so. so so. i'm never. going to pull. the phone from tom. so. this hour's top headlines on r t international un security team arrives in the syrian town of ahead of the official probe into an alleged chemical attack meanwhile eyewitnesses and medical stuff on the ground at odds he spoke to claim

but they saw no sign of toxic agents being new. members of the european parliament to voice their anger at the french president over the action taken against the masochists of the u.k. government faces a backlash from and its role in the strike. members of this house seem top let's say in foreign policy of this country the president. and we talked to the producers of a documentary called in the execution of shadow play in the u.s. the death penalty was a racial undertone. a one minute past nine on a wednesday morning here in moscow this is the international we do start this hour with breaking news from so. russia we understand

a seventeen year old school student has attacked his class and tried to set her on fire in the town of studly according to investigators he stabbed one of his classmates and teachers before dousing the room inflammable liquid and setting it alight the fire alarm then went off the building was evacuated the attacker also stabbed himself in an apparent suicide attack and now we understand all those injured have now been taken to hospital including the perpetrator. the united nations security team has visited the syrian town of duma with the aim of preparing the ground for the long awaited o.p.c. w. chemical weapons probe planned for wednesday. the un security team decides that the situation is safe we can do more then the fact finding mission will be. the experts will be investigating the alleged chemical attack in the area on april the

seventh however the us britain and france chose not to wait for the official probe before launching air raids against syria in the early hours of saturday and u.s. state department spokes person heather now it said washington's decision not to wait was justified. the o.p.c. view is something that we've back strongly but it can also take quite a bit of time for the o.p.c. of you to gather its information and compile the report so i would ask you should the united states and her allies wait around for bashar al assad to use more chemical substances honest people should we wait around for that formal investigation that could take months and months this is you know actually scandalous that the u.s. has launched a strike based on insurgent tide social media sources that it funds people saying stuff on the internet and who are those people there the syrian white helmets which has been funded to the tune of at least twenty three million dollars

by the state department so basically the state department's intelligence and the trump administration's intelligence is coming from sources that it funds sources who happen to function as to civil society arm of jaish al islam the sellafield jihadi insurgent group that was operating in dumanis. meanwhile sister channel r.t. arabic visited the hospital in dubai where white helmets activists filmed what they said was the off the mouth of a chemical attack doctors on locals describe what happened on the seventh of april claiming they saw no toxic agents being used by. those going on seven eleven had to be it was regulated and the most patients were coming in the stands in

a good light suddenly some people brought up shots in the patients that came in the boys and they started going to target patients from everything. they do from the white helmets told us about the use of chemical weapons we saw no sign of that you know if chemical. the way used against these people medical stuff would also be to thank something. really good thing that we had been attacked with chemical weapons from outside silencing about the chemical attack. and somebody said it was a chemical weapon and we run to where the noise came and started pouring water over the people but the seemed to be ok then to wait without any help but that confused somebody stops flowing water. sending the chemical

attack i was of the spotswood for my work. this experience as you said chemical poisoning. british prime minister terrorism and french president emmanuel macron have come under heavy criticism from u.k. and e.u. lawmakers softer their decision to strike syria without consulting their national parliaments for example the members of the european parliament during president speech there are many of them held up signs calling for an end to the military action in syria. reports about the backlash the leaders are receiving. what phrase or touch of only three countries have been to v for the honor of the international community in the legitimates multilateral framework you know it's all gets amana. least the marker and speech was a monument of political cynicism. when we want without any approval. of the polls months why have we hidden the fact that the area of eastern ghouta

where the alleged chemical attack took place is controlled by radical islamists not jewish shop or you'd be there it's been done already in iraq and libya why should we be aired in syria to the list but there has been a backlash for him for emanuel. the fact that he didn't after all is permission i don't you know people have not necessary decisions going forward but he was actually grilled in parliament on monday these strikes demonstrate the irresponsible behavior of the three global powers that yet again gave in to the temptation to play the role of world's policeman now over in the u.k. to raise them in may the u.k.'s prime minister has also faced a greater parliamentary is led by the opposition leader carol corbin point there was a bit of table tennis it went on for over eight hours on day one and pretty similar day to the parliament should have as an absolute minimum in trying to in law the opportunity to ask questions before full the government can order planned military

action the elected representatives in this house should be able to debate the deployment of british military forces into combat but that does not mean it is always appropriate the executive must be the servant of parliament not the other way round members of this house seem to have less say in foreign policy of this country than president trump that no one in this house be in any doubt that neither i nor this government take instructions from any press was. despite it resembles fiery remarks and how to fans we go to reaction on the streets of london where people seem to think parliament should have been consulted. it was an emergency situation where there was no room for maneuver. that this is not an urgent it could have waited two days more at least i don't think it's something she should have made

a decision based on her general principle going to war. i think in this particular instance it wasn't a war situation. discuss it and now you're coming you know pick any where are you achieving more consideration. when it's important decisions like this everyone should have a say like how do you think represent everybody. should be discussing doing it. to me this is not a constitutional. democracy. and so everyone. thinks is the scariest to be honest. meanwhile. spoken out against his city allowing a u.s. nuclear powered submarine to dock it was later used to fire missiles on syria. several days ago we received a note from the port authority informing us of the presence of the american nuclear

power something which we passed a resolution in twenty fifteen in which we designated the port of naples as a denuclearized area so vessels with nuclear power to carry nuclear weapons have no right to be here we receive peace we are against nuclear weapons we want to mediterranean sea in a state of peace not war. all the information war over syria is raging with a dissenting voices faint facing our staunch attacks from the u.k.'s mainstream media . has details on this there have been some in the u.k. who have said that the discussion around the u.k.'s policy to syria have resembled something of a mccarthyite witch hunt in the mainstream media and the most prominent example has been an article written in the times newspaper which has targeted a number of leading academics in the u.k. and accuse them of being apologists and one of the people pointed out or singled

out in the times article is louis all day the times said that he had written a tweet calling into question the account of previous chemical attacks mr all day has since gone on twitter and shown that he never sent that tweet and has demanded an apology from the times another example is tim hayward he's another academic here in the u.k. and he's been seen as being guilty of association because he's written for. publication called twenty first century wire whose deputy editor has also come in for criticism by the times her name is vanessa beanies so all of these kind of examples showing that to stray from the dominant narrative all of the war in syria will lead you to being accused of. being an ass that apology politics that's been the criticism of some here in the u.k.

and it's not just the print media we've seen an interview on the b.b.c. with lord west now he's an individual who is part of the military establishment not somebody who could perhaps easily be dismissed and i thought apologist and he went on the b.b.c. if he has used chemical weapons it's absolutely right to rafa crosses knuckles but i just wonder you know we've had some bad experiences on intelligence given that we're in an information war. with russia on so many fronts do you think perhaps it's inadvisable to be stating this so publicly given your your position and your profile isn't there a danger that you're muddying the waters and there are those who say that this current environment isn't conducive to free speech and to free investigation and inquiry over the events of not just the weekend but the past seven years of the u.k.'s policy towards syria and its support of the opposition groups there and that

is leading many to question whether the u.k. will continue to make the same mistakes in the future. following the weekend bombing raids in syria a bipartisan group of u.s. senators has unveiled new legislation aiming to limit the white house's power to continue its global war on terror. for too long congress has given presidents a blank check to wage war we've let the nine eleven and iraq war authorizations get stretched to justify was against multiple terrorist groups and over a dozen countries from nigeria to the philippines a proposal finally repeals those authorizations inmates congress do its job by weighing in on where when and with who we are. the proposed legislation that would require the president to give congress forty eight hours notice ahead of any new military action congress would then have sixty days to review that move if it doesn't it doesn't set a limit though for any military action however it includes

a congressional review every four years of the proposal also expands the president's authority to take action against al qaeda isis or the taliban but not a state of the current war powers as we know place since nine eleven have been used nearly forty times in fourteen countries to discuss the proposal of a hole with a former u.s. congressman and presidential candidate ron paul. absolutely and i have to say that i voted the i voted for that resolution it gives the authority to the president to go after the people responsible for nine eleven so they've used that ever since they claim they have to rewrite it we don't believe there's anybody even living today hardly had a thing to do with the nine eleven attacks. it more or less is defining things slightly differently but one slow up i think the effort to go to war i don't think it really repeals their war powers resolution but it does say

that congress gives the president authority to go to war against radical violent groups like al qaida and ices and maybe taliban but they say not i country. i really don't think it's going to pass. we'll see i only welcome the debate but i think they'll wake up and find out it's not doing anything and that when they pass these resolutions most of the time things hit worse so this whole idea that you can fight radicals any place in the world that's what they're doing already it's just more authority to the type of policy that we've been following and getting us into trouble with. the u.k. and us a first of its kind joint warning to those living in the west claiming state sponsored russian hackers might have seized control of computers and governments offices and even. the warning comes as the house of representatives issued its own alert about

the lack of background checks on people working saying many had unfettered access to the bodies network and those were the words of the chief administrative officer himself who went on to talk about the potential impact of such problems on the way the house and manages cyber security these gaps in a broad perspective relate to supervision and oversight of shared employees or lack there of improper vetting of the employees and perhaps most problematic the inability to enforce compliance with house information security policies for example the on authorize assets to office data or co-mingling of data the use of unsecured software a cloud service e-mail account any equipment. despite security concerns the proposal to abolish so cold shot employees was refused a t.v. host and political commentator steve malzberg believes this shows the alleged russian is not an issue of real concern the fact that this isn't

a huge news story here in the united states is is a is mind boggling the media is obsessed with donald trump with russia with stormy daniels the porn star with sean hannity and here we have a real security threat to the congress of the united states and yes they're being hypocritical and they're being derelict of their duties to make sure that what they do what they discuss what they undertake is protected why don't the background check for all of the people in i working in the congress that is a that is this and we're just opening ourselves up and asking for trouble and then when trouble happens they're going to find somebody to blame and they're not going to blame themselves and it's going to be their fault the program continues in just a moment.

what politicians do so. they put themselves on the line and they get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president when she. want to be pressed. to go right to the press it's like before three in the morning people. i'm interested always in the mornings in the. question. when else seems wrong. just don't call. me. yet to see how it does they come to. an engagement because betrayal. when somebody find themselves worlds apart we choose to look for common ground.

twenty past the hour here in moscow good to have you with us a new documentary cold in the execution as shadow pulls back the curtain on the subject of capital punishment through three different stories claiming race is at the heart of decision making when it comes to the death penalty in america. my team members take pride. in this person. was a little. city we didn't. get i didn't. even do anything. you don't know

because you were not choose. recent figures reveal black people make up around forty two percent of those on death row but comprise only around thirteen percent of the entire u.s. population in addition they are far more likely to be given death sentences in cases of interracial murders and we spoke to those behind this film. the racial application of the death penalty is there out. like that not to look so much at skin color of the perpetrator or to skin color of the victim if the if the murder victim is white. then the prosecuting attorney is four to eleven times more likely to seek a death penalty and if the victim were black and so what message is the justice

system send to society. one way that it can be interpreted is that white life is worth more than black white we're going to punish people who kill a white person. more severely and we are. forever nine executions there is one exoneration so for every nine inmates executed one person is found innocent i think that's the most startling in the in the context of the innocence and how egregious this could be and as our executioner. the jury givens are the former executioner of the state of virginia states one of the things that i think it's really. something that he expresses so well in the film and is this idea that it's it's an imperfect system works human we make errors and there are errors being made in the criminal justice system and as long as that

straight we should not be executing people. a self-styled john list in the u.k. is claiming police aren't doing enough over the death threats she's received online journal find that english is known to have posted hateful comments for example islam is worse than cancer and she's complained about the lack of police action over the threats she's received after posting such comments. the first time that these threats nothing happened and the second time i was these the threats i was novel successful the first as a second time was actually worse because i still don't see prince and his straight up refused to do anything because she said and she used this phrase inciting racial hatred and she said she threatened me in the very first message. and it's what you want to see because you're quitting and that's also why this is an e-mail allegedly received by juno from. me from

a the greater manchester police in issues want of consequences resulting from comments she's made online john i was also told to consider the freedom of expression over others and without any details of those said to be harassing her they would be no investigation in the end she was advised not to post anything likely to cause offense but we asked her a greater manchester police for comment to did say that an investigation is under review and hopes to contact john iowa shortly so we invited guests to debate the issues around this case well actually i know deniers personally and i see our ass questioned sometimes err on comfortable questions sometimes their questions people don't particularly want to answer and i don't i'm an atheist i criticize christianity critize judaism i criticize islam criticize any faith but it's only when islam is criticize that suddenly it's hate speech we have rules about freedom of expression freedom of belief and freedom of conscience however there are limits

to those rules and it's very dangerous to draw some kind of moral equivalence between people who are fascists or near nazis are spreading and inciting violence or hate preaching when people behave like that they should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law so everybody has to suffer the consequences of freedom of speech means yes sometimes somebody might say something that could a fair. she has a right to an opinion no but they and i mean nobody has the right to put a death threat on anybody for any reason because on a fainted because they were offended by an opinion do you agree if somebody's speech tell you better with me if you agree that do you agree that if somebody speech crosses the line into hatred inciting hatred or heris men or is racist or sexist or anti semitic do you agree that these people should be do you agree that these people should be prosecuted to the absolute maximum extent of the law on is

against british an english values i believe in free speech including yours even though i don't agree with your opinion tony some of what you want to. play when someone is a trait of your ex they don't want to speak to you i think you crossed the line yes i do do i think you should be prosecuted because of your opinion now why doesn't this thread it's on never acceptable never excuse you are now far worse than any mean word it's because words don't kill actions day and death phrase can be carried out. donald trump claims he has spoken directly to his north korean counterpart a person he repeatedly nicknamed rocket man in the past the surprising announcement came during a meeting with the japanese prime minister shinzo. with north korea directly very.

low during a press briefing a trump appeared to backtrack on that saying ultimately discussions with north korea were on almost the highest level the white house press secretary also clarified that the administration had had direct talks with kim jong un not the us president himself some reports also suggest the secretary of state nominee mike pompei are paid a secret visit to north korea over easter a human rights attorney eric to rock and believes it doesn't really matter who's been talking to young. as long as the intentions are good. you know at this point in time there is a lot of optimism and the optimism that they will talk the optimism that truck may see this as a legacy issue for him while undergoing incredible screwed scrutiny and tough times here in the states and so with that in mind we don't know quite what can come out with this what we do know is there have been talks at a highest level whether you believe the washington post story and the cia director

visiting north korea but we do know that they're laying the groundwork groundwork for talks but we don't know is how sincere they are in bed being in. neutral compromises in the context of national agreements and that has yet to be seen your program or tons of the talk of the. los angeles the city of luxury and fame but also an alarming number of people living in the streets. of simple fact in l.a. he's there's just not enough shelter even if people on the streets right now

decided to come in there's nowhere to come in and it's been a struggle. to get this man found his own response to the problem and constructed dozens of tiny homes for people in need of shelter when you have nothing in order to go. you know having something like this may as well be a castle but do the authorities accept such solution tiny house on a parking space is not. a solution. to have someone monitoring the site otherwise it'll be a free for all they're a better alternative to end the homelessness crisis. join me every thursday on the alex simon show and i'll be speaking to guest in the world of politics sports business i'm show business i'll see you then.

greetings and salutation. what is this talk watchers i leave for a few days and suddenly we are back to bombing poor people in syria again not the business much of a shock to anyone who's been paying attention last friday united states president donald trump along with u.k. prime minister theresa may and the president of france emmanuel mccrone unilaterally attacked the sovereign country of syria despite not being threatened molested or attacked by the war torn country in any way. the attack consisted of more than one hundred missiles at alleged chemical weapons storage and researches facilities near the syrian cities of damascus and elms and while some war hawks like republican senator tom blood stained cotton praised president trump's actions declaring the butcher of damascus learned two lessons tonight the hard way weapons

of mass destruction won't create a military advantage once the united states is done with you and russia cannot protect its clients from the united states are you wrestling over him others were not so pleased like senator lindsey graham who feels that short term death and destruction just doesn't send the right kind of message i fear that when the dust settles this strike will be seen as a weak military response and assad will have paid a small price for using chemical weapons yet again and senator graham is not alone many of the neo liberal cons in their news media parents were very disappointed that president trump didn't use the recent incredibly convenient alleged chemical weapon attack and doma to as they call it broaden the united states' syrian strategy which is the polite capitol hill way of saying hey let's go spend spend the summer dropping bombs on poor brown people so we can appease.