missions for. war in libya those words may ring hollow until you are confronted with images like the ones you're seeing now is one of the few outlets still reporting from libya we haven't left but neither have nato forces to bring you a report that looks at the talk about war. from a war that makes headlines when you hardly hear about somalia and make no mistake the u.s. is fighting in somalia just a proxy soldiers so could this be the new blueprint for the future of war. weary. the debate was. on tomorrow ok or

nonsupport a while keith olbermann and glenn beck prepare to bask in the light of their new adventures these old giants will release the face of alternative media and will their star soar or crash and burn. welcome back it's tuesday june twenty first eight pm here in washington d.c. and lucy cochran of any watching our team. and the civilian death toll continues to mount in libya where authorities accuse nato forces of killing one thousand civilians including eight children and an attack on the home of one of moammar gadhafi top officials the accusation comes one day after nato admitted to killing as many as nine civilians including two toddlers in a separate bungled air raid archies marine if an ocean on reopen ocean or pardon me is on the ground in tripoli and she filed this report. another day has brought more death and destruction to leave here a large private compound west of the capital tripoli has been leveled reduced to

rubble in a parent's airstrike. rescuers have discovered the remains of fifteen people according to libyan officials. he has destroyed belong to general who are the other one of the people closest to colonel gadhafi it was among those who took part in the military coup to greenville even leader to power forty one years ago the general escaped injury but most of his family died in the attack. because. this man is talking about. one of the grandchildren of the daniel and one of three kids killed in the incident . today of the family had gathered with friends to celebrate his fourth birthday. libyan civilians it is. in the airlie hours of this morning

killing fifteen people including three were children. but. the number is fifteen people nato has denied these claims just as it's never admitted the deaths of more than eight hundred others believe in god and says well killed by their bombs and nine people killed in sunday's bombing of a residential building in tripoli i mean the only seven casualties acknowledged by the alliance which claim to misstated your weapons technical failure and former pentagon official says the only thing clear about the nato campaign is the mountain casualty toll and damage it's inflicting on the even people they try to achieve a certain level of humanitarian effort and initially but the protracted bombing is now increasingly hitting civilian targets and it's creating a very negative reaction i think it does raise the question of what is nato's role

continued role going to be there as discontented actions increases other voices become more and more than out to. the libyan people. and it seems that the more anger they feel about nato the more they support their leader. that this is. a. knighthood. we will be all good to live in all of this is cool we're not sure these are the

bomb being attacking libya what certain is that more are indeed dying. off tripoli. now a bipartisan group of u.s. senators introduced a resolution today that offers support for continued u.s. military involvement in libya all at the same time barring the deployment of u.s. forces on the ground there of course off capitol hill's critics continue to push for an end to that conflict one of them is former u.s. attorney general ramsey clark now civilian deaths are a consequence of war of course and nato accidents all can say be justified in the context of the broader mission to help folks on the ground that's the question i posed to mr clarke and here's what he had to say i think the civilian casualties in fact all of the casualties need to be seen in the context of a war of aggression which nurnberg charter in the nuremberg judgment defined as the supreme international crime. new united states initially or perhaps still

now to some degree or nato has a right to attack of. libya under international law it's not the first time i went over to the navy in one nine hundred eighty six after president reagan caused the attack on tripoli bodyguards healing hundreds of civilians there at the time and first the first target was the compound where colonel gadhafi live they hit the at the office building the same one you see in the crucial day that attempt out in the compound there we don't have middle of a grassy field they hit the home killed a small child a daughter of state the time of government and here we go again it's a war of aggression going to be condemned as the supreme international crime that it gives if it's a supreme international crime or are you saying to present the united states is

a criminal and if so what consequences should be if well the united states is the principal instigator and the president is. the chief executive officer of the united states under article one of our constitution so there's no declared war the congress is upset about that our constitution requires there be a declaration of war by the congress but. so far the congress had declared many wars of aggression. it's declared war to enter wars and have been under way or to. real interest of the united states and it's unclear if they are i doubt that they would have rejected the president's plan had he gone to congress but i guess the broader question is you know if you look at the history of warfare in the united states every single president since reagan has had a war of his own so to speak is there a culture of aggression on warfare that we're fighting here that's broader than just libya yes of course it goes back before reagan.

remember the korean war bloody bloody war three or four million people killed for no reason except. these are who dominate the korean peninsula and divide it the most unified society on the planet at that time culturally never fought in a war off its own soil and certainly divided and. mutilated by huge armies marching against each other time and time again for years but mr clarke it was much easier if you got mom and vietnam of course it was much easier though in those days but that with the limited media to control the message by the white house by the congress either by the forces and power and now the people do have access to this information they see the consequence of the wars why do you think there isn't a broader support behind messages like yours to end these conflicts why are folks like yourself marginalized and c.n.n. with all due respect sometimes that's french by the mainstream establishment. or i

think the mainstream media is still the dominant. informer and opinion center. you know facebook and all these things are she was kind of an entertainment or a game or. irrelevant career but not not the serious word and not the official word show. the domination of the media by the same interests the. issue of the military industrial complex. is a threat to life on earth and that was former u.s. attorney general ramsey clark. well from a war that's making headlines to one that reaches largely undetected by the american people despite of course the flow of millions of us dollars for that conflict of course i'm talking about some alia a failed state by most accounts ravaged by two decades of civil war and home to the al-shabaab one of the most fearsome insurgent groups affiliated with the al qaeda

terror network and somalia is ground zero for a new kind of war and outsourced proxy war fought for u.s. interests but mostly without the help of u.s. troops it's a smaller cheaper alternative to large scale american intervention such a scene in iraq and afghanistan a military correspondent and blogger david abscessed traveled to that country and spent years writing about the secret u.s. campaign there now earlier he joins us from shanghai china to break down how that conflict that's playing out port for the somalis are doing the actual fighting and dying is nothing subtle we're gentle about it but my my point is that there are very few americans on the ground in somalia and what you're seeing in somalia is us as american money. this is a proxy war for america we have paid the chances north over them and to you to do you are hiding for us in the sense that. as much as it's in in our interest for somalia to be well governed and how's that been playing out working out for us

morally and much for answer that you should ask your priest but. on a practical level slowly is how it's working the transitional federal government's gone through several incarnations the latest is actually. it was began about two years ago and lately the effort the u.s. effort has been so focused mostly on making and giving the t.f. g.v. ability to reliably pay its soldiers which might seem like a kind of them. merely bureaucratic issue but in somalia it has strategic implications the t.n.g. it can only fight if they can afford its army they can pay its army somali soldiers in europe able they switch sides so pay the right people and i guess you have the conflict play out the way you want but i mean you know this whole somalia fall handoff campaign to someone who is not a military expert sounds great you know no not too many us dead soldiers no pesky

photos of american troops coming home in body bags can we expect this to be sort of the future of american war fare and will be seen as a fight to places like afghanistan for example and i believe that is the direction that the afghanistan war effort will take starting this summer as we begin pulling out the combat troops and will take a while to get to the point where it's a fully hands off kind of operation like you see in smaller there but yeah you can years of body bags and and the cost and direct cost and when we are growing awareness of the long term cost to our to our veterans yeah americans are losing their appetite for. war or fighting wars directly especially considering so few of these conflicts are at. the present a truly dire threat to u.s. national security but you know you've mentioned that somalia for example doesn't represent a direct threat to united states and as you've documented i mean the only way to

succeed there given the. intense math that the country is in frankly is to spend millions of american dollars a century propping up a failed state are we inviting the potential blowback here a potential negative consequences the blowback bad stuff an interesting question you've been seeing in recent years more and more somali americans that is kids who born in somalia parents or came to america within britain there are hundreds of thousands of small been. it's in the it's and you see the large numbers wars have sort of the stuff of these. kids going to the smaller to fight for al shabaab and he's a busy lot of the action in somalia perpetrate biologist bob are the bombers are americans americans. you know heard them soldiers and it was welcomed and it was

a they get recruited and they did some american community is looking into so. they tried a little bit and small they. are indoctrinated enough to strap a bomb onto their chest and blow themselves up services al-shabaab has worked out so the blow back is americans are they are american civilians are volunteering to die in somalia i mean that that's pretty shocking i don't think you really hear that a convert in the mainstream media all that much but. in that case what then golan somalia i mean how how do the americans want to see this play out and and how does that fit in with what the somalis themselves actually want to see. i think somalia by now is pretty clearly this knowledge people desire and islamic government and we have one in the form of it in the united states can we can talk to can work with it can compromise and that's what we need in somalia we don't need the u.s. side or secular democracy in somalia somalis the ones that somalis want an islamic

government and what americans want is an islamic that we should want is an islamic government it's small it's smaller that we can work with well david you know i would say that probably a lot of americans have heard of at least the movie black hawk down but but not a lot of folks are really aware of u.s. operations on the ground there what are their funding or through a proxy warfare is this something that concerns you and should we be concerned about. what troubles me is that so few people seem to be seem to be paying attention to the fact that we're not just fighting a war in afghanistan we're not trying to end the war in iraq we kept in little wars all over the world in yemen below the border war. with mexico not with mexico but the drug war strategy of the us mexico border and as well in somalia you know we the united states and boiled in conflicts all over the globe but the only

war the weather here anything about in conversation or in most part on the news is the war in afghanistan so i would just argue for americans to keep a closer attention. i think it's that we're lucky in in about the current approach in somalia it's probably the best that's not always the case and an electorate that you know that detached itself from from the from the wars that we fight gets the results it deserves well they have a military correspondent david after breaking down the details on america's outsourced war in somalia. all right well you don't have to be a fan of keith olbermann or glenn beck to know that they are polar opposites when it comes to politics now aside from their big paychecks but that's who earns from their cable news employers the two men have very very little in common at all now after years of generating both ratings and headaches for their sort for their

respective networks both men are trading in their mainstream podiums for new ventures but at the strength of their first so knows their personal brand will somehow guarantee success even if that means starting over completely from scratch from all or risk your alternative television programs archie's honest to theatrical story. i think it's french for it's despised by some loved by others they certainly can't stand each other who make you we more for journalism keith olbermann or me the less than one percent of the country that watches your listens to his show thinking they are not listening to an educated in person. can these mainstream media stars shine just as bright in the scary world of alternative media after years of mad chalkboard ing fox news channel's plan back is about to step off american t.v. screens as fox shows him the door it's imperative that now is responsible citizens who are awake we don't just sit in front of our t.v.'s and say yeah yeah oh my

god one bad what an amazing broadcaster i'm going to sit here and again as all the liars are going to miss the propaganda that will now take all that to his own web network. to get started it's called. the truth. here the access to this truth will cost cash as backs fans will have to subscribe to tune in to turn the damn t.v. off right now if you have to at one point he was up to three point one million viewers how many of those three point one million are going to we want to plunk down less than five bucks a month to see the guy it's difficult to have people pay for something they've been getting for free the whole time one person who won't have trouble pocketing the big buck is former emerson b.c. star keith olbermann several months after being dropped by the network reportedly for making campaign contributions to democrats he's appearing on

a new platform current t.v. channel co-founded by former vice president and the face of america's green movement establishment al gore the whole idea of having a broadcast network is to have viewers it's all about having viewers and nobody watches current right now nobody watches it. i could yell out my window and more people would hear me probably if i was the. channel hopes that will change with the liberal pundits hopping on board for reported i popping ten million dollars a year a satisfying three million dollar raise for alderman's and this n.b.c. days a much bigger corporate no network maybe the sort of thing where the first night the first week wow he's got three million people watching him in week three years ago down to twenty three thousand at that point i think people are current and he has started showing their fingers down to their knuckles and he what have we done while it'll take time to show which gambles pay off and which are old messages are

likely to stick even on new platforms oligarch. the one that's missing is why. i don't know for turning into an oligarch here what we're turning into but unless you ask why. we're going to transform into something i've got a question. don't you or hurts. unlikely mainstream media stars jumping the mainstream should becoming a trend confort of sleeping in bed with a corporate pillow it's too cozy for others to get up and leave i don't think there are enough losers in the world to convince o'reilly that you know. i think o'reilly is in the center. so fans relax and one sided shouting matches are not going anywhere for now and that if you're going to archie do you look all right you don't have to be a fan of either man to know that keith olbermann and glenn beck are polar opposites

when it comes to their politics and aside from once opposing huge paychecks from their cable news employers the two men have very little in common until now and after years of generating both ratings and headaches for their respective networks both men are trading in their mainstream podiums for new ventures betting on the strength of their personal brands will guarantee success even if that means starting over on smaller risky or quote alternative television platforms so is that really the case and what does that say about the mainstream channels that americans continue to turn to for news of course only time will tell the answer to that but in the meanwhile let's turn to sam seder in new york he's the host of the majority report and someone who knows a thing or two about alternative media welcome back sam so you know in rolling stone magazine they interviewed olbermann and they had him saying quote glenn beck and me were in the same boat now what boat is that sam and where is it heading well i mean i think you're right they're both leveraging their personal brand and they

can build. on and hope never fall out of their i mean it's not. a person i suppose i would say because you know minutes on cable television people can stumble on him in a way that they can't necessarily stumble upon going back or going back you have to go with this if you are well you could radically. if i can find olbermann on the table but there is a similar move to basically walking away from the larger corporate structure and. using the the attractiveness of their own brand to have their fan phone and is it doesn't say more about the failure of the mainstream channels and supporting alternative views or is it just too isolated cases where both men decided to make their moves for whatever personal reasons they need it so well i actually think i think it's a combination of the former in that there is

a failure by the what would media to do to reach certain audiences but it's also in many ways sort of the natural evolution of technology i mean we've seen people in music do this you know musical acts who have left the corporate structure of their their record labels and are standing out there getting their their music independently this is the next step and i'd be surprised not to see more i mean in many ways this is very similar to what howard stern did with satellite radio he left a certain corporate structure to wrestle radio headed into a place where with a little bit of work those were with little or paying it differently for him and his product and i think this is we're going to see more of this going full speed and i have to ask i mean in the case of keith keith olbermann for example i mean you know keep on going over to democracy now to turn whatever our salaries those hardworking folks are and i mean he's going to be reportedly earning ten million dollars

a year i mean is this really leaving the corporate structure for some new sorts of alternative media or maybe much of the old same just couched in a in a different brand well no actually i mean i think i mean i think the ten million dollar figure i'm not sure how accurate that is i know that the but out there but the difference is that current t.v. is privately owned it is not a corporate it is a. also making ball bearings or nuclear subs or some other product fox news is just one part of a larger media empire so the difference is that there's going to be less minefields in terms of what oldman can deal with i mean on on is from your night his last guest talk about why he didn't ban from m s n b c i think you're going to see a lot more taking on of corporate power because there is no corporate entity that that will be able to control and so it really is a change it's not so much his salary it's much as the independence that comes with

a with a media company that is not owned by a corporation that you know offshore jobs you know. around the world so i do think there is actually going to be a big difference so i do agree with you that there's a major giant difference between a general electric the parent of the fantasy and current t.v. but at the same time just to push back a little bit i mean this is still a you know the brainchild of us al gore it was it real that's politics are not he is by all by all accounts an established elite insider it's not the equivalent of same ocracy now or some more grassroots the funded organization so could we really expect a change in the message and you know see this as a real alternative media frenzy or oh yeah i mean i actually think so i mean i don't know you know i don't know either al gore or the polls are going to know. where they disagree on politics but i imagine it's not terribly different than you know al gore is no no general election you know at the end of the day i don't

expect the goldman to become a democracy now but i think that has more to do with what he's interested in talking about and where his focus lies and less about there's going to be any management saying you can't discuss this and you can't discuss that because i really do think there's going to be. there is a big difference in haiti. the model going forward i think our independent media in the future. is not going to be based on one specific revenue model but i do think it's going to be more independent going forward and they're not going to be as many landmines. but on that note i mean wouldn't it be more productive to take whatever amount of money that's going to be a skype or maybe you know use that for independent man on the street journalist that really do that kind of grassroots reporting that that's that's moving the country away from a persona based following or as i just unrealistic because you know it's personas i guess attract viewers and sell not ratings in this case but i think the nature of.

this industry you know weekly when you're talking about murphy goldman is both reports but it's also commentary so i think you know you want to comment vary from individual because the way they comment what they're willing to tackle with how they present is relevant i mean you know i don't think that the this is implicated in the broader problems that we may have with our media which i think are frankly broader societal issues so i think this really is a change you know i think it really is going to. be the harbinger of what we're going to see more of in the future and trying to blend back very quickly you know a lot of folks equated glenn back with this talks editorial anger angle a lot of people aren't very happy with the direction that that that he's taking the channel now that he's going to be on his own doing whatever it is that he's going

to do do you think that this will free up stocks make it a little less frightening to those critics or do you think i have just as much of an impact independently. well look i think fox. and. fox before going back out there and will be fox when glenn beck leads frankly i think glenn beck is going to have a lot more not less cultural relevance than he did when he was on top and again there's a big difference between he saw them as platform which is free which is available you can either streaming online in certain places or you can watch it on cable. are there glenn beck is going to be sequestered is going to be specifically you know paid by his members and i think he's doing that following is going to probably stay with him but i don't see glenn back in a position where he wrote his fall he told them and i think if you're going to see a lot of growth between now and six months and twelve months from now and in fact

you know you're talking about building out that entire station i think. goldman is going to have a much larger audience in a year from now as opposed to glenn beck where i think his audience at best is going to be the same size if not all the liberals are as sighing a sigh of relief and very briefly you know glenn beck purports to be preaching to mainstream america that same agent mainstream that suffering from unemployment to housing right house house prices etc etc i mean i think these folks really going to shell out for ninety five a pop if not more to listen to their demands. look they've been paying. for their cable and and other expenses i would imagine that important whom they. are ninety five will be worth it for them to maintain i would suggest a delusion that he sells them. for. good to be bathing in that type of greatness for ninety five disease like a deal all right well i guess who needs a good.