present. conflict would mean the official and. president rouhani says his country has no interest in going to war and is ready for prime. president putin says he has to speak to the 25th. despite the u.s. withdrawal. and. new rules to crack down on violent content criticism of the handling of the christ church mosque at the time. what if this was an actual real live stream of child pornography nobody would be even debating this i would say you've got to fix this technology. more. and more these videos.

and 4 hours a day 7 days a week of time for the. international with me. these are our top stories of the week and the latest up to date news of the day welcome to the program. the u.s. president donald trump another warning to iran tweeting that if iran wants to fight that will be the official end of the iran despite an offer from president hassan rouhani to hold crisis talks to resolve the ongoing standoff in the persian gulf. why we welcome to go we do not negotiate with a party that behaves like a bully and takes a knife out of his pocket and forces. we do not hold such negotiations with anybody their neighbors are spread instability everywhere we go in the middle east to. make the stabilizing influence in the middle east spread destruction. the leaders of

iran are racketeers the world's largest financier of international terrorism behind every problem is around and trying to do is to get to the game like general ration the u.s. has been waging what it calls a maximum pressure campaign against iran since withdrawing on the 25th the last year washington has imposed several rounds of sanctions and earlier this month toronto responded by saying it could scale up its uranium enrichment but more now on the dispute his daniel hawkins. 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 nevertheless though officials haven't explained

these recent developments and how any sort of radiant 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 has described 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 echoed by washington as well now the root of all of these recent troubles this reason this collation was of course troops withdrawal from iran nuclear treaty that was criticized roundly by the other signatories party to that agreement it was followed by threats of sanctions saber rattling and rhetoric on all sides certainly things are not slowing down and concerns globally are growing of just how far things could be pushed to the brink and you see this type of high you can't help it but you remember what the united states did when they wanted to attack iraq in 2000. 3 coming up that bogus intelligence

hyping up. shoes that's not really. something that should be taken seriously at the same people john bolton used to be working used to work for the u.s. government at that time he is u.s. national security adviser now and he wrote an article in march of 2015 calling for a military strike on iran iran is not interested in a military confrontation with the united states so many look at the u.s. history you see fast flag operations you see different types of initiatives when the u.s. wants that type of country they come up the disc uses so i hope we're not seeing a repeat of history. iran with a k. focus of discussions between the top diplomats of russia and the u.s. this week in the black sea resort to change the russian president was the last time to stick to the 25th. despite the u.s.

pulling out. american solution to go it was a americans have withdrawn from the iran nuclear deal so the deal is coming apart european countries can't do anything to save it and can't really cooperate with iran to compensate their economic losses but as soon as iran makes its 1st steps in responding and announces its withdrawal everyone will immediately forget that it was the u.s. who initiated the collapse and everyone will end up blaming it all on iran russia saying that it believes the iranian nuclear deal of 2015 is the best option going forward it's a system a platform a framework that's already established that will guarantee to the international community that iran is in the shooing nuclear weapons the united states agreeing to disagree the united states will continue to apply pressure to the regime in tehran until its leadership is prepared to return to the ranks of responsible nations that

do not threaten their neighbors or spread instability or terror. and we have many disagreements on iran now but the fact that we've started talking on this issue gives us hope that we will be able to achieve agreements if both sides show willingness to do that nevertheless both sides have said that you know they will continue to work together on coming up with some sort of solution along with the other signatories of the iran iranian nuclear deal. and venezuela we have disagreement i urge my russian colleagues to support the venezuelan people as they return democracy to their country. the united states and more than 50 other nations agree that the time has come for nicolas maduro to go he's brought nothing but misery to the venezuelan people. can. we hope that russians support. for material and. democracy can be imposed by force the threats coming both from u.s. officials and the opposition leader one who's always reminding us of the

possibility of military intervention have nothing to do with democracy. what both countries seem to agree on is that it's very well and that should decide what happens to their country they've managed to talk about all their differences and they vanished honestly say to each other we disagree on this this is how we. live in is that giants have committed to combat in violent content online after urgent to do so at a summit in paris on wednesday this follows the recent terrorist attack in christchurch new zealand which has live streamed on facebook and widely shared on other platforms. terrorism and violence extremism are complex societal problems that required all of society response for our part the commitments we are making today will for the strength of the partnership the government society and the technology industry must have to address these threats the tech firms including google and microsoft have agreed to ban anyone who shares violent over extremist

content they've also pledged to follow up on material flagged as terrorist propaganda more promptly on the rules the live streams will be implemented in new zealand 10 people have been charged for sharing the video of the christchurch massacre a reminder in march this year a gunman killed $51.00 people into mass the video was uploaded around one and a half 1000000 times on facebook in the day that followed the live stream. we discussed who should shoulder responsibility for moving extremely content platforms or uses with privacy activists bill new media analyst lionel and rights attorney jennifer pretend. 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's a spouse 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 monitoring

moderating in real time what these videos or what we come to funding some research to try and improve their ability to detect this in real time is sort of automated means which is absolutely necessary given the volume of content but the technology simply isn't up to it yet 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 safe book has the most incredible celerity what it comes to shutting down and immediately knocking somebody off who are spouses a poll a little opinion just by merely supporting somebody in need to recognize the fact

that a 1000000 copies were taken down effectively and we need to actually take god off to facebook the fact that it did take down so many different gopi there would have been any number of different videos. on you slowly and actually dealing with all those in real time would be almost impossible but those were the perpetrators do you publish them is that report told do you allow that what about people who are filming atrocities and they're doing genuine reports do you allow but if it appears to be atrocious attacks of the 4 we actually have to be slightly more realistic than saying oh the technology could do it come on get you move get a move over there as a formal complicated challenge and 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 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 i don't want to hear anybody tell me that the technology's 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 world view. it will be awful for anybody even thought 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. the pentagon is said to have developed a secret weapon it's a missile with blades nicknamed the bomb is designed to be more accurate than

explosives and thus reduce of 1000000 casualties introns strikes. as the details. drone warfare has long been part of the us government's war on terror and it's gotten ugly on more than one occasion. drones basically sitting on a screen and eliminating people. dehumanizing them treating them. as if you know from some other planet north giving them a basic right of proving their innocence i mean. one norms of justice on top of that it's all classified so leaking the methodology behind what human

rights groups have called a method for extrajudicial executions can get you in a lot of trouble for daniel hale an n.s.a. officer and now suspected whistleblower that could mean up to 15 years in jail now to be fair u.s. leaders have long talked about their deep conviction over civilian deaths the architecture of the legal texture around the use of drone strikes or other committed strikes wasn't as precise as it should have been and there's no doubt that civilians were killed but shouldn't have been apparently it was u.s. president barack obama who ordered the creation of a new missile device that would increase the percentage in accuracy of these predator drone strikes and minimize civilian casualties it's apparently called the ninja bomb now it may be the pentagon's worst kept secret they have not officially confirmed it but so far several military officials have said that it's being used it's argued that the new missile might enhance the image of the united states in

the countries that are already subject to u.s. military drone strike operations unlike a regular missile it doesn't explode instead it deploys 6 blades that fan out of its casing moments before impact blades are so sharp they can cut through vehicles and slice their target into pieces so we've got blades flinging through the air in order to reduce civilian casualties sounds plausible enough apparently the new ninja bomb has already been used in iraq libya syria somalia and yemen so is this new missile the answer will it improve the. image of the drone strike program in the eyes of the american public what do you think of the drone strike program. ok with it i know nothing about it it's pretty awful actually we have this thing now called a bomb right and what it is is it and when it detonates it sends blades through the air and the idea is this will minimize civilian casualties we can pick the terrorist we want to kill so in the ninja bomb and fewer civilians will be killed you know that the blades kill the. terrorists and not the civilians it doesn't seem

like that you can target maybe specific people with that seems like you'll just. spread out a lot of. a lot of damage i think that's also did a pretty good program them limit civilian casualties you're going to do not that's not happening i think if somebody suggested that that. i had i don't think that is even real i don't think it really busy. will reduce actually so i think this is a. very sick propaganda whatever you want to call it that way to make people look there's a kinder gentler way of killing people want to. throw assassination which. you my declaration of human rights are kind of the perception that they're talking about. this is social you know possible and the notion of assassination whether precise or generalized is so totally unacceptable we've all the pentagon to comment

on the reports only that you know when we get a reply. tensions have fled between the philippines and canada over a garbage disposal deal and will still ahead on a weekly. those who they are supporting craft and they have they don't care about me or they don't care about this the bit you know. the cure is about their own agendas and so we might be bugged here for a long time to be really a civil war that continues for 4 months time. you know world of big partisan movies a lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that

made stream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the 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 for watching closely watching the hawks. back to the program the united nations is urging the u.k. not to grant amnesty to soldiers accused of war crimes this follows a proposal from the defense secretary to shield the personnel from investigations into offenses dating back more than 10 years. plans have also been condemned by rights groups. it would be utterly disingenuous to have

a presumption of non-prosecution for abuse yet at the same time claim justice is being solved british soldiers who break the law must face just like everyone else these proposals potentially set a dangerous precedent. and the militant added to the controversy by saying she would like to extend the protections to troops who served in northern ireland with more on the story is polyploidy. the new boss in here has proposed a new law one that would presume soldiers innocent of any offenses committed throughout the course of a broad more than 10 years ago although that rule could have exceptions for example if new evidence of alleged crimes were to come to light it is high time that we change the system and provide divide legal protections to make sure the decisions how service personnel take in the battlefield will not lead to repeated or unfair investigations down the line for the new defense secretary the new legislation is

about making the system fairer and preventing what she called law fare repeated and unfair investigations against former soldiers this is not about preventing someone who's committed a crime from facing justice this is about stopping industries that surrounds these processes which is not about the pursuit of justice i have the iraq historic allegations team spent 7 years trolling through allegations of murder torture wrongdoing at a cost of 60000000 pounds to the taxpayer none of the claims resulted in a prosecution and in 2016 the unit was shot down just because i completed 72 as you know or with the infantry or associated units i lost many men. and i was involved in fatality shootings i was investigated along with others. the investigations were. aggressive and bloody awful to go through

so well former soldiers and members of the military say that the amnesty doesn't go far enough that it needs to include northern ireland 2 human rights groups are concerned that the government's desire to better protect its former and current servicemen and women will effectively place them above the law it's reported that there are around $150.00 investigations looking into alleged abuses by british soldiers in iraq and afghanistan the question is how the victims of those alleged abuses will ever get justice if these new proposals become law because so many detained so many killed the troops are the reason for the total destruction that the fate of those detained by them remains unknown. and of course some against an amnesty because of the systematic killing some of the blood they say since no

one cares we have to demand our rides through international courts because we're just simple people who just can't go by as selves to get our voices heard. there is great concern here that the crimes will be forgotten many people haven't received any compensation for the damage those who lost their homes or became disabled what they're trying to do is create an exemption from europe here. for soldiers of fighters on the battlefield that's obviously really dangerous because obviously the battle is one place that there's lots of very wonderful people civilians armed others who might not be after that whose human rights need to get those soldiers should have understood what they need to say just sr if you committed you or if we should you get punished if you haven't you don't so there shouldn't be any market amnesty or exemption for anyone anywhere the government couldn't find an easy way to say that we will now bring all of these veterans back into the court and this will be our intention from the. a feud between the philippines and canada over

waste disposal has escalated with recalling its ambassador and staff on wednesday after canada refused to take back 100 shipping containers of household waste it sent to the philippines back in 2013. that to recall shows that we are. very serious and ask them to get back the other ways. see religion with them it was later discovered the waste had been mislabeled as containing recyclable plastic in 2016 a court in the philippines ordered the canadian company to take the waste back but it continues to languish as a landfill site last month the hours spoken filipino president gave canada a stark warning after more than a year of waiting for the canadian prime minister to get things moving. i will declare war against canada we can take them down i'll return the trash just wait

and see i will advice canada your government is on the way prepare a grand reception even if you want to it is now theoretically possible to get it back but there's still a number of questions around who will pay for it where the financial responsibility is where the consequences are however foreign affairs analyst we spoke to in the law says justin trudeau has failed to make good on this and it promises. very long time to fill in size. unfortunately the recipient of top seek ways including nuclear waste of some of the united states and software western allies so this issue has been lingering for quite long time canadian waddles however i was a summer point for for the philippines for if you're president you going to take that because with no plans or just introduce us here in 2 years to go for the odyssey and saw me he promised that they're going to take back the trust of the garbage topsy was left here a lingering it's

a 1030 and it to your scheme does not happen i mean you can even go over to say that this was a private deal between a canadian company and if filipino functor part of the 1st get it is also good say that you know it's not only the county gets all these also whoever it was able to accept these back in 2013 the philippines this is the greatest diplomatic crisis could get the president to long term holidays philippines and canada would be watching the week on r.t. international show and thomas will have more a lot updates for you in around 30 minutes time so do stay with us. it's a tense situation in venezuela is still all over the news the problem in venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented but that socialism has been fully

implemented for inside venezuela things look different we're going to announce sanctions against. venezuela. have a supplement to. get out of some sort of data to move to the. moment the focus of the who story isn't new makes him henry kissinger to tell him not be tolerated in latin america. an alternative economic and social system could take hold and therefore the policy would be to make. the economy scream so wants to make the economy of venezuela scream. but it survival guide book stay single malt to start. the sure it's still there you don't get it back.

repatriations. the 70. 4. welcome to worlds apart the 2 state solution may still be then mantra in international circles but it's increasingly hollow and deceitful promise for these

release and palestinians alike according to polls the majority on both sides find it either undesirable or unfeasible thomas more of the status quo will it take to finally change tack well to discuss that i'm now joined by. professor of political science at the university of pennsylvania professor list it's good to talk to you thank you very much for your time glad to be here now i know that you personally started out as a supporter of the 2 state solution but then you changed your mind completely and i think for the majority of of our audience 2 states between the river and the sea still seems like the most optimal and the fairest option why do you think it's good in theory and not so good in practice i put it this way you're correct back in ne late 1600970 s. i was i began to be interested in the 2 state solution and became very active both as an activist and as a scholar and studying it and i believed until maybe about 10 years ago that it was

not only the prettiest picture of the future that i could imagine as plausible but also one that could be achieved through negotiations but as a result of the process. is that i and others have been warning about for decades of de facto annexation of the west bank in the credible ization of the entire process polarisation and so on i no longer think that it's an achievable picture so is there it's one thing to discuss what's the best solution as far as well what would the prettiest picture of the future that you can imagine be the fairest one the prettiest one the most attractive but if you can't figure out a way to get there then it's not really a solution it's just a picture so i'm not really saying any that there is a one state pretty picture either yet but i can tell you that there is no way to get to a negotiated 2 state solution from where we are now and the continued attempt to do

so is is retarding the process of actually making progress toward a democratic solution for all the peoples who live between the sea in the river now about 2 years ago soon after president trumps inauguration you wrote that by anding this almost obligatory fixation on the 2 state solution trump maybe opening a door for something more realistic do you still feel that way by accident i am reluctant to give credit to the president trying for just about anything but as the saying goes a broken watch is right twice a day and by accident away when he is at the beginning of his presidency that he'd be open to a 21 state or a 2 state solution whatever the is or isn't a balance going to agree on i think that was actually a smart thing to say and it recognized and in a way the position of the white house that the 2 state solution is no longer achievable through negotiation is correct there is no way to give in the

legacy of american for some support for israel expansion essentially over the decades given the kind of political culture and political system that israel has developed. really isn't a way to negotiate something between palestinians and israelis on the other hand there are what i don't like about the question or trump plan and what is left out by the administration is that going forward when you think about alternatives to a 2 state solution or alternatives to the endless diplomatic merry go round it never leads to it you've got to focus on the idea of equal political rights for all people who are controlled by the same government palestinians in the west bank and effectively in gaza as well are controlled by the israeli government just as much as the people who live within the green line and all of them.