about the rise in suicides drug use and violence to be judged as a leader with the goals of the twenty seven years since president bill clinton the cia back to. join me every thursday on the alex i'm i'm sure and i'll be speaking to us of the world of politics. i'm sure. i'll see you. in yet another the time to pressure iran donald trump launches an all out against iran at the u.n. security council but united opposition from almost all other states around the table. mismo graney who helped. get this deal together she's trying to hold a deal together because she did it. washington's envoy to the un makes

a shocking personal attack on the u.s. foreign policy chief with accusations of ego and pride for trying to retain the iran nuclear agreement. crossing the line the e.u. warns britain's brags that coverage has gone too far off to the sun newspaper. and a leaked memo reveals austrian police were told to give less information to the media to help contribute to positive reporting. it's ten o'clock here in moscow watching altie international with me in a day or two to welcome to the program. the u.n. security council meeting on non proliferation of weapons of mass destruction has seen the sparks fly donald trump open the gathering by again lashing out at tehran

probably hoping for a different response from yesterday when the audience chuckled at his serious speech he did get a different reaction but again not the one he wanted with almost everyone around the table hitting back insisting that iran is abiding by its nuclear operations. reports. donald trump who was chairing a u.n. security council meeting for the first time ever once again used this opportunity to leave the so-called and when in most of your deal tatters and it seems that instead of trying to diplomatically convince other countries which by the way this time were represented in many cases by heads of state mr trump decided to stick to threats whether that has had any effect on these countries for now see for yourself i ask all members of the security council to work with the united states

to ensure the arabian regime changes its behavior deeply regrets the united states unilaterally withdraw from the agreement a decision with far reaching consequences that makes it more unsafe but libya could it go directly condemns the you know actual actions imposed by the government of the u.s. against iran. would the u.s. president's objectives on the run but we disagree with the math that's. abiding by its commitments on the deal it remains the best means of preventing iran developing a nuclear weapon this is something that we are actively working on together with china iran and the e.u. so this u.n. security council meeting has been further proof that there is a deepening diplomatic well between america and pretty much the rest of the world europe in particular on monday a top diplomat federica moghul rini made it clear that europe wald to bend under

american pressure when it comes to the agreement and the e.u. even came up with a way to defy u.s. sanctions through a special scheme for payments to keep doing business with iran now. just before this un s c session began came a response to federica margaret any from the american ambassador to the u.n. and you may find the toll of that statement quite surprising the european union has to so wrong and it's all because of their ego and their pride. and their small graining who helped. get this deal together she's trying to hold a deal together because she did it but she's not looking out for the best interests of the european countries who number one don't want to do business with iran so indeed this appears to be a direct attack by a senior american diplomat against a top e.u.

diplomat i just want to point this out once again and washington has been sending this kind of message throughout this week to everyone those who don't see eye to eye with washington on the iran issue will face consequences here's the american national security advisor with more on that we do not intend to allow our sanctions to be europe or anybody else. this you want to see session was originally meant to be on iran however then the agenda was changed to non proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and a number of speakers immediately used that to tell russia off for the script all poisoning scandal another highlight of the meeting was donald trump directly accusing china of meddling in the u.s. midterm elections political commentator and believes the u.s.

over iran poses a danger beyond just the country's directly involved. people probably get used now a two people are rejecting what he says or making fun of it as we have seen in his first speech. certainly when the european union of foreign affairs the present of. said that that would be a special payments special give it for iran this is worrying no it's just for president run for everybody including myself because this is shows a split in. european relations. very good for world history and that's not very good for world peace. however it would be. company us themselves the three the people creating with iran everyday american

you'd be decide to truth that read with america on thursday with iran then we would have a problem with this companies to reading within the european union. washington's angry rhetoric against the european union follows brussels insistence on continued trade with tehran a powerful global quartet of the e.u. russia iran and china unveiled what's called a special purpose vehicle a mechanism to bypass u.s. sanctions on iran and keep trading with terror on and even leaders didn't hold back their fury at america's attempt to take tat. it cannot be accepted that the united states would decide with which world regions european companies can trade where they can develop economic activity but u.s. secretary of state might prepare has dug in even accusing those behind the mechanism of being complicit in iran's alleged crimes unfortunately just last

night i was disturbed and indeed deeply disappointed to hear remaining parties in the deal announced they're setting up a special payment system to bypass u.s. sanctions. this is one of the most counterproductive measures imaginable for regional and global peace and security by sustaining revenues to the regime you are solidifying iran's ranking as the number one state sponsor of terror. professor of international banking richard there told us the quartet's me is a quote step in the right direction away from u.s. financial control. the us has a lot of influence over the global financial system because of its importance as international trading partner to almost everyone and the united states have in the past used that weight and importance to exert pressure on the other countries and their banks to comply with u.s. regulations i think a special purpose vehicle is a temporary measure it is an important first step and i think in the right

direction. you know the european continent and europe and asia. should be able to conduct business without interference from forces outside of eurasia why not so they need to ensure the right infrastructure is in place whether this particular sort of special purpose vehicle will be sufficient remains to be seen that ends all the details but i think it's a step in the right direction but it follows the german foreign ministers earlier bombshell call to create an alternative to the global banking payment system swift which could be independent of u.s. command. where the u.s. crosses red lines we as europeans must counter-balance as hard as that is it is indispensable that we strengthen european autonomy by creating payment channels that are independent of the united states the european monetary fund and the

independence with system. the idea is a good one but whether you know whether european institutions will be allowed to operate this by the united states u.s. formal and informal power over europe particularly germany is extremely large. you know germany has never a peace treaty we're talking about having a peace treaty in korea we need want to germany as well the u.s. using a lot of patients rights. to do their business and have you know various agencies exert influence over germany so but also over the e.u. . russia and china chile have the ability to establish an alternative system and they also have the incentives so think europe should work together with russia and china in order to get this really going. near zero mobsters and just a taste of the anti brussels headlines and insults printed in the british tabloids

have a bracketed negotiations and the e.u. is now fuming that the press have gone too far as artie's charlotte depends he reports. it seems there is a feeling a little vulnerable in the wake of some media headlines in the u.k. hold the front page the sun the u.k. zurita evening tabloid used a clever play on words to get its feelings across of the recent salzberg summit you know the one where the leaders of the e.u. outright rejected the case breaks it proposals well that headline has caused a tailspin in the e.u. and the commission is now calling for a more responsible approach by the media in the way that it informs the public about issues like brigs it and there i was thinking that freedom of press was a cornerstone of the new media build of the culture you should

build the. of dialogue on the contrary we see divisions spread misinformation and in garbage in exclusion the backseat debate is the best example of that. again do you remember the front page of a popular british daily calling the judges the enemy of the people. just last week the e.u. leaders were cold dead rats on another front page and i would imagine ok for a european approach to lead based on quality and smart regulation if needed the son of a front page which said that justice commissioner is not the only hard hitting act on the part of the british tabloids known for pulling no punches and surely the breaks of debate coverage is no exception.

but headlines like this are really that offensive earn so it deflation to the extent that some sort of regulation is needed to rein in the main i think a newspaper can write whatever they want to but if it's aggressive towards a community in terms of law regulation. it should be forbidden to media needs to to remain free whatever is written in those media and that's it i think that freedom of speech is important so we should be able to write anything if it's necessary to respect why they have expressed by the public should also bear respected that. it seems the e.u. justice commissioner is proposals all. popular at least here in paris from what i

gathered the view on the street is mostly don't touch the press we asked the same questions in london and it seems opinion across the english channel is divide it and also influenced by readers preferences i think they've got the discovery regulations in place to keep playing by playing fairly i don't encourage strong language here that kind of headline could be fatal to people but that isn't going to. have a free press in this country can look after themselves they won't print it i think it's readers let's face it i think the paper should be. here to be. appealing fellows probably guarded. it was hoping its complaint would prompt the british press to change tack it seems the sun didn't get the message on wednesday the redtop ridiculed commissioner. as an obscure figure nobody's ever heard of the

outspoken newspaper added he would be better off disclosing any piece expenses and trying to muscle the press. now austria's a ruling coalition has been accused of trying to restrict media freedoms after a memo advising the country's police not to share information with certain media outlets was leaked artie's peter picks up the story the austrian interior ministry has been left red faced it's after an internal memo was leaked in which they instruct the police how to handle the media essentially if they don't write nice things about us give them nothing i would suggest a communication with these media should be limited to only the most necessary levels and that they should not be allowed to contain sweeties such as exclusive accompaniments the leak included some of the media organizations all the do not in . gage list editor is raging with the ministry and interior minister but this is

informational blockade for bad media and sweets for the good ones our democracy does not have to be in darkness just because a minister feels too weak to withstand criticism and appears unfit for the sensitive ministry the austrian interior ministry of justified the email saying it had nothing to do directly with mystical saying that this was an attempt to try and establish a united front between the interior ministry and the police against a media that they say is biased against them this is their rights and the best way to communicate both from a legal perspective and for the journalists themselves considering this is bishan of mice against certain media does not come out of thin air but austria's top officials have been unequivocal in expressing their anger at the news that this email existed governments and public institutions have a groove responsibility to protect free and independent journalism and any

restriction of freedom of the pris is only acceptable freedom of expression media and press freedom of the cornerstones of our liberal democracy and of our constitutional state in austria any restriction of press freedom is unacceptable that can't be discrimination against individual media the austrian chancellor deemed this leak important enough to take time out from the un general assembly to comment on it it doesn't look like it's going away from the austrian press any time soon we'll have to wait to see if mr kurtz follows up on his words with actions when he returns from new york peter all of us. are investigating officer who had a protester and a hand job at a rally against the country's ban on muslim head where a lawmaker. the photo of the office and the protest can be interpreted as police and denmark sympathizing more with the demonstrators supposing the niqab ban than

with parliament legislation therefore i want to complain about the officers behaved in. the officer reportedly hundred vale protester who had burst into tears after hearing that she wouldn't be fined for sitting on the ground the protester added she was terrified the police but forcibly pull off her face veil as she took her kids to kindergarten and the officer told her that wouldn't happen. the stop islamization of denmark joined the complaint the independent police appeals authority is investigating the case the officers lawyer insists that she acted in accordance with police guidelines denmark's august the first follows similar restrictions in austria belgium and france critics of the law warn it undermines danish liberal values and discriminates against muslim women. less discuss this further now with mohammed shafique chief executive of the ramadan foundation and fall of british police officer peter kirk and frank you gentlemen

for joining us here on r.t. peter let's start with you can you explain whether or not the officer overstepped the line by hugging a protester in this way. the police or the arrangements in different countries vary quite considerably i wouldn't pretend to be an expert on exactly what the constitutional arrangements are for the police service in denmark. i am aware that it's somewhat similar to what they are in the u.k. . in those circumstances the police protest placing a protest involved police officers treading a line between the protesters and between the states. and it wouldn't look out of place if that happened in a similar demonstration should the need arise in the u.k. but we don't have that legislation in the u.k. about six conference it wouldn't arise but if it did this this would be consistent with the u.k. model of placing mohammed the results of this you know quite unexpected in the

press i suppose a danish m.p. he's warned that such photos. undermined police neutrality as it suggests a pro muslim bias what do you think about that. well i think the irony hasn't been lost on people from denmark which is the bastion of liberal democracy and individual freedom has criminalized innocent muslim women who choose to wear the veil. is trying to criminalize the police officers who are using their own judgment in making sure that the law is applied that law is wrong it's discriminatory and it's offensive to liberal democracy and i think you know you refer to the stop islam as why zation of denmark it's a far right organization these are far right individuals who are perpetuating a narrative which is that muslims are ready to europe i don't have a place in european society and i think that's really damaging for community relations in that country peter do you think that such photos undermine police of

neutrality. in the context of this sort of legislation we seen something similar in france when they brought ban in and there were some issues around i think it was around the beach where there were some incidents with police officers there but it's not a good look for a state so i have police officers going round to remove in face coverings from other wise law abiding members of the public. our communities are made up of various groups and the police need to police all of those groups fairly the nature of the complaint. could effectively be summarized as the police aren't far right you know of and that that isn't what the police's job is the police's job is to facilitate protest in a liberal democracy and that seems to be what the officer went along with doing nevertheless mohammed has gone through the system has met this danish m.p.'s quite

perturbed about this and the hug. came after the officer assured the lady had clothing wouldn't be pulled off in the street but in a case of mass disobedience in that particular country because there's a new ban would the police have to take tougher action. but i think the police are human beings are they have their own thinking and in this study have the freedom to apply the law as they see fit in the circumstances that they find themselves in this is a woman who was taking the children to a kindergarten it was a protest it was you know of the basis that she reassured the individual. you know reassured her about her own safety and security and i think that's really important that there is a bigger issue here is that islamophobia are anti muslim hatred is rampant

a particular course the european union countries that these could please talk about liberal democracy the talk about individual freedom the talk about freedom of choice yet want to restrict it from a subsection of society and that's. that runs counter to everything that those liberal democracies claim to stand for and i just don't think this law is right and it should be rescinded peter if we look at the law now this new ban has come in and you know with your expertise the woman was crying because she thought that her veil would be forcibly removed how can the police implement such a ban in this situation. with huge difficulty if it wasn't in the context of a protest then that's even more concerning. and even more understandable that the officer. chose to exercise the discretion and not rip the face covering noise and then to sort of console and she got upset about that. this is

a hugely difficult law and it would be incredibly. incredibly difficult for the police in in this country where i'm familiar with how the police operate for them to enforce it because there is no there is no understandable wrong behind it we are we are getting into the policing of personal choice and it's always difficult when policing is not based on the harm that somebody is causing to somebody else something that you can say and turchin you can sign of that's bad and please don't do that because you're harming somebody else where it's just based on arbitrary decisions about what is and isn't permissible we've had a long history in this country around obscenity around nudity around the use of drugs and other substances and every single one of those is difficult to police because they're based not on absolutes they're based on someone's arbitrary moral

choices by those who happen to have power and that's an incredibly difficult thing to police yeah but peter you know the law and the legislation has gone through the the police are required to enforce it and the police once lawyer actually said she acted in her role as a dialog officer was thought a verbal and other skills are required attends demonstrations like the. what if it was a protest and that's what made me think it was that you had these liaison officers which sounds like a similar role to the ones we have over here then it would be to just sort of make sure that the policing of it wasn't excessive equally the demonstrators and the protesters didn't get out of hand we have similar things over here with a smoker cannabis every year there is a demonstration or a mass disobedience thing in our part where everybody turns up with the most cannabis in the place or wander around and don't do very much and we have a naked bike ride we have a cycle of motorcycle protests where they obstruct the highway whatever every sort

of protest involves some sort of disobedience of some sorts of mine the laws if it would be totally disproportionate for the police to wade in and enforce those minor laws in those sorts of circumstances it would be horrendous we'd be going back to the nineteenth thirties in germany and so you know i've got real concerns about governments that are starting to bring these things in unfortunately hasn't happened in this country yet in the u.k. but if it does the situation will be precisely that parliament can pass the law where police officers in this country in the u.k. are independent office holders under the crown and there is a long series of judicial cases that the home secretary the prime minister the chief constable nobody can tell an officer whether or not to use their coercive powers it is entirely a matter for them that answerable only to the courts yeah i mean one of the confusions mohamed is you know the protests that she was terrified that she didn't

understand the new law and if we do look at the wider picture which peter's been talking about doesn't this incident highlight the necessity for more discussion before such bans and put into place so that people know what they can and cannot do and again if the legislation go through what can be done to enforce. well i think when the legislation is introduced which is islam before because it's racist treads on individual rights of muslim women to choose their dress i think those those laws should be called out there should be the right to protest against them and they should be right to call them out for what they are what's happening across europe now is that the agenda of the far right which was on the fringes of society has become mainstream politicians who want to appeal to the base want to appeal to prejudice are using these. issues to garner votes to appeal to their

base and i think that's really wrong muslim in law abiding citizens play an active role in society going about their business government has got all right to tell women how to choose how to dress why why are these legislations going through we've seen them in a number of countries now haven't really why peter do you think this kind of legislation has been allowed to go through and in some ways in the way you've talked about the police and their individual rights. in some ways making it very difficult for them to follow the law or themselves that's what they're meant to be doing upholding the law. well soften him across europe is politics seems to be moving to the right it's a huge question and it's outside my area of expertise as to why that's happening but it appears to be lots of people seem to be feeling that they're left behind it seems to be lots of people fail to be that their norms are being. dismissed in

the region by the rights of others and then managing to get parliaments that have parties in applying to that populist votes to get support managing to change legislation i haven't seen any logical explanation at all for a law that requires face coverings to be removed if you just think of this in the context of other religious clothing like saying we're not going to allow. jews to wear their skull caps or the acidic cheese to wear black coats and homburg hats and all the rest of it or any other religion or any other religious jewelry or whatever if we were to say that span what would the outcry be and it's that equivalence is not being understood. it strikes me that behind it all is islamophobia pure and simple it but why peter. do you think this legislation is going through in western countries. which are supposedly meant to be welcoming

of diversity but the police you know let's get back to what the police are meant to be doing they're meant to be enforcing the law. the police are meant to be policing society and that means policing everybody and yes enforcement comes into it but every single day police officers choose not to enforce all sorts of laws if we have a situation where the police immediately they came across evidence of a law being broken and for staying there no police officer would go outside the police station gates by more than five yards because they'd be reporting somebody for some. a minor petty trivial offense and then reporting somebody else for some minor petty trivial offense we can operate where the police are basically. just enforcing everything all the time if you want to look at what happens where that approach is taken look at what happened in new york with the broken windows theory and zero tolerance policing.