tonight on r.g.p. freedom of the press for all except those who publish inconvenient truths an independent reporter is behind bars in yemen at the personal request of the u.s. president an exclusive look at this case and why you've probably never heard of it until today. and from silencing critics abroad or what about right here at home the u.s. is the land of the free and the home of zero transparency. plus the brits may have burned washington back nine hundred twelve but these days the two countries are burning with love for one another these friends with benefits maybe

sharing more than good will some nasty practices and in fact like secrecy spying and controversial extraditions. welcome back it's wednesday march fourteenth eight pm here in washington d.c. i'm lucy catherine of in you're watching our t.v. . well in honor of sunshine week we are dedicating today shows to the issues of government secrecy transparency justice and the rule of law and we're going to look at how transparency doesn't necessarily seem to apply to a growing list of the sixty's and whether it's secret prisons torture drone wars the white house approaches to be stay silent and make sure that no one else speaks out either and those who blow the whistle on wrongdoing while they suffered are dire consequences too but there's always the fourth and states right the members of the media are supposed to hold the government accountable but even here it seems

the watchdogs are often drowned out by the laptops for this of course journalists themselves are mostly to blame the us record on press freedom they have some problems but this is a democracy and the rule of law applies free press is a constitutionally protected right plus it's not like. the u.s. whatever move to imprison a reporter for merely uncovering the truth write another just a few weeks ago that jay carney reassured us all about the president's unfaltering commitments to aggressive journalism now and bring these questions up because they're exactly at the core of the case the herb out's discusses the case of julian law haidar showy he's an independent yemeni reporter who's been languishing behind bars at the personal request of rights or improper obama he's respected for his coverage of the war on terror he has interviewed al qaeda leaders including some in some of the ones that the u.s. has been hunting and he was the first to detail the u.s. role in bombings that killed civilians including children back in two thousand and

nine and while he was imprisoned on terror charges was pardoned after a national outcry in that country it was a phone call from president obama that kept him from being set free so why would the president of the world's military superpower take time out of his presumably busy day to worry about some journalist in yemen of all places sounds a little odd well not the only one that got so here's how harper's magazine editor scott horton explained. well it appears that the obama administration places great value on keeping its deal with yemen secret and he was working on the ground in yemen doing in fact exceptional work in revealing what was going on he was tracking the presence of american military and covert operatives there he was also traveling to the sites of many of these strikes interviewing people who witnessed what had occurred and in fact the tracking down in if you ingham are lucky for he

was the last person to speak to him before it was revealed that the muslim cleric who was born in new mexico was himself a target so really there was no journalist working in yemen who was doing a more thorough job of exposing the truth and sclera that the u.s. didn't like this the u.s. was very unhappy about it the u.s. wanted to keep a curtain drawn over everything and they were very angry at him for telling the truth a century revealing what was going on and in your view is this something that sort of and i later unfortunate incident or early you see any sort of trend with actual efforts and i this is going to. sort of silence those who criticize. paris saying or sensitive information like drunk or fair. well actually it links back to a number of incidents that occurred in the prior administration when when don

rumsfeld was running the pentagon he took a very aggressive posture against journalists on the battlefield who were reporting news that he didn't like and there were in fact. prize winning photographer for the a.p. camera man for c.d.'s to reporters for reuters a number of reporters for al-jazeera were swept up in the arrested held in a couple of cases for a year or longer in u.s. detention and accused of being in cahoots with with terrorists because of what they reported and every case these accusations were alternately proved to be absolutely bogus and without any basis in fact and the journalist had to be released but nevertheless the acts the act of seizing imprisoning the journalists in a clear message to the press corps and it was

a message that focused always on the local hire journalists and never someone who came from europe or the united states but someone who was hard locally and of course because of the danger of a battlefield the situation is very difficult for media organizations to operate in places like yemen iraq or afghanistan without relying very heavily on locals so this was an effort to to silence affected really major press organizations and i have to ask i mean because if we look at cases of american reporters being imprisoned i brought for example that two american journalists for current who were north korea there's also the case of our planet that every who is that detained in iran for a for a quite a while that's a huge media story here in the u.s. out why do you think these cases especially the yemen case how that really got not attention. well i haven't up to this point i mean i think you know jeremy scahill has written

a really fabulous piece on this that's just appeared in the nation and the stirring up some attention to it but in general you're right and in general i think it tracks the white house in official government reporting so i think we have a lot of people in the media here who are really reluctant ever to cross the administration on its characterization of the situation and you know i found that when i was studying the situation in iraq i was really shocked at how even media organizations that were being victimized would never faithfully report every completely erroneous indeed outrageous statement that came out of the pentagon about their own fellow workers and then the when. you know when the truth finally came out after trial and we got acquittals and release ordered this figure it is a very minor in consequential press story unlike the original arrest of the

government charges so i think there's a structural problem here in the way the news is relayed now and that really plays into coverage of the new type of warfare these corporate drone wars because you know you sort of talk about. the mainstream press parroting the pentagon point of view but one of the things that this yemeni reporter uncovered for example was the u.s. role in the bombings in two thousand and nine that actually ended up killing several civilians twenty something i think twenty one children the u.s. media coverage during that time was you know he had many drones are yemeni attacks kill militants right so let's let's let's switch the conversation let's broaden it out and talk a little bit about our treatment in the press the new covert drone warfare and how that may be having blowback effect for the united states. well i think one thing that's really remarkable is that inside the united states if you

look at this reporting of attacks the american media reports pretty much of what the intelligence community wants them to report and that have line maybe we get a little bit from the scene coming up a little bit later but that's not reported heavily so you know generally if we look at the drone more in pakistan for instance there's been better more comprehensive and more timely reporting about what's happened there inside of pakistan than in the united states now what's the reason for this the reason is that. the administration believes or takes the position that the drone war is covertly so therefore it can't be the sky and therefore it doesn't where the issue official statements are it's only the not for attribution briefings that they get out there and the american media falls in place behind that were as the media in pakistan or people like this in prison reporter and yemen you know didn't play that game they

went out and dealt with things the hard way they went to the villages they interviewed people they sneer they snap photographs and so forth and they reported the actual facts and it's clear that you know the truth in this case is in the enemy the end of the day there's there's an internal war going on in washington to hear the cia in order to maintain control of this program has to keep it as covert action that it's not covert action it becomes a military projects and cia has a huge vested interest in keeping everything secret in quotes. because that comes to mind is who the secrecy is supposed to full of because it's not like folks on the ground in yemen or in pakistan truly believe that this is it happening they physically visually see the results if the american public that seems to suffer at the end of the day it's this kind of covert warfare that's probably a better recruiting tool for al qaida anything for an independent journalist can

publish any young man could ever be if they it just seems like it's defeating our own interests. well that's that's exactly right i mean there's no question in the question from whom is this being kept the secret it's not being kept a secret from the people who are targeted they know all about it and they know there's nothing they can do about the defectively it's not being kept secret from the people in pakistan or yemen they know all about it it's only been kept the secret from the people in the united states to avoid this whole issue and all the legal and ethical questions about drones to avoid that becoming a political question in the united states all right well scott i really want to thank you for your time we always appreciate having you on air and we change things around at the last minute there so thank you so much as always for your insight all . employed scott horton contributing editor for harper's magazine well from silencing critics a barrage of those at home president obama promised transparency when he came into

office status of ministration is increasingly regarded as the worst on issues related to freedom of information so is that actually the case well that's the question that i posted jason leopold hearing earlier today and he is the lead investigative reporter actually out dot org here's this take. sure well you know first of all when obama came into office he made these promises you sign an executive order. promising to usher in a new error of open government transparency eric holder the attorney general. issued some new guidelines in march of two thousand and nine. what people seem to forget or may not even be aware of me not even aware of is that immediately after the administration released these memos these memos and the cia and the justice department's office of legal counsel prepared used for interrogation and torture

the so-called torture memos and that was it the administration. had clampdown on releasing anything else from that point on that was back in april of two thousand and nine what the administration has done is anything that has to do with national security the so-called war on terror past administration abuses such as you know issues revolving around the patriot act this is ministration has gone to court has asserted state secrets to block the release of information in shortly after these memos were released this administration had promised to release photographs photographs of that would depict the treatment of us or rather prisoners in custody of the united states government military in iraq and afghanistan there was a huge outcry. and dick cheney and his daughter liz cheney had

attacked the administration for even considering to release those photos so what this administration had done is that they were preparing to go to the supreme courts to basically block the release of the photos because a lot of a lower court had ruled that they must be released to the a.c.l.u. who had sought them out and then they went and ended up working with congress and congress to change the law to basically change the freedom of information act that would allow anyone who sought such photographs or videos under the freedom of information act it allowed the secretary of defense to basically say no just this week ok just this week i mean this is it wednesday so i believe it was on monday the administration the director of the justice department's office of information policy had got have again gone to congress and basically sought congress's assistance in changing a lot. or adding to

a cyber security bill that would more or less and block. information that people seek under the freedom of information act again this was you know this is due to the fact that the supreme court ruled that such information should be released but there's this fear that if anything comes out it could damage security so it is they're going to great lengths to pull law any information that would reveal government activity but here's my question in your view. why come into office and make this the top priority of the administration make this a key issue that you talk about as soon as you literally enter the white house only to go back on that i mean what change from obama's intentions to present day. i think that a largely this has to do with with politics and truly it's nothing more than embarrassment the revelations that would be exposed that would be highlighted

exposed from these documents that people would obtain under the freedom of information act would be truly embarrassing for this government it would probably lead to calls for investigation it would show in my opinion some extreme abuses of the of the law that the you know that the law was being abused i mean look if you recall when the. justice department memos office of legal counsel memos were released i mean the blowback was. truly reached a. you know a heated point where republicans attacked the administration they were accused of. basically providing the enemy al qaeda with you know or are sources and methods and

i think administration learned its lesson at that point and learned its lesson by stating we are not going to release any information on certainly our national security. you know or the war on terror that would. reveal the way the you know the policies that were put into place to you know to to prosecute certain individuals to interrogate certain individuals. you know there there this is ministration i think it it believe that it could make some changes. it it learned its lesson and i think that that moment in time when those memos were released that's when everything changed and we saw it happen with the photographs. in those recently a poll of the lead investigative reporter for truthout dot org. now british forces may have torched washington d.c. back in nineteen twelve but two centuries later it's probably safe to say that the

leaders of both countries are burning with love for one another but the british prime minister david cameron is in town for a three day visit to reaffirm england's famed special relationship with america this apparently entails watching a basketball game with the president munching on hot dogs and later this evening a glitzy state dinner or suction which by the way. the white house will be releasing the wine list for that dinner because it looks like the cost of chardonnay is get another state secret. is that they also look like c. secrecy fever has actually taken hold across the pond and the lack of accountability for abuses committed in the name of counterterrorism is rubbing off in the u.k. now cameron's government is moving to expand the use of controversial secret hearings in national security cases out from there in order to keep a lid on torture that's been committed at the hands of the americans separately the use of british intelligence in covert american drone strikes in pakistan is now the

subject of a new lawsuit against the u.k. by the civilian victims of those attacks and don't forget the two countries do seem to work in lockstep when it comes to wars in the middle east so the really need to reaffirm their special relationship or is a reconsideration of it a little bit more appropriate that's a question that i posed to andy worthington earlier today he's an investigative journalist and the author of the book guantanamo files here is his take on this issue. nine eleven and the war on terror began so we had a labor prime minister because being with a republican president now we've got a democratic president cozying up with a conservative prime minister and they didn't seem to make much difference may be able to demonstrate interchangeable these people because. there are pretty terrible reasons for a bomb or a cameron to be close but we know that both deeply involved in this horrible war that has gone on longer than any anyone can remember that should have ended

long ago. you know they were the country least. hand in hand shoulder to shoulder with each other in countering terrorism and there in the involvement in torture and rendition in the darkest days of the war on terror and i think you are hearing from my colleague jason just the full of course the obama administration does not want to ask about what took place in. the cameron administration here having initially appeared to favor transparency and i climb back. and i want to talk sort of about how folks in the u.k. seem to they see their own government is complicit in sort of this growing. clampdown on that information or. the u.k. for example beholden perhaps the u.s. how. will you know that in terms of accountability people in this country are aware

that we have demonstrably example of an independent judiciary that actually exposed the complicity into. the previous labor government and people will see that the attempts by the cameron led government to impose greater secrecy across the board in british courts is a dangerous obstacle to. it's a game and because ability that i have british people a sufficiently aware of the informs of keeping a check on our elected leaders will be to come back. when we have certainly enough of an independent media probing these issues for its be something that i think people will be. trying to talk you may have an independent media one case. or case by by any means popular i case but richard old wire was you know young kid

u.k. citizen who was in violation of u.s. copyright laws and is now being extradited to the u.s. by the u.k. for violating copyright laws we're looking at photos of him right now i mean it would seem based on your independent press over in the u.k. that this kind of thing is an outrage. well i think people are very concerned about various issues to do with the extradition treaty and i'm very glad that you asked me about that because we believe that to some extent this may take part in some kind of discussions between the two leaders i can see that they will be given much precedence by the extradition treaty that the u.k. has with the u.s. . you know this terrible one sided affair where by nothing really needs to be put forward in the way of evidence for the british to have to hand people over

prosecution in the united states and what keeps happening over and over again and the fundamental problem is that if these are people who have committed some kind of crime in the country where they are then those things should be dealt with their tradition treaty just seems over and over. is actually removing people unnecessarily and dangerously i think from the place where they actually should be dealt with and it's not just a case of this young man that you're talking about of course that's very very relevant that we have other issues like the like for example with a young man who spent eight years in a british jail without charge or trial pending his intended extradition to the united states you know these are these are terrible issues but as i say i'm not convinced they're going to be discussed much the same and i'm not convinced the tool that david cameron will raise the issue or shack up with the last british resident in guantanamo who neither the u.s. government wants. and the british government wants

a back he's been. the u.s. doesn't want him the british wants him back why is he still have but apparently when these guys need they never discussed it so i wouldn't imagine that the. other terrible instances of people's lives being ruined are necessarily a good be the kind of things that are on the agenda while they're busy watching sporting matches going to having a. question we're out of time but on the agenda looks like we probably won't know about it because. here in the us. one time. ok well there is an update on this story as it pertains to the extradition treaty at least as andy worthington just explained the treaty was an act in the aftermath of nine eleven and it seems to be a bit lost sight in favor of the united states and at least has been criticized as being unfair to british citizens now it turns out that a few hours after my interview with andy president obama agreed to top level talks

on cutting the number of britons extradited to the u.s. for trial now the u.k. prime minister pushed to deal with more of these types of cases back home in british courts for of course any changes would require a joint review of the treaty by officials from the u.s. justice department and the home office in england. let's one little victory or at least a potential victory for british citizens who don't exactly feel like getting extra into a different country to stand trial for crimes they committed and weren't guilty of in their home country and feel like we'd probably feel similarly about the whole thing but british is and still have a long way to go when it comes for surveillance and secrecy was a big brother on steroids i mean how would you feel if all of your phone calls internet activity and all the stuff online was monitored twenty four seven that's probably actually the case in fact it is the case in the u.k. i've heard bennett reports. soon you could be watched everywhere you go in the u.k.

even where the cameras can't see you all your emails texts and phone calls will be monitored under a new anti terrorist spy plan a government will know which websites you visit it will even snoop on your private facebook messages no matter who you are all your personal data will be stored for a year in a massive surveillance operation privacy campaign is condemned this is the first step toward the government taking control of usenet the only place in the world that's got that kind of regulation is china i'm sorry but britain is not china britain's already one of the most watched societies in the world the number of c.c.t.v. cameras is estimated at nearly two million now the government wants to monitor all electronic communication as well including social media taking surveillance to a level never seen before just what you say in calls and messages won't be kept but

the government will know exactly who you speak to when you do it and where you are it will be stored by broadband and mobile companies that security services will have real time access at the click of a button secretly living your life with you there digital rights groups say it'll leave people living in fear of big brother but the problem here is really that it is intrusive and the sort of places where you can see that might be useful could be you know it could be anything could be tax it could be to force it could be copyright infringement. terrorism and serious crime are a tiny subset of the possibilities that you could use this information for it's the ones being watched who are paying for it too so obvious security experts predict it will cost taxpayers over a billion dollars to be spied on even then there's no guarantee they'll be safe from other prying eyes any person who guarantees absolute security is an idiot

and if you're dealing with information which might be required at short notice by law enforcement then that means that quite a lot of people need to be involved or i suspect most of the time is going to quote unquote secure. their also it's highly likely that there will be failures as well you're toiling in the teachings private the now the legislation still has to go through parliament the previous governments wish for a surveillance where it was fought off in two thousand and eight so with fears of data safety the greater fear this time we're told is this threat to national security events like the olympics the government's justification so it may not be long before what you thought was personal reaches a much wider audience i've been it's artsy. and that's going to do it for the news for tonight but stick around the big picture is coming up at the top of

the hour last night's primaries resulted in big wins for rick santorum and surprisingly and an even bigger question mark when it comes to their public and party who is going to face president obama come the general election i sure as hell don't know if there's a one message from last night's result is that the g.o.p. is just as good here and the longer this race last month it's going to get those funk hartmann stays in a sit down with a panel of conservatism talk about the results asking if it's finally time to get a party that's all new in half an hour. carol thanks for tuning in the show doesn't stop here a lot's more stuff for you on our web site stories interviews and so forth are you dot com slash asay and and you can watch all of the stories you saw today as many times as you want and for presence of times it is all those you tube clicks on our you tube channel their address is on the screen for you r.t. america and i also want to hear from you i'd love for you to weigh in on what you saw this eve.