the. you live on one hundred thirty three bucks a month for food i should try it because you know how fabulous i had lunch i got so many i mean i have my hands down i know that i'm still really messed up. in the old story so actually. it's. worse cheaper to live through the white house or the. ministry. closer opposed to produce never seen anything like this i'm told. what's up guys i mean martin and this is breaking up the set guess what this week connecticut passed the g.m.o.

labeling law making it the very first state in the country to do so but before you start popping champagne bottles there is just one small problem with the bill that will only be put into effect in four other states sign on board to enact the same type of legislation now if you're confused hold on because it's about to get more ridiculous at least one of these states must border connecticut and to top it off an aggregate population of twenty million people must be encompassed under the provision why well because i'm only on the block monsanto yet connecticut justified this trigger clause by stating that they were fearful of economic repercussions if they enacted it alone i.e. a law suit so let's get this straight entire states in the u.s. are too scared to actually pass legislation that their constituents overwhelmingly support because they're terrified of a corporation wow what a pain that a commentary on the state of our nation considering how one hold ninety percent of

people in this country support g.m.o. labeling you may remember california's prop thirty seven which narrowly. lost because of a multi-billion dollar propaganda campaign or vermont which passed away bill in law but never interacted it because of threats from monsanto and now there's a little connecticut state that has made a promise or a pledge if you will to label franken foods but doesn't have the guts to actually do it because apparently monsanto has this entire country by the balls that's a comforting thought isn't it i don't know about you but i'm sick of all talk no action. it's hard to find the real news when you're drowning in the ways of the mainstream chatter so joining me to give a quick update on the top stories that should be on your radar this week has been test producer amir david what do you have for us today having lots of news for you today first to japan where massive anti-nuclear protests have been taking place just this past weekend tens of thousands of demonstrators came together in tokyo to

rally against the government plans to restart the country's now idle nuclear reactors reactors were shut down of course in the wake of the march two thousand and eleven fukushima meltdown but now the government says it's time for those reactors to open the japanese people however are apprehensive about a return to business as usual since the tragedy struck two years ago one hundred and sixty thousand people have fled their homes and are currently displaced but a travesty i mean i definitely don't blame their apprehension you mention the people who've been displaced what if the people who stayed after the disaster and we're have they felt any effects well for them having unfortunately it's been much much worse with the detrimental health effects really starting to take root there and in fact according to a report released this past summer over one third of the children in the disaster zone have developed abnormal growth almost definitely due to high radiation exposure so in a region that's prone to earthquakes and tsunamis many japanese citizens are saying

that it's just not worth the safety risk well i couldn't agree more with that sentiment. let's talk about the home front something happening right here in d.c. at the supreme court a case they've been following that could have enormous implications for privacy when he fills in on the absolutely laz you know on monday the supreme court ruled on this historic decision that gives the federal government and states the authority to collect d.n.a. samples from people when arrested without of course any conviction whatsoever the case was maryland versus king an address the rights of alonzo king a man who was arrested in two thousand and nine for pulling a shotgun on a group of people following the incident the police swab king's cheek for d.n.a. and afterwards proceeded to run that sample through the f.b.i. is database well it turns out king ended up matching with the d.n.a. on an unsolved rape case and later he was indicted on that charge as well so let me get this straight if i'm arrested for covering a protest or covering something and they can swab my cheek for a d.n.a.

put in a federal database i mean this is a really huge case of merit how do the court justify this ruling absolutely it is i mean it was a narrow victory with five to four five justices ruling in favor of the state but in the opinion justice kennedy wrote that you know d.n.a. is like fingerprinting and photographing a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the fourth amendment so i guess that was the rationale there but still i mean without charges or conviction the kind of have your d.n.a. swab been put in the state of isn't it what our civil liberties advocates saying about this well they are just obviously very concerned about this they are warning that this has completely redefined a citizen's right to privacy in response the american civil liberties union has said quote the fourth amendment has long been understood to mean that the police cannot search for evidence of a crime and all nine justices agreed that d.n.a. testing is a search without individualized suspicion today's decision eliminates that crucial safeguard so abbie while the government is in favor of this ruling there is

certainly a voice of dissent on this issue or the sky. areas part is that you get what precedent this case moving forward and that's exactly and even interesting lee even the l.a. times editorial board posed an interesting question they said when should society's interest in detecting and punishing crime override an individual's right to privacy so doing this to people who've committed a serious crime is one thing you know what happens when they want to take d.n.a. samples for someone on a minor offense so the question is where do you draw the line it's a slippery slope and do that is the question thank you so much b.t.s. producer amir david for that update of course. sometimes it's hard to understand the concept of censorship when we have so many options for news there are hundreds of t.v. stations newspapers and radio shows but the truth is that almost every avenue from

which we get our information in the mainstream media is controlled by only six corporations that have one specific interest profit news censorship is happening every day but not necessarily from the top down blacking out the stories but also in the form of self-censorship framing back page in all to protect the interests of those corporate conglomerates so who are the big six corporations that control nearly everything you see hear and read first there's comcast formerly owned by g.e. which controls m s n b c n.b.c. in telemundo and there's disney which owns a.b.c. the history channel and c.n.n. i'm sorry e.s.p.n. next to viacom the parent company of m.t.v. paramount and bt and c.b.s. with all its affiliates and there's news corp which owns fox news the new york post and the wall street journal and finally time warner the parent company of c.n.n. time and people magazine as well as warner brothers so what impact does it have on an agency that's supposed to serve as a watchdog for the power becomes

a lapdog for the powerful break down some of the most agree. just cases of censorship and conflict of interest in the corporate media producer man well that apatow has a what's going on so you know when i think of the top down censorship kind of the hand of the corporation blacking out a story two cases come to mind that are the most egregious the first one was news corps fox news that was going to or air a story on the bovine growth hormone. of course another monsanto case of censorship where they were invested in monsanto for advertising and their boss said no when a team of fox investigative reporters wanted to cover this story. threatened the station sent them a letter saying there will be dire consequences as a direct quote dire consequences for fox news if the stories aired and i wanted to play what happened when they confronted their boss about this. you know this is new this is this is stuff people need to know and i'll never forget you do should be to

we just paid three billion dollars for these television stations we'll tell you what they do. what we see. so really i mean you know you look at this case and it's such a such an egregious case of censorship and really will tell you what the news is the news is whatever we want it to be the news is whatever our advertisers want it to be you know it's not just when it comes to the media it really is it's not just the parent companies it's also your corporate sponsors it's also the people that are putting out the i mean monsanto how this story actually aired would have probably pulled their advertisements around up for aspartame and all those other products that that again are tested but advertise all over all over fox news and it's really interesting that you point out this story because the reporters and the guy that you just played they actually countersued against fox under florida's whistleblower statute and as it turns out under florida law they lost that lawsuit because it turns out it's not illegal to falsify the news so i mean that's that's

the really should give you an idea of how dangerous this is and help our former. and sent to it like they've been doing this for they do this for the past ten years once they get another label in a shoe or three months and censoring stories you also were researching a story about a.b.c. this is just another one of those examples back in one thousand nine hundred eighty eight kind of a very clear cut example a.b.c. . twenty twenty that we're going to air this story about how disneyland is actually hiring pedophiles i mean it's it's just a crazy story do you think in a theme park for kids and pedophiles this sounds terrible if they were able to pull the story why because disney owns a.b.c. it's very clear cut you don't want to endanger or make the corporate interests look bad so i mean that's one of those clear cut stories but i mean it also raises questions that one is relatively easy not to downplay pedophiles but when you look at cases like c.n.n. c.n.n. is running a story about the b.p. oil spill the deepwater horizon spill about the cleanup efforts and how you know things are getting better and as soon as the segment's over you see

a commercial come on and it's b.p. and its b.p. representatives going to come down to the coast some one eyed shrimp or whatever they're doing i mean that's that's there's a problem in there and it's so obvious but i think people don't realize it is as much as it's in your face realize that project censored one of the greatest research organizations in the country about censorship in the media did a study where they found that one hundred eighteen people only sit on two hundred eighty eight corporate boards that unify kind of this media conglomerate and corporate and corporate america so you have people involved in craft months santo so many different things defense corporations the pharmaceutical industry lobbying together all sitting on these boards and it really is such a small amount of people really controlling all these things from the top down that six hundred legs of the shocking things that you found in terms of just conflicts of interest i was looking at this and when we were looking at conflict of interest there's two things that really need to be pointed out it's not just corporations. a

lot of execs that sit in corporations for and you said in your introduction they're sitting on for example m s n. n.b.c. i'm sorry citi group philip morris their exact sit on board directors for lawyers that's not ok c.b.s. has has board remember sitting and wal-mart general dynamics these are drone manufacturers the execs for c.b.s. are the same guys that are sitting on the board of directors for drone many factures and how is that ok think when people think of the corporate media they're like oh well of course the corporate media but we're really we're talking about n.p.r. and p.b.s. as well i mean n.p.r. was running a story during the b.p. oil spill featuring a scientist that was talking about oil was in the gulf that would eat i'm sorry bacteria that would eat the oil it was like well this bacteria just to clean up the oil itself would have to worry about anything turns out later according to greg palast the scientists interview about the star was given half a billion dollars half a billion exact alors from b.p. n.p.r. never mention this detail this quaint detail when they were doing this story and of course we saw p.b.s. the thing about the money i mean we're talking about one guy that received half

a billion dollars that money he that that money actually spread out was more like a money spill is what greg palast said in that report that he did so you've got all these universities all these independent researchers all over the country doing research on oil biology and they're all being funded by b.p. and p.b.s. aired the drone documentary by lockheed martin pretty much a promo for drones and you know just talking about all of this really calls into question the u.s. state department issued a warning about restricted press freedom in the rest of the world meanwhile ignoring that the consolidation of ninety percent of the u.s. media by six corporations i mean really we're ranked thirty two in the world in press freedom here and exactly and i know that we had in progress pics somewhere i wonder if we can pull it up if not it shows you know between one thousand nine hundred three and now you're gone from this like multitude of media organizations in the country and really narrowing it down to six six they control nearly everything that we see and watch in this country everything that we see and watch and these organizations are also making political contributions so you know they're

throwing money in to both sides of the equation democrats and republicans and they get back. those special connections and inside information turning turning you know talking points and news actually do they do you think you. are taking a quick break but still ahead ever geoengineering discuss what it is and why you should know about it when we come back. to see.

let me let me let me ask you a question. here. is what. we have our knives out. but if you feel the slightest bad staying there. will be i don't want you to talk about the surveillance. the to. the future she's missing.

last month an extensive study published in the journal environmental research letters concluded that ninety seven percent of experts in the scientific community agree that climate change is amp or approach janick in other words directly linked to human activity in the face of this overwhelming evidence the powerful minority who disagree have stalled significant progress on curbing global carbon emissions however those who argue that catastrophic weather changes are imminent are urging for investment in development something called geo engineering or the altering of the natural world by artificial means so how does geo engineering work what effect could it have on the planet or earlier i was joined by clive hamilton public ethics professor charles sturt university and author of earth masters the dawn of the age of climate engineering i first asked quiet what benefits geo engineering has and what exactly the practice consists of. promotion geo engineering of the

most getting started because they're very afraid of the impacts of global warming and climate change and they argue that since. cutting global greenhouse gas emissions as manifestly. we really need a plan b. and what is that plan b. what exactly is do engineering for people who don't understand. geo engineering covers a range of technologies that generic definition a deliberate large scale intervention in the climate system in order to. counter the effects of global warming and geo engineering technologies generally divided into two classes one is known as the dark side will move all their use methods of getting. out of the atmosphere and storing it someplace safe and the

second class is not and so radiation management a range of skills. it's essentially designed to reduce the amount of incoming solar radiation or sunlight reaching the surface. it seems like this is just a license to continue to pollute unabated i mean isn't this just a really arrogant concept that we can just continue to pollute and will this have these technologies to deal with it later. while the scientists who are becoming involved in cheering and research. would say that these ought not to happen that year engine in should just buying us and time until we can get out political act that many people employ you must have a great anxiety that geoengineering will not be a complement to reducing carbon emissions but in fact will become a substitute for because it does look a lot like a get out of jail three cap and we can already see just on the fringes certain

politicians starting to argue well hey why don't why i'm just geoengineering the planet why are we going through all of this reduce and chop and emissions when we can just you know then and take control of the world's winter and i think the most obvious question is what harm could the state of the planet. one of the additions the one you just alluded to that is that we could keep losing and then after a while find their geo engineering scheme doesn't work said it we're in a much deeper hole in the we're all of the gear engineering schemes have a series of. scientific age logical problems for example perhaps that's almost zero engineering scame one percent most attention and one which you know in my view reluctantly. implemented in twenty thirty years' time when we get into our climate crisis the most prominent one is marina's sulfate aerosols which involves

touching me earth. of time. any sulfite particles higher in the stratosphere to reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth's are presently to surround the air. pollution. the early studies suggest it could be since new problems because for example worsen the hole in the ozone by. and although it may well quite effectively reduce the temperature of the it may have a serious effects on the precipitation patterns the rainfall patterns around the world for example it could interfere with the indian monsoon which of course is crucial to food supply for a billion people and i want to get into aerial spraying in a second but i want to go over the main power players right now in the world i'm dealing hearing. well a manpower prize for under a number of groups first of all there are some scientists there and there are quite

a lot in the u.s. and increasingly in europe who are researching geo engineering and there are people in the u.s. there are handful of scientists who are applying a very instrumental role that very well connected scientifically and increasingly commercially and politically. there's also some significant. flowing into geo engineering percentage so for example richard branson the. billionaire is putting part of your money into promoting jaron generic sense and cause gates is probably the biggest financial backer of geo engineering which has provided several million dollars to a fund controlled by a couple of north american scientists to support geo engineering research and mr gates himself is an investor in several geo engineering then ships and his name is on a couple of paints in the u.s.

paint an office on change makes to. regulate the world's climate in addition restylane. say some conservative political forces start to back geo engineering for example former house speaker newt gingrich camera a couple years ago strongly and geoengineering instead of reducing carbon emissions some conservative think tanks in the united states such as the american enterprise institute. once chewed said our nation. same tanks incidentally which have many years tried to undermine or attack the credibility of climate science those organizations of come out in favor of geo engineering and this immediately points to congress and the. context in which these technologies are riot arrives where there's been a mess of the political side in order to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in

large part because of ideological or political objections to the cons of regulation that would be necessary to say the united states government should quite fascinating that these think tanks right wing think tanks have denied manmade climate change yet support this solution to a problem they had previously said doesn't exist you've talked about multiple geo engineering experiments already happening right now what practices are being done and who's conducting these experiments. well there are a few some official and some unofficial and probably the most high profile unofficial or in other words the road geo engineering experiment that was conducted by a man that rushed george. a man with an interesting and entrepreneur who says he's an environmentalist who conducted an ocean i and thirty allies ation experiment off the coast of british columbia last year essentially what he did was he took

a boat out with various people including he says some scientists and he spread across a patch of ocean. and when you add on until certain parts of the action get the bloom of the out of. you know she kind of comes to life and because nothing creatures it will try and the idea is that it will take out and go out of the atmosphere. no was. criticized for doing so we are saying more interesting news from from commercial. heat that can make you know that your engineer clive i have to address this with you i'm sure you're aware about a very vocal group of people who insist that the world governments have already been practicing area aerosol spray and practicing geoengineering on a daily basis all over the world is there any truth to this theory whatsoever and have any governments practice geo engineering in any way yet. well the short answer

that is no is no truth to it well there's no evidence credible evidence to suggest that the people who are believing. i mean i've actually met a number of them and read their material and there's a con or so nasserism about empathy you know the point is that you know i'm sitting here because i take climate science very seriously and in my book rest mass inside . the science of geo engineering based on fear of you need to churn the best scientists but there are no climate scientists cloud physicists who take the claims of the chemtrails and will seriously this is really is a conspiracy theory it's not geo engineering and we really shouldn't get much attention but let's talk about whether manipulation in general as we know china use cloud seeding for the olympics it seems like a dystopian future and really my question i guess is where should the line be drawn

between nature and man. when i think this is you know way one of the concerns many people have about climate engineering which is much more than with a modification which as you say is being practiced in various places not with great success around the world we're talking about essentially taking control of the climate system of planet earth and regulating it to sit down they individuality perhaps and so we have this concern which is an equal concern which is expressed in the thread is playing god with the climate i mean you know that ability to believe in god to get the sense of what may be right yes souls that have this sense of playing god in other words stepping outside of the know good of human intervention and human technology control and that if we do that it's an engaging what could be a monstrous act of hubris then we all know what what follows from hubris and that

hubris and that is nemesis. you know back in but it's very hard to date so that's a serious concern which is not just by the still great news out of the year but which is based on the one on climate science and the extraordinary complexity global climate system thank you so much clive hamilton professor of public at the except charles stuart university author of earth masters the dawn of the age of climate engineering really appreciate your time. well if you like what you see so far go to our facebook page at facebook dot com slash breaking this make sure you are thousands of done already and give us a like we'll be updating our status and they lay there with links to past segments as well as reaching out to youth for ideas on what you want to see covered on breaking the sat here also check out behind the scenes photos were taken our studios are on breaking news that spotted and fun new places like visit metro add in hoboken new jersey head to our facebook page check out all that and more. guys about that person night show be sure to join us right back here tomorrow will be

breaking the set all over again.

in july two thousand and eleven the horn of africa was struck by a wave of famine. again our screens were flooded with images of m a c that africans.

over thirteen million people in somalia kenya ethiopia eritrea and djibouti are once again threatened by famine. the u.n. approaches the international community for immediate food aid.