they killed dozens of soldiers in iraq not with bullets but with poison the u.s. military's largest contractor has been found guilty of negligence for using a deadly anti corrosion chemical its water purification plans now they want taxpayers to pay the military families who lost their loved ones. selling his news network to al-jazeera for a pool five hundred million dollars in alternative energy

a lover of citizens helped him do a lot of good with that money if only the cash wasn't home from qatari oil profits will explain. it's thursday january tenth eight pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wall and you're watching our t.v. starting off today with a defense contractor that wants taxpayers to foot k.b.r. was tasked with the rebuilding iraq's oil infrastructure after the u.s. invasion the car modally water treatment center ran by the contractor was laced with a substance called sodium diet chromate k.b.r. told u.s. soldiers guarding the place that it was a mild irritant well turns out it's not my old but deadly the substances in extreme carcinogen and one of the soldiers stationed there died of cancer. and in november

a jury found k.b.r. guilty of poisoning a dozen soldiers the gerrard the company to pay eighty five million dollars in damages but now k.b.r. is saying it's not responsible for paying the bill taxpayers are why k.b.r. says it entered into an indemnity cation agreement with the government which project protects it from being sued and it's not just eighty five million dollars k.b.r. says taxpayers should cough up the company wants fifteen million dollars that is spent on legal fees to be covered also this isn't the first time the private military contractor has been in hot water some things you should know about the houston based company it's a former subsidiary of halliburton it avoided paying hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes by hiring workers through other companies in the cayman islands and two thousand and nine it was charged with bribing nigerian officials to win government contracts and it was also charged with installing faulty wiring that

electrocuted u.s. soldiers in iraq for more about this country shady past and whether taxpayers will foot the bill for their mistakes i was joined by mike doyle an attorney for some of the soldiers against k.b.r. i asked mike if this amounts to a tax taxpayer bailout for k.b.r. i think that's certainly what they're demanding that this really just the first twelve hundred sixty two soldiers and the families of the two soldiers that died from your chose your first well up to trial that's really what they're looking for . k.b.r. essentially saying through this indemnification agreement that no matter what they're guilty of that they're not responsible. well we do know that this going in the bedroom certainly there on the ground but we found out as the case developed from

the testimony of the cave your lawyer that they thought they had cut a deal with the government after initially it's no big deal to go ahead and no matter what they will miss conduct even by the highest principle officers whoever they killed soldiers allies iraqis taxpayers are going to have to deal wow well i mean this sounds like a ridiculous thing to agree to why would anyone agree to terms of such an agreement . you know i can't really speak to why it happened i can tell you that it was it was classified by the army up until just december twenty first of last year for over nine years and i don't think there's a really good answer that's been given about why it was given after they've initially been given this no bid contract was right and there's a lot we don't know we were not able to see it but they are trying to use this as justification to have taxpayers cover cover their mistakes k.b.r. spokesperson said it was necessary to enter into this agreement because the conditions in iraq are dangerous well it's no secret that despite declaring mission

accomplished in iraq the country has increasingly been unstable in the coming months and years so in light of that would you say that's a valid argument you know like for the whole business about why they should get this bailout how they got it that's not really something that we dealt with directly but i can say this there are a number of contractors today including k.b.r. that are doing all kinds of work military without this kind of bail out of her. well with a similar indemnification agreement is that is that what you're saying no i'm saying is there's many con matter of fact contractors today doing many of the same type of jobs that don't have this extra add on bailout agreement that k.b.r. that don't have it so you know without really being able to say for sure you know why they got of the first place i think it is pretty clear that it's not something that that's necessary to get contractors to do this work and competitively for right how many more defense contractors it would you say are and these kinds of

agreements cousin most agencies are not allowed to to engage in these agreements but the pentagon is exempt i understand and this is really something that we found out it wasn't part of our trial wasn't part of our case as you might expect or at least this can be argued they felt that if the jury in our case knew that going in k.b.r. knew that no matter who they harmed or injured they were scot free it might influence the jury about how they did business but we've heard sense then that somewhere around a group of a dozen of these type of devotees have been issued over the years right we had to the touched upon earlier past actions of k.b.r. and if you look at that looks like their main motivation is profit at it and the health and well being of those it seems like a head of a secondary motivation this isn't the first time they've come under scrutiny so why would the government continue to do business with the election so that's that's

a government decision i mean obviously they they're certainly good work done by folks for k.b.r. on the ground in different areas we know that what they did a car mentally was exactly the opposite we also know that at least in what happened in carmel valley they were very much focused on the war which was primarily geared towards getting it done fast and i think the evidence showed that that led to some bad decisions. right and what is the likelihood that now k.b.r. they're trying to have the taxpayers foot the bill what's the likelihood that that will in fact happen or that the company will be held responsible and to cover those damages well i know i can speak for the better of the families that were that they feel very strongly that cave your should not be able to push this all taxpayers that being said i know the government has. killed your being able to collect under this bill not agreement and that's a separate case that was just all after or trial of them now k.b.r. they were found guilty welcome news for these families these dozen soldiers that

were killed and their families and the communities affected. what's very action now dz who gave the r.z. response that the taxpayers should be covering this well you might expect having fought so hard for so many years to to hold your countable they have a different. i think that disgust and really are accountable but it's really unfortunate that they're trying to say to kind of believe by the next step of just saying ok fine no matter what we do we're going to dump it off the taxpayers and i think every one of the bedrooms the family members that talk to bill that's just another evasion of accountability for k.b.r. all right mike what is next for for this law so well right now that the oregon case which was the first twelve folks to get up to trial episodes are still under fifty more split between a few more in oregon and a case anding here in houston texas for indiana organizational guard as well as

some british troops who are also exposed out there those are on appeal right now on some immunity issues entirely separate and once those get resolved we expect to go to trial with the remainder since possible all right i want to mention the n.c.a.a. now has a provision in there that would prevent indemnity agreements such as the one that k.b.r. entered into from happening in the future how confident are you that this provision might prevent instances like this from happening again well you know they're going to lot of good developments aside from the jury holding k.b.r. accountable in this case that particular law you're talking about the past actually didn't ban these type of deals it just meant that congress would have to get notified they couldn't be done in secret that couldn't be classified and for on a draw to report out later so that's a really big step i don't know that these will go away or necessarily need to go away go on more scrutiny than they ever had. that was like

a duel eternity weapon doyle. also later in our tale it's not exactly hacking but d.d. o. s. attacks sure can be annoying for web site creators but can the method be considered a form of protest that story next.

let me let me respond or don't let me ask you a question. here on this network it's one thing we have our nights out. with the previous this time to spend staying there

again we're in a situation where being i don't agree to talk about surveillance. here is mitt romney trying to figure out the name of that thing that we americans call i don't know. i'm sorry i missed the guy who cares an awful lot of. you sir are. kind of their terrorist cells but i don't want to be wishing to feature isn't a liberal the chris point you. can securely but it's. going to spin it distracts us from what you and i should care about because there are profit driven industry that sells us and facials that garbage because that breaking news i'm abby martin and we're going to break that.

that activist group anonymous has carried out some high profile cyber attacks but now the group wants an online action called distributed distributed denial of service or d.d. o. s. to be considered a legal form of protest and they are taking this request all the way to the white petition here it is they compare the action to an occupy protest and say quote instead of a group of people standing outside a building to occupy the area people standing outside a building to occupy occupy a website to slow or deny service of that particular website for a short time but titian are also calling for those jailed for conducting these attacks to be released and their records cleared so far there's over

a thousand signatures on the petition and needs many more in order to require a response from the white house so can this really be considered a new form of protest state earlier i was joined by international human rights lawyer stanley cohen an attorney for the defense in the so-called anonymous pay-pal fourteen hacking case in california i don't like using the phrase attack it's more of an action it's alleged to be a process by which large numbers of people essentially hit a website with tremendous numbers of e-mails of cyberspace communications to slow it down or in certain circumstances to shut it down which rarely if ever happens. as we saw on that petition there it's being compared to the occupy protests how can you make. comparison i make it a better comparison i think it's very much the twenty first century sittin

countersuit in that occurred in the south down in the sixty's in the fifty's where people would literally sit in counters to challenge segregation to slow down business as usual when barack obama gets on the television and begs his followers and when politicians implore their followers to get on the switchboard to shut him down to send a message to support a position it's considered free speech the da says essentially nothing different than what obama is doing what politicians are doing and what corporations are doing to lobbying firms all right one could say that there are kind of some notable differences for example if you're picketing more traditionally the more traditional way of protesting is you're kind of a group of people gather outside they chant they hold signs a lot of times that can be very inconvenient for the company but it doesn't necessarily shut them down at least for the most part we haven't come across for example the case that i'm dealing with northern california right now which is sort

of the penultimate quote unquote. doesn't involve a dent in the theft or theft of services or stealing or anything criminal like that it's a straight slowdown didas attack it caused no harm and caused no injury and caused no financial loss pay-pal admits that it caused a minor inconvenience no different than the person blocking a street no different than the president suggesting that people bombard the switchboard to send a message we live in a century we live in a time where by design our political infrastructure our economic infrastructure is directed toward cyberspace we have changed the field and in order to level the playing field we've got to recognize first amendment protections all right i had read and i was reading up a little bit on the india last attacks and i don't like his that we're at the tack . i read that what it does is that it in fact computers with viruses a as that terrible.

it's legal picketing when you break the window it's now a crime so if you infect the computer you can charge someone not with some sort of conspiracy but with a criminal mischief offense we have traditional laws which are designed when people cross the line it's that we with all first amendment activities and it should be no different here we're talking about classic first amendment free speech activities keep in mind in this day and age corporations are considered to be purposes persons for purposes of free speech their money is recognized as free speech how much more true is it wouldn't people want to express through a system designed by the government in country right now their opposition to a policy by action without criminal mischief without damage without injury without theft all right so what do you think is the likelihood of this being recognized as

a form a civil disobedience what this petition is calling for i think it's less likely at this show that president obama will recognize that because he has a history of trying to repress free speech he's he's or he's afraid of the light of day i think it's more likely that down the road some of the courts may may look at some of these actions and find that there's first amendment protection and free speech implicated that's not to say that an effort to change the president's mind shouldn't be undertaken again we're not talking about hacking we're not talking about theft we're not talking about injuring property in any sense of the word all right and you had mentioned how you know this changed playing field and we're seeing that in a lot of facets of our life a lot of it is more of being dead. or digitally in a in the cyber world so would you say that this is going to be the future of protesting da i think to some degree the future is here i think that more and more

numbers of people people of conscience and principle determination recognize you can't pick up a phone or write a letter or even put petition in front of this anonymous cyberspace corporate entity that's all over the world the way that has to be done i think people are going to term increasingly used to water or otherwise describe the. it's not the time where the pamphleteer could stand on the corner where someone could necessarily blockade a street the playing field is change the means of protest will evolve as well. the playing field has changed but it doesn't seem like the government has updated many of the laws regarding technology has the time come well you know separate but equal was lawful in this country as was slavery denying the right to vote for one hundred fifty years i think the time has come i think that congress will increasingly understand that the patriot act and nine eleven has been used as a sub to fuse and a pretext to to pass these incredibly oppressive laws would seek to suppress free

speech which seek to control the discussion of the dialogue and would seek to keep people out of the debate that's what the first amendment stands for and that i would suggest as would be the us actions as covered by right lastly i do want to mention the last attack is considered illegal and this is under the. an abuse act and currently there's fourteen people that have been charged under it for carrying out this very act and i know this petition calls for these people to be released and that it be kind of wiped off of their records what do you think is the likelihood of that happening well there's fourteen people facing trial in northern california i'm representing remember sadie's here for was one of those defendants was probably several dozen persians throughout the united states who have been charged and i think prosecutors are hoping that some of these cases are going to go away i think they're trying to sort of fold over cases involving allegations of theft with pure free speech i think the pure free speech cases will

evolve and eventually go away one way or another because it's difficult to convince a jury that our best in our brightest our children of broken any law when they're simply registering their opposition to a policy by the action and not stealing or diverting or causing any damage to the computer system. really interesting mr cullen thanks so much for coming on the show that was stanley cohen international human rights lawyer thank you so much for inviting me. the cable network al jazeera has closed the deal with liberal leaning current t.v. and the deal is a lucrative one for al gore with reports he'll be getting one hundred twenty five million dollars from the sale al-jazeera of course is financed by the government of carter and has been criticised for biased reporting which reflects the foreign policy of the qatari government a former employee is now speaking out. about such selective reporting longtime

berlin correspondent abcam sullivan recently resigned and said in an interview with the w. quote the problem is that the organization lacks internal structures that would immunize it against what was presumably and attempted by the owner or by the editors to interfere politically and things that should have been handled in a journalistic manner well as you mentioned al jazeera is fueled by carter in oil rich country interesting that they're now paying off al gore whose legacy is his dedication to fight global warming one of his notable accomplishments in this mission. and ng movie in titled an inconvenient truth. this little boy. to live is what its day. but perhaps the

real inconvenient truth is how much gore has profited from his and few oil agenda he's made six figures from various speeches about global warming but he's been criticized for not practicing what he preaches the multimillionaire has multiple homes that goes all mega amounts of electricity so it looks like for gore big oil isn't so bad when he's making big money. we're going to take a quick break but coming up good news for andy drone advocates a german defense firm says it's invented a loser that can stop you. in its tracks back in a minute. ily. ily.

ily ily. put a picture of me when i was like nine years old i don't tell the truth. i'm a confession i'm

a total get it i love brad mcafee is pretty. good it was kind of a yesterday. i'm very proud of the role that she played. the a. solution to.

pepper spray just burns your eyes right i mean it's like a derivative of actual pepper it's a food product essentially was much stronger than anything you'd be biopsied thousands of times were stronger than any kind of the. worst for those things slide out six of a. minute. because you've never seen anything like this i'm told. it's so.

let me let me i want i wouldn't let me ask you a question. here on this network is what we have in the bank we have our knives out. but if you did this right it was just a bad thing never get here in a situation where b. and i didn't agree to talk about the arrangement. and that is some welcome news for people concerned by the growing number of drones flying in the skies above normally we view these drones at the top of the technology food chain but not any more german offense firm grind metal has developed a new laser weapon system that can shoot fast moving drones from afar the two laser

weapons used radar and optical systems to detect and track drones the laser is then shot to drones at a far distance from right out of the sky during tatts rhine battle plans to integrate an automatic cannon to the laser system and try to mount it on various vehicles to make the whole thing mobile but let's say you fear drones it can afford a laser system but the power to cut through a steel girder is there anything out there for you you probably afford a new hoodie new york artist adam harvey is unveiling a clothing line designed to make the wear close to invisible to surveillance drone the line is called stealth where harvey created it in collaboration with fashion designer joanna bloomfield the clothes include an empty drone a hoodie and matching scarf that confused thermal imaging that way the drones can't see so to speak a t. shirt to text where the organs from x. rays in a rocket blockers stop cellphones from sending or receiving signals harvey told the

magazine rhizome that he sees the clothes as a way to make people aware and to feel protected kind of like armor. that is going to do it now but if you missed any part of today's show don't worry we've got you covered we post all of our videos online in full just go to our youtube channel at youtube dot com slash our team america and there you can click common and forward those stories to your friend and we want to know what you want to cover don't forget to send us your story suggestions who knows it could end up on the air and for the latest information on the stories we covered and if you we didn't have a time to get to you can check out our web site that is r t called slash usa today our wonderful web team is working on a story about nationwide and ammunition storage in the wake of the connecticut school shooting done an ammunition scale sales have skyrocketed.