to protect yourself and get informed. wow, guys with it. it's breaking used this allied live on our team international, a crackdown on free speech by the german media regulator offering bands off sister channel r t t e. from broadcasting on any platform. spanish newspaper leaks. what it claims is the u. s. nato responds to russia's proposed security guarantees. the document refuses to keep ukraine out of the alliance. something moscow said it would not tolerate. while the european union dreams of a green transition, it's commission recognizes natural gas and atomic energy as sustainable resources. despite the big objections from environmental it

with you have arrived bang on time this hours news caused, i real research, i live on anti international from moscow. would you start this out with some breaking news for you? he has accused the german media regulator of suppressing free speech. after our sister channel archie dee was hit with a full ban including online news networks, production always taking the, regulates a court offer to wrong. lee named austin channels, broadcaster ortiz, deputy editor in chief of balcony, was here in the studio just a bit out via a license that was obtained with absolutely all courting european rules and regulations, according to the european convention on transferred to your television. and we are free to broadcast via that license in 30 plus territory across europe. they are saying that our tv productions,

which is an entirely independent production company, is actually the tv channel of that broadcasts from germany. and there's generally absolutely no broadcasting happening from berlin at all r t d e. the tv channel is oh, broadcasting right here for moscow in, in fact, there studios are essentially next door to where we're sitting here. and we were here all launching the channel mid december. yet nevertheless, the regulator is asking the production company to stop broadcasting, which they are not even doing. and to do it not just on television, but to do it on the all the online platforms, apps, etc, etc. which again, the production has absolutely no control over all of this is centered right here in moscow. and the tv broadcasting as well is done from here with you think they were afraid of something that we do here at our team? i mean, it definitely seems that there is quite a lot of apprehension about

a different voice, like r t or it's being present there, you know, and they are under fire. not just under it from authorities. in, in germany, the youtube channel was taken down within hours of the, of the beginning of the broadcast. that is obviously an american company. and then indeed there was pressure being put on an indicator independence satellite operator . util sat to take us to, to stop broadcasting our feed as well. so it really is a multi pronged attack when one of the comments that you've made regarding this, you say, quote, we will not be removing our feeds or channels voluntarily and encourage all platforms not to be bullied by the media watchdogs, illegitimate minds that does it seem like bullying. yeah, absolutely. and we've seen those done not just with regards to the broadcasting, but various productions have had all of their various partners. bullied, including your banking, banking, relationships, other operational relationships for or for the last number of years. and we believe

that, you know, the r t d production position is entirely not just legal and in accordance with all the rules and regulations, but is beyond substantiated and that we're hoping that the courts are going to see that side with them. likewise, our tv channels position is entirely legitimate within germany and other european markets, and we will be defending that position earlier. rushers of foreign minister. so good luck for off war of retaliation. if germany refuses to reinstate the channel. names of germany is trying to place its internal regulations, which it claims do not allow the registration of state channels above its international obligations under the european convention on trans frontier television. we spoke with karen, can i fill the former foreign minister of austria a she sees the craft down on r, c d,

e s punishment for networks success i think we own have been observing at development. that is more political than fact based i, it's really hard to detect a really like a really a real logic behind to pull up ongoing punishment sanctioning all of our t german, i believe is his mild situation. that due to the fact that there is a certain demand for a different way of tv broadcasting to, to the fact that the websites are keyed, german has already yielded some success in the german speaking audience. there is a certain aneice that has the reason being as so way showing that the german t v stations motive to blow those which are financed by public money by, by the audience. people simply half

a deep distrust of so it was really missing the whole debate is effect based argumentation. it has become from the german side, very politicized, and very, a harsh punitive approach towards our tv. and this technically is, was a kind of political chandler, it's, it's not motivated by purely legal arguments or the hola t saga has been going on for a few months already. now. in fact, since the very day of launch so on say, is nicky aaron now for a moment just takes a look back at the top of the events surrounding our sister channel b r t d launch date was an exciting day, but within hours it wasn't just reporting the news, it was the news with the channels live stream deleted from youtube, just a short time off. it went on and then just days later was

a finding increasing interference. and the channel signal also was taken off. what it's to start a line off, the juvenile authorities claimed and didn't have the license needed to operate in the country. but the thing is it doesn't need one having obtained its broadcasting license in serbia, which just like to many is a signatory to the european convention. of trans runs here television. the member states of the council of europe and the other states party to the european cultural convention are reaffirming their commitment to the principles of the free flow of information in ideas in the independence of broadcasters, which constitute an indispensable basis for their broadcasting policy. most of which i know about the closure of bank accounts and so on. there's a large number of tactics they're using say r t d cons operate, they're infringing on freedom of speech and that's very bad. but the european regulator is clearly under a different impression. the license must be issued in germany, and the application must also be filed here. first of all, this is a real irritant,

and we will take care of it. so what was the reaction from the german government? what it seems they've decided to stay out of the ralph and now although you don't have to dig to saw, to find the kind of tone being set by some in the ruling coalition, the media authority and youtube rightly pulled the plug on the pirate station of the enemies of democracy and lateral thinkers, this repeated attempt to circumvent european and national laws and the schools, the danger of this self proclaimed tv broadcast that requires action at all levels . so could this be the end of the road for the short live channel? well, our c d e is already preparing to fight on. we spoke with rock legend roger waters, of course, the co founder of pink floyd. he thinks germany wants to block alternative viewpoints that ultimately challenge the mainstream narratives. they want to create and may chain a monopoly of media that only express is the accepted

western narrative that comes down to them to those major outlets from the, the ruling class in western society. and then when in the western countries, russia today actually provides an old sun to view it to the view that is given by certainly every single american tv network. you cannot watch network tv in the united states because it's all nonsense. every single minute. i don't care if it's fox news or m s m, b, c. it's all made up nonsense. so, russia today, which you can watch in the united states, in which i do watch russia today to gives every appearance much more direct about the reality of our

lives this globe, than folks use or m s, m, b, c, or any of the other set. certainly, net network television and you say all the b, b, c, or d, b, or channel for any of the stations as well. but i would like to shut down, shut down any voice that doesn't necessarily tow the line and agree with big brother on every single issue down to the last cross t and doughty, di and full stop. this is so well in this is 1984 come to live there looking in a mirror when that when they accuse r t a being disseminated this information particularly now with all this nonsense about the ukraine, they're looking in america. that's exactly what they are. all during the full

text of the confidential us nato responds to russia. security concerns has been leaked. the purported document was published by the spanish newspaper l piece. early here in the studio, my colleagues neil harvey and saskia. taylor discussed its contents over the past few weeks, we've seen at the highest diplomatic levels, riley's of accusations of verbal sparring. and that's just what's been happening in public. so we can only imagine what's going on behind closed doors. but now a fresh document leak has all put off a glimpse into what is indeed happening behind those doors. and it's really showed that moscow and washington, alongside nato, a very, very far from reaching any kind of consensus with regards to ukraine, issue, uninsured. well beyond move, not that does seem to be almost a blind unwillingness from the military alliance to recognize any of russia security concerns. now, the spanish language paper hasn't managed to get its hands on the nato and us

response to russia. security proposals now will remember those proposals they were sent back in december. they fence triggered a flurry of tip from attic talks and cools, and essentially they requested legal guarantees, restricting father nato expansion, specifically with regards to ukraine. the document that we're seeing now though, reveals a very blunt response from washington and brussels. and it's in all states should respect the right of other states to choose or change security arrangements and to decide their own future and foreign policy free from outside interference. in this slide, we reaffirm our commitment to nato's open door policy under article 10 of the washington treaty. we have of course, requested comment from both nato and the us state department. but if we take just this document, it seems that it is an open shot case. them, they will not compromise. that is despite vladimir putin warning. but this is a very reckless disregard of russia's concerns. it's not well for help because do

people realize that this could potentially set all nations involved down a very dangerous path of no return association? because when you much listen carefully to what i say in ukraine's own dock trying to document it is written that they plan to return crimea, including by military means that it's not what they say publicly. imagine for yourself that ukraine and nate members will begin military operations in crimea. what do we do? go to war with the nato block? has anyone thoughts about that's going on? so the situation is it seems to me both sides refusing to budge and let him pitch and set it there in a slightly different context. but what do we do? what's versus reaction? been to this most has already sent, follow up questions to this document. so clearly there is a desire for continued a dialogue, but most disposition on this has been consistent from the beginning. it recognizes, of course, that every single country has the right to determine its own policy and assure its own security thought is not what's being disputed. here the issue is when countries choices have ramifications beyond its borders and actually post

a very real physical threat to someone else. and let's just be clear. a potential natal launchpad located in ukraine is just a couple of minutes miss all away from, from russia. so it's essentially, i think this fear that really underlies russia's concerns in that area. michelle is just ignoring our concerns, the u. s. and need to refer to the right to states to freely choose how to ensure the security. but it's not just about giving someone this right. after all, this is only one parts of the well known formula for the indivisibility of security . the 2nd integral part says that once not allow the strengthening of anyone security at the expense of the security of other states. so the washing leaders asking, why must we start profile our security that someone else can feel safe? not said it would be remiss if i didn't point out that the document has some encouraging moments. i'm talking about reestablish communication long military

channels, reinstating the nature office here and moscow discussing arms control. so reducing missile deployment to ukraine. but if we get to the bottom of it, let's be blown. according to this document, the west responds to ne, existential concern of russia says, we hear you what we don't care enough to do anything. and this is, in fact case closed. we're not going to discuss it further, but here's a list of much smaller things that we feel that we can give you to project an image that we are listening and being cooperative, but do nothing in any way to address your fundamental concerns. and with that kind of inflexible rhetoric combined, of course, with this ongoing footage of millions of dollars worth of weapons being sent to kiev. it's very difficult even with the best of intentions to see where to move from. now. we discussed the whole issue of nato expansion with political analyst, chris banbury. he says the alliance has gone from being a defensive block to being an aggressive one. now often to room here is the question of need to expansion and not document tries to avoid the fact that

a promise was made to mikhail gorbachev on the head of the status of the promises made by the americans to be no need to expansion into eastern europe and former soviet republics, that promise which know the americans are trying to deny that for me or they just said above all promises that has obviously been broken. i don't this need to in the west simply point hardball by saying that i'm going to contain is open to a policy towards ukraine. not as a c inside as a saying that it's unlikely the ukraine will ever be allowed to join. natal bought the appointment hardball, which seems to me an aggressive policy in relation to the russia. they expansion in eastern europe and expansion into the former soviet republics is a long way for being a defensive warms based on the north atlantic. so nice is rule is fundamentally changed and has become an aggressive one. ah,

natural gas and nuclear power could soon be classed as green energy in the e. u. of the european commission supports the idea, but has been slammed by various environmental groups as quote, green washing. there was still nice the approval of at least 20 member states crossing life. now it's about an arctic peter, all of us standing by peter low that stay k with billions of euro's being invested in so called sustainable energy. what, what is the latest now on this dispute? when you entered, she's been in focus for quite a while with energy prices across year of being through the roof. but what we've seen on wednesday with the e u commission outline their plans to reclassify some natural gas projects and nuclear power projects on green energy investments. what the u commission, hope that this would do is that it would well take a couple of boxes, really one that it would guess investment cash flowing into energy projects to get

more energy projects off the ground for to supply much needed energy to the european union. countries also that it would help the european union take some of it or meet some of its climate goals that it's set. now, mary had mcginnis two's the commissioner in charge of these type of things outlined exactly why they've gone down this route. we need to use all the tools at our disposal to achieve climate neutrality. we putting in place strict conditions for their inclusion. they're subject to clear limits and phase out periods. some will use this instrument and others may not. but whoever invests will be certain that the product they're investing in should it contain nuclear or gas. they will know. well, not everybody is happy with this, but some are. we'll start with those likely to be pretty quickly pleased with the saw. france and germany will start with paris and swell front generates just over 70 percent of its electricity from nuclear power. well,

they may well have just become one of the greenest countries in the european union . if this eventually goes through because of their use of nuclear, it's also likely to be quite well received here in berlin as well. where i'm speaking to you from germany does use an awful lot of gas to generate electricity. an awful lot of renewables as well. but gas is seen very much, is the bridging fuel as they try and transfer more and more towards renewables. the gulf stream to gas pipelines, the much talked about that infrastructure project between germany and russia, looking more and more important showed this plan go through and gas ultimately be designated as the green fuel. we'll see more or more investment towards gus in and across the european unity. and i said, not everybody was happy though. and heading into this meeting on wednesday, we heard from austria, denmark, sweden, and the netherlands. all saying they didn't want to see gus added to the list. there's also a whole host of environmental groups as well,

who say this is essentially just moving the goal posts to fit what you want to hear and what you want to see and amounts to little more than green washing. the complimentary delegated act tabled by the european commission sacrifices the scientific integrity of the taxonomy on the altar of fossil gas and nuclear lobbies . firstly, labeling fossil gas is a sustainable activity is completely incompatible with limiting global warming to $1.00 degrees celsius and with the use 2030 climate targets. secondly, even if ignoring the risks of catastrophic nuclear accidents, it is evident that nuclear does not apply to these key principles as it poses significant environmental and social hazards at all stages of its supply chain. while there's still a few hoops to for this to jump through before it could come into force. in fact, there was some questions put the money out. and again, if the commissioner about potential legal challenges from so member states no confirmation on that other yet,

but it does helps to go before the lead is of the 27 members of the european union . more than 20 would have to say no for to fall at that hurdle, it looks extremely unlikely that that would happen as of yet. once it gets passed there, which it looks like it will. it goes to the european parliament way, more than half of any piece have to vote in favor of it. right now. it does seem like it would squeak by the us looking at probably quite a few months though before we see these new rules come into place and we see gas or some gas projects and nuclear power labeled as green energy projects by the european union. no, i peter, thank you. well, canadian truckers are still out in force protesting against mandatory cobit shots and top officials of accused them of endangering public safety including the leader of the out both of province. and it is, however, unfortunate to see a small number of people who engaged in protest over the past few days express

extreme views and embrace hateful sim symbols. it's also unfortunate to see a small number break. the law create a public safety hazard and a enormous inconvenience for law body canadians including thousands of other truckers. by blocking the border at coots, i want to be very clear. we are not intimidated by those who hurl insults and abuse at small business workers and steal food from the homeless. we won't give in to those who fly racist flags. we won't cave to those who engage in vandalism or dishonor the memory of our veterans. canadians tours outside today. patriotic peace, loving canadians recalled massage in us and races by the prime minister. so again,

i will ask the prime minister, who may i remind this house war black face, one more time ties to the peace loving. patriotic canadians who are outside right. now just asking to be heard a yourself for truckers chanting freedom and what they use in their vehicles right now to look a part of the us border and the province of alberta. it's all despite the threat of being arrested, although it is reported now the negotiations are inside, taking place between canadian authorities and the truck is we spoke to one of the men from the convoy. i realize you're right away. i can't count all these people and all these vehicles. yeah, there was people. hi 5 in me as i drive drove my truck. it was just unbelievable. every bridge had flags on it flying. there was companies that had big dreams up in the holding flag. what the media is not, is trying to show is that this is

a small movement, but i want to tell the world that this is huge and we're trying to keep it respectable and we're trying to keep it clean and, and, and then save for everyone. we know at canada's behind us, what our prime minister doesn't understand is all those trucks that are there working because of his mandates. well, they were all to go. it's pretty simple. we're going to be freezing or we're going to we are going to succeed because we are leaving a canadas. mainstream media is being accused of pirating the government lined by vilifying the truckers with a barrage of negative headlines. there is strong public support. the organist organizes your say, raising nearly $10000000.00 canadian dollars in donations. some regions have made concessions. apparently, a quebec has now scrapped a proposed so called a health tax on the unbox unaided. so we spoke to local journalists, keon bags,

who says the media and the government are only making matters worse. i've been on the ground in ottawa for the past couple days and ever since conway actually arrived and the means for me has completely botched their coverage of, of this protest of this demonstration in this movement. in general. they say that it's full of races, sits. i personally have not seen any confederate flags, were not see symbolism with my own eyes. i've seen footage of it, but i've also seen fast swaths of people i outraged at the fact that that happened . and the thing is, i don't really trust. i don't really trust that it's true because you know, these people are hiding their face. they're showing their flags for a few minutes and then disappearing. but the problem is just for those relishing in this tyranny, justin trudeau is enjoying every moment that he's able to scapegoat a minority of people who are unvaccinated, 15 percent or so. and use that as a political step stool to stand higher and preach to his base who are eating it all

up. president biden has said that he's going to fulfill an election promise by appointing a black woman to fill a vacancy on the supreme court. and some republicans have suggested it's a bad idea to limit the candidate fail to one race and one gender. of course, that spoke a furious response from the liberal media. right wing radio and tv once a fight. they need a fight over the supreme court. they're already starting a fight. that's rooted and way down the politics. all the foxes prime time shows are outraged. the biden has committed denominating, a justice who is black and female ledger i by maybe to i'd rather quickly to get his nominee into the supreme court. the democrats widely predicted to lose that senate majority this, the after the november, the midterm elections. well meanwhile, and you poll suggests that 76 percent of americans want biden to consider all possible nominees for a new supreme court justice. only 23 percent. want him to limit the search to black

women. several us top politicians including a 2020 democratic presidential hopeful se, putting skin and gender before qualification is not just bad. it's dangerous for the country. the fact that he is willing to make the promise at the outset that it must be a black woman, i guess. so that's offensive, right. you know, you know, black women are what 6 percent of the u. s. population. he's saying to 94 percent of americans, i don't give a damn about you fight and shows harris as his v p because of the color of her skin and sex not qualification. she's been a disaster. now he promises to, to supreme court nominee on the same criteria, identity politics is destroying our country. we heard from christopher harris, the executive director of an hyphenated america. he thinks picking a candidate based on a race ultimately undermines deposition. oh, worst thing just to be a black person and having people believe that the only reason you were there is

because of the color of your skin or because of that you're a token or that you were the beneficiary of some sort of affirmative action program as opposed to people knowing that you were they are because you're qualified if it is in fact true, that the bite administration is looking to put a black woman on a supreme court because for no other reason than her being a black female, you're doing a terrible disservice that blacks, you know, i don't care if you put a black woman or a green person or whatever like that in a supreme court. i am a constitutional conservative. what i want to know is, what is the fidelity of that individual to the actual meaning of the constitution? not that it should be, don't if you're coming in and you believe it, it's a living document that i don't watch on the supreme court. i don't care about the color scheme of the gender if that's what your belief system is. i, that's if and out here what, how to international wrapping up and he was caught now as for me, 6, 28 pm on wednesday here at moscow. appreciate your company. many more stories built

a common when you were it's out and i will be in about an hour. ah ah ah. well oh oh oh oh i ah ah

ah . hello and welcome to cross to upper all things were considered. i'm peter lavelle, not long ago open public debate was considered a good thing even essential for a stable and functioning society. today. if you do not follow in propagate liberal parties, you are accused of misinformation and should be banned from polite society. shut up or else ah, to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, lionel in new york. he is illegal in media analyst in ohio. we have all over boy barrett. he is america's professor.