about revolution social justice and progressive change quite a bit. to that end i've been thinking a lot about the story of rip van winkle by washington irving the story of a man who lived in a small village at the foot of the castle mountains while america was still a british colony under the rule of king george the third one day when we went for a long walk through the woods rifle in hand and his dog by his side he climbed to the high point in the mountains where he met a group of elderly men drinking from a keg after a few drinks medical falls asleep when he wakes up he finds that his dog is gone his rifle is rusted and withered away and his beard is grown long and grey when he returns to town he doesn't recognize anyone who goes to a local pub where people are discussing politics there he's asked about his political beliefs to a cheaper claims his loyalty to the king outrage the crowd quickly deems van winkle as a traitor and as the people point to a picture of president george washington hanging from the wall you see rip and winkle had been asleep for twenty years and slept through the entirety of the

american revolution. now the story itself is a fantasy but i think there is an important message behind it this country may not have another defining moment like the american revolution but through each generation our actions can serve a defining purpose sure it's easy to skip a newspaper headline about occupy the f.c.c. for example although it's comprised of a group of concerned citizens who are working through the legal system toward more transparency from wall street and lobbyists or what about the rolling jubilee plan to buy debt for pennies on the dollar but instead of collecting it dissolving it altogether freeing the young people of this country from student loan debt. the same can be said about the recent ships and social thought with the last with last year's elections ending the drug war the legalization of same sex marriage we may not all agree with these issues but change is underway these are all signs of an evolution of ideas in a revolution of our values the important thing to remember is that change and progress and revolution it starts with in every one of us and that means giving

a damn otherwise become just like van winkle digging your head out of the sand after twenty years and waking up to find yourself on the wrong side of history. i today scores of palestinian youths clashed with israeli soldiers for a second day in the occupied west bank after locals accuse israeli settlers of beating a palestinian man with steel pipes is just one of several protests that have erupted in recent weeks many of which have been triggered by the death of a political prisoner multiple incidents of human rights violations and over one hundred israeli led ceasefire breaches the upsurge in violence pete's a grim picture of the prospects for peace and in a recent trip to israel president obama made it clear that a halt in settlement construction as a precondition is not an option so is there any hope left for mideast peace that's

the question asked by my next guest in a recent new york times column i'm joined now by rashid khalidi edward said professor of arab studies at columbia university and author of the new book brokers of deceit how the u.s. is undermined peace in the middle east rashid thanks so much for joining me how are you and great thanks thanks for having me and thank you so want to go and get started in terms of halting settlement construction what does it say when obama rejects a plea from abbas who now is the only recognized palestinian leadership is it safe to say is it safe to assume that negotiations are dead in the water before they can even begin. i think this is a process that's been dead in the water for well over a decade and even though the president tried in his first term to revive it he was stonewalled by prime minister netanyahu and i really do think that he is not entirely serious in trying to push it right now and by in effect accepting this israeli variety of israeli preconditions which include allowing israel to continue to gobble up the pod that the two sides are supposed to negotiate dividing the

president is in a sense washing his hands i think it's just very interesting the position that the united states kind of kind of takes on this we keep hearing the same rhetoric but i want to play a quick sound bite from former white house press secretary robert gibbs when discussing the peace process i think we have that sound bite we can take a listen the process is always. aided and helped when we are involved in it but we cannot construct middle east peace for the israelis and the palestinians. so over here we just heard gibbs talking about the u.s. saying that the u.s. cannot construct a peace in the region do you agree with this i mean is it that the united states is incapable of fostering peace or simply going willing to do so the united states showed when it felt major strategic interests were involved multiple times in the seventy's and the eighty's that it could impose or at least forcefully advocate for egyptian israeli peace for disengagement agreements between syria and israel or

egypt and israel before that so it's not true that the united states cannot put its weight into the scales on this issue it has not in fact if it puts it some on any side of the scale in the palestine israel conflict it has done so on the israeli side so i think there are multiple myths and what gibbs said there one is that there is an ongoing peace process there is not and has not been for a long time and the other is that they're there implicitly to equal parties in this there is a dominant israeli state which has been in existence for sixty four years which has nuclear weapons it's a regional superpower and which completely dominates the palestinians and there is a population under occupation and there so on equal that without some proper mediation which the united states united states in my view has not given you're not going to have any possibility of resolution i think it's risky when we when we discuss the peace process as as kind of just the subject i want to read something that you wrote in a recent new york times column you said that the american led process has alternately strengthened the israeli far right and made palestinian

self-determination more unattainable than ever continuing with the orwellian grotesquery that is the peace process is contrary to any enlightened definition of american self interest where she would you say that through the conflict the united states has only served to exacerbate the problem. the palestinian israeli conflict absolutely absolutely the united states diplomatically supports israel when it resists united nations efforts to censure it for its gross violations of international law it says to the palestinians when they try and take things the united nations no no go negotiate those of the israelis and then the israelis stonewall them and so in effect the united states is the defender and the supporter of things like settlement expansion and various other egregious violations of international law not to speak of the fact that hundreds of millions of tax free dollars are funneled to these extremist violence sadler's by american so-called charities without the i.r.s. or the treasury doing

a single thing about it the united states has actually exacerbated the situation made it worse sorry no no i'm sorry i think that it's you bring up an interesting point is that the united states actually supports israel that it's american tax dollars that go to perpetuate these policies can you speak about you know how these policies are actually counterproductive to to american interests. well i mean there was a time when the united states was deeply mired in the occupation of iraq that a number of american leaders like then secretary of state gates or admiral mullen who's the chairman of the joint chiefs and others said openly that american bias in favor of israel what is perceived universally throughout the world not just the middle east as american unwillingness to do what's necessary to help resolve this conflict seriously harms the united states and its image and it actually causes hostility to the united states and to the american military presence in the region so you have actually had american leaders saying this openly that kind of talk has died down and these people were slammed in washington for saying such things but

anyone who's been anywhere in the world and knows how how much dissonance there is between the american position on this issue and the position of literally almost every other country on the face of the globe knows that this is true and i want to switch the focus a little bit i want to talk about you know without palestine being unified obviously this this makes things even more difficult i'm wondering if you cannot make conditions continue to worsen in gaza in the west bank in the occupied territories is it would we be safe to expect there to be a more deep in rift between hamas and fatah. well i mean i think that the rift between hamas and fatah is is criminal and it involves behavior by both leaderships that is irresponsible and a betrayal of the higher national interest and there was a poll recently by drucilla media group in the occupied territories which showed that an overwhelming majority of palestinians feel that way including supporters of fat and how mess so they hold their own leaderships responsible for this divisive

destructive split that serves only the interests of the occupation i think that until the palestinians work to get their act together and reunite their national movement they're obviously in a much weaker position and they cannot you know they cannot define a new strategy which they really need to do to liberate themselves from occupation and to achieve self-determination yeah i mean this this is. it goes to show how many layers there aren't and to the complexity of the conflict but more generally speaking to what extent is the u.s. is unwavering relationship with israel ultimately undermining the peace in the middle east i mean peace in the region as a whole. well i think it does things like alienating public opinion in countries like egypt and jordan which have peace treaties with israel i mean one of the major reasons i would argue that so much egyptian public opinion and so much jordanian public opinion is so hostile to their existing treaties is the appalling treatment by israel of the palestinians which people in these countries are fully informed of

if the american public doesn't know about it it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen if our media our mainstream media don't fully report on the enormity of what forty six years and running of military occupation does to people that doesn't mean that people in jordan and egypt don't know about it and don't feel strongly about it and so yes i would argue that american support of continuing occupation is implicit in effect the united states is supporting it and american support of continued settlement expansion that makes a two state solution impossible. people all over the region from the middle east from the united states but also in danger's the existing peace treaties between israel and these two arab countries and you know no i have to agree with you on that i think that the stability of the region the whole issue we've come to realize that it's all almost contingent upon the resolution of palestine and resolving the palestinian question but unfortunately i mean if i could i would i would i would ari i would argue that there are other big problems in the region that are not related i mean the problem of democratization in the arab world the problem of the

arab gulf autocracies the issues between iran and the arab countries these are things that are related and i hate to cut you i hate to cut you off but unfortunately we're out of time but that was a rashid khalidi author and professor at columbia university thank you so much for joining us really appreciate it pleasure. sorry guys but if you like what you see go toward youtube page at youtube dot com slash breaking the set be sure to subscribe to our channel so you don't miss a single episode we also have a lot of our interview segments tab down if you want to take a close look at those i encourage everyone to check out our alternative voices debate from yesterday's show you can also look up every single segment we've done separately and our tab section on the top of the page from big brother watch the weapons of mass distraction check out all that and more at youtube dot com slash breaking the set to take a quick break for now but stay tuned to hear from one of our favorite politicians that we've had on this show next. wealthy british science some time to.

market why not. come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with my next concert for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kinds a report on our.

the news about international landlords in the very heart of moscow. where to do it if you've never seen anything like that. recently breaking the set was joined by a truly exemplary politician a man unafraid of fighting for the issues that americans actually care about talk about former u.s. congressman dennis kucinich in a recent interview with the congressman martin first asked him about the about oil being the motivating factor that took the u.s. to war with iraq a lot of former u.s.

president george w. bush's speech writer recently validating that notion here's what he had to say the . very beginning it was very clear that there was no legitimate reason to go into iraq the only compelling reason would be to try to help corner the market on oil it didn't work out that way for those who thought that it would but the fact of the matter is oil was so. well known as to be a motivating factor that when i ran for president in two thousand and four going cross the country i'd ask audiences tell me what this is about this war is about in three letters and thousands of people would respond simultaneously oil ever it was it's not it was never a secret. in two thousand and seven congressman you actually introduced articles of impeachment against george bush and dick cheney when you look at things like nixon being ousted for wiretapping clinton being ousted for an affair how is it that these two men could not be held accountable for initiating an illegal war based on

known lies well i think we have to place. the responsibility for that on the shoulders of democratic leadership. because we could have moved forward with impeachment but the democratic leadership wouldn't do it now there has to be a kind of bill in a democracy it is widely understood today that war was based on lies so then should not since the catastrophe of the war resulted in thousands of americans being killed tens of thousands injured maybe a million innocent iraqis died perhaps. in the hundreds of billions of dollars to iraq should there be some kind of bill and so what i've called for is a process of truth and reconciliation like south africa had many years ago where leaders are required to come forward and state their role in the decision making process and if they lie then they're subject to perjury charges we need to clear the air in america we need the truth and it's to every since everyone knows it was

based on a lie and what's wrong with calling those who lied to us forward to not only require explanation but to clearly are absolutely ira pelosi the times in a piece that was off the table i mean could it be that the democratic leadership was scared that they would open their can of worms and somehow be complicit in the lie well you know one third of the two thirds of democrats voted against going to war but the third that did vote ford were involved as were their counterparts in the senate establishment types politics that favored war and some of the leading senators who have become you know exalted public figures took a stand for that war and they've never been held accountable and even politically interestingly enough it would seem as though to be qualified to speak on foreign policy even still today that you have to have been for the war even though it was based on lies that's the kind of upside down thinking that continues to guide foreign policy decisions in washington d.c.

well speaking of upside down policy obama's reason for not prosecuting or even investigating the bush officials was because he wanted to look forward not backward however i can't help but wonder why he continues to look backward to prosecute those who looks posed of war crimes as whistleblowers instead of the war criminals no good deed remains on punished and those who were the whistle blowers are being punished those who took us into war based on lies are being celebrated this inversion of reality is orwellian it needs to be. reckoned with and that's why i call for this period of truth and reconciliation and. i don't want this in all law enforcement about looking backwards actually hello. i can agree with rose talk about that gas and war and in terms of looking backwards it was sold to us as a war of necessity in a post nine eleven world of course and bush at the time at a ninety five percent approval rating i don't blame people for voting for it thinking that we needed some form of retaliation but did you find the logic flawed

now looking back do you regret your vote to invade and occupy a country to find one man we did not congress did not vote to invade and occupy they voted to give the president the ability to respond to the attack on nine eleven and frankly i think it was appropriate that the united states struck at the training camps. and made the point that you are not going to attack the united states with impunity stop there and of story not invade and occupy and basically try to break the country. hasn't been successfully conquered in modern times so this this two points to the serious flaws in our foreign policy we have an obligation to defend this country and i don't take a backseat to anyone in saying that if america is attacked we have a right to defend ourselves but it was absolutely. it was criminal to go and think

that we're going to knock off the afghanistan occupied control that remake a country where a lot of it's just a box of rocks and what do we think who we think we are this is a major flaw to birds arrogance and we need to we need some explanation to the american people absolutely let's talk about your presidential run in two thousand and eight both you and ron paul were pretty much the leading antiwar figures of course on both sides of the spectrum of both parties i remember leftists and libertarians at the time calling for you guys to be running mates because you were so united against the wars and for the restoration of our civil liberties now these factions are so divided they're more. divided than ever before and it just seems like without any representation to have us these dividing factions fighting each other instead of the forces that we should be fighting against is really counterintuitive how do you think it got to be this way and how can we unite these factions to really focus on a cohesive unified opposition again i think that what ron paul and i prove is that

there is plenty of space in american politics for a new movement which goes across partisan lines which embraces the concerns of democrats and republicans liberals and conservatives that's based on the truth and protecting the constitution and taking care of our practical aspirations here at home and sharply curtailing this aggression that america has practiced around the world so i think you know ron paul and i have been able to demonstrate this capacity of creating new possibilities and frankly since the two parties continue to fail to address america's economic problems i think that the american people increasingly will be looking towards alternatives as we move towards a future i call it the two party dictatorship congressman let's talk about civil liberties which is something that you have been very vocal about in your entire term rand paul sorry at that his ethics filibuster not really supported by

a single democrat i mean how is it that drones and due process are a partisan issue now well they shouldn't be and what happens in washington is this whatever party holds the white house their supporters in congress try to protect the president of their party but the president isn't just a president a party president of united states and members of congress are just partisan participants in a process they are united states congress persons and what we have to remember is that both myself and ron paul rand father raised this issue of the drones in the congress relentlessly. a resolution in front of the congress force committee a committee they have to consider and you know this is finally people are starting to understand there are constitutional issues here and good for the scent of the rand paul for raising the issue on the floor of the senate but we haven't resolved that we should you know this other countries are going to start to use drones imagine for

a moment of china thought that it you know any other nation thought that they could invade us airspace with a drone as we invade other people's airspace we would stand for how can we expect other countries to continue to stand by while we violate their sovereignty and territorial integrity and then on a domestic level we've got to worry about the domestic use of drones won't be long mark my words that law enforcement domestically will start using these drones to go after suspects using armed force and they're counterintuitive abroad i mean it doesn't take a genius to see that killing people is drones is not a good way to fight quote terrorism and you served an epic eighteen year run and congress you were one of the most vocal leaders against the establishment line time and time again when you were redistricted did you feel that you were deliberately gerrymandered out of office because of your politics by the democrats. not by the republicans it was democrats you know a legislature who went out of their way to totally distort the map in ohio

and to cut my district up into four pieces making it impossible for me to win and now i can tell you i don't need just a fact i'm not bitter about it i you know i still have a home in washington a home in cleveland i can occasionally see the light of the capitol i just want to know who's home. unbelievable when your own party turns against the ideals of this country was founded on when you did leave congress and the media portrayed you as friends i mean they even called you the congressman with the most wacky ideas yet the majority of americans support what you stood up for how is it that this depiction is eve. allowed to exist and what damage does it do when people feel like they're marginalized for sharing views that you had one of those and are my feelings too it never changed my position and you know when you when you stand for the truth it's very easy to understand that you take on certain interest groups who are going to try to marginalize you it is interesting as you point out that someone

would try to characterize as fringe having opposed to war in iraq based on facts having challenges those who made the decision to cost our troops and our nation and the iraqi people so dearly having challenge other wars proven to be right again and again and again but you know what that means if the truth is that the french then what position is being celebrated. exactly exactly and you know you're speaking from an inside perspective you've been inside the system first so long when you look at things like monsanto like vermont not even able to pass a labeling law because of the fear of a lawsuit for months and i mean you also were one of the only people to try to get g m o's labeled. what is i mean what does this say it do corporations essentially have more power then then voter resolutions and how yes yes after buckley vs the laon citizens united corporations took enormous power over our government monsanto

look they were able to get the bush administration and its waning days to be able to claim that the first bush administration to be able to claim in one thousand nine hundred three that genetically modified organisms are the functional equivalent of conventional food no science based on at all but the dollar bill as a science of its own and so now you have hundreds of millions of acres of crops have been planted with. gender with general genetically modified organisms used to do that and we can't our markets are closing in europe as a result where people don't want to commit and even more than that we have no idea as to the effects with respect with respect allergenicity toxicity. functional characteristics antibiotic resistant we're part of a grand experiment now in our food and you know this is another one of the reasons why i eat organic and i'm a vegan indeed we are and thank you for bringing those friends ideas up to the mainstream and standing up for the truth that so many of us don't have a voice to share in this is done thank you so much congressman dennis. all right

that's it for today's show guys thanks for stopping by and we'll see you next week he's. told the conflict. islamic nation. and a peaceful one. the first of course was secure a little sick and. in place of. tradition still. cannot go on the catwalk in a swimsuit. republican country.

colin. powell i think little clean. good speech i am. her. i wish i was pleased. to come it's so good for her. mother. and. her to come out. a little.

older she knows our life. in eternal silence. her invisible. every day is a struggle. for our children sleep soundly at night. we are palestinian women working in the israel. we've done more for our kids than our husbands. we are phantoms in this life her womb her. mission free accreditation free transport charges free. range minced free.

three stooges free. download free broadcast. video for your media project a free media dog to our teeth on tom. what . are. police breaking news on l.t. clashes erupt to guantanamo bay is god's attempt.