and here we have a serious problem america is addicted to oil and it's an addiction the us cannot seem to kick so one year after the worst oil spill in recent history why hasn't much changed director of gas whole spills the crude intentions they boil corporations virginia tech and columbine there are some serious things and if they don't allow guns it's always the criminals that gets the guns so was openly carrying guns the answer to a safer america will debate. and why is cold war thinking tying up trade relations between russia and the united states lawmakers playing politics could be

to blame. and big brother is kolker using a workplace to promote a political agenda so with corporate election propaganda the wave of the future. good afternoon it's wednesday april twentieth four pm here in washington d.c. i'm lauren lyster and your watching r.t. now it has been exactly a year today that the b.p. oil spill sent millions of barrels of crude spilling into the gulf of mexico and what was the biggest spill of this kind in history yet with gas prices now averaging three dollars an eighty three cents a gallon that's a dollar more than a year ago goes gulf coast lawmakers on both sides are again chanting drill baby drill and despite b.p.'s mistakes that led to that spill how much as will they change the oil industry it seems when it comes to new rules one might be.

record profits. are good. and maybe scott roberts knows the answers to some of our questions his new documentary gas hole is about what the oil companies don't want you to know mr roberts thank you so much for joining us in l.a. today now i want to start with b.p. because it is the anniversary of that oil spill and after doing a documentary about the oil industry i want to know what has really changed as far as their business practices or as far as real regulations that have changed things since that spill well really nothing has changed other than the fact that you and i are paying a lot more for gas than we did a year ago and you would think that we would be paying these prices last year after the spill rather than paying them now after things that are going on in the middle east especially libya where we get no oil from at all well that's an interesting

point there are a lot of theories about why gas in some parts of this country are now more than four dollars a gallon we just heard president obama blame it on oil speculation on the part of investors we've talked to a number of people who blame it on concern over the unrest in the middle east which is a big source of oil what do you think is the reason. well i think it's a little combination of both i mean you look at it two days ago you know opec said that they were going to cut eight hundred thousand barrels per day from saudi arabia because they said we were over supplied and then the next day we hear that crude tops out over one hundred nine dollars per barrel because we're under supplied so who really has the answer well it's hard to know the research you did in your documentary did you get any answers is there any role that the oil industry plays you point out that you know after the b.p. oil spill we didn't see gas prices going as i now we are. and president obama is correct it definitely has a lot to do with speculators and you know

a lot of people don't even realize that we get a majority of our oil from canada we get as much from canada as we do from saudi arabia and venezuela combined so when something happens in the middle east the speculators go crazy in the in the price skyrockets and all that's one kerry now i want to ask it back to the subject of regulation are you surprised that congress hasn't passed major reform in response to the largest environmental accident and u.s. history. well after doing so much research for the film nothing really surprises me coming out of washington d.c. from from either side of the aisle it's you know a lot of people talk about alternative fuels and they talk about new ways and if you look at our film we go back all the way to president nixon and soundbites from presidents who say we need a comprehensive energy policy we need to be energy independent and it's a matter of national security and no one republican or democrat has really done anything about it why do you think that is just like

a thirty years of lip service paid. i think it's a lot of money that goes into washington d.c. from the oil and gas industry that's what i really think and you mentioned the lip service paid to alternative energy now purely from an economic standpoint with oil and gas prices going up with concern over foreign oil especially with under arrest in the middle east and some of that that you mentioned in the persian gulf why isn't there a push to utilize some of these other energy sources and invest in those and instead to again allow for deepwater oil and natural gas exploration the same kind . you know what was the precursor to the deepwater horizon oil spill i don't know to be very dangerous yet it's happening in those waters again by why is this the decisions that are being advised that the decision being made. i think it comes down to money i think oil companies like i said really don't care about the consumer it's business as usual they're making billions and billions of dollars

they throw some money towards the alternative fuel industry and doing research and we feel with what we found in the film you know a lot of that is green washing but why change business as usual when you're making billions of dollars so what would need to change in order for business as usual to changes as you mentioned i mean with these oil companies they're corporations they're running businesses they're always going to keep their profits as the number one concern for them so what would change the tide. we need powerful leadership in washington d.c. who's not afraid to point the finger at the oil industry create new legislation consumers need to find you know we live in a society where people know more about the american idol contestants than they do their own representatives we all have to get involved we have to push legislation and we have to vote in the people that are going to make a difference and do something about it but it was that if you say that democrats and republicans neither of them will really tackle the oil industry. i'm

sorry who would that be a you mentioned that neither democrats nor republicans have the will to tackle the oil industry so so what would a candidate look like that would be a solution. that's a great question i mean somebody needs to step up from from either party or different party and make that priority number one and then we have to lay it out we have we have to have a nasa like project and nasa like they did a man on the moon absolutely and something that's been just an interesting analogy you chose now we just have one more quick minute but i just want to ask you you mentioned americans you mentioned consumers that's something that's interesting because if you look to europe you see everybody driving these little car's fuel efficient diesel fuel the united states consumers despite the b.p. oil spill despite gas prices rising despite a lot of concern paid to where oil is coming from in the united states you don't

see americans trading in their s.u.v.s and lining up to get into more fuel efficient smaller cars why do you think that is. americans we like are big stories we really don't like to sacrifice our lifestyle for the better of long term good it seems i don't know in the in the car companies are producing cars that s.u.v.s trucks things that really are great on fuel economy we as consumers are buying them so they're going to keep making them and i know when you're in your documentary you actually talked about the oil industry perpetuating that cycle what have what will have they played. well one of the jaw dropping things about the film and what people really get surprised to god is the fact that we go back fifty sixty years and and i've found patents and technology with the help even of a retired cell scientist who was the top scientists of inventions that would have drastically increased fuel economy over the years and they've either by or

suppressed or over over regulation and red tape it kept them from coming to market that's a really interesting side that you don't often hear as such on the faceted issue and need while a year after the b.p. oil spill there's not much left to prevent it from happening again it seems that was scott de roberts director of castle thank you so much for being with us today and from explosions under water to those at the barrel of a gun today is the anniversary of the national day at columbine high school and this month marks several anniversaries the end of her story and the oklahoma city bombing the virginia tech massacre and the siege of the branch davidian compound in waco yet some americans see carrying firearms anywhere and everywhere as the only solution first say for america artie's killing for it has more. rested for years carrying a gun in the policy. is to rock as a defense. in kenya he didn't see

a reason to put it down being a former pretty sure if i thought that it was necessary to. obtain a concealed handgun permit to protect myself. right does it want to just conceal his he wants to kiriat out in the open to me it's the constitutional way to curious one arm. and i think that. if you don't exercise your rights eventually you'll lose on. his way to get drunk not leave the house without her magnum three fifty seven pistol is. checked into this special hand back for packing heat. in croatia i was not thinking. big but. even during the war you know. it was not. like here when i came here and this. is like. a wild west you

know like i was watching t.v. . and i am walking with. on my hip there are two hundred fifty million guns in the hands of american civilians and rutherford as i mean he spent more than twenty five thousand dollars on here it's never complete i mean how many pairs of shoes do you have. i mean. i see guns i like to get a read each one brings back memory. this was. my grandfather saddam. going to the notion of. rutherford carries his gun everywhere he legally can and even encourages his daughters and nephew as well and that isn't just rutherford of virginia citizens defense two thousand five hundred members they organize events like this one at parts restaurants and other public places where they openly carry loaded weapons in

an effort to normalize their critics say. i believe that you should be able to. carry a firearm in any manner you choose on an airplane in school virginia tech and columbine there are some serious things they don't allow guns it's always a criminals that gets guns and you can't have a gun in a gun free zone so guns going to be allowed on campuses the virginia citizens defense league is part of the greater open carry movement a well organized network of gun owners in forty three states. between everyone that makes you know. basically makes it easier to spread the message that. first some in the open carry movement it's about more than security it's about forming a militia defending themselves from government tyranny and even organizing insurgency in ford artsy carrollton virginia. and here to duke it out over open carry gun laws is david cobb drea he's field editor with guns magazine and columnist for the war

on guns blog and also ben cohen he's editor of the daily banter and a having to post contributor gentlemen thank you so much for joining me dave i want to start with you from what i've read the open carry movement is contentious even within their guns rights community so what really makes the case that open carry is a good and necessary thing. again there is controversy within the gun community some people think that it's pushing people too far outside of their comfort zones others think that it's time that we started to normalize the practices the report that proceeded just indicated and i think that it depends geographically where you really are there are some states where it's perfectly normal practice and it doesn't even raise an eyebrow whereas you have other areas where there are traditionally more anti-gun so they are more public transportation and someone's arm was not on. well some people have argued that it stands

a provocation and that even people that you know people that carry it even with the best intentions you know they're pretty much making their pet issue come at the expense of you know people's sense of peace and security what do you think about that ben would you agree with that i think it sounds to me what i can put it was that when you walking around the street shopping those schools libraries and restaurants with guns sounds to me like nothing to do with public safety ok on gun rights it sounds a lot like making a statement against the current government what do you think about that today without david i'm sorry but i did not hear him from him through calm assuming he did he is saying that people are doing this to make a political statement against the government and not something that our reporter alluded to in her report as well do you see that as being a major theme here i think that there are probably some people who would carry that is it to reach

a point that would say well you know what sometimes you need government for liberty if they're not going to be the ones that recognize that when if in fact they're going to be the ones you in cases like in my state of ohio are being deliberately indifferent to the law or so sometimes a little bit of a push is necessary but most of the people right now are just and i've got issues in america so i'd like. any particular legislation passed by the obama administration that actually have paid people's

ability to carry guns. i've been researching and i haven't found much so so the only thing i can really get you so i think anyone rush to convince you. the whole movement is making a statement god would ministration kind of democrats who are not trying to take away and i think the right to bear arms there but from what i read there is some new renewed cases being made for limiting open carry in the wake of the tucson shooting this is a major issue david is there a resurgence of things very movements because they're concerned over that there are i mean i think that these things are kind of rational no i mean. people carrying guns in public libraries is a physical north of the problem with i think any kind of policy that limits the kind of straightforward right i think there are question david what's what's wrong with a law against someone carrying a rifle into

a children's library as they did and i think it's michigan and now they have a temporary restraining order over that you know it is that not just common sense that there should be a guy toting a right call in a children's library. going to do if someone. in the children's library and there's no one there. to say that this is common sense and to disagree is irrational or is simply injecting them. frankly is insulting to the american founders and i would have to say that most. people who carry openly or not i would. urge them to debating concealed carry but again. the obama administration and democrats and obama administration currently running on them are you ok pick one because some of the common. in a way them is that even democrats won't really touch that the issue anymore and

i've been made a good point you know it's out of the obama administration that guns are now allowed in national parks and i mean that was a more liberal law so what are what are the anti gun laws that are being debated right now ok well first of all carol mccarthy is reintroduced another what they call the greedy campaigner calling of assault but on normal capacity magazines there are no initiatives underway to private sales and in terms of the private or the guns in national. credit that the administration wanted to have that was not right. it's not like they went to. school but they still did in effect what would you say to that ben do you think that he's getting some good cases david getting some good taste as far as half on guns right. gun owners' rights i think i think. he would have a problem with very commonsense laws very commonsense policy initiatives. like the ones you described so i think there's a serious come crime problem in america you have one of the highest murder rates in

the industrialized world has many statistics on people who carry homes people whose hearts have guns in their houses women are much more likely to die from from being murdered with a forearm these that something has to be done so that's the you have an epidemic of gun crime in america and something has to be done and very mild policy initiatives parts boy democrats and liberals is one of the best and you know we're just we're more pretty much we're pretty much out and you know i just want to ask you one question because this is something that comes up you made the case that you know if only the criminals have guns and if someone has a gun in a children's library who is going to protect everybody from getting shot at but can you give one case they give evidence to that because even in the tucson shooting someone was arms and reported later that he almost shot the wrong person so that didn't help in that case at all and you can look up. ok google if you your church

all right everybody google it and see see where you fall on the matter when they both of you gentlemen for weighing in on it that was ben cohen editor of the daily banter pretty david codger feel that there are guns not a thing. now president barack obama is getting sued a lawsuit was filed this week and u.s. federal court to require president obama to remove a cold war restriction that is still tying up u.s. russia trade now despite lip service for ending what's called the jackson vanek amendment for two decades under both democratic and republican presidents it's done the books and congress has not acted either now the lead plaintiffs in the case include a former soviet dissident who can confirm the important role that jackson panic once played but does no more and also anthony t. salvia an expert on u.s. russia relations and former reagan administration official who joins us now thank you so much for being with us now summer republican members of congress are holding up getting rid of this amendment why why are they pushing this issue when it is so

long over this is an outdated cold war amendment. was right is being held up the issue is that for several administrations and. presidents of there have you know it was certified that russia has been in compliance with immigration laws nothing no longer he'd immigration for immigration out of russia and in addition to that russia is no longer a so-called non market economy which is what it was under the soviet union so the language of the law you know applies to russia the no longer exists really because of the old soviet union when there was you know things like central planning you know nationalization of industry and private property and no meaningful price mechanism so it was a non market economy and that is that's the precondition for the amendment to go into effect first so you're going on market economy and then you have to be imposing undue restrictions on the immigration the food the free travel of people

immigration people right and now send me more than one and i'm just writing it up on your words but all the reasons that you get are good reasons for why that amendment should no longer exists or doesn't matter anymore why is it still on the books right well you know because honestly that's up. right it's you know it is there's a nervous about the whole thing you know it's you know the obama administration including the you know the clinton state department you know support the repeal of x x and that it should or should should be set aside as absolute the case but what we're trying to do in this particular legal action is simply to show that if you that a very straightforward reading of the language of the law clearly indicates that the president has the right to get rid of jacksonville on a on his own and that for the congressional elections or part a certain culture is built up around jackson bennett this is that because the congress you know in effect force this on a republican administration way back when the gerald ford administration which was

very interesting pursuing the top of the soviet union in the time of his and kissinger a secular state at the time it was a congressional action and there's a feeling that somehow because the current congress imposes on an unwilling us administration to somehow congress as the list the law but it doesn't the president our message to president obama is yes you can you can write on authority you can you can move jackson bennett but what reason do members of congress get for not lifting it is it political. you know the senate has been you know it depends i mean some some people do have political reservations about having a more open attitude towards russia this may reflect as you've indicated some kind of lingering sort of cold war mentality on the part of some people. you know as a reagan administration official who was you know really supported me very strongly and i work actively in the kind of the you know the anti soviet kind of policy in the closing years of the cold war you know i now have a very different view of all this kind of thing i think that you know russia is no

longer the soviet union and i think russia you know needs to be brought into the into the european family of nations and i think these kinds of old restrictions you know just make no sense right and if you are not literate and if i'm wondering if you have any other examples of where these outdated policies with cold war thinking are still in place to the detriment of you know current reality well and current relations between the countries. it was it of course i mean you know under president obama and i think even as a republican and a regular like myself i think i can say that you know the you know in favor of what obama has done obama has tried to to reset relations with russia and i think that's a good initiative and i think that's reflected in the arms control treaty that he signed with president putin i think that's you know the right way to go i think that it you know more recently we've seen in more recent administrations efforts to to less than forthcoming attitude in relations with moscow things like efforts to

expand nato up to up to russia's doorstep you know efforts to get after seen a lot of really of the suspend the a.b.m. treaty and efforts to build the strategic defense system in neighboring countries like poland the czech republic all of these things you know are part and parcel of what could be considered to be a cold war mentality and certainly the continuation of jackson that is part of the mentality i think i think we don't need that right now i think we need something else i think that the u.s. the u.s. i think is facing challenges from a rising asian military power economic power in east asia i think that the challenge silly a threat turns on how we handle it but right and i don't hold that there was a little challenge to russia writing that is going to go down to that other space that was iraq all my had to deal with today and i want to thank you so much for getting us the latest on that case i was adding a fabulous warmer reagan administration appointee and a leader in a fight to abolish the jackson gammick amendment. thanks so much now before the

november midterm elections if you work for koch industries as in the company of the billionaire koch brothers you received a packet and a letter for the president from your present rather we have here is this one it was saying that for the first time ever they were sending all u.s. employees at home helpful items telling them what candidates to vote for and about the proper role of business in society now here with us is my calc he's a labor journalist who with mark ames broke this story in the nation magazine and he's here to tell us that this is evidence that the u.s. is entering a new era of corporate politicking and election propaganda mike thanks for being with us you just broke this story i want to know why this is so concerning to you by such a big deal well we've entered a new era where now corporations under citizens united can hold a captive audience meetings with workers hand out flyers like this pressure workers and do voting for candidates and this was outlawed by the national labor relations that a corporation can have an employee sit around like some employees have this situation

in in a break room and talk to them about politics all day and concerns you about that what's wrong if you're a port open the door if it has to happen right so if you want to politicize in the workplace right and your boss is walking around with a republican button and then that kind of pressure on you to wear a republican button to three want to raise if you want to go along with obama you've lost your third group with him a little bit do you think of where do you see an example that i did you find examples of that in your story well certainly we already know from the way they do captive audience meetings and tell union campaigns i've been involved in many union organizing drives will come in and seventy percent of the people indicate they want to join a union and then the company with the lily to vote for several months and then after several months of these captive audience meetings where you bring the slip power point presentations and they tell them they're all going to lose their jobs and review the performance records we're going to vote down you know because they're afraid of their bosses and this could be a similar case short not every worker is going to feel pressured by this but enough workers that this is an unfair advantage look a union cannot come into a workplace and who. all the meetings about candidates it wants to support but they

can hold a labor union meeting and have that same kind of discussion with their members cracked sure but they cannot require their members to attend that meeting a corporation now under citizens united can require the workers to expend long meetings about voting for republicans now this is very dangerous most voters don't get very much information and if you have you know in the average employee union can hold eleven captive audience meetings with the workers now if you have a live in meetings with slick power points where you have in charge and all kinds of things come up we're talking about going to different statistics somebody is more likely to believe their boss and for centuries i mean for decades this is been outlawed in the united states and oregon just passed a law to outlaw this which makes this particular letter somewhat interesting because it looks like they may have violated the law it's unclear ok it's unclear a lot of bonaire i'm wondering is this just the koch brothers that we just bashing the koch brothers there's plenty of evidence that you know everybody kind of wanting to do that these days or is this a bigger trend is there any evidence that this is a bigger trend i will answer not that we're here you know the koch brothers who

advise a lot of corporations have already talked about this we know from intel unit campaigns that these type of captive audience meetings are the prime technique that they always use it's only a matter of time before other corporations adopt this and we've seen corporations in the past for that mom are tried this joint effort and then they had to back off and claim it was just a few managers so corporations are certainly looking to do this so you're saying this is the beginning of a new trend that is going to be broader than just the koch brothers they're not just bashing the koch brothers. i mean i'm not bashing the koch brothers i mean i could care less about that i care about the fact that people are feeling pressure on their job to vote a certain way and i just noticed when i mean what if your boss is going out to volunteer on the republican get out the vote drive does that mean you need to show up to in order to curry favor with your boss in order to get away a raise i mean previously i think do you think that americans in a day where you know every story is about how the koch brothers are influence in politics do you think that the workers here really believe that their corporations interests are their interests.