we have said you quoted the leader on another occasion you need to go to among this that had we not faced. isis in syria and iraq we would have had to face it in iran or they all supported assad way before i suppose we can pretend iranian support assad began with isis no no we we have good relations with that but the reason i mean countries have good relations and saudi arabia had even better relations with the last from two thousand and three to two thousand and eleven so it's not the question of who supported who it's a question of who came to fight extremists ok now that the now that the fight against extremism is in its final stages it doesn't mean that extremism is gone now we need to do a number of things first we need to do it with the issue at hand and that is it we have done our best i went to ankara i went to damascus i we had a summit in tehran all within the space of less than a week and then the summit in sochi between turkey and russia to avoid bloodshed in

it now we have achieved that we have a plan to have. a political not a political but a nonmilitary solution in that we are faced with a major problem and that is foreign fighters what to do with a large number of foreign fighters who are in it these are fighters that were brought into syria by out so no one is denying the presence of foreign fighters or the crimes that they have committed we've covered on the show but the problem is they're not the ones that are the only ones dying in syria when you look at the sheer suffering in syria hundreds of thousands dead millions displaced from their arms widespread torture in government prisons have been photographed airstrikes barrel bombs attacks on bakeries schools hospitals bread lines isn't iran complicit in all the suffering doesn't matter what you say your goal no motive was no that's what's happening on the behest five years ago when i assumed office as foreign minister i presented a four point plan immediate cease fire inclusive government political negotiations

for constitutional reform and elections based on a new constitution those who insisted. that they wanted a military solution we said from the very beginning i said in the our us history meetings that there won't be a military solution to syria that we need to put in to cause solution and we've been saying that for the past five years those who have insisted on the evolution that they could win back syria that they could push bashar assad from office and they have sacrificed all these people of syria i mean sucker force just their hands i prefer they have they have cause they say when the syrian air force drops a bomb on a bakery that's the fault of the people in the bakery no that's a false of the people who prevented the political settlement is not the fault of bashar al assad for sending in plays to bombay this is just false of the people who prevented political solution because of an illusion that they saw the syrian

government has a responsibility that they could remove bashar assad from i get the argument i understand that ok i'm asking about the responsibility of working rhymes i'm talking about iranian responsibility you something our government i'm not even money i'm not here to defend anybody i'm here to defend it i guess you're asking about it when i wanted a political settlement date if used they wanted their mercenaries these foreign fighters that today we don't know what who are in fighters into syria also from afghanistan you see from a pocketful don't you know that hold on there is a government in syria and last time i checked that government has a seat in the united nations those who try to overthrow that government through the use of diversion through the use of isis through the use of nostra are the ones who have created this not just primary by the syrian government the united nations and the other meaning war crimes nothing justifies war crimes and iran has had its own history of fighting a war against iraq where war crimes were committed against us they were there

chemical weapons were used against us and all of these champions of international agreement italian law state side and kept their mouths shut completely agree ok we insisted from the very. beginning that people need to investigate who used chemical weapons we said from the very beginning that they did rebels had chemical weapons and they were in an investigation and there was no investigate on the united nations and the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons a joint investigative mechanism unanimously supported by the security council they concluded the syrian arab republic is responsible for the release of sarin at a concert who are known for the seventeen and the russians then shut them down the same as it is on the wall and on here hold on we ask this investigative team to go to hans sheehan and to go to show you got to check whether these chemical weapons how these chemical weapons were used we used to this in the iran iraq war iraq used chemical weapons we asked the united nations iraq objected they went to the

warfront they check day verified these teams never been there they accepted the arguments of the white helmets we said from the very beginning that teams need to go under site to investigate the best people entered that from taking place because the best did not want to show of course they would say the assad government is prevented not only as a investigate she asked her government invited them to go to show it out but as but as an iranian as you say who clearly a very passionate about some of your country was subjected to sarin and chemical weapons and you're now allied with the government of the o.p.c. w human rights watch amnesty even hans blix not exactly a u.s. lackey has said it was probably the syrian government air force that carried this out when all of these organizations are saying assad is using chemical weapons he have said from the very beginning that we object and reject the use of chemical weapons no matter who uses them and no matter who is to be counted that is our categorical statement we don't differentiate whether it's iranians who are victims

of chemical weapons or syrians who are victims of chemical weapons we condemn it categorically we've made that point very clear to the president held up or not let me finish we've said that chemical weapons are. to us and that remains our position our problem is chemical the use of chemical weapons that alleged at a diner that was conceived conducive for americans to use it as a pretext for an attack this is a problem we need a full investigation the o.p.c. w. under pressure from the united states and from the west refused to conduct a full investigation of reality to any investigation to find outside guilt and have been several you will always dispute notice he is your life and he's using a local weapons no no no that is you iran of all countries shouldn't be supporting someone you think of course we wouldn't have had had there been any investigation proving because we've got insurance we know that showed up was not used that you know the the base that was hit by the americans on the claim that this was the base

that chemical weapons were launched from we know that it wasn't done from sugar ok and that is why we know that this allegation by the united states was false and we know that chemical weapons are being used we know who is using them and we believe that this is a dirty game that is being played in order to allow a credit aggression by the united states so it's easy to go to the judge alone and come back a minute but it's good to go to the judge together and see which arguments we have and the united states each time it goes to a judge it comes back a loser and then it be dropped from the court you're not going to agree on chemical weapons what about the bombs of bakeries schools hospitals documented by reporters on the ground eyewitnesses human rights groups amnesty human rights of the u.n. commission of inquiry says the syrian government response before war crimes you know are getting civilian area don has not participated in any activity in any populated area and we would never do so in the future we condemn any attack against

idiots do you condemn the syrian government weaken tightening maker in school we'll send them any attack against civilians you know by the syrian govern. no matter who does but i'm asking no matter mostly about zero matter who does it ok but i'm asking about the syrian government no matter who does so you won't condemn the syrian government i condemn anybody using chemical weapons i do not like instilled in us but i condemn any look at any government but at the same time condemn groups who use a billion says yes and the u.s. she and the u.n. is condemning rebels as well they condemn the syrian government and rebels as she ok let me ask you this question you said very clearly earlier that last time you checked at the u.n. the syrian government the government of syria they invited you in your there with the syrian approval as if they were as are the russians so does that mean you support the saudi attacks in yemen because they've been invited in by the government of yemen and the president of yemen on that logic and that place holder the government we're not bombing anybody in yemen we're not killing innocent human

beings or you're lying militias have killed elizabeth you mean the saudi arabia is bombing yemen on a daily basis killing people in yemen and refusing any opportunity to engage in peace talks we have offered a peace plan for syria we offered a peace plan in the yemen but but the saudis rejected the peace of thirty in syria forty years ago they rejected the peace out there in yemen three years ago hoping to be able to have a military victory in three weeks and they continue to bomb innocent people in the air and no one's defending that and what's interesting is you're reminding me that i came to new york a couple years ago interviewed the saudi ambassador to the united nations and i said why are you in yemen why are you there bombing all these people and he said we're invited by the government we're fighting terrorism and all of the reports of civilian casualties are disputed and when i hear you talking about syria i feel

it's the same argument though it's iranians are using the same logic to syria as the saudis are using in yemen that's what it sounds like is it the same argument. i mean people many people say the same things but is it the same argument sounds very similar and it does it yes does it that it's is is saudi arabia fighting i think another killing seven like any other no no no yes are they fighting the syrian government bank for your healing seven are they fighting terrorists in yemen they say they are there they are but those are sort of no no no people are useless and most are and there are internationally recognizing that risk groups who reach internationally recognized terrorist group the saudis are fighting in yemen but this is again a dangerous i know this is a dangerous and you know if you because you support hamas hezbollah which they are not which allows which the e.u. in the e.u. in the u.s. calls terrorists everyone calls an enemy terrorism normal is the problem there are organizations that are recognized as terrorist by the united nations security council and the last i checked therefore organizations that are supported by saudi

arabia are taliban. and die so let's talk about that and other groups there is no consensus saudi arabia is supporting them we are fighting to ok so let's settle on that and let's not just try to confuse they say you're supporting who these were fired rockets into saudi arabia and the and un groups of pointed out human rights massive human rights abuses by with us and the u.n. you see first of all who thieves have enough rockets of their own to fire into saudi arabia they don't need us anybody who's bombed out of existence would find a way to defend themselves who he's defended themselves yemenis defended themselves long before anybody was in iran to help them. they have been there for a thousand years they have forty aggressions they have defeated the russians they

will defeat this aggression this war should not have started we told the saudis that they did not want need to start this war there was a political settlement that could have been reached they wanted a military victory they needed a military victory for domestic reasons for very childish domestic reasons and they continued that they could have stopped this war three and a half years ago so they faded to do something that was that in their own interest because they were hoping you remember in syria seven years ago they said we will have. we will pray in damascus by the end of ramadan it's been seven ramadan since then they said we will have a big tree in yemen in country weeks we've been if you are into the fourth year we're almost out of time i do have to ask about the domestic front you have you're seen as part of the kind of reformist pragmatic moderate part of iranian politics you've called iran a democracy you've called it a democratic system in the past and of course your president rouhani has been

elected twice overwhelmingly by the iranian people but his boss the supreme leader of iran and i wasn't elected by the people has been in office for nearly thirty years and if you insult him you risk going to prison in iran how is that democratic by any definition i question your premise because the leader in iran is also elected. please check our constitution twenty nine years ago no no and he can be removed any day by a body by a party that elected him and that party was elected by the people every country has their own the assembly of experts you simply have x. but the guardian council which he appoints has a veto over that you know has a veto over the assembly of expert in picking the members of the other live expert on but he's not popularly elected by any definition of the word i hear about you when he was actually popularly totally elected for a twenty nine year total no popularly elected twice is present yes and then i'm going to speak to the iranian president elect ok saying that it really is and then

we we have a constitution that was approved twice by a referendum in that constitution that is a constitutional process and in that constitutional process it is an office of the supreme leader and that this is elected and then. observed boyd you're somebody of expert this is the constitution on mechanism twenty nine years i mean some some people lead countries democratic countries for longer than that but it doesn't mean that there are they're not a democracy the last question for a minister for nearly forty years now the u.s. and iran once great allies have been the best of enemies both sides have their grievances of course is there not just talk about trump here but looking into the future beyond trump is there any common ground beyond nuclear issues beyond trump the you can see the united states and islamic republic coming together oh well once the united states abandons its obsession that it wants to defeat iran in the region

which won't happen because we are in the region we are not in some seven thousand miles away from from our home we are at home and that is why our influence in the region is there to stay and the united states needs to recognize the realities of the united states failure has been its lack of recognition of the realities in our region and probably to rugby world so once the create that. i mean once they make that necessary jump to reality then everything can change foreign minister thank you for joining me from good to be with you thank you.

has been described as a limp in. the last and is a rare rubbing against around the world suffer from to come and read the blinds. because you rush we were moving. up in the square so al-jazeera travels to africa and it's inspiring individuals who are fighting to eliminate these ideas innocence lifelines the end is in sight. on al-jazeera. we have a news gathering team here that is second time out there all over the world and they do a fantastic job and information is coming in very quickly all at once you've got to be able to react to all of the changes and al-jazeera we adapt to that.

my job is is to break it all down and we held the view on the stand and make sense of it. in london a quick look at the top stories now donald trump supreme court nominee has cleared one of the final hurdles towards clinching a job on america's top judicial body on this vote the yeas are fifty one the nos are forty nine the motion is agreed to. the republican controlled senate voted fifty one to forty nine to set up a likely final vote on brett kavanaugh as confirmation on saturday all eyes are on key senators who have been undecided over cavanagh's nomination democrats opposing because of sexual misconduct allegations made by three women republican senator susan collins and democratic senator joe manchin of just said that they will support the nominee will following the vote dozens of protesters gathered outside

senator jeff flake sophos is also considered one of the swing votes who could make or break cavanagh's nomination and he's indicated he plans to vote to confirm him it was anger outside the supremes course as well with police arresting people protesting against the senate's votes in jordan has more on the public backlash to cavanagh's nomination. well it's not just demonstrators gathering here on capitol hill in washington you have seen people calling senators offices going to senators offices in their home states basically conducting sit ins basically mailing in terms of the border opposition to the cabin on domination you've seen people getting into very heated arguments on social media on public. shows on radio shows people are talking about this in a way that we have not seen sort of this wonderful discussion really in the last

couple of years and certainly in light of the past years vies of the need to move against sexual harassment in the workplace at school and in other places this allegation of sexual assault that has been launched against bart kavanagh has really ignited not just a lot of discussion about what to do about it but a lot of people who say that they have been attacked at some point in their lives have been very very vocal about their about their experiences and demanding that there be good change in the way that u.s. society is constructed not just in the way that men and women are taught how to engage with each other but in terms of changing the legal system as well that has led to political activism perhaps more notably on the liberal or progressive side but we've also seen more energy on the conservative side of u.s. society because this issue is so personal and so visceral really you haven't seen

anything like this in a number of years. and are other headlines the twenty eight hundred about peace prize has been awarded to yazidi women's rights activist nadia murat and congolese dr dennis mcguire a gay bar of his campaign for the victims of sexual violence after spending three months as an i still sex slave runs a hospital in the democratic republic of congo dedicated to helping the victims of gang rape jurors of convicted chicago police officers over the shooting of a black teenager in two thousand and fourteen officer jason van dyke has been found guilty of the murder of le kuan mcdonald policeman shot mcdonald sixteen times as the teenager held a knife by his side. a rebel attack on an army post in the eastern democratic republic of congo's left six people dead authorities say four soldiers and two civilians were killed in the attack in benny near the border with uganda a rebel group the democratic forces which opposes ugandan president yoweri most

seventy is believed to be behind the assault two people have been killed in ongoing violence along the gaza frontier it's believed one of those killed is fourteen years old protest writing a been taking place at the border fence that divides the gaza strip israel for months now and the president of interpol has been reported missing after traveling to china main hallway has not been heard from since he left the french city of louisville where interpol has its headquarters at the end of last month. lows all the headlines now we take an undercover look at how facebook moderates its content and ask if it puts profits before ethics inside facebook is next.

facebook is arguably the most powerful company in the world one point four billion people use it every day more than the population of any country on earth except china the story that you created represent the american dream you know that our mission at facebook is to help connect everyone in the world we take that responsibility very seriously but a series of recent scandals has exposed limbs that the hosts of the social network ministers that coburg i think we all agree that what happened here was bag of knowledge it was a breach of trust and i just want to be clear that you're going to take early action in this film we go into a company with facebook's content moderators to reveal how facebook decides what you can see that plan. it's good for you to refer to them so their birth program go to school. so. it's pretty boxes with billions of pieces of combs and

it's uploaded every day these decisions how far reaching consequences. of the woods on you is not necessary. but how they're made has been shrouded in secrecy until now you shouldn't be speaking about record basis of topics ok you know just go for patient docs not. from violence. to hate speech we revealed how facebook deals with extreme forms of. relief for through three. k. through her mother who for schools with graphic videos routinely left homeless sites she has to change it especially for the face of

a selfless. and far right groups getting special protection over sort of loaf all over switcheroo the reverses which is facebook putting profits before safety if you start censoring triggers them to believe interest in the growth but it's all it's all a big one of the. so this isn't even a facebook to bring the hotels that are at the meeting not the whole company this year facebook published a set of rules about what content is allowed on this platform. to be open on reserve the walls and gates faith and trust in facebook that's the reason i mean the brazen department that won that war or. moderations have told us there are serious problems with the way these rules are applied so we're going to company

facebook to launch a sense of the u.k. content moderation in something. facebook has outsourced a lot of its activity our reporter is working for a company called c.p.l. resources. and this piece of policy that we should be speaking of our record basis of topics ok to be you know to just go for patient they've got knocked off. facebook a highly secretive about the world so again no matter how strong you are sure that you don't actually reveal the information what you actually hear. so. give you the first call or going to see what you're going to do it was a call to whatever. the phone fiscal policies. or at least what we are. every week millions of pieces of content to reports it's

a facebook by users who think they should be deletions. these are some of the things that these you know are the photos that we're going to delete because these are the nipples yours are not covered by anything for the new photos and now there are a lot it's completely open so in that case we're going to go. unlike other media there is little regulation restricting what can appear on the social network so the decision to delete or ignore is entirely up to facebook. and it started off in us colleges and then we launched in us high schools and a little bit in us corporations and since when we opened up the site actually last ember a sex. started exploding internationally when i first met zuck he was twenty two years old and from that moment forward for

a period of about three years i was one of the people that he turned to for mentoring. venture capitalist roger mcnamee was one of facebook's early investors and a mentor to found among. he was absolutely convinced that connecting the world was possible and that that should be his mission we believe really deeply that if people are sharing more then the world will be a more open place where people can understand what's going on with the people around them and that's really what we want to get towards i was more proud of facebook than anything i'd ever done in a thirty five or six your career. before i understood what was going. for your vision for the url for months for us one of the most sensitive areas of facebook's content rule book is the section on graphic violence just you

know a good. look at it it's a feel good stuff and so i go over the books. we have our three options we have are no more there's no option taken to lease a ruger from facebook our mark of the service is restrictions on place of you're going to see the current dose of how it is presented its when content is marked as disturbing a warning is added to make the content viewable users must click on this warning under eighteen should not be able to view the com send but it remains on the site and freely available to anyone claiming to be over eighteen a video or so one volume is not necessarily going to get thirty forty one of your markets to buy so right one just could as well let the policy of money stays for the basic birth of a few. critical items so large i'm going to respond and consider for most of.

it's been dissolved the. videos of people who don't do not show but a newbies who just marcie through and through the book and still share them like raise awareness and work. so that was part of. next on the see this show weeks this is video is a short child abuse others find on one of. the repeated it can be easier for sloppy overshadowed by adults or i'm home alone and there are also the conflicting o'berg your call to move the boy audio or the coffee rotation or shooting or if it was too young to start by the wrists i goes right arms are not. always for one. course. it's.

you recognize those images and i feel as if you know. what video from they are from. that was sent to us from one of those supporters asking for help with a. sunday i am in boxes on this facebook page without i am asking for help because they saw i thought they'd seen and they were obviously it was scared they didn't want to call. saw initially see a little tiny boy it was about two or three on the video with a man talking to him which i not say. and then he was hit him and punched him

it was so him about and the newest stomping kid on him and then no piece of the video a cold saw. l.f. if noise and absolutely nothing not all from a sickening feeling that you've just you've seen some autonomy little boy. i mean you know you start from watching that video. not just go to. the noise. you are so he can get out your ass. you say and that's all you think about is a little y e m a we say in that way we say was happening to him you're full of idiots that. i am i did. and we received. messages back saying it didn't violate their terms and conditions. as it is our.

their life wasn't made. the grey area but it is so interesting to the mobster yeah because it's so obvious he is still technically on the on the go for the reporter asks another moderate so why he thinks some graphic content gets mocked is disturbing rather than deleted you know what they're raising is behind police or other uses. for all the years it's all for kids with warnings and. yeah i know it's awful so if you. think it should just be delayed and like i said. no cancel it. don't assume of censorship them ok if you start censoring to lose interest but it's all a bit insulting to read what is going to work. in the first two days after it was

posted on facebook the video of the little boy being beaten was shared more than forty four thousand times. from facebook point of view this is essentially. you know the crack cocaine of their of their products right it's the really extreme really dangerous form of content that. attracts the most highly engaged people on the platform. facebook understood that it was desirable to have people spend more time on site if you're going to have an advertising based business you need them to see the ads he wants his site what facebook has learned is that the people on the extremes of the really valuable. because one person on either extreme can often provoke fifty or one hundred other people and so they will live as much extreme content as they can get. we put the results of our investigation to facebook's vice presidents of global

policy. shocking contents does not make us more money it's just a misunderstanding of how the system works shocking consensually keeps people on facebook that means it's more likely that they will view advertising that makes you money that's why shocking content is good for facebook again i don't that's not our experience of the people he's also his around the world there is a minority who are prepared to abuse our systems and other internet platforms to share the most offensive kind of material by just don't agree that that is the experience that most people want and that's not the experience we're trying to deliver. there's no thousand as a couple of other options on that page so that with that we have is looking to see if you can find any. kevin and if. i've been going around for a while with no idea where to go with ace and if you porter facebook not saw a scene with their three of his just say to try and find out some information on the

video and to tell you i say. all boston be dark blue discovered we don't know or like. people be we drove. through yes but there's nothing all you got to do our policies will know you're always a jerk.