is that a geo political play because this is something the saudis are just drooling over there we're just so pleased about this and a lot of people in media don't like to talk about this shia sunni sunni sectarian difference here which is playing a very big role in what's going on in syria right now. well peter let me just to get back to what was discussed previously before the interruption i mean there are two dimensions to the to the situation in syria now there's on the one hand a very legitimate powerful movement of civilians who are claiming in fact change in the country and access to democracy to social justice to economic and political rights and this should not be undermined this this is a powerful and legitimate movement which started peacefully it's been only since a month or a few weeks that it has become militarized which is in fact leading to the internationalization of the conflict but so far it has been in majority a peaceful movement now these movements are claiming change and access to power and the end of the over the country there is another side to the debate which is now

the involvement of the international community and in fact the fact that syria is in a web of strategic alliances which is in fact trying to gain the momentum to take advantage of the political instability within syria to try to shape the geopolitical game in the middle east and we have calls made by neo conservative think tanks in america calling for military intervention regime change etc to build on this momentum and this is problematic highly problematic because the movement in syria has been very powerful and legitimate and has gained momentum inside and in the region if there are calls for military intervention if there are links made to syria's choice of partners in the region or syria stance in the arab israeli conflict that would bring that would deliver to my eyes what has been so far a very powerful movement and a call for liberty and democracy max i tend to agree with that area if we do get a military intervention which i still think is likely they each though it's the outsiders that will determine the political outcome the eventual outcome on the

ground in syria and it may have a whole lot to do with what i mentioned earlier when mentioning and you around. yes. first of all one has to avoid really be critical about some of the kind of. sorts of simplistic narratives that are recycled continually by the media and this from what i'm hearing now also by experts as well you know about democracy about human rights the syrian people as a whole rising up because there are thousands in the streets but you know there are millions in the country. and i think the same problem applies to our conception of intervention is being narrowly reduced to direct military intervention you know either invasions or bombings and so forth there has been intervention in syria by the united states and by others but i'm going to focus on the u.s.

for several years at least and now even if you knew nothing else what you will see described in the embassy cables that were published by wiki leaks is a pattern of the united states. providing funding to opposition groups that are tied to ultimately with the muslim brotherhood in syria and so forth this is not a secret what's also not a secret is that obama spokesman stated very clearly that the united states is pursuing a range of policy options what is known is special in intelligence circles and other circles as a continuum of force which involves sanctions dissin from asian campaigns psychological pressure attempts to isolate the regime and so forth and this is a kind of measure that's being put forth between put forth in front of the security council right now so there are all sorts of forms of intervention intervention has

been happening and it's mean happening since before these protests even began ok if i go back to you david what do you think the outcome will be worked. kind of syria i mean i mean everyone i don't think anyone will shed a tear on this program to see the assad family go no one ok it's more about a process what do you think the end game is i mean and we and i said facetiously you know what kind of jeffersonian democracy what kind of country do you think is going to be there is a going to be hostile to the west it's going to be and will continue a serious can traditional foreign policy what kind of relationship would have with israel with the around with hezbollah because a lot of people you know are focused on the here and now but those are the questions going to be asked whatever whenever we get to this endgame. yes i know there's a good questions but nobody knows the answer to those questions. outcome in terms of. syria's foreign policy is

a question mark and i don't think actually any of the players involved has much of a clue about that. because you i want you want to resume chains are you asking for really demanding regime change without understanding what the unintended consequences could be that's interesting yes we are because many thousands of innocent lives are at stake that's the key. anyone who insists on maintaining the regime is condemning thousands more innocent people in syria to death and that's why what matters is not what the foreign policy of the new syrian government will be but the removal of this vicious dictatorship as soon as part. of our want to think that russia's own interests can be preserved in that situation if it is willing to negotiate seriously with syria and i'm pretty sure we

all agree that they're talking to them and my well what do you think about that the the law of unintended consequences here is again i can bring up libya when i mean obviously mass and it's getting worse. right but i mean without even comparing i would say the choice of foreign policy will be in the hands of the syrian people and any democratically elected government which will. represent the majority of the syrian population i find it a bit difficult that syria's future foreign policy would be decided externally or by whoever is not from from syria this will depend on the choice of the people and if the question relating to military intervention is about to daming syria and shaping its foreign policy this is highly problematic and this is. why it's but it's very interesting that you have countries like qatar and saudi arabia and other members of the arab league very much wanting to determine outcomes in syria so that they have an interest in it i don't sorry i don't think they're just thinking about

the people they're thinking about their geopolitical interests that's what states do there is no there is a geopolitical game which is being played between a broader coalition of the gulf states i would say the u.s. see israel versus what is perceived as the syria hezbollah iran axis and the instability now that is lived within syria is an opportunity for power politics for you know is somehow severity in the links between syria and iran and hezbollah and weakening this axis and this is highly problematic because the syrian people still despite the fact that we have instability within syria there's been a choice made by the syrian people and there i would like to address the points raised by max there is a powerful movement there is a claim for a change within syria and i think should that should not be undermined and that is not fair to the young people who are dying on a daily basis and continue to go to the streets now how would that be instrumental eyes this is the issue it should remain an indulgence movement it should remain and

indulgent as river lucian and whatever comes out of the revolution the transition to democracy but you're saying same at the same time you're saying this. it's getting internationalize and it absolutely is max if i can go to you again when we look at outcomes here i mean it's saudi arabia qatar qatar united states israel to one degree or another and it's very ambiguous which way it would go for them because they prefer the know the deal with the devil they know but this is the major change in the region no matter what the outcome is because what i think we'll all agree that assad and his family are not going to be there for much longer. one to predict the future. they could very well be there for much longer i'm not certain how things could work out. early on in the. early years of the cuban revolution a lot of people would say that you know constable wouldn't be there much longer and he certainly was so that's not an area in which i'm going to venture. i am

kind of put off by the idea that foreign policies and democratic states whatever that means i think a lot of people understand democracy in the west i mean multiple parties and elections i would hope that the idea was a bit more complex and meaningful than that but the idea that in democrat that democratic states established their own foreign policies to reflect the will of the people as far as i know that's not the case and we could go on we've run out of time we marry interesting program many thanks to my guest today in princeton washington and in montreal and thanks to our viewers for watching us here r.t. see you next time and remember crosstalk.

you know how sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else you hear or see some other part of it and realize that everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm sorry welcome to the big picture. the mission of free accreditation free zones for judges free arrangement free. free spirited child free. mold free blogs just flown in video for your media projects and free video gone to our t.v.

dot com. few. me it is easy to. see.

welcome to the show we'll get the real headlines with none of the mercy or live out of washington d.c. now tonight we've got a special guest joining us dylan ratigan host on m s n b c and author of the new book greedy bastards how we can stop corporate communists banks there is an other vampires from sucking america dry so we can't wait to hear his ideas and then while the a.c.l.u. files a lawsuit against the government to have them expose the details of their targeted killing program including drone strikes that killed u.s. citizens last year some are arguing that human rights organizations need to take it

one step further and fly drones of their own for surveillance purposes we're going to debate that issue with harper scott horton and mark and us of the genocide intervention network we're going to all that morphy tonight including a dose of happy hour but first take a look with the mainstream media has decided to miss. all right so last night the results from florida came in and surprise surprise mitt romney was the winner and the mainstream media has spent all morning tirelessly discussing what this all means mitt romney scoring a major victory in florida defeating his closest challenger newt gingrich by a wide margin romney coasted in the florida primary with forty six percent of the vote newt gingrich a distant second from these victories was described as not just the fourteen point win but in the red cross almost every demographic group in his speech last night he already sounded like the nominee you had most of the establishment elected

republican officials in the state behind him vastly more than his rivals i mean big win in florida definitely catapult some into a hefty lead in the delegate count mitt romney back on top after his device decisive victory in the sunshine state but romney won this battle but newt gingrich wants to drag out the war. all right so if you want to say this is just taking us one step closer to seeing romney become the g.o.p. nominee this should not be time that we apply a little more scrutiny to the man not let him get away with just speaking in platitudes take this statement that he made this morning for example on c.n.n. . i've been in this race because i care about americans i'm not concerned about the very poor we have a safety net there if it's needs repair i'll fix it i'm not concerned about the very rich they're doing just fine i'm concerned about the very heart of america that the ninety ninety five percent of americans who right now are struggling and i'll continue to take that message across the nation all right i said i said last

question but i got to ask you just said i'm not concerned about the very poor because they have a safety net and i think there are lots of very poor americans who are struggling who would say that sounds odd. ok explain that well you had to finish the sentence the soul of the i said america is sort of a very poor that have a safety net but if it has holes in it i will repair them ok the challenge right now we will hear for the democrat democrat party the plight of the poor and there's no question it's not good being poor and we have a safety net to help those that are very poor but my campaign is focused on middle income americans. are i like that so that at least trying to follow up there but the fact of the matter is that mitt romney is full of it need is there has to be called out you see romney says if the social safety net is broken don't worry he's the man to fix it odd considering that in the past he's the one that having said that having a safety net is with leading this country on a path to socialism if you follow the president we're going to be more like europe

more like a social european social welfare state if instead we take my course we're going to be more like america if you will creating more opportunity for more people and helping lift people with better jobs and rising incomes. all right so i want to take a minute here to look at some of the figures that tell us exactly what following romney's path might look like as think progress helped point out today the plan of romney is thus far proposed to mean cutting medicaid by about one hundred fifty three billion dollars by two thousand and sixteen health care program for poor children will face cuts of four hundred ninety six billion over the next eleven years and ten million people be thrown off the rolls for the food stamp program not to mention of course the romney offers all guy the tax breaks for the wealthy who he says are not in his worry list and the none for low income or those in the middle that he claims to be so concerned about and if by last year forty nine million people according to census bureau had fallen below the poverty line you would think that he wouldn't just discount that portion of the population assume

that they'll be just fine if more people are falling into poverty you know i can talk about is cutting social programs that is not called fixing it but this isn't the first time that romney's been caught spewing complete and other nonsense about how to cut programs for the poor and how they will actually hurt the poor he did the exact same thing when he was supporting paul ryan's plan. but you know that if you cut seven hundred billion dollars in aid to the states that some people are going to get hurt in the same way that by cutting welfare spending dramatically i don't think we hurt the poor in the same way i think cutting medicaid spending by having it go to the states run more efficiently with less fraud i don't think will help the world hurt the people that depend on that program for their health care. all we really have to say here is that when mitt romney says that he's not worried about the very poor because they have a safety net and he's the one that can fix it he's flat out lying maybe not lying about the not caring about the very poor part but about having solutions for that when it's convenient he calls

a social safety net socialism and wants to do nothing but chop away and now suddenly he has a heart you know i don't buy it but it's not really a matter of opinion it's about looking at the numbers that are in the plan that this candidate has proposed and calculating what the result to be and so before the mainstream media continues on with this political horse race pretends to know every detail about romney and his campaign let's just start by calling him out on his lies with facts but unfortunately so far they keep choosing to miss. i will now that we've exposed mitt romney's doublespeak and his disdain for the very poor in america let's remind ourselves how it is that so many americans have fallen into this situation following the crash in two thousand and eight and entire banking system fueled by corruption and greed the went unchecked by the government and pulled a massive heist on the american people problem is that not only has this not

stopped but we see the exact same tactics used by corporations systems across the spectrum and the words of our guest tonight sucking america dry like vampires pinpoints five areas aside from the financial sector including trade health care education defense and energy and he says that they're all filled with creating bastards people have given up on creating value for others and instead get their money by rigging the game so that they can steal from the rest of us joining me here is dylan ratigan host of m s n b c's of the dylan ratigan show and author of greedy bastards how we can stop corporate communist banks tears and other vampires from sucking america dry don't think so much for your was so excited to be here i love your red chair thank you i'm going to use the you know this you got to use these trigger they make me stand when i say i need you really i should file a complaint and you look fabulous and everybody viewing area home dribble are but enough about me on to talk more about really bashing. you know what makes a greedy bastard i mean we really summed it up we have an ideal in this country

that has not only been the basis for our own aspirations but really has been the basis for america's role modeling as an idealised state of government at least in the past as a way to look at how a government ought to function in the basic principle is very simple that there is a there's no one set of rules for everybody in the country not two sets of rules that's the a little original presumption that currently is in complete breach i mean there's really been a breach the whole history of the country but now it's being done in the economic way. used to be done in gender and racial ways it still does happen that way but they've invented a new way to do it with these two sets of rules and because the media doesn't ask the right questions because the politicians don't ask the right questions we constantly get the wrong answers and really my whole goal with all of this is to refocus ourselves on asking the right questions which is are the interests of our financial system or is the interest of our financial system aligned with the interests of investment in america simple question i want you know i like that i

think it's interesting that you brought the media into this i was going to get there be broader than immediately you're part of this media right and i think that part of the reason that people like you are part of the reason the viewers are drawn to you especially after you ran an explosive rant and told everybody how angry you are as that you were just sick of of the lies the way that you put it but then you're part of this mainstream media machine as i often like to call it you know and that's n.b.c. is just part of the cable network i feel like sometimes serves perhaps their corporate interests also. remember my whole premise is that you can't solve any of these problems without a tremendous amount of ruthlessness to accurately define the issue and the appropriate amount of compassion in order to actually resolve it because the moral outrage which i channel myself for years is understandable and rewarding for your ego and not useful and so dan so your question i think we have to understand that for all the entire corporate media the business is predicated on your ability to accumulate attention the more attention you can accumulate the more ads you can

sell the more money you can make this things that most easily attract attention are these debates or these realisations of uncertain outcomes so when i have a horse race i don't know who's going to win and if i make the horse race seem really interesting then i can get a lot of ratings because it's like picking giants patriots who anything's going to win the league may not be a football fan but if the competition gets interesting enough you'll watch that's good for ratings it's atrocious for the debate the bet that i am making in the. the one thing that i think you should think about we all need to think in the context of our demonization of a given media organization or apparatus what will go frequently appropriately so is that at the same time in my case i have not only the benefit of the distribution of the mainstream media which is a remarkable privilege and a remarkable opportunity to be able to speak in a in that theater but also we're seeing the market validation inside of that commercial marketplace the ratings for the show are up fifty percent year over year the book is being very well received not because what we're doing is so

particularly since ational in the traditional attention seeking sense but because i believe the american people i think it's the reason that you have the audience that you have the american people are desperate for a more real conversation and as frustrating as the mainstream media is i personally am grateful to them for giving me the opportunity to speak in such a large theatre about about these things but so you think that the time is right. to be angry now for example you've been doing this for a while and i used to be at the n.b.c. as well why didn't you expose the greedy bastards before well from my perspective i was really naive because i was of the belief that the capital markets at its core was still the investment markets were still defined with a fair degree of price integrity and a real desire to actually pursue investment in ideas to develop things my bad the reality is when it was react when it was revealed i didn't fully understand just how deep the layering of the fraud and dysfunction was in the credit default swap market specifically and when it took me seven in

a way to really educate myself to fully understand how fundamentally not only corrupt but how determinative global capital flows and underlying fraudulent credit insurance market was laid underneath the bond and stock markets and it was only when i came to that realization that this was not only was this remarkably corrupt no capital it's basically insurance fraud scheme where they're just collecting credit insurance money but not paying the claims the government pays the claims but when i. saw that not only was that the case but that also that they were not going to do anything about it that when the efforts to reform the system first under president bush and then under president obama were all targeted that covering the problem up not resolving the problem was when i fundamentally went into the outrage that i did and it's only been through the process of realizing that the the we our problems are so big we can actually afford to indulge the ego of our own rage however appropriate it may be people think they're getting screwed over in health

and education with energy that you are yes but the question is ok once we get through the shock of ending the denial of what's going on which is two political parties being purchased in order to facilitate a very small group of interest at the expense of everybody in america once you get past the sort of shock and outrage of all of that the real question is well there's three hundred eleven million americans we have all this possibility we're going to have how we can do it so then i'm curious to you know what do you think about president obama because it away i think that obama managed to channel a certain. that was disappointed that it was in the population post bush era i hope and change. but now you have a president surrounded himself with financial advisors that are coming from right including some i think diner including jack lew and at the same time they've used the argument that they simply can't prosecute anybody with criminal charges because

it's just too difficult if you buy that here's what it my feeling on the press president obama and i valuate the present the office of the presidency not through the lens of the identity of the occupant but through what i see as the obligations of the person who is in charge of running america and so through that lens i find the president's behavior relative to policy on investment jobs back in this country to be a colossal and unadulterated betrayal of highest the. order of this country the only reason that he continues to be able to get away with the colossal betrayal of the very fundamental principles of justice that are definitive to the future of this country which is the integrity of our capital markets and the investments in this country and to breach that is effectively a betrayal across the board of this country the only reason the president continues to be able to get away with it is one the us has the reserve currency and as a result he can print dollars to cover the problem up with out the markets

evidencing the immediate response to that corruption and to his opponents ben bernanke in print the money i don't know that he tells i don't think he even is involved i think he has not been nearly as involved with it as he probably should have which is why i don't look at it as an indictment of him as a man other than negligence perhaps ignorance perhaps i don't i can't explain it because i'm not in his head but what i do know is that in order for this country or any country to function it must have transparent markets with capital in them and when we have a factual market that is worth seven hundred trillion dollars that is trading in a black hole from the fourteen hundreds that we the american taxpayer being asked to pay out and this president and the president before and by all indications the next president whether it's this president or romney or newt gingrich or whoever it is will continue to do the same thing the only reason this president has been able to get away with betraying this country the way that he has in dealing with our

capital structure is for the simple reason that his opponents want to do less than he does and so he hides behind the fact that the natural balancing that forces of a two party system that should be calling him out for his failure to defend america and its price integrity instead of those people are just as bought if not more bought than our president and so the president is able to do the bidding of the self preservation of the too big to fail financial institutions without any opposition but for the tiny opposition that we are now. getting from people like you or myself in the mainstream media or the occupation or factions of the tea party and we need to make the volume loud enough to basically call out all these criminals w r d's you're not hearing it from those that are here i buy here in washington we have to break really quick but we will be right back with more.

people calling like you said for free and fair elections. and we're still reporting from the some outlets where you can hear behind me loud explosions. i mean. i get it gave. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else.