showed a date at the end of the day it's one of the most sacred aspects as well. that we have you know in our constitution and that's why it's important that we tackle each one of these issues you can't just leave blake and you can make blake and know where you are the food is really easy it's just as excuse as an excuse to do certain things as we've talked about a lot it's supporting the right of free speech means supporting speech you don't like you're just lucky if you do like that also doesn't preclude you from the consequences that are true and one of the things that the organizer from last year had told the washington post that it was about white that this whole thing was about white people are being denied the ability to organize and political organizations the way other groups too free of harassment to face the issues important to us first of all where of they've been stopped they have their they had a second larger having another one they're getting everything they people want to give them special trains what protest is free of harassment what protest is free of people who disagree with you well it's the whole of the you know you have one side

agrees the other side disagrees and that's called discourse in this country and that's where i go to the ideas of you know it's just ridiculous i don't understand this at all it's just strange to me and science actually says i think what so what you really have to put into perspective about this tonight the right you know we're talking about the teeth you towards and the people like i was just there to once they got caught being there they were widespread as i was to accept jews will not overtake. the thing about that is that it doesn't actually help their cause a lot of the science into protests and show those kinds of protests don't have to have a thing about it there was a study out last year at stanford and the university of toronto and they were looking at extreme protest matters rob weller a stanford sociologist and co-author of the study stated that the reason that extreme protesters were dissuaded is that less radical bystanders couldn't identify with that people generally don't see themselves as disruptors of the social. order

even for the causes they believe in so what he's saying is even if they agree with you on some level about any kind of mistreatment or their you know legitimate times when conservatives or people in certain popular opinions were targeted by the i.r.s. or somebody else. is coming out with this like. angry and angry back doesn't actually help dissuade anybody you're just preaching to your choir and the choir that screaming back at you know what's really interesting too is the you also see it when people like the facebook and things like that you censorship because all that does is shy more like on the better some that you do you're trying to keep quite right and do with the world memoir you know it's like alex jones mailer you not was all of it bug you go too far you get taken off and not that the and that's really it all right everybody as we go to break lock watchers don't forget to let us know what you think of the topics we've covered on facebook and twitter see our full shows at our t.v. dot com coming up we slide down that slippery slope of corporate censorship with

journalist matt taibbi so stay tuned for watching the whole. show seem wrong. why don't we all just don't call. any of these yet to see. these things come out today. and in detroit because betrayal. when something you find themselves worlds apart we choose to look for common ground . when the make manufacture consent to the public well. when the really close is project himself. the famous

larry going to. be the one person. in the middle of the room sitting. doing. the. room.

with russia game alex jones now being cited as examples of the dangerous abuses a free unrestrained speech on social media platforms politicians like mark warner the democrat out of virginia are putting political pressure on social media and tech giants to root out and clean up speeds that capitol hill deems it appropriate and dangerous this pressure has caused companies like facebook to seek help from rather curious political groups like the atlantic council on whose board not to even a recent rolling stone article observed you'll find confidence inspiring names like henry kissinger former cia chief michael hayden former acting cia had mike morrell and former bush era homeland security chief michael chertoff are on tire of interest. sat down with me to discuss the slippery slope of facebook friend censorship. is this kind of push for the corporate policing of free speech. and political content it kind of as manifested itself in you know recently with

kind of facebook executives teaming up with a group of the atlantic council to decide you know what is fake news and bad political speech and what is good news and good political speech. how many different ways is this a really bad idea it's it's unbelievably scary and. even if you take the worst case scenario view of what happened in two thousand and sixteen with russian meddling. this is a separate. and extremely terrifying political development that has been going on for a long time even independently again of the russia story because a huge part of what's happening now with this whole situation with facebook zapping sites that you know some think tank full of people like the atlantic council that would would not be possible had not. the news landscape been extremely concentrated

in the hands of the century two actors now would like seventy plus percent of the district distribution of news in this country is either facebook or google so if you have a government. group meeting with facebook to decide what news to distribute and what not that's essentially like a you know a government run censorship program and we've never had anything even close to that except in wartime in this country and this is this is it's an extraordinary development and there's a there's a lack of. like a lot of things is i think there's a lack of an ability to see the forest for the trees here because you know down the road you know having the white house and the congress meet with facebook decide what new. we see i mean that is pretty fast and that's less was so frightening and you know. given the you know the i don't think we ever really saw this coming or we didn't read again lack of foresight that you know when you suddenly had facebook

the internet you know social media probably don't chat group you know all of that kind of come up in this kind of unrestrained free speech at the market on the going on predicted it would get to the level it was at today even back then how is that changed how we need to view the first amendment because normally first amendment is that protects free speech from government you know government can't tell you what you can or can't say blood it allows private industry which is you know facebook snap chat all these and they can decide what you can or can't say because tigris private industry how do we keep free speech if suddenly corporations are going to decide what is a pretty speech it's a very important question i think. one of the things that people need to understand is we had we had a pretty decently functioning system for a long time in this country that was based on the idea that bad or noxious or libelous or defamatory speech we dealt with in a very specific way through litigation we deliberately set the bar very high to

prove what libel or defamation was going back to late one nine hundred sixty four. but when the internet came along we created a carve out for internet companies and we essentially the law is called the communications decency act i think and this law basically says that you cannot hold an internet carrier responsible for the defamation or the libel that takes place on your platform so that means is all this speech floured on all these platforms and you can't sue the companies for it so it created the shield for defamatory libelous fake speech everything right. and people are now overreacting in the other direction they're saying there's no natural. way to go back and suppress this so now we need to just appeal to them to be been a benevolent censors for us and that's the really dangerous thing would be if it

goes all the way to the point of fact asking facebook to start working with the government to decide what is and isn't isn't that that's bad it is about it is bad and it's interesting because it's like it feels like we were talking a little bit about before it feels like everything involving russia is now this kind of catch all it's a lot like al qaeda was right after nine eleven that it's pretty much like any any neat thing we were thinking of need to them but you know it terrible for us that was would like you know we want to kind of use the russia name and use that fear to then pass something through internet free speech everyone's talking about i think we need to kind of rein that in maybe we can you know i don't know if this is the direct thought but the. you know there's that kind of thing of like maybe now we can use this kind of russia thing to help rein that him because we're scaring these platforms is essentially centric self-censorship yeah absolutely it's it's analogous you know the. after nine eleven you had the pentagon the

security state they had all these things that they probably have wanted forever right they wanted to be able look in our library searching histories they wanted to be able to do warrantless detention they wanted to be able to do enhanced interrogation they wanted to do drone attacks all this stuff they want to go to war without having to ask congress. and they got it up because people were terrified after nine eleven and this is so you know it's obviously politically a completely different situation but it's similar in the sense that all you have to do is really add russia to the equation and it's it's sort of an instant freakout. and i think facebook. was so terrified of the public relations consequences of being tied to this political story that they you know they turtled and now we have this very dangerous situation we're a month type media distributor is working hand in hand with the government and

that would never happened you know three years ago people would have been up in arms about it but now here we are it's ok you know we're worried is this go you know because it's like all you see is this kind of condensing down you know ok we have like to google and facebook are now controlling free speech you know you see you know what's five companies now own all the media i mean it's just this complete condensing down is there do you think we're going to get past this is there hope do you think that we're going to break out of this of some point i don't know because what would what it will require is some kind of anti-monopoly like a you know and i trust action against these companies and i don't really see that on the horizon. i think that. you need a lot of political bravery and what i was really worried about i saw this like a bird hearings earlier this year i wrote about this you know the only person. who brought up the idea of an antitrust action during that entire hearing was lindsey

graham. and everybody else what they seem more anxious to do was use facebook's monopolistic power rather than split it up or diminish it and i think that's that's where we're at we're in this dangerous place where these two gigantic companies that have you know sensually a stranglehold on information not just in america but all over the world rather than try to diminish that power that we have politicians who are anxious to use it and that that should be something that scares everybody yeah i do think some of the problem that we're facing today is that we're getting a lot of our leaders political leaders even a lot of the executives and media organizations what it is that everyone is kind of looking two years down the road or the next election cycle down the road rather than thinking in terms of like what happens fifty years from now right yeah no i think that's. it's it's a it's a common problem that's going on across politics right now which is that people are

not thinking about the long term implications of things you know these sort of embrace of survey on stools right leg where does that lead if we let that go on you know unimpeded without any oversight for another twenty years you know like are they going to continue to sort of push the envelope of what they're allowed to do what they're not allowed to do like people aren't realizing how quickly things can develop in a negative direction because america has never really had the experience of sliding into full blown to you know totalitarianism or something like that but the technical ability for something like that to happen is there you know and i think that people need to worry about that like it was a snowden so it's turnkey dictatorship is kind of already on the books i just haven't had the group come in to really do it right right it's it's there it's there it's possible and all it would take would is a little bit more acquiescence from the population on some on some key issues and this frankly to me this is

a big one like the censorship one like it happened last week and it was almost like the entire media landscape just sort of shrugged about it and i was amazed by that it is it is truly amazing last i want to ask you september is coming up which actually i think marks the ten year anniversary of two thousand and eight crash and when lehman brothers fell or of september fourteenth or fifteenth or whatever was yeah it was out of the yeah yeah i mean it was going on since two thousand and eleven but that's kind of the ten year mark. what have we learned in the last ten years from the bottle nothing yeah yeah and that and i've been hearing i've been hearing about this for about a year now that a lot of the same behaviors that we saw prior to two thousand and eight with the mortgage markets are going on in some other markets you're seeing you know an explosion of commercial lending instead of instead of mortgage backed c.d.o. as you're seeing. commercial loans with zero lows this time corporate borrowing has just now gone above the levels the preachy thousand and eight levels so we have it

once again a giant pile of leverage just sitting atop the economy. you know and maybe they will have more of a read on it this time that it won't happen but i think the failure to really institute appropriate rules last time creates a lot of danger that it could happen again. seventy three years ago this week the american military under the direction of president various truman dropped the atomic bomb on hiroshima japan killing over one hundred fifty thousand people and anything living in its wake except for one hundred seventy trees now known as. to look for a bombed trees these biological survivors all sit within about two thousand meters of the center of the blast point the spring after the bombing again goes not only lived but they bloom bringing a small shining reminder to the people of hiroshima that life can overcome even the

most horrific currently there are thirty two different species of smoke according to the city of a russian are from we've been well as to camp for trees and what they teach us is the importance of life of seeing the good in the bad and realizing that in the darkest moments mother nature is there to. show us where firing. always no peace and the high baku. live long. story story testament you can always keep fighting through even though even though the war circumstances in the same goes for free speech keep keep keep talking keep speaking be prepared for the consequences of your free speech but don't ever stop talking and don't let anyone tell you to stop talking are that is our show for you today remember everyone in this world we are not told that we are low. enough so i tell you all i love i am terrible and i'm top of the law and keep on watching those

hawks not a great day and night a place. to . play. the lead. i'm going with a post to some of those. but i. just focus. last time we chased. each one of them carrying twenty kilos of drugs. first offense to. bill is that they just the boys were. in the

family i mean i'm a little mundane boy they have this is the this is for me. i like it when. i don't see a porno maybe they don't mean. i will go down a great. part. around one. i. feel. like.

the headlines when artsy concern over social media giants acting like self appointed moral god is off a twitter so. several prominent libertarian conservative figures for alleged speech . the u.k. prime minister joins a growing chorus of. secretary to apologize. on the program londoners to make such remarks. who do you think would say something like that racist people. this was actually one. of my. also with me the

woman who followed her husband who went to syria to fight. terrorism. she deserves to be imprisoned. this is. the cycle of violence and all of. them make their own decisions. welcome to the program here when our international news team here rounding up your top stories for this hour. there are. social media giants policing what is acceptable to say and think it's off the numerous accounts belonging to a libertarian conservative figure over alleged hate speech. picks up the story what matters are all of the stories we hear from all of you about the impact your

connections have had on your lives you can choose from an infinite range of topics that interest you and then easily follow that topic in the news countries and cultures are brought together like never before. that was the online world as we used to know it all flew to any of those pesky for . trying to set limits in two thousand and eighteen you'll be told to hold up if twitter decides there are spots of your world that shouldn't be discovered what if you're keen to know what someone has to say let it be former u.s. diplomat peter van buren you might as well unfollowing your interests the man's profile is shut down for good because he jokingly wish someone had eaten the face of his opponent in a twitter rant honestly that's by far not the most offensive thing you can find online but what's abusive about showing mr van buren some support to users who did

so god bands to it's not about me it's not about the group of us who are band together i think it's a bigger issue and it's an issue that's that's raised its head this week people like us who are not part of the legacy media we're not new york times shapers of opinion we're also allowed to have our say so if someone from the new york times or the washington post put something up that we know is false we can refute it almost in real time that's very threatening i think for the powers that be this tendency to want to shut people down if they disagree with you is very dangerous it's going down a very slippery slippery slope toward totalitarianism there's a word for that see and ask. well someone saw it coming when even perhaps the most controversial online talking had alex jones was told get out of here by all major platforms we remove hate speech to keep people safe. after all they all have to stick to their own rules and keep people safe from hate speech

but then even those anti-left who come to hate jones went on alert could be because they thought someone would click on their profiles and see a hold up pop up alex jones a bad guy but the problem is that once you start saying that hate speech is a rationale for banning people from social media you get in some very very big territory. i'm no fan of jones some other things he has a habit of repeatedly slandering my dad by falsely and absurdly accusing him of killing j.f.k. but who the hell made facebook the arbiter of political speech free speech includes views you disagree with but there's no turning back when it comes to the online censorship evolution so i'm not sure it works like that anymore mr cruz plus people on the left are ecstatic bring it on is there a call that if it is even a crucial step forward in the fight against fake news and fringe extremism. info

was is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies the uses sites like facebook can use you to tear a nation the pots these companies must do more than take down one website the survival of our democracy depends on it the world is getting older and a bit more author a tarion only lately a top u.s. intelligence committee democrat has come up with twenty legislative proposals for keeping online platforms under a close watch brace yourself as you might soon have to say goodbye to things like anonymous posts or accounts that can be tracked down yep that covers just two of the twenty we discussed the issues raised with former u.s. congressman ron paul he told us social media outlets are far too heavily influenced by the government. that is a real mix bad the social media in one sense is a real delight there's a lot of information out there i have benefited by but it rejuvenated with

a lot of government assistance in the biggest role the social networks play is working with the government and giving the government the information they do the work for the n.s.a. so it's a mixed bag or they call themselves a private company the libertarian so we don't regulate private companies. and yet it's so mixed in empire law is the truth is treason so when people blurt out the treason on the internet it's not like they're saying something mean and ugly. things challenging the status quo is what they can't stand and they're nervous them so they have to silence people so it's more likely for an individual like myself to be silenced because i represent a challenge to the status quo but if anybody understands our first amendment the first amendment isn't there to talk about the whether the first amendment is there for us to be able to challenge our government but if we do that now whether it's direct regulation from the government or indirectly through social media we have

a real challenge i'm just hoping that technology can stay ahead of it all and that we can have alternatives to the dependency on twitter and these other companies that have been working hand in glove with the government and offer all the accusations of twitter being biased in its account by the social network surprised many this time by refusing to block the account of alex jones as the man behind the controversial old under the new site info was that he has just been banned by a host of other online platforms though including facebook and you tube over allegations of hate speech. u.k. prime minister to resign may has backed coles from with an apology for boris johnson gaffe prone form a foreign secretary to apologize and comparing women wearing niqab to. letterboxes writing in his newspaper column johnson called muslim face coverings offensive britain's x.

top diplomat also commented on women wearing burkas saying they look like and should be asked to remove their veils we read johnson's remarks to people on the streets of london to see if they could guess who made them. who do you think would say something like that racist people trump boris johnson and tommy robinson who would you go to for was actually boris johnson was. all. it was actually boris johnson even a normal person should do that but soon enough i had a squatters were position should never do that they can make you choose from trial . boris johnson and tommy robbers think it was boris johnson it might be sensible in public you should expose your face who do you think could have said something like that somebody didn't thank me for this well i'll give you some options trump boris johnson or tommy robinson. sounds like that this.

is actually boys johnson yeah it. was actually worse johnson guys real war you know great depression for him to say that that's that's a terrible thing to say well if you were to take a guess. but the guy's an idiot say why would he listen to anything he says. for anyone to say that especially someone in that position that's that's even worse . time now for the second in a series of reports on the fate of russian families who left for syria to fight for islamic state. in a culture to travel to southern russia to talk to a woman convicted to eight years in prison on terrorism charges it's off to she followed her husband to syria. the clock is ticking on zagat uts current life sentenced to eight years behind bars

for being part of an illegal armed group she won't actually go to jail until her youngest child turns fourteen and she's only one right now less than twelve months ago her life was old very different i was twenty nine when i left i went to turkey first with my husband i never thought i would end up there. within seven months as a good that was living in syria and pregnant with her third child she says her husband had been drawn to islam and a better life. he told me it was safe to go there he said it wasn't how it was being shown there was no ball me he said no war but the reality turned out to be fall morris than anything on t.v. they lived for two years in the city of top gun which at the times was under isolates control than they moved to rocca and she spent every day living in fear.