if you care about you and. this is why you should care what you only. coming up on r t the international community works on a deal to dispose of syrian chemical weapons and the fight in syria rages on opposition rebels have captured a christian village near the capital of damascus we'll give you the latest details ahead and it's been five years since the financial meltdown that started the recession today the top richest one percent continue to floor it while the rest flounder will take a deeper look at that but the director of inequality for all coming up and the government of pushback is pushing for a secular change all of this in a new proposal to ban people from wearing overt religious symbols we'll tell you more about that what that means later in the show.

it's friday september twentieth four pm in washington d.c. i'm lynn neary david and you're watching our t.v. . we begin today with syria the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons said today it had received an initial declaration from syria outlining the country's chemical weapons program a spokesman for the organization told the associated press that the declaration is quote being reviewed by our verification division the organization has not released the details of what is in the declaration though they have made it clear they are looking for ways to expedite the process of removing and destroying syria's chemical weapons stockpile this week members of the u.n. security council have been discussing the framework of a resolution aimed at detailing the way in which syria should transfer those weapons to international control they are also negotiating what disciplinary measures if any the syrian regime will face if they fail to abide by those terms yesterday kerry reiterated the administration's belief that assad was behind the

chemical weapons attack that took place on august twenty first. this week's long awaited u.n. report the facts in syria only grew clearer and the case only grew bored compelling every single data point the types of munitions and launchers that were used their origins their trajectory their market and the confirmation of sarin every single bit of it confirms what we already knew what we told america and the world. the syrian government still maintains that the chemical warfare was employed by the opposition meanwhile on the ground in syria the battle for control continues and it's specifically playing out in one small christian village just north of damascus called the town is considered a symbol of christianity and is one of the few places where the ancient language of

aramaic is spoken artie's maria the notion up is in syria and has more. further to the syrian village and the luna is where they are made question really just haven't spoken functions which was just was in daily use but not so much these days. off to do how just attacked a smidge the christian village in syria more than two weeks ago local residents were forced to flee the battlefield that was once then native land and calm organized life. many of them to graph each with christian families in old damascus we try to meet them only has been told stories for us so that. took them to the many least two told closely dramatis remain missing they say is the kidnap people and they fear the stiffing even the mall is dangerous and these people claim well about danger so she murmurs of entente its family would have killed all the

thursdays are beyond him a siege it's not the law now i'm going by the shouting about not going to all of it and got it in one interview i thought i was going to run that once a month home leave the lift up and come on make it and so on runs without an out of the seven bubble that sag on that mind you thing i can examine my chest and get all shouted down by the law even shouts like no had another one said let them go but down hundreds gathered for the funerals. they know the old mall choose a place muslims and christians to tackle model a village searing say was an attack on the country and its way of life. for the family with money very much other than the been in that it isn't that i wouldn't this didn't live in ma luna but it's surrounded by one o'clock was limited to my view maybe they see the last obstacle in the abstract stone with the hay on to on it's father in law is eighty eight years old he says nothing like these has gotten

old he's light years out of mind he was in the living in peace and now it's minute . who only christians out of the country who prayed to god that would defeat tricked them out another relative who's afraid to show her face says it's hard to say how many people were killed in honor because militants holed in the village often keep the bodies for further renovation and to instill fear their goal is not assad there is no established an islamic emirate in all of the middle east however fine countries are helping them with weapons money whatever they need helping them destroy the country m.p. for obvious religion special swede sanctified bread is served in the family to commemorate the dead. in church they held special ceremonies for several days. and again are the syrians equally shocked to pray together for the dead and the law of the ancient language in marlow united people for thousands of years behind now

is that it can sustain the nice to her only calendar russia and all over the country that turn a half year long conflict is taking lives language and shattering people's hope. from damascus in syria. this week marks five years since the collapse of lehman brothers investment bank triggering the largest financial crisis since the great depression this week also marked the second anniversary of occupy wall street an uprising that sought to channel the grievances of the financial collapse into a movement for change and while the protests in the street have subsided the message behind occupy has not particularly as we learn about the growing economic inequality in this country while the u.s. in income inequality has been growing for nearly three decades last year the gap between the richest one percent and the rest of america reached the widest point since the one nine hundred twenty s. this is according to global economists who analyzed i.r.s. data going back to nineteen thirteen what they found is that the top one percent of

u.s. earners collected about twenty percent of household income these staggering numbers are exactly what's explored in a new documentary called inequality for all featuring former labor secretary robert reich take a look at all develop the united states is the most money distribution of income were surging toward even greater inequality. eight hundred twenty eight thousand two thousand and seven become the years for income concentration it looks like this is going to bring. us here we need thirty six thousand government to make it work seventy hours. earlier i spoke with the director of the film jacob kornbluth i first asked him why all americans should care about the growing economic inequality gap. when the economy is so out of balance when the structural foundation of how the economy is organized is so out of whack this isn't just a moral question it's not just not fair that the rich have so much of the income it

also affects our economy overall our economy is stagnant now at the same time the incomes are so disproportionately divided and that's because of this income inequality and secondly it's because it also affects our democracy so our economy and our democracy are both in shambles because as partially as a result of this widening income inequality that we're seeing today absolutely well this week marks cue years since the rise of occupy wall street a movement that tried to tell the story of inequality for all the criticism of course was that occupy was unable to elicit real political change so how do you channel this important dialogue into action well i think occupy did a lot of wonderful things i mean we certainly it certainly put this issue of income inequality on the national radar in a way it wasn't before but it sort of but i think we didn't get past the headlines

the ninety nine percent of the one percent to sort of get a deeper understanding of what this income inequality really means for us when all of us are worried that our that our economy is stagnant that we can't get ahead in our jobs that we have such economic insecurity on an individual basis and we're also worried that our politics are too partisan and that it feels like we might have another government shutdown next month so if we understand that income inequality is one of the root causes of these major problems that we're all concerned about then i think that's a different understanding than maybe the occupy movement brought us to as far as what all this stuff means to share and for a lot of people that the subject of economics is not the easiest to understand yet ironically it's one of the most important subjects to understand as it crosses paths with nearly every decision that's made how telling challenging was it for you to tell a story about the economy in a way that was compelling that can engage a lot of people. well. i have no economic background and i'm not particularly political person when i started making this film so it was important to me that the

film be not only true but also entertaining and my wife is a schoolteacher she hates politics and economics too and she loves this movie and not just because her husband made it either but because she says it's for the first time she really gets it when you see the movie it not only talks about income inequality but it connects the dots for how it affects our economy in a democracy in a way that i think makes it sort of does have a sort of like you sort of understand it maybe for the first time past sort of the headlines of the rich have all this and the poor have all that are the republicans think this and the democrats think that this is a big picture understanding of why income inequality does affect us all and take of this film is not actually the first collaboration for you and robert rice the main voice in the film can you talk about how the two originally got connected and how it it really translated into a documentary film sure well first of all i grew up poor i grew up my mom raising

a family of four on between nine and fifteen thousand dollars a year so i've always said sort of a keen interest in who gets what in society but i never had any way to sort of voice that interest and then i scott really frustrated after two thousand and eight and decided i wanted to make these short two to three minute videos these kind of explainers that could explain to people like me who don't have an economics background some of these issues i felt sort of trapped in a twenty four hour news cycle where i wasn't getting i was hearing all this news but not getting any understanding of the issues that were that were sort of facing me and these videos sort of answered that and hundreds and thousands of people started seeing them i pointed the camera i asked them questions that i wanted to know and people got some information they needed and that sort of gave me the confidence that making a film like this would have an audience as well and of course robert rice was the former labor secretary for bill clinton and also served in the administrations of carter and ford were you worried at all ad that his political background would make the message of the film politicized. you know i think anytime you make

a film called any quality for all and you put somebody like robert reich at the center of it there's a danger that it gets sort of trapped in the same partisan bickering that i was trying to avoid by making this film but the way we approach this issue is to try and take a big picture of you we step out of the sort of partisan fights of the moment and we try and look at say the last forty years or even the last hundred years and sort of look at the shape of the economy and what you see that is something that republicans have had issues with and democrats and liberals and conservatives this when it kind of he gets this on structured as it did in one nine hundred twenty eight and again as it didn't two thousand and seven in both of those two years those were the two peak years of income inequality and the economy had its two biggest crashes of the last century right after both of those years so this is something that concerns both republicans and democrats and when you step out of the sort of day to day twenty four hour news cycle into a larger picture it doesn't really feel partisan the film sort of challenges the

assumptions of people both on the left and on the right here and you know jacob we only have like thirty seconds left but i wanted to ask you about kickstarter because i know you use that to raise funds for the project you made it well beyond your stated goal of seventy five thousand how instrumental do you think kickstarter another crowdfunding services are in leveling the playing field in hollywood you know. there is the fact that people who care about an issue can get together and do something about it we were sitting in the edit room and we would see it take up ten dollars twenty bucks at a time so it means that people who don't have a lot of money can have something to say about the types of movies that get made and get out there and for that these things are wonderful opportunities for filmmakers like me well said well that was it jacob kornbluth director of inequality for all in theaters september twenty seventh thanks so much for joining me thank you. and now to quebec this week the canadian province announced plans for wide ranging legislation aimed at keeping religion out of the workplace it's called

the quebec charter of values and if this measure is passed it would include a ban on state employees from wearing a religious symbol now that can be anything from muslim headscarves and jewish to christian necklaces donning the sign of the cross it's a move that has ignited a fierce debate about religious freedom critics argue that the laws are an attack on freedom of worship and multiculturalism however supporters of the measure say the bill would help treat everyone equally by ending special treatment for the religious at work and forcing secularism i was joined earlier by jacob bream's a william lyon mackenzie king research fellow at harvard university's canada program to discuss this proposal and its chances of becoming the law in the near future i first asked him to talk about quebec and its history of rejecting religious interference. famously it was for a very long time a very religious problem it was roughly run to by

a combination of conservative national politicians of the catholic church for much of the twentieth century but in the one nine hundred sixty s. there was something called a quiet revolution and who better very much a turn away from the church and be a very secular society much more on the lines of what we think of as republican france so now. very much defines itself as a secular society but one with a long tradition so what's interesting is that supporters say that this would end special treatment of the religious at work what kinds of special treatment are they referring to here. well primarily being in the special treatment to. chew present themselves as individuals in a way that civil servants often don't so one of the combat ministers said recently that. in no other way were civil servants allowed to express their

opinions they couldn't say things politically they couldn't. play loud music while they were at work so why should religion be one special place where civil servants could express themselves could try to tell other people their their personal views but really what is being but what is being regulated here is dress it's wearing a headscarf it's wearing a veil it's wearing a yarmulke it's wearing a chairman. so it's wearing of wearing a large cross so is that a special treatment because you can do that but you can't wear little pin that special treatment that's first well can you explain the government's argument that wearing religious symbols makes the government less inclusive sure so the argument is coming from a tradition that their backs up that really comes from france where the idea is

that the government should be a one hundred percent neutral space that civil service civil servants and bureaucrats should be. simply origins of the states and that if somebody is wearing a headscarf or wearing a yarmulke that that is imposing the you from. from a the other institution into the government into the states and that someone who is secular or someone who is of a different religion might feel uncomfortable working with that civil servants or might be or especially their civil servants is in a position of power so one of the really key questions should teachers be aware the allowed to wear religious symbols should prison guards be allowed to wear religious symbols or critics argue that the bill allows for a lot of christian traditions you know allowing for instance for christmas trees in public places also interestingly there are crosses on the quebec flag and

a kris effects in their voting chambers i can explain how this inconsistency really fits into the mindset that went into producing this targer well argument that the government makes is that these are historical symbols that the crucifix that's in the national assembly is a recognition of that who backs historical roots historical characters that the that the flag which has a one cross in the middle and then for leave which is a christian symbol representing the trinity and the virgin mary that those are representations from kovacs history and nat they are understood in a secular way now. i think it's a little bit hard to imagine how a crucifix would be understood by anyone other than a christian as it surely secular symbol i think that most jews or muslims

or six or hindus or atheist would see that as a as a pretty religious i'm symbol but there but that's the argument very interesting well let's talk about how difficult this is actually going to be any what what will it pass do you think think something like this will pass. well i if i had to guess i would say that something will the chemical the ruling party is a is a minority government right now but what is between them and the difference between them and a majority is a nother party called the cac which translates to the coalition for québec future. the chakras said that they think that this charter as proposed is going too far. but that they want something that they want rules against teachers in prison guards and other people from wearing religious symbols block to that there is room for

compromise that maybe care workers and hospital workers should be allowed to wear religious symbols or that. certain institutions like certain municipalities or even particular. even sure school could get exempt themselves so i would suspect that there is going to be some sort of compromise position and then i would suspect that there is going to be a long drawn out court that woman's well we definitely are going to keep our eyes peeled to see what happens with this jake of rahm's our research fellow at harvard university thank you so much for joining me my pleasure take care. yesterday a texas of people's court overturned the two thousand and ten conviction of former house of representatives majority leader tom de lay he was originally charged and convicted for money laundering and conspiracy but the court threw out the conviction and claimed there was insufficient evidence for those charges in an opinion released yesterday the court said that the evidence quote shows that the

defendants were attempting to comply with the election code limitations on corporate contributions but the travis county district attorney's office said it will appeal this decision made and a two to one vote the da released a statement that said we are concerned and disappointed that two judges substituted their assessment of the facts for that of twelve jurors who personally heard the testimony of over forty witnesses over the course of several weeks and found that the evidence was sufficient and proved delays guilt beyond a reasonable doubt here to discuss the overturn conviction and what it says about the judicial process i'm joined by mark levine a former congressional attorney and host of inside scoop mark thank you so much for joining me thank you for having me so now the appeals court is saying that tom de lay did nothing wrong you know he did not break the law what was he doing in the first place and you break that down for me and also you know what justification the court was using to really overturn this can shorten texas law has for

a very long period of time banned corporations from giving directly to texas state candidates and tom de lay wanted to do exactly that but he knew that it was against the law so he very secretly allowed the money to go to a branch of the republican national committee he got corporations to give one hundred ninety thousand dollars to them he told specifically it was going to individual candidates which of course is illegal then to publish them when he wrote checks to seven candidates totaling one hundred ninety thousand dollars and the court said world but he technically was ok because even though the corporation said they were given of your candidates they could have given the money for other purposes they could give the money just for access to talk to tom de lay. which of course is raises its own question of whether or not politicians should be selling access for have a much modern money but because it could have gone for something else therefore there was an insufficient evidence and though the twelve jurors found beyond a reasonable doubt it was true basically they said as long as you follow all the technicalities right you can basically ignore this law so he pretty much got off on a technicality and we're going know that you worked on the hill when tom de lay was

really rising to power in the republican party for people that don't know can you talk about the kind of influence. of the most powerful members of congress in the last thirty years tom de lay was called the hammer and he was called that because he knew how to hammer his way into authority he was second in charge of the house at the time speaker denny hastert was technically in charge everyone knew the real power lay in tom delay in this power was that he could go all republicans to do whatever he wanted them to do it was supporting president bush on something all the republicans that claim to hate spending now all them voted for massive spending in those days and the way you do it was he used his power over money to make sure that candidates that supported his agenda would get lots and lots of money because they didn't would not and i remember very clearly robin hayes a piece in congress anymore but he's a congressman from the eastern part of north carolina there was a textile bill that tom de lay wanted and that his constituents hayes constituents were very much against because a lot of textile workers in north carolina and i remember tom delay didn't have all

the votes so he started twisting with his arm not physically but politically it will hayes was crying on the house floor and file in the middle of the night changed his vote against his constituents to satisfy tom but all of this sounds familiar it sounds like an episode of house of cards or they go as we know citizens united was passed in january of two thousand and ten it opened the floodgates to corporate donations giving rise to the super pacs do you think that the leniency we're now seeing in campaign election laws has any bearing whatsoever on the overturn well sure i mean this actually goes farther than citizens united i think since united was wrongly decided it's a corporation. spend whatever the amount they want on free speech to influence election campaign this allows direct donations to the political campaign so it actually goes one further in my view corporations are not people and don't have the free speech rights under the constitution which which i carry with me but you know that is something that we're going to have to wait for a change in a state supreme court to overturn it absolutely well the district attorneys i

mentioned this leading out i was sad that you know this was originally tried by twelve juries they listened to forty different witnesses and then in the appeal of course two judges made this decision and the majority was republican i mean it's also even more interesting than that because as you know the two judges the two republican judges found for tom de lay the democrat who's the chief judge of the texas court found against tom de lay but they originally the court had two democrats and one republican but tom de lay got the texas supreme court to disqualify one of the democrats changing it from two republicans to one democrat office and how problematic because it's extremely problematic because it looks political not legal and this is a law that's been in force in the past by texas but now to protect the hammer seems like they're changing the law and as we know you know politicians are no stranger to corruption so what kind of precedent do you think this overturn is going to set for elected representatives going forward work toward a charge with criminal activity it sets a terrible precedent look bribery is supposed to be a legal united states but through all these technicalities bribery is basically

legal you want to buy a politician it's very simple all you do is you collect a bunch of money and the politician does what you want you pay them if he doesn't you don't do it you don't pay them and this is the way it works and corporations can raise a lot more money than individuals because they're not playing with their own money they're playing with the money we used to buy gas or go to the store whatever it is it's a very dangerous precedent and i hope it's overturned and do you think politicians are held to a different standard than the average american well i don't think bribery should be legal wasn't so i mean you can pay someone to fix your car you should not be able to pay someone to fix the law and that's exactly the problem in america and my sam . i ask you since we have a little bit more time i want to ask you about the relationship between tom de lay and jack abramoff i know all of this is going on at the same time can you tell me a little bit sure i mean. who was convicted by the way there were two other people along with tom de lay did exactly what right what he did pled guilty to it and are now serving time for it and you also have of course tom de lay himself. being what

he did and but hiding it at the time if it was perfectly legal why would he hide it so jack avram all of classic lobbyist convicted of similar kind of thing he's on the other end he's raising the money to help his clients get what they want to congress to pay off people like tom de lay it's no wonder they work very closely together well it certainly is amazing what has happened we'll have to see if they're able to appeal and be successful but i do appreciate your time mark levine host of inside scoop and a former congressional attorney thank you so much thank you so much well that does it for now for more on the stories we covered today go to youtube dot com forward slash r t america and check out our web site r t dot com forward slash usa can also follow me on twitter at america david see right back here at five.

technology innovation all the developments around russia. the future covered. over. did you know the prize is the only industry specifically mentioned in the constitution and. that's because a free and open press is critical to our democracy correct albus. in fact the single biggest threat facing our nation today is the corporate takeover of our government and across several we've been hydrogen lying handful of transnational corporations that will profit by destroying what our founding fathers one school class i'm job market and on this show we reveal the big picture of what's actually going on in the world we go beyond identifying the problem try rational debate and a real discussion critical issues facing america have october ready to join the movement then walk

a bit. as diplomats a problem with the complexities of dismantling syria's chemical weapons all sides in the conflict continue to escalate the carnage on the ground are the western powers truly interested in negotiations with the assad regime or are they biding their time searching for new opportunities to bring about regime change in damascus . army grieve the loss of every soldier. his mother father brothers and wife will forever grieve as was. grief that was

compound about the failing of his army. we have a duty to all families of our fallen soldiers given the truth the best we know the fastest we can.