the nature of administration the united states the iranians agreed to talks with the united states in iraq again the united states simply increased sanctions against the country and now as soon as president rouhani comes to power the united states implements even further sanctions are on the eve of his inauguration which is extraordinary it shows that the united states simply does not have goodwill how is the iranian government. going to convince it be convinced that the united states can sit down and talk with the united states when the united states behaves in such an irrational and hostile way and on the other hand the united states at this stage has isolated itself. are improving relations thanks to obama with the. washington's with the chinese with the indians with brics countries and other non-western countries and even in europe we see countries buried dissatisfied with american behavior for example in the case of. both both in britain for example parliament rejected war which i think came as a surprise to all of us who you know with the former prime minister in england support

the iranians agreed to talks with the united states in iraq again the united states simply increased sanctions against the country and now as soon as president rouhani comes to power the united states implements even further sanctions are on the eve of his inauguration which is extraordinary it shows that the united states simply does not have goodwill how is the iranian government. going to convince it be convinced that the united states can sit down and talk with the united states when the united states behaves in such an irrational and hostile way and on the other hand the united states at this stage has isolated itself. are improving relations thanks to obama with the. russians with the chinese with the indians with brics countries and other non-western countries and even in europe we see countries buried dissatisfied with american behavior for example in the case of. both both in britain for example parliament rejected war which i think came as a surprise to all of us who you know with the former prime minister in england supporting the war and being an american political and it

that also yes ok all right yes it does united states the united states does so does russia so do other states as well but instability is not in the interest of the united states instability is very definitely not in the interest of israel a small country surrounded by hostile neighbors that have made war on it half a dozen times in the last sixty five years so no it's ridiculous to say that this is somehow serving the interests of the united states or the interest of israel stability as internet is is in the interests of both of these countries as in the interests of the west in general it's frankly in the interest of russia as it is countering other regional threats the threat of terrorism and very definitely the threat of a of iran getting nuclear weapons capability ok george. well i find this extraordinary the say that if america wanted stability there was always a very simple way to go about stability there would have been to avoid getting involved in libya for all get off his regime was extremely stable and a good ally of the united states during the war on terror the americans co

is the interest of the united states and united states has always been concerned that some kind of arab nationalist movement will become dominant in the middle east. and america has always wanted a kind of a much weaker divided arab world and i think it also serves the interests of israel which an israeli nightmare has always been that there should be a united arab world in the united arab voice speaking on behalf of the palestinians so as long as the arabs are involved in this it was essentially was on the i think. the americans of these rate is a perfectly happy not to mention the americans vast military industrial complex that thrives on selling arms to the various international actors ok jason to be fair go right ahead fair time that's complete nonsense of course we're also we're you know appearing on a network that is hosted by a country that has made quite a quite a handsome profit from selling weapons across the region or here's a lot of countries in the world did make running out of ammo and such really and it's not you you're saying something like that of what you know and you

of the united states they fought they were viewing the united states the role of reagan but they were not they were viewing the united states of franklin delano roosevelt it's the america today that is the america of ronald reagan and other words this policies are now really being felt i find that many american and western economists in general so indoctrinated their sort of embrace. capitalist system so just as blindly as they used to decry the communist system when they look at the successful models both among developed and developing countries usually. models represent some mixture of capitalism with. very generous those of socialist parlous is no where would be one example china is a very different example but they are also mixing the team doesn't mean that pure capitalism doesn't exist on may be simply not realistic in the same way that pure communism wasn't really but i think you're getting at a very important point i mean there is no such thing as just capitalism there are many varieties of capitalism and so the variety that we have now i guess is the most pure form that we've

continuation of the old imperialist had joined and what i mean by that is that for example the united states is still very active in scheming certain military adventures for example in syria it's still unquestionably supports israel it's still involved in some sort of shady deals with the gulf states so. it is difficult to stand why would you. what do you think personally that we are seeing beyond of the american imperialism because although it's very expensive policies are still in place despite all the suffering that you know ordinary folks . subjected to yes well i mean the reason primarily is because the united states cannot just unilaterally one day decide to disengage from the rest of the world but it is slowly disengaging and if we take a look at syria for instance which you've mentioned there have been pressures from the united states actually to engage much more intensively but it has not and one of the reasons of course is that the country is broke and plus they're tired the american people are tired of this military adventurism so while they are intervening they're not intervening

is the savior of the world that attitude madeline albright more recently united states if we have to use force it's because we are america where the indispensable nation we stand taller and see farther than other countries hillary clinton the same thing obama this notion of where the indispensable nation what makes us the indispensable nation but we are the most powerful nation on basis the most powerful nation we have the atomic bombs we had a monopoly on atomic bombs what right do we have to worry about talk about other countries using weapons of mass destruction we began the process of the most serious iteration with the attack on hiroshima and nagasaki and have we apologize for that have we criticize that question that right now in outside of washington d.c. in the air and space museum next we're displaying the enola gay the plane that dropped atomic bombs on hiroshima to start the modern era of weapons of mass destruction and the head of the air and space museum said we're going to display the you know the gay and all of its glory as a magnificent technological achievement i

powers by that i mean the united states and russia. are in favor of that certainly we know the united states and russia are not in favor of that i think that the saudis are somewhat less clear cut in their view on this obviously and the problem is clearly on the part of the major factors in this situation. the major outside powers they do not want that to happen and i think that is why there is a degree of agreement here between the united states and russia that this whatever happens must be short of assisting the jihad as in gaining a foothold or expanding their foothold and being able to be the primary arbiter of power in syria i agree with you because that's when russia's major issue during all this when he for you know a cynic would say and i look at the a ray of forces the united states supporting military intervention and it's all about iran it's not about syria it's not about the syrian people it's not about democracy it's just a great way to get to iran and and this is you have to destroy syria to do it and this is you can make

the cheap to full diplomat of the united states is our secretary of state john kerry and on his right was the secretary of defense chuck hagel and then general dempsey who both of which said almost nothing and our our chief diplomat was the one who was trying to push war the idea of the diplomat is supposed to stop war it's time that the that our diplomats take the front take the front of all these problems that we have and put the war people back in their barracks as they say and let's and let's get some conversations going on but also your guest had had some amazing things to say i think one thing that would change the dynamic in this situation is if we saw the suffering of the people in iran if we saw the words of the normal person the worker in tehran the farmer out in the near mashad if we if we saw the faces of the people and we heard their words they would the american public would identify with them immensely because we have a lot in common with the people of iran and it's unfortunate that our government is what standing in the way and it's not the iranian government and when

the president of the united states. but we really don't have the exactly here to know what kind of attack should be launched. i understand snample new mexico's caution but if we start down this road, we're going to be running the campaign from here. and as smart as we are i don't hink we're that smart. >> i'm sympathetic to the view expressd in this amendment by senator udall that our military actions should be specified and limited. i also believe based upon our hearing the amendment reflects the administration's thinking about what is required to respond to the use of weapons of mass destruction by the assad regime. however, i believe it would be it would be a mistake for the senate to tie the president's hands by having us dictate the specific military tactics he can and cannot use to complete the mission. the language already limits the geographic scope of the mission to syria, focuses the mission on addressing the use of chemical weapons. limits the time frame and rules out the use of ground forces for combat opera

because the united states of america is stronger when the congress of the united states representing the people and the president of the united states are acting together. and the president wants that strength represented in this initiative. >> you're making the case, mr. secretary, which i understand, as you made it on friday. i think i'm still trying to understand the abrupt shift. i know that you and others on the national security team, based on my own reporting, were opposed to the president seeking congressional authority, thinking he didn't need it. the reaction from the syrian state media is that this is the beginning, they say, of an historic american retreat. do you feel undermined? do you think the united states has undermined its leverage in the world, its credibility, having ramped up the specter of military action as being imminent and then saying, well, no, we're going to go to congress first? >> david, i completely disagree with the fundamental premise that you set out. no, i did not oppose going, nor did anybody else that i know of originally. the issue originally wa

socialist parties here in the united states and the communist party of the united states were powerful. they had a lot of people, and they worked together with the c.i.o. and together, they went to the government at that time, and they said 2 things: "we represent the mass of working people, and we don't want to suffer the way we're suffering in this breakdown of capitalism. you gotta do something." and they addressed themselves to a kind of middle-of-the-road democratic politician who had just gotten elected president on a program of a balanced budget-- franklin roosevelt. and they said to him, "you've gotta do something for the people." and the socialists and communists said, "you gotta do something for the people," but they added a little barb, "because we think that there's a better system, an alternative system, to capitalism. and if you keep performing as badly as you're doing in the depths of the depression, we're gonna try to establish that alternative." and they pointed across the ocean to the soviet union, said, "see? like them." that scared folks. and mr. roosevelt was a goo

is the interest of the united states and united states has always been concerned that some kind of arab nationalist movement will become dominant in the middle east. and america's has always wanted a kind of a much weaker divided arab world and i think it also serves the interests of israel which an israeli nightmare has always been that there should be a united arab world in the united arab voice speaking on behalf of the palestinians so as long as the arabs are involved in this it was essentially was under i think. the americans of this raid is a perfectly happy not to mention the americans vast military industrial complex that thrives on selling arms to the various in international actors ok jason to be fair go right ahead fair time that it's complete nonsense of course we're also we're you know appearing on a network that is hosted by a country that has made quite a quite a handsome profit from selling weapons across the region one hears from a lot of countries in the world did make money off of amman such release not you legally you're saying something like that of you know you kno

because unlike the united states syria is not threatening the united states it would be the victim and so the assumption of the attack by the obama administration is that syria is too weak or small are vulnerable to actually use its legal right to carry out an attack against u.s. targets and he's telling the american people they won't strike there won't be representations but in fact obama or hegel or john kerry or mccain they don't know what the representations are going to be this is dangerous games when you carry out another war of aggression with the latest most developed high tech weapons against a country that's at peace with the united states so they don't really know where it ends they know how to start a war they don't know as we learn from iraq how to end a war michael they know how to start it but they don't know how to end it but you know there. well that's true because i think and that's what we have here what what they're operating under as far as i can see is in force meant for once of the of the chemical weapons convention there is no there is a compliance provision

why is he so critical of the united states? why does he want the united nations moved from new york? plus, is he still offering asylum to edward snowden. joins us on talk to al jazeera. >> president morales, it is great to meet you, and have this opportunity to speak to you. thank you for joining us. >> thank you very much for this opportunity to speak with you about different aspects that have to do with the life from the country, the region, and the continent. >> our pleasure. in your recent comments, to the united nations general assembly. you suggested that the u.n. should be moved from your city. why do you feel that way? because first, air pie rassey, black male, visas. even some ministers with a president, they don't get visas. i get a visa for four, five, seven days. they consider the cuban president as the promoter of terrorism? what's more, here sometimes you have a shootings, and like there have been in the last few years, and on the other hand, the resolutions that are passed here are not respected by the host countr

likewise, the united states remains committed to the belief that the palestinian people have a right to live with security and dignity in their own sovereign state. on the same trip, i had the opportunity to meet with young palestinians in ramallah whose ambition and incredible potential are matched by the pain they feel in having no firm place in the community of nations. they are understandably cynical that real progress will ever be made and they're frustrated by their families enduring the daily indin dig tee of occupati. but they too recognize that two states at only real path to peace. just as the palestinian people must not be displaced, the state of israel is here to stay. so the time is now ripe for the entire international community to get behind the pursuit of peace. already israeli and palestinian leaders have demonstrated a willingness to take significant political risks. president abbas has put aside efforts to shortcut the pursuit of peace and come to the negotiating table. prime minister netanyahu has released palestinian prisoners and reaffirmed his commitment to a pa

can't take yes for an answer america so i think it's very interesting is it to the united states said that assad must go not too long ago and now we may sit down at the table and negotiate the chemical weapons deal kind of interesting isn't it. i think you know it's. who you have to deal with so i think you know regime change is not an option for anybody in this at this point i don't think anybody can topple assad except the syrian people but i think what happens here is that we have to ask the question why did this offer by president putin which i think is very smart came about it was because america threatened to attack assad if it wasn't for the threat to attack assad he would not have become willing and volunteer to give up with his weapons of mass destruction and i think there's another factor here which goes i think in my opinion is very important there was a report recently in the german newspaper that the recent chemical attack was conducted by syrian forces with assad's consent i think the fact that now he's willing to part with it also shows also perhaps not sure that p

thank you very much for taking time to speak to our viewers here in the united states and around the now you spoke to the secretary of state, john kerry, he called you. what did he say to you? did he reassure you that the u.s. would strike even if congress rejected a resolution? >> wolf, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak to our american friends. secretary kerry called me today and told me that it is a process in the united states and we understand that in all democratic countries make it important to go to the conference. and we in the free syrian president -- after the use of chemical weapons against unarmed civilians. more than 500 children and we support president obama decision to go to the congress to get authorization to carry out strikes against the syrian regime and we understand really the decision making in the democratic country and realize that support for the decision will make it stronger and more effective and we hope it will encourage other friendly countries to participate in the international campaign against the regime. >> are you worried, g

sue dam hussein wasn't part of the 9/11, nor was he an immediate threat to the united states, and he s being contained. so secretary of state knew this, he just couldn't break through the group that wanted to finish gulf war, and get rid of sudden dam hussein. they viewed iraq as the first in a number of states they would knock off in the region, and when they didn't find chemical weapons in iraq, they created the idea that they would democracy as the rallying cry. as a clever, clef ploy. because it bridges the partisan divide. but now the american people has seen through this. we understand that you can't just expect people to go to the polls and cast a ballot, and subtly just like california there's democracy, look at that. these people are having debates on television, and aren't they friendly with each other, and they are so nice. and we just sort of transplanted america over there. >> where does that leave the debate? where does that take us today? >> i think the united states has -- the people have turned away from the middle east. as a cause. obviously we are stimworried about

the united states of america.hy would non-indigenous respect the indigenous population of any place? that's not the policy of the nons in hawai'i. and hawai'i kingdom was exclusive of all nationalities, the united states made obscured the nationalities of hawai'i. talk about the natives and non-natives. >> i want to comment on one of the comments you just read. the thing that one of the u.s. policies was to divide us by this thing by blood quantum, and that created a situation where hawaiians are separated whether you're 50% blood quantum or less. that's one way to divide and conquer a people. that's one thing that the hawaiian people have in common with the indigenous people of the continent, it was deployed to divide the people into natives who can get land and natives who can't. it's always about controlling the land resources of the people. in hawai'i it's a very strategic place for the united states who views hawai'i, the u.s. government has always viewed hawai'i as a sacrifice zone and a place to build up th

davis of the united states army. sergeant davis, then private first class davis, distinguished himself while serving at a remote support base in vietnam. november 18, 1967, sergeant davis' support base came under enemy mortar attack. and he was also threatened with a ground assault from across the river. detecting a nearby enemy position, sergeant davis seized a machine gun and provided cover for his gun crew. . but the enemy managed a direct hit. ignoring warnings to seek cover, sergeant davis returned to the howitzer which was burning furiously. though he was painfully injured by enemy mortar, davis continued fire, disregarding his injuries and inability to swim, he crossed the river on an air mattress where he aided in returning three soldiers to the support base, refusing medical attention for his own wounds, he joined another gun crew, firing at the enemy until they fled. i am proud to honor and remember the extraordinary heroism of sergeant sammy l. davis. thank you. yield back. >> thank you, i'd like to recogn

there were many exhibitions, in fact here in the united states. there was an exact that tramps to gent issues, there's the-- you had works being acquired by the museum of modernary here in new york. the you see all these connections coming together, and at the same time an unprecedented state pratronnage inside of whether they likeraphy shawrchg aand the foster of the scene, the domestic art scene? in aurora. and the congress, 'toine museum of cob interest rate after the. donald judge, jackson polac that would really be the envy of any of them here. >> rose: and all of. >> durks bai, london, paris, new york, los angeles, and even iran. >> rose: some is in iran? is it displayed prominently in iran? >> interestingly enough, in august, there was an exhibition of the art from the sa saqqakhah movement. in iran we're seeing new scholarship and new attention. >> rose: were there problems in doing this because of political conflict between iran and the united states? >> well, we do have sanctions here in the united states. >> rose: right. and so part of

he feels he looks weak to his colleagues in the united states and international colleagues.hat is not enough reason to go to war. >> kentucky senator rand paul joining the debate over the situation in syria. we are back now with the panel. we will hear a lot in the next week about this debate. the best way forward in syria. general keane. what do you think of the president's plan as he laid it out? short-term, limited, basically focused on attacking assad's chemical weapons capability. >> first of all, i don't like the fact we have given the enemy so much time to harbor resources. i think this action should have been over by now. secondly, i did support the limited action. if the objective is to reduce significant military capability and i was suggesting that assad would never use chemical weapons and have to give up his air power. that is within the means of the instruments that we're doing. shut down his air support and structure. that is still obtainable to a certain degree. we're going to have to work very hard, i believe, to make this strike very effective. i think it s

chemical weapons threaten the security of the middle east and the national security interests of the united states. i think repeatedly members of congress have spoken out about the grave consequences of assad in particular used chemical weapons. both speaker boehner and leader pelosi have stated in recent days that the actions of the assad regime are unacceptable and that the united states has a responsibility to respond. so as we debate, the world is watching and the world is wondering not whether assad's regime actually this. i think that fact is now beyond question. the world is wondering whether the united states of america is going to consent through silence to stand aside while this kind of brutality is allowed to happen without consequence. in the nearly 100 years since this global commitment against chemical weapons was made, only two tyrants have dared to cross the world's brightest line. bashar al assad has now become the third. in history i think everyone here knows holds nothing but infamy for those criminals, and history also reserves very little sympathy for their enablers. that is t

syria's regime will use chemical weapons on its people again if the united states does not take militaryction. that's the word from the british prime minister, david cameron, he made that comment before the british parliament. he assured british lawmakers the united kingdom would not take part in military action after the lawmakers voted against it. the french parliament began debating today. there's no scheduled vote and france's president is not seeking parliament's approval for strike. france is america's oldest ally and among the countries supporting u.s. intervention in words. those countries are highlighted in green. leaders of the countries in gray say they're undecided, waiting for the u.n. approval or a possible political solution, neither of which seems possible. the countries in red here have outright rejected military response. johnathan hunt is here. the british prime minister says as john kerry said and others, if we don't take action, he will use chemical weapons again which is not to the if we do, he won't. that said there's a lot of support for u.s. intervention overseas

you break a law, the united states will step in.e are on shaky international legal foundations with this potential strike. we need to know if we have exhausted all options to affect syria's behavior. we need to increase our attention on the source of assad's ability to continue to ruthlessly kill his own people. that is support from nations including russia and china who are cynically trying to hold the moral high ground. assad would not be able to maintain his grip on power if he were not being supported from outside. the full force of international outrage should come down on those nations that are refusing to allow the u.n. to act and find a solution. finally, i see this potential bombing campaign as a potential next step towards full-fledged war. you have been here before. the iraq war began as an international effort to kick some hussein out of kuwait, and then years of a no-fly zone to keep saddam from threatening his neighbors or reconstituting his arsenal of chemical weapons. as we all know, this limited military action even

figure and according to the new estimates. $11.7 million unauthorized immigrants are living in the united states as of march 2012. number of unauthorized immigrants peaked at $12.2 million fell in 20009. joining us to talk about the tebgs anding immigrant rights in california is state assemblyman bob -- he is the sponsor of a measure passed the that passed the state legislature. sorry, passed by the state legislature they louse permanent residents to sit on a jury. it's good to talk with you. >> these are green card holders who made their home in california. they live here and have raised a family. rather than confirming benefits like drivers license or a right to practice law, we are giving them a duty. we're sayinging you're here. we want you to participate in the jury deliberations. from the jury -- -- it checks the precedence and it's more representive of what we have here in california. >> we clarify what i was saying earlier. you allowed these here legally to serve on jury price have not become citizens yet. there's also legislation that will give drivers licensed to undocumented imgrants

the united states navy doubled its strength in the mediterranean in the past week. to move there. secretary of state john kerry, told house democrats three middle eastern nations, turkey, saudi arabia and the united arab emirates have used bases against syria. pentagon correspondent chris lawrence joins us with more on the military maneuver that we should know about. there are reports that assad is hiding military assets in civilian populations. the military leaders have assured him strikes would be effective a month from now. how confident are officials at the pentagon that you're hearing from, the president isn't waiting too long? >> very. one official told us that if the syrian regime thinks it's going to get benefit out of this delay, they're sorely mistaken. the confidence comes from the fact that they feel they have 24 hour surveillance over syria, the technology to hit precise locations, and they feel that assad cannot hide some of his major assets. they say he does not have the fortified underground bunkers to stash attack helicopters and planes and you can't

i'm a member of the united states congress from the united states of america.ssure the people of egypt that i as a member of congress will stand strong in support of continuing military support for, united states support financially to stand for the military in egypt. we've seen the threat that the muslim brotherhood has posed around the world. we stand against this great evil. we are not for them. we remember who caused 911 in america. we remember who it was that killed 3,000 brave americans. >> no, you don't remember, because the muslim brotherhood is actually a thing. it's not just a term for guys who are muslims who maybe have siblings. muslim brotherhood's a thing in egypt, a real thing, and members of the united states congress, from the united states of america, going to egypt and telling egypt that as members of the u.s. congress, you think that it was the muslim brotherhood that about 9/11? oh, excuse me, 911? that's amazing, but that happened in egypt. republicans michele bachmann, steve king and louie gohmert, "a," have passports, and "b," used them

could that ever happen in the united states? everything we can. >> reporter: this whichcould meaning the salad while passing on the fries. jim axelrod, cbs news, new york. >> pelley: and that's the cbs evening news for tonight. for all of us at cbs news all around the world, good night. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> your realtime captioner is mrs. linda m. macdonald >>> we begin tonight with breaking news out of hyattsville where a car has hit and injured at least eight students in the parking lot of northwestern high school. first responders say most of those injuries are minor. none appears to be life threaten. they say an after-school event was being held at the time. a car pulled into the lot and ran into those students. the driver stayed there. police are now investigating exactly how it all happened. good evening to you, i'm derek mcginty. >> i'm jan jeffcoat. we're going to get to the news at 7:00 in just a moment but first here's a look at your world in 90 seconds.

since the early ninety nine his american diplomats have essentially been used to an idea of the united states being the one and only country calling the shots and that period is obviously coming to an end not only because a fresh of a because of many other countries coming to the fore so i wonder if they american diplomats have really made that mantle transition team to negotiation rather than. you know blackmailing or coersion or deciding for others you know real negotiation and power sharing international power sharing well i was a diplomat in russia from one nine hundred ninety three until the end of one nine hundred ninety six and then frequently dealt with russia when i was the undersecretary of state for political affairs into two thousand and my sense was that while there was a tendency particularly among political leaders it's a see whether in fact they could translate american military and economic strength into diplomatic dicked if you could put it that way from time to time it was often necessary to negotiate in negotiations were part of the diplomatic environment and i did find am

getting ready for it so we have the most grotesque coalition ever assembled in history out qaida the united states israel saudi arabia and other persian gulf states who could have made such a scenario but be careful what you wish for because i'm certain israel will be in this war big time and very quickly because i'm certain that syria and its friends will immediately turn the war take the war to israel in the first hours after the united states bombardment of syria begins israel presumably will retaliate and enter the war will then have an arab israeli war fought on top of the oil fields and in the midst of one of the washed depressions the developed world has ever seen so look for the oil price rocketing perhaps quadrupling as it did in one thousand nine hundred seventy three seventy four look out for the straits of hormuz being blocked unoiled moving out of the gulf to the world look out for the suez canal being blocked and attacked look out for war throughout the world there is going to be mugged and mayhem throughout the world not happy clappy mr christian barack obama who just the other day

situation developing in taking the same scenario in syria even though yes if those strikes that the united states is proposing are carried out and if and assad is indeed eliminated as the had ever stated for his governing structures limited do you think that's what ultimately improve the human rights situation on the ground what will two points i mean first of all i don't think to cheat or ship is the worst possible scenario it's about women but the worst situation is something like what you have in syria should. a where you have a series of militia you know nobody controls the terror of the country different parts of the country controlled by different factions one of those factions happens to be the government but you have a mass killing going on so this is not just a dictatorship nobody was proposing military intervention when it's just assad ruling over a unified country the united states wants intervention to get a handle and assad well what are you talking about that was the policy statement by president obama get syria read of president assad let's go back to three years ago before the war