the main goal of destroying terrorism and then was it achieved? yes, and no. ok to essentially no longer exists good for us. but there are certainly other terrorist groups that are worsted on ahead of the anniversary of 911 ortiz been looking at the lasting impact of the us led war on terror. today we'll be hearing from a british army veteran about the devastating toll of the 20 year afghan conflict graph to many people, the situation which we just gave up. also had the taliban unveils that new government for afghanistan, including a terrorist on the f. b, i most wanted list, but washington left with no other option. it must cooperate with the incoming leadership. and the australian high court rules that media companies can be held

liable for defamatory 3rd party comments posted on their facebook pages. the decision didn't go down well with many news outlets, as we discussed with our panel of guest needs to be accountability directly on those posting the comments where people are basically able to do their own research and looking into things that people are claiming. and the section we shouldn't mention, or, or part of that is having the large audience. and we know that they can also choose what is that and what i broadcasting live from moscow to the world. this is our international, my name is donald quarter. welcome to the program. now we start this news hour with a developing story up to 12. people have been wounded in

a mass shooting in east saint louis in the u. s. state of illinois. according to local media, police are searching for 3 suspects in a wooded area after their getaway vehicle was hit by a commuter train. 6 of the victims are known to have been taken to the hospital, but there is no information at this time on their condition. of course, we'll bring you more on that story as we get it. almost 2 decades have passed since the tragedy of 911. the events that triggered america's war on terror, we're continuing to investigate the last impacts that those conflicts have had on the lives of millions in our special report called on heard voices. the will use all tools at our disposal phase, killed our children to united states was bringing people to watch a sight. it was a pointless exercise among those who paid the highest price for

the african invasion were the $457.00 british personnel killed in action. but for those lucky enough to make it home, many were still left with lasting trauma. let's now hear the account of trevor colt who served in the british army for 20 years. he saw 4 tours in afghanistan and received one of the case, highest honors for his service. i take my life last year and i was in a wheel by the way, my mind ended. i nearly lost my son and i didn't know what to do. a lot of the guys i was with don't really talk to each other anymore. i mean there and to try to delete it and move away from all. put, put quite a few people lives in the last, but for 5 years. i think the most recent is only a few months ago. and i

have been through hell and you're still living it. you just get a feeling of fear she wouldn't understand, you know, and given the order to kill someone and stuff you people get upset of it, things today that don't need it. i won't. so i will, can my coffee, i really just drink the coffee when i 1st went to the gallery on, we were told we were going to burn the poppy fields to the palm, to work and do not. not pon, changed them out. we landed and gone on our troops in a way that they haven't for many years are going to be fighting alongside other countries and situations. a great danger, soonish are very good at taking orders and just getting on with it. i'm not

questioning orders, but as you go to the years and you mature and you start to sort of have to bring in the things yourself and realize why we here. what do we think we know looking at cost on? i think it was a point this exercise. what's happening in the south of afghanistan, the residence about the taliban trying to get back power the water way back. and the taliban had already got in the grind that we'd already cleared. my friend, my really was just a couple, stood on one and died instantly, lost his arms and legs. i believe it's 17 casualties all from, from our group out of each of those casualties. you've got quite a few guys affected by what they've seen. it's trauma, public trauma, as a constant heights about over a weeks and weeks, and most the

u. k. troops and officials of work round the clock to a remorseless deadline. it thanks to the colossal exertions this country has not been processed, checked, vetted, and ended more than 15000 people to safety in less than 2 weeks. i mean, it's been a complete mess, hard by ins and ministration worked with the rest of his allies. it would have been, we were going to leave anyway, but we could have gone up and a systematic approach. for instance. you don't even need to have the military mindset to understand that if you're going to extract from a country, you bring back all your citizens from the embassy, put them into secure bias, and then fly them. what you don't use flyers, your military and angle. what about the, what are the civilians tama and i got tional sick at home,

be $600.00 version m. 16 weapon systems, 3 stars and bombs left behind. so that's munitions that can use for id. like last night i was watching that i watched a video of telephone draft as us special forces moving in behind her to take control of fortune x. which, you know, it's just unbelievable. we've lost too many people for situation which we just gave up on the highly decorated former british army officer trevor cult. throughout the week we'll be hearing from more people both soldiers and civilians whose lives were forever changed by america's longest war. that's in our special coverage on heard voices. 9 days after the u. s. pull out from afghanistan and the country has a new government and waiting. it consists mostly of hard lying taliban militants. and the us says it's in no rush to recognise the new regime that said the white house has added that it has no other option,

but to work with the very terror group. it went to war against 20 years ago. when acting, interior minister is tiny networks terrorists wanted for a bombing the kill. think people including an american is believe to have participated in cross border attack against us troops. there's a $10000000.00 bounty on his head. why are we engaging? should we not, should we not talk to the people who are overseeing garrison and just leave it and not get the rest of the american citizens out? the international community is watching. the united states is watching. its whether they let people depart the country who want to depart, whether they treat women across the country as they have committed to treat them and how they behave and operate. and therefore we're not moving toward recognition . at the same time, we're dealing with a reality world here we have to engage in order to get american citizens and others out of the country. the taliban unveiled it's all male interim government. on wednesday the military will be led by the son of the taliban founder and the interior minister is a militant wanted in the u. s. for deadly bombing, including

a 2017 truck blast and couple that killed 150 people. taliban leadership will also include members of a u. s. designated terror group and former quantavia mo inmates. the prison has been operating at a u. s. military base in cuba for 19 years. in that time, almost $800.00 people have been held there without charge or trial many subjected to water boarding stress positions and sleep deprivation. our former c i a analyst john kerry ack who who lifted the lid on abusive interrogations in guantanamo told r t. neil harvey, that he still stand by his decision to speak out. i have 0 regrets. i will never have any regrets. somebody had to tell the american people that the government was committing crimes in their name. you know, when we try to convince the world that we are a shining beacon of human rights and respect for civil rights and civil liberties.

and then they see us carrying out a torture program at secret prisons around the world. it just makes us look so hypocritical, i can understand why any country would want to emulate the united states in a situation like that. the end of this 20 year military campaign by the united states in afghanistan. did you ever imagine that it would and so quickly, so frantically. no, i didn't imagine so, and i don't think any americans did just like no american assumed in september or october of 2001 that 20 years later we would be having this conversation. you know, president biden said just about a month ago that he believed that the african government could hold out for 6 more months. in fact, they held out for 6 days. and i think that that he gave that 6 month time because that's what he was told by the cia. and it just goes to show you that this

was another intelligence failure in a long line of intelligence failures. i think the after, at the afghan people rightly resent the united states for 20 years of occupation and then in the end, nothing to show for it, but death and destruction. we made this terrible, terrible mistake called nation building, where we decided that it was, it was incumbent upon us to impose a western style democracy on a country that never had any history of western style democracy. and then we couldn't understand why it didn't stick. what we have to have is true and robust, congressional oversight, which we have not had in decades. what you see general is a group of congressional cheerleaders for the cia, the f, b i, the defense department, and the state department. and that has to stop. there has to be legitimate, true oversight, where members of congress tell the government to stop crimes are being committed

and then we have to see those crime prosecuted and see the people who carried out those crimes punished. we haven't seen that in many, many years. meanwhile, the united nations human rights body has warned that if ghana stan is facing a total collapse and basic services with food and life saving aide about to run out, it's estimated at least 600000000 dollars and 8 will be needed by the end of the year to prevent a catastrophe. you and also reports that nearly half of our dana stands population of 38000000 people needs humanitarian aid. among them are 3 and a half 1000000 people internally displaced by the conflict. the red cross president peter mar, traveled to the country and visited medical facilities before meeting with the new afghan government. he also spoke to us on the one side. you will see all that these remnants of war. you see these

camps, distorted vehicles, military vehicles. you see destruction where fighting has taken place, including in some of the cities like flush car and others. and on the other hand, you see and normally of life and normal life, you see that this country is and has been affected by 40 years of war. and by poverty and the 2 together create enormous humanitarian need. we had a long conversation with marla, about the deputy of now, and now it's government, a very substantial conversation with him self and with some of his closer ates and collaborators in order to ensure that the humanitarian space, which is needed for

a good, impactful, and usually humanitarian assistance are guaranteed, i think we got a lot of understanding and also good sense that we need for it or dialogues as we move forward. i court in australia has ruled that some of the country's largest media companies can now be held liable for comments that users post on their social media pages. the case was triggered by dylan bowler, a former detainee and an australian youth detention center. he claims that negative comments posted on an image of him, shackled in a spit hood on social media were defamatory major news outlets including sky news and the sydney morning herald appealed to the ruling, saying they can't be held responsible for 3rd party comments. the decision was upheld by the high court the acts of the appellants in facilitating

encouraging and their boy assisting the posting of comments by the 3rd party facebook uses rendered them publishes of those comments. the appellants attempts to betray themselves as passive on unwitting victims of facebook's functionality has an air of unreality. having take an action to secure the commercial benefit of the facebook functionality, the appellants bear the legal consequences. facebook has yet to comment on the court decision, however, it looks likely that australian news outlets may now disable the comments feature feature. facebook added in march or post fewer stories on social media, something they say restrict freedom of speech. this decision was time the exchange of ideas incursions facebook uses to turn off a petune into for comments i call on australia is attorneys general to address this anomaly and bring australian law into line with comparable western democracies. my colleague niel harvey discussed this issue earlier with their panel of guests. we

need some accountability needs to be accountability directly on those posting comments. and if you want to pursue those people, you can. but at the same time, if the media companies are encouraging this by skewing what they publish on facebook and other platforms to generate interest, to have those little rabble rousing plate bite, then they need to share some of the blame it. it's supposed to, the people actually say, comment section, seriously, most people read comments be entertained. they know it's maybe a bunch of yahoo's and most people are basically able to do their own research and looking into things that people are claiming. and the section, it's kind of a stretch to hold a publisher accountable for defamation or what have you, based on just what someone on the internet wants to say on their facebook feed. there's a fight now for the attention by media organizations and they do use the comment section as a way of whipping up interest in

a story. and that must be fully aware of the inflammatory things that said the money is the very, very hateful and very defamatory on many subjects, but it serves that purpose. do they need to take more responsibility for? this is the double edge sword, the, the tough issue because, you know, in one way we should take personal responsibility. we should be able, we should be allowed to have a freedom of speech regardless of what that is. and i hope that people have the wherewithal to know what to follow, what was more now with a book this outlook does not matter, has an audience of millions and millions of people, 1200000000 people around the world. and so the audience is much, much larger looking at a lot more chances for damages or onto one reputation. and so that's why i think, i think at the very least we should have been mentioned or, or look at in part of that is having these large audiences. because we know that they can also choose what is that and what goes in especially comments. but what

they were saying here was that when articles published, even if they try not mention the name, they are still, it will be part of that article to have the comment because you chose to put it, you're encouraging people to comment urging people to say thing whatever that might cause to a 3rd party or somebody else, and that is what they're looking at is that people a lot more people are going to read comments from john, go with 10 followers. if it's on some major tabloid article, or even any major new organization, home and sections of any website, they seem like a kind of a double edged sword. seems like the companies enjoy them. maybe they kind of create more interest. they generate a buzz around an article or a particular topic, but the, but also that come with that dangerous side that people will say, had a lot of hateful, potentially defamatory stuff. is this the best solution now that what's being proposed or is there a better way to go? we have to start training people we, we smarter about how they take information and what they read online. the rational

people. busy know when they're being misled, they know when something a quick page, they know it's a really common section and maybe pull it or they need to look into something more deeply. you know, as a free speech i polluted. i think that if you want to go down this route, the owner needs to go on the owner of the property, which is facebook, you know, in new york time to someone at the facebook page is the most common. thank you. are kind of the own their page. facebook got very clear. the 3rd to serve as a basement owns everything you put on their site. so it does it, it seems suspicious that this comes down onto the publisher and not the publisher being the news organization and not facebook itself. first of all, within facebook, they can shuttle coming. and they're not particularly worried about having driving up a big item. i think for all that can simply go in and secondly, they told me directly if a comment is in against their all they have to be given the opportunity to take it down. and therefore if somebody points out,

the defamatory comment has been published. and the public hit publish as a publisher to do so. if the publisher ignore this opportunity and doesn't take it down the very, very brightly, the publisher should buy the music you're watching our international. the messaging service whatsapp is again under fire for apparently ditching a pledge to protect its users private data. we breakdown the implications after this short break the the way the u. s. government funded is through the issuance of treasury bond and they pay the interest on those bonds by collecting taxes who owns most of those bonds? virtually all those bonds, the top 110th of one percent. so the government simply becomes

a pastor mechanism for people to pay money from their pockets through something called taxes that are just a fake leave that hides the transmission mechanism of your money through the government into those who own these bond loan. when i would show the wrong one old fool, joe, don't get to shape out this thing because after an engagement, it was the trail. when so many find themselves will depart, we choose to look for common ground in the

welcome back to the program. now the messaging service whatsapp prides itself on advanced encryption technology, which supposedly keeps your messages private, but it turns out most users are handing over far more data to the apps parent company facebook than thought ortiz. dmitri polk has more everyone likes their privacy. and when you use a messenger, like what's app that keeps hammering on and on about how secure it is, you're inclined to believe that your private data stays well private. well, shocker, that's apparently not the case. what's up turns out to be, well, not that private and it's owner. facebook keeps paying hundreds of millions in fines for privacy violations. and that's after numerous promises from zuckerberg, about insuring a truly secure experience on their platforms. i believe the future of communication will increasingly shift to private encrypted services where people can be confident, what they say to which others stay secure. this is the future i hope will help

bring about that was back in 2019 and what was supposed to be the messenger to bring about a part of that private future. but come on, this is facebook were talking about, according to a recent investigation by the pro public a platform, it turns out facebook actively undermined its security assurances. the only encrypted data available for scrutiny is extensive. its includes the names and profile images of the uses. what's up groups, as well as the phone number, profile, photo status, message phone, but your level language and time zone unique mobile phone id and ip address. and that's not all. other unencrypted data reportedly includes access to the user's entire list of electronic devices. any related facebook or instagram accounts the last time they use the app and even a history of any previous violations, not exactly what you would call complete privacy. although a spokesperson for what did reiterate that users messages are still encrypted and

are only seen when they are forwarded to the user submitted report system. the decisions we make around how we build out app. our focus around the privacy of our users, maintaining a high degree of reliability and prevention abuse. but the company doesn't just stop at batting accounts, which have been reported by users. they've also allegedly share all the information they have with the justice department. apparently what's ab metadata played an important role in the arrest of a former senior advisory at the us treasury? natalie may edwards, who had been sent to prisoner for leaking sensitive information to the media, describing how dirty money flows through us banks edwards has maintained. she leaked the documents in a bid to expose corruption. notice was accountability and american people had the right to know what was occurring within treasury and that it was a national security issue. and the american lives were in jeopardy. instead of the government doing their job, they decided to come after a whistleblower with the increasing rate at which the u. s. government requests

information from all facebook affiliated platforms. it's plausible to assume there will be more arrest based on may the data in the near future. and while facebook promises but it cares about security and privacy of its users at the end of the day, it doesn't seem to have an issue collecting and giving out information to those who ask for it seems the company is more concerned with stopping the spread of what they call disinformation, and with trying to assert their influence in politics, instead of actually remembering that they started as a social media site, it's true to say that nothing is really private nowadays, but that doesn't change the fact that when a company assures and promises its users that something will be encrypted and they, they will not be able to review the content of their messages. when that trust is broke. i think that they should be entitled to, at least, frankly, at this point, some sort of compensation. there are different protections for consumers in every

industry, but for some reason, tech companies seem to be the only ones out there that can once again reg, they're on terms of service and for their customers trust with no consequences, largely. and i think it's about time that the actual elected officials in the world start asserting their power against these tech janes and reminding the silicon valley billionaires that know they are not our rulers, and that nobody elected them. they are not above the law. russia and its neighbor, bella roofs are moving towards closer towards integration. now the leaders of the 2 countries met in moscow late on thursday. the ongoing spat between minced and the european union over refugees was also high up on the agenda as ilia portraying co explains. well, now there's definitely a new reason for tension between the european union and bellows, which have already been locking horns for a while now. because of many different issues in particular because of the attitude by brussels to the comp, like between the government and minsk,

and the opposition there. now you can definitely add afghan refugees to that list. brussels has accused men's of taking advantage of this as a tool for pressure on the european blog. now, on the other hand, bell ruse is saying that the european union is turning a blind eye on how poland and lithuania are mis treating the african refugees and all how they're pretty much taking them out of the country, back into bellows. during the press conference, the journalists asked the 2 presidents whether moscow and mens were ready to react to all that accordingly. with some joint action, a lot of my potent replied that this is none of russia's business. because here we're talking about the border between poland and bell rouge, between lithuania and bruce, but the russian president did go on to criticize the european union. what he meant was that european countries are in touch with the taliban. however,

they are refusing to talk to the bell, russian government directly, which never came to power as a result of an armed take over with you. my answer is go and talk to the bell original authorities, european countries talk about the catastrophe. enough chemist on blame themselves for leaving the people the but some african refugees have been pushed out of europe towards better versus borders with lithuania and poland. i don't understand this logic, you can blame dollars for anything, but at least taking the afghans went to push them out to back to get this done. but then will they ask us to get them out of there again, there is no logic. a much wider discussion on the of refugees and other security issues related to again, a stan is expected next week when alexander lucas shinkel and vladimir putin will be joined by other heads of state from the region induced on bay. that's the capital to g. stand only about 200 kilometers away from again,

is stand. this all the proves how crucial these issues are at this point. but it also shows how the most important regional players, such as russia and china, along with their post. soviet allies are ready to deal with all of that together. or for more details on those stories you just saw. make sure to check out our website, r t dot com or follow us on your favorite social media platform. we'll be back with more in just about 30 minutes. so stay tuned. the for many of us, the end of the american war enough denison was inevitable. in the end, the conflict was more about a massive grip than about nation building and smart, strategic thinking. jo bible says to us is done with we making foreign countries through the use of force. there is no reason to take the american president. i just work

i use this is boom, but the one business show you can't afford to miss branch a board. and i'm rachel. and then washington, coming after you crate becomes the 5th country in as many weeks to adopt a new law aimed at recognizing and regulating crypto current will break down what it means for the growing industry and its power worldwide. what china makes the unprecedented.