ah, it ah, none of what is before by the united states all by you when he's actually fighting a war, essentially to prove it, the better done the surgeon. so russian follower, once again in, in this region and saw that it was warned to the point at its limit, i've won as it is. it's possible, ah ah, as i've been doing news for 30 years in 2 languages around the world and here in the united states, i've interviewed for president sudden co founded a 1000000000 dollar business. and i believe, after all of that, that news should be honest and direct and impactful. this is direct

impacts. ah . so let's begin with this. did you see what happened with president by the last he met with his chinese counterpart using thing. remember this president as well as most of his predecessors and the us media as a coalition has spent the better part of the last 67 years, making china and g out to be monsters. then this happened the 5th. so is that an authentic truce? probably not. in fact, before she's meeting our government, had chosen to freeze out the chinese government essentially treating it as if it doesn't even exist as if it's

a voice in washington is not worthy of recognition. now, is that a smart play, or as recently written by politico one that the biden administration could live to regret you see? usually, usually governments, even if they don't catalog here to the agreed upon rules of international decorum by respecting each other's diplomatic cory diplomatic representatives that they're sent to your country. at least you talk to them, right? give them court. but when it comes to china, the by the administration had chosen to abide by a different set of rules, like ching gung, the china ambassador to the united states. he is one of the most powerful people in the chinese government. but that gentleman, mister gong, the ambassador, mister barton, decided that he and his upper echelon would not talk to him. they refused to meet with them. they refused to talk to him. that since arriving and washington, the ambassador from china, chin has been limited to

a handful of meetings with low ranking us officials. the chinese embassy has repeatedly asked for meetings with higher ranking administration officials, but it's been repeatedly turned down again and again. and so we're left to ask the question why, what gives why you do that, right? why would our government want to give the chinese government the edge of seeming more conciliatory, more reasonable thinkers, say what you want about the chinese government thinkers. say what you want about teaching big for example, but allow me to say this, ignoring their ambassador, right, makes them look like victims. and it makes us in the united states. look not so welcoming, maybe even bad, maybe even bullish. and what does that say to the chinese people are for that matter to the rest of the people in the global community. by the way, it's not just the united states government, it's heavy handed when it comes to china in an increasing sign that our media is

less than a watch dog, as it was once designed to be. and it is, as it has been in the past. it's become more of a cheerleader of our government officials when it comes to our foreign policy and specially our foreign policy look what happened recently when china held its national congress gathering, who endow 79 years old. he's frail, often appears like he's kind of out of it. i know my mom is about that age and she can look the same way. nonetheless, because he's the nation's former president. he was invited to the congress. he seemed to have what some would describe as a bit of a senior moment during the congress. but our western medias conspiratorial coverage of the event made it seem as if for sure what took place was a plot. that's what they wrote. maybe even a qu, that's what they wrote. was it really?

and there was also an extraordinary thing, the closing of the communist party congress trying to formulate mr. c. pre to set the who didn't, how, seemingly forcibly scalded from the side. now it looked like he was frightened, that he wasn't feeling well. quite obviously he didn't want to go mister, she was sitting next to him as were other top leaders. and it looked like mister who in the end had no choice. now this is become a topic of the bite within china for those who have seen it. could it be possible that it was just, maybe a disagreement? maybe even a political power moved between the sheep people and the who people i don't know. and by the way, if that's the case, yeah, just like the type of thing that occurs in congress isn't in parliament all over the world, probably on a daily basis. and gets a lot less coverage than that. and usually isn't called a cou, or a conspiratorial play. so why did i overplay something like that? why the extremely negative, negative coverage?

why does it seem like our media is making a relentless effort to go beyond what is just normal critical analysis of china, which is well deserved and more into a realm of hype and over play riddled with conjecture and coming to conclusions without the necessary facts. so let's talk about this. joining me now. sure are good days and expert on the geo politics of us and china relations sort of thanks so much for joining us, emma. so what is it with, especially at the beginning where the, by the administration really was given the cold shoulder through the chinese ambassador to, to, to, to what end do you do something like that. the biden administration has been craven in terms of engaging china because us china relations ro, very bad during the trump trump time. and the democrats wanted to stabilize the

relationship, but they did not have the political courage to go and do that immediately. so they did that in increment little bit 2 steps forward, one step back. why? why, what was, what, what would be the fear of reaching even to your worst enemy reach out to him? find out, hey, listen here, you got it some to tell you, but i'm going to talk to you. you're not going to have meetings. this is disengagement thing is what i'm really questioning 1st and foremost seems want see it. it doesn't seem to win for anybody. and especially for you, if you're the disengaged, you're right, exactly. you want to tell them, go to them, tell them very clearly what you ask. so what your demands are, where you stand in the relationship and make it crystal clear and the by and then most recently tried to get to that point that it has done so very incrementally. and that's why it's been so wishy washy and you don't credit at the end of the day for that that has been progress, not enough progress. because the binding nutrition isn't 2 minds, whether we really want to stabilize this relationship, all have some photo stability while continuing to throw darts. how do you think she

perceives our president? there is a difference between where the chinese government perceives the administration and president biden and the president she perceived present bite. and the reason for that being mister, she's a tough man, but he has also a very long standing relationship with mister biden. and i let me tell you, but one thing which i think how so by the way, i didn't know that he has. how's he, how does he have a long standing relationship with mister by 1st of all, my father, as well as for the list of items being offered in politics ages. okay. yes. as he has that, they were both wise presidents and in, during the obama administration. and she was going to was the incumbent president going to be the president. so it was known he was going to be president. and so they were, was that relationship interesting? but i will tell you this, that in 2030, when she did become president, while biden was vice president still, and biden was traveling to

a ship. it could have been very easy for me to she to say, oh obama or uncle. sure, but biden is just his clerk. what's the point of meeting? we'll have a profile mom meeting, but he engaged him for hours and hours on the substance of us china relations. he knew whether by didn't, if becomes a president some day or not. but this is a man i can do, i have done business with and it's important to create these connections. washington at that level. they're thinking that far ahead. they're not, they don't know if he's going to become president, but they know he's an important interlocutor and you need to engage him sincerely. and that's what they did for why can't buy to be more of a mixer and engage and say, you know, i'm going to break the ice here. and you know, reach out especially coming out of what was in terms of china, us relations, a disastrous for years with mr. trump. that's a great question. and i'll tell you this last you was a, this year this year was a 50th anniversary off. the shanghai communicate nixon, kissinger and mall in china, set up the foundations of,

of that relationship. i'll also tell you, as i said, the democrats are all little craven in terms of foreign policy engagement because the republicans come at them and say, look at the people in the weekly people. but i will say this in the post school era . we had 3 democratic president, clinton, obama, and now biden clinton obama. their 1st terms of pretty, fraught with china. we couldn't step up and say we want to engage me. and of course clinton did push for my phone and get that done. the t our thing, but it was truly in the 2nd term when he felt assured that they really had very a pretty good relations. clinton she, she, john some in, in 1990. there was a debate about time. was there a strategic partner strategic competitor because the republicans thought have china and that will be a strategic partner with obama also, the 2nd term was very, very productive. the news channel relations. and so there's a potential even in this new normal in us china post 2017. that if we do have biden

in a 2nd term, if that we may have a productive opportunity to really stabilize and ground those studies and make it peacefully co exist and, but i don't anticipate that happening now or for the next 2 years because domestic politics is going to, well, right, and i said, the democrats just don't have a backbone on this because the fearful they will be called commies. exactly. on the track. he talked to she, he must be a communist. we were seeing more and more military exercises off the coast of taiwan. and these exercises i would think so basically uncovered by the us media. they are covered in that part of the world. and it has to be scaring the hell out of the people, whether they're in the philippines or malaysia, even australia. that rim is looking at what could look like the brinkman ship of war, whether we get to it or not. and the thinking i would imagine,

and i don't want a word in your mouth, has to be that america may be pushing a little too hard there as well. you know, america is pushing hard in the, in the pacific and the, and the real hit against americans in this regard has been that we, there is a kind of a system which is an inclusive system in the, in the pacific. and the u. s. is looking at veges out there to create an us versus them situation and is also in the process over militarize. and at the end of the day, i think this will, which comes back to heart america. because issue issue is still a part of the developing world. most countries and isha cherish development, china men story to issues. let's grow together and develop together. while when america goes there, like common harris in apec has nothing to offer from an economic standpoint. she has only gone from the military toys to offer and they look out there and say, no,

this is not what you're looking at. yes, we are richer security. but we want to grow. we want prosperity, prosperity will engender piece. what do you have in this regard? and there isn't an answer, and that's why because at the end of the day, even if you're going to compete with china in a ship, you will need a plurality of ation steps to back you. but when their main reason for them in primary purpose is to grow economically, they start off in questions and these questions are not for the also people who are fairly profoundly the singapore humans a lot. yeah. they're coming down very clearly that were the anglo americans be the australians, the brits and the u. s. is going is not where they want to go. they say they're things like digital trade agreement like the c p t p p, the trade agreement. and they've been very for the right thing, we want china in, while australians on the, in the us obviously out of it is like, no, no, no, china shouldn't be out there. yeah. and drawing these,

which is not going to be very helpful strategy issue. it almost seems and your points a good one that you know, you push too hard on guns, guns, guns, security, security, security, and you run the risk of turning your friends and enemies. because what they care about, just like what americans care about what you care about, what i care about as the safety of my, my children and my grandchildren and my family moving forward. so when someone talks to me in terms that make me fear a war, i trust them a little less and i fear that we could be using that breaks midship in the wrong way in those countries as well. so, you know, it's always a pleasure to talk to you soon. thanks. thanks so much for stopping by and having this chat. this is really important is an important conversation for all of us, no matter where we are in the world. by the way. i have a podcast where i as a journalist, as a latino and as the co founder of a 1000000000 dollar company, tell my story and share with you what i've learned about how to succeed,

how to grow. it's called the rick sanchez podcast, and i write you to check it out, go there. i'll see you there. but when we come back, well russia says no more dis information. if you report ally especially about our military, you could go to jail too much. not enough, just right. what questions do? let's talk about the ah ah . mm.

november 22nd 2022 outraged orthodox christians confronted ukrainian security service offices, looking entrances and exits the keys, oldest monastery. were looking for alleged russian spies among the monks. we mean villa seminars are using the right phone. the reason for the brutal crime down one church is parishioners had song a song about ah, it's wrong been reason enough to condemn any old dogs, christian attack, imprison and even kill them. russia, what i knew russia finance because when you love store you in your store of gloss, layla fenusse total thought i shoot you

a samuel sample i used from his dog. this seems neat. he just sat down with the museums are important for preserving our history. so that it is a lot to future generation, but our physical museum spaces themselves, a relic of the pat. this is one of the best news in the world from a touch of st. petersburg. how rusty is the director here? and i bet he has met the russia has updated its laws regarding fake news, fake news, that's kind of a loaded word right. that i personally never liked to use because. busy well, i mean, unless i'm making a joke about it, right, which now what people do with that work, that's how they use it as a joke,

because it's been so over used. it's kind of lost, its meaning. it has come to mean much more than the meaning for which it was originally intended. on the less the international community and journalist, especially in the west, have re acted with such an aggressive stance. the bbc, for example, has recently stopped reporting on russia. why? while they're of the opinion that their reporters are now in danger for simply doing their jobs, right? are they right? is that really what russia is saying? is that really what rushes doing? when they say they don't want people putting out misinformation? ok 1st, let's look at this law that has been so reported on in the west, and let's look at it both in context and let's look at it as well in historic se. okay, so in 2019 russia passed this law, establishing fines for publications of unreliable information. right?

that's what it was in right? think news on there, by the way, on reliable information 2020. the laws were then expanded to include all other unreliable information, especially when it came to coven 19. busy because the government thought it was unimportant health matter. and you should be lying about information. when it comes to coven, i t are putting out this information. and now in 2022, the laws have been expanded once again to include publishing, false information about the russian military, certainly a lieu of what's going on and ukraine. and doing so could actually send you to prison for a number of years. that's why the b b c said, well then we just can't cover the story. so we're going to pull our reporters. so forget all that because there's always going to be a lot of mr. cost with everything having to do with war and opinions about stories like these that are so heated. here's the real question. and, and this really isn't so much about russia as it is about what happens when

a government has a right or does it to try and tap down what is regarded as mis information. does a government have a right to deal with this information or miss information? remember, one government or one woman's misinformation is another man's truth. so this is where the wicked gets really sticky. so what do we do? what do we do? not just in russia? what do we do with twitter? what do we do with facebook in the united states? that are making decisions about who gets in? who gets to share information, who doesn't get to share information? this is a, this is a fascinating subject, not just because of the russian law, but because of the situation all over the world. so joining us down is somebody who is certainly has a lot to say about this because he's been looking at it and he's been writing about a ted rall, who is a syndicated editorial cartoonist,

a columnist. and an author said, thanks so much for being with us. we appreciate your time. thanks for having me, rick. appreciate it. so what do you make of this? i mean, i use russia as an example and you know, they're going to have their reasons for wanting to have what many in the west call this fake news laws. but isn't this something that almost every government is going to have to be dealing with all over the world? well, every government always has to deal with messaging, positive and negative no matter what. so the question is, how do they do it? and culturally, and politically, every regime has its own way of doing this. the u. s. tend to try to do it through their connections to corporate media and, and to sell access to public officials. and they tend, do you can't really say that they call up the new york times and tell them what to say and what not to say, but the influences there, it's more subtle. russia says that if you're reporting on their country

and you go there and make a, what they would call a blatant ally, a blatant statement that is not true about their military, that that's harmful to their government, especially when they're in a state of war or military intervention in them or whatever we're going to call our battles nowadays. no matter what country we come from, do they have a right to do so? well, i mean, that's an interesting question. i mean, do they have the legal rights? certainly they have the legal right. you know, the question is, do they have, is it a good idea politically, you know, and it might be a good idea politically, domestically, and it may or may not be such a good idea internationally, right? i mean, because they open themselves up to the criticism that they are censoring the news and they're trying to control the environment in a way that might not be acceptable to certain other western countries. even though

they try to do the same thing in a different way. right, so the legal, right, absolutely no question about that in, you know, i mean the united states, for example, as a long history of controlling the narrative and allowing deciding, you know, which reporters get to get accreditation to be able to travel within a u. s. controlled war zone, you know, if you went to iraq as a c n n reporter and you said things that the pentagon didn't like, they would yankers your credentials and you'd be on your way home. how could they do that? i mean, wouldn't see it and be responsible for assigning its reporters. well, cnn assigned to the reporters, but the military would say if you want our cooperation, if you want to be embedded, if you want us to care, if something bad is going to happen to you, it's like a protection racket. no, we can, we can't help. what might happen there, and there's plenty of examples of that having occurred,

and the u. s. did that afghanistan, and they did that in iraq, for example. absolutely, yeah, no question. i mean, i covered the war in afghanistan in 2001 i was there several times since, you know, i never, i was never embedded. partly for that reason. i think it's better to travel as an independent reporter and find out what's really going on on the ground with local people. but that's my approach. and a lot of other reporters, corporate reporters preferred to travel with the us military. and if they didn't tow the line, they were kicked out, it seems to me like there was a time when you and i were younger, where there seem to be rules that we all understood in terms of figuring out what was a story, what was it the story, i'm almost going to be is bold enough to say what kind of was the appreciated or conventional truths. and we had

a media that we kind of trusted, even though you read back and you find out there was some inky stuff going on. but it least, there was a general description that we all kind of agreed on about what the truth was, what the world and our policies were, what our institution stood for. man, i gotta tell you. it just seems to me like that's completely gone today. it's gone, gone, and i don't know in whose hands it resides, do you? well, it's so it's in no one's hands free and it's in everyone's hands at the same time. i mean, you know, i think there's a lot, it's a perfect storm. there's a lot of causes for this. ah, you know, one thing is that everybody is discovered that opinionated news sells better than on opinionated views. it's also the fractional ization of the media where, for example, in the u. s, there were 3 or 4 channels for news when i was growing up and, you know,

now you could get your new source from literally hundreds of internet sites and tv channels, including international ones. so, you know, i mean, i think it's, it's, everything's atomized. and there's a tendency for people to seek out sources that confirm their own biases and preferences. yep. and not that that. it's a fairly bad. it's just human nature. but you know, i, i think you're right, this shit, you know, the famously i, the senator from new york said that we're all entitled to our own opinion, but not her own facts. that's no longer true. so great talking to you that i really appreciate the conversation was thanks, my friend. by the way, i do want to let you share my mission. it's simple really. i want to d, silo the world like i was just talking about with ted. and we've got to stop living in these little tiny boxes too. so don't live in boxes, right? the truth doesn't live in a box. the truth is, everywhere i'm reaches. i'll be looking for you again, right here. or i hope to florida direct impact.

ah ah ah in 1834 france invaded algeria, and straight away the french started inhabiting it to strengthen their position. the colonists known as b a. no, ours took the best land from day one, the local population was put into an unequal position and was brutally exploited. this cause, mazda is content. the people of algeria began their long term fight for independence

. in 1954, the banner of freedom was raised by the national liberation front. a guerrilla war against the occupants broke out. the french tried to suppress to rebellion using cruel measures. full villages were wiped out packs of georgia and executions of civil people, including pregnant women children and old people took place more than 2000000 people were put into concentration camps. however, these punitive measures didn't help the algerian patriots managed to induce france to start these negotiations. in 1962 evian accords were signed, voting algeria on the past towards independence. but this was achieved at a colossal price. algeria by rights is considered to be a country of martyrs. according to the calculations of historians, the french colonists are responsible for the deaths of one and

a half 1000000 algerians. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy confrontation, let it be an arms race is on offense. very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how strategy will be successful, very difficult time to sit down and talk with watching it was a shorter one and i'm not going to stay like a

national z m a a. i've never intentionally violated any countries territory. that's the message from china as the u. s. suggest spacing is deliberately using it's blue spot on them and starting a target on russian region. so most goes condemned. the u. s. delivery of long range rockies to crane, which could potentially hit crimea on the do 70 imposes the price cut on russian oil to cut moscow's revenue. while president putin says the country will not place both all to states support familiar with

.