we're going to load a show at the real headlines with none of the mercy of the live in washington d.c. bin laden's death still leaves a lot of questions for the u.s. and countries around the world so if the obama administration stops talking are outside or conspiracy theories in it then shifting to the topic of libya it's becoming obvious of the war has reached a stalemate but will the western powers ever admit that they made a mistake that the first g.o.p. primary debate kicks off tonight in south carolina but frankly nobody's going to be

there so we're going to ask why and since it's think what are my over going to revisit an issue that was dominating news cycles this time last year immigration so why the crowds and the coverage suddenly disappear then stare at your favorite cocktail you won't want to miss tonight's happy hour we'll introduce you to the dumbest criminals of the day details on all that and much more it's a night show but first our top story. the more time that goes by since the obama administration announced the killing of osama bin laden the more questions are raised here at home and around the world yesterday the white house announced that they would not be releasing photos of bin laden to prove his death or releasing any new details about the raid in order to protect operational techniques that may be used in operations in the future and the last week has seen a constant change in the story beginning with the line the bin laden was armed in use his wife as a human shield both details which have now been walked back by the white house they've admitted that bin laden was in fact not armed they said he resisted and

therefore his assassination was in line with military and international standards but pakistan and its embarrassment that the al qaeda leader was found in a mansion sized compound in a city that's also home to retired military leaders and a military academy where they felt launched their own investigation and the pakistani security officials have said that there are no signs of bin laden or others were armed or resisted and they've a label of this killing as cold blooded and valid disastrous consequences of any war on authorized rates are carried out so with the white house deciding to seal their lips will we ever know the truth or does not move just open the door for more outside theories too about earlier i spoke with lieutenant colonel anthony shaffer senior fellow at the center for advanced defense studies who is still serving as a regular reserve lieutenant colonel and i first asked him if he thinks that obama is making the wrong choice by not releasing the post-mortem pictures and may they consist of decision which i believe ultimately is wrong but the fact that first off

this was for better or for worse in the name of the american people the american people need to be the ones that the audience the white house is actually answering to in this case i think the american people are owed for better or for worse the picture plus the procrit president or even with president bush when we killed. in iraq that picture as gruesome as it was was released to be inclusionary their pictures were released so they. the same picture when he was dead was really so i don't anticipate you know what i believe it is realistic that there would be a muslim uprising or a massive response any more than it's going to happen once bin laden's wife starts talking about her perspective on what happened so this is where i think there's a hugely inconsistent perspective by the wife and you think that's something that is very good even the massive response you considering that another of our other policies are changing we still have troops in iraq we still have troops in afghanistan we're still you know shadow wars going on in yemen and in pakistan so will one man's death i mean granted yes he was the leader of al qaida but would

have put our troops in any more danger video images were it was smothered i'm a proponent of we should have captured him but with that said he's dead just put it out there get it done the other issue we're talking about here which i think is going to hurt us in the end is this is just leaving the space open for all the conspiracies my facebook is full of my friends talking about this is you know he's already been dead there's no so you know to me that one or another put it up there people say well they could photoshop it just just do it just get it out there and as best you can fix the narrative say this is what happened and let it go you know the other thing to the last argument here aside from perhaps you know being scared that there might be some type of reaction to a song but not intending to releasing the photos and they're also saying that there's an mmog moral argument here that we don't need to parade him around like a trophy there's no need to see these gruesome images but you know i think a lot of people have argued only recent days to that how moral is it to go wage war to go assassinate somebody and then not be able to see what you've done to him to realize the consequences i agree with your point completely this is done in the

name of the american people there was so as bad as is it there's going to this is it's done just own up to it secondly president obama and others were calling for the release of photos related to prisoner abuse so i don't understand how a prisoner abuse photos or any more was you know bad but having a good terrorist who clearly even a lot of the muslim community. a lot of this guy did so i don't know i don't understand what were the moral equivalence of clemency is different between what i'm prisoner abuse photos released and the terrorists i don't know because i don't get what you think is really going on in pakistan here obviously there are a lot of fingers being pointed they were i think that they're embarrassed as well if you consider the fact that you know we flew into supposedly unannounced of course that some of it not and was hiding in a massive mansion size compound in the same town you know to have a military academy but what they're doing now is they've launched their own investigation that they don't want us to be

a part of it's an independent investigation their investigation is already saying that in fact none of these men were armed that this was a cold blooded murder if you bob ministration now really remains tight lipped on this doesn't say anything else then are people going to start listening to pakistani we know that the u.n. is also asking for all the details of this raid. are they going to become suddenly the credible source here and they will absolutely i think the obama administration in many ways the old adage is if you're going to hold up big and i think they need to stop to get their act together and what this narrative really is because it changes so many times is this is not good the second thing that's happening here is not only the pakistanis doing their own investigation they've hired high priced lobbying firms here in washington to make sure that their side of the story and the money we created continues so i think clearly whatever happens here the pakistani investigation will only benefit the pakistanis we have to we have to understand that no matter what they say but the problem is that the rest of world's going to probably take an area the pakistanis come up with and run with it based on the fact

that we've changed our story you're a source of many times do you think that we should give the u.n. all the details they're asking to do an investigation to see if this really was conducted illegally the obama administration is saying absolutely this was all within the legal realm a lot of times before we heard it with their treatment bradley manning at quantico to the only that's all according to the military planning military rules don't we just want to quote. those very words by at least coming to you and giving them their investigation let me say something to shock your viewers we do things of the american government are illegal in the international law all the time no way out and i bet that's a harsh crack but that's the truth and the truth is we've highlighted this over to another country so i don't care how many times white the white house spokesman says we do this we're going to let you know we did what we thought was in our best interest of the country and violated their sovereignty just get it get it's one of the situations accept that fact and get over it now the question becomes why did we have to violate their sovereignty that goes back to your original part of your

question about what about the pakistanis the pakistanis have not been a good partner and this is what i think most of i spent part of the day on capitol hill this morning talking to members asking me my perspective on what does this all really mean well this is what it really means the pakistanis are going to act in their own self-interest this is not our policy makers continue to fail to understand as long as we give them the money with no expectation of results other than you know don't tell us we'll try our best they will continue to play us against ourselves in this case they're going to of course put together whatever narrative benefits that it's time we get much more realistic and frankly i knew my book operation dark heart talks about this we knew this in two thousand and three the pakistanis cannot be trusted by the fact they have their own interests that are contrary to ours in many instances unless we understand that deal with it we will continue to have to kind of from the long as we're doing here are fair officials you know secretary of state hillary clinton will say that this is a relationship that we we still very desperately need that we're a friend in ways that we maybe won't understand each other all the time but we

really do desperately need each other how much do we really need to practice as if we have bin ladin if supposedly i mean that's where al qaeda is now right we need to get out of afghanistan how much do any of pakistan well frankly i this point the only thing that i see is a clear concern of ours is the nuclear weapons program by the fact that we want to make sure it remains stable and controlled people who will not use them against us or our allies with that same. we are now actually helping fund through the funds we're giving them their ability to develop new technology within their weapons program and as most of us know most of those weapons are aimed at india and other allies so the last thing in the world we want to do is help destabilize a relationship between the indians and pax which result and possibly a war between the two of them so this is where we've got to take a realistic look at where is our money going could we really get anything all these years and to me if it goes beyond a shadow of a doubt that the pakistanis are either gravely incompetent or in cahoots with it in some form there's no if nothing else and with that in mind you've got to look

realistically at what a lot of money is being used for if it's not being used to benefit our interests i'm sorry i'm being brutally honest here then we should reconsider why we're giving and speaking of money now a lot of congress members there of course a big fans of the special ops teams jaison came general and that's where a lot of money is going to start going to want to thank you very much for joining us tonight thank you. coming up the war in libya has reached a stalemate so what's next for speaker professor robert farley about the real possibility of putting troops on the ground then there's a g.o.p. presidential primary debates night in south carolina that elephants actually going to be there so explain why one has to debate with j.t. for air and stared out oh. let's not forget that we sat in a parked car right. i think. one well.

we never got the look shows the can from safe get ready because our freedom. charter here broadcasting live from washington d.c. coming up today on the big picture. new web site with twenty four seven live streaming news times what to tell you

about the ongoing financial heart unlimited free high quality videos for download. and stories you never find on mainstream news. in the me so. maybe the political. parties are touched. say. hi guys welcome to show and tell or show part of our guests have to say on the topic now i want to hear. just watching you tube the video response or the twitter first part of the question that we post on you tube every monday and on thursday when the show long response is going to leave your voice be heard. many are in agreement of the nato led war in libya has reached a stalemate but often still shows no signs of stepping down and casualties continue to rise so could the next step for nato forces in fact be placing troops on the

ground are teasdale bushell has more. months of libya's speech to according to mates of libya's leader could look at the for years building defensive positions be well civilian casualties from filming continue to mount nature's spokesman review its solution send good ground troops. the u.n. security council should adopt a new resolution and libya resolution one thousand seven hundred three does not invisible man operations we need a new resolution. and forces plan that all along says a leading u.s. law professor clearly what we're seeing unfold here in libya is a pre existing war play out are by nato by the british by the french by the americans with hair moved everything now is following a forty five am which is why i believe that since they have failed to do polls

gadhafi with the steps are solved far the next stage will be moving into a ground invasion later powers of jupiters the international community into supporting war and that's one of them protecting civilians was the claim but driving the country's resources is the real goal this is one of the most the worries and transgressions of the rights of nation national sovereignty and international law that we've seen in the post-war period the west the u.s. and france and britain have been called virtually according to the evidence that's leaking out covertly arming the opposition to gadhafi in hopes of grabbing control of the oil and in the different parts of libya the libyan government's promise is still for nato if it sends in ground troops some agree such a war may be tougher than expected we will see increased activity not only in the

air but also on the ground and maybe this will solve the problem from the perspective of the nato countries but maybe it was simply because we were the one who. coming from thirty thousand feet coalition soldiers feel fairly safe a tent she wore activists want putting troops on the ground risks not just more civilian killing but nato deaths as well and the further away they get from high tech and they and the nearer they get low tech then the greater the danger of casualties on both sides turkey china and russia who will criticize the bombardments of libya for minister sergey lavrov thinks nato has already gone far beyond the first u.n. resolution to maintain a no fly zone and hints a second resolution to move in ground troops may not come as easy and all several nations feel tricked if anybody wants to ask for this money it welcome to the u.n. security council we will discuss trying to understand what is planned because the

negligence from the mandate and we are seeing now are enough to learn lessons with international opposition on the rois nato states face an uphill task to make the case for more war or britain's prime minister will dealt sending ground troops to libya his defense secretary of methods of parliament they plan exactly that but you have members good at the number of civilian deaths from nato bombing a drawing likely to welcome escalation of the conflict r.t. london. so while the world is currently caught up in what it means now that we're post bin laden and tries to weave through all the details of exactly how the getting rid of his mission went down let's not forget that there's an entirely different war still going on in libya hillary clinton brokered a deal today in italy with the libya contact group to fund the rebels but that's not the only sign of mission creep as the e.u. now says that its humanitarian aid mission might need ground troops and that would require a new u.n. resolution for two months and it's become quite clear the air strikes and calls for

could offer to go are bringing about any change least of all positive results so is it time for the western powers to admit they made a mistake joining me to discuss it is robert farley assistant professor at the university of kentucky patterson school lawyers and money robert thanks so much for joining us tonight if you're just wonder do you think that perhaps the inner vention in libya has made it off the stronger that if we hadn't gone in there may be you know some of the unrest would have continued maybe there would have been more pressure from inside but now it's top it is the civilian casualties are rising now more cut off the supporters are coming out of the woodworks because he gets to as the nato victim. i think that's a really good question and he answered the answer but he still doesn't have control of the country and he was he was winning against the rebels when do you know intervened and it looked like he was going to see as many whether the future would have been told by mask or not is a different question. and so i'm not sure that he's actually stronger but i think

he's been far more resilient than anyone in nato expected i think he's been a lot more resilient than the rebels expected and in that sense i think that people are beginning to are going to come to his banner on those terms and of course we haven't seen any signs of of regret that would be embarrassing i guess you would say from nato or from the u.s. quite the opposite now they're saying that they're going to start funding the rebels and the e.u. of course is saying they might need even need troops on the ground to go on with this humanitarian mission so do you just picture this continuously moving trudging creeping forward from here on out. we've talked about this a lot and it's really hard to see exactly where this ends up and i think you're actually right in terms of thinking about. how we're moving forward but there doesn't seem to be any way to britain stalemate me or doesn't seem to have any qualms about ideas about how to break the stalemate you would have expected the parents had london to washington had some sense of what to do at all he simply

didn't go out so we got to vote but they would have some sense of what to do some sort of plan but it's been being increasingly apparent to me that they didn't really have any sense of what to do if something went wrong and so now we have a situation where we are continuing to have to try to. get off he is not backing down and he doesn't seem to be willing and so i think that we are going to seeing some in the senate for more support for the rebels and of course they've already made the next the next meeting in june there are you talking about perhaps down the line using that obvious frozen assets so does look like they're planning so my long term here and now you know you mention the fact that they didn't know what to do in case that's not wrong i can't believe that we got into another war without a plan b. but let's look at the way that we just handled the situation with osama bin ladin of course you know also last week when the son was killed as well as

a few grandchildren they said that that was an assassination attempt and while that may not be legal do you think the nato or the u.s. might actually have the guts to go for it try to do it a real south and south we know that regime change is their desired. i'm scared i certainly think it's possible that because even if you kill it sometimes a very strike. going forward whether he's going to be the director are going to have struck his or her question but when you bomb and control command and control facilities and he's part of these command and control still it isn't he may be killed there also may be some sort of operation with special forces that is in some sense of order. what i'm skeptical of is that they've got to get out it is simply going to make the situation there what a key there is an entire regime here and it's a regime that is tied together by buttons or writings that want me and people have been fighting the rebels there you know who their own people who have surrendered have been executed by the rebels are going to cases and they're going to be reluctant to themselves to surrender so i don't see even if you know if he is

killed. by the west i don't necessarily see this conflict and any time soon and of course one of the other problems is that it was labeled as a humanitarian intervention to help civilians not necessarily pick sides and go ahead aid the rebels but we see civilian casualties now piling up and you know this is something i asked one of my guests yesterday about i was just curious what your take is too if you look at the international laws when they have a war it just boggles my mind that it's illegal to go in and try to assassinate a foreign leader no matter how horrible griddle they might be but it is legal to to launch airstrikes and to bomb from the air and to kill civilians. right right well it's it's because if you can't get legal questions one of which is the doctor which means if you're trying to achieve some sort of military you need it might just go against the. rules on their own sort of make sense when they are carefully explained they don't make sense when you can sort of step back and see all the absurdity of it and these absolution rules really it's i think basically so world

leaders don't try to assassinate one another on a regular basis and so it's good for them. yeah but as we've often seen rules do tend to get broken robert i want to thank you very much for joining us and of course we'll continue following to see what happens in the stalemate in libya now thanks so much thank you well tonight fox news is going to be hosting the first proposal a candidate for the two thousand and twelve presidential primaries in greenville south carolina and almost nobody is going to be there that's right only five people are going to be there and it's herman cain gary johnson and ron paul rick santorum and the only so-called big name tim palmer it's another bad sign for an already painfully slow start for the g.o.p.'s election race so why the lack of candidates and it could actually give a chance for those outsiders to have a real voice joining me to discuss it is j.p. fair senior communications strategist new media strategies and from our studio in

new york is tara dowdell democratic strategist i want to thank you both for joining us tonight tara i'm actually going to start with you do you think that this is the worst presidential debate ever you know i've read some really funny commentary today people saying this is probably going to be the only presidential debate in history that actually lowers the statue of everyone participating. well clearly the front runners and the presumed front runners are staying pretty far away from this and i think that's a bad sign for the republican party and also the land polling that's going on as you stated surrounding this debate is also adding to this sort of sentiment this feeling that they were just aren't ready for prime time they were publishing contenders and to presume contenders i mean right now all of the candidates even the front runners no one's really lighting the world on fire and that's going to be a big challenge for them in perspective and also on a number of other friends that are important in winning elections k p what's going

on here why the hesitation for people to jump into the race here and you can see this is the clock is taking some people are trying to say that it's still early but if you look back to four years ago there were double the amount of contenders there are many republicans have some magical candidate that they're just hiding until the right moment to whip them out or you know what's the deal there are a couple of factors that we need to take into account one is that unlike four years ago there is an incumbent president that is running again when president bush was leaving office that his vice president was not going to run so there was no legacy issue and so it was a question of what you want to happen now so that's that's a big part of it and this was also a fairly reminiscent of the discussion that took place with president obama then senator obama people were talking about how he couldn't be serious or that he wasn't quite ready and because he was working hard and early. being in this race he wanted getting the nomination i think that these are important things this is an

opportunity for the lesser known candidates to get their voice out before the hubbub gets out about you know a mitt romney or whoever else allows them to enter the race speak their turn get a lot of attention and show what they have to offer and you know if they get laughed off the stage then fine didn't have much to lose but at least here's an opportunity for them to be heard but i wonder about that because you could say that obviously there is a lot of tension. right now politically a lot of people are unhappy with the two party system with washington in general you could say that even libertarian thought is starting to become a little more mainstream so wouldn't that be the most daring move that republicans could make is actually try to let ron paul be the main guy and take the lead and maybe be a contender to grok obama because there's no one else out there that i think looks exciting i mean i don't think tim pawlenty is going to beat obama in two thousand and twelve people are very excited about ron paul but i think that a lot of republicans feel that the best thing that they can do is let ron paul speak as much as possible and run into those areas where there are some conflicts

between himself and your average republican and that's and that's i mean this is where this sort of thing gets hashed out but at least here we can have that kind of debate and also ron paul does have staying power right i mean he will probably last at least until the end of this year if not the beginning of next so we're going to we're going to see a lot of ground we're going to see a lot a lot of this debate where you were going to see some more. so some stranger issues maybe being brought up but at least we at least we get started on this my house i have so i think that a lot of potential candidates this time around are going to have to answer some more difficult questions especially when it comes to going to maybe quantitative easing or what they think of the federal reserve and that will be exciting but i mean without this wild card being taken seriously terry what do you think does that make obama unbeatable and twenty twelve with at least the lineup that we're seeing now. well i think the good news for obama is that the line and we are seeing now you're absolutely right is that the line of that we're seeing now is you know there

don't there's not a lot of support there's not a lot of enthusiasm and excitement in a twenty ten election cycle you saw enthusiasm you saw this groundswell for the republicans and that's how they had the massive numbers in the congress but you don't see that right now and for president obama yes he is well positioned but he should not absolutely should not take that for granted because we still have base challenges in this country the economy the rising price of gas and the president is confronting a lot of there's still rests in the middle east as you've been talking about unrest in north africa and then there are signs showing there may be continued unrest in parts of sub-saharan africa so there's a lot going on in this world and he creates a level of uncertainty and a lot of times when people are uncertain and feeling and secure they blame the people in power i think what we're also seeing is that when the republicans people are unhappy we're where they're going right now in congress they elected them they wanted to focus on jobs that was what the mandate and sure was and the republicans

have not done that and so i think there's a lot of it is going to. excuse me the democrats have. them from doing a little bit supposed to talk about the pros haven't actually offered their own version of the budget paul ryan came forward with a plan and everyone was talking about how this might kill the how this might actually cause me and you know that is that is true and. let me just president obama did come out with his own budget. peter talking about what he would do it wasn't serious you had paul ryan to see. dollars that's a huge job creator that no one is taking seriously republicans did come out with a plan to take care of jobs and you have been harping on this issue nonstop now it's well. let's hear let's hear weird. even harping about jobs nonstop when they're going after n.p.r. they're going after planned parenthood they're going after you know it's working with users alerting them but these are parts these are parts of larger debates

where the n.p.r. thing was brought up in terms of you know cutting cutting the budget and frankly it was a distraction but it wasn't the only thing that they were talking about but it was about jobs i mean that was a side issue and it was a small thing the main discussion was happening about how can we reduce the size of government a very real discussion that needs to happen really a pretty second charity have anything to finish out i'd like to just run by that point the reality is that the budget is believed by paul ryan has been booed in a town hall meetings that he's been hosting people came actually believe and every independent analysis said it will actually eliminate jobs that create jobs eliminate jobs and that's the last thing we need to do when what we have right now is a jobs crisis i'm all for a new government try i want to thank both of you for joining us tonight. give us an answer as to who the hell is going to be president in two thousand and twelve but we will keep watching that coming up when oklahoma state politician has no problem voting for outrageous immigration laws but now he's raising money for think if i open raise or.