and that can be abused >> jim walsh, joining us from mit. >>> the un and envoy in syria, meeting with leaders in qatar today. part of the geneva peace talk that's set next month in geneva. syrian opposition vowing not to attend those negotiations unless basharas is off the table. >> >> david albright said that iran has nearly doubled it's stockpile of highly enriched uranium in the last year. he thinks that iran could produce enough uranium to make a weapon in a few weeks. the white house said that it disagrees, saying that it probably would need a year. iran insisting that it's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. >>> he was once in the presidency. and now he could spend the rest of his life in prison. >> reporter: disgraced medication, bo xilai's trial. it's the first time that such a sensitive case was heard. ultimately, the public saw what only the government allowed them to see. but like the usual defendants in the courtrooms, the mayor of the 33 million people refused to go quietly, he was, first of all, to challenge ping for the presidency after all of this. the chari

and jim walsh, a former republican congressman from syracuse, new york, served from 1989 to 2009.e chaired four sub committees. in your time in congress was it ever at bitter and as partisan and divided as it appears to be now? >> well, a little rough in '94 and '95, in that era, but not like it is now. >> when i came in '89 the democrats had held the majority for close to 40 years. so republicans had never tasted a majority. so when we did win the majority in '94 it was a very contentious race, and things changed in policies and the way we ran the place. there was real tension. >> but it wasn't as ugly. >> well, absence makes the heart grow fonder. >> but you say it wasn't as ugly. do you really think it's not just fond memories. that was clearly a deficient time even though you went through another shutdown in that era. >> one of the difference is, the hostility that jim brought our are the republicans and the shock to the democrats when they lost the majority. what has happened over the last 30 years the redistricting has been very hyper partisan. so that in this last election

joining us now live from watertown, massachusetts is jim walsh, and jim, does pakistan have a legitimate beef with the u.s. over these strikes? >> certainly the prime minister coming to town has vocalized that. he has said we are concerned about it. why? because he faces political pressure at home. pakistanis see this that they can't even control their own territory, and are naturally concerned about the casualties. cashmere and drones, i don't think either of those will be resolved in this meeting, and i think both parties, pakistan and the u.s. will focus on other issues. >> osama bin laden was hiding out in pakistan. he was the most wanted man in the world. pakistan was supposed to be our ally, and some say with friends like that who needs enemies. >> i hear ya. but there are a number of issues -- this is like a family member with whom you have a bad relationship. you are still in the family, but there are lots of grudges here. i think the president going into this meeting, his number one agenda item is going to be afghanistan, we're getting out of there. 2014 is coming quickly, and p

the nsa spied on 35 world leaders, let's bring in jim walsh, who is with us now. is a research associate in security studies at m.i.t. jim, good to have you on the program. you've probably seen this from former secretary of state madeleine albright. she says let me just say this is not a surprise, countries all spy on each other. albright said this at the center for american progress. this was in washington. then she went on to say, i will very much remember when i was at the united nations the french ambassador coming up to me saying, why did you say that to somebody about why do you want women in the government? she follows by saying, excuse me? to what extent is the domestic politics driving the conversation, and frankly, look, the outrage over this issue? >> yeah, yeah, tony, i think you're right. spy something as old as foreign policy. you're playing those board games, there were always spice. it happens. it's to be expected. i think part of it is domestic politics. look, it makes these folks look weak and compromised. if the president obama, if it was found o

. >> jim walsh joins us from boston, a researcher at the mit securities study's program.hat do you make of the attack? >> it's a little surprising. obviously an attack aimed at foreigners took place at that mall in kenya and so this is an opportunity for the u.s. or others to, first, try to degrade the capability of al-shabab, and, second, to send a message that if you carry out attacks there'll be a price to pay. i'm surprised because they went into a terror stronghold, they took a lot of fire and put themselves at risk. they didn't use a drone. so this was a major operation for the u.s. >> i want to get your thoughts on that - the fact that they did not use a drone or fire a missile from a ship - why do you think they made that decision? >> i think there are a couple of things in play. al-shabab made a tactical error by putting its leadership at risk, putting them in a dwelling next to the ocean. if they were going to carry out a terrorist attack they should have planned for a response by others, and they made themselves vulnerable. often drones will be used when there'

i talked about that with jim walsh. >> everyone spies. spying is as old as foreign policy. a lot of these countries have asked for or benefited from u.s. intelligence, would probably do it if they could pull it off or can't. i get all of that. but there's domestic politics. the voters in those countries are very unhappy with u.s. surveillance practices and those leaders have to respond to that. and this makes them look leak and compromised in front of their own domestic political audience. so no wonder they are anger. and most international politics it's about national interest and hard-nosed stuff, but personalities, individuals matter, and if someone feels like you are betrayed their trust or crossed the line and they are angry, that does have reverberations in international politics it looks like angela merkel is pretty ticked off right now. >>> kathleen sabilius is speaking about the health care website. >> i think if we knew we had another six months we would probably test further, but i don't think anyone fully realized that both volume caused some problems, but volum

i talked about it with jim walsh. >> everyone spice. spying is as old as foreign policy. lot of these countries have asked for or benefits fr frfrom -- [ technical difficulties ] -- on the other side of the ledger, though, you know, there's domestic politics. the voters in those countries are very unhappy with u.s. surveillance practices, and those leaders have to respond to that. and this makes them look weak and compromised in front of their own domestic political audience, and no one likes that. so no wonder they are angry. and most policy is about national interest and hard-nosed stuff, but personal advertise, individuals matter, and if someone feels like you have betrayed their trust or crossed a line, and they are angry, that does have reverberations in international politics. it sure looks like angela merkel is pretty ticked off right now. >>> there is a new report out from the united nations that says that there is strong evidence that senior pakistani officials gave the cia approval to launch drone strikes. kristin? >> reporter: that's right. we heard from pakist

. >> and earlier we spoke with jim walsh at the massachusetts institute of technology about whether the u.s. should apologize for the nsa. >> he's not president of the united states, he doesn't have to meet angela merkel when she is really mad at him. do the french spy? yes they do. do the germans spy? yes they do. do they benefit? yes they do. but it's clear that those voters in france, those voters in germany are very upset about u.s. surveillance. and i think the leaders, part of it is personality and if someone's really angry at you or feels you betrayed their trust then it does matter and if it's the president of germany then yes it does matter. when peter king says we saved thousands of people let's be careful about our generalizations. nsa does lots of different things and not clear at all as senator shaheen suggested that every one of these programs is absolutely necessary in its scope and duration. so i think there are answers that have to be made here. >> if all these countries are doing basically everything the nsa does are these foreign leaders truly yum set or are they aski

. >> we spoke with jim walsh at the massachusetts institute of technology, about the question - whetherhe u.s. should apologise for the nsa. >> i think it's easy for the congressman to say that, he doesn't have to meet angela merkel when she's mad at him. do the french spy? yes. do the germans? yes. do they benefit from the nsa. >> yes, they do. in those countries the voters are upset about u.s. surveillance, and the leaders, you know, part of international relations - most of it is national interest and part is personality. if someone is angry at you or it feels like you betrade their trust, it matters. if it's the president of germany, it matters. there's repair work to do. when peter king says, "we saved thousands of people", let's be careful about generalisations. nsa does a lot of different things. as senator shaheena suggested - it's not clear - that every program is necessary in scope and duration. there are questions that have to be answered here. >> explain to me - if the u.s. says the other countries are doing the same thing that the nsa does, are the foreign leaders truly act

. >> jim walsh from mit, thank you for your time this afternoon. >> thank you. >>> syria met a crucial deadline for removing chemicalcal weapons. the government revealed details about its poison gas and nerve gas. it hopes to eliminate all of syria's chemical weapons by mid 2014. kilheny duchardt has more. >> syria is meeting an ambitious sa deadline for the organization known as opcw to destroy its lethal stockpile by next year. syria handed over the details of its poison gas and nerve agent program thursday ahead of its october 27th deadline. opcw is not releasing what their report says, but it did sar the syrian government disclosed 23 chemical weapon sites. the head of the opcw u.n. team said the country has so far been cooperative. >> we had very good meetings with the syrian government at most senior level, there is continued strong cooperation with the secretary general with opcw and opcw has confirmed in recent statements and we build on this because we have one shared goal which is elimination of the program, which is of benefit to all and particularly the syrian people >> rep

for mo on this i am joined by jim walsh a research associate at m.i.t.'tudies program and with us from washington, d.c. that reason hunter from georgetown university and a distinguished scholar with the carnegie course of no, i want to start with you, there has not been any real deal between the u.s. and iran for a railroad lonvery long time. iran has caused us lots of problems in iraq, iran remains steadfast enemy of israel. it backs hezbollah and lebanon and assad in syria. do you think secretary kerry is on the right track when he says publicly a couple of days before these meet that goes no deal is better than a bat one? >> i think that obviously if you want to have ideal it has to be something that both sides feel is going to improve the current conditions and will satisfy their basic concerns. although at the moment talk is really focused only on the nuclear issue and all of these other regional other issues are not going to be discussed, it's quite yours that if, indeed, u.s. and iran reach some kind of agreement on the nuclear issue and then this

we have former ambassador john bolton, but first let's talk with jim walsh, from.m. nice to see you again. >> good to see you, jenna. jenna: senators menendez and graham wrote a piece in the "washington post." they said the whole reason we're at a moment diplomatic moment that we have to pass even tougher sanctions to make sure diplomacy happen. what do you think? >> i think they got that half right. often when you have sanctions, sanctions sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. when they do work they work because they lead to a negotiated settlement n souththt a negotiated settlement. same thing with libya over its nuclear program. sanctions by themselves are not going to do something. here we are at the moment of negotiations. frankly i wouldn't take any sanctions off, but i wouldn't in contrast to the senator from new jersey. i would not impose new ones as we're about to sit down and talk. that is the equivalent, slapping someone and trying to be nice to them. let's give the negotiations a chance. if they don't go anywhere, we can certainly put on more sanct

jim walsh, international security expert. >>> washington state is the battle ground in the continuing fight over genetic engineering and the food we eat. a citizens initiative is on the ballot. it would require clear labeling on most food containing genetically engineered ingredients. as an al shoveler reports, a con tincial big-money campaign is on the way. >> this has brought in more than $23 million, 18 on the no side. >> the food labeling regular lemmings conflict with national standards and make no sense. >> it's simple. it won't cost you a dime. >> we have a right to know if our food has been general theically engineered. >> it's about product labeling and about jet en i can engineering, which is complicated. most of the processed foods sold in the state of washington would have to be clearly labeled as genetically engineered. here is what genetically engineered means in the initiative: any food that is produced from an organism in which the genertic material has been changed. >> here is what the two sides say this campaign is about. >> you may look for a certain. ingredient. i

jim moore is a political analyst in texas who covered senator cruz. joan walshs an msnbc contributor and editor at large of salon. this guy, since june he's gotten better known and doubly hated. the more he's singled out as someone people don't approve of. it's fast. i think he's a roman candle. up, all of excitement. and here it is the poll showing his unfavorables as i said. this guy is going nowhere. what's your thought? >> i agree he's going nowhere. he brought together left and right. we all agree we don't like him. that's one thing. i used to fear him as a 2016 contender and i don't so much anymore. i never thought he could win the presidency, but i thought he had a shot at the nomination. ron johnson and tom coburn are both, they don't deserve a whole lot more credit. because both of them are default deniers. they say they don't matter if we default. and they have voted with ted cruz. they haven't voted on a clean cr. they voted it down. harry reid has only passed that with democrats. so i think he's succeeded in pulling his party to the right even though