of a spell of me and my fellow travelers feeling violated for simply wanting to travel beyond u.s. borders but having your face scanned by a faceless government agency feels invasive imagine what immigrants and refugees must feel like when after their long hard trek to the shining city on the hill that is the united states the u.s. government reaches into their mouths and takes the very strands that make up the core of their being regardless of their consent i'm talking of course about the new pilot program launched this january by the u.s. government that will not only collect d.n.a. samples from the thousands upon thousands of people that are detained regularly by the u.s. immigration officials but then they will send those samples to our trusted friends at the federal bureau of investigation to be held indefinitely in their criminal database in a memo released by the department of homeland security the new york times reports that u.s. citizens and permanent residents holding a green card why are detained could be subject to d.n.a.

testing as well as asylum seekers seekers and people entering the country without authorization and that refusing to submit d.n.a. to submit your d.n.a. could lead to a misdemeanor criminal charge. my goodness from facial scans in our airports the d.n.a. swabs at our borders seems that now more than never it is a very good time to start watching the hawks. like you that i got. to. know them a bone the watching the hawks to roll them for and joining me to day discuss the

taking of d.n.a. and facial stands by the united states government at our borders and. yes to give journalist ben swan ben now yeah i know that you like myself have recently traveled internationally were you going to ask were you subject of in your face scanned upon departure the way i was and was there any signage or helpful notices informing that you that as a us citizen you can opt out of these scans if you want to know i here's what was interesting so i actually went to australia leaving the us i did not have to go through any kind of face scan but coming back into the country i did have to go through it when we landed we actually then it in l.a. accident l.a.x. they forced us to go through a facial scanning because they didn't even make us fill out the forms you know when you get on a plane in your travel into the country or into a new country coming out here you have to fill out a customs form right and then submit the form where they said you don't need to submit the forms and we got off the plane we did have to have our faces scanned so

our faces rescanned in order to go through that process of what's really interesting about this story tyrell though is that most people don't realize this d.h.s.s. has been wanting to do this for a long time and not just on international flights for people coming into the country or leaving the country they were pushing as of april of last year to actually have facial scans in every airport for every domestic flight so if you get on the domestic flight they want to mandate that you have to go through a facial scan they couldn't get that through there were too many fights and legal challenges from the a.c.l.u. so instead they decided to move on international flights and that's where it is right now you know what it was going to ask what is their excuse for why what are the reasons that they're saying that we need these scans and i mean it do they have a justifiable excuse beyond the kind of you know omnipresent well it makes things safer for security and things like that and do the civil liberty issues with this out way to support these supposed security benefits well that's what we don't know in terms of the legal standing of whether or not it outweighs that look at your

absolutely right the excuse that's being used it's always it is right it's about security protecting the homeland we've got to know who's coming. and we have to be able to recognize who's getting on planes because those of course are the greatest threats to our national security or you know planes in the hands of wrong people and 20 years later this is the line that still be used after 911 but here's what's interesting is that we don't know as to whether or not a court would ever side with the government on this because as i said they've backed off when the a.c.l.u. began challenging them saying you can't just scan every single face that's getting on an airplane because essentially what you're doing is you're creating a barrier to the right to travel we have a constitutional right to be able to move about and encumbered and so if you make it essentially a process where you have to be searched and have a facial scan in order to get on a plane you're preventing people from being able to do that because the only option now would be to say i want to get on a plane so we don't know where the courts would fall on it because the a.c.l.u. never got a chance to challenge it but again it has already happened here on these international

flights and i think it should be challenged in court as well whether or not you should be forced to have facial stance taken before you're allowed inside the country you know it's interesting too because when i look when i think about what i want through without that that bothered me but then when i read another story about the fact that you know immigrants and even green card holding people travelling into this country and you know people so you can you know refugees are now getting their d.n.a. swab at the border that just got implemented the beginning of january that really frightens me and it raises the question in the mind maybe you can help me answers why why do we need to collect the d.n.a. of citizens and non-citizens who are taken into custody by customs and border patrol i mean that sounds absolutely crazy especially when you look at. it just sounds nuts to me when you look at it because it by the time they even get it over to the f.b.i. these people have already been let loose anyway right so the people have already been let loose by the time that that's the d.n.a. sample to get to the f.b.i. so it makes you question why would we need a. d.n.a.

reservoir of all the different people who are coming into the country illegally whereas you could certainly. part holders now we're being told us citizens won't have to go through this but think about just the sheer numbers so the h.s. is saying about last last year they took about 7000 d.n.a. swabs they're expecting this year once now this is the put into place taking about 7 148000 swabs that's a massive difference right 774-8000 where would you be catalogued who will keep them how will they be useful and here's another question for you so you know d.n.a. samples you can distract people with them it's not like oh someone took their d.n.a. sample return the list of the country now we can find that when we leave them with the life slots if i did that after the fact so if somebody later on i suppose the rest of it and then matched the d.n.a. then you would have a match but how would that serve a purpose that has any kind of usefulness to it i think that's the big question around us we don't know what answer to that seems like an awful lot of waste of

time energy and money for an issue that really in issue that is important you know immigration and what to do with these refugees is important at the end of the day i don't think that swapping their d.n.a. is going to make that any easier or any any better at the end of day but i want to thank you so much for coming on always a pleasure having you on and bringing your insight to our audience thank you sir. several things. with tensions still white hot following the united states assassination of iranian military leader qassim solo money and iran's we're told tori strikes on u.s. military bases in iraq it doesn't take a team of experts or political prognosticators the tell you that before the end of 2020 war between the united states and iran is a very real tangible possibility but are the american people ready for a potential u.s. war against iran i mean does the american people really know today that the cia actually deposed to be a coup a democratically elected leader of iran back in 1953 and action that led to much of

the anti-u.s. sentiment we see today can u.s. citizens even find iran on a map that's a good question well a recent poll done by politico interviewed nearly 2000 registered voters and found out that nearly 80 percent of them couldn't actually locate the middle eastern country so many questions well r.t. america's own john he took to the streets of miami to put political findings to the test and here is his report. a new survey by the research for morning consult a new site politico finds that quote fewer than 3 in 10 registered voters can identify the islamic republic on an unlabeled map the poll was conducted january 4th and 5th after the u.s. killed iranian general qassam saloon money and just days before iran bombed a us air base in iraq 28 percent of the 1995 registered voters surveyed in the poll were able to accurately locate iran on an on label map of the middle east region only 23 percent could identify iran on

a larger also unlabeled map well we printed out our own unlabeled world map and hit the streets of miami to see if people here had any better luck pointing out iran i'm doing a poll talking to people can you point out iran on this map. you know me well that . i think is in this general area here you're absolutely correct yes point out iran on the map iran. here right there you got it right around here. pretty much tell you what value iran you've got the middle east region iran. next and you know that saudi arabia is the it's his big one here is iraq here. runs right there it's right there so yeah yeah i will say this when i said yeah yeah. it's. right there he got it on iran out on this map iran. iran iran

a country add iran iran. does right here oh that's africa but close close what about you can you point out i can just point out but you tell me very sure it's right here is this it is is it now right there you know it's. one of the if you get to be on t.v. and that they are by the way those young men said if the u.s. did go to war with iran they think the u.s. quote would hold its own speaking of which the morning consult political poll also found that while most people surveyed supported the u.s. strike on general somani 69 percent said the attack made war with iran more likely and half said they thought it made the united states less safe. who've read i guess those folks down in miami do actually they can actually pick ron out on the map all right everybody as we go to break walk watchers don't forget to let us know what

you think of the topics we've covered on our social media be sure to check out watching the hawks the podcast which is now available on spotify awful music and everywhere you listen to your favorite or maybe not so favorite podcast coming up representatives from both the left 3 and the right of us politics join us to debate and discuss some of the most important and unique news stories of the day including the social media censorship surrounding the rising tensions between the united states and the state to watch the full. text risers financial survival guide. when customers go buy your do something. good now well reducing our. that's undercutting not what's good for food markets it's not good for the global economy.

on my hands on guns and money i'm not. on them side anyone on. the main thing about saving time about what became because it was i mean time that was in a sentence of on love as in the one about the. home from. one when the one in the bible come and. see the candle in the game but i'm before but i caught on to him but i. knew now by now i'm by the on now move on. the. people but as you could see the slow you force me to focus on the best

of you so. what. you see is just. the most look nobody. really believes. that you haven't seen yet and that. you don't want to. see. that it. was up. to.

the bridge of speech and expression is one of the most important if not the most important tenet of any precinct in society that is why it became our very 1st amendment to the u.s. constitution but what happens when the freedom of speech and expression runs headlong into u.s. foreign policy and corporate interests this is what we are seeing play out in real time as c.n.n. business is reporting that instagram and its parent company facebook are removing posts that voice support for slain iranian commander solo money. to comply with u.s. sanctions you see stolen money and the islamic revolutionary guard corps were designated as a foreign terrorist organization last april which means that any social media post

in support of the iranian military leader could be viewed as supporting a terrorist in fact after solmonese killing instagram suspended at least 15 accounts belonging to iranian journalists according to a statement released by the international federation of journalists when pressed as to why a facebook spokesperson told the media that quote we operate under u.s. sanction laws including those related to the us government's designation of the i r g c and its leadership well joining me now to practice a little free speech on this story and more including the upcoming final democratic presidential candidate debate before the iowa democratic caucuses are 2 voices representing the left and the right in u.s. politics democrat strategist and political analyst. cross them. and g.o.p. strategists believe a bill i apologize for just talking about that. i'm so so let's get into this i want to ask you both should instagram and other social media companies be silencing

reporters journalists or anyone who shows support for solar money or iran which is absolutely i think that this is a clear violation of the freedom of speech but i also feel like these in this particular case these are journalists the expectation that they are going to uncover and from from their viewpoint being journalists who are based in based in iran being journalists who are going to have a vision of iran that a lot of our american journalists do not who also have a historical understanding of what's going on in the sense that also our journalists do not and even american media have questioned whether or not the killing of so the money was actually legitimate whether or not the timing was actually a legitimate whether or not this president had the authority to do so considering the fact that he has not present the case for why this was an imminent threat so i don't think that this should have been that their statement been removed at all. and i feel this way even there was a discussion that we had a probably a few weeks ago about whether or not donald trump's twitter should be suspended in

things like that you know i had i don't support censorship across the board and i think that that you know like me she said there's a lot of information you know someone who actually follows what's going on i actually do know where iran is over there but this is one of those instances where i think there is an overreaching government and there appears to be an inconsistency because as we saw i think you know if twitter well twitter is just twitter it's not going to do that so it's really just facebook and instagram but i think this really is just an overreach and maybe they're trying to align themselves with what they feel is if it's do us sanction and i understand like the u.s. sanctions argument but most people don't understand that even if we're journalists are in the process of delivering news especially in a region like iran i say no even even if that news let's say is against us foreign policy but we have a lot of news that is shared shared widely now that you know nudes or news that are supporting supportive of different regimes or even organizations that we may not like but i think that if we're talking about

a free press i think that we should just have it all out there yes you can you can turn away from it you don't actually have to watch it but i think this is just it's going down a very very very thin line between that type of censorship and what we look at because we've seen all these social media companies go after you know voices of opposition on both the left and the right over the past year which is really interesting about their private businesses they have a right to decide who is or is not on their platform but it is interesting seeing this kind of play out like this i want to also has this this week president trump tweeted in a long tweet but i want to pull this out of the usa is watching this you tweeted this to iran turn your internet back on and let your reporters room free now trump along with many other u.s. politicians and pundits have criticized the ron's treatment of free speech protesters journalists and things like that over the years but i want to ask you too can the u.s. kind of throw. politicians here and whatnot throw these stones at other countries iran in particular when we've used tear gas on protesters you know we've we've

we've imprisoned whistleblowers and have marginalized journalists and gone after people like julian the songs that many people use a journalist can we can we throw stones at other countries given what we've done absolutely not i mean we have a president who is trying to pull out a whistle blower right now we also have a president who under his under his regime and i will call it the trump regime was ok with him as not pursued in american journalists who was actually killed and we have a very interesting history of in many cases suppressing journalism particularly journalism that we don't like and we have a president right now who is absolutely ok with. taking i'm taking away the credentials of journalists we have a president who is ok with calling our journalists the enemies of the people american journalists who are actually just doing their job as another branch and branch that's very important of the government to showcase to the people what is actually going on behind the veil we have a president who has gone in an all out assault on on journalists in and of themselves he's been buying with talking at his rallies about them getting beaten

up he's been fine with inciting violence against them and i think that it's very rich coming from someone who has been the leader that president trump happens to be when it comes to his own relationship with journalists right here in this country really go to your book so. i'm going to say i think think there's a huge difference between the u.s. and many of the countries over the or the middle east. as far as whether or not they should you know i think we probably go down a really a slippery slope if we start comparing the 2 yes there are many instances where the u.s. has kind of piled around with. kind people and not just really just across the world so we really do have that history but the u.s. just as a nation as a sovereign nation you know we're not in the business of you know purposely you know attacking protesters you know who go out and i think that's probably some of what the opposition is that or what trumps concern is is how it was done we are

that we've seen this happen with black lies matter protesters specifically we brought in tear gas we've seen them bring and we've seen them bring in weaponry we've seen basically an all out sim i army assault on many protesters in our country right on the right to move in like we have a history particularly when it comes i regularly yeah but i really have a habit of doing absolutely but i think the u.s. has the u.s. and how they've gone about how we've gone about doing it is a little different than what we see over in iran or any of these. democratic well absolutely i think i think for me that really makes the difference if you start comparing the 2 i don't think there's really much comparison between. how the u.s. deals with free speech and what we're talking about with iran so i do think there is a there is a difference there but you know the idea that trump tweeted and i mean it is i mean it's well 2 i do feel that we should we know it's always important to make sure that if you're going to throw stones and if you're going to criticize other countries you lead to make sure you have clean hands before you do it i want to

speaking of interesting hands the wall street journal recently reported that allies of president trump are pursuing an effort to acquire right wing news channel one american news network and it's in a bid to shake up a conservative media that's really been dominated by fox news and only box news now some say this move is being considered because fox news has been going left which is news to me. you know and so i have to as i've been this is about i read this debate is fox news now too progressive for the right for the republican party and are we seeing a split potential split in the republican party like we're seeing in the democratic party where you see that split between centrist democrats and progressive democrats is there a rift taking place right now there the there is a rift in the republican party but it's definitely not with fox fox is as conservative as the right lingering as it's always been and probably always will be i mean the viewership speaks for itself and i don't think that fox news you know i

think there's probably some washington d.c. speaker talking about the idea that somehow you know it's either people don't want to merican work and so you know that's a that's that's not true at all and it's interesting that people are even making the argument that fox news out of all networks is moving left now that they do the you know they push conservative points of views and there are a lot of great discussions there on fox but i don't i would i would be interested in finding out where you read that i like when we're in the i think it was like new america a little rabbit a few other things were kind of like you know they've been critical of donald trump fox as so therefore they're looking for you know well mainly positive to come to the memory of donald. some problems here in there saying oh you know this person is on fox news donna brazil is on fox news so fox named hiring a. contributor has ruffled a few feathers but in addition to that i think the elevation of shepard smith and especially in certain conversations where he was the one who made a lot of national news and various sources being critical of the president and

watching how that how that has shifted some of the conversation bought started off with a monster of being fair and balanced everyone knows that that was out of the window from its insert but i think that they've gone probably more right since president trump has been office than they even were you know i want to i want to ask you about this through we're talking about ok we know emerson we see plays to the left you know fox plays to the right now we're talking about adding more channels and all along these kind of very divisive party lines is no news media divided enough at this point like should our news media really be playing to audiences regardless of what political corner. and i think cable news is very different if you're talking about the original big 3 you're c.b.s. or a.b.c. or n.b.c. i think that those will always be the most mainstay middle of the road anybody on either side is probably going to have a bit of a conversation piece there if you're talking about cable news it's more entertainment value and i think that whether you're c.n.n. m.s.n. b.c. or fox you know that you have to have certain characters as there are of you know that moneymaking machine that actually helps you so i think that when you do that

you automatically know who your audience bases and you cater to that audience and i don't necessarily think that's wrong but i think that as a viewer people have to understand that that's part of the market and that's part of their market has got a job and then rinse ratings matter and then that's what is really driving a lot of the even the the back and forth the negativity that you see in news i mean these things trim so you get on you get on television you say something nasty about the president well more than likely that's something that's going to try and or even when barack obama was in office if you get on television and you say something about barack obama that type of thing will turn and i don't think that will unfortunately i don't see this type of acrimony or whatever getting any better because i think the state of our apollo. it's just one allow it i don't think that people are so pushed to their own side you know you're talking about living in tribes now i think we're in the middle of tribalism and i don't expect to change any time some of these other new sources like the way in which believe in 20 their team has it has the element of we're right we're going to always stay right we're going to be far right they push a lot of conspiracy going if there was

a lot of confusion is one thing about being conservative another thing when your net conspiratorial conspiracy theory lot of contenders never agree on anybody on the outside as they do so that's that's kind of the spin machine they've been going to i'm going to say thank you both for coming on the day a 1000000 the number station with us truly a pleasure as always thank you very. right. in what can only be described as taking a page out of blade runner researchers and scientists the united states have created what are being called the very 1st living machines yes these tiny less than one millimeter long xeno bots as they're called are made from assembling the stem cells of african clawed braga embryos incubating them and then cutting them reshaping them into a body forms designed by a supercomputer not only not only can mate heal on their own but these you know bots can also heal themselves researchers believe that these are the very 1st living programmable organisms because they are neither the traditional robot nor

a known species of animal yet they have the traits of both scientists believe that in the future will be able to do a host of things from finding radioactive contamination to cleaning the oceans and even the arteries in your body. that does not my friends make them any less creepy all right everybody i got to say that is our show for you today remember everyone in this world we're not told that we love the outside tell you all love you tyrrel but keep on watching all those hawks out there and have a great day and but everybody. good food descriptions sound up the tasing even for the owners so how to choose the pet food industry is telling us what to feed our pets is really more based on what

they want to sell us than was necessarily good for the pet turns out may not be as healthy as people believe we have animals that have you know diabetes in our stratos they have auto immune disorders allergies we are actually creating these problems it's a huge epidemic of tom's and i believe can be linked to very simple problem of diet and some dog owners so heartbreaking stories about their pets less treats the larger corporations are not very interested in proving or disproving the value of their food because they're already making it a $1000000000.00 on it and there's no reason to do that research. just one magic bullet you could actually come up with some of the top of these baby bob talk about ways we get access capital and capitalism cavil's important so we could actually have programs that actually help folks who want to do that but when you give every by a $1000.00 i'm

a poor person i'm going to consume that and then you're rich you're going to invest that equity that the wealth disparity is going to grow because you're not using your money did that console you're literally buying more crazy things and then my landlord knowing that i got a $1000.00 you just go raise my writ so then you get your flesh and go all in there . plus leave. you could keep the salon or smear the focus off of us if you still. want to get one. you see in the prison for the most good moment in the. room. you're. not you know that i was sitting

in there. you know one of. us secretary of state mike pompei outlines america's strategy of deterrence and saying the killing of an iranian general. was part of an overall approach it will apply to russia and china. over a 1000 french doctors and hospital workers resigned from administrative duties claiming the government is failing to provide proper funding for the health care sector. which was of the no strength for several months it was an emergency services unit have been sounding the alarm nothing has been the problem. and the media machinations declassified u.k. government documents were.