the peoples of the camps like a lion. washington or does u.s. officials in iraq to evacuate as soon as possible to raise the alarm on the international stage over a supposed increased threat coming from neighboring iran. security in the future of russia's relations with washington lead the way in discussions in sort cheap as president putin calls out washington but putting the iran nuclear deal after painting tehran as the bad guy. plus the u.s. attorney general investigate the galaxy of evidence used in the rush pollution probe although doesn't question the findings of the reports.

we're getting this is all to. leave iraq now as fast as possible that's the dramatic warning that has been issued by washington to u.s. employees in the country comes amid a heightened sense of urgency from the american side of what it calls the increased threats coming from iraq's neighbor iran earlier i discussed the alleged iranian threats with my colleague. seems now although hostilities have reached new heights the u.s. has issued a security alert all its non-emergency personnel in iraq asking them to immediately depart from the u.s. embassy in baghdad and from the consulate bill that's an order that relates to all non-emergency personnel now why the sudden panic well this security alert mentions

no specific threats or reasons u.s. officials have of course previously referred to what they described as substantial threats to personnel relating to rein activity in the region in particular their iranian proxies in both iraq and syria it's unclear though as to what exactly these threats are or indeed why the threat level has jumped now at what is quite clear is that the u.s. does want to show it's taking things seriously and that there is a clear and present danger from iran or its proxies to americans in the region we'll see what happens 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 right of course u.s. forces and other u.s. workers in the region do face a level of background threat it's a volatile area rife with conflict and armed groups on all sides of hostilities nevertheless though officials haven't explained these recent developments and how any sort of iranian threat would actually manifest itself to harm u.s.

personnel tensions were wrapped up last week when the u.s. deployed an aircraft carrier group complete with bombers to the region iran is the squad all such moves as psychological warfare. stating that they're not looking for confrontation or war but they would respond to anything they viewed as u.s. aggression that some. view of that echoed by washington as well now the root of all these recent troubles this reason this collation was of course trump's withdrawal from iran nuclear treaty that was criticized roundly by the other signatories party to that agreement it was followed by the threats of sanctions saber rattling and retro. on all sides now germany and the netherlands have also suspended their military training operations in iraq interesting enough also citing the risk of potential attacks from iranian proxies although i do have to out the german defense ministry have also added there's no concrete threat once again and this situation is of international concern to many countries moscow one state may have received no

sort of reassurance from what compare on resolving these tensions and they are predicting an escalation in the gulf in the coming weeks and months so certainly no sign of things calm down anytime soon amid the alarm over iran a senior general in the united states led coalition in syria and iraq appears to refuted the idea of a heightened level of threat skate part explains. the does seem to be rather a difference of opinion a breakdown in communication between u.s. military central command and the coalition's 2nd in command over the threat posed by iran though there's been no increased threat from iranian backed forces in iraq and syria we're aware of their presence clearly. and we monitor them along with a whole range of others because that's the environment we're in we're british major general chris kc of the coalition's deputy commander for strategy and information

seems to refute the trumpet ministrations claim iran is mobilizing groups in iraq and syria to attack american forces where his comments also seem to contradict the claim terrine is an escalating threat u.s. national security adviser john bolton has long promoted action against iran but the british general says there's little to fear there are a range of threats to american and coalition forces in iraq or syria we most of them all about forces is clearly one of them. and i'm not going to go into the detail of it but there are a substantial number of militia groups in iraq and syria and we don't see any increased threat from many of them at the station press to explain the discrepancy gekas seem to limit his earlier remarks to a group of militia in iraq called the popular mobilization forces while some are backed by iran but the coalition considers them compliant yet later a u.s. military central command made a terrifying statement stressing iran is

a threat well if but as a senior british commander and america's central command share the same intelligence have similar information on terrorist locations airstrikes and danger zones how can i give statements that are so different the u.k.'s ministry of defense has distanced itself from the remarks made by the british major general claiming he spoke in the capacity of a military officer in the u.s. led coalition in iraq and syria it added that his remarks speak about us. garia not the overall geopolitical situation in the region major general gray can i was speaking about a very specific area in which the u.s. led operation inherent resolve operates he wasn't speaking about the weight of geopolitical situation in the region but considering the specific area he's talking about is iraq and syria you think his words might hold some weight. 3 days of high profile talks of ramped up in the russian resource city of sochi on tuesday the russian president met with the u.s.

secretary of state with venezuela syria and iran all up for discussion and speaking at a press conference today alongside his austrian counterpart president putin gave his view on how washington is playing the around card. makes the decision to withdraw from any kind of a deal everyone will forget the us initiated the collapse of the deal and global opinion will be iran's fault i've said this to iran on many occasions i don't think they have any reason to withdrawal from the deal huge 3 days here in sochi very big talks high profile talks 1st we had the chinese foreign minister then the u.s. secretary of state today the president a lot of topics almost every major crisis in the world now was discussed here of course they talked about iran venezuela ukraine. in the middle east syria yemen they talked about financial markets about oil about gas you

know all sorts of things but of course front and center was iran because it is really getting into the dangerous phase now the phase where everybody fears an escalation and today putin was asked about what russia plans to do to help resolve this crisis. among them when you find brigade i cannot just go around saving everything that is around us we have played our part and we're ready and willing to play this part in future but it depends not just on us but on our partners on the europeans on the u.s. and on iran itself. the europeans the russians and the chinese have similar views in the arena in crisis they believe it's gone too far and that the best option for the world for all the countries involved is to stick to the iranian nuclear deal of $2015.00 and even the europeans have called what the united states is doing is

dangerous and provocative book of him personally have is that any additional pressure on iran is only going to undermine political relations even further in matter how much we argue about the probability of this happening if the u.s. continues putting pressure on iran ilesa the risks of a crisis as happened in iraq several years ago and in europe no one wants that to happen unfortunately there's no easy solution to the arabian crisis but they they at least talk about it not by the way was the take away yesterday when might compare with the u.s. secretary of state visited and they've let me putin said that you know he he now has a sense that there's some willingness in washington to repair restart relations with russia they agreed yesterday that you know they disagree on many things they also agree to start repairing various communication channels hotlines for example

counterterrorism intelligence financial political. putin was also asked about the potential meeting with donald trump and he replied that at the g 20 summit if the americans a willing if they want to start serious serious you know take serious steps towards repairing relations russia is always willing. the u.s. attorney general has launched an investigation into possible misconduct relating to the mob the report specifically william barr will see if the law was broken and trying to establish whether colluded with russia won't give the same scrutiny to the part of the program pleading there was no. addling by. it i'm open pics of the story. since 2016 the democrats have been pushing an investigation of donald trump for allegedly colluding with russia in order to win the $2016.00 elections well now the report is out and the verdict is no collusion and at this point it looks like

cable news will not stop the noise about trump and russia despite the report being released well now we've got a new investigation to cover it seems the republicans are now pushing to investigate the investigators u.s. attorney john durham he is not a rookie by far he investigated the cia and revealed that they had destroyed tapes and evidence of their torture program he also investigated the f.b.i.'s relationship with mafia boss whitey bulger so when it was announced that he would look into whether or not federal officials broke the wall when investigating donald trump the democrats got antsy so did former f.b.i. director james calming and feared personally i feared as a citizen investigate what investigate that investigations were conducted what would be the crime you'd be investigating so it's a terrible cycle to start perhaps the f.b.i. does have a reason to be concerned after all they did send an informer who posed as an assistant in order to meet with trump's aide now this informer stephon helper has

a long history in fact he was involved in cia spying during the 1980 elections trump says that his campaign was spied on however those who oversaw the operation strongly object to that wording you know. the dictionary definition of spawn surveillance or spying a term i don't particularly like it's not a term of war used by intelligence people it has a negative connotation of a rogue operation out of control not in compliance with the war and that's not the case at all now let's not forget that the feds clung to the now discredited steel down ca in order to apply for a warrant to surveil donald trump now a full 10 days before they applied for the warrant they were already questioning christopher steele's credibility and here's some language from a memo that surfaced. there is a technical human operation run out of moscow targeting the election payments to those recruited and made out of the russian consulate in miami it is important to

note that there is no russian consulate in miami but the intel community presented christopher steele as being credible when they applied for a warrant to spy on trump now durham will no doubt be looking into whether or not that is legal now let's also not forget that chuck schumer waived his fist on behalf of american spying agencies take on the intelligence community they have 6 ways from sunday of getting back after everything related to the trial for russia investigation seems to be a widely contested the words presented by one side are presented as false and by the other side and amid all these allegations of dishonesty bias partisanship we're expected to believe by both wings of the establishment that what they are saying about russia and their allegations that it meddled in the 2016 elections is absolutely true. well i guess the american people will have to decide what they want to believe caleb lupton r.t.

new york. let's go miss lee rockwell says there's little u.s. public appetite to question the russian meddling narrative. they all know there's no evidence republicans democrats moller. barr i know that there are a lot of americans who have same view i do want to know where the evidence is. but i think the you know this the establishment the media both political parties. they're all saying one thing and i don't know that the american people will ever see it will they demand it i'd like to think that they would but i'm i'm afraid i don't believe that i'm afraid this is just going to go on and on and on and pompei o bolton. and the administration the democrats the republicans in congress the media they're all being the same drum and they're all lawyering and we just have to hope that. president trump will pull back.

we just have to see. ukraine is offered to free a journalist working for a russian news agency as part of a prisoner exchange with moscow a real vision skewes ukrainian was arrested in kiev on charges of treason russia's presidential human rights council expressed concern over his treatment journalists and public figures rallied outside the ukrainian embassy in moscow to support a journalist since he is the head of the ria news agencies ukrainian office he was imprisoned in 2018 accused of supporting separatists in eastern ukraine dumbass region at the time he appealed to mrs president vladimir putin for support asking to be bait of russian citizens. was yes when you're one of what friends today it's the years since our colleague was imprisoned on the monstrous charge only because he carried out his journalistic work it is a shameful beach in the history of modern ukraine we hope that the new president

will dimmers alinsky will find the string and be able to read the beach from the history of modern ukraine that's needed now as it was through. it will be the start of korea in the ukrainian tool to chambers without medical assistance in conditions equivalent to torture this brings shame on the country shame on legal authorities and shame on you korean society and we do hope that there will be forces inside ukraine that can say pick up the keys to the sill and the journalists free. a storm of controversy has erupted around a lot been m.e.p. have to she burned a dress that resembled the russian symbol of the st george ribbon on the day the country commemorates victory over nazi germany so under carolyn the n.t. is claiming she taught the clothing just because she didn't like the colors but the fact she invited the press a lot has led to claims of provocation particularly when she explained what she used for fuel yanis reinhard the father of my husband

was a renowned eye doctor and during world war 2 he was a latvian legionary medic this alcohol is frontenac from his private stock latvian legionary referred to there acted during the 2nd world war as part of the german version assess it was created in $1043.00 on a written order from adult headley and fought against the soviet union european commission against racism and inequality recommended to the latvian or thirty's to condemn any attempts to commemorate the group or some of link the actions of the latvian i mean pay with the upcoming european elections. she bought a dress for a crazy some and then decided that this dress reminded her of the st george river and that's why it had to be burnt she showed it to the tabloid press it seems all means are on the table to get some p.r. ahead of the european parliamentary elections right colleague oh yes it was a deliberate insult to russians and to russia.

the the russians living in the ethnic russians who were left in citizens living in latvia love war one little ask her what was their goal what was it to incite. the tension was it to provoke russia was that in fact to do something to make herself a board. because now she's very well known. and she's the hope proof of the person . is just propaganda seeking from her point of view this is certainly a way to provoke. a great media interest so that everyone is aware who she is and a point of view of what she's done and so on. to convince many good for. paris has been playing host to a major global summit about online extremism called in the wake of the christchurch mosque attacks in new zealand ahead of the gathering facebook announced its new one

strike policy aimed at banning those who break its rules comes after the social media giant faced a wave of criticism for its failure to act following the massacre of facebook said that anyone sharing violating content without context would be blocked for a set period facebook has also played 7 and a half $1000000.00 towards you research partnerships to automatically detect banned content is elance prime minister called it a good 1st step she's led the charge for action since the atrocity. social media connects people and so we must ensure that in our terms to prevent harm that we do not compromise then target all pillar of society that is freedom of expression but that's right does not include the freedom to broadcast mass murder and so new zealand will present a call to action in the name of christ church asking both nations and private corporations to make changes to prevent the posting of terrorist content online to ensure its efficient and fast removal and to prevent the use of live streaming as

a tool for broadcasting terrorist attacks and just to remind you back in march a gunman live streamed that attack in new zealand was an attack in which $51.00 people died dozens more were injured about one and a half 1000000 copies of the video itself were posted on facebook in just the $24.00 hours that followed the live stream. well that summit i mention in paris it has just wrapped up with the french president among your micron's saying that the road map will be produced now to try to find a way forward officials the representatives of social media companies found to work out ways to eradicate such content from appearing on their platforms. ok so big questions to be answered let's bring in some guests we've got privacy activist and technology expert bill be legal and media analyst lionel an anti terror expert and legal analyst jennifer britton all join me on the line pleasure to have you warned. about as i mentioned if i may start with you bill as want to talk about you know the technical aspects of what's been discussed it's not the 1st

time the attack in christchurch that we've seen offensive material. often in the past it's been posted directly by terrorists themselves put online for people to view or to discuss them facebook's announcement claims if it's going to tackle this problem is the last we'll see of these offensive videos. no because it's a very very difficult task monitoring or moderating in real time what these videos are and what the content is. funding some research to try and improve their ability to detect this in real time with sort of automated means which is absolutely necessary given the volume of content but the technology simply isn't up to it yet and that we need to go a long way to improve the technology so that we can have a better idea of a better ability to moderate in real time using some form of automation. larnell where does this fit in with the 1st amendment in the u.s. the u.s. in prides itself on freedom of expression freedom of speech where where will it

clash with what facebook's trying to do. nowhere at all are the idea of somebody actually showing in broadcasting real time slaughter of human beings i make it even simpler what if this was an actual real time live stream of child pornography nobody would be even debating this i would say you've got to fix this technology and now this is nothing to do with freedom of expression nothing to do with the dissemination of ideas in no way does it violate and by the way very quickly facebook has the most. credible celerity what it comes to shutting down and immediately knocking somebody off who a spouse is a political opinion just by merely supporting somebody so i don't want to hear anybody tell me that the technology is not there or there's no way to monitor this

because let me tell you something if this war is something that was contrary to the zuckerberg worldview it would be awful for anybody even thought it so they're dragging their feet it's nonsense and they know exactly what has to be done and they're simply not doing it it sounds simple when you put it jennifer just when i asked the question then you know lionel made a case that seems pretty clear cut you know used to child abuse but who decides what material crosses the line. well and that's the thing you have an army not just with facebook but with twitter there's an army of contractors employees and other people who are there to immediately get it off right away as has been stated this happens with people that espouse certain political opinions and other ideologies and so now we're talking about you know we're talking about getting off far more egregious things they have i do believe and i know that they have this technology not only do they have that they have hundreds upon thousands of employees of contractors of people whose jobs it is to

sit there and to see what's coming up and the moment something that is violent that is agree just that is horrific comes up they can shut it down immediately so what troubles me with this entire thing is the fact that yes they are using an atrocious act an absolute horrific violent act that went on far too long but they're using that to essentially say especially with this one strike policy facebook now has where if you if you post anything you're not going to be allowed you're either going to be suspended indefinitely kicked off facebook or you're never going to be allowed to live stream anything again remember light streaming is different than posting and that. people can get across political view. points that say facebook or twitter or one of their employees might not agree with in life time and life feeds and so now they're saying if you do anything post anything that we consider as offensive or terrorists or hate filled that then we're just going to shut you down from ever being able to life again they're utilizing something that yes was egregious was horrific the new zealand attack said actually make much broader ways

to say we're going to shut down your speech or just we'll bring up briefly. because one of the claims made on facebook is if someone posts a link to a terrorist group they'll be shut down they'll be banned for a period of time will be brought to decide who is a terrorist group because i mean that's very dependent on the opinion of what country you're in would this be decided depended locally depending on what country you're in will facebook follow us foreign policy seems pretty open to interpretation. well let's add it specious to even suggest that here's the good news for purposes of what we're talking about now because i would venture to say that some of the stuff that's being promoted and promulgated and posted and platform on facebook is not only terroristic but a and contravention of you name it but that's not what we're talking about here i could argue the point whether

a particular group of spousal be terroristic we have something right now we we've had television we've had radio we've had forms of every kind of immediate broadcast there was and there was either delayed broadcast there were means by which people took understanding of the technology and then working accordingly i am the most ardent zealot when it comes to absolutism when it comes to 1st amendment free speech or the equivalent internationally what we're talking about now we're talking about now in terms of actually having how about recently there was a case of somebody who was who was tortured over a period of days tortured i mean this was days ok 5 minutes 10 minutes you know that this was nobody was watching them minding the store that is a different story and i'm going to say something again if zucker berg wants me to believe that this celerity this speed of light censorship when he doesn't like

something you're saying it supported a oh i don't know trump or whomever that that technology which allows the immediate pouncing upon of ideas that that's not there when it comes to live streaming mass murder in serial killing come off i don't even want to hear that bill in terms of the technology that exists at the moment how easy is it to can navigate any kind of restrictions with i don't know where that would be the likes of v.p.n. so. it's even just fake accounts how easy is it to avoid this detection. it's it's not necessarily the source that you're actually looking at so most of the pins are actually political here what we need to do is to we need to recognize the fact that a 1000000 copies were taken down effectively and we need to actually take a hat off to facebook the fact that it did take down so many different copies the problem the facebook face was there were so many different versions and all you have to do in order to recognize the same video being reposed it it's

a take or digital footprint of it or digital fingerprint and once that has been done you can prevent it being reposed it the problem we have is that we had any number of reedited slightly altered versions of this being reposed it which you need to reanalyze to have a fresh fingerprint and that is an enormous challenge but we also have under this scenario purely looking at live streaming and purely looking at people streaming things that they are doing themselves which is actually quite what you come to scenario planning it's a very narrow perspective what do we do if there is an event that is not necessarily being filmed by the perpetrator but it's already being filmed by hundreds of thousands of other people be it the olympics or the world cup or the holiday or any large gathering which is already being filmed i mean we had a pipe bomb go off at the atlanta olympics that killed 2 people and injured a 100 if we had had small bones back then there would have been any number of

different videos being all being shot similar taney asli and i see dealing with all those in real time would be almost impossible but those were the potent perpetrators do you punish them is that reporter do you allow that what about people who were filming atrocities in miami more they're doing genuine reports do you allow that if it appears to be atrocious attacks and therefore we actually have to be slightly more realistic than saying oh facebook's got the technology it can do it come on get you move get a move on there as a far more complicated challenge is to ensure they're going to. just when you as well jennifer you only got just under a minute apologize i just want to ask you when we're talking about this 1000000 copies plus of the time being circulated to what extent should facebook be allowed to intrude into account can they check private messages that say that you saw this video food it was disgusting should it privately with 15 friends and didn't support it should they be allowed to look at them. of course they should not and that's

just in line with basic u.s. laws the laws of privacy versus connecticut these are foundational laws that you have a right to privacy this is an american company and they should try to adhere to those plus you have unlimited number of journalists international journalists american journalists who might have watched the video to see what was going on or people that made it may have just been interested you know the horrific thing about this is that we are now given social media giants like facebook and twitter a very very severe amount of power that was supposed to only be a spouse of the us government federal government and state governments under the 1st amendment and now it's as if social media giants and platforms like facebook or twitter have taken over the you know what you guys have your 1st amendment governments you can't do anything we're the ones who dictate your speech now that's dangerous and that's something that needs to be consistently watched guys i'm sure we carry on for much longer i'm afraid the clock speed is though just concludes to say many things for us on to build new media analysts law and legal.