next week president obama will reveal his plan for the federal budget that's traditionally released the first week of february but this year it's pushed back by the stated reason was quote determined based on the need to finalize decisions and technical details of the document i would say probably has more to do with the one point three trillion dollars in cuts scheduled to start two thousand and thirteen under last year's budget control act and right about now the administration is combing through government project after project department after department all looking for ways in areas in which to cut but you know it i have an idea of just one place where they could start it's called the chemical and metallurgy research

replacement nuclear facility and it's located in sunny los alamos new mexico home of the bulk of the u.s. nuclear program and it was approved by the partner of energy a decade ago to build plutonium components for new atomic weapons and it's still in the construction for eight days that's right a price tag at the time it was approved was three hundred seventy five million dollars the current estimated price tag is five point nine billion dollars handy graphic was put together by the project on government oversight was calling on the administration to defund the project in the budget to be released next week let's be honest cost overruns are a standard feature of these kinds of projects we've told you about the unexpected cost of the f. thirty five the f. twenty two amongst many others but this one is just insane from three hundred seventy five million to five point nine billion that's not a small or insignificant jump by any means and so just one of these billions of dollars actually get the american taxpayer wells out of weinstein over at mother

jones pointed out almost nothing to a two thousand and eight congressional report on the facilities there is quote no coherent mission to justify it unless the decision is made to begin aggressive new nuclear warhead design and pit production mission at los alamos or for example build new nukes that's something that supposedly we're supposed to be moving away from. fulfills our common objective to negotiate a new strategic arms reduction treaty that includes significant reductions in the nuclear weapons that we will deploy it cuts our delivery vehicles by roughly half that includes a comprehensive verification regime which allows us to further build trust. that would be president obama speaking in prague when he signed a historic new start treaty pledging to reduce our nuclear arsenal to five thousand warheads far more than we would need to blow the world into smithereens five times over so if we're trying to reduce our nuclear arsenal but we possibly want this facility for all those who supported continual bleeding of the american taxpayer

say that it needs to be built to quote support current nuclear weapons stockpiles through surveillance and life extension programs small little tidbit up the project on government oversight guess is that it will be operational until two thousand and twenty three long after those current nuclear warheads will be supporting or have gone through scheduled life extension programs meaning that this facility literally serves no purpose and yet if the government continues to fund it the taxpayers will spend up to six billion dollars on it now obama has made the reduction of the nuclear arsenal a stated priority from the very beginning of his presidency and he has an opportunity in the coming week to put his money where his mouth is the federal budget which will be released next week they'll need to find one point three trillion in cuts and i say this pointless expensive facility is a good as place to start as any. now despite the fact that u.s. troops left the country at the end of last year the u.s. has long had other plans for iraq most notably a massive diplomatic presence of sixteen thousand people including and protected by

contractors based out of the embassy in baghdad a seven hundred fifty million dollars building and the biggest of its kind in the world but a new york times report revealed yesterday the state department is now preparing to slash their diplomatic presence possibly by as much as half now this due to what they reportedly see as iraqi obstructionism as of late the iraqi government has made it much more difficult to get visas they've delayed convoys of food and they're working on a bill to impose tougher restrictions on security contractors but what specifically did the new york times see as a good measurement of what more difficult means an embassy life here's a quote within days the salad bar at the embassy dining hall ran low sometimes there was no sugar or splenda for coffee and chicken wing night wings were rationed at six per person over the holidays housing units were stocked with meals ready to eat the prepared food for soldiers in the field. so yeah that one got a lot of laughs yesterday but just how telling us that here this guy's with me is michael o'brien author of america's failure in iraq michael thanks so much for

coming back on the show good to see you. are before we get into the quotes in the last let's just start with the idea that sixteen thousand people was to somebody an acceptable diplomatic presence to keep in the country after the war is over after their troops have been pulled out why on earth would need sixteen thousand people well they needed sixteen thousand people to augment the lack of american troops over there most of them are going to be security contractors they were going to be a part of about five different installations around the country including the embassy in baghdad also noted in that article was that the embassy in most schools or the satellite embassy in mosul maybe our consulate is has been has been scrapped due to. all the different problems that are up there that the iraqis have with the american presence there but the fact is that most of those people are. security contractors providing security for all of the american civilians all the all the

diplomats over there and as you said the the the point is that there's a lot of bad feeling there's a lot of bad blood between iraqis and americans and well frankly for good reason they don't want to stay here they're. very bent out of shape over all the problems that have her have occurred in the last nine years and frankly in the end that embassy complex which is way over budget cost overruns at the at the years. is basically a boondoggle but you know i mean if you think about it from perhaps you know the iraqis perspective too if if they feel like this is become somewhat of an oppressive force right there is just too much going on your troops are supposed to withdraw from the country why do you still need so much personnel there if the state department planned all along to have. just a much smaller force could that have made relationships there are the relationships perhaps

a little bit better but i really think that it's it's because. they thought everybody was going to leave they thought most of americans were going to leave and there would be a small diplomatic presence there with all the soldiers left and they all wear uniforms so i mention this in in my book extensively. soldiers in uniforms are different than security contractors with goatees and golf shirts and khaki pants they thought when the soldiers left in december that would be it in the wall there would be was a small diplomatic presence that oracle mentioned the there were five diplomats at the u.s. embassy in turkey and about fifty five total staff sixteen thousand total staff in the year at the u.s. embassy in or in baghdad that's absurd it's it's crazy i think the whole thing was a knee jerk reaction just like after nine eleven the department of homeland security its creation was a kneejerk reaction the invasion of iraq in two thousand and three was a kneejerk reaction it was overreaction everything related to iraq was an

overreaction. and again you know going into afghanistan was one thing going into iraq was totally different and i think that the building of the mountain as a reaction or you could just call that something completely based on lies which was sold to the people who you know who reacted alongside with it but i want to donate all four of the over reaction i want to get into a little let me read this line again right that the new york times decided to highlight as to how tough life is at the embassy right now that within days the salad bar at the embassy dining hall rather low sometimes there was no sugar splenda for the coffee on chicken wing night wings are rationed at six per person i mean right off the bat that sounds absolutely ridiculous would you agree did you will you know did you see the photographs that came along with that article there were about thirteen photographs inside the embassy it's incredible when i was over in iraq i was based out of baghdad. and i ate my meals at the at the at the embassy compound which was the old republican palace of the republican palace in baghdad

which was saddam's main the seat of his of his of his government and the food was absolutely unbelievable i gained a ton of weight the food over there the food in these countries is for twenty year old soldier that you know burns over five thousand calories a day the i can totally understand what that reporter was saying the food over seas especially in countries where we have a lot of military presence and and all that like iraq and afghanistan it's simply incredible i've never read that well in my entire life the state department didn't have a reaction to this right they had a press conference today avatar a new language saying that whoever was whining about that should have done so and they think that the new york times exaggerated the story a little bit but at the bottom i mean at the end of the day right if if some of the really basic problems are the fact that the convoys are being stopped right that you can't get mail at the embassy those seem like such basics then how are you

supposed to do the actual mission right how are you actually supposed to conduct diplomacy you can't you know did the state department bite off a lot more than it can chew here where you know it's funny because this is another example of the complete lack of planning regarding anything in iraq we the invasion in two thousand and three was poorly planned the post invasion was poorly planned the dismantling of iraq's security infrastructure was the opposite that was anything but anything but a good plan this is another example of the continuation of the poor planning i don't know what the state department was thinking i don't know what our diplomatic corps was thinking the embassy facility itself it's not one building it's a campus of multiple buildings for the very fact that you know if mortar and rocket fire starts coming in and. was one facility that were ruins the whole facility so they they they broke it up into a compound so that way if one building gets wiped out by

a mortar it's just one building. but the number of people the number of staff and again it goes back to my original point we use mercenaries now those security contractors are mercenaries they're there to protect american civilians and american assets in iraq because the soldiers in uniform are gone but we meant that with with with security contractors with gulf shores so the and because they're such bad feeling about america's actions in iraq in general but about america's the security contractors you mr square massacre blackwater and all that iraqis i think are going away to minute most of these people are security contractors they're not diplomats we want to mouth and now they're clamping down that's right now appearing out of it and it will to put a lot more tough restrictions on them and you know coming out with accusations that they think that they're going to be there for intelligence gathering purposes for one country or another but you know it definitely doesn't look like good news

nothin's michael thanks so much for joining us thanks for having me. are just ahead of myself i want to start keeping an eye on the skies because a drone could be watching you in the back of a growing use and how to become the norm let's. see. people calling what you said for free and fair elections. and we're still reporting from the summer as you can hear behind me loud explosions.

you know 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 say. i'm sorry is a big issue. our

guys it's time for you said it i read it right take time to respond to my brilliant and engaging they were comments from facebook twitter and you do believe that's going to say i listen now and i want to do something a little bit different with this segment is the last night we had author chris hedges on the show and we spoke to him about the existence of the black bloc within the occupy movement now he wrote earlier this week and the block block was a cancer in the movement and last time you said that it had the power to kill off occupy altogether our viewers had a lot of really strong opinions on this topic clearly it's something that's over

which there's a lot of bait out there so i decided to pick some of them out and basically. let them speak for themselves so black bird said on youtube blacklock our agent provocateur by definition their aim is always to provoke violence as such they are no different than undercover police who infiltrate demonstrations just wait until those fifteen million unemployed americans many of the white collar variety receive the last of their unemployment insurance insurance benefit checks and start losing their homes and cars occupy will grow tenfold perhaps more i prefer to see the militia protest protecting protestors free speech rights. said on you tube c'mon chris you know damn well the elites of our forms of capitalism have long declared the fleecing of america and wherever in the world the globalist and federal government can get away with it you've been covering many other nation events you've seen other nations citizens rise up with violence to fight back the powers that be in resistance to suggest that the american movement for true direct citizen democracy can be accomplished be a peaceful protest is raising the white flag to our enemy of the few now calm calm

call commented on youtube and somebody give me one instance where the ruling class ever gave anything to the lower class without the threat of violence there must be a good cop and bad cop routine and i view chris hedges as being a good cop and the block as being the bad cop each compliment the other for eleven said on you tube ever since the battle in seattle i've never trusted the black bloc they show up to other people's protest or a garbage cans in the windows and think that they're making a difference in the world he believe in anything you would do your vandalism without wearing your mask like a coward using garbage can lids and hammers are going to compete with armed police they're like the guys in fight club except they actually had goals and an agenda black log stay out of my heart so it's all that i have for you guys right now but thank you our viewers for their passion on this topic and as always remember that we are all ears here so i'll be back with more as usual next week and we'll also try and see if we can see this other perspective to walk after the interview with

chris hedges. well we knew that it was coming for months and now it looks like domestic drone use is going to come to an airspace near you this week congress passed a bill directed at the f.a.a. which not only will speed up the nation's switch from radar to an air traffic control system based on g.p.s. technology but it also require that a to open up access to unmanned aerial vehicles within four years so that means that by september thirtieth twenty fifteen drones will be flying in the same airspace as airliners cargo planes business jets and private aircraft as the associated press described it now you can bet the law enforcement agencies are all eagerly awaiting the opportunity but are we ready for drones to be surveilling our skies and what are the new legal questions will be brought up concerning our privacy to discuss this with me is hardly giger policy counsel at the center for democracy and technology hi thanks so much for joining us tonight thanks for having me now ok as i mentioned this really was a broader f.a.a. bill in order to modernize the way that we control our air traffic control system

but of course this little bit about opening up the skies to drones isn't it too and so it passed with bipartisan support but do you know he was there anybody out there was there any civil libertarians that decided to speak up and maybe dissent when it came to the voting no and you're right it was a bipartisan effort and passed overwhelmingly in the republican controlled house and then also in the democratic controlled senate there were no hearings the bill passed the house and then three years later passed the senate so the thing was fast tracked no hearings on privacy the building to the nothing about the civil liberties implications of filling the sky with flying robots all right so this one was a piece of cake for them how we're going to get into the negatives but first let's talk about what some of the pros might be right i mean who do you think for the most part is going to be applying for these permits in order to use the airspace is going to be law enforcement a lot of people are going to be applying for it and there are definitely some pros the law enforcement is considered the largest domestic market for drones right now but it's going to be used by all sorts of folks commercial entities hobbyists

there's. a wide range of technological innovation that can occur with releasing or allowing domestic drones to fly over our skies however as i said that must be done responsibly and the think having privacy and civil liberties protections in place beforehand are very important some of the pros include things we've already seen drones were used to scout out the fukushima nuclear power plant they found environmental problems in texas they are helping cops with it with interest fugitives that is true and that is a valid use but they do use should not be as under strict as it is currently this is something that i guess the media might be able to start using to write if they want to fly over a certain space and then get a story get the footage that you can't get with a helicopter as a matter of fact believe that the dailies owned by fox has already flown the drone twice that is right i got it and got into a little bit of trouble with the f.a.a. but surely when it becomes legal for them to do so than short they'll fly a drone strike a point so now when it comes to our privacy one of the dangers because you're right

about this too if you actually if you look at what the supreme court has ruled in the past that you have an expectation of privacy if you're in a public space so how much does you know does anything really change if it's a drone doing at first but like i said a helicopter or some other type of so you're right that these are court said that about privacy in a public place that being said drones offer a type of surveillance that we really haven't seen from helicopters that are certainly very different from human observation drones can fly for hours and hours in hours without the need to refuel they can survey an entire town all at once they can be outfitted with facial recognition cameras license plate scanners all sorts of thermal imaging cameras high definition cameras you name it why if i sniffers so it offers a pervasive surveillance that we just have not seen yet that being said the supreme court and the law in general really is going to have to come to grips with current privacy law and the ways that this is restricted by the first amendment as well if americans privacy is to not enter

a very dark period all right so there. few things that you have actually suggested that you think that tell us about them so the how to do two things first of all the a with it is currently licensing drones to law enforcement agencies it will license drones to commercial entities and other government agencies on a more widespread basis within the next two years as you had said so for the process for the licensing process it ought to one require all applicants for a drone license to submit a privacy statement that includes the surveillance capabilities of the drone and how they intend to use that information to the f.a.a. should make all the drone licenses and the accompanying privacy statement publicly available on law and that way it would prohibit secret drone use now we can understand what they are and if those are good ideas let me interrupt you just for one second what do you think the chances are that we might actually see that happen right because currently i mean you have the that's filed a lawsuit to just try to get the information as to the permits that have already been granted once this becomes more widespread you know are they just don't want to

be as secretive about as they are now i have two thoughts about that number one the already has a very similar process in place for aircraft if you go in if it is web site you can search for aircraft by the owner of the aircraft name the make and model the tail number and so forth to a lot of the chances of this happening are going to be is going to be up to the american people and it's going to be up to congress if the american people and of congress are silent on this issue and demand that the f.a.a. do something about this then you know the changes go down on the other hand if the american people comment to the proposed rule making which we think will come out this coming spring then there is a greater chance that it will happen as it is will well within the men dates you have these sort of transparency requirements the question is whether or not they will actually go forth and i guess that we can only hope that people actually speak out and force them to take into account you know some of these things here ali thanks so much for joining us thank you for having me thank you. by now anybody who

uses the internet knows that there is a whole side. or war going on but we're not talking about battles between hackers this is about what's taking place on capitol hill monks politicians that are trying to exert control over the internet and its current form think of the way they use the internet as the wild west not a lot of rules not a lot of people tell you what you can and can't do but just like in the wild west there are some people that are trying to rope you win and make sure that everything you do is well documented control and lawmakers are using their weapons laws to do it take for example the protecting children from internet pornographers act of two thousand and eleven this house resolution would force internet service providers to keep logs of their customers activities for eighteen months just in case police want to review them in the future second the cull of seen it's pointed out this only covers i.s.p. so anybody who gets to the web through a wireless router like say anybody to a web cafe or they wouldn't be tracked by anyone else who goes through legitimate i as p.s. could get screwed over here just think about holding on to all of your information all of your web history just in case police want to see everything you do online

kind of scary some even say it is the law enforcement to circumvent the fourth amendment meaning that your right to privacy from police goes out the window because see the thing here is that it's being sold as all the name of protecting the kids the name of the bill would make you think that it's all about protecting the kids in those bad guys on the web when you actually look at what's in the meat of the legislation you realize of the title is very misleading as the legislation is slowly gaining support and has already made it out of committee were thankful to report that the online community is also noticing what this bill is really about and they're the ones who want to stop it opposition to h.r. nine hundred eighty one which is what the bills called comes from several fronts demand progress has already received ninety thousand signatures patriot groups have written blog posts on how damning this would be that became law and of course the read of there is have expressed opposition to it to paul supporters are also coming out against the protecting children from child pornographers act now if you'd like to join this growing opposition we'd like to show you who's behind the proposal and

if you're a regular viewer of the show i'm going to say you probably aren't. to be that shocked it is none other than representative smith the same one that wrote and co-sponsored so but those tech there is mike masnick pointed out he's perhaps the single largest threat to freedom on the internet right now so there you have it want to join the movement then you might as well put lamar smith as enemy number one because despite criticism he's sticking to a guns to his guns when it comes to protecting the protecting children from child pornographers so far and he's working tirelessly to change the internet as we know it we can only hope that we can see the same public outcry for h.r. nine hundred eighty one as we saw for so by just a few months back. now still to come tonight congress might have said they're putting their foot down on earmarks but looks like lawmakers are saying one thing and doing the opposite of details and full time and on a happy hour tonight should whales be considered people and are you for the life you dating somebody you're related to believe it or not there's a website for that what's going on with.

people calling what you said for free and fair elections. and we're still reporting from the clinton as you can hear behind me loud explosions. in the.

you know 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 everything you thought you don't know i'm sorry welcome to the big picture.

i guys it's time for sides to a time of war and giving in to the lawmakers over on capitol hill say for the past year or so washington is making overtures to combating our debt crisis by pledging to keep out the pork several politicians as spoken openly about how earmarks have been abused with our country nearly sixteen trillion dollars in debt i can't believe that the majority here in the senate still think it's our job to take on the bacon to their states and to their special interest that's how they pass a bloated budget so they just sprinkle a little sugar in there for everyone around the senate and in the house and we pass the sayings. well the calls were answered and the obama administration's announced that he'll veto or the administration is now says they will veto anything with earmarks in it and both parties in the house and the senate have also put

a two year moratorium on any pork attached to bills keep that in mind because important both sections of congress all five hundred thirty five members have said no to earmarks for two years that sounds like a pretty definitive statement right well according to the washington post politicians are having problems following their own rules water shock after an in-depth investigation it turns out that sixteen lawmakers have found a way to circumvent this moratorium and finding ways to provide aid to their states and more importantly programs that are tied to the families of those politicians yes somehow it's illegal to fund your own family members when you're in congress here's just a few examples of those lawmakers arizona representative ed pastor part of the house appropriations committee and he has a say over the budget the national city nuclear security administration turns out since his daughter laura has become the head of a scholarship program back home for at risk students and since she was named director of the program daddy sent over about four million dollars her way from the nuclear agency's budget.