mass killings. in all fairness, in these cases, is he right? >> no, i don't think he's right. first of all, we have not put in place the issue of dealing with who should be getting guns. we have not put in place limits on ammunition. we have not put in place restrictions on the automatic weapons. some of us support an assault on assault weapons, a ban on assault weapons, there's some of us that believe in simple bills that indicate that if you are a person that has a gun, you need to secure a gun. it may not deal with mass murders, but deals with the numbers of children that shoot

themselves getting guns in their homes. >> there's a wholistic approach that once but in place, will not interfere with gun rights and the owners who desire to hunt or participate in guncompetitions of any kind would the proposal have predicted the devastating carnage in san francisco. >> yes, the limits on high-powered ammunition and rifles, the assault weapons ban. the issue of no guns to terrorists, but obviously in this instance, this gentlemen sned name was not on the -- gentlemen's name was not on the list. and some of the decisions would have had a direct impact, along with the idea, again, this is stigmatizing actions of those in the faith. that information should have

been very much in the eye of those responsible for preventing domestic terrorism, and certainly the apportioning that took place for the fiancee, and the visa that was given. was not appropriate. it was not detailed. it was not at the level that it should have been, and this person should not have seen that. >> democrats have been frustrated by meaningful gun control legislation. we saw it after newtown when a vote in the senate was not allowed. is the price too high to get anything done. is there a compromise, something that may be willing, in the embargo, to get a budget deal. if violence is a huge issue, is there policy positions worth trading if it means compromise deaths. >> i can't raise the policy positions put on the table.

but the democratic leadership, over the years, has been willing to sit down in a - how should i say, nonhostile atmosphere, sit with the n.r.a., to be honest. and work out a gun safety agenda to help the american people. today we would be willing to do so. those of us on the judiciary committee has begun talking about criminal justice. we can be discussing how to move forward on gun safety, and i'd like to use the word gun safety, control. >> if we talk about restricting gun laws, making it harder to obtain a gun, is it fair to talk about revising the visa policy well? >> let me say this - i do not want to ban the visa, as i indicated in the committee hearing yesterday, i have seen the wonderful faces of love, and particularly by our men and women of the united states

military, placed in bases and pofrts overseas, and they have the opportunity, of course, to fall in love. this is not - just like i think it is outrageous to stop all muslims from coming into the country, it would be inappropriate to do anything untoward with the fiancee visa. there are places that this individual came from, the evidence of radicalization. none of these questions were sufficiently arrived and answered, and unfortunately, we had this enormous tragedy, that is a bipartisan approach that the congress men take. looking at how details you must be on that visa, but also we voted not a punitive vote, but a reasonable vote on ensuring those that have been to the fight, coming out of certain countries have, and being nationals of 38 countries with a visa waiver, that they would

have an interview. >> would you agree that this perhaps could be an area for compromise if the vetting process needs to be tightened. could you agree with the republicans that the system is not working. >> i never go to the negative. what i say is the congress did something positive. we, in a bipartisan manner pass some new directions to the visa waiver programme, requiring the countries with the privilege. that if any of the nationals or anyone else comes from those areas where the fight is going on, where there is i.s.i.l.'s presence in the fight, dominating and killing muslims and christians and muslims, that that individual coming through their country that has a visa waiver programme, wanting to come to the united states. we are not stopping them going anywhere else, wanting to come to the united states, they must

have an interview and we must have oversight to make sure the process goes without enhanced abuse, that we get the facts and we know who should not be allowed in, and who should be allowed in. we have to fit the system. nation. >> i thank you so much for your time. best of luck. >> thank you for having me. >> next, why mass shootings are such great business for the n.r.a., and in our panel... >> tramp -- trump is not the only one in his party spewing anti-islamic rhetoric. >> radical islam, whatever you are calling it... >>..crazy people...

>> we're here to fully get into the nuances of everything that's going on, not just in this country, but around the world. getting the news from the people who are affected. >> people need to demand reform... >> ali velshi on target.

our bannel is coming up. first, be afraid. be very afraid and have the credit card ready. >> that was the information available two weeks after i.s.i.l. killers slaughtered 130 people in paris. >> no target is too intimate or sacred for the monsters. they'll come to where we worship. educate, and where we live wow, even invisible angels. right or wrong, the n.r.a. and corporate sponsors are well

positions to cash in again. nothing pumps out mass gun sales like mass gun slaughter. ask the fbi if you don't believe me. last month the shopping spree called black friday arrived two weeks after the paris attack, and on the same day as the planned parenthood shooting. an fbi record for background checks in a single day was set. keep in mind, that's just the ground checks. add in the loopholes and thousands of guns were sold that day. gunsales spike when there's a fear the federal government will come and ban categories of guns. we'll see it again and again, and are seeing this yet again. the fbi processed close to 2 billion background checks alone, and close to 22, with christmas still away. to buy those to celebrate the birth of baby jesus.

that's great for the n.r.a., getting much of its revenue for the friends in the gun industry. after the newtown massacre. the n.r.a. boasted that it gained over if 100,000 new paid members, and that's more money than anyone else made due to a massacre of small children. well played. keep in mind, when we say n.r.a., we refer to the management, not n.r.a. members, 74% of whom support universal background checks for all purchases not supported by wayne or his angel singers. recap - mass shootings occurrence, n.r.a. warns you that people are coming to kill you and leaders are coming to confiscate your guns, and people will see you and gun manufacturers profit after another massacre. and sends the money back to the n.r.a., repeat,

massacre, profit, repeat. mass shootings - good for the n.r.a., good for gun

companies welcome back do third rail, the tragedy in san bernardino left many americans worrying responds. >> new york's daily mail took aim at those that tweeted about their prayers for the victims. >> when it comes to gun violence, time and time again, prayers. >> president obama responded to the calls for sfricter -- stricter gun control. >> this is not about gun control, if you think shooting in california is about gun control, you don't understand what is going on in the world. >> let's meet the panel. laura flanders, the host of the laura flanders show. broadcast internationally an the news network. a comedian and adjunct law

professor, and tommy is a republican strategist and senior advisor to the new york governor. thank you for being here. we want to believe that there's a way for both sides to come together and realise that when it comes to stopping violence, commonalties are differences, and we can agree on something. >> you would like to think so. we are in the midst of a presidential election, you need the cooling off period. thoughts and prayers are appropriate. you have to get to the facts first. we jump to the conclusion that this was a planned parenthood attack. this is a terrorist attack. parenthood. >> i agree. let's get to the facts. we can have calls for gun control and bombing i.s.i.l. et cetera, et cetera. the thought that prayers are wrong, and there's a lot of criticism. i'll go with the prayers for the first half hour. >> is there a wrong way to ? >> yes, bombing syria, bombing iraq. telling muslims that they

shouldn't be allowed to come to america. all the islamaphobia are the wrong ways to respond to any of these things. i would take umbrage with calling this a terror attack as if it's unique to other attacks. if they were inspired by i.s.i.s., why weren't they inspired by fox news. they've been demonizing the spot. into if you look at mass shootings, and if we keep score, and you compare non-muslim shooters, 352 to 2 in 2015. this is not an issue necessarily of looking at all of islam like the republican party seems to be well. >> let me disagree with that quickly. don't take trump as the republican brand, or saw someone party. >> it would be nice.

>> a third of voters say they are voting for him. that's a small number in the overall poarty, and there's a number expressing outrage over donald trump. >> donald trump is doing to islamaphobia what was done for homophobia. loretta lynch walked back comments that the justice department would take action when hateful speech heads towards rhetoric. her words from pataki tweeting: >> i think we have to call it what it is. there's a segment of the israel population, a radical portion of that religion that is a problem right now. we have to confront the problem. by no means the overwhelming

group of people of islam faith, muslim faith are great people. >> there is no better recruiting tool for i.s.i.s. than this tool. hate speech is not just tacky. >> it seems that there has been a lot of fomenting and gathering without that. the reaction to this happened after they had been beheading journalists, drowning their own people, and we have seen the videos, all of a sudden. because we have to go out ... >> tom, i think the confusion that a lot of folks have is they criticize the president for not using the radical phrase islams. >> trump is not the only one in the party spewing islamic rhetoric, it's throughout the party, it's throughout the platforms, and marginalise 99.9%

of muslims that are not part of the i.s.i.l. it seems george w. bush looks sage like on the landscape. >> we didn't hear that from our democratic friends, we didn't hear them applaud george bush, or were they said great job, you brought us together. >> no, that's not it. that is not the point. >> george w. bush unleashed the wars that we are coming home to roost in the country, he said we have to fight them there so we don't fight them here. that. >> what can be done to have both sides coming together. we have one side of the issues saying we need prayers, calls for greater health. donald trump is extreme. his speeches are better in german, and then the speech that gun control alone will not do it. >> the new york times and reporting didn't seem fit to refer or mention it. it was diplomacy and talks.

that will not be helped by anti-islamic language. >> this is not a country. who are we talking to? who are the leaders? >> radical islam, or whatever you are calling it. >> what are you calling it? >> as a movement, it's not something that we have been against. if this mr the 1980s, and they were fighting afghanistan against the russians, they'd be house. >> what is your solution? >> the solution is to stop the rhetoric that islam as a religion has anything to do with it. it's a political problem. politically. >> you stop supporting the regimes in the middle east. the way the foreign policy talks to us, we hate i.s.i.s., and love saudi arabia, does that mean there's good and bad beheadings, i don't get it. there's no consistency in the way. every secular arab leader, we have overthrown, and the fundamental religious ones are

our allies. >> the conflict ends when they no longer want to kill us. i don't think killing them gets us there. we have to move on. i want to move on - i'll state a premise, a commonly held piece of wisdom, and see if the panellists agree. president obama recently restated a relief that climate change is a greater threat to america than i.s.i.l. >> empirically climate change is a greater threat. we are talking about millions of people could die. it's real, not fake. people can't see it, because it seems too imaginary to some people, and i.s.i.s. and others seem immediate. climate change empirically is a bigger problem than i.s.i.s., for sure. >> is it fair to say big money in politics is a greater threat, because it prevent action on climate change. >> look, i think a lot of things in this world are bigger problems than i.s.i.s. them. >> human greed.

guns. there are things in america that are bigger problems. you are likely to die in many other ways than you are by anything related to i.s.i.s. >> you guys and your stats. the names is a gender neutral prefix or mix for transgender folks that don't identify as male or female as opposed to miss were mr. do you buy na? >> i don't care. this is an irrelevant thing. if the "new york times" wants to call someone a man or a woman, we have bigger problems in this country or world than to worry about what the "new york times" will call someone. i'm, as you know, someone if bruce gener wants to become kaitlin genre, i'm for it, supportive of it. i thought that mean he went from a mr do a ms. >> he did. >> who is the mx. >> sting's son refuses to another.

>> so we need a new set of - fine, i'm okay with that. >> score one for liberty. lara, the university of southern california's former head football coach is suing the school after being fired for showing up in no condition to work. he says hays alcoholism is an illness and disability. do you buy it? >> it's a story, he's trying to do a gacha on the american disability act. >> it requires minimal protection for people with disabilities, it includes alcohol as a disability. does that mean they can show up for work. it means maybe your employer can take time off to go to a meeting. this is a story where you have so much. it's not what the lord intended to do or does. >> i don't buy it. >> at the homecoming dinner, he made a jack ass of himself.

>> it is a horrible disease. but would a fair compromise be to have them provided with the treatment they need. >> it's open to discussion. it provides them with time to go to meetings. it's nothing to do with behaviour, you don't have to tolerate behaviour on the job. the guy working the foreign motor line, he should get the help. the football coach making 5.5 million, i am not sure we should keep him around. >> that's a point crossing political lines. donald trump will win the 2016 g.o.p. presidential nomination, do you buy it? >> no. once we get through iowa, new hampshire, the race is less people in the race. >> when you have party leaders calling them out. that's the first step. moderate. >> dick cheney was for gay marriage before obama and hillary clinton.

>> do you by it that trump will bet the tom nee? >> it's scary that trump got as far as he could. we are the country letting trump be the leader, and the country guy. >> don't forget kenya. >> i think there's hope. >> i'm with tom. let's have him. >> laura flanders. thank you for joining us. i think we solved every geopolitical crisis in the world in this short segment. that does it for this edition of "third rail", thank you for >> everyone has a story... and the only way to see all of america, is to see the human stories... one at a time. our american story is written everyday. it's not always pretty, but it's real... and we show you like no-one else can. this is our american story. this is america tonight.

♪ >> announcer: this is al jazeera. ♪ hello, welcome to the news hour, i'm jane in doha with teams in nigeria, turkey and india coming up, a dutch court rules oil giant shell can be sued for oil spills in nigeria. who is a terrorist and who is not? major debate ahead of new syria talks in new york. kurdish fighters in iraq appeal for more help in the fight against i.s.i.l. u.n. says refugee numbers are at record levels and