these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. charlie corporations rule today. well that's it the final debate between president obama and mitt romney is over while the media focus is on the zingers the candidates use will tell you which topics weren't brought up at all also give you a preview of tonight's third party debate. plus we've heard that the n.y.p.d. is surveilling the muslim community but now an inside look at what information has been gathered and more importantly who is doing the spying had we'll tell you about the nineteen year old who says the n.y.p.d. paid him to spy. and towering above high above city skylines and

apparently u.s. law coming up we'll explore the biggest technological threat to cell phone privacy that you've probably never heard of. and tuesday october twenty third five pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wall and you're watching our team well the third and final presidential debate has wrapped up this time the focus was on foreign policy and there were some noteworthy moments like this one president obama calling mitt romney out for deeming russia our number one geopolitical foe governor romney i'm glad you recognize that al qaeda is a threat because a few months ago when you were asked what's the biggest geopolitical threat facing america you said russia. that al-qaeda is that russia in the 1980's are now calling

us for their foreign policy but along with notable one liners discussed at length last night the attack on libya in libya the ongoing crisis in syria the iranian threat and u.s. ties to israel but none of the candidates have their final chance on the stage some say there's a lot to be desired so what are some of the critical issues the incumbent president and romney didn't talk about to weigh in our very own artsy producer are going to said i am abby martin host of breaking the set joined us earlier today. it's rather interesting to see that there was a lot of talk there a lot of name checks on stage a lot of you know mentioning this or that but not a lot of detail or at least not a lot that hasn't been discussed. before hand so very very interesting all right speaking of what was mentioned i know you compiled this list of the top mentioned issues and then we're going to go into the lease mentioned let's take a look now iran mentioned that was

a top one there forty seven times israel thirty four times pakistan and the economy of both mentioned twenty five times afghanistan twenty one times now for the least mentioned latin america. was mentioned four times all i guess all but one by me drones was mentioned twice but obama did not mention it will talk about that more later yemen. euro zone not to mention no mention drug war no mention so drones were mentioned for the first time last night and all three debates so they have broken their silence but was that was that enough abbie you know of course not i mean when you have extensive drone warfare going on across the muslim world we're talking about putting drones and i mean here's romney saying you know what i agree with your counter with your drone king policy romney is right there in line with them so why would they really elaborate on something that they

so strongly agree with well i think that's i mean that's a good good thing right at the for the voter out there that they you know maybe it's going to be a little bit more moderate on this actually no you're going to see a moderate mitt on that one no not at me not at all i mean i think that's i think if you're going to do you know glass is half full on this one you see like well ok so they actually do agree so there wouldn't really be that much of a change there so actually you know we do have that clip let's take a listen to it. i believe that we should use any and all means necessary to take out people who pose a threat and our friends around the world and it's widely reported the drones are being used in drone strikes and i support that entirely and feel the president was right to the usage of that technology and believe that we should continue to use it to continue to go after the people who represent a threat to this nation. so there is romney advocating the use of drones as we had mentioned president obama did not even say the word one so he basically

dodged the question a very it masterfully so it was a very artful sort of for sure for sure it wasn't even i mean how can you answer a question about drones and not even utter the word one as unless he just made a pivot. propagandists are the i mean when you look at the recent report that just came out of pakistan very extensive report saying that civilian casualties are extreme all the rhetoric we hear about drones they're strategic pinpoint precision really they have a two percent success rate which is a ninety eight percent failure rate when you're looking at all these top brass of al qaeda that they're taking out how many countless innocent civilians are dying in the process and then that's a having the drone program is a very which expanded under president obama is a very controversial program as you had mentioned abbie no mention of the civilian death toll and also some of the other effects of this drone program the fact that it is breeding anti-american sentiment especially in pakistan where they are not fans of the u.s. and the implications of that on our foreign policy that's and this is

a foreign policy exactly exactly i mean i want calm propagandise only because it's giving them way too much like credence to be honest like these are politicians and you can see how hard they're working very hard to get it off again i would think because i mean one minute from which it isn't obvious that he is in the word i am going to go in there and give it you know pivoting i don't. know but i really do believe like it's interesting the fact that the economy had the same amount of mensch. pakistan i mean that's very telling of how how we are actually dealing with foreign policy right now it's not it's not even it's not even important i mean that's that's essentially what what they're signaling to us right now and couldn't be farther from the truth i wanted to point out something that wasn't mentioned at all you know israel is mentioned how many times thirty four twenty times they want to think that when you're talking about israel talking about human rights spreading democracy abroad you think that you'd mention that little little plot of land that the israeli military is phasing out palestine that wasn't really mentioned at all

during the debate at all not a single word that's on our list but i get your i mean another thing couple other things not mentioned we should like touch upon like n.d.a. nothing latin america only for mentions of those all mitt all answer of course saying oh we need to increase trade that's it but really the moderators fault to not ask the question about something like you know there's a lot to indefinitely detain american citizens on u.s. soil what do you go i mean how can you explain that you know i mean i mean so of course they're not going to bring it up they both agree with it romney said that he would vote for it so it really you look at the moderator who's fault really is it to not ask these hard questions right you know for all of us that tweet now a live tweet while we're watching the debate it was interesting if you if you noticed the hash tag stuff and da was trending on twitter last night there in the debate so i mean it sounds like people are interested in it people do want to hear

it it's not like this for the range group of people that are aren't concerned about it so it was a coordinated campaign from the sparrow project along with other activists to try to get it on the radar because we knew we knew very well that they were going to talk about this issue we knew that the debates weren't going to mention this at all so we at least wanted to put it out on twitter to get people who were paying attention to see that this is a very important issue i want to do want to move on now let's take a listen to what was said last night the issue of china. with respect to china china is both an aed the search but also a potential partner in the international community if it's following the rules so by our attitude coming into office was that we are going to insist the china plays by the same rules as everybody else we can be a partner with china we don't have to be an adversary in any way shape or form we can work with them we can collaborate with them if they're willing to be

responsible. so i mean it seems like neither candidate can decide whether china is our friend our fellow i mean that's what mitt romney was saying during the primaries i mean you had there was much tougher talk on china and what he proposed during that debate so it's a very when it comes to trying to moderate mitt came out last i absolutely there you go. guys well you know what. we talked about what isn't mentioned last night but this is why viewers should tune in tonight it is true salute party debates on tonight so likely you will see a much of the things that weren't talked about this time around you'll see that probably go into detail about it later on so you have definitely need to check that out i mean why do you think people should tune in tonight because they'll see what hasn't been covered by the corporate controlled media the more defense contractors you know monsanto owned media and of course we're going to see the issues that people really do care about and we're going to tune in to the third party debates

because we can exclude the other alternative voices that does not represent the people anymore and well what about those that say you know what we saw the three debates these are going to be one of the winner is going to be president obama or it's going to be mitt romney's so why put energy toward it toward these other candidates because a wasted vote is voting for the two stubborn figures you're basically giving credence to their platform i mean the things that they propose i do not support so i'm going to. a wasted vote voting for either of these people in the day your vote is the voice is your vote so you use it as you as you may that's right. wrapping it up there very nice wrapping it up. your voice as you're. looking forward to our coverage tonight that was our it's your producer on it was said oh and abby martin host of breaking the sets. x.i.i.

officer turned whistleblower john kerry who pleaded guilty today to leaking the names of secret operatives to reporters as part of the deal prosecutors dropped the most serious charges one of the charges was filed under the world war one era espionage act he has been sentenced to two and a half years behind bars if you can recall kiriakou became the subject of an intensive federal investigation after an interview on a.b.c. news back in two thousand and seven where he confirmed and spoke out against the government's use of waterboarding on terrorist suspects here's a clip of that as time has passed and has september eleventh has has you know has moved farther and farther back into history i think i've changed my mind and i think that waterboarding is probably something we should be in the business of doing why do you say that. because we're americans and we're better than them. well let's talk more about this case and today's developments i'm joined by kathleen mcclelland national security and human rights council for the government

accountability project kathleen thanks so much for coming to the studio so i guess first just a reaction to the police deal and the sentence that curiosity now face says well once again the government tried to use the espionage act to go after a whistleblower and failed the espionage act the charges were just ran mysteriously dropped and. kiriakou pled guilty to in intelligence identities protection act charge and he's only actually the second person in history to be found guilty of a crime under that law and the first person served eighteen months in prison so he will be serving a little bit longer and it's unfortunate that he was the only person going to jail in relation to the bush era torture program. the justice department the cia won a victory here of protecting torture because. all of the officials who torture detainees and prisoners jose rodriguez who went on sixty minutes and bragged about

how he enjoyed torturing prisoners john yoo and jay bybee who wrote the legal memos that authorize torturing prisoners the officials that ordered it and even officer a whose name pled to confirming for an investigator and author and was revealed to be involved in torture he's enjoying his retirement in vienna virginia. i want to talk more about this plea deal and you said kind of mysteriously that charge was dropped if he was though charged under this espionage act he would be facing a lot more time is that correct yes i think. it is ten years and he was facing three espionage charges which were all dropped so do you think that he kind of got out the best the best that he could in terms of his sentence you know. i think that for someone. who's a whistleblower and who's facing criminal prosecution any any time in jail is really a travesty especially in comparison to the conduct of the actual torture her say

and the people who authorized torture. and you know who himself has five kids three young kids very young kids and i think that he had to make this hard choice in order to be there for when his kids grow up to see his kids grow up and not miss it and frankly i don't know why he's the only one i think the question really is why is he the only one who had to make that choice why not jose rodriguez or john you or jay bybee or officer a or all these people who were deeply involved in orchestrating and authorizing the torture program right and whistleblowing advocates like yourself in a gentler radically what we have are on this show relatively frequently they say that this is more about his public comments about waterboarding we played that clip earlier on do you believe that to be true absolutely i mean the. the name that he's that he pled guilty to confirming was never actually made public had

been it's been made public in the past couple of weeks but he the charge that he pled guilty to was essentially giving the name to an author who then gave it to an investigator who then gave it to criminal defense attorneys who then put it in a sealed court filing so it's not as though someone's name who is undercover is now out there in the public eye in the past couple of weeks his name has come out and the fact that he was deeply involved and even headed the rendition group at cia headquarters but as far as as a result of john kiriakou actions the harm was was that a bunch of guantanamo prisoners found out the name of their alleged torture and tried to use that in their defense so would you say anybody's safety was compromised by the information that was released by carry on. the government hasn't really you now after the plea the government doesn't have to prove that there's been no public evidence of any specific danger. to anyone. you know as

a result of what curiosity pled to or even what he did and frankly there's no evidence of any of the whistleblowers conduct actually harming national security the government's always going to say that the conduct is of grave danger to national security and i'm sure that's what they'll say after this plea is that you endangered national security but in fact the actual harm i don't see why giving help in guantanamo prisoners get a fair trial is a harm to national security ok well now he is he is facing the ramifications he is that he's facing this jail time. for leaking these names to the media that's what he has pled guilty to what kind of ramifications could we see in terms of in the future will slow blowers. we king. we can through the media blowing up sources to the media it's

a tremendous chilling effect in fact actually only applied to confirming one name but obviously lots of newspapers in the united states and lots of journalists know the names of undercover officers and choose not to publish them and sometimes choose to publish them and they get those names from somewhere and in fact the officer who's name. to confirming. was well known in the human rights community and to many journalists before to confirm it so are confirmed it so. the idea that no one knows who anybody is it's just sort of a legal fiction in reality lots of journalists know that there was a big article in the washington post about someone with the pseudonym roger and who was a high level counterterrorism official at the agency and they said well we're not going to print his real name but they knew it so the idea that journalists don't know the names of people working at the cia is it's not really reality really

interesting kathy and i appreciate you coming in and weighing in on this that was kathleen mcclellan national security and human rights council for the government accountability project. another case of the n.y.p.d. racial profiling this time a paid informant is coming forward describing out he was instructed by police to quote bait muslims to talk about jihad and terrorism this was done while he says he was he infiltrated the muslim community going to mosques and study groups and snapping photos many of them of innocent people the informant nineteen year old sham your rock month says he was paid around a thousand dollars a month for his undercover work he was also facing minor marijuana charges and police said his work would make his future brighter but armaan is now speaking out saying his role as an informant is quote detrimental to the constitution for more on the n.y.p.d. using informants to trap muslims i was joined earlier by cyrus mcgoldrick care for

the new york council on american islamic relations i asked him if this is an example of blatant racial profiling on the part of the n.y.p.d. . shocking not so shocking unfortunately this is just one more revelation in a whole string of them led by the associated press. somewhat amused that it took. about eight months to figure out what we've known for years was that this surveillance was producing absolutely no leads that it had no value and that it was extremely illegal and a violation of community trust. as upset as we are we have to at least look at the bright side at least he came out unlike the many people who are still undercover and are still providing you know useless information to the police. and says that he was told to quote bait muslims so i mean what do you think is this provoking them to do something they otherwise wouldn't do or is it catching the guys that were at risk of committing terrorist acts. well it certainly fits the

trend of first glance you know a trend where almost one hundred percent of these so-called domestic terrorist plots were really invented by informants or undercover agents and leading people into these types of crimes just last week there was a young boy arrested by the federal reserve for allegedly plotting to blow it up and apparently it was an f.b.i. informant dragging him along the whole time but then also i noticed something in the article today that was especially disturbing and that he was really recording not just to get people in plots and plans but to just get people to say something that was somehow inflammatory or that somehow controversial and that that speech was enough for the n.y.p.d. to keep tabs on that for me is a whole new level of terrorism and something that we should all be conscious of i think that word that he uses bait when you use that description is very fitting that you're almost provoking them to say something and then once you once you've baited them they become suspect. i do want to bring up what the

n.y.p.d. is saying but they actually are saying very much. spokesman paul brown didn't immediately return a message seeking comment on this case but he has denied widespread n.y.p.d. spying saying police only follow leads do you buy that and i'm impressed that you even still ask paul browne to remark on these things they've been denying this from day one unfortunately the documents the n.y.p.d. documents themselves that the associated press has included in the reports and that they're basing their reports on makes a very clear with the n.y.p.d. is all about is about racial profiling religious profiling ethnic profiling national profiling it's really just goes right to the heart of everything that's wrong and so you want to listen to us you don't listen to the police you can go right to the n.y.p.d. documents or so i encourage you to look at the associated press website on the subject to look at the documents there's no defense of the n.y.p.d.

unless you ignore these documents entirely and so it's really important that we know the facts that we know what our government is doing we are blessed to have a few media outlets that are still telling the truth and still willing to ask the tough questions and find the facts for yourselves and that's really you know we double our efforts to reform to make sure that we're really making change that we're turning this energy in these really bad stories really negative stories into something concrete into some real justice i. do want to bring up this other point. regarding racial profiling this informant hear rahman is now coming forward saying he doesn't want to be part of this operation he says that it's quote detrimental to the constitution what do you think about that is not only is it not ethical but is it also in your opinion is it unconstitutional. i think so you know i'm not an attorney and so i like to think of these things in terms of right or wrong but yeah i gotta agree this is absolutely constitutional this is

a violation of this idea that the government should not be you know establishing religion and it should not be targeting religions that's absolute vital and so we lose that neither money neither myself nor. any constitutional experts but i think it is important we know this is a tremendous violation this is a violation of the contract that we have with this government the trust that we're trying to build up here you know the n.y.p.d. which is for ten eleven years despite the real facts on the ground despite you know police raids despite mass surveillance entrapment cases is now trying to reach to our community and calm and then offer photo outs to community leaders even going so far as to erect this puppet show muslim advisory council and then my p.t. and then on the other end to be paying people like this kid who are criminals essentially or paying them to then collect intelligence on each other is a real shame and something that we should really push back against hard. you know we have seen or seems like there is this rise of islamophobia and this post nine

eleven era that we live in and when you see programs like this the n.y.p.d. carrying out programs like this do you think that it's feeding in to this. islamic sentiment. i think so i don't like you know essential izing islamophobia as a post nine eleven thing because honestly it's really only an escalation from islamophobia and a phobia you know just general racism of the ninety's and before you see it muslims are the target now before us it was another group and after us it'll probably be another group and so it's important i do like i appreciate what you say that this is a cycle you know what this does is it feeds you know it feeds into this hate it feeds into a cycle of fear a cycle of war you know the more that you can entrap these young men the more that you can manufacture crimes especially where there are no crime not only allows the police and the f.b.i. to justify their budget and course we have to follow the money but at the same time it's feeding into this fear is justifying wars abroad and we really need to see you

know the real urgency of this is not just about one person it's not just about one boy and unfortunately it's about a lot more because it's one per week but at the same time we need to see this in the context of the broader war which is why they call it a war on terror has really become a war of terror. thank you so much for joining us and weighing in on this really important topic that was cyrus mcgoldrick care for the new york council on american islamic relations. and that it was story that's close to your heart though it's probably literally closer to your pocket or your purse we're talking about cell phones we use them every day and in the process they contain quite a bit of information about who we are who we talk to and where we are white house correspondent christine friends alex plains how a certain device can capture this information with ease. every day we make calls from our cell phones now this is thanks in great part to cell phone towers the way

a works of the cell phone radios the nearest tower as a cell tower is connecting your call it's also getting some useful information about you and your cell phone for instance where you are who you're calling and the length of your conversation even when you're not making a phone call your cell phone is still sending a signal to the tower every couple seconds as far as a cell phone can tell devices called sting rays are indistinguishable from cell towers sting ray is a brand name for what's called an international mobile subscriber identity locator so how does it work well to make this fake cell phone tower all one needs is an antenna a computer that can map locations and a device the m.s.i. or sting ray once a system is connected to your phone it can get information about all of the calls being made to and from the phone it can also paint a cell phone to determine its whereabouts is centrally it can search huge swaths of space for one particular cell phone signal some devices according to the electronic

frontier foundation can even get the conversations themselves now the equipment needed to operate this system can be carried by a person mounted on to drones or other vehicles so you're probably wondering who has access to these sting ray devices well right now the federal government and the military both have access to them and based on recent court cases like the united states versus ring made they've been using them quite a bit in washington and christine for example r.t. . for monday's so-called sting rays and what they're capable of are the web producer andrew blake joining me a short time ago i first asked him why more people don't know about this. really can't right now because sting rays and other these devices are sensitive law enforcement gadgets they really law enforcement doesn't have to tell you everything about that they don't have to tell you why they're using of them to tell you exactly what they're doing with them and

a lot of information about the actual specific technology itself isn't being released because the companies behind them they don't want to go living their trade secrets out for everyone else to go ahead and steal so there really is just a very primitive not information that we actually know about them but from what christine just said what we do know is enough to really scare people and it's not just just you know your classic fear mongering it really does mean that the cops can drive around the city and aim this device wherever they want and track you down or maybe not necessarily track someone down but figure out who is in any geographical region for a span of several models even if it's and goes up like seven kilometers some of them can reach and they're accurate in some degree by only two meters so they can actually pinpoint where you are at what room of your house just by driving around and waiting long enough to find you wow. i mean so significant ramifications for people's privacy but you're saying that they could pinpoint

anywhere when if they're able to pinpoint to a child molester or a kidnapper or are rapist or somebody like that i guess that would be good yes we can go ahead and say that but the thing about these technologies is that they get everyone everyone gets lumped into here so one way that you can use one of these sting rays is you go ahead and you send off its magical beings and it tries to figure out who is in the region and it can if you're looking for one specific person let's say mr child molester sure you might be able to find out yes they're in this area this far away their cell phone is the strong that last turned it on at this point they're making calls whatever but you can also find out all of that information about every. in that region so potentially thousands upon thousands of users are having their locations and there's nothing stopping police from finding this information out about anybody it's not you know the inspectors are just facts they're governed by their own internal policies so each law enforcement agency can say.