and. trial and error from closing get mo to the international case of collegiate shaikh mohammed president obama has done an about face on campaign promises so did he caved to political pressure. sooner you'll. integrate a road there's. some forward. just the way he reviews. so given libya is it true would the u.s. actually intervene in syria next. and from foe to friend of washington how does this happen well it could all start with

a one stop shop make over on k. street. and as russia rockets into space the u.s. chooses the home front over the final frontier we'll take a look at what happened then and the consequences we're seeing now. good afternoon it's tuesday april fifth at four pm here in washington d.c. i'm lauren lyster and you're watching our t.v. get straight to the stories with the announcement yesterday that the obama administration will bring alleged nine eleven plodder collene shaikh mohammed to trial in a military commission at guantanamo bay it is a total about face from last year's announcement that k.s. them would be tried in civilian court in new york city not only a reminder that obama's campaign promise to close get no standalone broken but

a defeat for the president who made that case that federal courts are really the best place to try to ease terror suspects now my next guest argues the president caved to politics and here to make our case as dappy of the atar senior associate of human rights first law and security program kathy thanks for joining us now holder blame congress for the obama administration's complete turnaround on this issue do you buy that and if not what do you think is behind the decision. well you know it's partly true that congress has made this difficult for the administration but on the other hand the administration had over two years during which they could have brought khalifi muhammad and his coconspirators to the united states for trial and they didn't and that's two years before congress put in place a ban on transferring any points on the detainees to the united states for trial but i want to add just one time us to turn around and say and i'm sorry that i mean it's just congress is right i didn't mean to interrupt you but i just think it's really politically possible that it just could have been that simple that the obama

administration could have transferred those suspects to the u.s. i mean already we've seen obama not be able to deliver on his campaign pledge to close gitmo and even he said it just proved to be too politically difficult so with the opposition it is beyond just the restrictions from congress we've seen more recently do you think it really could have happened is that a little optimistic to believe that it happened. no i mean in fact this was a cornerstone of his campaign was closing guantanamo bay and bringing these people to justice and yes closing guantanamo bay is challenging because there are still one hundred seventy two detainees there but we're talking about five people being brought to the united states for trial that could have been done without the approval of congress we have a system in place that can handle federal court trials that can handle terrorism trials we had another guantanamo detainee who was transferred here to new york for trial was tried was convicted has been sentenced to life in prison without parole that all happened perfectly smoothly perfectly quietly the new york federal court

system is actually the most experienced set of courts to handle terrorism cases in the country so they could have done that quite easily with a face some republican opposition absolutely but the opposition was purely about trying to undermine undermine president obama wasn't that the u.s. justice system couldn't handle it or had some real prather the same times these detainees at the same time there's been opposition from new york lawmakers from democratic lawmakers from mayor bloomberg they did not want this trial so there's more it's more complicated than just opposition from republicans you know that are doing that based mainly on political moves like you said so would it have really been possible getting now. you know i mean that's another area where unfortunately i think the administration botched the effort in mission should have talked to those new york politicians first before they announced that they were going to bring police shaikh mohammed and the coconspirators to new york for a trial they should have smooth the way there was really no reason not to bring

them to new york for trial and yes political opposition grew out of a bunch of local concerns and local opposition mostly from business groups who were concerned about traffic tying up lower manhattan that didn't have to happen the administration could have handled much more carefully talked through with the mayor with this new york senator it's kind of smooth that way before making that announcement what if the u.s. couldn't have one and we could not convicted them into doing in court what evidence was thrown out because it's you know by they believe that he was tortured what about that issue. you know again that's really a red herring i mean eric holder himself the attorney general in two thousand and nine stood up and said we have a ton of evidence against these guys none of which comes from their statements now if they were tortured which we know that they were mistreated in prison and some of them were tortured those statements made under torture cannot be used in u.s. federal court but as eric holder said they didn't need to use any of those

statements and if you look at the indictment that was unsealed yesterday it lists so much evidence against them reams and reams of evidence against them you have prosecutors spending years spending their whole careers putting together this case these prosecutors are extremely experienced they track all sorts of things from every phone call to every communication to the purchase of weapons and of weapons materials you didn't need to use their statements in order to convict them so what's really lost here what's really lost internationally you know getting the has been used by al qaeda for example to continue to fuel support for that cause an outcast them who already may be considered a martyr i almost becomes one does this make this worse. i think it makes it much worse and i think that is one really big issue is that now has them kind of gets what he wants as he gets to be martyred he gets to keep that help keep the guantanamo bay prison open and have that continue to harm the reputation of the united states and at the same time i think the american public loses out we don't

get a public trial of the worst atrocity the curd that it ever occurred on u.s. soil this is the worst terrorist attack that ever occurred thousands and thousands of victims and relatives and family members of people who died in those attacks now we don't get a public trial we get this trial in a remote island in. montana while bay in cuba which is a country we don't even have relations with people cannot travel there to see the trial a handful of reporters will be allowed in but will be highly restricted that's not the way to try the most important terrorism case in this country's history in secret and under special rules laws a lot done according to our normal us system well along those lines it was more of a public trial when that have made them even more of a martyr maybe fueled more opposition from her more support for them. i don't think so i mean again federal court judges here are extremely experienced and how to handle difficult cases we've had

a lot of terrorism cases in new york in the past and they're very good at knowing how to handle that they don't invited to senators just stand up and make big statements in fact i've been to many of the military commission hearings and guantanamo bay and it's easier to do that in the military system in the military system the defendant is allowed to stand up and make an unsworn statement in federal court that doesn't happen in federal court it's much more controlled and in fact a federal judge could have taken serious control of the case and not allowed the detainee to make long statements or into a media circus there's no reason to think that that should have happened that's a really interesting point i want to ask what you think i know you've written that you think that that will affect obama's supporters and is about based on a campaign pledge but how much do you think that the average american really cares about these issues it seems like much more pressing for them are issues that hit home domestic issues the economy. i think you're right i think the economy is certainly the most one of the most pressing issues here in the united states on the

other hand i think that increasingly i'm hearing people who were big supporters of president obama and his administration being increasingly disillusioned that doesn't mean that they're going to maybe vote for the republican opposition but it might mean that they just don't vote it might mean that they sit out the next vote a lot of people who felt you know here is the guy talking about change we can believe in and people felt so desperate for change and they really believed in him and this is one of his big one of the cornerstones of his campaign was to really restore american integrity and national security to close guantanamo bay and his unwillingness to put some political capital behind that and really push for that has really dissolutions a lot of people so i think it's disappointing and i think that he's it the loss of support just mean that might mean that not so many people go out to vote next time we'll have to see a backlash and what impact it really does have and if people really care about about this issue that actually does make a huge difference in terms of how the world may see the united states and its

regard for law and for fair trials that was daphne a guitar senior associate and human rights at the first law and security program on thank you and when it comes to the war on terror how things can change course we were just talking about you know get knowing that will issue and how that has all changed in light of the realities on the ground perhaps the realities of politics and it wasn't long ago in fact it's back in two thousand and eight that the u.s. welcomed an unlikely ally to the u.s. fight against terrorism it was libya's leader colonel moammar gadhafi now the libyan leader faces its third week of u.s. coalition airstrikes so what's behind the change well our team is going and she can take a look at the u.s. interests at play and also what could be next. as waves of public rage sweep through north africa and the middle east what power is jump on them as many analysts say in an attempt to direct the waves of unrest in

a way that's most favorable for them in libya forging relationship with the opposition so that it could not be goals there are people there to do business with as syria popular raphe gather steam some experts say western powers might see the advantages of getting involved there to these three countries syria and libya are the main countries that will not align themselves automatically to the global power elite or the western powers interested objectives in more traffic in the middle east as for example egypt will do or used to do with hosni mubarak and definitely kuwait and saudi arabia syria is iran's closest ally in the region and the cost to support the remark in syria after income with mentions of iran tyria is obviously a strategic ally for rand in the in the region and without syria iran loses their their bridge their land bridge to lebanon and they're here hezbollah in force and so of course hezbollah would suffer if the syrian regime to fall and that would be

stabilizing iran and weaken its power in the region which would be an obvious benefit in being called american forces some expert even believe that destabilize ation is part of the strategy the west perceived in the region you're seeing reflected a strategy which includes our moms other points the generalized weakening of a sovereign nation states of the sovereign genes in the arab world in order to try to isolate iran. with very few perhaps no friendly countries in the region and that will then leave iran pretty much alone at least in the arab world and will facilitate further turmoil inside iran although the u.s. secretary of state has ruled out america's involvement in syria for now the country's defense secretary card of the syrian army to quote empower aroud aleutian and follow the example of egypt's military syria.

just the way. you ran though would be a tough call and no matter how much washington you want the regime there to sault for now it's seen as a mission impossible i'm sure that there are some in the u.s. who would love to attack iran and there are others who would like to take over the iranian opposition i think they know that the iranian opposition is not so fond of the united states they have a long memory in iran people remember the role of the united states in overthrowing the precursor to the shah of iran overthrowing the democratically elected government of mosul back in one thousand fifty three so i don't think the u.s. would be welcomed and i think many in washington know that would leave you being torn apart by the war and anti-government protests momentum in syria question on everyone's mind who might be next i'm going to check our reporting from washington

r.t. and for more on the motives behind u.s. military involvement in libya and what that means for say syria i'm joined by stephen soonest professor of politics and chair of middle eastern studies at the university of san francisco thanks so much for joining us now you've argued libya is not likely being fought on humanitarian grounds and you know you cite the ongoing support we've seen forth a yemen or bahraini regimes while those countries early suppress the anti-government protesters there those are of course u.s. allies but yet the quick intervention in libya so i wonder what you think is really the primary and then the u.s. and bombing libya right now. oh clearly we want to get rid of gadhafi. in the size of those who would like to see more progress turn government in power while he is indeed a brutal dictator he's. a preacher's very nasty and and one could indeed make a face perhaps this intervention in

a massacre that's not of the actual reason that we want to look at the united states britain france i mean all three countries that have led this effort have supported governments have also been killed hundreds if not thousands. of innocent civilians and one of my friends in egypt israel right there was there's other there's a history of other african dictators that the united states has not had had bomb dropped on but in fact have given economic assistance and security assistance so what's behind that double standard. this is an effort at least initially. when pretty easily and hopefully get a government that will over itself go its power to us incidents no this is very different than facing east in egypt and the exciting thing about that was uprisings and was not just that they were nonviolent but that it reads or insanely indigenous

movements by the people themselves it was without foreign intervention it was a. challenge both the al qaida in the sense that you need to have that kind of terrorism and islamic extremism to overthrow dictators is also a challenge those who do conservative learning that only through you have this invention tend to barker's become the middle east right so in many ways they're trying to really hijack this cement so that people can do it themselves nonviolently i think oh no we need to come to your rescue we need to help you to get you know power and when you go in the say ok thinking of western intervention and also western interests you know syria is not a friend to the u.s. much more similar to libya and these other countries where we're seeing protests so what do you think the likelihood would be that the u.s. would get intervened i mean i want to just play a little bit of what a lawmaker recently said about intervention in syria there's a precedent now that the world community is in libya and it's the right one we're

not going to stand by and allow this assad to slaughter his people like his father did years ago and in doing so we're being consistent with our american values and and we're also on the side of the arab people so i think the u.s. could use that kind of thinking to possibly intervene in syria. there's certainly politicians who would like to see that but i doubt that the obama street or certainly they would not get support from the arab league and from most european countries because while they have issues with assad it's not considered he's not out there the way adopt the has been alienated everybody also the big difference between the repression that's going on now in syria which is real. but it's not massive today to what the senator was referring to and in terms of the hala massacre nine hundred eighty two that was an armed uprising by islamic extremists where. the regime probably could get away with that kind of the repression by

contrast this is a nonviolent movement similar to what we've seen elsewhere well they be willing to certainly. beat and and attack and in some cases even shoot protesters it's not going to get to the point of the kind of massacres that the west has been used as intervention you know the difference is that despite the many problems of the assad regime it has much more of a social base khadafi does at this point and the people of syria even those who oppose assad would resist any kind of the western intervention russia has a base in syria tired to see any kind of resolution for an intervention getting past the u.n. security council in the case of that country now also i'm curious you know gadhafi you mentioned he's a dictator that is now discords as the u.s. and u.s. allies but how do you get to that point because it actually wasn't that long ago that back in two thousand and eight khadafi was actually helping the weapon the war on terror and back in two thousand and three when the u.s.

that you know were gained diplomatic ties with him and he let oil companies and you know how did it all turn around so quickly for him. well he was rehabilitated in a sense that we were happy with another he was an ally but he is kind of resigned to communicate communicate and so we could work with him better and there was no real prospect at that point for him being overthrown so they figured i might as well live with what we have when it looks like there's a possibility could actually be overthrown i think then the interest came from more involved and ironically however the gadhafi was was in the biggest trouble during the first week of the uprising when it was nonviolent that's when the that's when the opposition took over all those cities had there's mass destruction. that was stevens in a professor of politics and chair of middle eastern studies at the university of san francisco and as he pointed out when it comes to african dictators and their

relationships with washington while some have their assets frozen and face embargoes or even air strikes others enjoy a warm and fuzzy relationship with the u.s. diplomats now how does this happen well arty's kalen for take a look at the role of washington's p.r. machine k. street lobbyists and what part they play in a make over ok good part of. their country men have turned against them but several autocratic leaders have friends where it counts in washington. well several of them have been swept away by popular revolutions across the middle east and north africa for decades they clung to power with u.s. support and the help of d.c.'s k. street home to the biggest and most powerful lobbying firms in the world capable of transforming libyan leader moammar gadhafi from this mad dog of the middle easterners are. of the world revolution took partner in talks time between. two or three years perhaps the best

cinderella tale i'm k.-street is that of oil rich equatorial guinea denounced as one of the most repressive regimes in the world for its torture as traditional killings and political prisoners teodoro obiang brought to power in a military coup thirty years ago and claiming to have been elected by ninety seven percent of voters in two thousand and nine recently dropped one million dollars to hire lobbyists lanny davis davis was former president bill clinton's lawyer during his impeachment proceedings and enjoys close ties with secretary of state hillary clinton says it came here for the latest and finally i mean to interrupt you and voila went from despise the press or to a smiling snapshot with president. bamma himself and while lobbyists are autocrats salesman to the state department the pitch is a very specific one the us withdrew its ambassador in level in one thousand nine hundred four but is exxon mobil and chevron texaco billions the drilling equitorial

guinea's oil washington warmed up but the aren't just dropping dollars in d.c. . being sun a little too doro is living the sweet life in hollywood dating pop stars and purchasing this thirty five million dollar malibu mansion which is. there for american. bank account of yes truly am commission plans for a three hundred eighty million dollar yacht three times with the oil rich country it spends on public health and education per year. well most of the population survives i'm less than a dollar a day like his predecessors of both republican and democrat before him president obama loves the united states as a friend or fumin rights around the world intervening in libya so-called humanitarian grounds but critics say he's just as pragmatic as his predecessors as

well when it comes to turning a blind eye to repression and places like equitorial getting as long as the oil keeps flowing the wind soared artsy washington d.c. . and those resources that stay even here in the united states and right in the p.r. machine can occur with that report now it's rich and bears to a different country where there was a time when americans boldly went where no man had gone before but fast forward to two thousand and eleven and the u.s. has effectively shuttered its manned spaceflight program investing caput f. twenty two is in the air at times but not shuttles headed for the final frontier but decades after the space race russia has not done the same and as our t.v. test our sylvia witnessed firsthand the exciting blastoff are still blazing new trails of space exploration. but there's a lot of excitement definitely especially among vs spectators for the we're going to see the takeoff of the crew two russian cosmonauts of onyx on the summit which

they are going to cycle as well as nasa astronauts ron garan well for the last a few hours leading up to this point right here we have been following them for go here three flight traditions if you will very interesting indeed especially for first timers and even those who have been here several times say it's never quite the same t.v. whole process that we saw them are getting out of you for the facility first they left the signatures on their doors as had their treat assessors and then they walked to the aisle to the crowd and they we saw them in their space is very interesting to see them very dear and say quite an emotional farewell to the people what we've inherited by some of them but this is a very special mission if you will because this is happening close to the fiftieth anniversary of you to go god it's a first space flight happening right here with what they call the current star this is where it all began with nasa astronaut on board ron garan in his words he has said that fifty years ago on back to mankind became a different species that's

a great goal to go beyond the boundaries of very. heavy things i believe you can get to the ground here now do you think you guys will it will take about less or ten minutes to get it through its orbit is to zero gravity and then a couple of days to reach the international space station well where they will join three of their colleagues and ron garan who's a very tech savvy astronaut he did say he will show. very best to keep us updated using twitter that is the biggest swedes as well as blogs that we do look forward to reading about their experiences up there it's. amazing they can twitter and

there is no there's no limit to twitter but joining me now to talk about the space issue is jeff member states entrepreneur and as we were just talking about june is the last shuttle launch in the united states and then after that it's just been on the russians for a test the russians are doing this now and the u.s. though has continued to finance over the years to a great extent another very expensive venture its military budget you know accounting for fifty percent of the world's military expenditures welsh you know shuttering its space programs now if we want to you know continue on the russian comparison russia cut much of the funding for its army back in the ninety's but they continue to fund space programs and now look at that so what is being lost in the u.s. priorities is something being lost when we're great series of questions where there is not what's being done what is there anything wrong with us we're already losing out the russians were first term varies capitalism and commercial and they've kept their program going in large part because of their customers the united states and

nasa and the european space agency so when they face cutbacks and they have their serious economic interests at this location they said wait a second we want to continue space but we'll go commercial and we'll take customers and their launch vehicle safe it's robust it's operational and they were able to continue by embracing a more commercial program we made i think foolish to teacher decision twenty years ago you can blame it on democrats republicans it's the way we are in america twenty years ago we should have said you know we need a new vehicle after the shuttle but we don't think that way we wait until emergencies and we have the tragedy of columbia and the crew was killed on the return of columbia and then a committee came on the augustine commission and said we can't continue the shuttle . and so as usual we're going to have there's a last minute situation we have a gap of maybe six years before the americans get back involved how does the u.s. lose out by not investing in space anymore well we lose out because we have

to keep workers here who are doing cutting edge technology what's the payoff the payoff could be supersonic jets that take us from new york to moscow in two hours the payoff could be having transportation to national labs and space you never know what the payoff is and speaking of jets let's talk about that because for example of the f. twenty two fighter jets which the u.s. has funded recently as an that but that was one of the most expensive fighter jets in american history hundreds of millions of dollars so how does it compare building that to building say a space shuttle with a different well you don't want to get into a game everyone always plays there came invest in my program with me. i can say what we should do in terms of the pentagon i will say that we need a commercial space program we're moving in that direction we can't rely on government funding we need trust to murders we should be taking the saudis and the israelis and and everyone else to space commercially we should be taking the

germans to space commercially why next year strategic rentier right why are we learning course you believe that your space entrepreneurs are going to happen less what is really the payoff because when the customer is just the country's because there really is no no we have a lot sites investing in space iran must be co-creator of paper was going commercial has a u.s. government contractor has a satellite contract and he's going to go public at some point there's another publicly traded company and for junior orbital sciences they have a contract to go commercial to send out crews commercially the future for us in space is commercial if we don't go commercial and we continue to go on these big budgets the tea party people will kill us the people who aren't fiscal deficit reduction will kill the space program we've got to go commercial in order to maintain all of those words marshall doesn't look like we'll have any space program by definition for i want to thank you for coming and your attorney here every day if that was going to do it for our show for more on the stories that we covered go to.