so if you're in florida. these are the images the world in seeing from the streets of canada. corporations rule. but can they alone show that the real headlines with none of the mercy rule out of washington d.c. now as president obama takes his turn to spark peace in the middle east a look at the money that the u.s. throws of this conflict as well as other countries in the region haven't we learned that peace can't be bought that new york city attempts to kick smoking in the butts starting today it will be illegal to smoke in most outdoor public areas but will determine if this anti-smoking legislation is actually a health issue or just the latest example of a nanny state then

a lot of prisoners will be getting issued a get out of jail free card thanks to a recent ruling by the supreme court that says california's overcrowded prisons are unconstitutional but why are they overcrowded in the first place we'll take a look at the business of private prisons and then although fox news has the highest ratings as also a lot of the republican party the two thousand and twelve presidency just think the list of g.o.p. candidates is pretty pathetic and the talking points have only become more radical and that is the end of the show we'll have our monday edition of happy hour but for now let's move on to our top story. just days after president obama made his middle east speech he brought his message to the american israel public affairs committee a powerful pro israel lobby apac held its conference over the weekend here in washington d.c. and while everyone seems to be willing to talk abstractly about peace negotiations nobody has been able to agree on any one concept just yet artie's by in a church again has more. president obama's calls for peace and

a two state solution fell on deaf ears both with this release from a new from the mere mentioning of going back to preen nine hundred sixty seven border lines is unacceptable. so. this is going to retrench. and with the palestinians who believe there is nothing but words in what the u.s. president has said is that if they pressure on it if you know the prime minister of israel or in israel's government now also it's like a cross it's like a lose lose thing like it's very hopeless like we hear the very things that kind of implementation addressing the powerful pro-choice world lobby in washington president obama has made sure to be reaffirmed that no pressure will be put on this real quick because the process and he's proposed solution was just the friend's advice cannot be imposed on the parties to the conflict. no vote at the united nations will ever create an independent palestinian state and the united states

will stand up against the first a single israel out at the united nations or in any international. rules legitimacy . analysts say the contradiction of words and deeds has been a constant source of global frustration about the us foreign policy in the middle east. one example. feel bomb administrator has called these really settlement expansion illegitimate but when he came to actually polling at the un security council to condemn the settlement expansion is illegal the us veto the resolution the failure of the united states. effectively with the israel palestine nation. the president made a very strong case but we should not tolerate civilians being bludgeoned by. their rulers but we do nothing when really truly is do all these things. because

they're. pretty hard in terms of our credibility. internationally and that's not important the surveys suggest president obama's ratings in the muslim world are as low as ever experts say the inconsistency with which the u.s. reacted to different episodes of the arab uprising is to blame president obama's speech on thursday was seen as a way to reach out to the arab or old and say the u.s. supports men and women of the street as opposed to suppressive looks but it seems he's words resulted in more confusion about u.s. policies particularly when it came to these really palestinian conflict when obama said what he said in the last speech was. most of the palestinians feel frustrated only about the speech also i was eating with the israeli media. they are also. so i don't know who said the speech but president

obama is facing pressure from both the international community that has long been suggesting the two state solution and the nine hundred sixty seven border lies as part of the solution and its ally israel which finds that proposal unrealistic president obama's attempts to please both the international community and israel into what resulted in yet another nonstarter in the middle east peace process i'm going to check out reporting from washington. president obama is only one in a long line of us u.s. presidents who have placed a middle east peace high on their foreign policy agenda because the process continues to go nowhere it's become painstakingly clear that words speeches they don't help but perhaps it's time to really analyze the actions of the u.s. and how they vie for the region and by that i mean let's talk about money the u.s. gives israel three billion dollars in aid a year they also give the palestinian authority eight two thousand and ten it was two hundred twenty five million dollars worth not even equivalent by any means that

clearly peace here hasn't been got think of egypt yemen tunisia other nations in the region whom the u.s. government also showers with money and weapons their populations have or are in the process of trying to overthrow the leaders that our money supports so can you really buy peace or does it only allow for more corruption and more extremism to grow here to discuss this with me israel mcgovern former senior cia analyst thanks so much for being here tonight both now when we talk about perceptions and the way that people look at u.s. foreign policy do you think that money actually becomes even more powerful than speeches the president may give than votes that our country might take at the u.n. when it comes to knowing that israel is the top receiver of u.s. aid they get three billion dollars a year how much does that weigh on minds well that is the symptom really the proof of how. published it has become. people in muslim world look at that and he

pretends like wait a minute you are any pretense of equal treatment these are the figures that you cited here with israel getting three billion and the palestinian authority getting a couple hundred million and that speaks volumes and when you have people like general petraeus and even secretary clinton herself saying that this agenda vacation this total of unification with israel i suppose trouble and actually increases terrorism one wonders what's going on in their minds that one has ideas but if terrorism increases and the whole objective of this is to get people who bought it or the stymies or others to operate in a war so-called terrorism well if it's not working one would wonder you know what's afoot here and what's a photo of course there are people making people profiteering on these sales these are sales for every dollar that the israelis are given half of that goes back to u.s. defense contractors are the same with pakistan so there's

a lot of money to be made in this was there or not it helps or hinders the so-called war on terrorism or would you say that it's helping or it's hindering i mean can you name me one example where peace has been able to be bought i think some people would say well look at iraq there we tried to pay off a few warlords are doing the same thing in afghanistan i wouldn't call either of those successes no you can't the the the classic example of course is back after world war two when the marshall plan did come into effect and did change things in europe very very profoundly but one has to go back almost therefore to see a situation where just money will work now there are other tools of the promise of course after the arabs did attack israel and people forget that they did in fact history was seventy three the u.s. came up with some very clever proposals look at israeli leaders we don't want this to happen again so let's have a mutual defense treaty you know but spread of the money i mean. who's going to attack you if you have neutral. literally most people talk about israel but they're

not of course you need to be true defense and treatment to be one of these really say well no third were preferred take the money why because you have a treaty with somebody that imposes mutually acceptable obligations not true story wars were told in the other person and it also requires an internationally recognized borders and the israelis didn't want any poor of that and so they turned to stone preferred the three billion a year a low people knew that what could three billion a year mean in this district of columbia or in the towns and cities of this country that are having trouble paying their teachers and firefighters their policeman three billion dollars a year that's a lot of money i think there are a lot of people across the us that are saying that right now if you look at some rasmussen poll some earlier in the year the majority of americans still said that they don't want any foreign aid going to middle eastern countries there was more support than any of the other countries to israel but you're very right in the

sense that americans are being told right now the basic services social services might be on the chopping block here but let's also look at the way that you could say in the region the u.s. also pushes them to itself with its money in terms of egypt and supporting mubarak regime also making arms deals with egypt as well but that money never really trickles down and that's why we're seeing these arab spring revolutions right now that money you also was read to israel. i mean literally for almost forty years it is true that i have to worry about anything on a so the border that is peak and that's changed now there's a strategic change that israel is running scared and with good cause and what obama i think is trying to do is say hey look things are really changed now you're going to have to compromise because just look at the events of two weekends ago we were along its borders in servants of. the the time. when the israelis displaced the palestinians seven hundred thousand of them there were demonstrations or border

infractions on the lebanese border the syrian border some of the borders so there's religion they're going to have to be able to not going to be able to live with what they put accustomed to and obama's trying to move them over to try to look like for americans as well if we take us a little bit beyond just israel if we look at egypt if we look at yemen and what's going on like i said with the arab spring if these revolutions are all successful who's going to look like the bad guy we talk about hypocrisy in foreign policy it's the u.s. that has been giving money to these dictators all along you know well that's true but has been known for a long time. i think that that's not going to matter a great deal you know who cares about what the yemenis think who because of the syrian things i care but for authorities don't we talk about the american people i think it's important to make a distinction between the american people and their representatives and their senators who many of them receive inordinate amounts of money from the israel lobby that's right here in washington today so it is obama corps so they are not with

this program and what needs to happen is the american people need to just speak up and say look if we're democracy and we need the money here in the this country vote differently you couldn't you couldn't safeguard israel offer him a treaty again i don't advocate that we offer him a treaty and see what they say they'll say no thanks because that would mean you know that would mean a very different strategic situation right now very happy please because when i come into washington says netanyahu i get at the white house and that's the bully pulpit you know teddy roosevelt used bully pulpit in a different kind of meeting ok that's when you're sort of free to be a bully and the question is who's going to get away with it all have to wait and see but i guess in the meantime it seems like throwing money at a lot of our problems does seem to be the easier solution for a lot of us politicians rael i thank you very much for joining us tonight welcome to fully. all right we have much more to come on tonight's show if you have

a trip to new york city planned this summer be careful if you're a smoker and he went straight smoking ban takes effect today that curbs where you can light up outside so is this public policy for your own good a little bit on overload and we'll look out the problem of prisons overcrowding in the us how much are private prisons to blame for that fact and not. let's not forget that we live in a part right. i think. well. we haven't got the nuclear safety get ready because you get.

a charge in here broadcasting live from washington d.c. coming up today on the big picture. new web site which twenty four seventh's live streaming news times what to do about the ongoing financial heart unlimited high quality videos for download. and stories you may never find mainstream news. so. listen. those aren't much to stand.

by guys welcome michel and tell the alone a show we've heard our guests not to say on the topic now we want to hear from our audience just go on to you tube to video on our to twitter for plot of the questions and we post on you tube every monday and on thursday in the show your responses during the week let your voice be heard. today is the day that new york's a new smoking ban goes into effect smoking is a long been outlawed in restaurants bars government buildings and offices but this new ban goes after what many see as the last bastion complying with legislation passed in february of this year it's now illegal to smoke in any of new york city's public parks beaches boardwalks and prominence but is it actually going to work smoker ag advocacy groups are already planning

a smoke in the park from age twenty eight in protest and the n.y.p.d. is leading the enforcement to the parks department which hasn't shown any signs of clamping down so perhaps to really figure out whether this will work or not it's better to go back to the original debate to guess how all this will play out is as an example of a nanny state at its worst banning smoking for your own good or is this a public health issue that most americans support which gives a voice to those who don't want to suffer the negative effects of smoke do anything discussed this is jacob sullum senior editor at reason reason magazine and the author of the book for your own good the anti-smoking crusade and the tyranny of public health jacob thank you so much for joining us tonight what do you say is this protecting the rights of nonsmokers or is this infringing upon the rights of smokers you could say that we're all taxpayers here all of our money contributes to keeping some of these public parks intact but is it always the moralistic argument

that ends up winning out i think that we've lost a cup there for a moment hold on we're trying to get him right back we're going to try to get him back but jacob has done a lot of reporting on this issue and there are a lot of people out there that would say it is indeed the nanny state taking into effect i think we're still waiting for jacob but if you also look at a lot of scientific data there of course we've seen a lot of studies as of late that show that the effects of secondhand smoke even is he backed jacob can you hear me now. ok we want to go yeah we lost you for a minute i'm happy that you're back or did you hear my first question at all is this protecting this protecting the rights of non smokers or is this infringing on the rights of smokers though saying that we all pay taxes so in essence all of our money goes into these public parks and and boardwalks to keep them out but is it always the moral argument that wins in the end. well i think if you look at the justifications for slow bans including the outburst of combatants who one is

usually of the size that is this is to protect bystanders and to protect nonsmokers from the second hand smoke but i think the real motivation of not chaos in terms of the public health agenda is to get smokers to quit so in a city like new york where you can't smoke in the workplace you can't smoke in bars or restaurants and now you can't smoke in parks or air on beaches or an industry and walkways i guess you can still smoke if you're walking down and out of the street and so you keep moving it makes it very hard obviously to maintain a happy so it has the not incidental effect of getting people to quit smoking and in fact the city's health commissioner said this is what this is the main goal of this is to get people to switch it's not which i think was was an example of where candor on his part i think that really is the main motivation in terms of the public health officials and the struggling activists polygonal college going to be i think you know they're worried about the nooses primarily they may talk about the long term possible long term health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke but i

really don't think that's the main motivation i don't think it will series of ludo they happen to walk by a guy smoking a cigar apart and that they're going to get lung cancer or heart disease i think to the extent of they are concerned about smoking in public places because they perceive it to be a nuisance or it's not a tractor it's magic that the kids and you know in a public place this outdoors there really isn't a very strong justification to let me have a nuisance simply because it's so smoke so diluted in the outdoor air that there really isn't much of a nuisance there at all i think in public places they're indoors things like you know courthouses at least asians where which are not only in north but where in fact people often have to go because there are through a legal process where there's a strong argument that they're banning smoking altogether or restricting at the very least so the government owns that property and out operates it on behalf of taxpayers and has to the rules so i think what's reasonable that on the senate. but certainly on public property the government has set some sort of that's in contrast

with private property like bars or restaurants with really is going to the government so that was a solution in my view that are we should be in your property or i'll take up and you know are there anything to take that tell us exactly how many people are or what the rates are for people quitting smoking because of these rules and you think that if this was a public health issue they would approach it in terms of education educating people about the negative effects of smoking rather than going through punishment. but i think that the problem is that education had its impacts and it's pretty much done having it sober what we what we saw at the time and surgeon general's report back in the sixty's was that people did pay attention it made a difference that these the health effects of smoking being publicized and there was a quite a steady decline in smoking to the point where now i think it's under twenty percent of the doc but the lation still smokes versus used to be you know in the forty's to women fifty's from near and. so it's part of the change but what happened is that over the years the people who are most receptive to the health message those are the ones who tended to respond first and now are left with. a

smaller minority is not as receptive that message and therefore you see any sort of movement using more coercive means things like smoking bans were like increasingly punitive for tobacco taxes in new york it's a look at another example that it was cigarette taxes in the country with several dollars on each. levied by this city and then several more dollars the state on top of the federal court and we are starting to see a smoking advocacy advocacy group saying of their planning smoke in the or the bill just moved to other parts that we'll see how it all works out whether this enforcement really does work jake i want to thank you very much we have to wrap it up without a few technical issues here. our it is time for show and tell on tonight's program last time we wanted to get your input on president obama's middle east speech was vague rhetoric for the decades

old conflict between israel and palestine we asked if you thought obama's speech signals a change in u.s. policy towards the region let's go to patrice or truce in a sense for treason a sentry to find out what you have to say. after president obama announced a plan for mideast peace talks based on the sixty seven borders he burst the palestinian position angered israel and generally took the world by surprise was it a smart move your viewers believe it signals a real change in u.s. policy and the most positive opinion that came to us was from twitter from miles he said obama's speech is the first time a u.s. president has proposed something realistic regarding is your own palestine chris agrees he said both parties need to be pragmatic about the situation in order to make progress but tim believes this is all a waste of time speeches rarely change anything he said this one is no different my take when two groups of people just keep arguing the same thing over and over sometimes someone just needs to stand up and shout stop i think that person who

tried to do that was the president of the united states so mr president now that you have everyone's attention we all want to know if actions will follow words. as always thank you for your responses and here's our next topic for you we just discussed new york city's new smoking ban that takes effect today making it illegal to smoke in public parks boardwalks beaches and prominence and it's being treated as a public health issue but some say that this is the nanny state at work so we want to know what you think does new york city's new smoking ban go too far you can respond to us on facebook twitter and huge tube and who knows your response just might make it on air. now in what could be a big blow to prison systems across the u.s. supreme court has ruled that california's overcrowded prisons violated constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment they rejected the straits of quest for more leeway and agree that a prisoner release plan is now necessary and two thousand and eight and two thousand and nine analysts found that one hundred twelve california prison inmates

died unnecessarily due to inadequate medical care but why are these prisons are overcrowded to begin with you can say that the war on drugs california's three strikes law and general lock them up and throw away the key mentality but there are other forces lurking behind the scenes a lobby for those strict laws and for more prisons the private prison industry not only are these private institutions beginning to spread to more states in the u.s. but they also been found to lobby legislators for strict immigration laws like arizona's s.b. ten seventy so they can take in more people and make more profit so could this ruling helped thwart the growth of growth of private prisons or could only make it worse joined me to discuss this is x. co-creator of quentin may a project of brave new foundation that's launched a nationwide on land him online campaign called immigrants for sale axel thank you so much for joining us tonight before we get into just the immigration topic let's talk about private prisons in general you know how much these private prison industry zeven say the prison guard lobbies how much of they really forced certain

states to take up a strict rules when it comes to being tough on crime. i think they've had a tremendous influence particularly in the immigration case they have gone state to state and this movement this anti immigration movement that we've seen throughout the country has been directly attributed to the private prison group or asians we have c.c.a. lobbying thousands of dollars in arizona in georgia in florida we have the geo group who has a huge state interest in all these states so we can say with certainty these private prison corporations have a lot to say in how our prison systems are being transformed across the country now obviously for private prisons it's profitable but more prisoners they get the more money they make but how much money exactly would they get if if some of this strict immigration legislation became more acceptable across the board in the u.s. well we can see how much profit it already already without having the full array of

laws that we are expecting to happen in the next few years that profit over five billion dollars across the board they own over one hundred thousand beds spaces around the country they're in virtually every state in some shape or another with concentrations in places like arizona and georgia similarly so arizona and georgia are the states that just passed them very gracious largest private prison detention centers in georgia store detention center and we saw how h.b. eighty seven have been so there is a correlation they have one hundred fifty thousand spaces that they have to fill every year and they're certainly devising a lot of strategies to make sure that they fill those spaces now i want to talk about the issue of overcrowding again very many obviously you can say that a lot of the stricter legislation is what sends more people to jail but also when i was looking into the practices of these private prisons they only take they refused to take certain prisoners who might have

a certain mental sickness or just physical sickness and they pushed those into the state run prisons so nonsense are they directly involved or at fault for also making the state run prisons more crowded and inhumane as the supreme court rolls. absolutely i mean. the key here factor is that these are entities for profit these are introduced there are out there to make money so they will do everything in their power to make sure that they're sure shareholders have a profit that year sometimes that means lesser conditions sometimes that means not taken prisoners sometimes which is the case in store and they had a prisoner die because often time and again he came up and said that he had. different health issues and they didn't even attend to it they actually let him die because they didn't have held service facilities so these are prisons their main purpose is to make money and if that means lower conditions that that means circumventing some of the regulations that. our government prison system has

they'll probably do it it's so secret all these contracts and all these forms of governance that these private prison corporations have around the country are so secretive it is very very hard for the public to have access so this is why we're launching immigrants for sale campaign to expose these types of issues and to let the public know that they can do something about it well so what's in it for the lawmakers then because you know if you look at recent data that's been put out there by the new york times on arizona's private prison system it turns out it actually ends up costing the state more money to save them any money right now honest every state is going through a budget crisis you would think it would be in the lawmakers interest to perhaps reform some of the criminal justice system q you know reduce the number of prisons that might get them more votes. actually it is the opposite way in certain states and here's here's the explanation why a lot of these private prison system they go through lobby groups or interest

groups like alec the american legislative exchange council which is a group that connects both private prison and multinational corporations with legislators and they devise strategies that will be politically advantageous for the legislator as well as a for profit mechanism to the multinational corporations in the case of anti immigration legislation c.c.a. has invested a lot of money into the pockets of legislators thirty six of the co-sponsors of arizona as you ten seven a lot have some direct connection with c.c.a. whether it was through a campaign contribution or not the governor in georgia nathan deal got money from c.c.a. so there is both money in their campaigns which now we know that corporations can donate as much as they want and we also have the interest to take to join both the multinational corporation or the private prison corporation in this case with some native is an anti immigrant. been peddling throughout the last few years and they want to marry the.