make up on r t the police across the u.s. are given the responsibility to protect and serve but that's not always the case today will shine a spotlight on excessive force used by officers across the country. drones are used by the u.s. government to conduct warfare around the globe but a large number of police agencies are using drones to spy on citizens and that has leaders in a virginia city declaring themselves a drone a free that story ahead. of the annual conference is underway here in washington and there are more warnings of military action against iran coming from israel we'll have a report on the meetings coming up i. know it's monday march fourth five pm in washington d.c. i'm meghan lopez and you're watching r.t. starting off this hour despite relentless efforts by the l.a.p.d. to shed its reputation of police recklessness case after case of excessive force

keeps coming to light this one involves a seventy one year old woman her daughter and a case of mistaken identity you've probably heard by now in an all out manhunt for a former police officer turned cop killer christopher dorner police opened fire on a vehicle with two innocent women inside and the hernandez is only shield to protect her daughter from hundreds of bullets was her own body r t correspondent ramona lindo takes a closer look at her story and a few other cases of police recklessness tragic case of mistaken identity is the explanation given as to why los angeles police officers fired one hundred rounds at two unarmed women delivering newspapers neighbors are still shocked and frustrated we had a boy. in the upstairs bedroom also caused by the l.a.p.d. . rowland belak house says his neighborhood has always been peaceful until the l.a.p.d. showed up he's still waiting for the city to pay for the damage to his home belak

has also astonished at the reckless gun fire that continues to mark history their whole. idea of their training is supposed to be on based on the law and not emotional reaction and they totally went against the whole training seventy one year old dame and as is still recovering from two gunshot wounds she suffered while trying to shield her daughter margie attorney lynn jonas says that the women are still fearful for their lives they have a difficult. time grappling with the fact that the police essentially tried to execute them this is the quiet neighborhood where officers shot at a marine and as an marjah kuranda right next to this elementary school is this neighborhood where several homes are still riddled with bullet holes shooting no way it's going to be just fine if it is all hell's going to break loose. hell broke loose twenty years ago after the rodney king trial but many believe violence that permeated the l.a.p.d.

decades ago has been exposed once again this is a police department really is a model of a paramilitary organization when it comes to urban neighborhoods because specially people of color in two thousand and eleven law enforcement in los angeles county shot and killed fifty four people that is seventy percent higher than the previous year every time it happens just a pony can make dates on kendrick was unarmed when he was shot and killed by police while what they stopped doing it must all be justified they didn't pay to do it. you can put on administrative leave because of legal protections for police officers involved in shootings we may never be allowed to see the names or the testimony from officers who shot a grandmother and as we do not trust a l.a.p.d. we do not believe any investigation issued by the police is going to come up with any tangible result we do not believe that bonnie can investigate quat

now the question remains if the officers who shot at civilians will be held accountable for their violent deed in los angeles ramon berlin though r t and that's not the only case of excessive force that we are hearing about today a few hours north of los angeles a u.s. district judge has ruled that police officers must face excessive force claims coming out of occupy oakland the protesters claim the police used unusually harsh tactics to disperse a peaceful group of activists who are speaking out against wishing hikes. at the university of california berkeley the berkeley police used their batons to beat protesters who had linked arms in order to avoid eviction meanwhile in new york occupy activist michael primo was found innocent of assaulting a police officer when video evidence directly contradicted a new york police department officer who was underwrote here to discuss the case of mr primo and other instances of police recklessness i'm joined now by matthew feeney he's the assistant editor for reason twenty four seven matthew thank you so

much for joining me let's talk about these these different cases that we're seeing is there are trying to kind of going on are these the exception or are they really the standard or what we're really seeing is that there is a trend in the use of excessive force by police throughout the country and i think that this is something that you know is not isolated to the instances you just highlighted it's actually something that has continued over the last few years ok so the l.a.p.d. certainly has a reputation of police brutality but we've seen this increased militarization of local police forces i mean across the country from tanks to swat teams to the gear that they use except for a how does this affect the relationship between the police and the civilian population it affects it really dramatically it's really interesting that we are starting to treat our police in the same way that we train our military and the military is designed and used by countries to find to isolate and eliminate enemies the point of a police force is to protect the rights of citizens and the second that you start

treating police or police like soldiers should be no surprise citizen stop feeling like enemies in a war zone the fact is is that what we want to have is a police force that people can look up to where people feel safe but as we just saw in california actually citizens are more often or very often the receiving end of brutality do you think that we're setting ourselves up with a with this increased kind of militarization four. square off basically between police and some. i mean these the police are supposed to protect the civilians but more and more seems like with these tactics they are coming against the civilians is it not right exactly and i think you know i don't want to phrase it just. that civilians are the only ones at risk the irony of this is that police officers are very often putting themselves at risk by using these tactics and it can be a surprise when they when citizens push back but it is also very often seen in

instances where people directly bash into people's property without you know very very quick alone in the middle of the night and you know until it's made aware of what's happening with people the homes assume that masked men with automatic weapons are still in the house they respond that often times so it shouldn't you know we should continue to expect these sort of things to happen as long as police keep behaving like soldiers so what can the civilian population do to protect themselves really i mean in the end both occupy instances that we highlight a little bit earlier the reason that these people were exonerated in the end was because there was video evidence is that the only solution or is there something else civilians could do was a very powerful tool but thankfully technology is allowing us to have right which is that we have cell phones and you know cameras are very cheap so it's very very important that people realize that they have tool to the disposal that they can oftentimes use although you know states states different states have different jurisdictions about laws about filming police but another side of this is just

education people i think too often civilians. made to feel about the police or you see period when the people actually know their rights and everything a policeman does is not necessarily justified all the ok so let's talk about the three cases that that we covered a little bit earlier as i mentioned do you think that this is something that should be handled by local authorities or should it be a nationwide discussion of what's going on while i think legally i'm not a lawyer but i imagine that it should be treated locally and then work its way through the court system but i think. has to be part of a national discussion goes it's not something isolated to major cities like los angeles or new york it's happening in towns across many many states across the country where police are using excessive force ok and finally let's talk about the testimonies that these police officers put out and obviously michael primo the police officer in that instance said that he was very violent toward him and that was the reason that they arrested him but should we put so much talking to police

officers testimonies i mean in an article opinion piece that i just read today it says the san francisco police commissioner wrote an article saying that police officers are. commonly accused of perjury and they're also guilty of perjury so shall we say we just trust police officers at face value no i think when anyone appears in a court and takes an oath to tell the truth it should carry weight whether you're a policeman or a civilian now like i said earlier going to technology and footage is allowing it to become more difficult for police officers to actually lie under oath but that's something that can happen whether police or militarized a lot of the police can lie but i feel by no means because i want the police over so we should give them any sort of special treatment when they're under of so when in doubt find the evidence to prove something's going on it's all alright assistant editor at reason twenty four seven my matthew for me thank you so much for joining us thanks for having. well by now the topic of unmanned aerial vehicles spying on

u.s. citizens has become a major sticking point both in the halls of capitol hill as well as on news channels ordinary citizens are trying to find ways ways to protect themselves from drones whether it is through legislation or protests but one city in virginia thinks it has the answer charlottesville has become the first city to formally pass a measure barring courts from using information obtained by drones in its calling and it is calling for the virgin your state assembly as well as congress to follow suit artie's justin underhill reports. charlottesville virginia home to thomas jefferson and the university of virginia has a long history of being a voice for freedom now it can add freedom from drones to the list charlotte says anti drone resolution is the first of its kind in the nation we have a very active group of socially conscientious activists and they will often bring us issues that they see as emerging across the country and so we that is

exactly what happened with the drone with solution the resolution which passed by a three to two vote calls on the virginia general assembly and congress to adopt legislation barring information obtained from drowned by being used in court and the city has adopted such a ban locally the measure also endorses a proposed two year moratorium on drones in virginia council member dave norris who voted in favor of the bill sees the issue as urgent we know that these this technology is already being heavily marketed to local law enforcement agencies and other groups and there's even one county in virginia that already purchased two drones for surveillance and so we know it's coming and we just felt like we want to get out ahead of it however not everyone in charlottesville is on board vice mayor kristen sake of voted against the resolution she told other council members that the action is premature to say this and the germ thing to me seems to be sort of like outline planes because bombs can be dropped from them the resolution that the council passed was a toned down version of activist david swanson's proposal for

a no drone zone in there i included a local ban on drone use in charlottesville public or private one thing they added was not a ban on local use of drones but a commitment from the city that they would never use drones for surveillance or weaponized should they ever use any drones in any way the legislation won't prevent federal or state operated jobs from flying over charlotte but the resolution has. raise awareness and prompted other cities and states to take similar measures i've heard from city council members in cities large and small towns i never heard of before have contacted me asking for a draft resolution john whitehead the original author on the charlottesville resolution has now floated anti drone legislation in all fifty states we have about seventeen states that are considering our legislation which basically says that any type of domestic grown low in this country can have any kind of personal weapons

into any information that they collect cannot be used against american citizens that a court of law since the resolution was passed lawmakers in other states have begun drawing up their own versions currently twenty seven states are considering legislation groups like the electronic privacy information center have preached charlottesville for its proactive measures we've seen a growing increase in recognition that this is a problem and there's a real privacy concern with the use of this technology these bills not only are going to be talked about but they're going to be passed and there's going to be real rules for surveillance in the united states even though privacy advocates admit the drones have benevolent uses it might not be enough to outweigh potential negatives we have survived for millennia without coffee delivered by drones you know if we have to sacrifice that to protect our fundamental constitutional rights and the future of representative government in this country you know i'm willing to

do it and with the proliferation of anti drone resolution from the country this looks like the beginning of a new fight over constitutional rights in charlottesville just two hundred r.t. well charlottesville might have adopted a resolution to bar information collected by drones to be used in court but it cannot put the kybosh on all unmanned aerial vehicles flying around in its airspace that's because the airspace is actually governed by the federal law and the f.a.a. is responsible for regulating it it's a loophole that legislators and organ are. workings here as well for more on the turbulence this city and the states across the country are actually facing i'm joined now by our team's own justin underhill just stansell so let's start by talking about this loophole does it negate everything that charlottesville ban is trying to attempt to avoid no it does not so because one of the main things that charlottesville passed was a ban on information obtained from drugs but being used in court now the f.a.a. has control over federal air space but that they don't have control over federal

excuse me charlottesville courts so whatever goes on in charlottesville isn't going to be affected by the f.a.a. but if they were to enact a no drone zone which they have but if they did they would get into legal issues with the f.a.a. we understand that there are proposing and trying to get into this moratorium a two year moratorium on drones flying in the air space how likely is that a passing will right now so it's gone through both houses of the house in the senate of virginia and now it's waiting for the governor to sign it so we have yet to see he's been not clear as to whether he'll go through with it ok so charlottesville discharge as well resolution doesn't actually prevent john drones from flying in the air space it just prevents see the information and it calls on the state of virginia to really act on this as well i mean but at the same time like i said it doesn't prevent these drones from flying so does it actually accomplish anything or is it more symbolic at this point well it is partially symbolic so the fact that they have banned information by being is in court that

substantial but the fact that they have no drones currently in virginia that's more symbolic and that was actually one of the concerns that a city council member that voted against the bill addressed to said we don't have drones and in charlottesville why are we considering this now it's not important issue but what's happened is that a lot of other cities and towns have looked to charlottesville for the legislation that they've passed and they've actually asked the activists for example legislation that they could pass in their own in their own town and we. i know that david swanson was one of the real people pushing this in charlottesville the resolution that actually went there was quite watered down can you talk about his original version and are there any cities or states that are trying to pass that version i don't believe that there are any cities or states that are trying to pass that version he included a lot of additional measures so he included a no drone zone he included measures that would ban armed drones that would

also speak out about drones being used in iran or anywhere in yemen around the world and that that did not go through in charlottesville and it's unlikely that a city would take on such a global perspective for their legislation so let's talk about the other places nationally that are trying to pass this anywhere in particular we should be looking will right after charlottesville pass their legislation seattle abandoned police drone program and then after that. there have been there are currently twenty more than twenty states that are considering anti-drug legislation and one of the most interesting ones is organ which is considering air space and they're trying to regulate their organ airspace well we know there is a lot of criticism about drones like can be used for positive things but they can also be used for not so positive things like spying on surveilling their citizens artie's just you know under health thank you so much for bringing that report. when readers look through the opinion pages of a newspaper they expect to encounter

a variety of viewpoints about today's trending topics that's why it's called the editorial section after all but how do you ever wondered how writer formulates his or her opinions and the motivations behind it all well it turns out that some of those writers were actually being paid by the malaysian government to write critical pieces of opposition leader anwar ibrahim buzz feed discovered that from may two thousand and eight until april two thousand and eleven conservative writer joshua trevino was paid nearly three hundred ninety thousand dollars to focus on the politics of malaysia a sum that he actually used to subcontract ten other writers to write columns in publications from the guardian to the washington examiner and beyond well michael brooks is the producer of the majority report and he joined us earlier to break down this confusing case it turns out that trevino defends himself by saying that he's not a journalist so i asked michael is this an applicable defense. that would probably come as news to many people who read his columns and his blog post. he wasn't

identified explicitly as representing the malaysian government so obviously implicitly or not implicitly very directly you would think that he was offering objective analysis and it's as simple as that i don't really think there's much nuance here he was dishonest in his dealings and his in his representation ok what about the other writers or media outlets that that published them should they be held equally responsible as he is being. well i think you know the other writers you know they have this notion of being sort of subcontracted or whatever it may be there's a little bit of murkiness but essentially yes i mean look this is a p.r. and communications operation that was posing as objective journalism i think the only kind of clear tipped off would be why would anybody be interested in publishing or why would these guys even want to be writing about malaysia i mean

certainly trevino is no expert in the region and didn't really have any credibility or value added on the issue i think for the outlets that publish them it's embarrassing obviously and they should check their procedures and look at their processes i don't think they should be accountable on the same level but it's an embarrassment ok do you think if he and the other writers would have disclosed the fact that they had some sort of relationship with the malaysian government would that have made it ok or are we entering an agent journalism where more often journalists are part of the stories themselves or should we just accept that. well there's a lot you know kind of tied up in that question it's a really good question i think that part of the problem is those contained in the question with these guys because no one would have any interest in what they had to say about malaysia of essentially some kind of you know conservative bloggers

pundits journalists just came out and so they look you know this article is part of my contract work for the malaysian government i don't think most people would have any interest in reading that you know the proposition is that there is some type of dispassion analysis here and this is why you should be interested in what i have to say about malaysia so if they were identifying themselves as such they wouldn't be performing their function anyways and i think that that's a critical distinction because this isn't just a piece of p.r. this is a very particular type of p.r. this is kind of astroturfing false representation of information that's supposed to come from objective arbiters but really comes from. a skewed source which in this case is the malaysian government as money funneled through communications firms which hired these guys so if they were identifying themselves they would have been hired to do what they were doing so intrinsic to what they were doing was the misrepresentation michael doesn't matter doesn't matter if it was appeared on the

editorial pages or on the newspaper does that make really any any difference. again i think that in these guys' cases it would make some difference because of how they're identifying themselves and how they're broadcasting them so i don't think there's anything wrong with somebody saying hey look. i work for the malaysian government or anybody else for that matter and i'm making the case for them but when you come out and your role is to be some type of analyst and you're not identifying who you're working for what you're representing i mean it just seems you know again it seems almost simplistic because it is pretty simplistic it's a problem and it's a misrepresentation so what does this say about the state of fact checking today expression of the fact that writers themselves you know should we should the media outlets trust the writers or do they need to follow up expression when it comes to these freelancers. yeah i mean i think obviously there does need to be

a bit more kind of follow up i think again specifically in these cases i don't know why anybody would be interested in what josh trevino had to say about. the more malaysia i mean frankly the only other sort of public distinction that this guy has is calling for foreign governments to kill u.s. citizens when he recommended that you know the israeli government. kill american citizens on a gaza flotilla a couple years ago i mean he's kind of a low balls propagandist not particularly interesting writer with not much to say so i think it's a tip off as to you know why is this guy writing about malaysia what's his interest here and what's the relevance of what he might have to say but obviously the process in general should be tight because there are a lot of interested parties out there and a lot of different was late getting information and if nothing else it should

remind viewers too and readers to always check what they're being told before they just believe it michael brooks producer of the majority report thank you for joining us thank you so much it's that time of the year again time for hundreds of americans conservatively to file into washington d.c. and gather for the annual american israel public affairs committee conference for years a pac has been seen as the litmus test of sorts for political hopefuls to make their grand entrance into the spotlight of both the democratic as well as the republican parties but this conference is known to spur as much controversy as it does conversation our senior national correspondent guy n.h. you can was that the conference this weekend and takes a look at the latest push for intervention in iran. apac is pushing for a congressional resolution that you say should israel decide to strike iran the u.s. would do all the support including military or oceanus mosque to humane on the table . i.

have stated this time in the game and we expect those who say to me. this kind of a congressional green light for preemptive strike although non-binding is seen by some as a way to put pressure on the obama administration which so far has been reluctant to see the us dragged into another war in the middle but the us will never abandon their nuclear efforts unless they genuinely believe that america is serious about keeping all options on the table. i many of the conference said they thought the administration was soft on iran but that's a view that was expressed on the sidelines not from the podium the potential of israeli nuclear defense is the only thing that's keeping the country alive not relying on america because obama has not been forthcoming in defending them against iran in fact he's been stalling them apac is also pushing for legislation that

would designate israel as a major strategic ally of the united states the question many ask is why does the country that's perceived as being closest to america suddenly need the congressional see the full now according to an n.b.c. wall street journal poll that came out just a few days ago fifty five percent of americans now no longer want any sort of preference between the nuclear side of the israeli palestinian conflict may view this is a chance particularly in the face of sequestration where there could be cut just across the board almost two hundred million dollars they could view this as a last chance to tie in support. history here you see. the subject the conflict with the palestinians has received considerably less attention at the summit then iran but the general impression here is that what's widely regarded as the most influential lobby in the american politics has detected a potential threat not just from israel's neighbors but from inside washington

itself. in the wake of two wars in a battered economy we see signs of an increasing desire to disengage from world events and focus inward. this growing yearning to untangle from what is perceived as too complicated a world effects both parties conservatives and liberals alike they just want out. for israel even the tendency toward isolationism is extremely dangerous refusing to speak on camera some of the delegates expressed frustration over the president's decision to nominate chuck hagel as defense secretary chuck hagel is known to have been critical of the pro israel lobby president obama will not be speaking at the conference this year but he'll be traveling to israel at the end of the month and one of the speakers here said it's going to be a real challenge for him to show that deep down and i quote him he really understands israel and the threats that he faces that gives an impression that the

character is not too happy about the administration seemingly trying to play down the war talk in washington i'm going to check out. speaking of loaded guns three d. printing technology got a big boost from president obama by his most recent save the union address but this latest innovation isn't without its flaws last year a gun developer first displayed an a r fifteen rifle that was composed of several printed parts but the printed parts only lasted for about six shots until today take a look at this. the developer is now claiming it has improved the receiver parts enough to allow the gun to fire over six hundred rounds so a major step forward for the three d. printing industry and a big step backward for gun control advocates the blueprints to the lower receiver have been freely distributed and downloaded by internet users which brings up some serious questions about the feasibility of regulating printed weapons for now no

gun exists that complete is composed completely of printed parts but the defense distributed company is in the process of developing other components of these parts . that's going to do it for now but for more on the stories we cover go to you tube dot com slash r c america and check out our website that's r t dot com slash usa you can also follow me on twitter at meghan underscore lopez my question to twitter followers tonight is there ever a reason to engage in symbolic legislation or is it just a waste of taxpayer time the anti drone resolute resolution in charlottesville is seen as a largely symbolic measure meanwhile congress voted more than thirty times to repeal obamacare in the last year unsuccessfully so can some ball of voting be justified or are there just too many other issues to focus on tweet me.