one only goes to show his birth certificate there is new polling that shows birth or fever has now infected an awful lot of potential voters but is it where obama was born that's the actual problem or is this just a facade for other fears looking at what's really behind this great american divide . between the roi you can see what you want to do what he wants to seize america i think it should be a little bit more structures people begin to create problems. so as the florida pastor who burned the ground ignites protests in the heart of muslim america we ask is it ever alright to silence free speech.

and the robot war has begun this is the u.s. deploys drones to fight the war in libya so is this so-called humanitarian mission flying above and beyond the original goals. get out and it's friday april twenty second four pm here in washington d.c. i'm laurin lister you're watching r t well the birth of a movement it's been cast as the french fantasy of the far right but now it's resurfaced in the spotlight with the soap box of possible g.o.p. presidential hopeful donald trump take a listen. if that will not die the voters believe that president obama was born elsewhere in fact far from cooling there's new polling that shows birth or fever has now infected an awful lot of potential voters well i have the

president's certificate right here in certified it's got a certification number it's got the registrar of the state signed it's got a seal on it and it says this coffee service is prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding back out that wasn't donald trump but that was the mainstream media reaction doing anything they can to disprove claims that president obama was not born in the united states and you pull those shows that this movement catching on it's anything but french now take a look at these numbers forty five percent of republicans believe do not believe that president obama was born in the united states twenty two percent are unsure just thirty three percent believe he was born here now as you saw earlier the mainstream media is focused on proving those people who do not believe he was born here wrong with evidence of obama's birthplace but are they asking the right questions lost in this discussion is the divide in this country over the birth or movement and what it represents it reflects the portion of the american psyche

that's moved mainstream which seems to defy live birth certificates and use paper birth announcements so what is this really about well joining me to get to the bottom of it is adam koch as he's host of adam vs the man here on our t.v. out and i thank you so much for joining us you are a libertarian you are coming to us from new mexico most recently some would think that you would identify more with some of those forty five percent of americans who don't believe that the president was born here i don't think that africa is with you but i want to know what you think this is really a reflection of well i do it of those who are skeptical of everything that we hear from the mainstream media and by you personally believe the president was born in the united states do i know that know to have certainty know or two little pieces of it were going to convince me if i believe all there was no. so there's a place for scalp the skepticism but i think this is a fringe issue even though you know as you pointed out a lot even a little of it as you pointed out it does have

a certain mainstream appeal and there is an appeal to a lot of the republican base that says i don't like this guy and anything that someone says it's not about him i'm going to latch on to and that's not something that's really unique about the republican base this is a part of human nature and human psychology you know we're able to attach evil things or bad ideas to people that we don't like and i would have i would have killed those people and how many people be opposed to the policies or the rhetoric of presidents in the past you don't see the same question of their legitimacy as a president or their citizenship what is behind that well there's a unique. aspect with the first black president and i'm not going to try away from it and say that that's not part of it because it's it comes from a new american ethnocentrism and it's primarily seen in the republican party now i think in the base and in independents rather than in democrats only are starting to see it there too because we're not a good place as a country right now we're not a good place economically and so when you have a kind of crisis of confidence you seek out you know people to blame places to lash

that negativity onto and it's no surprise that obama has become a target of it the fact that it's taken this particular form in the birth of a movement you know it's a little disappointing it's a little bit silly and i think it is a fringe issue like it has brought of people like you pointed out but it's not something that people are in the streets about people in the streets from the republican base saying taxes are too high they're talking about the issues with the vine fine fair enough but but the five percent of republicans don't believe he was born here and you see that same kind of mentality to when you hear people say obama is a socialist and people do take of history how would that rhetoric also the further rhetoric at a party rallies so what are these things kind of really about policies or are these kind of proxies for deeper seated the accusations of socialism actually have some grounds an analysis of his real policies there whether or not you want to move past the way with socialism to it is a matter of how far how you want to define it but in terms of the birth or issue

what we see in the way that donald trump is presenting it now there are people who want to raise this to sensationalize and i think trump is running for a publicity campaign not for president i mean i don't think anybody's really taking him seriously at this point at least i would hope not but there is there is that appeal and because of that there are people like donald trump who are going to use this issue to manipulate the political process and i wouldn't be surprised if trump was on the obama administration peril for this if he's only i really don't want to let out a conspiracy in paris and he was coming out but along those lines. you know admin if you laid in the republican party in public and basically think people are that dumb now i mean come on it's not that they're dumb but that they're not paying attention and that they don't have the time to because they're worried about their families and get a job and taking care of their own personal economic situation they're not. if you ask them what is the most important issue facing the country and in surveys that say we know what is your top concern it's economy jobs

a little bit foreign policy which to me is unfortunately low because i think it's so directly connected in terms of spending to all of our economic problems. obama's birthplace doesn't register on those surveys people aren't concerned with that if you say do you think obama was born or not a lot of people will say they are of course not that guy but do they really care about is that really a priority i don't think so and i don't think this thing with trump is going to do just that what you just said highlights that to divide in this country what we've seen on you know by so many media outlets all of our adversity is dismissing birth errors as bigots and it's idiots and. people constantly trying to you know show proof to these republicans that they that obama was born here show as i purchased a ticket there's so much focus on that and almost as much as that's happening you see an increase in these people that they do not believe he was born here also i'd kind of not even addressing what this might represent do you think you know coming from new mexico coming from some may consider the real america is there this vast a vibe between you know people perceived as the elites like obama and like some of

the mainstream media and they are going this is realistic and there are real concerns and what you see what you're talking about with the base of the republican party and the group through issue is simply one symptom of yes no we are a country that is starting to realize that it's not about left right it's not about republican democrat it's not about these partisan issues it's about who's really in control this country who really owns this country and it's and if you like to have a real america think it really owns this country and i think control not them and that's a problem and that's why people are pissed and that's why people are willing to latch on to this and in a way there's a certain desperation that says things are really tough we know we're not really in a position of empowerment to be engaged in this we know we have someone in the white house that we don't like who's not doing anything good for your connery so there's a natural channel for that into silly things like growth or ism but it is good dialogic they seem to declassify logic as much evidence that. they gather there are people who are birth and who are all those things you said about him but the vast

majority of that forty five percent are just people who don't trust the means. media anymore and for very good reason and don't trust obama for very good reason because he hasn't kept promises and he's lied from many of his campaign promises of turning to obvious lies and so they have good reason not to trust him they have great reason not to force the mainstream media that's going to pieces of paper that are from a newspaper and from the government so. can you really really kill people for just having that doubt and saying you don't fall on the side as you probably know born here i know i can respect that i would probably people who simply on that ground say i don't trust the source of this information i haven't done the research i don't really care but you know if you ask me one way or another i'd say it was a border you know those people i can do it personally i was on the side of probably born here and it's probably a completely irrelevant issue but i am not going to ridicule people for some conclusion because they don't trust the sources of this information because i don't

think anybody in the mainstream media seems almost all too happy to i want to thank you though for giving us that fresh perspective that we're not seeing on the mainstream media and from adam vs the man check out a show later on tonight meanwhile as moammar gadhafi forces reportedly killed libyan civilians and pushed back rebel forces nato air strikes have not stopped a libyan war from moving towards what u.s. admiral mike mullen says is a stalemate something analysts have been saying for longer than that and now the robot war has begun yesterday secretary of defense robert gates reported the u.s. has approved the use of predator drones in the north african country they there are kills as it had strategically important success rate just two percent in pakistan and it sparked outrage over civilian casualties now as concerns over mission creep mounts are she's lore and asks if the cost in every sense are escalating for the u.s. and its allies as nato drops drones into libya take a look. philippians it's been

a long hard month as strike after strike by nato forces in the middle of an increasingly violent civil war but in the midst of all that bloodshed what's been achieved according to many not a lot i think the situation has deepened and probably got rather worse the african union attempted to cease fire was scuttled i believe by western interests and now britain is putting troops in on the ground as advisors i think it's very dangerous we're involved in a civil war force there is no part of interest also and at what cost priceless human lives certainly but the ministry of defense refuses to release information on how much the intervention in libya is costing the british taxpayer early estimates suggest. dollars a day that means a month's offensive may have cost the u.k. as much as one hundred fifty million dollars and counting and this at a time when they do case slashing spending on public services leading to widespread often violent demonstrations. it's an incredible amount of money when they say the

there is no money available but we could every week we could be building a new hospital several new schools. we could be paying the student tuition fees which are going up to nine thousand the year next year defense cuts have already begun and the ministry of defense is expected to save nearly eight billion dollars over the next four years ironically experts say that's made the libyan woman more expensive now that the u.k. no longer has an aircraft carrier every mission is longer and logistically harder. since. we could be doing a better go. and that would cost us. one hundred million. now

and for all that investment defense strategists are calling the situation a stalemate gadhafi is still in libya reportedly using illegal and indiscriminate cluster munitions on rebel forces peace seems no nearer and nato appears to be settling in for the long haul until the libyans themselves can negotiate a deal after a month of strikes u.k. forces look more inextricably involved in the conflict than ever just in the last week the ministry of defense committed to sending military advisors to libya to organize the rebels this is seen by many as the most significant step so far towards deploying ground troops and once that happens many seen libya turning into a not that afghanistan ten years and counting lower emmett's r.t. london. joining me for more is david swanson he is author of the book right here war it's a lie they say right there on your screen david you know i want to ask you this

this use of drones that we now know is going to be going on in libya what do you think the toll is going to be of earth or the think that we have been drones have a success of strategic kills the success rate of just two percent since two thousand and four and pockets don what is their success going to be on libya i know no reason to think it will be higher of the twenty five people killed in pakistan today are known to have included children we're talking about of it spends months meeting face to face with chalk level taliban officials who turn out not to have anything to do with the taliban and we're supposed to believe that a guy at a desk in was made just can't identify who's under a roof in libya or pakistan or anywhere else in the united nations denounces this is the illegal and here it's been used as part of a mission supposedly justify justified by the department of justice in washington as help holding the credibility of the united nations you don't which is a resolution that dance foreign forces in bend in in force is an arms embargo it's

lunacy that's a great point that you mentioned the united nations stance on u.s. drone use so is this a violation of the u.n. resolution that is the reason that nato is in libya right now. arguably so it's arguably a crime regardless of u.n. resolution anywhere in the world according to a claim see in recent years by the united nations and the you know for those who think that we needed a. no fly zone and we needed to prevent a massacre that claim has come and gone that's been done and so the question is even if you buy that argument which i don't but in the world are we still doing there are in one side in a civil war violating the arms embargo that's part of that resolution putting foreign forces in which violates their resolution and tacking retreating troops and

using not just drones but missiles from planes and other weapons that kill civilians you know and at what point in this operation it is clearly going to result in more deaths on both sides then were were claimed to be at risk. from gadhafi do you say enough's enough this was the wrong decision and just to be on the u.n. resolution is this mission creep of that if they fanatically getting at pelf and a longer dried out operation there and libya even gave yesterday was tweeting that you know this takes time it was always better to get a copy regime out by and take a long time. i'm betting i've been trying it's a day to find someone to take my bet i'm trying to get some one hundred dollars that it goes over that sixty p. a market's in the war powers act i can't find anyone willing to bet me i would bet it goes for several years at least and if the us pulls out europe still might stay

in the this is going to be a divided country this is going to be a stalemate and creating a martyr out of gadhafi won't change that there are interested parties on both sides of this war and violence is just not an obvious solution here or anywhere you know airstrikes haven't worked to avoid a stalemate which is what many i have a great a bit of coming to including admiral mike mullen so what makes anybody think that drones which are now remote control air strikes will be more effective and get out of a stalemate and past that. i'm not convinced that anyone thinks they will be effective but i think that a lot of people with good reason believe they will dissuade american hostility to the war because with american lives are not directly at risk. of other people just are not valued in the same way even in a war that was launched on the pretense that its sole motivation was saving human well it's so do you think of that as political for the united states so that they

can make that argument that hey no u.s. lives are at risk air. i think that's why we're moving to the use of only and ergo weapons here and elsewhere i think it avoids putting american lives directly at risk you know i think that you know we'll avoid a draft at all costs will destroy the economy we'll put everything into recruitment we'll hold people over we'll take them on educated and older and less prepared and we'll give them longer terms of so-called service but if we can avoid using human beings at all if we can use machines and claim that no lives are at risk the pentagon loves that and just a moment but i'm just wondering you know if it avoids human lives and human cost on the american side using drones but i'm just curious what impact this has on the muslim world because drones are wildly unpopular they've been a sticking point between islam about in washington as a result as a million casualties and

a disdain for these so when the muslim world you know more broadly knows that the united states is now using drones in libya does this fuel anti-americanism resentment frustration with american foreign policy i can't imagine how it couldn't i was recently in afghanistan there seems to be a lot more resentment of this sort of behavior these killings then of torture and imprisonment and those kinds of abuses i can't imagine that you don't have the same result here in a country where gadhafi for all of his faults is widely seen as a resistor of foreign empire all right well i thank you so much for giving us that perspective david swanson author of war is a lie but that fresh news now meanwhile speaking of the perception of the u.s. sparking a price debate today the qur'an or the constitution free speech and its limits those issues are being raised as florida pastor terry jones tries to raise a protest against jihad and sharia law or what he perceives of it in the largest

islamic community in america and he's best known as the pastor that presided over the burning of the koran igniting outrage and deadly protests in afghanistan artie's christine for that is in dearborn michigan but the story. they came to show that the planned protest was not causing a rift in their community even formed a human chain in a show of solidarity christians jews and muslims were not afraid. but we work together as a team as if as one family they came to send pastor terry jones a message whatever has imported it i'm going to pray and as god to deliver him a message to him is i am praying for you he needs help more than it will attend a service on the eve of the protest planned by a man that has held the qur'an on trial and another man who actually set the holy book on fire to fight what some here deemed the greatest offense with peace.

peace. but were some in the city of dearborn are divided are along the lines of true rules of law the constitution and the qur'an and truly it with that freedom of speech but i think it should be a little bit more strict with people they get to create a problem he has every right to say what he wants to do what he wants this is america this is not the middle east but at least he should not hurt our feelings for some across the country the question is will freedom of speech incite violence . earlier this month in response to pastor terry jones actions more than a dozen people were killed in mazar e sharif in afghanistan here in dearborn it is about public safety pastor jones was refused a permit to protest at the mosque but was told he could protest elsewhere he should not be stopped from expressing his opinion in other venues that he's been offered

including in the city hall under local laws here there are four designated for. the henry ford community center a public library city hall and right here one thousand for this record but the bigger question from. is should there be designated free speech zones or under the first amendment of the constitution to the entire country designated free speech zone and they're born michigan christine for sound r.t. . and here to talk more about this issue is richard greene he's a communications strategist attorney and a former air america radio host he's also author of this book you see here words that shook the world he joins us from los angeles i want to thank you for being with us now free speech pretty fiercely protected by the supreme court and of course obviously in the constitution in this case should it be protected for terry jones should he be allowed to protest to protest. you know one of the reasons

why i'm here is because i wrote an article in the huffington post when this first came out and people were very upset oh my god how can we have bridge terry jones free speech but the truth is every single day we have bridge the free speech of so many people i mean janet jackson doesn't have the right to communicate her fashion opinions as it were at the super bowl when i was on air america we almost got thrown off of the chicago affiliate because no wiley the actor said the password you can't in television or in radio if you're in the united states even if you are a law abiding citizen you can't use the f. word or the s. word you cannot advertise out hard alcohol you can't advertise cigarettes you can't advertise pornography even though those might be expressions of one's you know opinions or sentiments or political views or anything like that so what i want people to understand and constitutional law it was my favorite subject in law

school the first amendment is a wonderful thing but it is not absolute and there is a minute legal action provision in the united states supreme court cases that say that you can stop someone from doing something if it will in fact create some sort of horrible activity action as a result and that's what terry jones is about to do so richard let me ask you why do you think people are so fiercely protecting his freedom of speech the a.c.l.u. it was very difficult to get anybody who would come on camera and say that his free speech to be limited but i think that is. you know what i think i think we simply have this this fantasy that america is all about free speech and we are but we also control it and we control it and circumstances i mean oliver wendell holmes all the way back said that you cannot stand up in a crowded theater and shout fire why because the deficit result from that

exercise of free speech was in fact harmful to society we've made a decision that janet jackson exposing her nipple is somehow harmful to society and i would argue were that me saying or anybody on a radio show or a television show saying a swear word is harmful to america harmful to the public safety and i think that we need to just get real we either do and fact now of course citizens united says that corporations even foreign corporations can spend. millions or billions of dollars to influence united states elections and they have every right to do that but you know we've got a weird idea about free speech and the a.c.l.u. god love them and i think it's fantastic to have protests and they stood up to protest but the nazis to protest in skokie in front of a whole bunch of holocaust survivors that's fantastic but if in fact and this is

the law and i'm just stating what the law is there is imminent legal action similar to the you know some sort of protest that would hurt people and kill people there is an ability within the united states constitution to limit that this guy when when the constitution came up we didn't have television so now any action that happens in dearborn michigan is the same as if it were shouting fire in a theater in afghanistan or anywhere else in the muslim world and so it's a different reality and i think we just have to have a conversation about. and i personally am going to i'm opposed to allowing someone to do something that has at its core the desire to incite riots and create that kind of the kind of aftermath you can do whatever he wants he wants to come on your television show he wants to write an op ed in the washington post that's great but he can't do something that isn't intended to incite

a riot now along those lines. with the freed american hiker who spent a year in solitary confinement in iran she said she was appalled at what pastor jones has been doing when she learned of it when she was first any ron and she sees that as a threat to innocent americans and says it feels extremism but on the other hand and people that do not agree with you and her would say can you blame her graphic violence like we saw in afghanistan on the burning of a book. well i think we have to be realistic here we absolutely know that this will cause a reaction of a lot of historical precedent and so we said well we can't stop everybody from doing anything that is an exercise of their freedom of speech because it just might do something that's harmful someplace else why then would we limit people from being able to say i have a bomb it's just

a joke that person would get taken off of an airplane and thrown in jail even though it was a joke so we we just have to be clear on what it is that we're going to protect and what we're not going to protect and so i challenge the a.c.l.u. and everybody else is it's over first amendment the first amendment let's let's get rid of all limitations allow me when i'm on a radio host thom hartmann or you know wiley or anybody else to say whatever they want to do allow us to say whatever you want to say on airplanes allow us to advertise whatever you want to advertise on television and then we'll at least be consistent and not hypocritical now you know the u.k. they they don't allow jones to go into the country into their area they also arrested a man that burned the koran for theatrical bigotry and did have a right are we just too p.c. you know i mean it falls into the area of hate speech is that the kind of thing that we really want to protect where people are doing things that purposely again

i'm going to come back to that point purposely intended to create a violent reaction knowing that it will create a violent reaction we've lost what twelve people were killed in afghanistan with this and not case doing something before. you know is that more or less dangerous than saying i have a bomb when you when you're in a in a security line going into an airport i guess i just want to be consistent and not have it be this fallacy that the first amendment absolutely protects free speech because it doesn't i think terry jones is is detrimental so those short term and long term interests of the united states i would personally say use your freedom of speech in a different way and i'm happy that the permit was denied all right well that's the year after final word on that i really appreciate you for giving us your opinion on that was richard green communications strategist attorney and author of worth.