well handled the stuff. coming up on our t.v. washington is becoming the political battleground congress is still debating u.s. military intervention in syria we'll tell you more next and in war torn syria the violence has reached a small town near the nation's capital it's a village that holds one of the all this christian minorities in the world growing concerns for this community coming up. and don't forget to put your best face forward the department of homeland security is putting together a huge database for facial recognition but does this really help law enforcement more on that in tonight's show. it's friday september sixth eight pm in washington d.c.

i'm your i david and you're watching our t.v. we begin tonight with syria as the debate for and against a military strike continues in congress president obama cleared a major hurdle this week by gaining approval from the senate formally relations committee as they voted ten to seven on their own version of the military authorization however it hasn't exactly been easy for the administration to continue that momentum giving a full breakdown on the numbers behind the fight is r t political commentator sam sax i've long believed that our power is rooted just in our military might but in origin as a government of the people by the people and for the people and that's why i've made a second decision. i will seek authorization for the use of force from the american people's representatives in congress and with that president obama dispatched his top secretaries to congress to make the case for military intervention in syria but today after

a week of hearings both opening classified in the house and in the senate the president's plans to get congress on board are falling apart yes on wednesday the senate foreign relations committee move forward an authorization for force in syria and a vote before the full senate is scheduled next week but the senate is not where the president's problems a lot it's in the house republicans and democrats are lining up together to oppose any military intervention in syria our he's been on the hill all week and here were some of the responses we received from skeptical lawmakers unintended consequences for the result of the united states getting involved in this civil war is my concern is a member of congress i came here today with a very open mind. to hear the argument of why we need to strike syria and still today they said ministration has failed to show me the direct threat to the united states of america the question is what's best for us what's best for americans we

are not under attack none of our allies are under attack there is a reason why we call the department of defense the department of defense it's meant to attempt to defend us and our allies against attacks that hasn't happened yet we have absolutely no guarantee it won't expand no guarantee of peace in the region a lot of american money spent some american blood maybe american lives and i'm very concerned we have no guarantees that we'll be successful now based on what you heard right there it's not too much of a surprise that early with council the house or the president's authorization for force going down in a resoundingly feet here the numbers coming out of the house so far there are one hundred seventy three lawmakers still undecided but of those who have made up their mind. anzor close to it only twenty six support strikes and eighteen are leaning toward a yes vote on strikes now on the flip side eighty five members plan to vote no and another hundred thirty two are leaning no you add that together that equals two

hundred seventeen votes the resolution is defeated the president stymied sensing this debate is slipping away president obama announced that he would address the american people on tuesday to make his case and he's got his work cut out there too as a reuters poll this week showed fifty six percent of the american people opposed strikes only nineteen percent support strikes so what is going to happen what will the president do if he can't get congress on board well this morning his deputy national security adviser tony blinken told n.p.r. that strikes are off the table without the go ahead from congress he said quote the president of course has the authority to strike but it's neither his desire nor his intention to use that authority absent congress backing him but when asked specifically whether this was the case the president today refused to limit his options i did not put this before congress.

just as a political force or a symbol of deputy national security advisor said it is not your intention to attack if congress doesn't approve it is he right i don't think that's exactly what he said but. i think i've answered i've answered the question so the president refuses to rule out going alone in striking syria that under his own admission he was elected to stop wars not start them and now as he's reversing this position in light of what he believes is a moral imperative to act he's losing international support he's losing congress and he's losing the support of the american people so is this war really worth it in washington same sex are to. and while top administration officials try and convince congress here at home that a military strike is necessary president obama is seeking out support from the international community abroad at the g. twenty summit meanwhile on the ground in syria the battle for control has continued

with fervor just yesterday government troops along with a legit al-qaeda linked rebels fought for control of one syrian christian town north of damascus called ma lula there have been a series of hit and run attacks on the village which holds one of the all this minority syrian population the residents of mali who speak the ancient language of aramaic which scholars believe was the language of jesus the attack highlights fears among syrian christians and other minorities that an alternative to assad's regime would not tolerate religious minorities earlier today i spoke with archbishops karim of the syrian orthodox church i first asked him to give me a sense of how madhur fits into the demographics of syria. very ancient town northeast of damascus and it is on the list of the heritage of. senses the us go list. is made of mainly christian and some muslim

families who have lived together for many centuries peacefully. is one of the very few towns and cities in syria where make is still spoken. of course the habitants of my rule originally come from the outer make people of syria which was the dominant race in syria before islam now many of our own become just through language and through other things but it's our make. identity in addition to the syria population of the north east of syria in the jersey of a house. and the two villages. around. the only places where i make in different dialects it's this and indeed that it's a rarity in a south that i wanted to move on and ask you how you would describe the experience so far for syrian christians in particular even priests have been targeted there

throughout this conflict malula is no different than other christian. population of christians in the large cities they have always felt that what's happening in syria right now is against their own interest as citizens of syria especially as christians as it's well known and documented christians and the as a rule. have lived relatively very peaceful. conditions and the government and the syrian population have been really nice to the christians because the christian after all these inhabitants of syria the original happiness of syria therefore keeping the christian present in the middle east especially in syria is a richness and is. enriching the syrian society therefore they always stood with. the country i cannot say with the government because they love the country

and that's why they think the current regime is good for christians it's a secular regime and they are very much afraid of what comes after if this regime so let me ask you how would christians be affected by u.s. military intervention in syria they'll be affected quite badly and it's really just give us some examples so far we have lost quite a few priests we have two hours bishops prominent church leaders the two reasons of aleppo you're one and. since april twenty second we have no word about their bows we don't know where they are we don't know what happened to them we are hoping and praying they're still alive and they will come back but they have been kidnapped by by elements who are affiliated with al qaida so what happens if syria god forbid is ruled by groups affiliated with al qaida are we going to have another afghanistan the air let's just look at iraq although the government there

is not affiliated with any. muslim. muslim but the christians being driven out of iraq in their hundreds of thousands sticking of iraq you know i wanted to ask you if syria does border iraq and of course they're seeing a lot of sectarian violence right now do you think that what's going on in iraq is instigating what's going on in syria i don't believe so i don't believe it's instigating but i do believe the elements in iraq are making things much worse for the syrians there are of course as we hear from the news there are people coming through iraq through turkey through jordan and through lebanon there are elements of extremists who come from all the way from of guidance then and those pics that and other countries such as saudi arabia and qatar they are fighting in syria they are doing their jihad in syria yes. they are making things more difficult for

christians because these people who come outside of syria do not understand. this syrian society they do not know how syrians live together peacefully side by side for many centuries christians and muslims they come there blinded by the hatred and by the river is just convictions they want they want to implement sharia law now the extreme norms in syria my at my feet my feel is that when they will come if god forbid this government is toppled that we christians have to make a choice either to leave our country our own land or to be converted or otherwise be killed there to be martyred and i know that your fear is shared by many many syrians particularly christians in syria will keep our eyes peeled and we're hoping for the best to thank you so much archbishop archbishop from kareem from the syrian church for joining us we appreciate it thank you thank you for having me president

obama is on day two of the g. twenty summit taking place in st petersburg russia today eleven countries including the united states have issued a joint statement on the syrian crisis in response to the use of chemical weapons it says we call for a strong international response to this a grave violation of the world's rules and conscious that will send a clear message that this kind of atrocity can never be repeated those who perpetrated these crimes must be held accountable r.t. correspondent a nice and now we brings us the latest report from st petersburg. i was elected to end wars not start a u.s. military intervention in syria dominated talks that the g. twenty but if obama was looking to gather overwhelming support at the summit he didn't get it. so.

we will not participate in military action aside from france turkey and saudi arabia a few countries expressed outright support for obama's proposal of a military strike in a joint statement they condemned the use of chemical weapons blaming the government and called for some kind of response but they stopped short of backing a u.s. attack on syria from a host of president putin. a weapons attack near damascus. that he says was carried out to discredit. my view everything that happened with the so-called use of chemical weapons in syria was a provocation by the rebels who count on help from abroad from those countries that originally supported them that's the reason for this provocation i also want to remind you that the use of force against a sovereign state is acceptable only if it's done for self-defense and we know that syria hasn't attacked the u.s. and only if the u.n.

security council approves such action as one of the participants of our discussions on the issue put it yesterday those who do otherwise put themselves above the law. obama continues to insist assad was behind the attack and he wait for the u.s. response. regimes brazen use of chemical weapons isn't just a syrian tragedy it's a threat to global peace and security the u.s. president is due to address the american public on tuesday and try to make his best argument for an attack on syria one that failed. to convince global partners at the g twenty summit just to give you a better idea of who exactly is opposed to military action in syria along with russia you have china india indonesia argentina brazil south africa and other countries' economies of the g twenty did six times a joint statement condemning the attacks back in august they do believe that also

it was behind it and the joint communique goes as far to really hint that they also support these countries find passing the u.n. vote russia and many other partners here think that's a very dangerous precedent that's going to be set up and what will happen then to smaller countries what will happen with north korea how will they see this kind of late a brazen overstepping of international law what kind of precedent will that set up in terms of trying to convince north korea per se to get rid of their nuclear program so very hot debate here over the past two days but it should be said that leaders are leaving st petersburg with no kind of solution on how to move forward with syria that was artie's a nice and now we still ahead on our if you thought your online encryption was locked down think again the n.s.a. is able to crack most codes that have more after the break.

dramas to try to be a short. story for the so you know. six street lights. to be true. for. the. it was terrible a little very hard to take over. to get on

a plane never had sex with the perfect there are moments. when. it was. one of the problems. of. talking about the same story doesn't make good news no song no consequences some tough question thank you.

one of the only ways to shield against government surveillance is to use online encrypted tools that help users communicate securely but the national security agency has seen to crack the code and have been doing so at least since the year two thousand this according to the latest secret documents leaked by former n.s.a. contractor edward snowden we now know that both the n.s.a. and its british counterpart the g c h q have made millions of attempts to gain access to encipher data sent over the internet according to the board cns a made a huge break breakthrough back in two thousand and ten when it found a way to monitor large amounts of data flowing through the world's fiber optic cables these spy agencies found ways to gain access to data sent through virtual private networks which are frequently used by businesses and privacy conscious users to conceal ip addresses that means that the digital scrambling used to

protect trade secrets medical records and more have all been unscrambled by the u.s. and i say in addition the spying organization has been covertly working with the technology companies to get access to user data according to budget documents quote the n.s.a. spends more than two hundred fifty million dollars a year on its enabling project which actively engages the u.s. and foreign i t industries to covertly influence and overtly leverage their commercial products designs to make them exploitable it is unclear which technology companies are working with the n.s.a. however back in june in a guardian q. and a edward snowden said that quote encrypt works but that users would have to say use strong crypto systems and make sure that the software is properly implemented. if you thought the license plate readers were invasive just wait until you hear about the latest scanner on the block it's called biometric optical surveillance

system the guy. from its newest advent and facial recognition software according to recently released documents from the electronic privacy information center we now know that the department of homeland security is making considerable progress on a face scanning tool the system works by using video cameras to scan people in public and then identify them based on the characteristics of their face the technology operates by cross referencing state and federal databases of driver license photos and mug shots and while this technology will certainly aid law enforcement agencies privacy and civil liberty advocates are now heavily cautioning the ways in which the system can be abused to discuss this more i was joined earlier by our t.v. producer adriano who said oh i first asked her about the system the f.b.i. is separately developing called the next generation identification program and what the differences between that system and the homeland security tool. honestly the

short answer is not much because you know official recognition it actually works around the same way which is you know you take a picture it scans of your face usually head on it scans and then cross references with a database usually an existing database at this point that actually goes and measures different points in your face in order to make an i.d. right the only difference in this case is that the department of homeland security has a much bigger area in order to be able to call this data and be able to cross-reference it from as you pointed out earlier the idea to us has driving records has different places for being able to come in here and going to ask us to pretty much everything absolutely well thirty seven states already have their own sort of state system and they are all incorporating features of facial recognition software so how exactly what's the plan here how are they going to be working independently or is there some plan for the states to be working well heed to any of these

programs being able to succeed or the key to success is really cooperation. none of these states are an island in of itself so in order to be able to get that data and for data to be valuable in any way they have to be able to identify. different red flags that are in different areas in order to better safeguard from you know any criminal activity any acts of terror so on and so forth so the different faces of law enforcement have to work together in order to just be able to identify these things before tragedies or crimes are committed so this has to exist before hand and of course law enforcement agencies claim that this is going to better help their operations help them catch criminals but why is this going to be such a threat to our privacy well what's interesting is you know it all boils down to how this information is being used because it's only it's only we would only expect this to happen that technology would modernized to catch. with the way that the

world works today right but the problem always lies in how it is being used and how it's being gathered and how at the end of the day how is it going to affect our daily lives right so that's when that problem comes into play it's when we don't know exactly what how and why and when this is going to be used and of course defenders will say well i mean we have no reasonable expectation of privacy when we're in the public well that's interesting right because we live in a you know in a society right now are things posted everything's uploaded right like you dislike you do all these things right but in that situation there is an actual relationship where the user or the poster itself is actually sharing that information right there actually choosing to share that information and posted it moving forward in this case however that sort of you know that sort of agreement doesn't exist right so in other words you are not willingly giving up any information you're not willingly giving your consent in order for this to be gathered in order for this to

be used so that's again where you know privacy advocates sort of you know come in and say hey we don't know the extent of this so that's why we're worried right now . and what about legal oversight is there any are there any regulations or does the government sort of have free reign on that i mean with all the disclosures that we've seen so far things to. the latest from edward snowden and so on and so forth continue to just roll out every couple of weeks almost we see that essentially there isn't any oversight right that's the that's the big problem or the oversight that exists is secret so we don't know exactly how things are being you know take into account how things are actually being monitored if they're being monitored in which way what are the way violations are occurring so we don't know because that information is not available to the public so that's also a big part of this conversation right is to be able to create said mechanisms in order for this to exist in order for all of this to coexist in the state should and

i finally i want to ask you you know in the case that we willingly do give up our information we post our pictures all the time of our family of ourselves is that all just you know fueling the fire fueling the fire especially well what's interesting is you see like in the case of facebook for example we also know do you know disclosures that these companies are working together with the government in order to have to obviously work with the government in order to share information right so it would make sense that the information that you would see would be used in some way shape or form in order to correlate in order to just. picture a bigger picture of what is happening right so it only it only makes sense i wish we had more time to talk about it america is all you have thank you a.j. and i was there all for joining me appreciate it. in the world of mass media it looks like more of television has fallen under the control of a few companies and while a lot of it has to do with money and power there's another reason why this is all

allowed to happen residents laurie harmfulness with more on that. in one thousand nine hundred eighty three fifty companies ruled american media today that number is six and it's probably going to be even fewer soon case in point in the past year at a company called in clare broadcasting has paid almost two point five billion dollars to snap up seventy nine local t.v. station they own one hundred forty nine stations in feministic market reaching about thirty eight percent of all u.s.

television households which is a funny numbered because the telecommunications act of one thousand nine hundred six specifically said that national broadcast companies are only allowed to own t.v. stations that week thirty five percent of the viewing audience know more than that it says that for a very specific reason it's bad to protect the american public from the knobbly on the news so that we have more than one news dora's it's there to protect us from having only one or two big giant propagandists doubtless telling us their version of the story that fits their agenda. sinclair skirts the thirty five percent rule by maintaining its local status the act says it will conduct a wool making proceeding to determine what local limits should be it said that in one thousand nine hundred six seventeen years ago and they asked these these deal hasn't done squat about enforcing that rule along with many other rules the act

that it would establish when it first came out clinton touted the act as a way to. open the market to competition and in reality the act allowed for a massive deregulation and media consolidation unlike anything we've ever seen that is allowed media companies like thing claire to consolidate into the giant the he myth they are today if you think the government doesn't like this consolidation you're wrong if you think it's a mistake your wrong why because it's a hell of a lot easier to control the narrative of three media outlets instead of three hundred and that makes it easier to control the masses and if you write this off by saying yeah but the internet the fact is seventy four percent of americans still get their information from t.v. and radio today the f.c.c. is repeatedly trying to lax regulations to allow big media to get even bigger they

just aren't issuing press releases about it later clinton did. so unless we stay vigilant and vocal it's safe to assume the american media all of our believe is poised to get even worse with the f.c.c. the more hypocritical thing tonight a talk about that by following me on twitter at the reception. well that does it for now for more on the stories we covered go to youtube dot com slash r t america or check out our website at r t dot com slash usa you can also follow me on twitter at amir a david and don't forget to tune in at nine pm tonight for larry king now tonight's guests are economist paul zak and psychologist jonathan height on the science of happiness from all of us here at our teens have a great night. well

. science technology innovation all the latest developments from around russia we've got the future covered. mission free cretaceous three cents for charges free. range month free. three stooges free. old free blank can plug in video for your media projects a free media. tom. wealthy british style.