the. plot of your putin orders asymmetrical response to the latest u.s. missile test that as russia warns the u.n. security council of a new arms race of action is not taken. one step away from an arms race that cannot be controlled well regulated in any way the united states will remain a party to a treaty that is deliberately violated by russia. also this hour conservative activists in the u.s. celebrate after a court agrees to reconsider a case accusing global tech giants like google and facebook of anti-conservative bias. and a ship captain who faces jail for saving migrants from the mediterranean has turned down a french bravery award accusing paris of parker see that as european states still

wrangle over what to do with newcomers. a very warm welcome to the program from all of us here at r t h q in moscow joining us this hour a lot of reporting has ordered an analysis of the threat posed by a new u.s. missile the weapon was recently tested just after washington pulled out of a key arms control treaty with moscow the russian president also ordered a symmetrical response to the weapon r.t.c. uptrend go has a story. there you have a and all the latest developments in statements are in essence the new reality of the world without the intermediate range nuclear forces treaty how murder by washington and moscow decades ago and eventually torn apart after an announcement by the us president donald trump at the end of last year earlier this week the u.s.

state department announced that the us successfully tested a new cruise missile that was previously outlawed by the terms of the i.n.f. treaty plus even before that the us secretary of defense revealed that america was working on the deployment of new missiles to the asia pacific and the head of the pentagon made it clear that he wants that to happen asap now this friday the russian president as a result of that got together with the most senior russian officials that are in charge of security in this country and now he's saying that the american tests are nothing but a clear indication that washington pulled out of the treaty now because moscow was violating something russia believes that this was a well calculated plan to get their hands on tied the americans have orchestrated a propaganda campaign alleging violations by russia as it's now clear this was just a smokescreen to hide washington's own breaches of the treaty and its intention to

leave it there soley for 0 doubts about america's real intentions having got rid of the existing limits it's now free to deploy previously forbid missiles anywhere in the world top american politicians say that you systems could be deployed 1st in the asia pacific region but this affects our interests as well because it is situated near outboard has over the last few months we kept hearing warnings from the russian capital that if here they realize that washington is rushing to develop or deploy new missiles now that they don't have to abide by the terms of the agreement moscow will do exact. the same and on friday mr putin made it clear that the russian take on this won't change and that moscow was ready to take all the necessary steps reasonable and i mean. as you know we've never wanted and still don't want to get into an arms race which is expensive and destructive for a country's economy all the latest weapons that we've been developing were response

to america's unilateral pullout from the 2003 antiballistic missile treaty we were forced to maintain the security of our people and our country we are doing the same and no doubt will keep on doing this in the future so once again the message from the russian government is they don't want to be dragged into this game but they are being forced to do it and the response from them will come quickly journalist neil clark told us the u.s. has history when it comes to pretext propelling out a global treaty it's fascinating is it because the united states seems to be threatening a number of the same time again well of course washington needs a pretext to walk away from a treaty it's better p.r. isn't it if you want to get out of the treaty to accuse the other side or it is really all goes back to 2002 when the bush administration walked away from the the antiballistic missile treaty it's a policy this is a policy to to break away from the invitation. to actually. to or

develop. policies aggressive it's about threatening countries and that means lots of missiles and that means testing and frightening other countries so i think that that's a key point to make here they could just come out and say look we're going to break this treaty back to accuse the other side of breaking. the situation surrounding the collapse of the i.n.f. treaty was addressed at the u.n. security council are tensions flared russia and china called for global action to prevent a new arms race and rebel powers splendid each other for the ongoing escalation of . because do you realize that because of the u.s. ambitions we are one step away from an arms race that cannot be controlled or regulated in any way the united states will not remain a party to a treaty that is deliberately violated by russia that with as if this depended only on us we would not reach this dangerous situation the united states is taking the necessary steps to address the threat posed by intermediate range missile forces

and being deployed in ever larger numbers by russia and china are good if you but you know what about you are you going to avoid responsibility for what is happening in the future generations forgive you for this russia's present actions are in line with a pattern of aggression that represents a clear threat to international peace and security the russian federation has the sole responsibility for the reason demise of the treaty as it will be in my judgment do you not understand that by your responses to the americans you are returning the historical situation when missiles will target european cities from different sites. it was a heated debate at the united nations security council now the united states has recently withdrawn from the i.n.f. treaty the intermediate range nuclear forces agreement and not only has the usa withdrawn from the treaty but the usa recently tested a missile that would have been a violation of that treaty had it still been in effect many are viewing this as an

escalation of a potential new arms race between russia and the united states now when the representative of the united states spoke to the security council they accused russia of being responsible for the agreements demise this is the us representative here today because the russian federation preferred a world in which the united states continued to fulfill its i.n.f. treaty obligations while the russian federation did not we've heard a narrative today that the united states had itself been in violation of the i.n.f. treaty because of our recent flight to which use the m k 41 launcher that is also found in our aegis the sure missile defense system this is categorically false now russia emphasize that its concerns about the m.k. 41 launcher have been proven to be indeed correct and that this launcher could easily be tested in transformed into the tomahawk missiles that were recently tested by the united states and those missiles do indeed violate the treaty now

russia which had been accused of having violated the i.n.f. treaty had repeatedly requested that inspectors come to russia and see if indeed these allegations from u.s. leaders were true however the united nations and the united states ignored their requests to defend themselves against these allegations of violating the i.n.f. treaty russia asked for dialogue around the issue and this dialogue was ignored here's some of what we heard from the russian representative. in accusing russia the united states and the countries that's growing to alone with its are ignoring facts and common sense we proposed a closed door meeting to look at time. misato of this clone us and give full information to convince them that we did not violate the treaty but they refused we cannot understand the arguments from the us but we do want to save the treaty china was also subject to us allegations that the security council united states accused china of boosting its military arsenal as well china responded that it was not

correct for the united states to withdraw from the trading and blaming china for their decision was not honest or correct either this is the chinese representative addressing the security council with the i.n.f. treaty is of great importance to not only the u.s. and russia but it's a global peace and security it is an accent to which use china as an excuse for leaving the treaty china rejects the baseless accusations from the us. now the i.n.f. treaty was signed in 1087 and it was a key moment in the deescalation and ultimate end of the cold war between the united states and the soviet union and the recent decision of the united states to withdraw from that treaty as many concerned about the potential for a new nuclear arms race now many hoped that the meeting could be the opening of dialogue toward restoring some kind of treaty regarding intermediate range nuclear forces missiles and such however while a lot of accusations were exchanged no real consensus seems to have existed among

the countries represented at the un security council the us was preparing to do this. that the fact that they launched this time to collect missile from a mark 41 launcher proves what russia had been complaining about when the us put these agents missile systems near the russian border russian western border and said oh these are to guard against iranian missiles which of course don't even exist there are no russian intermediate range missiles based around the united states and there aren't any chinese intermediate range missiles based around the united states and the danger of these missiles is that they can strike their targets within minutes so it forces countries like russia or china to put their i.c.b.m.'s on here trigger response this is very very dangerous time now and it's a going to lead to an enormous arms race. conservative activists in the u.s.

are celebrating after a court agreed to reconsider its censorship case against facebook google twitter and apple does bring in the loft to accuse the tech giants of bias and of suppressing content from the conservative and of the political spectrum controversal right wing activist laura louer is leading the case with a group called freedom watch she has previously been banned from all kinds of online platforms from twitter and facebook to pay pal and. the lawsuit also alleges the 4 tech giants violated the 1st amendment and u.s. anti-monopoly lost there have been a growing number of leaks and testimonies from those who work for big tech alleging an anti conservative bias even out blacklist where is someone. shows that there are conservative then they'll be blacklisted between different companies and different teams. that really need to change i see google executives go to congress and say that it's not going to be late it is not political and i'm just so sure

that's not true they're telling people that oh they don't they don't have any blacklist this is all you know they don't have any political ideology they don't have any political bias but it's really clear that they do now the current legal consensus is that tech giants are allowed to moderate the content which appears on their sites or through their apps that they have denied any censorship. you discriminate more on philosophy like anti conservative versus pro liberal no. policies in our rhythms don't take a look consideration any affiliation philosophy were viewpoint there is absolutely no directive in any of the changes that we make to have a bias in anything that we do we use a robust methodology to reflect what is being said about any given topic at any particular time and we try to do it objective lee using a set of rubrics certainly if this happened to her this is happened to

a lot of people and it's high time that the big tech giants were challenge to hunt this there's a confusion i think because americans love free speech and we love private property so we love for example when it's a company and we say well that company has a right to do anything it wants to but there comes a point where it's almost like a public utility because they have such a monopoly on communication in general especially in terms of social media so some of these giants that really do have control. they've changed the game you can only come to one conclusion when it seems to only happen against conservatives in general and and i think that this flies in the face of of our free speech and you know that for most of us in america we could agree that our 1st amendment speech right is critical to everything that is freedom and most of us would wish that some of these tech giants would go along with that. the german captain of a migrant rescue boat in the mediterranean has

a bravery award from france she accuses paris of hypocrisy given its treatment of refugees. we do not need authorities deciding about who is a hero and who is illegal at the same time your police is stealing blankets from people that you forced to live in the streets while you rate protests and criminal ice people that are standing up for rights of migrants and asylum seekers in 2017 p.r. claims boat was seized by a tiny authorities in the port of lampedusa with rescued migrants on board she was charged with assisting illegal immigration and could face up to 20 years in jail the paris mayor's office has reacted to her criticisms of the french authorities inviting her to the city to see how migrants are treated there. we are waiting for you in paris to show you the different ways we are ensuring a dignified reception for migrants despite the tensions that exist on the subject with the state you'll fight is ours all the french capital is up with the federal government over migrants france is also wrangling over the issue with fellow e.u.

members. delve deeper. parish has consistently lobbied for better or worse that consent is for migrants while the city was actually the 1st to open a temporary reception center which some 13000 migrants said to have passed through and it's invested 40000 viewers in a restaurant to feed my kids if the paris match says they would have done more but for the french government i do not understand why the government is allowing indignity and kiryas on the capital's doorstep between 700 and the 1200 migrants are sleeping rough in the streets in makeshift camps under bridges on roadsides where they're forced to leave inhumane conditions and does she have a point that the french state has repeatedly cleared migrant camps in paris but when one is dismantled sure enough another suing replaces it michael's government

has also been criticised for a controversial asylum and immigration bill in a bid to limit new arrivals that law double to 90 days the time in which illegal immigrants could be detained it shortened deadlines for asylum applications and made illegal crossing the borders as an offense with a jail time of up to a year but is false really in a position to sought out the problem itself it's been trying with germany to find consensus across the entire 8 you for a solution to the crisis on that level brussels is slamming italy and eastern european countries for shutting their doors to my quote. very people critical with me or paris is doing i don't know what went into the mind. of mine because you see of course they don't we're going to go. from here and you can see the people sleeping in just. to go with respect to eat today because he did these good. most

of the mines and friends and take them in in such large numbers so they blame the tenant for not opening their bulldozer to the fans don't do that either so the company people critical the thousands of there in the media and maybe because exactly because of the so-called humanitarian probably see we should give them the illusion that they would be. and they won't be i mean the world all be from my quince in no time be at the way that they treated the activists not happy at the way the government to helping the local governments not being happy with the federal governments and those federal governments who not happy with brussels brussels it seems is not happy either it's one that huge circle going around and around but it's actually not getting anywhere challenged even ski auti paris. the british prime minister boris johnson faces a backlash after he put his foot on

a table during a meeting with president mccrum but not all is what it seems the details after the short break. you can. you know world the big part of the lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smart we need to stop slamming the door on the bad 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 on sunday

shouldn't let it be an arms race based on spearing dramatic development is only going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time time to sit down and talk. welcome back the picture you see behind me a british prime minister boris johnson putting his foot on a table during talks in paris has drawn a wave of criticism online but many users didn't see the whole video which suggests the french president seemed to joke the table could also be used as a footstool but the pair then sharia law over it. even. though.

rude and embarrassing imagine if not granted he's food on the table in buckingham palace what a not to slope take your foot off the table man arrogance uncivilized the updated version of donald trump dumps love the pseudo boorish antics fool or distract you he doesn't act like there is because he has no class but because he is off and for the class that can afford to act as if they had none. some have even suggested mccrone tricked johnson to make a fool out of him or that it was a display of alpha male body language the french newspaper le parisien even ran the story explaining it's not an insulting incident but rather it joke british radio host and columnist john van thinks the accusations against the u.k. prime minister are ridiculous boris johnson is what you call a rock star politician he's the only politician apart from trump known by one name is boris and that's what he was like when he was the mayor of london and don't

forget you got democratically elected twice he's the man who got stuck on a zip wire which would have actually left him suspended in the air which would have killed most politicians career but people go oh it's boorish so his style is very hands on his style is optimistic boris johnson is trying to deliver what the british people want and the british people at the moment are with boorish junction we don't necessarily want another slick politician like cameron no thank you to attack boris at the moment for having used for on a table when the president of france is actually explained it was and in so to me just seems ridiculous i think the media need to grow up. a 2nd belgian region will introduce a ban on hollow and kosher slaughter next month the practice requires animals to be alive and healthy they are killed by having their throats cut pre-selling is not widely used which is one of the reasons why the practice is banned in several

countries but the muslim and jewish communities are unhappy including in belgium. everyone will just do it at home or in some corner hidden from view i don't think that's what they want to achieve. i think that the bans have more to do with 2 legged animals than with 4 legged ones if there is one positive thing that comes out of this latest attempt to cut tail religious freedom it's the bringing closer together of jewish and muslim communities we spoke with slovenian floss 1st about the issues raised i don't think it did. this well we should never forget that you are. the fruit of. let's call it right we call it but they find the cannot operate they could just take that book again is there a side. effect that i claim big move to god. and you know.

if you got big bucks real fundamentalist immediately it's never just let. it be. when the rich exist in the same. degree when they embed. a 9th round of peace talks between the u.s. and the taliban is underway but a new study has raised concern any peace in afghanistan could be undermined by cia backed militias operating in the country the report by brown university is one watson institute argues if a deal is brokered and washington withdraws its troops the militias could start causing trouble militias that operate outside the control of the central states and the chain of command of its armed forces will undermine the process of state

formation and the prospects for a sustainable peace the cia has not confirmed backing militias in the region the links have been alleged throughout the almost 2 decades america has been fighting in the country with more details here style quarter. peace talks with the taliban could be making some serious headway washington is certainly optimistic about them the conversations are going well the truth will be in the reality of what really happens other going to we can reduce violence will create a space where we can withdraw not only american support but nato forces that are there as well reducing violence would be great in a country that's seen 19 years of continuous war according to the reports there are 4 key negotiating points at the moment 1st the taliban must guarantee that it will not allow foreign armed groups to use afghanistan as a base for their terrorist attacks an obvious reference to al-qaeda which brought the u.s. and its allies to the country in the 1st place and return the u.s.

and nato troops must pull out from afghanistan then there's the questions of a permanent cease fire an internal political dialogue and then there's a couple of elephants in the room like for example the future of cia armed and trained afghan militias a new report by a u.s. based brown university's watson institute argues in fact no real peace could be possible unless their future is addressed throughout the militias reputedly have committed serious human rights abuses including numerous extra judicial killings of civilians sponsorship and shoes that their operations are clouded in secrecy our concern is if such units in the militias continue to operate from of understand enough to understand it's going to. be a clause that widens continue and i think that these militias are uncontrollable the most infamous of these groups is the so-called coast protection force from

summary executions to torture you name the human rights abuses they've probably been accused of it and they're not exactly shy about who they hang around with. we are better trained than the afghan national army the helicopters and drones belong to the us but we regularly received requests to support them the cia doesn't admin they train these militias of course but they have quite the track record during the soviet afghan war they financed a group of islamic fighters called the mujahideen to fight the afghan government then backed by the u.s.s.r. and guess who came out of the mujahideen the same taliban that continues to be a thorn in the side of the us to this day one of the conditions of u.s. withdrawal is that the cia also will. stop all activities and leave the country and these groups are despondent or would be a return to the good tool or taken under the control rather the central government

in kabul then this peace process is a complete sham and it will cut into as much we as a bunch of flags went because these groups will still be operating the cia will still have a presence in their country therefore the us will still object at least. afghanistan when training more militant groups to fight the ones that turned on you last time lands you in trouble once again it might be time to take a hint donald quarter r.t. that's a wrap up of the day's top news for now but don't forget you can always find us on many of your favorite social media platforms like twitter and facebook for up to the minute reports. that's geysers financial survival they say money that the girl was. going to be using this is a central plank supported by a cummins i'm going to call them right now so you stop to.

give me too much. is enough. but i'm also the most companies you know. when i meet. this company she told me nobody goes from didn't you know just to see. someone. who seemed. kind of on this. day. to your list.

below and welcome to crossfire we're all things are considered. politics is supposed to be about the art of the possible this means compromises and tolerance sadly this is no longer the case and in character assassination are now the rules of engagement today. if you say the wrong thing think different thought you must be silenced.

racism i'm joined by my guest in washington she's a republican strategist and consultant also in washington we have remington greg he is the counsel for civil justice and consumer rights at public citizen and in denver we crossed antonio before she is a conservative commentator all right crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate it really let me go to you 1st here in washington from my far away perch when i peruse american cable from c.n.n. to m s n b c to fox it's all about racism race is the topic that is talked about all the time is that the most burning issue or is that just a lot of deflection pivoting virtue signaling because i see this conversation and it's maddening because nothing is ever resolved except 1st smearing people that's not how politics should be run particularly in a country like all countries in the world that have major problems that face them so tell me is it all about race.