ah with breaking news here on our ti, poland says it can not officially confirm the launch missile, which landed on its territory with moscow. saint afforded missile fragments do not appear to be related to russian army in strikes on ukraine. meanwhile, the top nato power, the u. s says they can not identify whether the missile was russian. i some other nato states have quickly called for implementing the alliances article 5 for seen a collected military response. ukrainian officials, a multiple cities across the country,

have been hit by missiles targeting energy sites and leading to widespread blackouts. plus, while the west pushes with ukraine agenda, most of the world wants a peaceful solution. that's the message from russia as foreign minister at the ongoing g 20 summit with from lost out of the world. this is our to international. i'm rachel blevins here with the top stories of the our welcome to the program. we begin with breaking news, as poland says, it doesn't have any evidence to confirm you might have a launch and a large missile attack on its territory that says the russian defense ministry says the fragments which have reportedly been found at the site do not resemble any armament currently used by the russian military, the incident branded by polish media and officials, as a missile strike occurred on tuesday in a village close to b,

ukrainian border and left to civilians dead. moscow has called the incident a provocation. statements by polish media and officials about legit russian missile strike are deliberate provocation aimed at escalating the situation. the russian military has not conducted any strike on a target near the ukrainian polish border. the fragments shown by the polish media do not pertain to russia weaponry in any way. russia had reportedly been conducting strikes on multiple targets, remind ukraine to earlier in the day. the polish village that was allegedly hid is 70 kilometers away from the nearest reported target. in the western ukrainian city of lavar, these are on verified images, reportedly from the scene. you can see the damage vehicles in a rural area. missile fragments reportedly found at the site are also visible. the polish foreign ministry said the minstrel was russian made not stating who exactly

launched it, that some reports say be alleged fragments are from a soviet as 300 air defense missile type currently used by the ukranian armed forces. the polish military is on high alert with the countries leadership in contact with fellow nato members about the incident pulling nato allies in the baltics have accused russia directly attacking the block and called for an immediate reaction. you, current resident zalinski has said russia should quote, be put in this place under nato's article 5. an attack against any member state is considered an attack against all of the member states, and therefore may lead to a collective military response. it's one of the alliances core principles. article 5 has only been invoked one following the terrorist attacks against the u. s. as a timber 112001. what is considered tack is decided by the member states as poland as part of the alliance, a military attack on that country could trigger direct involvement from other nato

forces. however, nato's top military power, the u. s. doesn't seem to be as competent as this partners and invoking article 5. as the pentagon has admitted that washington cannot confirm whether the missile was russian. well, i think we want to deal with facts. and so again, we've seen the press reports. and as i mentioned before, i walked in here no information to corroborate these reports at this time. but again, we're taking them seriously and we're looking into them. and so i think it's incumbent on, on all of us to get the facts before we start speculating or jumping to conclusions . and then we'll go from there. now it appears so far the united states has given a somewhat measured response, while some members of nato seem to be calling for an immediate escalation. we are hearing washington say that they need time to investigate and determine the truth. here's what we heard from the state department,

just after what we heard earlier from the pentagon. i don't want to speculate about hypotheticals. we're working with the bullish government and our allies and partners to gather more information and assess exactly what will happen. we're going to do that, we will determine what will happen in east terminal for britain, next steps. and also we've heard from the white house. this is the statement from the white house. shortly after receiving these reports, national security advisor jake sullivan spoke with chief of the national security bureau of poland. we cannot confirm the reports or any of the details at this time . we will determine what happened and what the appropriate next steps would be. now joe biden is currently in bali for the g 20 summit. however, we understand that he has been briefed on the events on what has taken place, and he plans to be speaking with the polish head of state and the public leader will be speaking with biden over the phone. they will be consulting on the matter. now, as we've heard from the nato chief himself, the question remains, if this is

a situation which article 5 would be involved and that would mean an immediate military response, or rather, that this is a situation in which article 4 would be involved in which it would be important for countries to consult with each other. we understand that the nato countries are at this point in touch with each other trying to determine what happened and it appears the pretty solid position of washington. at this point is that more investigation is needed to determine exactly what happened while there are voices that are speaking loudly and calling for escalation the position of washington at this time from what we're hearing in their statements is that they need more information before making a solid decision, whole and military is reported to be on alert, as well as nato's joint forces in eastern europe. the alliance has scheduled an urgent summit to be held later today. it is also set that international experts, including from the us, are going to investigate the incident. so for more on this,

let's cross live now to civil rights attorney, robert patillo. robert is good to have you on the program today. now, so far we're hearing that poland is saying the rockets were produced in russia, but hasn't confirmed who launched them if they are certain that it was moscow? would the evidence not have been made public already? what is your take on the situation was i think this is one of those choices where we have to take a measured approach and find out the amplitude, the situation we've seen several times in the last century. attacks be attributed to a nation and the justification for war. we go back to the spanish american war, for example, the u. s. blame spain for tech in the us, us, us as main to start the war. and that never happened. if you go back to vietnam, you had to go to tompkins resolution, where they claimed that norfolk the means fucking us naval vessel, the and that was the justification for entering that war. it never happens. so we have to be very cognizant of the western powers using false flag attacks

justification to escalate military involvement. and when it comes to some of the reports of this, maybe being an es $300.00. so be their anti aircraft rocket. thousands of those were produced between 1965 old women tell today, there is no way of knowing if it was from the, from russia, or if it was from another former soviet block nation, because so many of them are actually still in circulation. additionally, there's questions about the range of those weapons. those are anti aircraft weapons, not ground, the tech weapon, with a rangel about 150 kilometers about 90 miles. i don't believe they're russian forces that close to the polish border that will be able to hit those. so i think there are many questions that need be asked by the international community. they will not be difficult to bring missile remnants from ukraine to poland in order to justify escalation or in that mental article 5, everything that be measured approaches approaches the correct approach where you make a really good point there. and that is that, you know, we're in this situation where we're still waiting on

a number of reports to come out. and yet the initial media reports were quick to jump on. this claim that these were, quote, unquote, russian missiles. and they were quoting anonymous, us intelligence officials, and yet even the pentagon came out and said that they couldn't confirm it. and now we're hearing more and more these claims that they can't be confirmed exactly who was behind it. so what do you make of that response that we've seen from the united states, and especially from the pentagon right now, taking that measured approach in this situation? so i think this is a sign of the wanted desire to bring this to a peaceful resolution by the us and not jumping the gun and try and escalate as we've seen the u. s. i in the past week to present to the you in the resolution for operations against russia. we saw the g 20 in bali. this in the past were being then trying to rally nations against russia in order to push for a the resumption of talks. and i think that that approaches the necessary approach

that any attempts to escalate this. they do not benefit the western benefit, the premium people do not benefit russia, do not benefit the world and we have to start working toward the pizza world resolution. so i think this is one time to having joe biden as president that be helpful because having all my trump or someone like george w bush or detainee and office, we don't know the us response would have been having a measured approach. clearly the correct approach. now when it comes to the reports that we've heard so far, you know, you have polish officials that have accused russia conducting the missile strike. but the fragments, as you noted earlier, have been shown by the media to be from an s 300 missile defense system. which is also used by ukraine. what do you make of poland being so quick to put the blame on russia? and how seriously should we be taking this talk of possibly invoking article 5 right now, that's coming from a number of nato member states. wondering what we've seen of poland under president

or a president due to as well as the other balkan states have been on razor's edge in the invasion ukraine. if you think about, we're polling situated directly butting ukraine and also butting bella roof. they've wanted more experiences of from the western powers that they will be supporting the been a will not be the next nation being invaded. if that that may just be the reason they jumped the gun on a case like situation like this where it could have been a misfire. ukrainian missile could be volkswagen tech. it could be just an effort by deceptive to so fear in the opposed people in order to escalate this war. there's all sorts of possible answers to this. i think the medium invoking invoking article 5 will serve nobody's interest in this except for the people who want to see the destruction of europe and who do not want to see if he's a resolution to this matter. certainly a lot of stay karen will continue to follow as the situation unfolds. civil rights

attorney, robert patillo, thank you so much for your time and analysis. thank you. now all of this comes as ukrainian cities remain without electricity after russia has reportedly conducted around $85.00 strikes on ukrainian infrastructure. that's according to authorities in kiev. archie correspondent, mariah garcia, has more details on the blackouts affecting the country. ukrainian government has described the situation with electricity as desperate even bordering on catastrophic into regions in ukraine have been plunged into blackouts or outages of being observed, observed all over the country. lowball network operators limiting services in the bid to keep others rubbing, such as basic phone calls. in tier half the cities said to be with our power in oil, this is, this is as a result of a mass of volley of cruise missiles and other strokes. of course,

ukraine learned by the russian military of the euclidian sa. good said the claim that 85 various shrikes, most of them cruise missiles, were lodged at various critical infrastructures such but you claim claims that 70 of those missiles what was shot down. these should be of course taken with a grain of salt. all of this information goes through military censorship. across the border in the russian region of belgrade, the city of shed back now has been showered by ukraine. that's according to the local governor who says that at least 2 people had been killed and 3 others wound at moscow has not yet commented on any of these latest developments. russia has previously said that it targets ukrainian military and energy sites in order to degrade the countries armed forces. overshadowed by growing tensions. the g 20 summit opened in indonesia on tuesday,

where the world is watching to see whether leaders can agree on a closing joint statement as divisions deepen over the conflicts in ukraine. ah, most of the world has not side it with the western, the ukraine conflict, pass the message from the russian foreign minister leading moscow's delegation at the g. 20 summit in bali artes. maria phenomena is there with more details. well, many expected this year is d. 20 to be tough for russia ahead of the global gathering here in indonesia is bali longdon, for example. sad that the venue could be used to confront moscow and call out coating. also, we expected to see some extra moves towards even deeper isolation, both political and economic of moscow. that was the german tense was appeal again before they summoned officially started on the u. s. also had plans to turn this

event into an anti russian platform. it's picking up the press conference that he gave at the end of the 1st day of the 20 here, a foreign minister la rog, sad that far from everybody's ready to support this rhetoric. we're pushing for a story and the answer is very simple. no one except the west and it's close of satellites joined the anti rushes sanctions. it is impossible not to touch on this topic because the west makes a priority to fro the ukrainian situation into any discussion. for 3rd world countries, a calling for a peaceful settlement for agreements the know perfectly well with this process is handed by ukraine, which is legally been negotiations with russia. and i have to say, we're heard a lot here proving that the indonesian president, who is the cost of the g 20 summit, has asked the western leaders to tone down their rhetoric against russia. well, china said that russia too important to be excluded from global formats. in for

years. we support russia and it's worthy roland. the g. 20 summit. russia has strong influence in various spheres of cooperation of the world community. no one dares to deprive russia of its true right to participate in international multilateral negotiations. it seems that the razor division within the west itself, we more more often hear words such as peace and negotiations from different west and politicians and officials. the new now seems to run out of sanctions imposed on russia. i had a chance to ask for minister law whether we actually can take this as an official shaved on if so what could we expect? let's take a listen. jervey to show up. i told you, you never know what's going on in someone else's mind. short periods of mutual understanding with the european union evaporate quickly. just today i had a brief conversation with president micron. it reaffirmed his intention to maintain contact with lot of my opponents where to find some kind of agreement and resolve

the whole situation as he put his to force. i told him once again, all the problems are on the ukranian side, which categorically refuses any negotiations. and put forward, obviously, unrealistic conditions such are inadequate in this situation. are good to go to the man intrigue over this years to 20 was and still remains. whether hates member is, will be at all able to come to a consensus over the final declaration as the group which brings together 19 of the world's major economists. philosophy you is torn apart by internal divisions over how to approach russia, ukraine conflict. the document used to be signed on wednesday instead of a law bro voracious war minister said that some western countries wanted this document to be politicized. and they wanted to include condemnation of russia's special military operation in ukraine on behalf of the entire group. that would mean rushing polluted, and that is absurd. of course was indo china. saudi arabian brazil refused to move

and they refused to accept this condemnation. so now we have to wait for the end of the summit here to see what the final edition of the declaration will look like. the canadian security intelligence service has ruled that the countries freedom convoy protest movement did not pose a threat to national security. or revelation which clashes with the government's earlier decision to invoke the emergencies act. at no point did the service have said that the protests in ottawa or elsewhere constituted a threat to the security of canada. canadian security intelligence service did not assess that any foreign state supported the protest through funding that foreign states deploy disinformation techniques or that any foreign state actors attempted to enter into canada to support the protest. last february convoys have truck

drivers, blockaded streets and ottawa protesting against coven 19 mandate, and government is meant mismanagement and calling for true doze resignation. the prime minister then invoke the emergencies act and the bid to end the protest. the move extended the government's powers and was questioned by legal activists. so to go further in depth on this, let's cross a live now to a canadian lawyer and legal commentator david fry. hi, david is great to have you on the program today. now when it comes to this statement by the canadian security intelligence service, where are you surprised by it? and do you think that there will be any consequences for those officials, for the overreaching mandates that they imposed short answer? no, i was not surprised about it because i was there throughout the protest. documents from basically are days to the very last day when the police came in heavy handed holy, militarized, police force the vital protest. everybody knew it was an overreach at the time. the

justification at the time was that there was a blockade him back to the bridge critical infrastructure for anybody who's been watching this public emergency commission. we all knew it from the time, the emergency that was in the basket. a bridge blockade had been resolved via court, ordered by the time the works to back with him. but there was no national reg, threat to infrastructure, threat to overthrow the state. what we're seeing through the inquiry is that even by true, those own recognition problems that had all of the resources they need to put it into it. but it went on for a little too long to embarrass stuff and you don't need special scale. and his underlying intent behind all of it was reprisals and punishing the project. this is what they did, which is why a lot of people thinking both the act on the want to punish them. but on the other hand, to try to trigger a violent response from them to sort of retroactively justify invoking how and it

seems as if we've learned so much over the last few months. but i remember back when she made that decision, i mean he was invoking the emergency act for the 1st time since it was passed back in 1988. so you would think that he would have some sort of legal basis for taking such extreme measures. but do you think that he did now given everything that we've learned over the last, almost year now for the emergency, zach replaced the war measure, the war measure that had been in both once, maybe twice in the history of canada. i know one and probably only one for sure. oddly enough for with them, you know, it was just and dad would be more measured back 3 f l 278. no one was paying attention a thought for a 2nd. it was justified. it was an overreach, it was a you said that it was done to punish the protesters and some feel it was done to test out the new powers of the government to freeze bank accounts and store future protectors to let them know if you know what the government acceptable will freeze

your bank accounts and cause you all sorts of problems. everybody knew it was over which this commission is flushing, you know, making it painfully obvious for anyone who had any lingering doubts, inconvenience to the citizens of all. well, what they referred to as micro aggression. during this inquiry, people entering restaurants. the mass blocking street is not what was intended to trigger the invocation of the emergency back. it was an ovary from day one. everybody knew it. anybody was paying attention now is getting the whole picture here. what's gonna happen at the end of the day? probably nothing. this is not a court here. this is not a court trial, is not a criminal case. this is an inquiry that is required under the law itself to be conducted carried out to investigate the circumstances surrounding invoking. yet they're going to have something like a year to produce their final report. my prediction is going to produce a report from the commission of low that's going to say not justified indication of

the act overreach. and that's it. recommendation for the future as to how the law can be respected in the time of process. but at the end of the day, nobody goes to jail over this. there will be no monetary penalty. it's going to be recommendation probably a recommend of the government, hopefully a political embarrassment. but the solution is ultimately want to be a political solution. but your company that this final report has drafted in a way to certainly monitor just intruder diversity. wow. ok. so you have the intelligence services and bidding admitting that the government not only overreacted but took a number of steps that are arguably, should not have taken. you've got the government sitting there, you know, not necessarily hitting that. but at the same time, knowing that there's a reason why they did all of this in the 1st place. do you think that is very movement there to stop this from happening again. essential. is there any sort of movement for checks and balances, or really is there anything to stop the government from doing something similar

just with a different protest movement in the future? i unfortunately think there's not anything that can prevent a government from the future, but for some form of clarifying the legislation. but it's not like a legislation. it's dealt with the owner to be in vote, in the case of a national emergency written infrastructure or cetera. this was a protest which immediately inconvenient, loud noise, the center was located provincially to one city and all 4 or 5 st. just to highlight something, it's not just that the cs and basically knology. there was no pressing concern to invoke is that true to himself? when he discussed it with 4 and we have a transcript of the conversation, he told hort, premier ontario, you have all the resources you need to deal with. that is the antithesis of invoking the emergency back. it's intended to be invoked when provincial infrastructure existing laws are insufficient to be quite crudo is saying to

forward and we see it now on the transcript. you had everything to be be protected . if you think or unintelligent, i can get thrown interest, but he acknowledged behind closed doors, the products that had what they needed. the problem just didn't want to process, didn't want this in the 1st place they wanted. they didn't want to politicize this issue and make it a political problem, but just intruder was hell bent on doing it. there should be political help to pay . the problem is that there's still a lot of canadians who think that it's justified. by them we suppress what was a very noisy, inconvenient, but the very peaceful protests and for the creases got all of those. protesters did not get into the temptation. when trudel came down with him or is that to react while we and ultimately that would be the saving grace we are seeing now true ostensibly invoke the emergency back to provoke a violent response from the government. we ceases internally now saying they knew by their own intelligence, that by 2 invoking the act it would further canadians extreme. it would further

ferment at the government. it might provoke a violent response. unnecessary. she did it anyhow. and for the grace of god, it did not provoke that reform and the protest. they'll come on top of the end of the day. but we've got to go through this 2 more weeks of it then like a year for them to draft their final recommendation. there should be political healthy, but i think enough canadians are tacitly accepting that because they didn't like the protesters that they're willing to put up with this risk in the future and the insufferable and intolerable uterus. one. unfortunately, for those canadians who are in favor of the government's move and right now, they're always in favor of it up until it is targeting their movement, the cause that they support whatever it may be. but unfortunately, in a lot of those cases, it's too late. by that time. now i have to ask you, what do you make of where the freedom convoys stand right now? you know, we had so many stories about them in the headlines, whether it was being targeted by the government, having bank accounts frozen,

that sort of thing. where does that movement stand right now? the conway is over. this is the last step of it. and we're going to have the commission there, every side is going to present their side for then their position. it's an adversarial process mission, so it's not like the january 6 bipartisan commission adversary on each side, but then there case the evidence is being flushed out. and at the end of the day, protesters conway are being represented. they will be heard and the conclusions will be put in some report a year down the line when the collective consciousness will have forgotten. yeah, certainly a lot to be learned from this one and will continue to follow not only the story but also the precedent that is by it. canadian lawyer and legal commentator david fry. hi, thank you so much for your time and analysis. thank you very much. and that's all for now. be sure to check out our t v dot com for all the latest breaking news and updates. we'll see right back here

at the top of the hour. ah, for some reason, a number of so called european intellectuals and politicians maintain the e. u represents the highest level of human development we were told. europe is a garden and the rest of us live in the jungle. rhetoric aside, europe is in serious trouble. hardly a model for the rest of the world. in fact, europe is declining into the relevance. ah, ah, [000:00:00;00]

a with a ah. mm hm. mm. i don't welcome to worlds apart. the americans never had

a problem starting wars, especially far away from the shores, but putting in that to them has often been obliged to mass barely hear after it's disgraceful pull out of gas sunday. but an administration got itself involved in the ukrainian conflict with no formulated exit strategy at this point. are there any better options to finalizing these conflicts and wars the end of the world? well, to discuss that i'm now enjoying by richard black, former virginia state senator and retired 2 years army colonel sen. it's a great on a great pleasure for me to talk to you. thank you very much for giving us this up or change it. well, thank you. i'm very pleased to be there work here on i'm very concerned about the branch that are taking place and so i look forward to our discussion. now before we got to the details of the current confrontation,