donald trump threatens the wrong with obliteration of terror on moves to attack america. the us president clear message. there. to the south the u.k. suspends exports of crowd control equipment to hong kong over the city state's crackdown on recent protests that's one of the resume selling weapons to saudi arabia which stands accused of targeting civilians in yemen. fears in germany over the possibility of islamic state fighters returning home and the government admits it's lost track of scores of extremists who travel to iraq and syria.

thanks for joining us tonight. and perhaps his most threatening twitter outburst yet the u.s. president has warned he will obliterate iran if iran attacks anything american the threat followed iran saying the white house was suffering from a mental disorder over u.s. plans to extend sanctions on the country this is mr trump. measure did you want to see your tweet message you know ok with the messages when they're ready they have to let us know. when they're ready they'll let us know very simple to go. do whatever doesn't make any difference whatever they want to do i'm already have an exit strategy for iran if we're. going to need an exit strategy.

and strategies however some u.s. lawmakers have reacted strongly to the idea of war representatives from both parties voted to repeal a $911.00 law that would allow a military strike against the wrong without the approval of congress. this amendment affirms what president knows and believes unfocussed unconstitutional and ending wars in the middle east make america weaker not stronger congress must result to ensure that any military action is carried out constitutionally and last week we watched president schoen come within minutes of striking a row and evolving the united states in yet another trillion dollar war in the middle east present from complaint ending costly wars overseas but given the advisors he chose and his recent risky actions he's not living up to that promise now we have members of congress coming forward one democrat and one republican putting forward an amendment to the national defense authorization act that would not allow for any funding of a u.s.

military attack on iran without the approval of congress the bill would prevent the president of united states from taking action against iran unless there was statutory or congressional authorization for him to do so this bill has some pretty widespread support now us president trump was recently interviewed by the hill and in that interview he stated that he did not believe he needed congressional approval in order to take measures and strike against iran this is what trump said in the interview do you believe right now that you have the authority to strike iran without congress i do i do believe that i like the idea of keeping congress abreast but i wouldn't have to do that this is been a longstanding disagreement if you look at recent u.s. history many military actions by the united states in places such as vietnam or libya have been taken without congressional approval been carried out simply on orders of the president now it's interesting to note that there has been voices criticizing trump for the potential of

a new war against iran one voice was that of mowbray looksee is a republican member of congress from alabama and he said that in washington d.c. there seem to be some forces that are pushing for new wars without thinking about the consequences for the military military families and others who are affected by the decisions this is mo brooks. there are a variety of political influences in washington d.c. that love it when we flex american military muscle and they don't seem to care one twit about our men and women in uniform who are risking their lives and sometimes giving their lives well it is interesting to note that recently the united states did come apparently 10 minutes away from a strike against iran apparently there were 3 locations in iran that were to be hit by a u.s. military strike however trump called off the strike 10 minutes prior to it taking place now that was in response to iran shooting down a u.s.

drone now this drone that iran shot down iran says it was in their territorial waters they were defending the territorial integrity of their country however the united states maintains this drone was in international waters and that it was an unprovoked attack all eyes are now on washington d.c. as many voices around the world are deeply concerned about the danger of conflict between the united states and iran. i mean while the iranian parliament has put forward of build to extract a toll from foreign ships passing through the strait of hormuz that's close to where the world tankers were attacked and incident washington of course blames on iran to get some more perspective on this i'm joined live by journalist aslan a visiting scholar from the center for middle east through studies thanks for joining us so good to have in the program today. this legislation potentially iran is considering putting on the toll for ships passing through the strait of hormuz is this terrans is trying to make the most out of a bad situation i mean how do you see potential developments there. thank you for

having me on 1st but the issue which has been this cost in the iranian parliament has not been yet passed and i think that the more discussion of that be made on the issue and i think it is telling the others that the meaning iran is providing the security in the region you know lots of costs can be upon iran to do such a thing so but this is not the only place or whatever way that the iranians are using but the walled and the many countries are passing that while there are a so if the security needs to be well established in the air we are as it has been the case since the past so far they are there is also a need to pay the cost and i don't see that as a retaliation to retaliate to remember iran is taken by the iran wants to tell the others that they need to share. the costs because the using the waterway and this is not only for iran i don't see that as

a retaliate 3 measure but in terms of other potential steps to iran could take because the rhetoric from you know trump has been quite hostile that this can be obliterated the new sanctions coming up with cetera i mean do you think if this is not a. there could be any steps that iran could take to put some pressure back on washington well i would say that this is another retaliation. but yes the pressure or the approach that the americans or their allies have had toward iran has impact that this behavior iran now we are in this collection more than the region as a result of the united states withdrawal from the nuclear deal and then followed by maximum pressure against iran so in terms of the recent sanctions against iran we have been seeing that the americans on the one side they have been talking about negotiation with the iran but on the other hand we are seeing that the american officials are talking about targeting iranian foreign minister zarif so the

question that comes into my mind is that i think the most probable figure or person can be considered if any negotiations are considered with the united states will be ministers or if this indicates the contradiction or inconsistency in the american approach and policy toward iran. and these sanctions are also targeting i.r.g.c. commanders. the i.r.g.c. has been put in the sanctions list before so this adds functionally nothing new against iran but it's mostly symbolic on the one side we're seeing americans talking about negotiation on the other hand you are using military threats as well as economic war against a country this shows inconsistency as well as i think ambiguity in their policies because i think donald trump is enjoying advisors to conflict the

viewpoints toward tehran and other international issues and this has caused this broad chaos to the white house in relation and is of iran just going back to what's going on in the strait of hormuz the potential tolls there you know potentially even closing it completely in the future what impact do you think this could have i mean analysts are saying if things get worse between iran and the united states we could see. oil breeching $100.00 a barrel even higher here you know who are the real winners and losers from this escalating situation while iran has said that that will be either win win game or lose lose if you lose you will lose as well so if that will be the case that iran will be able to close the whole i mean strait of hormuz or not that's one question iran has said that it has ability to do such a thing but even if not iran is not able to do such a thing i think the this issue even for a short time the blockade of the strait of hormuz can have its impact in the global

energy market and that is something the americans specifically donald trump is afraid of because is one year about one year ahead of the presidential election in the states so if such a thing happens it can influence and impact on the gasoline prices in the country and he can be the 2nd president in the united states that this gasoline price or the energy she can cost his presidency at this as this has been the case during the george bush the father so i think iran has ability and different mccann isms to blog close the strait of hormuz was but let's not forget that if a conflict happens in the region that is not will that will not be only limited to the strait of hormuz but will have other places in the region including the gulf of other than as well as other places in the region used by iran and proxy forces to counter those let's say attacks against the country so it shows that the scale of

the breadth of the potential impacts of the conflict doesn't but just briefly i want to touch upon secretary state compares visit to saudi arabia he's been trying to whip up support for what he calls a global coalition in response to the iranian challenge we've not seen lot of support from european countries from the u.k. jeremy hunt saying the u.k. would. involved in any sort of conflict here. do you think people would back any sort of countries would back a coalition against iran or is there something missing here while that exactly indicates what iran and the rain and foreign minister has been arguing as they be team which includes the man of so the arabia been zeid of the united arab emirates as well as john bolton and benjamin netanyahu israel they have. shaped and framed a team that is pushing toward and toy iran campaign in the country and some of them favor

a military attack against the country but i would say not only the europeans or other countries will not desire such a con of campaign against iran or let's say having a military conflict with iraq but also that they have some differences among themselves even so the arabia as well and you know the united arab emirates they have some differences in dealing with the issues in the region they might have the differences of iran in terms of the. intensity of their actions against iran so if you compare this issue with their relation to qatar which exists or coate or other quench our countries in the region or iran's neighbors you would see much of difference among these countries so that's why i think the that let's say campaign which seeks isolation of iran in the region will not be effective in the long run and i think the solution in the region needs cooperation and talks and

diplomacy between different sides in the region this is the argument of iran iran has also expressed readiness to engage in talks and diplomacy with so the arabia as well as other countries in the region but. because there cannot be a germany in the region for that has been. so i think on the other hand against iran i think that will not be achievable certainly far from the united front for now journalist about us laurie thanks for joining us on the program good to have you on today great to be with. u.k. government suspended exports of crowd control equipment like tear gas and rubber bullets to hong kong incisions been taken in response to the suppression of this month's protests in the chinese city state which saw millions demonstrating against the proposed extradition law. but we remain very concerned with the situation in

hong kong and i raise those concerns with the chief executive on the 12th of june i today urged the hong kong s a our government to establish a robust independent investigation into the violent scenes that we saw and we will not issue any further export licenses for crowd control equipment to hong kong unless we are satisfied that concerns raised on human rights and fundamental freedoms have been fairly addressed the freeze on sales of police equipment to hong kong comes just 8 days after the u.k. was forced to suspend new weapons exports to saudi arabia and sober riyadh's alleged abuses in yemen looking at the 2 cases and some apparent discrepancies he is charlotte dubin ski. it comes just a week after the u.k. government also announced that it would not be allowing any new licenses of exports of arms sales to saudi arabia and to its coalition partners in the war in yemen that followed a decision by the court of appeal here in the u.k.

that said that those arms sales had been a norful again citing possible violations when it comes to human rights now despite that decision by the court and despite the fact that the government says it will look at that decision the prime minister to reason may said that the u.k. government will look to appeal that decision we continue to operate one of the most robust arms export control regimes world. take our responsibilities on arms export licensing very seriously we're disappointed that the court found against the government on one ground and we will be seeking permission to appeal this judgement so 2 cases of possible human rights violations let's took a look at the 2 together now let's start with hong kong 3 weeks of protests tear gas being used rubber bullets being used accusations of police brutality and dozens injured but not a single person killed as a direct result on the other hand you have the conflict in yemen which the saudi

led coalition is involved in at the moment and what we have a close to 100000 deaths over 4 years the majority of them many say are civilians so what's the difference between these 2 different scenarios on the ground well some would say what you really need to do is to follow the money and when you look at what the worth is of those sales to hong kong it's apparently only around $1800000.00 pounds to the u.k. economy on the other hand in yemen arms sales since 2015 are worth more than 4700000000 parents it's a huge difference and some might question whether it's easier to take the moral high ground when there isn't much of an impact to the u.k. economy and that's what this comes down to a not really a stance when it comes to human rights violations. political analyst chris bambery told us that humanitarian concerns take a back seat for the u.k.

government when it comes to lucrative weapon sales britain along with western governments is very selective about those that it seeks out the situation with the arms sales to the us so days very different because the decision of the hong kong was one mead by the british government in the question of the arms sales to sodhi and its call which in our eyes in the war against yemen this forward a court hears where it was brought by the campaign against the on street oh and in g. all and what we have here is the british being forced to the british government force to seize these arms sales to saudi arabia and the others but not wanting to do that one iota i think the british will do everything they can to overturn the court's decision and or to find a way around it because this alliance with saudi arabia is fundamentally important to the british to bring great britain p.l.c. they will do everything to maintain it even at the cost of 100000 yemeni days. the

german government says it's lost track of around $160.00 islamic state supporters who travel to syria and iraq to join the ranks of the terror group admission from the interior ministry which in a response to wait for human request has led to fears that some surviving fighters may try to return to germany with a story his speech wallop. the best estimate suggests at least a 1000 people left germany to go and join an isis and following a question from a member of the bundestag to the interior ministry it's been revealed that in 160 cases those identified as extremists have disappeared without a trace occasionally such individuals could have succeeded in escaping and all disappearing in an attempt to alleviate fears of isis terrorists living among german society the federal government has said that they are convinced that it would be extremely unlikely that anyone who had traveled to join isis would be able

to come back to germany and live or noticed however the m.p. that 1st raised concerns says she's not convinced considering the surest fragmented protection of the ease external borders it is particularly worrying that the federal government has a pattern take a no further measures to prevent the uncontrolled reentry of isis militants 2 thirds of those who have left the country have german citizenship this presents another issue what to do with those who want to return to germany well in the case of isis supporter of. currently being held in a kurdish jail his lawyers are suing the german government they say has a responsibility to bring him home from our point of view the federal government is constitutionally obliged to bring fabien back to germany it has not fulfilled this obligation for political reasons the lawyers maintain that there is a german constitutional obligation for the government to protect the fundamental

rights of their citizens even when they are held in foreign nations and his younger brother who's location is unknown traveled from the central german city of castle to syria to join isis in 2014 their father says he was a should be and would be released if berlin requested it however he believes the germans are turning a blind eye to the sea. the german government would prefer it if my children on the other islamist would just disappear forever here's the thing it isn't that easy for the german government to intervene even if they wanted to and there is no indication that they really do germany currently has no diplomatic relations with syria and the federal government here doesn't recognize the kurdish y p g group who is holding gary busy hart in the case of the at least 160 people who travelled from germany to join isis and remain unaccounted for or berlin doesn't know whether they are alive or dead whether they remain in the middle east or whether they've

come back here and if they've come back here whether they pose any potential threat to society the german government and the security of the secret service intelligence services seem to know exactly how many people left germany to go to syria and to iraq and to shine it with one of those armed groups and suddenly they say now we lost track of them germany seems to have been sleeping officially they didn't say a lot about this and certainly they have no real policy about us this is why nothing is happening now and that discussion is being put forward through the media or through the facts on the ground they will be forced to do one thing or the other eventually and our society is not really aware and cannot really imagine what these people are might be up to we need a public discussion about this without stigmatizing without being a racist or islam or for big but the german society and the politicians have to be

more realistic about the threats. little trump has lashed out at facebook and twitter claiming that they've been liberally repressed his reach online and off of the social media giants doubled their efforts to remove comments on account suspected of hate speech as well as possible bot. people are are all democrats it's totally biased toward democrats if i announce tomorrow that i'm going to become a nice liberal democrat i would pick up 5 times more followers twitter is is just terrible what they do they don't let you get the word out that they should be sued because what's happening with with that guy is like his ations of buyers also being leveled at google investigative group project veritas for lease the probe which claims the search engines politically motivated a video of alleged google employees discussing policy was posted on you tube but was quickly removed from the platform and includes an interview with

a whistleblower as well as that secretly filmed conversation with a company executive. about furnace after. results so it gives them the political or germ book the want and so all they have to borrow through algorithms so book or looking good of course if they were in a state is a great deal. like letting her see a theory i'd like to see you make all these out of. the resources that we do start with the same thing in exactly the. way it's. dougal executive filmed by project veritas the claims are nonsense and that she has no connection to the projects being discussed although she did admit imprecise language was used meanwhile the revelations have triggered a heated discussion in the us congress. due to removed

a video from project which appears to show senior google executive acknowledging politically motivated search manipulation within a did to influence election outcomes none of us here want to own this out of this i appreciate the concern and the desire to foster a robust debate look like they're talking about. very serious political bias and it and their intent to implement that bias in their job let me be clear this employee was recorded without her consent i believe these statements were taken out of context but the statements that i quoted from were full of complete statements that were not edited so it is concerning when you see somebody who is an executive with google and you are more than one in that video by the way we do not allow anyone lower level our level to manipulate our products in that way in this project very this video which i did watch last night they allege that there are internal

google documents which they put on the video and this is what it's sad it may be desirable to consider how we might hopes the eat reach a more and equitable state via project intervention what does that mean every robust set of guidelines to ensure that we're providing relevant trustworthy information we work with a set of readers around the world around the country to make sure that those search trader guidelines are followed those are transparent and available for you to read on the web. all right well i personally don't think that answered the question at all and we spoke to come august senior lecturer at the melbourne university of technology who believes algorithms have made google more influential than entire nations. google has and this is the great paradox of it as a system as a company it's bows its transparency to information but of course the reality is we

do not know. the nature of its algorithms function in an open sense it's not entirely transparent where that is of course on a certain level of google's influences grace in many ways than states and governments themselves and that's rather dangerous if you believe in the notions of the and accountable of accountable public institutions and so forth but that is the nature of information management it tends to produce interests of a specific type and that's what google tends to through its algorithm system employ . and in a world facebook and france have struck a deal to hand over data relating to hate speech and possible terrorist activity from the online platform is artie's paula with more on that agreement. facebook has agreed to give up daughter to the french authorities in cases where it will help identify those uses on its platform that are engaging in hate speech this is the 1st time that the media giant has of me to hand over identifying information

regarding its uses that are not related to violence or terrorism cases now france's digital affairs minister has applauded the news this is huge news it means that the judicial process will be able to run normally it's really very important they're only doing it for france now it follows a number of meetings that were held earlier in the month between the french president emmanuel necron and the founder of facebook mark zuckerberg and also these things between facebook's global affairs head and french ministers however a spokesperson for facebook says that this does not mean that the french authorities are being given carte blanche and that the media giants will scrutinize each and every request from the french authorities for basic information in criminal hate speech cases he also says that in those situations where they feel that the authorities request is too broad or inconsistent with human rights or in

some way is legally and sound they will push back at the moment facebook uses artificial intelligence to identify hate speech and it defines hate speech as a direct attack on a person based on their ethnicity their national origin their sexual orientation their gender a religious affiliation and they race losses the channel on 2 fronts spoke to the pope from mobile french media outlet thinks the definition of offensive content needs closer scrutiny. whole problem is about how we understand the terms hate speech and offensive content that's the problem if they want to include racist anti-semitic content content which is offensive to a certain sex or religion they will need to define it and understand what's behind it otherwise blasphemy will be included as an offense which is not so you need to be extremely careful about what will be included in the concepts of rhetoric that incite hatred and offensive content and who will decide this is

a man you micron said this will be a working group in which there will be a french controller and representatives from facebook they will work together to define it or. race to become the u.k. conservative party leader and in turn the next prime minister is down to 2 but an issue usually reserved for the far right organizations of britain is casting a shadow over the battle for 10 downing street. wow. i i i i i i i i i i i'm very clear that retreating from britain 1st was the wrong thing to do i was. thankful

. christians and jews have paid lip service by saying they have 0 tolerance to islamophobia and and see muslim prejudice but this new poll confirms they face a real crisis. the 1st step to challenge this crisis should be a show of leadership from jeremy hunt and boris johnson they must both confront the racism of some quality members and the complacency of others thank. you alex i if you say the.