they do when they will suffer greatly we'll see what happens with. the u.s. president is another warning shot of. complying with some of its obligations under the 25th. states currently on his way to russia on a mission to solution to the escalating crisis. on its former embassy in washington d.c. a violation of international law with activists in saying they are trying to prevent an illegal takeover and a u.s. military school publishes a decades long history of washington's interventions in the affairs of other

countries. like saudi arabia and the. various european ports fighting to pick up an arms to liberate the activists say could be used to kill civilians. for their good afternoon you're watching international now the u.s. president donald trump has issued another warning to iran threatening serious consequences if it restarts its nuclear program. we'll see what happens 9 with iran if they do anything it will be a very bad mistake if they do anything i'm hearing little stories about iran if they do anything they will suffer greatly we'll see what happens with the road when the statement there does come media reports claimed that the trumpet ministration has drawn up plans to send 120000 troops to the middle east that in the event that

iran attacks american forces or starts working on nuclear weapons well in about 2 hours from now the u.s. secretary of state might compare is meeting his russian counterpart sergey lavrov in russia's black sea resort of sochi that he will discuss the crisis surrounding iran and it fears washington and tehran edging towards war. has more now on what to expect from the meeting. in short the situation is incredibly dangerous now what with an entire u.s. aircraft carrier battle group now stationed on iran's doorstep with trump himself threatening iran with suffering shouldn't misstep radians saying that they will defend themselves and that they're ready for any eventuality the situation as i say incredibly dangerous what's worse it is right for an escalation perhaps an unintended what and russia's foreign minister sergey lavrov said he intends to have

a very honest conversation with his american counterpart. when you will produce needs or real ask mike pompei you how the u.s. is going to deal with a crisis that was made by washington's unilateral decisions iran has the right to partly suspend the implementation of the nuclear deal if other parties don't keep their commitments the u.s. secretary of state at the last moment diverted from moscow to brussels where the europeans were holding a session on the iranian crisis sergey lavrov said he had little doubt that the americans would exert tremendous pressure on the europeans. in order to get them to pull out of the iranian nuclear deal but judging by by all appearances the americans were unsuccessful europeans came out in a statement they said that they condemned the united states for threatening the iranian nuclear deal and the rain ians a day and demining the reigning nuclear deal themselves they also said that they're

very concerned about the potential escalation we are living in a crucial delicate moment where. the most relevant. attitude to take the most responsible attitude to take is clearly should be and that of maximum maximum restraint avoiding any escalation on a military site the iranians to a losing patience they've said that since the other signatories of the reigning nuclear deal aren't abiding by their commitments namely to shield to protect the iranian economy from sanctions sanctions that the united states has reimposed back in november it's almost a year since they pulled out of the rain in nuclear deal the europeans were supposed to offer a trade mechanism protect the iranian economy from those sanctions to allow the arabians to continue to trade with their oil their financial sector their banking

they haven't been able to do so or haven't been willing to do so the iranians have now pulled out of 2 commitments to sell excess uranium and to sell excess heavy water and they're threatening in 60 days unless the other signatories of the iranian nuclear deal abided on of their commitments that they'll restart work and desired and construction on their nuclear reactor in all this is going to be a lot to talk about here and saw it she with me a putin sergey lavrov and my compare all said to me but people ringback are looking at things really. here by all appearances neither the united states nor iran planning the youth anytime soon more against their will middle east analyst have a after a c.r.p. does believe that iran the iran nuclear deal can still be rescued iran has given 60 days to europe to clean up its act and live up to its commitments and we are not

starting to see a renewed effort on the part of europe to do exactly that and hopefully the meeting . as a fresh reminder to the americans that the course of policy toward europe is failing and europe is determined to salvage the deal just as russia and china are so i'm cautiously optimistic about the lifespan of j.c. . ability of the other signatories to join forces and preserve the deal in the interest of regional and global peace and americans need to make a u.-turn on the erroneous policy come back to the table negotiate with irina and. now iran is not the only country washington has tried to bend to its will cut them off and looks back now at some of the governments and i have been on the receiving end if u.s. special operations vietnam ukraine yugoslavia libya one of these countries have in

common well you guessed it uncle sam has been involved the u.s. central command recently published a study that's now being dubbed the pentagon's scholars guide to overthrowing governments the joint special operations university published its study they looked into research of special forces operations of the us military across the planet from 1941 to 2003 now the joint special operations university is an entire academic institution dedicated to studying the art of war here's what their research found that the report divines u.s. special ops into 3 categories disruption coersion and regime change 68 percent of the operations were disruptive only non-disruptive cases took up 32 percent they were divided between coersion and regime change here the highlighted cases of the 3 categories.

because. $47.00 instances were study disruptive actions failed just less than half the time and attempts to strong arm foreign governments were more successful working in 3 fourths of the instances when it comes to overthrowing governments u.s. special ops or batting at $23.00 out of 40. of an attempted overthrow now the only overthrow conducted during a war time was successful that's the war in afghanistan in 2001 but is success really the right way to describe the conditions facing those countries the united states by entering the war against the taliban. post $911.00 resulted

in the us seeing a reversal of all of the strategic gains and friendship. be achieved in central asia been lost also credibility. they destroyed the credibility of u.s. strategic forces and u.s. prestige that the most shocking statements come at the end of the report where the authors say that these kind of operations will probably never stop these clandestine interventions of range from support to civil resistance movements to convert paramilitary operations to large unconventional warfare efforts in support of conventional military campaigns even presidents who prior to their election looked upon such activity with disfavor found themselves compelled to use it after taking office and such activity could next be used in the latin american country venezuela which appears to be in the sights of the american military that's because the venezuelan opposition's representative in the u.s. has sent a letter to the u.s.

army requesting a meeting for strategic and operational planning caracas has branded the move an invitation to port of military intervention in venezuela the venezuelan government has also condemned the police raid on its former embassy in washington d.c. is a violation of international law officers tried to expel activists who claim they are defending the mission from illegal seizure they argue that the u.s. is preventing caracas diplomats from working at the compound and trying to replace them with illegitimate opposition representatives police arrived at the compound and issued an eviction order to the activists most of the activists left after the . that's a lie for them to stay inside giving that offices that filed to present an official arrest warrant. i think it's likely that a gun law never asked why it was made to the general to me i didn't say oh they will probably try to get it into law the protesters have spent more than

a month at the embassy the u.s. ordered to promote serving nicholas government to leave the site says it recognizes the opposition leader as venezuela's just in president days before the police raid the authorities cut the what's happening embassy. well before handing protests this in the same person police posted one on the embassy stores it stated that the u.s. recognizes quite as people as venezuela's representatives and that the activists must leave investigative journalist max blumenthal believes that u.s. authorities being overly aggressive. well there are 4 embassy protectors still inside they refused to leave after 3 others left today a notice was placed on the door written in verdad font signed by no one which claimed that one carlos vecchio were the legitimate representatives of the venezuelan embassy but it wasn't clear this was posted by any federal authorities

secret service entered the embassy everyone thought they were going to arrest those inside and instead they left closed the door behind them and those 4 embassy protectors are still there so there could be an embassy protection agreement between venezuela's government and a friendly country which would allow that country to move in as a custodian for the embassy and allow switzerland to take over the u.s. embassy in caracas and this would mean a deescalation of the conflict and the possible nail in the coffin to for go i go i don't know if that's going to take place i know there are negotiations underway but it's very telling that the embassy protectors were allowed to stay inside for the federal authorities to enter venezuela. bisi is a violation of the vienna conventions article $22.00. and is it could be considered an act of war. the saudi arabian ship sent to pick up weapons in europe has been hounded by protests among its journey in france activists succeeded

in preventing it from collecting its cargo claiming could be used against civilians in yemen now a french flag has been projected on to the vessel in spain you can see here however madrid does claim that the ship left their port carrying material that will not be used in a combat capacity countries are under increasing pressure over their arms sales to saudi arabia. reports. well amnesty international has blasted several european union states saying they have failed to poll their obligations in regards to the arms trade treaty because they're selling weapons to saudi arabia with the will largely be used in the war in yemen the barrio has been bouncing off european ports like a pinball this is a serious test of countries resolve to uphold the obligations on the arms trade treaty and e.u. common position on arms exports several states have food this test in the space of

just a few days now the concern is that some of these weapons could be being used on the frontline in the war in yemen and could be being used against civilians now that yemen conflicts being ongoing out since 2014 around $10000.00 people have lost their lives in the conflict and millions have been pushed towards the brink of starvation it's been described by the united nations as being the world's worst humanitarian disaster and the concern from amnesty international is that if it is possible that the weapons being sold by e.u. member states to saudi arabia are being used in any way to perpetuate war. crimes or to violate international law then not means that they have broken the obligation when it comes to the arms trade treaty the voyage reminds us that states preferred to allow lucrative global trade to continue to operate behind

a veil of secrecy well amnesty points out that is saudi cargo ship has been making the rounds at several poor european states for the last week or so we know that it was able to dock it and twerp in belgium and it was able to receive a supply of missions there and since then it's tried and failed to visit several other european ports and now we do know that the belgian foreign minister has acknowledged that there are concerns over the sales and this is what he had to say going to be you know you would be good to suspend deliveries to saudi arabia if it was shown they had been used in an ongoing conflict such as in yemen which case the regional government must make that decision would not be possible now here in france we had confirmation from the defense minister this flawless polly that that saudi cargo ship was also due to dock in the port of laughter in northern france and was due to receive

a shipment of arms from france as part of the sales to saudi arabia and now this is what she had to say last week in regards to that. there would be arms delivery according to credit to agreement which was made a few years ago well that news was met with protests at the port of when it was announced last week that's because there was a leaked investigation in the last month or show which alleges that the french government has been made aware by secretive military notes that weapons sold by france to saudi arabia could have been used on the front line in yemen and could have been used against civilian and for. that provoked lots of anger from people who wanted to stop that shipment from going ahead now president michael also spoke about this last week saying that he had received confirmation from riyadh that any arms france sold to saudi arabia wouldn't be used in this way but despite that

because of the processed those on's were not able to be loaded on the ship and then it moved on its way attempting to visit ports in spain and now on its way to italy but the controversy continues and many human rights organizations are unhappy that any of these sales are taking place in the 1st place what they've called on is for european union states to now halt those sales to saudi arabia off their arms. were earlier the french defense minister did say that there was no conclusive evidence that french weapons were killing civilians in yemen saudi arabia itself denies targeting civilians deliberately saying that it is focusing solely on who he rebels who sees yemenis capital in 2040. you're watching r.t. still to come feebly to kill a giant monsanto is accused of spying on me on a prominent and pesticide activists we'll have a look at that story in more detail just after the break.

you know world a big partisan group a lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that midstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door. and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now we're watching closely watching the hawks. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy. let it be an arms race on all sides very dramatic developments only really going to exist i

don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time time to sit down and talk. again. monsanto has improved in a previous c scandal law for french media outlets claimed that the company was gathering information on influential anti pesticide activists with that their consent french authorities have now started to probe into that for a complaint by the. to this something to be learned that secret files were being kept in hundreds of theirs grutness from one to 6 these mapping

now biggie actors and the debate about life with france were distributed according to. the french paper claims that the so-called monsanto file dates back to 2016 and contains 200 names they do include journalists and politicians who have been critical of the company lamont alleges the list was drawn up to sway views on life this 8 based pesticides monsanto was bought by the german chemical giant by air last year and a $63000000000.00 deal by itself has apologized for the incident and is investigating the matter environmentalist nadine yes it was one of those on the list. in a direct access of the doors here contained information and now are going to and it's headed we're concerned about that it also has private information obtained by monsanto in any case it is known that these procedures are illegal there is no law that allows collection and storage of private data of the people to our

organisation will file a lawsuit to at least shed light on whether they have any other published data we're also concerned about the fact that the list mentions private persons politicians journalists who are pressured to support the company to secure its place in the market of compounds which by the way are considered to be carcinogenic in fact today the company has a quite negative image which is fair but the was more bad news too for buy on tuesday after a california court ruling it ordered monsanto to pay $2000000000.00 in damages to a couple who claim monsanto weed killer called roundup gave them cancer it is the biggest claim so far against monsanto the weed killer contains a chemical called guy for sate when used on plants. crops that can end up in food and also drinking water and several studies have also shown it can cause cancer

however and monsanto do insist the roundup weed killer is safe but those who brought the cancer case against them disagree but really. we put it on song to song for you. for a minute caption. and it's. our. little. bit. this is really it's been doing. things for 45 years. to the time they got held to account and this was a clear statement to every single person in the world. to cut it out and do right by people working the way it's. harvard university law professor and faculty dean is losing his job after months of student protests against him students objected to ronald sullivan joining the defense team of disgraced movie mogul harvey weinstein

and although sullivan has since stepped down from that role the university says he won't renew his contract the law professor was the 1st african-american to become a faculty dean at harvard his wife who is also a harvard dean is suffering the same fate on learning of the university's decision the couple cents a statement the harvard student newspaper. we are surprised and dismayed by the actions of harvard announced today we believed the discussions we were having with high level university representatives were progressing in a positive manner but harvard unilaterally ended those talks or some harvard graduates have voiced their concern over the decision to pointing out that everybody no matter how pleasant is entitle to a legal defense others went so far as to call harvard's decision and barry singh harvard says its base its decision though on signals coming from students adding that the climate on the campus had become untenable human rights attorney jennifer

breeden told us sullivan's case does set a disturbing precedent. i am very surprised by harvard university especially given that this is from the law school at harvard i mean we're seeing in recent years how some of these top tier law schools like harvard are sort of going down and how they train their future attorneys students these students chose to become attorneys but they're feeling unsafe because a professor or a dean chose to take on a case to defend somebody who's alleged of a crime this is a man and his wife will have nothing to do with allegations of harvey weinstein so not only are we seeing a dangerous trend where innocent until proven guilty is off the books we're seeing a dangerous trend where anybody who does their job which is attorney is that have a right to represent that they're being punished they don't even have the right to employment anymore is absolutely unprecedented and should never happen again. my wall street has suffered the biggest selloff since the start of the year amid america's ongoing trade war with china after beijing raised import taxes on

$60000000000.00 worth of u.s. goods in response to fresh tyreese from washington on friday washington high tariffs on $200000000000.00 worth of chinese goods the latest tit for tat exchange between the 2 countries after trade talks failed to produce do china has already imposed levies on imports from the u.s. worth $10000000000.00 and the latest measures targets $5000.00 goods ranging from coffee beer beef and also television says president trump said that despite china's retaliation the u.s. is in a strong position. i love the position we're in so our farmers will be very happy our manufacturers will be very happy and our government is very happy because we're taking it in tens of billions of dollars i think it's working out very well again we do much less business with china than they do with us so then insists that america is actually benefiting from the trade war with china by cashing in on

import taxes although his chief economic adviser seems to disagree. president says china doesn't that china it pays the terrace they may suffer consequences but it's the u.s. businesses and u.s. consumers who pay correct and yes to some extent and i don't disagree with that again both sides both sides will suffer on this i think trump has has staked a claim in the mind of his supporters to be this great negotiator and and they you know i know i think he believes on some level that he can win a trade war when the fact is that in almost every historical instance that i can think of on trade wars tend to result in very few reasons losing but no winning the u.s. and china have the largest g.d.p. is in the world they're 2 of the biggest traders so i can't think of a country in the world and probably not a consumer or very few at least who won't be affected adversely by this trade war the way to resolve this would be for both of the nations to get out of the way and

that each individual firm and consumer firm an individual who is trading whether it's between the u.s. china or any other country pursue their individual interest to me that's what this is about it's an individual assessment whether or not you'd be taking advantage and trying to be like to say that the u.s. is a trade deficit next to and that's a tremendous mis. representation as a matter of fact the u.s. does have a trade deficit with china claims of goods but it has a massive trade surplus and service unfortunately there's a lot more awfulness that can become can come out of this. and that brings you up to date or not say thanks the company will back again as usual that it's healthy.

but politicians do listen to them. they put themselves on the line. they get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president i'm sure. you somehow want to. have to go right to be cross was like that before 3 in the morning can't be good. i'm interested always in the waters of my house. there should be more. than 2040 you know bloody revolution here to clear the demonstrations going from being relatively peaceful political protests to be increasingly violent revolution is always spontaneous or is it you know we hear cup what if we mean your list put the video and put him in the new bill is that i mean you explain the title of the former ukrainian president recalls the events of 2014. those who took his invested over $5000000000.00 to assist ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure

a secure and prosperous and democratic play a. clip. of a much. greetings

and salutations do you know that in 1038 decision by the u.s. supreme court the press was defined then legally as any kind of publication. which affords a vehicle of information and opinion it seems almost quaint now to imagine a world in which information and opinion are freely published without the government or politicians in or varying intervening in that process whether you were in moscow or minneapolis why then are we seeing the persecution of whistleblowers and the journalists who publish their stories more than ever the director of whistleblowing and source protection that expose facts just erratic recently told newsweek there are 2 ways to clamp down on a free press you target the sources the new target the journalists and publishers and according to the columbia journalism review the journalists obsess about trump's rhetoric the media itself has under covered this growing threat perhaps this is because it does not fit neatly into a narrative after all the trying to began under the obama administration whose

justice department prosecuted at least 8 espionage act.