s disagreed with miliband there a lot of them behind the opposition leader in that call the facts of the for any actions taken as he said it is thought that the government will win that vote later on today but they're then going to be looking at having to have that second vote there's no consensus erica and indeed in the public many polls that have run a lot of people as we said in the context of past interventions and so i think that term humanitarian intervention there's a real feeling amongst a lot of the public that this might not be the course of action certainly seeing the rhetoric really gearing up over the last couple of days it's not out the question that you'll see a further we call of parliament for the weekend because the un inspectors are currently in damascus is thought could present their report to the un security council as early as saturday so no doubt the question that you'll actually see another parliament recall but as we said the prime minister very much having to lay out his case today and trying to convince parliament that military action is the right group so

issue and one which honorable members of we have to make a judgment now the opposition leader ed miliband has been calling for the government to have evidence preceeding any decision he wants the u.n. inspectors to finish up their report to present that report as that that is needed to get international legitimacy and the prime minister's been responding again to those calls facts for action. to speak of the problem is making a very powerful and heartfelt speech could be explained in house why he thinks the president did this there seems to be no logic for this chemical attack and others what's more and some people do but i think if he reads the it's a very good question if you read the conclusions this is where they find the greatest difficulty of ascribing motives now lots of motives have been ascribed but in the end we can't know the mind of this brutal dictator all we can do is make a judgment about whether it is better to act or not to act and whether to make a judgment about whether he's responsible or not responsible in the end these are all issues of judgment and as members of par

motion on military strikes on syria and so he's put the brakes on slightly opposition leader ed miliband said that he was going to make his m.p.'s votes against any such motion and also it became clear that around seventy of cameron's own m.p.'s looked like they were going to vote against so now there's going to be a much more softly softly approach there will be a debate on thursday but m.p.'s instead of being asked to vote immediately on military action will be asked to vote on a strong humanity. alleged use of chemical weapons cameron now says and the government say that they will now wait for the results of the u.n. report from syria on this alleged chemical attack the u.s. however still says that it's not really interested in waiting and then off that report has been received then they will have another vote on direct military action and david cameron also says that he will now go back to the u.n. security council to try to secure some kind of resolution a u.n. mandate for military action meanwhile the speaker of the syrian parliament has written a letter to u.k. m.p.'s we can buy t

digital and connected world the revelation by rusbridger came just a day after the detention of david miliband a partner of the guardian journalist and glenn greenwald the journalist who had broken the story of snowden's leaks and the same materials around it was obtained under the new case terrorism act and was held in question for nine hours at heathrow airport it caused an outcry among politicians and journalists and even david anderson the independent review were of terrorism laws who demanded an explanation prompting the u.k. home office to go on the offensive the government and the police have a duty to protect the public and our national security those who oppose this sort of action need to think about what they can do if they want to protect the public to tell the public what it is they're protecting them from a generalized statement about terrorism in general doesn't really do the trick you've got to be able to say well the everybody. and he's got what in danger of the public for the following reasons you've got to have reasons for no such reasons have been advanced miranda's new tens

ed miliband. >> i move to -- a move in favor of the amendment. there was a moral outrage -- this was a moral outrage. the international community is right to condemn it. everyone in this house and most people in the country will have seen the pictures of men, women, and children gasping for breath and dying as a result of this attack. i can assure members of this house that the divide that exists does not exist over the condemnation of the use of chemical weapons and the fact that it breaches international law. nor does it lie in the willingness to condemn the regime of president assad. the question facing this house is what, if any, military action we should take and what criteria should determine that decision? that is what i want to focus on in my speech today. it is right to say at the beginning of my remarks that the prime minister said a couple of times in his speech worse to the effect of, we are not going to get further involved -- words to the effect of, we are not going to get further involved in that conflict. i have to say, that is si

well, you heard opponents of david cameron, ed miliband, for instance. >> live pictures. actually great viewing. saying you cannot go and watlau a military strike based on the high likelihood that the regime is responsible for a chemical attack. at the very least you need to wait for results to come in. >> i want to read you something that john mccain said. this was yesterday. those who say we should stay out of syria do not understand that this is now a regional conflict. in other words, this is not merely contained now to syria. is he right? >> he's absolutely right. this is not just a syrian conflict. this is a conflict that involves practically all of its neighbors. every single arab country with the exception of only a few has taken a stand for or against the regime. and it's not just arab countries. it's iran aligned with assad. turkey aligned with the rebels. the u.s. aligned perhaps with the forces against assad. and it's russia aligned with the regime. so you see this has become inside of syria very much a proxy war. never forgetting that those who are suffering

this is edward miliband, the british opposition leader.osed to any action being taken in syria because he's afraid that it will pull britain into a larger war in that region. let's listen. >> which is upholding national law and legitimacy. how can we make the lives of the syrian people better? and we should remember on this occasion the duty we owe to the exceptional men and women of the armed forces and families who will face a direct consequence of any decision that we -- that we make. mr. speaker, the basis on which we make this decision is of fundamental importance because the basis of making the decision determines legitimacy and moral authority of any action that we undertake. that's why our amendment asks the house to support a clear and legitimate roadmap to decision on this issue. a set of steps which enable us to judge any recommended international action. and i want to develop the argument about why this sequential roadmap is, i believe, the rye thing for the house to -- the right thing for the house to support today. most of al

ed miliband. -- a move in favor of the amendment. --re was a moral outrage this was a moral outrage. the international community is right to condemn it. everyone in this house and most people in the country will have seen the pictures of men, women, and children gasping for breath and dying as a result of this attack. i can assure members of this house that the divide that exists does not exist over the condemnation of the use of chemical weapons and the fact that it breaches international law. nor does it lie in the willingness to condemn the regime of president assad. the question facing this house is what, if any, military action we should take and what criteria should determine that decision? that is what i want to focus on in my speech today. it is right to say at the beginning of my remarks that the prime minister said a couple of times in his speech worse to the effect of, we are not going to get further involved -- words to the effect of, we are not going to get further involved in that conflict. i have to say, that is simply