there are no better products the united states and australia about friendship is about to get a whole lot cozier the us military has that on some islands near australia and they might be a future home to a big straight ahead we'll tell you why this region is prime property for us. your walking down the street of the camera that takes a picture of you is able to compare it through facial print is able to compare it to your driver's license for or some other photo who's watching your every move the u.s. government of course but what is your digital footprint say about you and does this

mean privacy is dead will explore. and that's not the only example of overreaching government control the new national defense authorization act is looking up more locking up more american freedoms than ever before but a group of authors journalists politicians and professors are trying to stop the n.c.a.a. in its tracks i'll tell you how. it's friday march thirtieth four pm in washington d.c. i'm christine for watching our team. well it appears there are major plans for the united states to expand its military presence toward the southern hemisphere this includes an expanded presence in australia and in the long run a new air base on the cocos in healing island territory of australia located in india in the indian ocean sort of halfway between australia and sri lanka there's

talk the islands would replace the u.s. as current indian ocean based on diego garcia which is least the u.s. by britain at least runs out in four years and well as specifics of the new base remain under wraps an in-depth report by the washington post from the location should be quote ideal from am surveillance aircraft as well as unmanned drones also an official review conducted in now these are just a few of the details of an agreement announced back in november by president obama and the australian prime minister here's president obama speaking or not is that there are no better friends there the united states and australia or darkest moments. what are called the independent institute island islands those are island i've been left kind of cut straight to the chase here this is about china right. ideal location for both manned surveillance plan planes and unmanned drones what do you foresee that this will look like if this is indeed the

next sort of future in diego garcia well i think it could be done in stages you don't use learner runways for drones and that sort of thing you do for if you were to put like fifty two heavy bombers like we have in diego garcia or other bombers that we have there and so i think you know this could be ramped up over time they. seem to think this has been thoroughly discussed they were kind of caught unawares by this would certainly at the lower levels is being discussed and it could be a plan for the future is a part of this simply the u.s. government or the pentagon trying to send a message or is this actually just the next strategy in terms of no it's military defense well i think they're trying to send a message to china and they may have been trying to send a message to the australians that we're ready to do this and we want to talk about it now all right it should be interesting to give our eyes on a very interesting report incredible out of people by surprise all those details ivan eland senior fellow at the end of the term well we've been telling you about

a new digital data center being built in utah for the national security agency a whole lot of that is expected to be housed there including perhaps some information about you this little tracking of americans is expected to be connected to the center on occasion having noticed a whole lot of these technologies to track people already in place are d. correspondent kareen important gives us an up close and personal look. ten years ago biometrics robotic spies and state surveillance were the makings of a spy by flick starring tom cruise center from the control room today many scenes from the hollywood blockbuster minority report how about arguably the calm in the know can reality with life ominously imitating art your walking down the street of the camera takes a picture of you is able to compare it through facial mapping is able to compare it

to your driver's license for them or some other photo. maybe a surveillance photo and say all right marina was on the corner of forty second. at three o'clock last saturday in addition to facial recognition new york city's police department is just one of many law enforcement agencies that also require citizens to undergo an iris scan before being released from police custody. in the past six months iris scans have been taken from hundreds of occupy wall street activists placed under arrest by christina gonzales they really don't tell you why they just say it's another form of identification and it's really creepy to have someone holding up the machines in your phrase and you have no idea that only the health of what there are clearly use it with their larger purpose of using it is for iris cans are like a high tech fingerprint but much faster officials can quickly identify anyone who's

unique scan is on the database but technology is becoming increasingly useful as a tracking tool in the u.s. in the virtual world of tweets. facebook posts and search engines every internet user is defined by a data footprint if you think anonymous comments and blogs are protected think again through the use of what's called forensic linguistics. u.s. investigators can now uncover are behind every single keystroke if i have a good or not a large enough sample of your writing in your post i can tell you and compare i can even put it into a database and database. using that information finding every other post you ever did the digital data trail of every american will soon be connected to a massive building in utah a two billion dollar data center is reportedly being constructed for the us

national security agency the complex will allegedly be able to collect analyze and store all forms of personal communication including online purchases so calls google searches and yes private messages but they're actually looking at de encrypting all of the data that comes out so for example when you use g.-mail your all your e-mails are encrypted by default google has given you the service and has allowed you to say my communications are protected now the n.s.a. is center is designed around building systems that will do you encourage that data and remove any protection it you can put onto it earlier this month cia director david petraeus paints a picture of america's dystopian free fall when describing the emergence of the internet of things the first refers to an increasing amount of personal information washington will eventually be able to obtain once all who electronics are wired to

a network of u.s. intelligence officials estimate that by twenty twenty up to one hundred billion ordinary devices such as refrigerators and dishwashers could be wired up to the internet just the way p.c.'s and cell phones are now that bottomless pit of data could allow big brother to monitor virtually anything it wants even the cia director says the very idea of secrecy will change forever. our new york. i call it spying big brother or an extended reality show we're all a part of these technologies are here to stay and they're only getting more intricate more developed so we want to talk about what this means on a broader scale chris a growing as a graduate fellow at the center for applied cybersecurity research he's in our new york studios all right chris a lot of this i don't really find surprising i mean i go to the gym i use my fingerprints when i walk in when you post pictures on facebook now facebook somehow

recognizes the people with some sort of facial recognition software should people be surprised that this is going on you know that you should be surprised that facebook is using the data that you give it to help you i think the surprising thing here is how much data and sit in the hands of the government and unfortunately the way the law is in the united states once you hand over your data to a third party whether it's a library or email provider or telephone company or a credit card company once it's in their possession the government can come and ask for it and there's really nothing the company can do to stop them or to stop the government from getting information if they have the right kind of court order the government gets it gets the data and it ends up in a database and then who knows where it where that from there i mean how hard is it to get one of these court orders. it depends on what kind of data the government's after the court order that allows the government to get information detailing who you've called where you've been that kind of information can be obtained with with

what's called a relevancy senate so the information is relevant to an ongoing investigation which is a very low standard if the government wants the contents of your inbox you know the contents of your e-mail or your facebook messages then that's a higher threshold and and then the highest one of all is if the governor wants to wiretap you in real time and then they have to really show up to hire a very high threshold but so much of the data that we create is transactional data about where we are what we're purchasing who we've been near and that information can be taken very very easily by the government it is true and i think just about anyone who's ever bought anything online whether it's shoes or make up after you even look at those that sort of comes in all of your searches whether it's on google or something totally unrelated all of a sudden issues that you thought about buying yesterday are you know there for you to see the next day i mean i think it is interesting a bit certainly one of the most common arguments in favor of these types of technologies is hey well if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't have to

worry i guess chris what's your case against that argument. right so i think the first thing to note here is that everyone has something to worry about everyone has a secret everyone has a few secrets whether it's the prescription drugs that you use whether it's the you know the person that you happen to love or what their gender is or what your sexuality is or your religion or your political beliefs everyone has something that they don't want to broadcast the entire world i mean the fact that we have curtains in our windows and clothes on our on our persons mean we have something that we don't wish to be broadcast that every single person but there's also some context to our audience of this which is that we share information with other people whether it's you know on one on one conversations whether it's on facebook we share information with the people that we expect to have it our friends the businesses we interact with but we don't expect that information to do is be out there for everyone to see right so i know that the bookstore knows which books i read because the car is scanning them as i'm purchasing them but i don't expect someone walking down the street two days later to say oh hey chris i saw that you you've been

reading that book recently the same thing happens for the clothes or buying the prescription drugs or purchasing the movies and books or reading in these things are private outside of the context in which we initially gauge and the activity with the merchant and what's happening now is that the data is sort of bleeding out it's ending up in databases by large firms run by large firms like google and amazon and so we're losing our contextual privacy that this data is being shared with people that we don't think should have it and certainly is being used in situations in which we might not realize upon the point at which the data is captured and thirdly for a business perspective it makes sense why some of these businesses why it might want to know what you're reading for example what kind of shoes i'm buying but what about the whole government aspect of this what do you suppose is the reasoning behind this i know a lot of people say you know with the chinese they have a lot of these technologies but a lot of times they're sort of less concerned with for example what u.s.

lawmakers say behind closed doors and more concern or interested in what maybe steve jobs was talking about it's business as far as the government is concerned here is there a financial game here or is it something else. i mean i think that you have to understand that government isn't one huge piece trace of the different components and cs and they each do different things so law enforcement agencies in the united states are primarily concerned with enforcing the laws and so they are going to be interested in you know finding out who is breaking the law who might be breaking the law and so that's going to be you know looking into crimes of some kind the intelligence agencies are going to be investigating terrorism there also could be investigating espionage and themselves engaging in espionage and so for their interests you know for the cia and n.s.a. then the e-mails the politicians and the e-mails of foreign business leaders are going to be up for grabs i mean you have to understand that there's no you know there's no one person who's calling the shots on all the wiretapping the in the

u.s. it's sort of happens in a distributed way what can be done about the house well we can ask the companies who give us the tools that we use to try and protect our privacy better so as you noted earlier google is now using some encryption by default the problem is is that many of the services and tools that we use are provided to us for free google famously doesn't charge for his e-mail so does facebook so does yahoo microsoft and all these other firms because they're not charging us for the services that we use oftentimes their incentives are and are not aligned with ours and in essence we're providing the data that then they use to sell ads and so it's very difficult to get them to really protect our privacy when you know not keeping our data in the first place or using really strong encryption technologies would limit their ability to show us ads so i think one of the most important things we can start doing is having a debate around you know should we be paying five dollars a month or five dollars a year for facebook so that suddenly the company has an incentive to really protect

our privacy. graduate fellow at the center for applied fiber security research restarts appreciate your in fact on this topic thank you. well a group of high profile journalists and activists made their first round of statements yesterday at a u.s. district court in new york city against the national defense authorization act also known as and da the group is follow a lawsuit against the obama administration determined to overturn n.g.a. provisions in this bill is a military spending bill but some of the provisions give the united states military the power to legally detain suspects indefinitely and without charge or trial and that could include american citizens as long as they're suspected in some way shape or form of being associated with terrorists plaintiffs include pentagon papers whistleblower daniel ellsberg writer and linguist noam chomsky and journalist chris hedges the lawsuit is named hedges v obama and i spoke with chris hedges earlier this month about the lawsuit. moves due process for anybody who is deemed not just

a terrorist to have could be associated forces that's not a term that's defined it's no. it's quite a frightening piece of legislation and chris that in addition there's nothing that gives exceptions to journalists and since he personally has done several interviews with groups deemed terrorists this could impact him and others like him who are simply trying to get a deeper understanding of people whose perspective perhaps the u.s. government doesn't want out there for a while as an attorney with a law and security program at human rights first and he's here to talk about some of the legal implications here first of all let's let's talk a little bit about the lawsuit itself i know from what i understand yesterday was sort of a preliminary thing they were giving statements about why this is important i know our last week chris hedges was questioned by the government for four hours to make sure he was deemed a suitable plaintiff in this break this down for that's for us how this works well

i think your introduction to this segment really kind of got a court issues in this case basically what the law says is that if you are determined to be a member or a substantial supporter of the taliban or a quote unquote associated force the military can hold you indefinitely without charge of trial with this lawsuit is seeking to challenge is the notion that individuals who may just have a very tenuous connection to terrorist organizations journalists in this case or activists. challenge the war to ensure that it cannot be applied in an overbroad way certainly part of the evil lot of these people have is the language that i've read through this action action ten twenty one and ten twenty two and you know there's words and phrases like associated forces well you know i could be associated with anyone and not even know about it or do it but not for the same purposes. you know how do you get around this or why we. this language do you think

included in the first place well i think there's a sense that you know something needs to be done about terrorism ten years after nine eleven and so congress came through and passed what i certainly think is an overbroad bill it's unfortunate that the president signed it into law and into law by the way on new year's eve december thirty first and twenty eleven so i think a lot of people weren't really aware that it was even going on certainly weren't aware when he actually signed a bill and made it into a law that's right and so you know we're faced now with these ill defined terms that are but there are very broad but the government says that these are only individuals who are fighting alongside well it's unclear quite frankly how broad or how narrow this as bill is i think you know the responsible thing for congress to do would have been to to gotten out of the business of indefinite detention when we have a court system that works very well it's separating you know those who actually committed crimes from those who are innocent so yes it's troubling and i think that's why

you're seeing all of this. you know posed and the activity out there trying to really challenge these overbroad claims so one of them. in this lawsuit. how does the obama. how does it work i mean they issued their statement that the court yesterday or what's going to take to actually get sort of a full fledged trial here well it's going to be an uphill battle for this case one of the problems is that none of these individuals have actually been detained by the military so there's what's called a standing issue where these plaintiffs are going to have to show that there is some kind of concrete risk that the government is actually going to come forward and detain them so that is going to be i think the hardest. hurdle that these people plaintiffs are going to have to overcome in showing that this law is in fact overbroad but i think that that process is ongoing we're going to see. you know

additional legal filings where the government and the plaintiffs will basically spar over what this what this law means and we'll have to go from there and it's really interesting because we're starting to hear even though a lot of people voted for this that we are starting to hear just in the last few days last week even a lot of republicans on capitol hill hellinger in washington are starting to say hey you know maybe we should look at some of these provisions. what's going on in congress i mean how is this happening after the bill was already signed well i think we saw some of that during the debate over the bill i agree it's a growing opposition and i think part of it is that folks are actually sitting down and thinking about this issue and the real threats to individual liberty that this bill could could pose and you're right there are the republicans on the hill there are democrats on the hill that are proposing legislation right now that we didn't see before and i should mention before the bill was signed mark udall came forward with proposed legislation to sort of rework and it was called the you doll amendment to try to take some of the more controversial things out that's correct

and you don't have republican co-sponsors on his bill in the house and you're seeing an effort by ranking member smith who who is the democrat on the house armed services committee who's trying to roll back some of these provisions utah has a companion bill in the senate so i do think we're going to see some challenges legislative challenges to these provisions as we move forward and just real quick i yesterday after the court period at a court hearing there was a press conference outside a lot of people talking about the severity of andy i want to play something really quick jennifer bolen said she's one of the plaintiffs and executive director of our revolution truth. and we actually feel we are in. so if you think that's going to difficult to prove that they are in fact in danger it's unclear it's like i had said before it's an uphill battle certainly the more that the plaintiffs can show that the military

does intend to detain them in some way shape or form the better they're all of success in this lawsuit but i think that you know this lawsuit aside there are broader legislative proposals out there to really kind of challenge the endianness detention provisions and we should watch those as well certainly good to know at least that more people are talking about this both in the general public sphere and i even those lawmakers haven't forgotten about it. now because the council for human rights for stupid shit thank you. well coming up next on our team is the capital account so let's check in with lauren to see what's on today's agenda lauren we made it it's friday and what's going on in the financial world we did make it christine happy friday well first i'm just curious let's do word association what do you think of when you think of warren buffett maybe currently certainly the buffett amendment that has wealthy people pay the same in taxes as for example their secretaries exactly and what if i told you it warren buffett his whole tax the rich which you just said you prove to me that this is how he's really

known for right now what i told you you know hey that's really not the case maybe warren buffett really doesn't want to be taxed more there's plenty of evidence to the contrary and he's trying to achieve something completely different epitomizes where we are in capitalism ending us today you're going to have to watch the show to find out what i mean but you're not going to want to miss it all right sounds very interesting lauren lyster thanks for that and for us here that's going to do it for more of the stories we cover make sure to go to youtube dot com slash r t america or our website r c dot com slash usa and you can of course always follow me on twitter at christine for example. culture is that so much of the divinity but usually that is a very fine mark when serious divides as the peace plan for syria gains

international support worries remain it is only a low before the civil war in the country. download the official t.m.p. cation job i phone the i pod touch from the i choose out story. one child sees life on the go. video on demand on cheese knife bold comes an r.s.s. feeds now in the palm of your. questions on the

t.v. dot com.