we're not going to have another apollo program whether for the moon or mars i mean apollo was a very special time we had a cold war going on between the u.s. and the soviet union space had been identified as one of the areas in which you could demonstrate the superiority of your culture and you know the the russians were launching things first and then the americans and finally we got to the moon first but at a tremendous cost i mean at the height of the apollo program over four hundred thousand people were working on apollo it was for about two years nasa was getting almost four percent of the u.s. government's budget that's not going to happen again so nasa if they're going to be successful in space exploration has to learn to do it not apollo style but affordably and i think therefore there's a lot to be learned from the public sector and by working with the public sector

and using these developments particularly the rockets in the spacecraft developed at a much lower cost than nasa has previously been paying for launches that might make it possible on a much more limited budget that we then we had during apollo to get started with real space exploration again that's what i hope will happen dr hofman we have to take a short break but to be will be back in just a few seconds states went. to the c.d.c. and good bye. and it is a nuisance is a c.p.a. getting. secret indeed priests accused of sexually abusing children can get away with it literally i like to call this the geographic solution so what the bishop needs to do then he. finds out that the priest says is

a perpetrator is simply moves him to a different spot where the previous standard was not. highest ranks of the catholic church conceal the accused priests from the police and justice system to that and that's known as the i intend to include at tuesday's out in. the street.

welcome back to worlds apart jeffrey hofmann an american astronaut and now a professor in mit's department of aeronautics and astronautics now dr hoffman just before the break you mentioned that space x. already has the capability of transporting cargo and perhaps humans to mars i wonder if figuring out the transfer of capability is enough to command these very icy and dangerous voyage to the raft planet or absolutely no i mean there's a whole slew of things i mean. radiation how we're going to deal. with the radiation exposure. just something simple like keeping food

viable for three years i mean there's there's all sorts of things that nasa is looking at that problems that need to be solved to say nothing of the. you know the psychology how are we going to keep people healthy physically. i really think it's important that we first go back to the moon it's been almost fifty years since we've had human beings on the surface of another planetary body and mars is very hard which isn't to say that the moon is easy but it's a lot closer it's easier to get to you can come back relatively quickly if something goes wrong. and many of the things not all but many of the things that we have to accomplish on mars we could test out on the moon i think the moon would be an excellent test bed and with the exception of the united states up until the

recent change in policy every other space faring nation in the world russia included is wants to go to the moon. and i. hope that we could actually put together an international lunar exploration initiative much like we have the international space station consortium and together the countries of the world cooperating with the private sector. could afford to get back into real space exploration and i think that would that would create a real a lot of excitement it's interesting you say that because i'm sure you know that back in two thousand and seven hundred knots and the russian space agency ross cost him a signed an agreement to look into building the first lunar space station and that's at the height of well very poor relationship that we currently have at the in our two countries why do you think the space exploration was somehow on the fact

that by all of these political matters that divides our countries i think it's actually a cause for at least some optimism not not just talking about what we would like to do someday in the future with the moon but the current activities on the international space station where the two biggest players are the united states and russia. as you say we have our problems on the ground but i think it's very. you know it's a cause for optimism that still in space we were each keeping up our parts of the bargain and we seem to be getting along quite well if there is some hope that maybe get off the surface of the earth and we're not arguing about little pieces of ground in the middle east or wherever in the world. that we can actually behave more like members of the whole human race and work together you complain about the

shortage of budgets that go into space programs and i think that's even more the case for russia done for the united states but i wonder if those financial constraints actually provide for these call parading experience because the russians need money and the americans need the the russian equipment or technology for the time being do you think that's a good range meant that does it provide any synergy apart from. each of the sides getting what they want. it provides a certain level of safety again looking at the space station we have to oxygen generating systems we have to water production systems and they're different. and if one somehow has a design for fault and breaks down. you have a certain level of safety by having different types of engineered systems than this

would be particularly the farther away from earth you go the more important the reliability becomes on the space station if we have a failure of a piece of equipment we can send up into something else to replace it or if the worst comes to worst it's pretty easy to come back to earth in a hurry you go to the moon and you're much farther away from help and if you're going to mars forget it there's no no way if something breaks they they can't send you a spare parts so to have to differently type engineered systems. really provides a lot of extra safety she now a few minutes ago you're sounded very excited about this infusion of private money into space exploration and i think many x. parents believe that somehow private money can come to almost stops national budgets as far as the space program is concerned our space programs are concerned

do you believe that's realistic to expect that you can continue exploring space. by the use of private money rather than relying on state budgets nasa has budget is is a little over nine to around nineteen billion dollars a year that's a lot more than even you know jeff bezos puts about he said he puts about one billion dollars a year into his blue origin company he sells a billion dollars worth of amazon. stock and he's got plenty of amazon stock to sell the real question is what's going to motivate them. the you know you're not going to make a profit by exploring mars and the government does it not to make a profit but because traditionally the governments have sponsored scientific missions but if you look at the history of exploration. you know earlier on in

previous centuries there was a lot of private sponsorship of exploration again what i hope will happen is that we'll have a mixture of public private investment in this. how much the private sector wants to put into it depends on what they will do you know do they need to make a profit from it i mean jeff bezos has said you know he he runs the amazon business because that provides enough money for his space company he's motivated by his work in space is not really to make a profit but when you look at what's happened over the last few years it has truly been revolutionary we have seen a tremendous amount of innovation just the idea of being able to reuse parts of the rockets nasa tried to do that with the shuttle economically it was not a complete success but. you know nasa was never on its

own probably was never going to develop the ability to reuse parts of the rocket or even to substantially bring down the cost up until space x. came into the game and nasa is launches were all with the united space alliance which was a monopoly created by boeing and lockheed. and they had no real motivation to reduce the cost of flights because they were getting their contract basically they had no competition and they were getting a cost plus contracts so. the more the launch costs the more profit they've got now we have real competition and rocket companies all over the world not just not just boeing and lockheed but ari on space for us cause most of the japanese the indians the chinese everybody is concerned can we compete with space x. so it's really been revolutionary and it's led to

a tremendous amount of innovation which i do not think we would have had if it had just been the government involved now i heard you seen one of the interviews that private companies such as basics of blue origin are willing and able to take more risks than nasa or any other government agency do you think government should play any role in determining the pair of amateur yourself though the risk just as a matter of public safety because i think you would agree that launching a vehicle into space represents that and based moon or no they do in order for space exploration any any or boeing or lockheed i mean any any private company needs to get government approval before they launch and of course the government approval is mainly to make sure that they don't hurt anybody on the ground we don't want rockets falling on the land near big cities or anything and they need to get

the right now it's the federal aviation administration that has authority to approve commercial launches when it comes to launching people the first people who are going to get launched in the space x. and boeing is also making its its own private capsule space capsule there or they're going to be launching nasa astronauts and there of course nasa will determine the safety. conditions that have to be met and i think for as far as the fine the general public if nasa decides that these vehicles are safe enough to fly now. sastre noughts than probably the federal aviation administration which frankly doesn't have a lot of expertise in human spaceflight will say well if it's if it's good enough for nasa then it's good enough for us and and then they'll give approval to fly other members of the public you know we talk maybe about the birth of

a space tourism industry still early days we don't know if it's all going to happen if it's going to be successful but this is the long vision middle lot of these companies have you know. bigelow will put a space hotel up there and space x. will launch paying tourists to go up and it won't be inexpensive especially at first but there's plenty of people who would love to go into space and they may have a chance in the next generation they want to go into space even if that represents a certain risk to their lives i want to ask you specifically about calculating those human risks because i heard from a number of facts press. especially after day they have the loss of the shuttle columbia. has become more risk averse than before but on the other hand i've also heard many american astronauts and russian cosmonauts say that they i'm just found out space exploration is an inherently dangerous time to taking and they are ready

to take certain calculated risks for the sake of common good do you think the agency especially in the united states is balanced enough bit to been you know protecting people and providing a certain a space for. exploration to reach is always a mission of always contain a certain degree of frisk where we would we would like the next generation of human space vehicles to be safer than the shuttle than the one one big thing there is that they will have a launch escape system which the shuttle did not have so had there been a launch escape system. the challenger astronauts would have survived even though their shuttle was destroyed when the shuttle was designed it was designed with so much redundancy that people managed to convince themselves that it would be safe no matter what happened and therefore since you could always get the shuttle back the crew would be safe as well well that turned out not to be the case and i don't

think we'll ever make that mistake again. when it comes to the question of will tourists be able to take those risks well you know tourists pay seventy five thousand dollars to get a guided climb up mount everest and people have died you know tourists have died on on mount everest. so i think it's clear at least a certain subset of wealthy. people who are looking for new experiences are willing to take a certain level of risk and there will continue to be a certain level of risk in spaceflight. it's not yet as safe as flying in an airplane but you know in the early days of aviation there were a lot more crashes it was a lot less safe than it is now i suspect the time will come i don't know how long it will be in the future when we don't think it's any more dangerous to get in iraq

at than to get in an airplane but that time is not now and i don't know when that's going to happen so there were there will be a risk in spaceflight but i think there are people who are willing to take those risks while at your certainly one of them dr hoffman we have to leave it there but i really really appreciate your being with us today and sharing your thoughts and your expertise your experience and job viewers please keep the conversation going in our social media pages as for me hope to see you again same place same time here on both a part of. but

you go shoot when you get you learn to use scissors none of us are not allowed to play and one million people die and die. killed people may be even dangerous. now no one's come too late to change everybody's wrangling and that's to.

apply for many clubs over the years so i know the game inside guides. football isn't only about what happens on the pitch put a funnel school it's about the passion from the fans it's the age of the super money just kill the narrowness and spending two to twenty million album fly a. book it's an experience like nothing else going to be true so i want to share what i think of what i know about the beautiful guy my great so well paul chimes with. and thinks it's going to. this baby and. this. vote with your remote. special coverage of the russian presidential election. monitoring much more.

months of trading insults. to be the first ever meeting between leaders of north korea. at the same time. raising the specter of a global trade war with. retaliation. and . once again shell civilians trying to escape the.

clock on a friday morning here in moscow international welcome to the program. u.s. president donald trump has caught many off guard by agreeing to meet face to face with the north korean leader kim jong un only recently the two. who had the biggest . now the surprise announcement was made by south korea's national security adviser . north korea. is committed. to do provide solutions that he expressed he said you're going to meet the president that's known as possible we heard the announcement and now we have confirmation from the white house that yes a meeting will take place between kim jong un and u.s. president donald trump now this would be the first meeting between the head of state of the united states and the government of north korea their head of state this is quite a surprise to many people we've heard secretary of state rex tillerson who recently

said that the usa was a long way away from any negotiations with north korea i don't know yet until we are able to be ourselves face to face with. representatives of the world. whether the conditions are right to even begin thinking about negotiations to terms of direct talks with the united states and the u.s. negotiate sions or we're always from negotiations and furthermore we've seen that the united states recently impose new sanctions on the country now there's also been quite a heated exchange and war of words between the two leaders in recent months the. year of strategic patience. with the north korean regime has failed. or. not make any one reference to the united states. they will be

met with fire and fury. the u.s. neglects the international community's will to stop this b.s. on the korean peninsula. and we can have mad men out there shooting rockets all over the place have no choice but to totally destroy north korea. russia. is on a suicide mission for him so no one from he's on a suicide mission. he's a sick puppy. donald trump has said that the sanctions recently placed on north korea will remain in place until any agreement is reached and pointed out that in the lead up to the

meeting north korea has agreed to freeze any ballistic missile testing any nuclear testing or proliferation so at this point other seems to be a free is in north korea in anticipation of a meeting now we understood that this meeting will take place before may and the location and time are yet to be announced. president trump also signed a controversial order imposing have have tariffs on steel and i mean you me imports to america are the moves faced fierce backlash both from abroad and within the u.s. but trump insists it is needed to protect the country's national security. today i'm defending america's national security by placing tariffs on foreign imports of steel and aluminum the american steel loman in the district he has been ravaged by aggressive foreign trade practices. it's really an assault on our country despite

domestic and international backlash trump has signed a proclamation imposing twenty five percent tariffs on steel imports and ten percent tariffs on minium imports encouraging companies to buy american well the president argues that protecting these industries will guarantee economic and national security however truck has offered to relieve to some u.s. allies of the tariffs will not apply to imports from canada and mexico at least temporarily until nafta is renegotiated even though trump has received some domestic applause from unions in particular that wasn't the case internationally when he first announced these new tariffs on twitter the world was furious. you should try it you want to change your choosing a trade war is surely the wrong prescription china will certainly make appropriate and necessary response we will defend our interests if need come.

i'm convinced that increased terrorists will hurt us all in the long room trade rules are bad and easy to lose. well trump has stated in the past that he sees nothing wrong with trade wars and now other allies are threatening tariffs on u.s. imports of peanuts juice alcohol etc but trump's move has been met with domestic backlash as well from both democrats and republicans who believe that protectionism harms national security now more than a hundred house republican members signed a letter on wednesday expressing deep concern about the plan suggested to change the course of action to avoid untended negative consequences to the u.s. economy and its workers but considering that to canada and mexico have. been exempt one can't help but wonder if these new tariffs are intended to hit china trump has

listed china as a threat to national security and he's repeatedly expressed a need to counter china so we can't be too sure now it'll be interesting to see how china the e.u. and other u.s. allies react to this when unveiling the tire of the white house so trump was apparently so excited that he did forget one important detail would you like to take a picture in the oval office i assume you've all been many times into the oval office come on let's go and do that let's go into the site yes i'm going to give will go into the oval office we're going to sign this will go into the oval office we have a picture ok ok thank you treasury secretary steven when he was reminding the president that he actually needed needed to sign bad order before doing a happy snap. the plan has received broad support from steele and i live in uniforms in the u.s. but a columnist jeffrey tucker says it could actually force key u.s. allies to seek new trade partners. so it seems as if every european

nation is is washing their hands of the u.s. we're no longer trust through trade partners in light of this and so europe is seeking other allies china canada australia or anywhere in the world the us and this has been growing for some months is that i say this is becoming isolated and in the global economy and let's not make any mistake about this in the twenty first century there's no such thing as nations when it comes to economic affairs anymore and we all must cooperate together and the u.s. is excluding itself and giving up its credibility trump and spirit here it is contrary to the national interest and the good of the global economy. shelled a refugee convoy trying to leave the rebel and terrorists controlled syrian and clove of eastern guta the russian defense ministry has confirmed that several

civilians were killed in the assault artie's. takes a look at different factors now hampering the russian sponsored evacuation process . according to the russian military the three hundred families had allegedly gathered together to leave eastern ghouta crossing the frontlines is always dangerous so it's best done when there's a safe window with the agreement of both deliverance the syrian government was waiting for them the rebels he knew what was going on and shelled them they reportedly shelled the procession of civilians i mean a kilometer before they were out of east ghouta and then to top it all off they shelled their relatives and journalists. waiting on the syrian side at the end of the corridor nothing's changed they aren't allowing civilians to leave just like the islam islam is brother and did in aleppo.

and then. that started to you know. then of us to hear it we didn't have a. lot of like. what they said about you but any use. seems our student kind of thing. yet here in washington tell it they don't mention that they think it's joke like russia has called for these jokes like humanitarian corridor wars russia needs to just do what the united nations had agreed to and voted on and that is a countrywide ceasefire fleeing civilians would mean less human shields it would be a p.r. blue people don't want to stay with the rebels they'll talk say all sorts of horrible things about life and the jihad ists they'll challenge the narrative why let them leave too many problems think.