-- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com we ran out of time for "the ridiculist." that does it for us. we'll be back in an hour from now. "piers morgan live" starts now. this is "piers morgan live." welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. tonight, the white house and capitol hill grapple with the stakes in syria. nobody has forgot the war in iraq and the catastrophic aftermath. will president obama strike syria? and what will be the cost to this country? i'll talk to sen tar john mccain.

he said strikes now will be too little too late and the tragic toll of chemical weapons. dr. sanjay gupta, and the interview many are talking about. what james dimaggio's sister told me about hanna anderson. >> the hanna anderson that i saw a few nights ago on tv is certainly not the girl that stayed in my home three weeks prior to them disappearing. >> tonight, i'll talk to drew about what he thinks of her shocking claims. i want to begin with the big story tonight. a report from jim acosta. >> briefed congressional leaders and key committee members this evening because the briefing was on a non-secure conference call, the information was unclassified. the lawmakers are saying administration said there is no doubt officials were responsible for last week's chemical weapons attack. one lawmaker told cnn they were

told about intercepted communications from a high level syrian official, which clearly indicates they were responsible for these weapons, and the briefing did touch on the vote in british parliament today against a strike on syria in response to that vote in britain. a senior u.s. official tells cnn it may be necessary now for president obama to take unilateral action against syria. that official telling cnn we care what they think. we value the process, but we're going to make the decision that we need to make. that comment echoes what a white house spokesman said earlier today before the vote in britain. >> part of my answer that's important for you and your viewers to understand, the president of the united states is elected with the duty to protect the national security interest of the united states of america and the decision he makes about the decisions that he makes about our foreign

policy is with our national security interest front and center. >> now, the white house national security staff put out a statement this evening saying the president will continue to consult with u.s. allies but there is no mention the u.s. will go along with international partners. the next step comes when administration releases it's intelligence report on the chemical weapons attack to the public. the white house has hinted the president may make another statement on syria and presumably a window for action opens up this weekend when u.n. inspectors are scheduled to leave syria, but the u.s. appears to be ready to move before any further action at the ump u.n. they want to send a signal not just to syria but the world about the use of chemical weapons, piers. >> thanks very much, indeed. joining me now is senator john mccain. senator, thank you for joining me. why are you so credit kill of the president's actions so far

in reaction to syria? >> well, first of all, we have watched syria evolve into one of the great humanitarian tragedies in recent history. there is 100,000 dead, a million now, children, refugees, it's the conflict has spread to jordan, to lebanon, iraq is now in chaos and resurrected al qaeda base, 5,000 hasballah are fighting. daily flights of weapons flying in and russian aircraft into damascus in an unfair fight and numerous instances of the use of chemical weapons, the latest being the largest. >> i want to play you a clip from the british prime minister david cameron today in the uk.

listen to what he said. >> i am deeply mindful of the lessons of previous conflicts and in particular the deep concerns in the country caused by what went wrong with the iraq conflict in 2003 but this is not like iraq. it is not about taking sides in the syrian conflict. it is not about invading. it is not about regime change or even working more closely with the opposition. it is about the large scale use of chemical weapons and our response to a war crime, nothing else. >> now the reason david cameron got so much pressure in britain is because of what happened in iraq where the british people felt misled by tony blare and his government and supposed weapons of mass destruction. one of the biggest problems president obama's administration faces is the dis trust from american people on intelligence that says assad has used

chemical weapons. how do you get around that? >> first of all, i think it's understandable americans are skeptical and scenical and that's why the actions we should have been taking and should be taking have to be explained to the american people and consequences of wide-spread regional conflict in the middle east. i can remember the debate over dessert storm, cow sew voe and did what we needed to do to stop gin side. american people need to be explained why it's necessary for us not to have a single american boot on the ground, which is critical to them, but why we need to give them the weapons they need. we need to neutralize the air of bizarre al ashar al-assad, whic

way is flying in weapons. we need a safe zone. none of it requires american participation. the united states has not given a single gun weapon to the free syrian army. they only gave them mres about to expire. plane loads every day are flying into the airport in damascus with tanks and air and every kind of a weapon you can imagine. it's an unfair fight, piers. >> part of the problem, i think, president obama faces is he set his criteria having said repeatedly he thinks assad should go and look, the red line for me is the use of chemical weapons and now he says he as to act to chemical weapons usage even though there isn't the public evidence that assad directly ordered it, even though many suspect he has but having got to his own red line, he now

has to do something. many people say that put him into a difficult position in terms of leadership. >> i think it's put him into a very difficult and contradictory position because this wasn't the first time that bashar al-assad crossed the red line. there are some allegations it was as many as 30 times, absolutely as many as ten and there is no doubt this is chemical weapons. come on. does anybody really believe that those aren't chemical weapons, those bodies of those children stacked up? and so that is just a fa sod and the other rational is that they may be over taken by. they are no more extremist than you and i are. they are fighting for freedom, and we should be helping them

obtain the goal of freeing themselves from one of the most brutal dictators in history. 100,000 people killed, a million children -- let me just mention one thing. i was in jordan in a ref gee camp. a woman was taking me around who was a schoolteacher. she said to me, all these children, she said see these children senator mccain? i said yes, i do. they will take revenge on those people who refuse to help them. there is no policy, no stroateg and until we get one, you'll see this kind of confusion and to announce that any action we take would not be regime change to me is incomprehensible. >> but would you, if you were president, ignore the u.n., ignore international corporation and just do it? >> would you ignore the stacks of dead bodies without a mark on

them? would you ignore that it's already been established that as many as ten times at least and as many as 30 where chemical weapons have already been used? there is no doubt about that. is there any doubt -- >> can you be 100% sure -- >> absolutely. >> no, no -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> of course, i can. here is why i can because we know he's already used them, so why wouldn't he use them again? only in larger quantities. >> i am more playing devil's advocate -- >> sure. >> than disagreeing with you personally -- >> let me toss -- >> let me ask you this question -- >> yeah. >> i want to ask you one question. >> go ahead. >> how can you be 100% sure on the evidence that we've seen that it wasn't a rogue element of the rebels deliberately letting off chemical weapons to lure americans into a trap? that's an argument some people are putting forward. >> pigs fly. some people put that forward.

the rebels don't have those weapons. they don't have the chemical weapons. so how could -- and there is ample evidence that is going to be forthcoming. but the difference between this, here is the bodies stocked up, okay, and the ample evidence. in iraq, there was no -- there was no evidence of concrete evidence of weapons of mass destruction when our secretary of state went to the united nations security counsel and told the world there was. this is vastly different situation than iraq. and look, if they want to wait three or four days and get the u.n. absolute augthentic case ad bodies of children stacked up are nothing but the victim of chemical weapons and it has to be done by bizarre assad. there is no other logic. >> finally, senator, you're obviously going further than

many saying look, it's not just about targeting a few military bases or whatever in retaliation for chemical weapons, you would like to see america take a forceful roll in aiding the rebels to over throw assad. is that the position you take? >> i've only taken it for two years. it's very well-known and the situation has deteruated and the numbers and the tragedies that i just described to you have taken place. it started out as a demonstrations and then to what was clearly an advantage on the side of the free syrian army until we had to have thousands of hasballah, the weapons coming in from iraq, the iranian revolutionary guard on the ground and this turned into a region conflict and proxy war to some degree. >> senator mccain, it's always good to talk to you. thank you very much indeed for joining the show tonight. >> thank you, my friend. i imp size again, no american boots on the ground nor any american aircraft in danger.

we can do it. thanks. >> senator. thank you, as always. i want to bring in president obama's former national security advice sore. general jones. you obviously heard senator mccain forthright and to be fair he's been saying the same thing for a couple years now. what is your reaction? >> well, i think that we do have a situation that calls for some very, very serious consideration for our options. we know that weapons of mass destruction have been used and in this case chemical weapons. we know that we're pretty sure that you can tie it directly to the assad regime. we know our president has take an very declarative position, and i think a proper one to say this is unacceptable and we're considering the range of options we have to respond to that. so on the one hand, if you do decide to take military action in response, you have to

consider the range of consequences of that action. some people will talk about mission creep. some people will talk about a retaliation on the part of perhaps the assad regime against israel. we have -- >> let me ask you general, let me ask you general, if president assad as many believe unleashed chemical weapons against the syrian people and the rebels over throwing him. if america enter seeds now in any way, it will be seen clearly as aiding the rebels against assad, therefore taking a position in a civil war and many people in america say look, we've been down this road before in iraq, afghanistan, libya, almost everywhere. is it america's place anywhere in the modern world now to be getting involved in other country's civil wars? >> well, i think it's america's place to show leadership in

resolving some very, very difficult and dangerous situations, and you do that in a number of ways and one is, i think, by consulting with friends and allies by letting the united nations efforts run their course, by talking to the north atlantic treaty organization, listening to the arab league. on this level, as senator mccain pointed out, this is really an aggravated situation where assad, presumably assad unleashed one of the four weapons that are untouchable in terms of acceptable on use, and that's nuclear chemical, biological and raid logical weapons. so you have people watching in the region. you have friends and foes alike. the strategic consequences of sending the wrong message to assad and iran would be

certainly part of the envelope here. so i think you have to ask yourself, what are the consequences of taking action, but maybe the more important question is what are the consequences if you take no action? and if you take no action, you're inviting more of the same, and you're sending them precisely the wrong message to our other antagonists in the region building a nuclear capacity and that's iran. i think there is a range of options we should consider in audition to a military strike that would include perhaps considering taking a chunk of syrian territory north and maybe the south to establish the kind of provide comfort to scenario where we would also aid this humanitari humanitarian. this is military doable. ideally it would be done by a

coalition of perhaps nato, but this is something that i think would send a strong message, not only to assad that there are consequences for these actions and part of the consequences are that you'll lose a piece of your land and we'll conduct humanitarian operations for refugees out of your territory. so the strategic -- the tactical response of a military strike is one thing. the tactical response can have strategic consequences and i'm sure that's what everybody is thinking about now. >> general jones, thank you very much indeed. >> you're welcome. with a strike in syria, a mixed message, both sides of that question when we come back. ♪

nascar is about excitement. but tracking all the action and hearing everything from our marketing partners, the media and millions of fans on social media can be a challenge. that's why we partnered with hp to build the new nascar fan and media engagement center. hp's technology helps us turn millions of tweets, posts and stories into real-time business insights that help nascar win with our fans.

so the strategic -- the tactical mixed message, both sides of

their control over chemical weapons may erode, where they are alied to known terrorist organizations that in the past targeted the united states. then there is a prospect, a possibility in which chemical weapons that can have devastating effects could be directed at us. >> president obama talking to the pbs news hour and suggesting any chemical weapons in syria might be turned against this country. is that a real possibility? joining me is george w. bush's security advisor and the former

u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and book author. welcome to both of you. bill richardson, how damaging is it potentially to president obama and his plans for military action in syria that the british government and british prime minister david cameron suffered a defeat in parliament with a clear will from the british people and many members of parliament not to take military action in syria? >> i think the president has to be very careful, and he is being careful. only 25% of the american people support military action in syria. secondly, we have to avoid the iraq war where there are no weapons of mass destruction so you have to have proof. thirdly, the president has to get a broad international coalition, other wise he hands a propaganda victory and assad can

say very few countries support the united states with a strike. so i think he has to be deliberate on the military side that the strikes work to our advantage and to find ways to arm the rebels and destroy the command and control centers but at the u.n., too, i think even though the russians would veto the military action, we can try to get for instance a ban on arm shipments that bring in chemical weapons. we could try to send assad to the international court. i think the president is pursuing a delicate deliberate path saying that we probably are going to use these military air strikes, but he's got to take all these fact tomorrows into consideration. the worst thing we can do is go in without a plan, without a strategy, without an effort to really detour assad and his continuation of these war crimes. >> general hayden, the problem

is, nobody is quite sure what the plan is, and president obama hasn't committed to what the plan may be and that plan may have to dramatically change if british forces will not be involved and that sets a bandwagon running around, say, the french and other international forces to say, look, we can't take part in this. would america consider unilateral military action and how risky is that to america's interest interest? >> president obama made this for the jiets aunited states and fo himself, frankly a year ago. i can't conceive he would back down from a very serious course of action in which these actions have serious consequences. with regard to the capacity to conduct the attack, it would be good politically to have other

nations join us but in terms of raw military power, the united states has sufficient strength to do that. >> that is true robin wright but is it sensible for the americans to act unilaterally in this case because i imagine president obama didn't expect the british not to join him. that will be the case. where does this leave him po politically and what do you think is the sensible course of action? >> hope that france, britain, turkey and maybe some arab countries would be willing to go along with the united states in terms of what it does both military and in backing it to give it credibility and the fact that the british who have been allies of the united states for so long and so many of our military operations may not be part of it. this is not over. the u.n. weapons inspectors are there until saturday in damascus taking a look at what happened. they will bring out samples, intelligence and this may give a new body of evidence that will allow the british government to

go back to parliament and try once more to get using milder language but some kind of vote of support, and that will be cred critical of the administration bizarre al ashar al-assad, will make him feel better because this will be unpopular in the arab world and he'll think that this shows that he's cracked not -- it may not only crack the sent the in the arab world but also in the western world. >> this is one of the problems, isn't it? again, i come back to what this mission is. i think president obama has to be extremely clear what evidence he's acting on and what action he intends to take because this is a president who said assad has to go. he's saying it's not about regime change, which is confusing in itself. do you just target military bases? how effective would that be if

it's a riddle wrap on the knuckles? it might have the complete opposite effect. >> well, this is why you have to have the military air strikes have a specific purpose. i think this is what the administration is trying to do, destroy the command and control centers, find ways that weapons can get to the rebels successfully. ensure, for instance, that these military sites that contain some of the chemical weapons are destroyed. so that has to happen but i think at the same time, the president has to be conscious, also, we haven't mentioned congress. there have been to be consultations with the congress with the house and senate. the house and senate are probably not coming back from their recess for another ten days. so the shift here, the use of military air strikes building an international coalition, the objective is to shift the military momentum away from assad who has the military

momentum now but to say that assad is in good shape now with the international condemnations, with the arab league taking a strong position against him, with the saudi's, france is strong. what is key is yes, the weapons inspect tomorrows from the u.n. find samples, that they interview witnesses and say evidence is happening to show there has been use of this violation of international norm. this is app war crime. you can take military action based on a war crime and i believe this is what will happen. the president has to be deliberate. he has a lot of challenges and pressure on him, but i think you want to get your ducks in a row, and those ducks aren't in a row yet. >> general hayden, just quickly, if you don't mind, urging that america get involved in aiding and abetting the rebels to over

throw assad, how dangerous would that be? >> it's dangerous and respond appropriately to what assad has done with chemical weapons. with regard to the larger task, piers, my rule of thumb here on this one right now is go big or go home. this can't be done by just putting our thumb on the scale and hoping for the best. if you want to do what the senator is recommending, it would require a major effort and sustained effort on the part of the united states. >> robin wright, again, briefly, if you don't mind, if you were president obama, what do you do and how soon do you do it? >> well, this is the problem, i mean, he's going to the g 20 group of industrialized nations leaving tuesday night and so, clearly, he's trying to either act before this happens, sunday, monday, perhaps after the u.n. and weapons inspectors come out or another vote in parliament or wait until after he gets back and consultations.

i think policy is faced real setbacks over the last 24 hours. >> bill, final word. >> piers, what i would say is critical is the president face-to-face with president putin. if he can convince putin to at least be flexible on a u.n. resolution with force or arm shipments, that has to be key and that chemistry between the two needs to be improved. that relationship at the g 20, a side bar discussion that would be frank and tough i think is essential here. >> governor richardson, general hayden and ms. wright, thank you very much indeed. 1,300 people were killed in last week's cheap kimical attac. dr. sanjay gupta tells me why those weapons are so deadly. [ tires screech ]

[ beeping ] ♪ [ male announcer ] we don't just certify our pre-owned vehicles. we inspect, analyze and recondition each one,

until it's nothing short of a genuine certified pre-owned... mercedes-benz for the next new owner. ♪ hurry in to your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for 1.99% financing during our certified pre-owned sales event through september 3rd.

the syrian regime has been condemned but president obama but graphic disturbing images like these that you may find hard to watch of children dying. what exactly is the use of chemical weapons so chilling? joining me with the facts is chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta. let's talk about chemical weapons. what are chemical weapons? what makes them so disaster rous? why do we fear them so much? >> chemical weapons, there is so many different types but in this case you're right we're talking about something particularly chilling, neuro toxic agents and

siren, the most toxic is what they suspect it is. they can test for it easily, piers. they have been talking about the inspections going on. you can test for it in the patients but the surroundings and it stays in the soil for a long time. just a fraction of an ounce of this stuff, piers, on your skin could be fatal and absorbed across the skin and on the lungs and across the eyes. it's grbad stuff. >> does it look like a seron attack or similar? >> it's tough to sometimes make conclusions from the video evidence alone, but hearing doctors descriptions of this in some camps and the doctors over the borders. think of it as turning all the machinery in the body on.

all the various, your nose, mouth, lungs, everything gets turned on and see the frothing of the mouth with fluid coming out of the lungs but throws the body into a state of convulses and people can have seizures which can be witnessed but the diaphragm, which allows someone to breathe. it it essentially starts to seize up. it's tasteless, odorless, you can't see it. you don't know until you get sick and it starts quickly and can degrade quickly, as well. >> and that, of course, is what makes it so much more dangerous than conventional warwarfare, y have warning, hear it, smell it. with this kind of attack, no warning, it's completely out of nowhere, right?

>> exactly right. i remember covering conflicts in the past where it was unclear, was there a concern about chemical weapons. you essentially, if you're worried, you protect yourself head to toe and wear certain masks. i brought a mask to show you. this is what a military grade mask would look like there is a respirator built into it and designed not only to inhibit what could be coming through into the lungs but also absorgs across the skin on the face. so, yes, absolutely and it's one of these things i think having again, been out there in these war zones, people worry about the most because of that just comes out of nowhere. >> and sanjay, we seen really chilling video of syrians making home made gas masks trying to protect themselves in case of further attacks. they are making them out of plastic containers, styrofoam, are any of these likely to be effective? are they sensible to try and do what they are doing?

>> no, and you know, piers, it's sad to watch that because i mean, people think they may think they are protecting themself in someway and it's sad because maybe that's the only thing that they have. they don't have access to the type of mask that i was showing you just now and not only does that not work, it probably is worse than nothing at all because it's difficult to breathe, it may offer a sense of false protection, you know, so they just don't work. and keep in mind, again, you talk about seron here, is something they can verify, whether it's been used. that can get into your body in all sorts of different ways. what you saw there doesn't do anything. >> and the reason this is all so important is there is two polls, support for u.s. action is it in the national interest, june 28th, july 28th. yes 27 percent, no 61%. this is a poll. in a cnn poll in may with proof of chemical weapons, would u.s.

action be justified. 66% yes, 31% no. so it's supported if it's proven. >> look, people talk about the line being crossed. you heard that language being used by lots of different people. the line here is the use of a weapon that is so indiscreme end and kills people within a short amount of time. look, by estimates 100,000 people killed by bombs and bullets in syria and those people -- people, their families have every reason to be outraged but this does seem to cross a particular line, and just as those images again you're showing, piers, so indiscriminate and grew zoom. they don't have a chance. >> thank you very much indeed. >> you got it, thank you. when we come back, i want to talk about the hanna anderson case. dr. drew pinsky breaks down some of the shocking things lora

dimaggio, the sister of the man that abducted hanna told me about her brother. all year long. and now there are endless ways to love it... from crispy to spicy to savory. [ man ] you cannot make a bad choice. [ male announcer ] red lobster's endless shrimp! as much as you like, any way you like! you can have your shrimp. and you can eat it, too. [ male announcer ] try our new soy wasabi grilled shrimp or classic garlic shrimp scampi. all just $15.99 for a limited time. it's gonna be a hit this year. [ male announcer ] red lobster's endless shrimp is now! we would never miss endless shrimp. [ male announcer ] but it won't last forever. so come and sea food differently. [ male announcer ] but it won't last forever. help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

[off screen] hthere you are. [speaking german] hi, grandpa! [off screen] give me a kiss! [speaking mandarin] what do you think? do you like it? [off screen] happy birthday! can you see that? [speaking polish] [off screen] did he apologize? [off screen] thanks, micah! [off screen] bye, guys. bye. see ya. oh my god! every day, more people connect face to face on the iphone than any other phone. i miss you.

car sales events.ng, and that means... and now there's a new way to buy: truecar. at truecar.com we'll show you... what others paid for the car you want, so you'll know if that sales price... is a great price. save time, save money, and never overpay. visit truecar.com

i remember very vividly telling my brother, she's -- she's trouble. she's going to -- she's -- i said you need to watch out for that one. she's trouble. >> calling hanna anderson trouble.

that's from my exclusive interview with lora dimaggio, the sister of james dimaggio. she said there is no proof he abducted her or murdered her mother and brother. i'll talk to dr. drew pin ski. dr. drew, welcome to the show again. good to have you. what do you make of this case, because it's very intriguing, it's complicated and this astonishing interview with james dimaggio's sister, i had no idea of what she was going to say. what do you think of what he said? >> i spoke to you once about this already and i'm telling you what, the fact that she is so intent on protecting her brother and doesn't contemplate an alternative view is troubling. most troubling is at the core of this we have a child, a teenager who may or may not have been provocati provocative. that's a sign that adults need

to maintain boundaries and assist that child in creating that acting out behavior. people have is this grave misconception that teens will be teens but the reality is teens are in trouble will begin to behave in these ways and that is precisely when adults need to step up and not get sucked in or not get gratified by any of their own issues which in this case the guy clearly did. >> let me play you a clip from hanna anderson's interview with nbc and what she said about her relationship with james dimaggio. >> the letters were from like a year ago when me and my mom weren't getting along well. me and him would talk about how to deal with it, and i would tell him how i felt about it, and he would help me through it. they weren't anything bad. >> yeah. >> you see, that would keyuate an impression, wouldn't it, if you looked at the bigger picture here of somebody who was probably groomed by james

dimaggio for some kind of relationship. >> that's right. >> is it possible, drew, if that's what was going on, that she may have gone voluntarily on this trip with him, completely ocho -- oblivious with what happen with the murder, tomorrow tour, fire? >> that's possible. people early in the course of this series of veevents were asking me, how is it a young 16-year-old could tolerate being abducted. for all she knew she was going on an outing with uncle jim, and the behavior she had engaged in, having been to malibu and hollywood. who knows what she thought was happening. the other issue is again, when she was spotted up in idaho by the former law enforcement officer on horseback, apparently, she muttered under her breathe, boy, we'll all be in trouble now having her

believe they were hiding out, that he got her to believe. >> i think either way, though, you hit it on the head earlier. she remains a girl who just turned 16 and remains a victim of this appalling crime -- >> piers, if i can interrupt. i say this all the time and i hope people can take, big people take care of little people. that's it. adults take care of minors. we are -- it's a sacred obligation and if they are vile, it by comes on us. >> interesting development today in the george zimmerman story, the man, of course, who shot trayvon martin but was acquitted of doing so with any malice. his wife shelley zimmerman pleaded guilty to perjury over a lesser matter involving that case and said this in the interview. let's watch this. >> i was staying at my father's house. we had gotten into an argument

the night before, and i left. >> pretty intriguing that we didn't know that until now, drew, george zimmerman's wife wasn't at home on the night he committed the crime. she was staying at the father's house. could that have affected george zimmerman's state of mind, is that a material piece of evidence. >> i don't know legally but certainly from behavioral psychological standpoint if he's in a heightened state of arousal because of a fight with his wife, he, i don't know that he would have been looking for trouble but may have been prone to find trouble where perhaps he wouldn't have on a different night. we don't have to use imagination too vividly to understand that someone feeling aggressive coming out of an unplease sent circumstance could have a heightened sense of alourousal get themself into a situation they might not have otherwise. >> fascinating. she said the marriage, there was

a lot of strain and hinting it may be in trouble. an interesting development we discover that the zimmermans were not together that night. let's move on after the break, drew, to the big issue in america right now, miley cyrus and twerking. i need to get your opinion. i feel like we haven't closed this matter until i heard from you. after the break. like carpools.. polly wants to know if we can pick her up. yeah, we can make room. yeah. [ male announcer ] ...office space. yes, we're loving this communal seating. it's great. [ male announcer ] the best thing to share? a data plan. at&t mobile share for business. one bucket of data for everyone on the plan, unlimited talk and text on smart phones. now, everyone's in the spirit of sharing. hey, can i borrow your boat this weekend? no. [ male announcer ] share more. save more. at&t mobile share for business. ♪

congestion, for the smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the buses are running on natural gas,

they don't throw out as much pollution into the air. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment.

[ male announcer ] this summer, savor every second of vacation. but get your own cookie. enjoy a fresh-baked chocolate chip cookie at check-in and more, with rates as low as $99 per night at a doubletree. book now at doubletree.com/getaway.

♪ there it is, the twerking that shocked the world. what should we make of miley cyrus? back with me is dr. drew pinsky. everyone is getting their proverbial nickers in a twist over this, quite literally and metaphorically. she seems to be, from what i can tell, loving all of the attention. she released a picture we showed earlier. this is from the cover of her new album "bangers," which has a very provocative image. this is a girl that seems to me that is fed up being squeaky clean hannah montana and she wants to be sexually provocative

and naughty is. there anything wrong inherently about her behavior? >> i think you summarize it accurately, that she wants to cast off hannah montana, but i'm dying on the inside. before the last break, your throw to commercial had me just dying. the biggest event in america, as aircraft carriers steam toward syria, did you ever think those words could woman out of your mouth, the big event, miley cyrus. >> we live in a social media world where she attracted more tweets in that period than almost anything this year. so whether you and i take a dismissive view of the news value of this, the reality is america is buzzing with preponderance about it. >> that's right. and i think ultimately it is the

fact that this was a weekly clean image of hannah montana and it now just exploded on mtv vmas. i think she was very self-conscious. i think robin thicke was in on it, and these are entertainers. she's an adult enter taper who wants to change her image. i dare say there's more to come, and hannah montana is gone. the problem is, and here's the problem, those of us that are parents, whose children were raised on hannah montana, myself included, we are just cringing, because we really don't want our daughters, our sons to be thinking this as the natural evolution into adulthood from hannah montana to this. it sets our teeth on edge. it's not something we really want for our kids. my daughter's friend summarized it nicely. and i sighed a great heave of relief when her friend said, miley, go to college. i thought okay, good, mission accomplished.

>> i've got three teenage sons, at least two of them want to be harry styles from one direction. it's an interesting debate. dr. drew, thank you very much. >> thank you, piers. >> we'll be right back. [ male announcer ] this is pam. her busy saturday begins with back pain, when... hey pam, you should take advil. why? you can take four advil for all day relief. so i should give up my two aleve for more pills with advil? you're joking right? for my back pain, i want my aleve. you're joking right? [off screen] hthere you are. [speaking german] hi, grandpa! [off screen] give me a kiss!

[speaking mandarin] what do you think? do you like it? [off screen] happy birthday! can you see that? [speaking polish] [off screen] did he apologize? [off screen] thanks, micah! [off screen] bye, guys. bye. see ya. oh my god! every day, more people connect face to face on the iphone than any other phone. i miss you.

tomorrow night, the latest on the crisis in syria. all eyes on the white house.

will president obama order a strike? and my interview with lora dimaggio and what she says about her brother, the man accused of kidnapping hannah anderson. see it all tomorrow night. that's all for us tonight. anderson cooper starts right now. good evening, everyone. we begin with breaking news. action tonight by great britain slamming the brakes on any immediate military action on syria unless president obama wants to go at it alone, which the white house is signaling he might. parliament in england weighing a resolution that would have okayed the use of force. weighing it and finding it wasn't enough. here is the key moment as the measure failed loudly in the house of comments. >> mr. mcneal, you're like an