tonight taking on syria's toxic arsenal albania's says no so now the search is on for a country to receive the weapons for destruction after damascus met its obligation to destroy all production facilities. washington tries to whitewash a multimillion dollar british inquiry into the roots of iraqi invasion in case it reveals a few painful truths between bush and blair. and america's booming private prisons lobby for tougher sentences and more inmates but an ex-con tells us profits are being put before rehabilitating criminals back into society.

just joined us and kevin owen here in moscow to my just after ten pm now our top story syria's chemical chemical dissolved much protein a crucial phase with the roadmap for the weapons actual destruction in the works but further progress is in question tonight as the next main stage where the talks are going to be said for elimination is still uncertain albania which was the most favored choice till now was just rejected america's request our middle east correspondent reports. today is the deadline for the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons to go up destruction deadlines for syria's chemical arsenal so far damascus has made all deadlines in its destruction program with the latest being the first of november when it had to destroyed all equipment used for the mixing of production of poison gases and nerve agents damascus says that remains committed to meeting these deadlines on our part we are ready to do

whatever it takes to commit ourselves to these the blood's but experts see we can do it sooner we are ready to do it i was recently in damascus where none of the foreign experts that overseeing the destruction of syria's chemical weapons program would speak on camera other than to say that they were extremely satisfied with the progress that was being made and that damascus was cooperating fully we have made a commitment and syria as well known for respecting its commitments this is not a commitment to the security council this is not a commitment to the p.c. that we do this is a commitment also to our russian friends and one of the debates right now is way to actually destroy syria's chemical weapons which are estimated at around a thousand tons of chemical weapons have become a heavy burden on syria especially for the presence of militant groups in its soil that might want to use such weapons or could even induce

a disaster by mishandling members. the final deadline for so you're destroying a four tire stockpile of chemical weapons is the middle of next year policy r.t. tell of a well here's how serious does our woods been progressing damascus revealed its chemical site shortly after the russian and u.s. brokered deal was struck although it's worth mentioning the inspectors couldn't visit all of them because of the heavy fighting syria has still managed to meet the november target for destroying all chemical weapon production facilities but removing the existing arsenal will be quite a challenge take a look at what the inspectors are up against here on the map these are the major stockpile sites some are located in contested areas or close to rebel strongholds where fighting is almost nonstop. once again the biggest question now is which country then will be willing to take in syria's estimated thousand tons of toxic weapons for destruction political analyst chris bambery explain to us why the choice albania one of europe's poorest countries for this task was controversial to

start with. was that it's a norwegian merchant ship accompanied by a norwegian naval vessel which is going to syria to pick up these weapons with mustard gas and siren and bring them to albania the norwegians say they don't have the expertise and the ability to dismantle the chemical weapons i would ask you if the richest one of the richest countries in europe don't have the expertise and knowledge to do this how do you expect the poorest country in europe to do this kind of smacks of a colonial mentality that somehow we're going to dump of these things in albania we're not going to bring them to britain why don't you choose a country which has the expertise for its instance in britain is the aldermaston chemical weapons facility i would trust that to dismantle those weapons but they involves high levels of expertise and also albania must be one of the least stable countries in europe this is not to attack the albanian people but they are being in state has hardly a long history now it's not very stable there's a problem of all crime there and i think it's

a very strange decision to say we're going to take these deadly weapons and put them in a country which were security must be an issue. for course we'll keep you updated on the developments on air and online plus if you go to our t.v. dot com you can see the latest footage from what's happening on the ground in syria if you can head to our emotions section of. a wide reaching british investigation or why the country invaded iraq alongside where the u.s. is being stopped in its tracks thanks to washington it's emerged that the white has brought the inquiry to a halt as it could expose secret communications between then prime minister tony blair and president george w. bush but it's terser a similar reports tonight that may be more at stake to. the report by the independent newspapers cites a senior diplomatic sources and essentially what they say is that washington is playing a key role in trying to block the publication of some classified information which

essentially contains the conversation and exchanges between then president george w. bush and the u.k. prime minister tony blair no this will be crucial information for that iraq inquiry that's going on here and i was far as justifications are concerned some of those diplomatic sources say that the us is highly possessive of any information that relates to the president or anyone around them and also that it is not london's call to make that decision on publishing information again which relates to the american president and also david cameron have told that some of the documents need to be handled sensitively and that has been interpreted by the cabinet office as ensuring that the relationship the special relationship between the u.s. and the u.k. is not affected and therefore it puts the government of david cameron in an awkward position of the having to perhaps block some of that evidence as per washington's decision and it will be a politically embarrassing move to have to do this critics are saying that it is important for the public to be able to know and see this information not least of

which because the goal of this for your inquiry is essentially to look back at how then the government british government had ended up making that decision of sending forty five thousand troops to iraq and to learn from those lessons and not make the same mistakes that was the goal and if you don't publish crucial information about the purpose and another thing is that this inquiry has already cost the taxpayers some eight million pounds so if this becomes a new target a watered down version without such crucial information some are saying it will be a total waste of taxpayers' money and toward this we germans resolute governments have no right to sweep history under the rug. there's likely to be no outcome anytime soon and that really seems to me a coverup both on the part of the people who support tony blair and of george bush it makes you wonder exactly what is in these conversations between bush and blair the must be quite

a lot to hide for them being to be so worried about about them being released people want to know what did tony blair and george bush agree how early did they agree the war what were the conditions of it because frankly if this was a grade as many people believe in the spring of two thousand it means all the effort to produce a dossier all the things all the pressure for a second resolution at the un this was a sure rod because tony blair already knew that he was going to go to war and nearly two hundred british soldiers died during the iraq war there have been hundreds of thousands of iraqis who've died there were millions of people demonstrated all of these people have the right to know and there is absolutely shameful that our government and the united states government are trying to prevent them from knowing. it's not just classified information is being kept hush hush in the u.k. later we'll tell you how the ruling conservative party is purged its website so that no one tied the promises they failed to make good on.

militiamen in the libyan capital of open fire protestors killing up to sixteen people according to government sources the situation spiraled out of control after demonstrators approached the armed groups based demanding that they get out of tripoli but the shootings further enraged the crowd which then set about burning down the unit's headquarters militias have controlled various parts of libya since gadhafi fell there refused to disband let's get more on this from defense consultant moeen rode his joyous mutates knowing the facts a question doesn't it where was the official security while these protesters were making their feelings known. well you see kevin similar to iraq they disbanded the military and the civil service so there is in effect no central military role to be played by anyone the militias there's a it's a free fall for all the militias in misrata benghazi tripoli and other areas so the there is no security aside it's iraq two point zero this particular militia group

is the one i believe be responsible for the clashes in tripoli last week are they a singular militia group or are there more of them surrounding the capitol indeed within the capital as well imbedded in their. here there are dozens of militia in the capital the main one being the abdulhakim battle libyan islamic fighting group which is a terrorist group and all of the others are terrorists in the. dozens of militias controlling and this this one in particular we're talking about is from misrata so the there are all sorts of militias coming from different towns and tried to take control of tripoli but that's obviously leads to clashes and murder of civilians in tripoli and what are they fighting for can you put it down to one particular figure if we all got different aims different aspirations these militias well they don't have any aims or aspirations at all these are all love vying for

power they're trying to take over tripoli because that's the capital obviously but none of them seem to be succeeding which which is setting the conditions for another nato intervention like iraq and like afghanistan which is exactly what. has been preconceived. you know the murder of the revolutionary guard who was essential to this plan so that they they're now planning to or trying to take over tripoli but because there are so many different factions in there they can't seem to succeed so they resort to murdering each other let me get this straight could someone not have seen this coming into taffy's final hours those very violent now as we heard how much better libya would be with him gone. we look at the picture now and there's a very different picture emerging isn't there. good question the nato member states

saw this coming they know exactly what was going to happen the arabs are not a united people and the only person who could have kept the nation united was the revolutionary moamar gaddafi so yes the western forces the nato nations member states saw this coming and they knew there would be chaos in the country and this is why that there is no solution other than probably the condition is set absolutely right for nato to intervene with boots on the ground in these day taffy managed to keep these warring factions these warring clans under control how did he do it with some success then. remember daffy shared the proceeds from all the natural resources oil in particular he gave everyone housing all married couples got five thousand dollars when they got married and an apartment or a house and everyone had an equal share the only people who are not really happy.

the benghazi people because these extremists these they want to impose sharia law or strict islamic cause of practice in libya remember most of them were terrorists or criminals most of these are benghazi people were operating gangs or shipping people from benghazi into europe so there were criminals a mixture of criminals and terrorists in all this terrible terrible situation moeen which is again and of course the key here as in so many other countries we see this this kind of fighting this kind of speech the keys oil isn't it and control over oil and gas. completely dead this four natural resources here all is key absolutely correct then there's gold there's also uranium in the salt and there's the water probably the largest reserve of underground freshwater in the world is in libya.

in the northern areas of libya so therefore key natural resources but yes you're absolutely correct the oil is the main reason all right knowing thanks for your time on roof of defense counsel from the line from birmingham u.k. thank you more world news after the break including how britain's governing conservative parties are raising its pre-election promises for the public's online i use. the idea that heads of government think they could talk freely. to the risk of being intercepted whether by agencies a bit of a state or even by private enterprise it's crazy. technology innovation all the developments around russia. the future

covered. please. r.t. dot com is launching a special project to mark the appalling scale of violence in iraq. we want you to know. corpus turn your mosque on everybody now if you'd spend years in the political wilderness how do you make sure that your backlog of promises don't come back to

haunt you well if you britain's conservative party just pretend they didn't happen apparently it's deleted a decade of speeches from his website that were made before scraping back into downing street in two thousand and ten bullyboy has got the details. but you never ever wish you could carry vulcan time and simply take back something you said or promise you made and. i certainly have and so dear husband you taste consists of the federal government's apparently after it was revealed that the personal glory when site had six days ago raised all of this speech is made before the conservative party was elected into power back in two thousand and ten its race especially is that in the run up to the next general election that someone simply trying to get this elite button on their part of any promises remember that time that david cameron pledged not to reorganize the n.h.s. well the speech is no longer on their website and it could be because after being elected the government to went on to preside over one of the largest free

organizations in n.h.s. history there was also that time that david cameron promise not to cut child benefit after which the coalition scrapped the welfare payment for higher earners and froze it for the rest of u.k. families and i wanted me another thing that's now much harder to locate on the net is a quote of david cameron saying that the internet is democratizing the world's information try searching that on the tory party website rather than just removing it from the conservative site they've tried to remove it from the internet archive when he became prime minister one of the first promises he made was this will be the most open government and it's pretty clear that's not the case the irony is that the speech is deletion is simply fueling public interest and then the fish a line from conservative h.q. is that they have revamping their website for a new digital era just starting a new chapter. polly boyd artsy london close capsules where there's some

critics chairman of the boat group a conservative think tank in brittany's in london tonight hi there good evening what i'm straight with cameron is a position of the democratizes. politics it makes information more freely available therefore it's a good thing and instead it was one of the speeches that disappeared as well. well i think it would be nice perhaps to find a conspiracy in what's happened with the conservative party website but the real reason behind it is that. the conservative party is keen for its latest policies to appear right at the top of the google search and that's why they've they've removed the previous speech and it's nice to get it in context as well as we are to see how our party may have changed its thinking surely. i'm sorry it's nice to get it in context though to see how a party may have changed its policy over the years to be able to look back what's what's wrong with that. i don't think there's anything wrong with that at all and i

think actually for the vast vast majority of this information it's been reported on and recorded on other websites and indeed the british library has all of the archived information from two thousand and four to two thousand and ten which would include those speeches relevant to any policy changes that cameron has made during this period in government but as i say that the reason the conservative party has done this is is just to make the google search appear with their most recent policies right at the top so people can access it. in the shortest possible time here but there's also been a change of websites code as well stopping search engines from archiving pages again to the high tech there's no problem as you say why put that in there. where the best because that page is also come up with a google search because of the time they've been up on the internet it's more likely that they will appear high rob on the on the search engines data so it will

be more likely for example that you'll get two thousand and five policy appearing before a two thousand and twelve or two thousand and thirteen policy and others say that that's you know that's the reason why they've done it but those costs historical speeches as you say have been all caught by the british library and of course are also subject to the political discourse that has gone on this country over the last ten years which is recorded throughout the media one reason given as well the removal is to free up space is that really such a problem in this modern day and age i mean you tube for instance is unlike its run in space at the time so for instance. no i don't think it's much to do with space as i say i think it's i mean the if you want to find a conspiracy here the only conspiracy is simply that the conservative party are keen to have their most recent policy is the most accessible i don't think it's anything to do with space but i don't think it's anything to do with trying to a racist. because that is something but it's made it more difficult to find out

because you come to the conservative parties you come to the conservative party site for the most incisive place to find the information rather than scouting around everywhere else and you put a date in if you want to know what the conservative policy was in twenty thirteen you put twenty thirty in there if you want to know two thousand and nine you put two thousand and nine is so short it could have been that big a problem could it and where does it leave david cameron. the whole stance of wanting more transparency it's kind of knocked it to the ground a bit isn't it. what i think unfortunately the reality of the way people use the internet is they don't tend to stay on websites very long and they don't tend to read things for very long and that's as i say why the conservative party have done this they want people that are on their website for longer than two or three minutes to be able to get the information they want to put out their. research is that we're going to go into the detail of comparing past speeches between you know two thousand and four and two thousand and fifteen i think that's that's

a different kind of user and that's not really the use of the conservative party is looking to appeal to the conservative party wants to appeal to voters of would voters they're not really there to provide a historical record out of interest have policies changed generally very much between say let's pick a date two thousand and five two thousand and thirty. yeah the conservative policy has changed vastly specially in the period we're talking about you which is between two thousand and two thousand and ten but would also go on to include up to two thousand and fifteen and of course time progresses and we've seen the conservative party shift radically to what many people would describe as no longer being a conservative party in the traditional definition of the word i think there are a lot of issues around that but but again as i say that's not why the conservative party has changed its website in this way ok well thank you for your explanations there are much appreciated ben-hur is clearly chairman of both group conservative think time and closer. ok who says crime doesn't pay the constant stream of

convicts in the united states certainly keeping private prison corporations in the money's was little wonder they're also campaigning for tougher christo deal penalties even for petty crimes report looks at the cash made by incarceration. corrections corporation of america is the hilton of the private prison industry a multibillion dollar business that's getting rich off punishment we are c.c.a. the more people locked up behind bars and the longer they stay there the more money c.c.a. makes last year the company banked a reported one point seven billion dollars they are fully aware of the reality which is that they need massive are serious and in order to stay in business they need excessive sentences for nonviolent crime so yes they push for legislation that will sure more and more people are in their stores with more than two point zero young people currently incarcerated the united states trumps china russia and the rest of the world in the number of prisoners doing time about half of those in u.s.

jails are in for nonviolent offenses since one nine hundred ninety america's private prison population has increased sixteen hundred percent the war on drugs mandatory sentencing and a broken immigration policy have forced more people into prison c.c.a. has roughly ninety thousand prison beds in twenty states jesse lava from the watchdog group beyond bars says many of the companies contracts guarantee occupancy lock up quotas basically say if you're a private person and you have a contract with say or a local government you have a guaranteed number of people in your car go down with it doesn't matter taxpayers are still on the hook when the government is still on the hook for filling up your prisons. in the land of the free it is hard to expect the prison population to decrease as long as corporations continue profiting by keeping people

locked up reporting from new york marina puerto nile are to. well we spoke to a man who spent a decade behind bars in both private and public jails and now as a human rights advocate alex friedman told us the private prisons are all about cutting costs. notes rehabilitating criminals back into society serve six years at a privately operated prison as part of the ten years total that i spent incarcerated and my experience is privately operated prison pretty much is what led me on to a career if you will fighting against a private prison industry it is a very drastic experience and people come out of prison generally worse than they went in to get the isolation due to the lack of resources and rehabilitative programs and what that means of course is that when they get out they are more likely to the times to recidivate come back and that benefits no one except for companies like c.c.a. because if you profit from incarceration then the more people you have locked up

the more money you can. buy the influence the private prison firms wield over the government lobbying for legislation to provide them with even more complex. the people really benefiting from prison privatization are not the public it's not the prisoners it's not the states that contract with these companies that's the seriously rather corporate executives and the shareholders who own stock when you incarcerate for the purpose of generating corporate profit you have a built in incentive to incarcerate as many people as you cared for as long as possible because that's how the the market system works the companies have faced considerable criticism for lobbying governments and corporations and potential officials and other government officials for basically more contracts and to put more people in prison. brief tonight a mass rally in egypt the supporters of the ousted president morsi descended to the clashes which have left one dead security forces used tear gas to disperse the

crowds and xandra dozens of people were arrested the muslim brotherhood called for major demonstrations on friday to denounce the on go to trial against morsi. al-qaeda linked rebels in syria have beheaded one of his supporters by mistake he was a sunni islamist but was captured and killed by insurgents who mistook him for his sad support the rebels then published a video apologizing for the execution of her admitting that they'd killed the wrong man the group known as the islamic state in iraq in the event has become more of a main jihadist groups fighting government forces in so. as the philippines battles to recover one of the strongest of storms to hit land there are conflicting numbers of casualties tonight the authorities is saying that three thousand six hundred people could have been killed but the u.n. is putting up the figure before adding up to the devastation to by typhoon haiyan two hundred thousand liters of all of spilled into the ocean after strong waves grounded a barge the small glimmer of good news there though the leak has been contained in a cleanup is under way. thank you for your company tonight about with more news

just over thirty two minutes between now and then after the break sophie shevardnadze had next to talk to a veteran veteran british diplomat and politician about just how much pressure the u.k. stubborn. that's putting on the media right now. you know i love these rare moments where action of something totally sounds positive to share with you the f.d.a. is working to ban partially hydrogenated oils which are the leading source of trance fats and foods and possibly the cause of up to twenty thousand heart attacks per year across the usa according to f.d.a. commissioner margaret hamburg as you know i would like the chemicals in my food kept to a minimum but the thing is the people at the f.d.a. are surely aware of all the hormones in beef and jim o's being produced why does the span have such a very narrow narrow focus in fact when you look at all the things that americans

consume smoke use that to swear health some get the violent band hammer while others are completely tolerated if you ever talk to hardcore marijuana smoker they'll tell you to do that we does better for you than beer and that's the eagle man and they kind of have a point i think there is this is one of those rare instances where a balance position isn't really a good idea well the country could go the libertarian route and let it be everything be legal let people make their own choices or do what i think would be much much better actually really ban all the things that are destructive to our health both of these paths have positive and negative effects but they are a lot better than our current plan of ban some harmful things for some reason and allow other harmful things because while they lobby better but that's just my opinion.