tv Consider This Al Jazeera May 13, 2014 10:00pm-11:01pm EDT
anger growing in africa over the hundreds of kidnapped girls. why attention was not paid to their plight earlier. the u.s. steps up its role in an offensive against the most dangerous al-qaeda affiliate - how much of a difference will it make. a major ruling - questions where your right to privacy ends and google's rite to link to anything online begins, and why the u.s. army is saying no to 80% of people that want to join
its ranks. i'm antonio mora, welcome to "consider this," here is more on what is ahead. >> u.s. military team on the ground helping with the search and rescue. surveillance planes in the skies over nigeria. >> nigeria has the lead, we play a supporting role. >> the integrity of the government is at stake. >> google must delete links about users if they ask. >> the european court said to google "you need to respect the rights of privacy." donald sterling, clippers owner, is trying to clear the air. >> i'm not a racist. i love people. >> i really think he has dementia. >> this is bigger than the clippers and the n.b.a. american surveillance aircraft joined fbi and state department experts and teams from four other nations to search for hundreds of kidnapped
nigerian school girls, kidnapped by boko haram, which released this video of more than 100 hostages on monday. boko haram's leader said he'd sell them into slavery, but offered to trade them for fighters. the head of the dialogue committee for boko haram would not rule it out. >> we hope that we'll be able to get the guests out as quickly as possible. a lot of promises have been made. we are pursuing those. >> a former government mediator said the kidnapping and the government's response damaged the country in world opinion. >> each day spent by the girls in captivity, the integrity is at stake. moral standing as a nation is under security you ni. >> i'm joined from nairobi by
the african union's special envoy for women, peace and community and is a founder of a group. you made a passionate call last week for more efforts to find and rescue the kidnapped girls when you were serving as co-share in the world economic forum in abuja. is enough being done to find them now? >> i think when you are in abuja, what was interesting is the whole world was aware that the 200 girls were kidnapped. that was a momentum. what we have been asking and demanding and made a call as african mothers is to say release these girls, so they bring them back at home. that has been echoed by
everybody. while the government was dealing with the issue the international community saying bring them back. as a special envoy of the african union i saw many member states saying condition we support you to deal with the problems. that is what name needs to do, is to link with the international regional and international to bring our tutors back home. i remember when we had the plane that crash, which unfortunately we are looking for that plane that we could not find. and the malaysia plane - you can release the mobilization of resourc resources, services and the drones - you name them, everybody was there to make sure
we find the plane. we haven't found them, but there was a lot of attention. we need to do that for the girls. we need to come as a unified force to look for them. >> how frustrated were you to see the worldwide effort involving tens of millions for a plane that was almost certainly at the bottom of the sea, while it took weeks to start a minimal effort to save hundreds of girls. >> a lot of the melbournisation should continue. -- mobilization should continue. we don't know where the plane is, but we know the 200 girls are somewhere in nigeria. they are not suping in any sea, they are on land. they may be hiding in the forest. we do remember that the world find osama bin laden, and find
people we want to find and we can find the girls and bring them home. >> tuesday, nigeria said they were willing to net with boko haram. should the government do that, does not that negotiation risk encouraging more kidnappings than this one. >> i always said you don't negotiate on the bodies of women somehow. i call this as a proxy war. >> they might have an issue. we don't know about the issue of the government. could you imagine those young girls, what they have done. just asking for their rights, their rights to go, to get
educated. their rights to contribute to africa as a nation, as a consequent. they were demanding the right to be educated, and what they get was to be kidnapped. i think that for me the first thing - dialogue can happen, but those people need to know that there is no impunity. but if they know that today they have done this, and the next day if they do it they will be brought to justice and to trial and to be punished. i think it will be stopped. to boko haram, it may make sense to them, but send, as i said, all the resources possible to find the girls and bring them pack home. >> talking about the rights of
the girls, 11 more girls were kidnapped by boko haram's state. nicholas caist os in the "new york times" wrote a piece how educated girls are their terrible nightmares. it talked about how educated women are doing better than their neighbours. is anything done to protect girls at schools? >> you know that the girls are asking to be educated all over africa, you know. if you wanted to get out of poverty, as you know, we worry nigeria talking about economic growth. africa is rich in natural resources. you name them, everything. but we call most op our people. we want our girls to be educated, our boy to be educated. they are the human capitals that
we had, the people that can transform economically the nation so that if the education of girls and boys are crucial, i think that is what boko haram is ung that maybe if they have a war, waging the war in the community or whatever they are targetting, they need to destroy. the know the phenomenon of destroying the woman's body when we have war, which we, like, rape, we saying this is a crime. these people need to be brought to justice, they are criminals. we need to fight them because, you know, for me even denying the right to education is a crime not just for nigeria, but a crime for the world a crime against humanity, so nigeria and
the government of africa, the african union should make sure that nobody in africa deny the right to be educated. >> let's hope the men are brought to justice and the girls are brought home safely and something can be done to protect boys and girls who want education. human rites act visit - thank you for joining us. >> thank you very much. >> turning to what has become a hot war in yemen. as u.s. backed government forces struggle to crush one of the al qaeda's deadliest affiliates, al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. yemeni attack helicopter and fighter jets and artillery blasted at what was described as al qaeda hiding places in the south of yemen. state-run media reported five al qaeda militants had been killed in an air strike. a military campaign launched
april 29th folioed a series of attacks that reportedly killed 65 militants. the question - can the u.s. and yemen destroy al qaeda in the arabian peninsula once and for all. i'm joined by the former director. c.i.a. counterterrorism center, and is advisor from e.r. g partners, a firm with a focus on security and intelligence, and an al jazeera contributor. robert, good to see you. yemen's government is committed, suicide attacks have been responded with, and an ambush aimed at the minister of defence. can the yemeni gof, with u.s. help, drive al qaeda out of yemen? >> well, outed the straight april is no. they can't drive al qaeda out of yemen in the short term. we are seeing military gains.
fighting the campaigns, they cap make it difficult to hold territory. that's what they are doing in the south. we are seeing a movement on the part of the militants to move into adjacent provinces and a number of claimed casualties, a number claimed by the government which is small. we are seeing a dispersal of fighters into contiguous provinces. it sort ofs the short-term aims of the yemeni government. they don't want the organization to control turf. >> yemen fought a similar campaign against al qaeda, and they came back strongly. don't they always have the option in the rug the ter rain of dispersing, coming back and fighting another day? >> in conventional military terms this is a difficult fight to wage. when you deal with what is
essentially an insurgent army, they have the initiative. in this, as in other insurgencies that we see, the ultimate solution is a political one. the deposit made positive steps and agreed to a federal set up in yemen whereby six regions will be provided with their own executives. in the lopping term the hope is this will drive a wege between the local people without whose support they can't have pore long. >> we are showing the extraordinary video of the aq, a.p. rally, where the group was addressed by al qaeda's number two, was releasing the video a mistake. and was waving the red bag to a bull.
>> perhaps, but that said, they need to be able to show that they are independent, autonomous, and able to stand up to the government in yemen, and to westerners seen with distrust by many parts of the country. it would be wise not to do that often, but i think it is important for them to show themselves split -- politically. >> the u.s. embassy has closed. c.i.a. and an embassy official shot two yemenis reportedly tied to this cell that was kidnapping people. they were trying to kidnap these two americans at a barber shop. is the clandestine war there?
>> there is a clan deft in war waged within the large econtext of this conventional fight, where the government in senna is trying to establish its authority around the country. within that struggle there is the kind of terrorism struggle, if you will, between the u.s. and the west and the militants focused not just on local issues in yemen, but the larger target and particularly on the united states. >> how important is it for our security at home to defeat al qaeda and the arabian peninsula? >> well this is an organization which poses not just a theoretical threat, these are people that have struck at the united states in the past. they could easily have brought down an airliner in detroit back in 2009. a year later they came close to bringing down a cargo plane transiting toward the united states. so these are people that pose a
threat. i don't think we want to overexaming rate it. this is a legitimate concern for the united states. the important thing is for the u.s. to carry out the campaign in a way which enhances and does not undermine local political support for the government in senna. at the end of the day that is going to determine the direction of the struggle. >> let's talk about the broader al qaeda threat. last year, a 43% entries in terror attacks. we talked about al qaeda and its affiliates, how they hold more territory now than ever, but there has been a split in syria, where the head denounced one group, that group is fighting the other group, and how some terrorist elements condemned another group, and how they targeted muslims and christians much are there cracks.
>> yes, but this is nothing new. when we talk about cracks in al qaeda,it's a facade. al qaeda is more a movement than a co-heerpt organization -- coherent organization. map of the groups operate independently. the problem between al qaeda central, the organization controlled by the successor to osama bin laden, is that al qaeda is much more sensitive than some local groups to the long-term political effect when they kill large numbers of civilians, that's the problem that al qaeda has with the islamic state of iraq and syria, a state disopened by al qaeda. the same is true of boko haram. given its muslim extremist affiliation - it's not down the movement favoursly kidnapping the 200-some-odd women in
nigeria. this is what al qaeda is trying to struggle against. that said, these are ipp dependent organizations they don't look to al qaeda for leadership. they like the brand because of what that conveys in the public mind. at the end of the day they depend on themselves, and the fact that they are estranged fro al qaeda doesn't make them any less dangerous. >> good to have you on the show. coming up, a major decision office that could impact what you can find in your internet searches and affect your right to privacy. a story anyone considering fertility treatment needs to see as multiple births in america multiple. we run down the risks and why some want to clamp down on ivf. harmeli aregawi is tracking top
what is this place? where are we? this is where we bring together the fastest internet and the best in entertainment. we call it the x1 entertainment operating system. it looks like the future! he has a phaser! it's not a phaser! it's my phone! he can use his voice to control the tv. you can use your woice?
my voice. your woice. my voice. "vuh," voice. his voice. your woice? look. watch sci-fi. [ female announcer ] the x1 entertainment operating system, only from xfinity. in what some are calling a landmark ruling, the european union's highest court said google must grant users, under certain circumstances, the right to delete links to news articles, documents to and other information about them. it applies to 28 european union countries, it's a setback to other companies like yahoo and microsoft. they'll be required to referee
complaints were users, and it strikes at the heart of privacy rites on the web and muddies the line between free speech and privacy considerations. i'm joined by stefan hoyer, the us correspondent for "brand ions", and is a contributor to daily dot and the co-author to "faking it - a guide to digital self-defence." let's begin with the ruling. the case originated in spain. a man argued when a google search pum -- pulled up an access notice of his repossessed home - that that was a -- against his privacy rights.
isn't google and others just putting up information or others. >> there's a sense that it is presenting information by processing and indexing it. that's the difference. that's why the court thinks google should be responsible for removing the links. >> doesn't it put google in the position of making decisions about what should be public and what should be private? >> google and other companies have been making those decisions, whether we know it or not. page rank algorithm and other technologies used that decide what we see at what spot - whether on page 1 or page 5, that is already a decision they make. it's based on software, it's a constant decision making. in that sense it's nothing new. >> the ruling says it can be taken down. it seems to me, as a former
practicing lawyer, that that is incredibly broad language. if you pardon the silly champ, could i complain to google and have them take down a picture of me from 20 years ago, or someone with a mug shot for dui when they were 19 say "that's irrelevant, it's two decades later", and that person may say it's not relevant today. >> you are right. that it's brand new unchartered territory. we'll have to see how many people file complaints or take down notices. it's not unprecedented. you take uh-uh -- youtube, and they have people taking down some cases. google looks at the cases and decides what to take down. the basic question is do we want to let a commercial entity decide. do we want to live under a giant
magnify class? >> true, but it seems to me it gives them a lot of power, and want public figures, politicians that might want to hide something, saying "that was a long time ago, it's not relevant, take the information down, and the voters don't have a chance to decide whether it was relevant, because it's been taken down. >> the ruling that i understand makes a distinction between public figures and persons of public centres, so there's a higher bar compared to the average citizen. so far as google making decision, that's going on. whether you get something as the first or the fifth result, information on a politician, it can determine whether you see information or not. without that decision, we would have that filtering power by a company. >> don't you think it will become the wild, wild west if this is a ruling that stands in europe and conceivably elsewhere
where everybody is going to the companies saying "i want this done, i want that done", i would think it's incredibly expensive for google to sonnrespond to th requests. >> people work at some of the companies we have been talking about. there's a process this place, taking down notices for material, it worked well. there'll be a process. it's not clear how that will play out, will google wait to be sued, will it wait for a form to come in. this is a brand new decision that came down, and is has to be seep in the context of e.u., privacy changes coming down the pipe. this is the start of a longer process. >> you have to wonder about lawsuits and every witch way. the ruling an only binding in the 28 countries. what about the u.s. is in any chance that something like that could happen here?
>> without being a lawyer, the legal framework in the u.s., is different. it's usually case law, it's state by state can be different. there are few broad frameworks and some are in the process of being updated - for example, electronic communications privacy act dating from 1986, when the cloud was science fiction. there was a bill in congress to update that. the u.s. has a different playing field in that sense. the companies that are working globally must find a way to sink ronize those two frameworks. the european and u.s. >> if it came it the u.s. it raises first amendment and privacy issues that find it interesting to discuss, and see what happens there. >> it's a pleasure to have you with us. thank you for trying to explain this to us. >> thank you for having me. >> multiple births in america
are sky rocketing. so are concerns about the cost to families and society. 2% of single births are preterm. it 11% of definition and a third of triplets are born that early. it increases the risks of premature death and other issues costing the u.s. health care system 26 billion. a study in the medical journal is calling for policy changes to reduce the number of births. let's bring in arthur cap lain, director of a medical center a division of medical ethics. there's a dramatic increase in multiple births because of the fertility treatment, ovarian stimulation or ipp vitro fertilisation, what are the consequences. >> this is happening because women are waiting longer.
single mums are saying i'm not sure mr right is coming along. they are turning to fertility treatment. consequences - premature babies cost a lot of money. 26 billion due to prem futury, a lot driven by multiple births. another problem - you get more premature births and more disability in the kids. we don't like to talk about it because it's great to have kids and for infertile couples it's a miracle. it has costs. >> this is because fertility treatments increase the likely had and invitro because it costs so much, it's rarely covered by insurance, that parents end up with multiple embryos, because they want to make some takes, and they have more implanted, and that ends up resulting in
twins and triplets and bigger multiple births. >> that's right. you come in and may be told your insurance doesn't cover the treatment, and it would be $15,000 a try, which is not outlandish. >> of course it's outlandish for most people. >> as a charge. >> yes. >> let's say that's the number. you hear that and think how often am i going to be able to do that. give me as many embryos that i can, put them in because i want this one chance. you have six, seven, eight transferred. if all of them take, multiple pregnancies, here they go. the cost of fertility drugs, they can cost. the incidentive is have many babies as fast as you can, because insurance doesn't pay
for this. most families would like the one baby they were trying to have. what can we do to make things better? if you call that better. i don't mean to imply that twins or triplets is a bad thing. >> and it wouldn't be fair for me to come here and have a shot at the media. we glorify those sextuplets et cetera, it's not good for the mum, it's risky for the babies. i haven't seen, a six, seven without problems. we don't want to make it seem like it's a good thing to do. what we could do - some centres could say we are not going to transfer three or more embryos, it's not safe for you or those babies to be. we could pay more for fertility. if you pay $26 billion for
prematurely, throwing it under health reform, that's a worthwhile investment. you'll get let prem futury and disability. >> you think covering fertility treatments would end up saving us money in the lopping run. >> i do. >> what ethical questions are the big ones raised by all of this? >> probably the biggest of all is this - i say this with trepidation, but it's a posterior. if you have a multiple birth it's possible to do selective reduction, kill a foetus in utero or more. some say let's transfer the embryos, talk it from four babies to two two to one - huge and tough ethical question. these are couples that want babies, you say now you are having too many, we'd like you to consider selective reduction. they don't want to hear about that.
others say it's wrong inherptly. it's a soapies choice that no one should make. it's a technique that is out there, controversial on their face. >> because people argue you are killing. >> what about the embryos that are discarded? >> the other part is when you make embryos and you have a child, it works on the first go, and you had seven, and you put three or four back in mum, the other tree you don't want children. what do you do. most get frozen. that raises issues for those that believe life begins at consippings. in nature -- conception. in nature, it turns out we make a lot of embryios that don't work right. the failure rate is 40-50%. nature makes a demand on us that embryos fail, so i'm not sure that it's wrong in the inveetio or fertility area to say we have
to dispose of embryos. >> enough to keep you busy. >> so many health care considerations as well. >> remember, too, a lot of happy parents, because they wouldn't have had children otherwise. >> it's a mare abbingle that it -- miracle that it happens in the way it has. how many decades. >> "79. >> thank you, good to see you. time to see what is trending on the web? >> the '60s were on important time for social and political change, particularly in the united states. there's an exhibit at the bronx documentary center in new york city painting a picture of that era, called "the '60s, a decade of change", in this photo martin luther king's daughter looks at the camera as he tieses her
shoes", and a child at a par raid honouring king after his death. also on the right a woman holding a sign "america, love it or leave it", here building workers collapse and four men participate in a draft card burning. a woman protests an invasion of the dominican republic. and lastly the 1967 photo shows a national guard on the streets of newark new jersey in the aftermath of riots that lasted six days, leaving 26 dead. these photos were tape by ben dict and are on display in app section. >> so much upheaval. thanks.
shameful events of the holocaust for western nations including the united states. 75 years ago the st. louis ocean liner left germany on a journey known as the voyage of the damned. more than 900 jews were on board. they were turned away instead, and rejected by the united states and canada. forced to return to europe, many of the refugees found themselves victims of nazi concentration champs. >> joining us is martin goldsmith who retraced their lives, and to their tragic deaths. it's the basis of a new book: >> martin, good of you to join us. you say in the book you felt a need to connect with the vani vanished generation of your family murdered a decade before you were born.
why did you choose to trace the life of your grandfather and uncle to trace the path that ultimately led to your grandparent's death. >> my parents survived in nazi germany because they were musicians. they made it safely to america in 1941. by that time my father's father and his younger brother were held in camps. they wrote letters to my father, and when i began work on the first book, my father gave me a stack of letters saying you should learn about this. my father heard guilt not saving his father and brother. i think he managed to pass on the guilt unknowingly and
unwittingly to me. when my father died in 2009 and when my brother died of a heart attack less than a year later, having lost my father and brother i decided to trace the steps of my father's father trying to save my grandfather. as you say, they have been murdered 10 years before. i felt the need as my father had failed to save his father and brother. >> it sort of had fallen to me to save my grandfather and ung. >> there was a personal failing. there were larger failings in the story. people my age and older might be aware of the tragedy because of the book and the movie coming out four decades ago. younger generations may not know. your uncle and grandfather, they
thought they had escaped nazi germany. what happened. >> alex was arrested. he was told after he had been released that it would be six months to leave the country or face arrest. he and my father's younger brother booked passage on the ship, leaving hamburg on 13 may 1979. he thought that that wee land in cuba, establish a beach head in the western hemisphere and send for the rest of the family. powerplays in the government made it impossible for more than a handful to land in havana. the ship weighed anchor and sailed north where it plied the waters off the coast of florida, seeking permission to land. it was denied.
permission was denied the right to land in canada. it sailed back across the atlantic. my grandfather got off in france, pleased that they weren't at least returned to germany, but that began a stretch of three years in which they were sent from one french camp to another before they were sent to their deaths in aalst witch. >> the anti-semitism and politics in canada and united states, not letting them come in, how they were in havana harbour, relatives could wave from below and they were outside miami and never allowed sent in, sent back to europe and hundreds died. in the case of your relatives, they were in these french concentration camps, it's a striking thing about your book.
there were concentration champs in france, run by the french, without snigation by the naasies. >> absolutely, many of us know some of the names, but we should learn the names of others. lemille was built by the french, the government, with no prodding from the german government, and when the final solution was put in effect in tumor, the french were too happy to ship the concentration camps. >> we should say that there was one hearing in this story, there was a captain of a ship. >> from the beginning, gustaf
was 5 feet 4 inches tall, short in stature, but as you say, enormous in integrity, saw to it that the passengers were afforded rites and privileges of people taking the liner from hamburg to the west. on the way back he devised a plan that the idea was that he would run the ship aground off the coast of england and ferry everyone to safety. that heroics - those were not necessary because of a deal breakered by the american committee. after the death he was named rubbishous among the nations. >> the subtitle refers to a voi im of betrayal, not only by the government, but in your own family? >> yes. the people on board the st. louis purchased first class or second-class tickets.
they assumed that they were leaving the country of their forebears and they were living under great duress and they thought they'd be arriving in the western hemisphere. they thought once they arrived off the coast of florida, that the golden door promised on the basis of the statue of liberty would be open much but it was shut in their faces. they were forced to return to europe, many to tare deaths, as was the case for my grandfather and uncle. >> the story of st. louis is one that ought not be forgotten. so many lesson. the book is alex's paying. great to have you here. >> coming up donald sterling was supposed to apologise for racially offensive remarks.
today's data dive looks at a military that is leaper and smarter. a maim junior misconception is that the army is a back up for high school drop outs. the reality is getting into the military is tough and getting tougher. four out of five who seek to join the army don't qualify. this year's class faces stringent requirements since signle up became voluntary. 99% of today's recruits are high school graduates. these days those that want to
join need higher scores on the entry test. the armed services vocational aptitude battery. if you are overweight or have a past smarn you may be dismfld. a recruiter told the star if a kid was caught with a marijuana joint in his car, they'd be a shoe in to enlist. now you are not authorised. the articly imposed tattoo regulations, mapping neck or face tattoos, and ones below the elbows and knees. then you can on the have four tat u and they have to be small enough to be covered by one's hand. part of the reason for imposing the rules is it can be more selective. in fact, it's targeted 57,000 recruits - it's the lowest since 9/11. since then the army has only missed a recruiting goal once, during the iraq war. several factors are at play.
in a bid to save face and possibility the ownership of his team, l.a. clippers donald sterling spoke out about his racism scandal. he did more harm than good. >> i'm not a racist i made a terrible mistake. when i listened to that tape, i don't know how i said words like that. i was baited. i think you are more of a racist than i am. >> how is that? >> i'm not a racist. jews, when they get successful they'll help their people. and some of the african-americans - maybe i'll get in trouble. they don't want to help anyone. >> sports editor for the nation, author of the brazil's dance with the devil, the world cup,
and donald sterling apologised, seemed sincere, he claims he isn't and has never been a racist, and then he started to go downhill, claiming he was baited into saying what he did, he blamed the media and said successful african-americans don't give back to communities. he was trying to do damage control, probably did the opposite. >> definitely did the opposite. it was an exercise in anti-public relations. it did more harm. with the recording one could say it was in the privacy of their home. people say things, it's a terrible thing. who among us would not look terrible. this was a planned event. that is what is so galling? a. he met with a public
relations expert and organised a sit down and despite that he did more harm than good. >> one way he did that was going after ma'amic johnson. let's hear that. >> what does he do, big magic johnson, what has he done. he has aids. did he do any business. did he help anyone in south l.a. what guy goes to every city, has sex with every girl and hatches hiv, is that someone we want to respect and tell our kids about. >> talking about magic not doing anything for inner cities is untree. he's been active through businesses and charities. why would be target magic johnson? >> there's a temptation to go back and forth with what donald sterling said and treat it as if it's an intellectual discussion. that, i think, gives him too much credit - let's have a
serious discussion about what magic has or has not done or whether or not he's a role model. we have to forget that and realise that we are dealing with someone, donald sterling, who is a megalomaniac, cannot accept the fact that he has been pushed out of a club he's been a part of for 30 years, and basically has everyone else in the club doing something unprecedented, telling him that he, in fact, does not belong in the club with them. i have to say, there's a lot of folks saying "maybe this has to do with early onset dementia", i am sure you heard that. his wife said that on a news show. not only is that insulting to anyone who dealt with a relative who has onset dementia or al ales -- alzheimer's do not know
donald sterling's history or read his court transcripts over the years. the only thing you can say is donald sterling is who we thought he was. >> he's in denial. here is more. >> the players don't hate me. the sponsors don't hate me. the players don't hate me. the media - it's all the media. why wouldn't they like me when i'm respectful? >> you believe the players of the l.a. clippers. >> absolutely, they know i'm not a race. >>. >> james -- lebron james said players don't want donald sterling as an owner or his wife or members of his family. what about shelly sterling. she said she'll fight to keep her part of the team. >> lebron james said n.b.a. players would not and should not take the court if a donald sterling opens the team. it's a huge deal saying what
they feel about the sister-in-lawings. shelly sterling attempted to speak about the effort to push her out as if it's a question of sexism saying "my husband said these comments, why should i be pushed out. if the wife of an owner says something, will the husband be pushed up." this is right from it's about donald sterling's words. this is why the n.b.a. needs to be clearer about why this is happening, and that is a pattern of behaviour, including years of racist business practices relatives to his real estate holdings, houses in los angeles, and shelly sterling not only benefited but was an active part of the arrest im going into the slum lord empire. >> she has been mentioned in the lawsuits. film director and avid basketball fan spik lee had this
to say? >> adam silva - they have to do something with the man and his wife. everyone is applauding. the decision, banned for life. it's like it's crickets now. where are they in the process of moving forward? >> where are they. when will the next steps be taken. >> the next steps are going on as a.p. people are supposed to be lined up. spik lee is correct. it's critics in terms of public commentary. particularly shelley sterling and it goes back to what one of the other openers said. they are scared of the slippery slope. if they look at it as business practices, there are a lot of owners who have some explaining to do. >> a lot of issues raised by
that. >> good to see you. >> the show may be over, but the conversation conditions. >> on facebook or google+. you can find us on twitter. we'll see you next time. hi everyone, this is al jazeera america. i'm john seigenthaler in new york. mining disaster unfolding a mile under ground in turkey. at least 200 people dead. hundreds missing. our reporter is on the scene with the latest. closing in - a wildfire if san diego forcing thousands from their homes as temperatures soared to record highs across california. prediction policing - using twitter to stop future crime.