had been missing for decades before it was found any last year. it was discovered in an old shoe box dress is said to be in good condition pot from a small hole in the back, and suspected to fetch up to $1200000.00. phantom has launched to a new attraction for tourists with a head for height. it is the world's longest glass bottomed bridge policy in a 526 meter structure in glen dawn in china. the glass was in bridge in the northwest. some la province can support up to 450 people at a time or given them a spectacular view with the last jungle far below. ah, or, and it's a quick update headlines here in algebra. and frances increases military and humanitarian aid to ukraine. president for them as events key has accused russia of trying to wipe out all life in the east and don bass region as moscow intensifies its offensive. yeah, funeral has been held for palestinian men killed by israeli forces in the occupied

west bank. the palestinian health ministry said he was shot dead jury and railey army operation. as in, on friday, the estimates is ready forces have killed at least 40 palestinians since february, and israeli forces a searching for suspects who are accused of killing and is ready security guard in the occupied westbank. israeli military say that palestinian gunmen opened fire illegal aerial settlement and then fled to see the u. k. his end to minister to the british virgin islands for talks of the territories premier was arrested in the u. s. andrew, for he and a port official, a facing drug trafficking, a money laundering charges. a new report has called for the u. k. to re impose direct rule. hundreds of haitians are protested against gang violence and killed these 20 people this week. crowds shouted insults that the government and the police control of parts of the capital would have print. ecuador president is declared to the state of emergency in response to an increase in drug gang violence

. 9000 police officers and soldiers have been deployed to 3 coastal problems is more than 1200 people have been killed in gang related violence. or since january the governor of kansas in the united states is declared a state of emergency after tornadoes cause destruction a fair and neighboring nebraska a twister in the which the area of kansas swept through suburbs, destroying homes and businesses. no casualties have been reported. electricity blackouts, so threatened in india, color reserves are running out of power stations as everyone tries to keep cool, dream heat wave government canceled 600 passenger train services to prioritize fuel shipments to power stations. david look downs in china. have helped cause a factory output to fall to a 2 year low manufacturing slade sharply in april, raising concerns about the world's 2nd largest economy and disruptions to level

supply chains. headlines. more news coming up right after upfront frank assessments. what are the political risks of panic? russian oil gas for western leaders, pull sanctions on russian energy exports. us a recipe for such informed opinions. france is not abandoning to fight against jedi still resumed the area, going to be acting from nisha and from chad critical debate. could china actually help in russia's invasion of ukraine in depth analysis of the days global headlines inside story on al jazeera, in 1971, a military analyst by the name of daniel ellsberg leaked to the press. a 7000 page top secret pentagon study and covering years of official lies about u. s. military involvement in the vietnam war. the leak documents known as the pentagon papers were instrumental in exposing the scope and strategy behind the u. s. is war in the region, in many, at the time, believed that they could change how the world viewed war decades later as conflicts

rage on and ukraine, yemen in ethiopia, just to name a few. the decision making process behind wars remains as murky. is that what we do know is that billions of dollars is spent on weapons and defense contracts every year, making conflict incredibly profitable results. so who benefits from war? and who are the biggest players behind the war machine? and up front special with daniel ellsberg. daniel ellsberg, thank you so much for joining me on up front. thank you for having a large part of your life's work. has been committed to not only raising awareness about the dangers of nuclear weapons, but also the money behind them in $20.00. 20 is the pandemic raged the 9 nuclear weapons. states collectively spent an estimated $72000000000.00 on nuclear weapons . and we're now living in a time when the danger of nuclear war, of course, has spite. where does this leave the movement for nuclear disarmament given how

much money is that play? and all of this is kept us from having any real effect on reducing the danger of nuclear war all these years. i'm over was quite effective in helping stock a above ground testing and even the underground testing eventually. but in other respects i, it really hasn't been very effective. and i don't think the movement was as conscious as it should be of the money behind judging the effect that had on congress. they really acted as so. it was just a question, what people watch which was tool void nuclear war, or rob, ah, just political, strategic aspects of it is not needed. it's dangerous and so forth. but it came very little attention to the role of companies like allowing lockheed gracie on general dynamics. and just the as if far they really weren't effective. it's like

talking about climate without talking about the exxon corporation or shell or chevron. and actually that is the weight climate is talked about pretty much we just don't fish fact that we are facing a large flows of money directed at keeping the status quo, which is the status quo of extreme nuclear danger, especially in times of crisis like this. and of climate movement toward an abyss. basically the end of our current civilization are great. we shuffling with people around the world and talk about the threat of nuclear war in this abyss that we're headed toward. and that's certainly a piece of another piece of it. is war in armed conflict. it's taking place right now is plaguing multiple countries. you can see that ukraine, you, that yemen, you got some malia, you got the ethiopia list goes on. but behind wars like that are a weapons industry that you just alluded to that was worth $531000000000.00

worldwide in 2020. and as of this recording, while the basin of ukraine intensifies the stock prices, general dynamics like he martin, as you mentioned, northrop grumman, arethia, and they recently hit their 5 year hive. so as we talk about war, we also have who benefits from war? can you help me unpack that a little bit? who's really benefited? is the old earth, latin silken coolly bono, who benefits are going all the way back when you can name? let's just go in the last century world war one. the loans by j. p. morgan to the british for arms, for the british, it had to deal or even had lost the war to some extent, j. p. morgan would have gone bankrupt and wilson, our president, could not allow that to happen. that would have been a financial disaster. and that goes on from there on, in particular whoa, whoa, who benefited from vietnam? going on as long as it did?

or if kind of stand right now, the war that we're supporting in yemen through arms, just show to review a, keeping it actually genocidal war going on, or enormous massacre. and i think with very little benefit except to the arms manufacturers. people ask, why don't we learn from our failures in vietnam and afghanistan and elsewhere? and the answer is, who has a listen to learn? those wars were very profitable for the people you name for lockheed raytheon knows will come in and the others are. they have anything to learn. i'm afraid that right now, there's 2 major purposes that will keep the war that can keep the war and ukraine going. as long as the war in afghanistan, not in the way that is being waged now. but by a kind of guerrilla, we're that we're supporting that we support, as we did against the soviets in afghanistan for 10 years. and the f ukrainian

people would be ground to bits in the course of that as the afghans were. and yet it's very comfortable for people who are supplying those weapons and keep going. there is one other major motives that affix these things in particular in europe. and that is that r u. s. role in europe who are not after all, a european nation. and we have no particular rule in a european union, but in nato, that's as the mafia says. cosa nostra our thing. we control nato pretty much, and nato gives us an excuse and a reason to sell enormous amounts of arms to now to the formerly warsaw pact, nations which had only 2nd raid or obviously soviet weapons altogether. from the moment that the berlin wall came down, lockheed representatives were in warsaw showing them on a need for f,

20 two's and for other weapons right there. against who as the russians are reasonably asked, actually, russia is an indispensable enemy in europe. and nothing else can rancho, it's the same noble enemy that if that's that fascinating language, break that down for me, the, an indispensable. and what does that mean? it means that you can't really justify new trident submarines or i she be amg that northrop grumman is making a whole new life she via against ian or isis or i. l. cater ah, nature stoked cutters. as rationale for multi 1000000000 now dollar arms budget. only russia has to target any sophisticated arms to fight against. you don't need advance 5th generation fighters against people who don't have any aircraft or fighters of their own, or sophisticated ones. but russia and now china and for the future in particular,

to offer noxious arrival or a competitor, but shown who could be painted as an enemy against whom you have to defend. and of course, put now in the last shoe once has just been a bonanza for the armed people. because last you've made a russia look, an offensive o enemy of some kind. who has to be defended against with the latest weapons, with new weapons. and of course, russia has its military industrial complex to maintenance fast. they remind me of the black arts poet, gills got herons that everybody loves peace. the problem is you can't make no money off of it. you know, in the past few months, more than 5600000000 dollars has been poured into ukraine in the form of military aid from the u. s. from the u. k. and from the e. u. we seen similar situations in the past when u. s. arms were used by libyan in syrian opposition groups. but what happens when

those conflicts are over or seemingly over? oh, where did the weapons go? iraq church, it's a long time before these contracts are over. as you know, in afghan, a santa went on for 20 years, and it could good much longer. in libya, what we did was supply a lot of weapons to people who in turn. so some 2 other insurgencies of the m terrors groups and others throughout africa. and elsewhere, and of course, our efforts in afghanistan armed in effect against the soviets isis, or i'll should say al cater and then later isis. so he things have low back effects . ah, heaping in my a didn't these amps industry. so it would be wrong to say they didn't invade ukraine. cooking did that. however, they, in their people, they were inferencing in the government, were willing to risk

a war like this coming from their policies, which were attract provocative in terms of making it likely that the russians, any russian leader would eventually react against it. however, illegally crushed as we reacted with khrushchev put missiles in cuba. jewish retires, and those missiles did not, in fact threaten our security. and i say that as someone who was looking at precisely a problem in the pentagon, at that time working for his mcnamara said, hey, it's not a security problem, missiles into what? it's a political problem. critical, good. i mean, this is somewhat at this stage, foreseeable, right, i mean, after thing, what happens in syria with thing, what happens in libby or we, as you've done, we could go back decade prior. the weapons end up in the hands of folks who as physically we wouldn't want to have them. and yet we continue either to fund them directly or by proxy. so i guess the question for me is,

why do we allow it to happen in ultimately? what happens, it is what, what kind of considerations given to what happens to these weapon? well, it comes down to who the we is that we're talking about. i, it's not just, it's not a century, the taxpayers or the citizens who are, by the way, regrettably willing to, she had deaths of others who don't look like us. ukraine is getting much concern about the casualties in the war crimes because it is not a brown muslims that are being a victim, i'm sure, but by the russians in this case. but it's white christians and that they're like us and to see them in such anguish. inter that creates a public pressure that i wasn't there before, but in all of these other cases and so should, oh, what's the problem? we hear that matters. the ones that provide the large campaign contributions and they provide the personnel at higher levels. and these ranks benefit fine from them

. there's no problem. i may not be very successful, but he failing war is just as profitable as a winning one. in fact, in someplace better cause it goes on forever. as you say, the winning is over tree with when you say the libby is it is the prime example i where and you could say to some extent, afghanistan where the weapons fanned out to other people had provided opponents to an adversaries. but is that bad? multiple adversaries are also good for the military industrial complex, not only in our country and in europe as well. it's not only americans who sold these weapons, though it is mainly these oversee the french, the others. and the russians have big arms markets in the world. according to the institute for policy studies last year,

the average american taxpayer gave about $2000.00 to the military with over $900.00 going to corporate military contractors. in contrast, the average taxpayer contributed about $27.00 to the centers for disease control, prevention and barely $5.00 to renewable energy. how do you advocate for peace when so much taxpayer money is going to will call it. the 5th republicans in particular, are very resistant. to spending on social welfare or of any kind for people or anything that in any way seems to compete with private industry. the one thing you can get republicans to budget money for is allegedly national security. even though almost none of these weapons actually add or even

relevant to our national security, but they are relevant to making threats against russian. you need russia later, china will be a good enough militarily to serve that purpose of the necessary, the indispensable enemy. but now it was hard to keep the cold were going fully at full speed with russia as an enemy in the ninety's and the reports of the century. so now it's back and was back before the attack on russia. but now kootenai has fit into that. in a way that i think was not unwelcome to our military industry. if they didn't actually wanted. i'm sure they could even count on russia actually invading another country, but to have russia objecting and complaining and posing and threatening to invade, as he did a whole year ago with, with, with troops on the edge of ukraine in belarus. all that was good for

business and it doesn't, by the way, it doesn't justify putin's aggression at all. he's did to have reason to feel in the longer run threatened russian security in terms of weapons so close to their borders, like the weapons in cuba that we objected to. kennedy had no rigid increase in sugar threatening to adventure on that. and russia has had no legitimate recently for grading craig, like tar, nevertheless, we've pursued a policy that was warmed against. going back to the mid ninety's by george cameron over c founder was a cold war. and trish, who should issue an indescribable error blunder. mistake try to make an enemy out of russia by moving especially into ukraine of some of the u. s. as top spies and military generals with ties and defense contractors end up

as intelligence analysts on various news channels when they retire. for example, former c, i a director john brennan became embassies senior national security and intelligence analysts. as you say, connecticut with what you're going to say. and former c i a director michael hayden became a national security analyst for c and n a. how much does this compromise what the public is told about war? what else, what the stake? well, it depends which you think the purpose of the functions that really is in times of war in our military society. their function pretty much is true. so the public on the need for more weapons and the need to intervene in this country are media is ultimately controlled by major corporations like general electric, ah, for a long time. and jo, many other conglomerates basically themselves recognize for consist of big business. and as a war is good business for the media and joe,

for the administration, even when it's failing. so hoof sure. i'm answering your question. it's natural for them to hire these people if their message is to get propaganda out, who better to do it? and he's military or the she a people, if you want, endless war, which in effect, the wish has wanted. so this, so then what happens, right? what happens when citizens are only told the truth about war after the war's are over, after government information is leaked after information is the classified. it seems like we only get this under extreme and unforeseeable circumstances and the people were trying to conceal it. so what does it mean for us? well, the kinds of information that we needed to blood vietnam was represented by such as the pentagon papers, which was a study of vietnam decision making from 45 to 6768.

i put that out 1st starting in 69 and then through the newspapers in 71. so that was somewhat belated, but not too long. but i put on trial for a possible 115 years in prison. so down quite a few people, i didn't see any other big leech like that for 39 years until chelsea manning put out hundreds of thousands of files on his canister. and in iraq. and she spent 7 and a half years in prison. ed snowden, for his revelations, essential revelations of criminality. why the national security agency, the universal surveillance, not only in our country but around the world, but where it wasn't so illegal, but definitely against a constitution in america. and so essentially a lifetime exile. so these people and daniel haile revealed the drone program or

they did what they should have done just as i think i did what i should have done, but everyone has paid a penalty. very heavy penalty nodded my chase nixon actually committed so many crimes which happened amazingly, almost miraculously to become revealed. toward the end of my trial, i kept me from having to go to prison as he had intended, with the others and say either exile or prison. and that discourages you mentioned is healthy man and he of course leaked information through with you leaks. and now it looks like we can, the found drilling a size is being extradited to the united states and weekly published, of course classified information including document. it's both in u. s. war crimes in iraq and afghanistan. and publishers were integral to the information that you liked about the vietnam war. so i'm curious from your perspective, what happens if that president that you spoke to is said that allows governments to

dictate what can and can't be published? well, if i may put it this way, it threatens to create a new, as chris is not distinguishable from russia today with julian, a sorry, ah extradited if he hasn't yet been expedited, but it was expedited and prosecuted, convicted here. we will have had the 1st instance of an actual journalist i hadn't been in prison for putting out the truth. i was the 1st source, former official, ah, to give information like that to join wish and i was put on trial for it. but no journalist is here, we're going put on trout, thanks to our 1st amendment, freedom of the press and present speech, which most countries don't have as the law or a. it will be essentially rescinded. if julian massage has successfully prosecuted. and we will then approach the state control of information such as

we're seeing in russia today. all of these cases of course, demonstrate the importance of exposing the truth about what's happening when it comes to war in other matters. and of course, your leaking of the pentagon papers is a prime example of that. but today, we have an expansion, arise even of this information and it's hard to decipher what's true, what's not, what's fact, what's fiction? how important is it to have actual transparency when it comes to government actions and government decisions about war? i'm afraid that transparency and war are 2 words don't really go to each other. they don't exist together. in war time, the secrecy that the government carries on all the time about his own crimes and lies in misleading statements in bad predictions and reckless actions. that secrecy

is certainly legitimized in war because you have to keep it from an enemy. that's one of the senses in which i said at least, are indispensable, especially as it's a long term, once in a, in a cold war, we have to keep things from russians altogether. so you don't, you don't pick transparency. and when people do come out, there's 2 native it, they do get prosecutor and it's coming out of the sick. part of it, which is very dismaying, is nothing much happens. it may affect public opinion to some extent good public. the thing doesn't try policy or whether a war can be ended or not. i hoped it would. in fact, in my case, nixon was so concerned that i might put out his secrets, which i did have, but i didn't have documents to prove it. but he thought i had documents into shut me up. he did domestic crimes against an american me,

which actually figured far more politically in the millions of other people we were killing in vietnam that a crime against an american counted more. unfortunately, when these things have come out, i have to say not much has changed. so there's a problem with the audience, with the citizenry. you could say with our species. and i actually, i do say that our willingness to support unquestioningly a leader, especially when he or occasionally she can point to when he's threatening their security. and she has to set down public information about it in order to people go along with that pretty well. and when they find out that not too many of our own soldiers are getting killed, as if canis, then they let it go on indefinitely. as chance them was 20 years. ukraine. i think

if it, if it devolved down, if the russians came in, war didn't get out, which i don't expect them to do wish. and others will be supporting a guerrilla war, which could be his cost route to the ukrainians. as the guerrilla war that the lucia dean put up, that we supplied against the soviets in afghanistan, that costs a 1000000 and a half afghan lives. and i would hate to see that imposed on the ukrainian people when under any circumstances. i've been through a war like that in vietnam. and i saw what we did to in search. and in the way of, i'm pushed several 1000000 lives that has not yet been the price in afghanistan, no matter what, what we're hearing about or crimes which it will could be so and negotiated outcome in which concessions are made on both sides. however, unsatisfactory might look to many people on both sides,

could save hundreds of thousands to millions of lives. and i would like to see that happen. i don't think it will know. i don't think it will. wow. and on that sobering note, i want to thank you for your time, daniel ellsberg. thank you for joining us on. thank you. all right, everybody that is our show up front will be back with may analysis, era frontline reporting an in depth analysis. we bring you the latest on the ukraine war on the unfolding, humanitarian crisis documentary, but inspire whitney springs world issues into focus through compelling human stories. the philippines votes and one of asia biggest election over 35 years since the country emerged from his father's dictatorship. could frontrunner for dinner,

mark was junior to take the top spot al jazeera investigative program full blind for time, with a special theories on abuse in the boy scouts of america, lebanon goes to the polls, but will political change help the country find its way out of its crippling economic crisis may on al jazeera when the war on ukraine commenced. people in power reached out to inhabitants of hockey. the nations 2nd city, less than 40 miles from the russian border. as the carnage on falls, a handful of civilians document their experiences as they tried to survive and maintain some normality in a reality. turn upside down. a rare glimpse of life under the bonds ukraine. a city under siege on a just either i will cover all of latin america for most of my career, but no country is alike, and it's my job to shed light on how and why natural capital is capital,

which nature created no rush when nature is transformed into a commodity big business takes a new interest by landscapes protecting landscapes. it's a phenomenal opportunity to be able to use a business model to achieve sustainability of nature. but at what risk banks, of course, don't do that because they have at the heart protection of nature. they do that because to see a business in pricing the planets on al jazeera. ah, this is al jazeera ah, hello, i am emily angry. this is the news, our live from doha. coming up in the next 60 minutes, france promises more military aid to ukraine, while president vladimir lens. he says, his forces are in the fight of their lives. israeli forces search for suspects

after the killing of an israeli security guard in the occupied west bank. the premier.