Rogers and Comey testified for hours before Congress Lawmakers on both sides used the time to hit their key points The FBI is investigating any possible coordination between members of the Trump presidential campaign and Russia, and there is no evidence of wiretaps on Trump Tower. Those were some of the takeaways from a lengthy hearing Monday where the directors of the FBI and National Security Agency testified before the House Intelligence Committee covering Russian interference in the 2016 election. FBI Director James Comey and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers spent hours answering questions from members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. Here are some of the key things we learned. In his opening statement, Comey publicly confirmed for the first time that the FBI does have an open investigation into allegations that there was coordination between Russia and President Donald Trump’s campaign as part of a broader investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. “As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed,” Comey’s statement added. He told lawmakers that the investigation began in “late July,” but because it is ongoing there were many details he could not comment on. It did not take long for the hearing to pour cold water on Trump’s repeated claims, through tweets, that former President Barack Obama somehow ordered wiretapping and surveillance of Trump Tower. “I have no information that supports those tweets,” Comey said, adding that the Justice Department authorized him to speak for them as well as the FBI in the matter. Comey also said that it would be impossible for any president to order a wiretapping operation against anyone. The ranking member of the committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, sought to clarify with Comey that his corroboration of former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s statements about not finding evidence of Trump-Russia coordination referred to an intelligence community report that didn’t assess the topic. “Yes. I understood the question to be about the report itself,” Comey said. “The unclassified intelligence assessment doesn’t discuss the issue of US person coordination with the Russians,” Schiff said. “And I assume that’s because, at the time of the report in January of this year, that was under an investigation that you have now disclosed, is that right? “ “Correct,” Comey said. “The counterintelligence investigation is the FBI’s business.” While no evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians was confirmed or proffered Monday, Democrats repeatedly returned to the topic, asking Comey and Rogers several series of questions they for the most part could not comment on. Many of the Democrats used the hearing as an opportunity to get concerns on the record or, they said, to make sure Comey was aware of them, including meetings or contacts between Trump-linked officials and Russian contacts. “Is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? Yes, it is possible,” said Schiff in his opening remarks. “But it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected and not unrelated, and that the Russians used the same techniques to corrupt US persons that they have employed in Europe and elsewhere. We simply don’t know, not yet, and we owe it to the country to find out.” No evidence was presented, but Comey said the investigation was only in its beginning stages. Comey said due to the ongoing nature of the investigation, there were many things he could not comment on – and he added his “no comment” responses shouldn’t be interpreted, either. “Because it is an open ongoing investigation and is classified, I cannot say more about what we are doing and whose conduct we are examining,” Comey said. “I know that is extremely frustrating to some folks. I hope you and the American people can understand.” The notion of “unmasking” Americans came up several times, prompted by Republican lawmakers’ anger over the leaks that former national security adviser Mike Flynn was caught up in the US surveillance net during his conversations with Russian officials. Normally, US persons caught up in surveillance of foreigners would be masked, or their names kept confidential, so lawmakers asked Rogers and Comey who would have authority to reveal a person’s identity. Rogers said there were 20 people at NSA, including himself, who could do so. “If it’s criminal activity (caught during surveillance), we’ll disseminate the information, and if the FBI or other criminal activities are on the reporting stream, in some cases I also will generate a signed letter under my signature in specific cases to Department of Justice highlighting that what we think we have is potential criminal activity,” Rogers said. “But because we are not a law enforcement or justice organization we’re not in a place to make that determination.” Rogers and Comey confirmed that other agency directors, such as those at Justice and the CIA, would also be able to request a person’s name be unmasked. But Comey said the White House could only make such a request to the agency that collected the information. Comey wasn’t asked about it directly, but in his opening statement he obliquely referenced a chief complaint of Democrats – that he spoke freely about an investigation into Hillary Clinton but not Trump’s campaign during the election. He said that talking about closed investigations was different. “Some folks may want to make comparisons to past instances where the Department of Justice and the FBI have spoken about the details of some investigations, but please keep in mind that those involved the details of completed investigations,” Comey said. “Our ability to share details with the Congress and the American people is limited when those investigations are still open, which I hope makes sense.” The FBI warned the Democratic National Committee long before they were publicly victims of a massive hack that divulged embarrassing emails on the eve of the party’s convention. Comey said his agency first notified the DNC in August 2015, nearly a full year before the party discovered the intrusion into its system and hired outside help to kick the Russian hackers out. The FBI director also confirmed reports that after the hack the DNC did not give the FBI access to its computer systems or networks for forensic investigation to support the FBI’s conclusion that Russian hackers were responsible. But Comey did say he wished the bureau could have been more aggressive in warning the DNC in hindsight. Rogers and Comey both testified that despite the intense Russian hacking and propaganda effort aimed at public opinion, no actual votes in the election were compromised. House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes listed several key swing states – Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, North Carolina and Ohio – and asked Rogers if there was any evidence that vote tallies were changed. But the directors would not go so far as to say the election was not influenced by the overall Russian campaign. Responding to a tweet from the White House that included a video of the hearing and asserted that Comey and Rogers testified that Russia had not influenced the process, both said that was not their intention. “It was not our intention to say that today,” Comey said, adding it’s not “something that we looked at” as part of intelligence community review of the election. CNN’s Stephen Collinson, Adam Levine, Tom LoBianco, Mike Callahan, Manu Raju and Donald Judd contributed to this report.

FBI investigation into Trump-Russia coordination


Sharbat Gula was arrested for falsifying documents The photographer says he is committed to helping her The Afghan woman, whose striking green eyes in a National Geographic cover photo made her face known around the world, is under arrest in Pakistan. Sharbat Gula was 12 when photographer Steve McCurry captured his iconic image of her living in a refugee camp for Afghan nationals in Peshawar, Pakistan. Now in her 40s, Sharbat Gula – also known as Sharbat Bibi – was arrested in Peshawar on Tuesday for  falsifying documents and staying illegally in Pakistan, officials said. If convicted, Gula could be jailed for up to 14 years or be deported, said Zia Awan, a human rights lawyer based in Karachi. Last year, Gula was arrested on similar charges, but was later released. McCurry, the photographer, said he is committed to helping her legally and financially. “I object to this action by the authorities in the strongest possible terms,” he said in a statement. “She has suffered throughout her entire life. Her arrest is an egregious violation of her human rights.” The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Afghanistan told CNN it would only be able to assist in the case if Gula registers as a refugee. “Sharbat Gula falls under the ‘undocumented migrants’ umbrella,” said Duniya Khan with the agency’s Pakistan office. “The UNHCR cannot intervene since she is not a registered refugee.” Related article The story behind the famous photograph The International Organization for Migration (IOM), which assists undocumented migrants, says the arrest – although legal if the ID card is proven to be false –  is symptomatic of the mounting pressure on Afghan refugees in Pakistan to return home. “It is a sign of the times in Pakistan, that it has now reached someone who was something of a celebrity in the ’80s, someone more high profile than the average,” said Nicholas Bishop, project development officer for the IOM in Afghanistan. Human Rights Watch said since July 1, Pakistan has repatriated 370,000 Afghans, nearly 220,000 of them registered refugees. “They are joining more than one million internally displaced Afghans who are struggling to survive in a country still wracked by conflict and crushing poverty,” the group said in a statement. Millions of Afghans have sought shelter in Pakistan over the years as their country became ravaged by conflict, HRW added. CNN has reached out to the Pakistani Interior Ministry for comment, but hasn’t heard back. CNN’s Zahir Shah contributed to this report.


President Donald Trump has announced a new executive order on immigration. It is a slightly more lenient version of the extremely controversial “travel ban” he issued in February – Iraq has been exempted, leaving six instead of seven Muslim-majority countries on the list. People from the six countries who hold visas or are lawful permanent residents of the United States are also exempt. Trumps first “travel ban” sparked international ire and was eventually blocked by a federal court. This new ban is different, but it’s sure to keep the spotlight on the future of immigration and Islam in America. It’s time to step back and look at some numbers that put this issue in context. Non-immigrants include people like tourists, business travelers, students and some relatives of US citizens. They also include workers with H-1B visas, given to people with specialty occupations. The top nationalities of these visitors are: Mexico, Canada, the UK, Japan and China. 2016 saw a record number of Muslim refugees being let into the US. However refugees in general come from several different backgrounds and parts of the world. Would you have guessed, for instance, that the top three countries from which refugees came last year were, in order, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, and Myanmar? Let’s take a look at immigrants who eventually become citizens. That’s what naturalization is – becoming a full US citizen through a rigorous naturalization process. Mexico was the top place of birth for citizens naturalized in 2015. The other top two countries where these new US citizens were born? India and the Philippines. According to the Pew Research Center, About a 10th of immigrants coming to the US are Muslim. They also estimate there are about 3.3 million people who practice Islam in the US.  Another interesting tidbit from their report: They estimate the number of Americans who convert to Islam is about equal to the number of Muslim-Americans who convert to another faith or no longer identify with Islam. The new executive order lists six countries, all of which are predominantly Muslim: Iran, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. Trump’s initial executive order included an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees. This new order reduces the ban on Syrian refugees to 120 days. 2016 marked the highest number of Syrian refugees admitted into the US. The 12,587 refugees accounted for 14% of all refugees admitted. That number is dwarfed by the overall estimated number of Syrian refugees – about 11 million in the past six years – as well as the number of refugees who flee to Europe. According to Eurostat, 350,000 Syrians applied for asylum in EU countries in 2015. When we say barely, we mean BARELY. According to the CATO Institute, not one person from the seven countries included in the initial ban has killed anyone in a terror attack on US soil in the last 40 years. This includes refugees, as well. During this time, only 17 people from the seven original nations combined have been convicted of directly planning or implementing a terrorist attack. International terrorism is a serious global issue, one that most leaders and citizens agree needs to be taken seriously. However, when the risk is boiled down to a matter of immigrants, refugees, and American citizens, the threat becomes infinitesimally small. According to a review by the CATO Institute, the chances of an American dying in a terrorist attack committed by a foreigner in the US stands at about one in 3.6 million. The breakdown includes attacks over a 41-year period and includes the 9/11 attack, in which 3,000 people died. Once you narrow it to refugees and and illegal immigrants, the threat is even smaller. Again, the threat of terrorism needs to be –and is – taken seriously, but there are thousands of other phenomena that claim more American lives. Even so, the statistics above don’t tell the whole story. For instance, in 2016, the number of Americans killed in terrorists attacks in the US was unusually high because of the Orlando nightclub shooting, which claimed 49 lives and is considered an act of terrorism carried out by a Muslim extremist. However, it’s important to remember that attack was also the deadliest terrorist attack – and the deadliest mass shooting – in the US since 9/11. On the other hand, the gun violence statistics do not include suicides by firearm, which usually hover around or above 20,000 per year.

President Donald Trump's new executive order on immigration


This page includes the show Transcript Use the Transcript to help students with reading comprehension and vocabulary At the bottom of the page, comment for a chance to be mentioned on CNN Student News.  You must be a teacher or a student age 13 or older to request a mention on the CNN Student News Roll Call. The Weekly Newsquiz tests students' knowledge of events in the news October 9, 2015 Today, we’re bringing you a special edition of CNN Student News. Today’s show focuses on some of the economic issues facing the young members of the U.S. workforce. Who are the millennials? Why and how are many of them facing student loan debt? And how can they overcome some of the challenges of interviewing in a competitive job market? On this page you will find today’s show Transcript and a place for you to request to be on the CNN Student News Roll Call. TRANSCRIPT Click here to access the transcript of today’s CNN Student News program. Please note that there may be a delay between the time when the video is available and when the transcript is published. WEEKLY NEWSQUIZ Click here for a printable version of the Weekly Newsquiz (PDF). 1. Name the U.S. state that, according to its governor, recently received levels of rain that had not been seen in a thousand years. 2. In what country would you find the city of Kunduz, where a Doctors without Borders charity hospital was bombed last weekend? 3. What type of animal, featured on Monday’s show, has been used in Mozambique and some other countries to “sniff out” landmines? 4. Name the international trade agreement between 12 countries that has both support and opposition across U.S. party lines. 5. What Communist nation started to see a significant economic transformation after its government announced major reforms in 1978? 6. A vaccine currently in development is showing promise against what deadly virus, which has killed more than 11,000 people since an outbreak in March of 2014? 7. Name the agreements, signed in the 1990s and named for the capital of Norway, that pledged cooperation and coordination between Israelis and Palestinians. 8. Name the series of international agreements that date back to the 1800s and set rules for how civilians and captured or injured troops should be treated during wartime. 9.  A farmer in what U.S. state found the remains of a woolly mammoth while planting crops? 10. What is the generational nickname for people born in the 1980s and 1990s? if you need one mammoth discovery from Monday CNN Student News is created by a team of journalists who consider the Common Core State Standards, national standards in different subject areas, and state standards when producing the show. ROLL CALL For a chance to be mentioned on the next CNN Student News, comment on the bottom of this page with your school name, mascot, city and state. We will be selecting schools from the comments of the previous show. You must be a teacher or a student age 13 or older to request a mention on the CNN Student News Roll Call! Thank you for using CNN Student News!


Rogelio Martinez and his partner were responding to activity on patrol Martinez had been a border patrol agent since 2013 A Border Patrol agent died Sunday morning from injuries he suffered while on patrol in southwest Texas, US Customs and Border Protection said. Rogelio Martinez, 36, and his partner were responding to activity while on patrol in the Big Bend Sector, which runs along the US-Mexico border, and the partner reported they were both injured, the agency said. The agents were patrolling near Interstate 10, in the Van Horn station area of the sector. Customs officials would not say what type of activity the agents were responding to. Other agents responded, provided medical care and transported both to a local hospital. CBP was later told Martinez had died, and his partner remains hospitalized. It was not clear what injuries they suffered. A Customs and Border Protection spokesman said Martinez was not shot. “On behalf of the quarter of a million front line officers and agents of DHS, my thoughts and prayers go out to the family and friends of Agent Martinez and to the agent who is in serious condition,” acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke said in the statement. On Sunday night, President Trump tweeted about the incident, writing, “We will seek out and bring to justice those responsible. We will, and must, build the Wall.” Border Patrol Officer killed at Southern Border, another badly hurt. We will seek out and bring to justice those responsible. We will, and must, build the Wall! A tweet from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott expressing his condolences described the incident as an “attack.” “Our prayers are with the families of this Border Patrol Agent who was killed & the other who was injured in this attack in Texas. Our resources must be increased to prevent these attacks in the future. #txlege #tcot” Our prayers are with the families of this Border Patrol Agent who was killed & the other who was injured in this attack in Texas. Our resources must be increased to prevent these attacks in the future. #txlege #tcot https://t.co/60tHfoWKRq Texas Sen. Ted Cruz also called the incident an “attack” in a statement. “This is a stark reminder of the ongoing threat that an unsecure border poses to the safety of our communities and those charged with defending them. We are grateful for the courage and sacrifice of our border agents who have dedicated their lives to keeping us safe. I remain fully committed to working with the Border Patrol to provide them with all the resources they need to safeguard our nation,” Cruz said. Carlos Diaz, a spokesman for the CBP, would not describe the incident in any further detail, saying the FBI is investigating. “The FBI is still actively investigating the incident and gathering the facts,” FBI spokeswoman Jeanette Harper said. The Border Patrol’s Special Operations Group and agents from CBP’s Air and Marine Operations were searching the area for potential suspects or witnesses, the agency said. Martinez had been a border patrol agent since 2013, officials said. CNN’s Darran Simon and AnneClaire Stapleton contributed to this report.


US will cut $32.5 million used mostly for humanitarian aid Critics say a US culture war will hurt women worldwide The US cut funding for a UN program for women and girls, a move that critics said was based on faulty information, could lead to greater instability in the Middle East and hurt women around the world. The United States, as promised, has drastically cut funding to the United Nations’ most significant population agency, which helps women in 155 countries around the world. The Trump administration announced the move late Monday, sending notice that it would pull $32.5 million from the United Nations Population Fund because it works with the Chinese government, which forces its citizens into coercive abortions and involuntary sterilization. Related article Trump, Egypt's leader bond over terror fight UN officials said that the UNFPA, as the group is known, has nothing to do with abortion. And they said that because the US funding goes largely to emergency aid at a time when the world is facing the worst cluster of humanitarian crises in decades, the impact on refugees and women in crisis will be disproportionate. The decision “could have devastating effects on the health of vulnerable women and girls and their families around the world,” said Secretary-General Antonio Guterres through a spokesman. Guterres “deeply regrets the decision by the United States to cut financial support for the UN Population Fund (and) believes that the decision is based on an inaccurate perception of the nature and importance of the work done by UNFPA,” said his spokesman Stephane Dujarric. In Syria, UNPFA said it has helped an estimated 48,000 women with safe childbirth, some 74,700 individuals with gender-based violence outreach, and offered health services and psychological support. It has created 64 women’s centers and safe spaces. In Iraq, it has created primary health centers, women’s centers that provide support for survivors of gender-based violence and a dedicated center where more than 700 Yazidi survivors of sexual violence receive mental health, psychosocial and medical support, among other projects. UK Ambassador to the UN Matthew Rycroft told reporters that “the UK continues to support that part of the United Nations.” Related article US signals openness to Assad staying put Swedish Ambassador Olof Skoog said his country is “very concerned about the Americans cutting the funds to the UNFPA. We think UNFPA are doing a great job, we support them, we think they save lives.” A provision called the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, which has been included in every Foreign Operations budget act since 1985, already makes it illegal for US taxpayer dollars to fund groups that fund abortion. But President Donald Trump on January 23 signed an executive order that directed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to ensure that US tax dollars don’t fund groups or programs that “support or participate in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.” Tillerson, who is cutting the State Department budget by 28%, made a determination that the directive applied to UNFPA, which the US helped found in 1969. UNFPA partners on family planning with “the Chinese government agency responsible for implementing China’s coercive family planning policies,” said a State Department official. “UNFPA can therefore be found for purposes of the statute to support, or participate in the management of, that Chinese agency’s coercive program. We will continue to consult closely with UNFPA to assess carefully whether UNFPA’s programs should warrant the restriction in future years.” The UNFPA refuted the US claim that it supported abortion and said it regretted the US’ decision. The group also indicated that they hoped Washington would reverse course. “We have always valued the United States as a trusted partner and leader in helping to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every childbirth is safe and every young person’s potential is fulfilled,” UNFPA said in a statement. “We, therefore, look forward to continuing our work with the United States to address these global concerns and to restore our strong partnership to save the lives of women and girls.” UN officials said the decision was incomprehensible. “UNFPA does not fund or perform abortions anywhere in the world. Period. Even where abortion is legal,” said Seema Jalan, executive director of the Universal Access Project at the UN Foundation. “Second, UNFPA has never and does not promote coercion or birth quotas anywhere in the world.” In fact, the work UNFPA has done in China has had the effect of reducing abortions, said Peter Yeo, vice president for public policy and advocacy at the United Nations Foundation. UNFPA’s “primary goal has been to move China away from the One Child policy – that’s what drives up China’s abortion rate and UNFPA has successfully moved them away from that policy.” The State Department official said the funds would be transferred to the Global Health Programs account, for use by the US Agency for International Development to support family planning, maternal and reproductive health activities. But UN officials said the money won’t help people who need it most, people in places the US often won’t go, but the UN will. “UNFPA is often the first – and in some cases the only – health provider in humanitarian crises,” said UN Foundation president Kathy Calvin, noting that the group is “often in places where the US can’t be.” Last year, she said UNFPA used funding from the US to reach 9 million people in crisis situations with HIV/AIDS prevention services, domestic violence counseling, pregnancy checkups, safe childbirth as well as midwife training, pre-natal care and safe delivery services. They are also working to end child marriage and female genital mutilation. Longer term, Yeo said the cuts, particularly in the Middle East, “will undoubtedly increase instability among refugee populations and encourage refugees to migrate to other countries,” to seek safety, food and shelter. “When families feel insecure, it leads to situations where they either migrate or you end up with kids who are separated from their families, young men leaving home at an early age,” he said.”It’s a toxic soup for luring young people into violent extremism and UNFPA’s work is a core element in reducing that toxic soup.”


Israel hadn't announced a new settlement in the West Bank in about 20 years News comes as Israeli forces clear an illegal outpost built on private Palestinian land For the first time in about 20 years, Israel has announced it will build a new settlement in the West Bank, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said Wednesday. In the first two weeks of US President Donald Trump’s term, Netanyahu has announced plans for 5,500 housing units in the West Bank, while the municipality of Jerusalem has advanced plans for about 550 new homes in East Jerusalem. Related article What you need to know about the Israeli settlements Trump’s marked departure from the Israel policy of predecessor Barack Obama has buoyed the Netanyahu administration’s desire to settle contentious areas of land. The announcement of a brand new settlement in the West Bank differs from other construction, in which units were added to existing settlements. Netanyahu said the team will start working immediately to find a location for the new settlement. The news came the same day Israeli forces cleared an illegal outpost built on private Palestinian-owned land near Ramallah in the West Bank. While some families left the Amona outpost peacefully, clashes broke out between protesters and police. Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said about 3,000 members of Israeli security forces were deployed to Amona, with many blocking access to roads to prevent settlers’ supporters from joining efforts to resist the eviction. About 600 settlers protested and set fires and thrown rocks, nails and other debris on the road in an attempt to hinder the security forces’ passage. By Wednesday afternoon, at least four were arrested and 15 police officers suffered minor injuries after stones and liquids were thrown at them, Rosenfeld said. CNN saw some settlers leaving the site on their own volition. Police said one family surrendered a bag containing weapons that had been stashed in their home. The Israeli High Court had ordered residents to leave the area last year. But the attempts to dismantle the outpost have recently been held up for months, and it has been more than a decade since the legal process began. Amid the evacuation, Naftali Bennett – the right-wing Jewish Home party leader and education minister in Benjamin Netanyahu’s  government – told his supporters to move beyond the perceived setback of the outpost’s clearance. “From the ruins of Amona we will move to build a new settlement. From this mountain we will move towards applying Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria,” he said, using the biblical terms for the West Bank. Israel’s announcement that it plans to create 3,000 additional settlement homes in the West Bank is seen as an attempt by Netanyahu to appease his right-wing base, which is dissatisfied with the decommissioning of the Amona outpost. Related video Israeli settlement construction resumes The government has approved the construction of the new units, according to a statement late Tuesday from Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman. The announcement in Jerusalem came just a week after 2,500 new settlement homes were approved by the administration. At the time, Netanyahu told the Knesset, the parliament, that the expansion was just a “first taste.” The settlement program is illegal under international law, but Israel disputes that finding and insists the status of the West Bank is more ambiguous than international law allows. Many in the international community believe that such settlements are illegal and a barrier to any future “two-state” peace deal. Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state. The UN Security Council resolution states that Israel’s settlement program has “no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law.” Secretary-General António Guterres is concerned about Israel’s plan to build thousands more settlement units, his spokesman said in a statement. “We once again warn against any unilateral actions that can be an obstacle to a negotiated two-state solution,” spokesman Stéphane Dujarric said. The government-approved expansion of the settlement program is distinct from illegal settler outposts such as Amona. The decision, along with other recent expansion announcements, has drawn criticism from the Palestinian Authority and the EU. A spokesman for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas condemned settlement plans in the occupied West Bank, which he said defied United Nations resolutions and international law. “We have started urgent consultations in order to take the necessary measures to confront the settlement activities,” spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh said in a statement. “We call on the US administration to rein in this Israeli government’s policy, which is going to destroy the peace process.” Related video Baker on Israel, settlements, two-state solution Last week’s announcement of 2,500 new homes came just days after Trump’s inauguration and marks one of the largest settlement expansions since 2013, according to the settlement watchdog Peace Now. Trump spoke with Netanyahu two days before the announcement. Israel had also reacted angrily to the US abstention in a UN vote on Israeli settlement activities prior to Trump taking office. Trump later expressed his support for the settlement program. With Trump in office, Netanyahu has been under pressure from his right-wing coalition partners to accelerate settlement construction. Almost two weeks ago, he stalled a legislative push in an attempt by some politicians to annex parts of the West Bank, including Maale Adumim. Located just outside Jerusalem, Maale Adumin is one of the largest settlements. The new construction comes two weeks after a peace conference in Paris, which called for Israel and the Palestinians to embrace a two-state solution and find their way back to the negotiating table. The Israeli Prime Minister called the conference “useless.” Oren Liebermann reported from the West Bank. CNN’s Andrew Carey and Holly Yan contributed to this report.

Israel's settlement program in the West Bank


Editor’s Note: CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem is the author of the best-selling “Security Mom: An Unclassified Guide to Protecting Our Homeland and Your Home.” She is a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School, a former assistant secretary of Homeland Security in the Obama administration and founder of Kayyem Solutions, a security consulting firm.  The opinions expressed in this commentary are hers. Juliette Kayyem: Trump executive order on border wall is little more than tactical symbolism on a campaign promise Kayyem: More dire is his apparent intent to end Syrian refugee program, rendering America anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant Donald Trump built his campaign on the promise of building a great southern border wall and getting Mexico to pay for it. But the executive order he announced Wednesday, while it may nod in the direction of that pledge, is not a change in policy, nor is it even an instrument that could compel Mexico to foot the bill.  What it is, actually, is proof that the promise of a wall has always been a house of cards. The more noteworthy, and potentially more dangerous move from Trump, relates to the disconcerting, anti-Muslim inclinations evident in another executive order he is expected to issue. The Department of Homeland Security is vetting executive orders that would end America’s Syrian refugee program and suspend Muslim majority-country visas. Trump is reportedly considering whether ending the entire refugee program is doable and whether a subsequent revamp could favor religious minorities (mainly Christians in Muslim countries). Related video Trump: Mexico to reimburse US for wall For now, let’s talk about Wednesday’s executive order on the wall, and let’s begin with some reality. There already is a wall -- 700 miles of it – along the roughly 1,900-mile US-Mexico border. This fact gets lost in media coverage, and was ignored by Hillary Clinton and other Democrats during the campaign. But it’s there. And where the wall leaves off, drones, surveillance technology, or Border Control facilities and Border Control agents pick up. Any promise to build more wall will fail mostly because of geography. You cannot build a wall on the Rio Grande, for example. And in other border areas vast mountain ranges make an ocean-to-gulf wall simply impossible, if not ridiculous, to build. As former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told me in an interview for my podcast last spring, “It makes no sense to build a 10 foot wall on top of a 10,000 foot mountain.” There are also political challenges to building a wall that have nothing to do with Mexico or geography. In Texas, a red state, a lot of folks are not too keen on building a new wall, and the same is true in New Mexico.  In Arizona, most of the Mexico border already has a wall.  Many in these southern border states who oppose further extending the wall believe it would inhibit commercial and agricultural activity. In some areas, America’s longstanding deference to tribal lands would prohibit such a barrier. Related video Former Mexico FM: Pena Nieto must cancel US trip Even Trump’s own secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, John Kelly, knows that border security is more complicated than miles of bricks and fencing. At his confirmation hearing, Kelly acknowledged that even a complete wall from the Pacific to the Gulf would still need additional layered defenses to be effective, “I believe the defense of the southwest border really starts about 1,500 miles south, and partnering with [other countries].” Apparently recognizing this, Trump’s executive order does not specify how or where these new sections of the wall would be built. Trump’s wall order is merely a concession to his supporters and, of course, carries no force in compelling Mexico to pay for construction. As yet, Wednesday’s order has few facts, no dates and no details. Related video WH: Mexico to pay for wall one way or another In other words, a big nothing, little more than tactical symbolism on a cornerstone campaign promise. Operationally? Empty. Rather, what the occasion reveals is the inadequacy of such a barrier in securing our southern border — and the rest of our nation. What it also reveals is Trump’s consistent adherence to his unfortunate campaign platform: America as unwelcoming: anti-Muslim, anti-refugee, anti-immigrant. Smoke-and-mirror proposals will do little to stem a terror threat (terrorists with French passports, for example, will make it through easily) but do much to heighten antagonism toward our country. Trump should be called out for already violating his major campaign promise, that Mexico will pay for the wall. These feints at strengthening our borders in reality only weaken our unity.

Donald Trump executive order on border wall


Protesters yelled out "you shame us," referring to the government's refugee policy Some politicians praised the protesters while others denounced them as undemocratic Pro-refugee protesters shut down a sitting of Australia’s Parliament on Wednesday, gluing themselves to leather upholstery to resist police. The group of about 30 men and women interrupted the parliament’s Question Time with cries of “you shame us” and “this is a humanitarian crisis.” Parliament was suspended for 30 minutes while officers forcibly removed the protesters, some of whom had superglued their hands to leather in the public gallery, CNN-affiliate Sky News said. It seems the remaining 6 protesters really have super glued their hands to the leather of the public gallery and aren't moving. One guard now applying some sort of soap or hand sanitizer to attempt un-gluing a protester. They were protesting against the Australian government’s policy of processing asylum seekers in offshore detention centers, which has been condemned by rights groups and the United Nations. The demonstration comes less than two weeks after the government announced a one-off transfer of refugees from remote camps on Nauru and Manus Island to the United States. Protesters: 'We are here today because the Aust govt is torturing refugees' #auspol MORE: https://t.co/FKav58J26u https://t.co/g1iFEsf2lH Speaking after Question Time resumed, senior government minister Christopher Pyne said the protests had been the most serious since 1996 and called for an investigation. “This is obviously a very serious matter,” he said, suggesting a member of Parliament may have helped them to gain access. Incredibly wild scary scenes in parliament as protesters dragged away pic.twitter.com/YYDeHwiBQA Opposition Labor Party Leader Bill Shorten said the protests were “the exact opposite of democracy.” “Do we reward those who would seek to stop this parliament operating by walking away from them and giving in to them?” he said. In the aftermath of the protest in the House of Representatives today, Senator Richard Di Natale and I met with the... But Australian Greens Party Leader Richard di Natale met with the protesters after the incident and thanked them. “We are at a point in this nation’s history where we have a government, supported by the Labor party, who have said that it’s acceptable for innocent people seeking our help and protection to be turned away,” he said in a statement. “But not only do we turn them away, we torture them.” Related video Australia to close controversial detention center The protesters claimed to be speaking on behalf of Australians who are unhappy with the bipartisan support for Australia’s strict refugee policy. A number of human rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have criticized Australia over their use of offshore detention centers to house refugees who arrive by boat. Amnesty described the remote camp on the small island nation of Nauru was like an “open-air prison,” in a recent report, adding “vulnerable” children had been put there so they could “suffer.” A United Nations report released in October found multiple cases of “attempted suicide, self-immolation, acts of self-harm and depression” among children on Nauru. The Australian government has repeatedly denied claims that the living conditions on Nauru and Manus Islands are unacceptable. “(Our) commitment is compassionate and it’s strong,” Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in October.


Congress left for summer recess without agreeing on legislation The Senate is set to vote on a $1.1 billion Zika bill Tuesday The fight over federal funding to combat the spread of the Zika virus is heating up on Capitol Hill as news cases of the infections are being confirmed in South Florida. After consulting with public health officials, the White House sent Congress a $1.9 billion funding request in February to help fund the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s efforts to combat the virus, which can cause serious birth defects. But Congress left for summer recess without agreeing on legislation, as Democrats objected to riders that blocked funding for Planned Parenthood. “We’re hopeful that when they do return, that Republicans in Congress will have had an opportunity to rethink their priorities and will once again put the health and safety and well-being of the American people back at the top of the list where it belongs,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday. The Senate is set to vote on a $1.1 billion Zika bill Tuesday, when Congress returns, but that bill includes the same Planned Parenthood rider that has angered Democrats. Don Stewart, deputy chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, said that while Puerto Rico will get new funding for contraception and health care under the bill, that money would go to hospitals and community health centers, but not necessarily to Planned Parenthood. “They would rather have no funding than have funding that goes to hospitals and community health centers but not guaranteed to Planned Parenthood,” Stewart said. An aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said Democrats would continue to block the bill. “Democrats have been calling for bipartisan negotiations for months, but instead of coming to the table, Republicans are holding a vote on a bill they know will fail,” Adam Jentleson said. “Once this partisan exercise is over, we hope Republicans will finally engage in real negotiations to address this critical issue.” The additional funds are taking on new urgency as two areas in Miami deal with nearly 50 cases of locally-transmitted infections. Heavy rains and flooding in other parts of the south such as Louisiana and Texas could also help the virus spread as mosquitoes take advantage of standing water. There are more than 2,500 travel-related cases of Zika in the United States, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “That’s how you get local transmission, because when mosquitoes bite those people and then bite people who never left the United States, that’s how you get local transmission of Zika,” Fauci said during a Twitter town hall. Fauci echoed the administration’s call for the $1.9 billion already requested to fund efforts to fight the virus. The Department of Health and Human Services declared a public health emergency in early August in Puerto Rico, where officials reported 10,690 laboratory-confirmed cases of Zika as of August 12, including 1,035 pregnant women. The actual number of people infected with Zika likely is higher because most people with Zika infections have no symptoms and might not seek testing, the agency said. Earlier this month, HHS also redirected $81 million from elsewhere in the department to continue efforts to fight the Zika virus. HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell said in a letter to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi that she was exercising her authority to transfer $34 million from within the National Institutes of Health and $47 million from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority to keep “Zika-related activities” going. Without that, she said, the unused Ebola money they have been using since April will run out by the end of August and prohibit phase II of a Zika vaccine trial. CDC Director Thomas Frieden is warning of dire consequences if there is not enough money to battle the virus, which causes only mild symptoms in most people but can be particularly harmful for pregnant women who risk giving birth to babies with microcephaly, a condition that causes a small head, brain damage and hearing loss. It has also been associated with other adverse pregnancy outcomes including miscarriage, stillbirth and serious neurological problems, according to HHS. “We don’t have the resources we need to mount the kind of robust fight against the disease,” Frieden said in the Twitter town hall Tuesday. “Without additional funding, we will not be able to fully understand the impact of Zika on pregnancy and newborns. We won’t be able to develop better diagnostic tests as rapidly as we could and we won’t be able to improve mosquito control to protect ourselves from Zika and other mosquito born illnesses.” The CDC awarded $6.8 million to national public health organizations to help battle the virus through mosquito surveillance and epidemiology, vector control and communication and outreach programs and has provided states, cities and territories more than $100 million to date to fight Zika. Frieden said a vaccine is still at least two years away. “We hope Congress will fully fund the request,” Frieden said. “That way, we can robustly and rapidly protect American women and their babies against Zika. It’s important that his funding includes reimbursement authority and the authority that allows us to spend money efficiently and rapidly.”


The train speeds out of the darkness of the channel tunnel, emerging into a landscape of high security fences and barbed wire. Welcome to France. “The migrants have come back, you know,” the conductor says as we pull into Calais station. “Trying to get to England. It’s going to be a big problem again.” For years, Calais – just 20 miles from the English coast – was the last stopping-off point on the migrant route that led from warzones and trouble spots the world over. Thousands gathered, setting up camp as they waited to cross to the UK, through the tunnel, or hidden in trucks and cars. Their camp, “the Jungle,” was demolished in October 2016, and the migrants and refugees it housed dispersed. Aid agencies have since been banned from handing out food in the area. The camp may be gone, but some migrants are still here, clustered around an ornamental pond in the park, or sitting together on a roadside verge. That they have ended up in Calais may be down to a quirk of geography, but their presence in a region already struggling with high unemployment has provoked resentment among the community, helping to fuel a rise in support for the far right. At one of the town’s many “friteries” (fast food stands), Jessy Boin says he plans to vote for Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Front, because she has vowed to cut the number of migrants allowed into the country, “it’s a big problem here.” Meanwhile, customer Loic Focquer, who is unemployed at the moment, believes a vote for Le Pen “will make the job situation better.” In the first round of the presidential election, Le Pen scored a convincing win here. She ran on a euroskeptic and anti-globalization platform, promised to improve the lot of workers, and – perhaps most importantly – offered something many here in Calais and elsewhere in France crave: Change. After decades of economic stagnation and high unemployment, regardless of which of the two traditional main parties – Republican or Socialist – were in power, voters in France are looking for something different. And this Sunday, one way or the other, they’ll get it. They are faced with a choice between Le Pen, who has spent years trying to make the xenophobic, anti-immigrant party her father founded “respectable” to mainstream voters, and Emmanuel Macron, a relative newcomer to politics, who has never held elected office and whose En Marche! movement didn’t exist 18 months ago. READ: Will Europe ride the populist wave? Macron was a distant third in Calais, but came first across the country overall. He performed strongly in larger towns and cities, including the capital, Paris, where he handily beat more seasoned politicians, including the conservative Francois Fillon and left-wing firebrand Jean-Luc Melenchon. The Place de la Republique is at the heart of the people’s Paris. It is where Parisians come together to mourn in times of sadness – mass protests were held here after the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack – and celebrate in times of joy. With the final round of the presidential election just days away, it is also where people come to debate and demonstrate. The statue at the center of the square, surrounded by flowers and candles after the Paris attacks, is now covered in political graffiti. As May Day marchers prepared to set out from the square on Monday, Assan Kericha cooked kebabs and sausages on a food stall. He said he voted for Melenchon in the first round: “I don’t like the others, but this time I’ll vote for Macron – of course – to stop racism and to stop Le Pen.” Natassja Naguszewski set up an anti-Le Pen protest in the square on May Day, at which scores of campaigners wore masks combining Marine Le Pen’s hair with the face of her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, calling into question Le Pen’s attempts to sanitize his anti-Semitic legacy. Naguszewski said she fears that, if Le Pen wins, France will become an insular police state, in which those considered “foreigners” are demonized. As well as trade union demonstrations, May 1 in Paris is also traditionally the day when people sell sprigs of lily of the valley in the street. One such “muguet” vendor, who had set out her stall on the Champs-Elysees – near where policeman Xavier Jugele was gunned down days before the first round vote – said she was still deciding who to support, but wanted to back a candidate who would solve France’s unemployment and security issues. The differences between Le Pen and Macron’s support bases demonstrate the deep divisions in society that France’s new president – whoever he or she is – will have to repair: urban versus rural, rich versus poor, elite versus working class. A quick glance at a map of the first round results shows another divide too: east vs. west. READ: The beginner’s guide to the French elections The next stop is Bordeaux, a prosperous university city near France’s midwestern coast. The train hurries out from the station into the spring green of the French countryside, through bright yellow rapeseed fields and past the occasional fairytale chateau, until vineyards spring up on both sides of the track. Bordeaux’s mayor, Alain Juppe, was briefly in the running for the 2017 presidency himself, but lost out to Francois Fillon in the Republican primaries. In the first round of the election, Macron came out on top here, followed by Melenchon and Fillon; Le Pen came in fifth. Jean-Michel Dewelle, who runs a plant and flower stall at the city’s Capuchins’ Market, says he voted for Macron in the first round, and will do so again: “I’m convinced he’ll bring progress … it’ll be a lot better for France if Macron wins.” As for Le Pen, “she’s a fascist,” he says, bluntly. “I absolutely wouldn’t vote for her. I voted against her father in 2002 – I supported [former President Jacques] Chirac; I didn’t much care for him, but I didn’t hesitate for one minute.” Students Camille Baudoux and Sarah Sanchez say they will follow the 2002 pattern – voting for Macron, who they would not normally back, in order to stop Le Pen. “We’re picking the least worst option,” says Baudoux, adding she isn’t sure who’ll come out on top. “I think there are going to be a lot of people who just don’t vote.” READ: The french election spells trouble for the EU Fellow student Celestin Hernandez cautions that, should Macron win, he will face a tough time in the months ahead. “He won’t have a majority in the legislature, and that means it will be difficult for him.” In his men’s clothing store in one of Bordeaux’s main shopping streets, Karim Laiche says he isn’t convinced Macron has it in the bag just yet: “We don’t know how it will go – we could have a surprise,” he said. “The polls are saying it’s 60-40 to Macron, but polls can be wrong – Trump happened in the US, and we could end up with Le Pen here,” he says. “So, we pray, and above all, we vote!” Heading southeast from Bordeaux, the landscape changes slowly, becoming hillier, drier, rockier. The view from the train window looks, at times, like a Cezanne landscape. READ: Defiant rebel valley opens doors to refugees The final destination is Beziers, near the Cote d’Azur. Many here are hoping Le Pen will find some way of swinging those unfavorable polls her way in the final days of the campaign. Beziers voted overwhelmingly in support of the far-right leader in the first round. Its mayor, Robert Menard, was elected with the support of the National Front, and has turned his town into a “laboratory of the far right,” where the limits of France’s famously secular society are being tested. Menard was recently convicted of provoking hatred and discrimination (and fined 2,000 euros) for suggesting that there were too many Muslim children in Beziers’ schools. “Everyone’s voting Le Pen, even if they won’t admit it,” says one Beziers café owner, who asks not to be identified for fear his political views could damage his business. “Le Pen has solutions that everyone wants, but nobody wants to talk about. “I like Macron a lot, but we’ve had enough,” he adds. “Economically, Macron would be a lot better for France, but Le Pen will actually do the things she says. I’m voting for her, to change the system.” OPINION: France’s election ending in a verbal cage fight Change is coming to France regardless of the outcome, and the winning candidate will face an uphill climb to repair the damage done by a bitterly divisive campaign. Many in Beziers are hoping Le Pen can overcome long odds to secure the win. But others in town, including restaurateur Maxime Roque, are preparing to hold their noses and vote for Macron in order to keep Le Pen out. “Voting in the second round isn’t necessarily a pleasure,” Roque says. “You do what’s best.”


Editor’s Note: John McCain, R-Arizona, is a U.S. senator and chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. The views expressed are his own. John McCain:  White House floundering in response to Russia's Syria moves This is America's last opportunity to make a difference in Syria, he says Russia’s military intervention in Syria on behalf of President Bashar al-Assad is the latest disastrous turn in the Middle East under the Obama administration – and another humiliating setback for the United States. But as in past crises, the White House is once again floundering. Just consider: A few weeks ago, the administration warned Russia not to send its forces to Syria. Russia did it anyway. The administration then tried to block Russia’s access to airspace en route to Syria. It failed. The consequence? President Barack Obama acquiesced to his first formal meeting in two years with Russian President Vladimir Putin. U.S. defense officials rushed into talks with Russia’s military to “de-conflict” in Syria. And Secretary of State John Kerry called Russia’s actions an “opportunity” to cooperate because we agree on “fundamental principles.” How did Putin respond? By bombing U.S.-backed opposition groups in Syria. President Obama is fond of saying there is no military solution to this or any other crisis. This ignores the reality that there is a major military dimension to the problem, and it is getting worse each day. It also ignores history: Most civil wars actually do end when one side wins and the other loses. That is Putin’s military solution, and he is now imposing it with Russian airpower and an anti-American coalition of Syrian, Iranian and Hezbollah ground forces. Russian troops will likely take the field with them. And Putin may then expand these operations into Iraq. Related video Can Russia afford its military campaign in Syria? However this conflict ends, it must not involve Putin shoring up his partners, crushing ours, destroying our remaining credibility in the Middle East, and restoring Russia as a major power in this vital region. Vladimir Putin must be stopped, not least because he will inflame every aspect of this conflict in the process: the refugee crisis, the mass atrocities and the growth of ISIS. There is an opportunity here, but the opposite of what Kerry suggested. It is an opportunity to impose significant costs on an adversary that wants to undercut the United States everywhere. It is an opportunity to weaken an anti-American ruler who will always view us as an enemy. And it is an opportunity to rebuild U.S. credibility and influence in the Middle East by taking actions, as only we can, to arrest the spread of a regional conflict that is an incubator of global terrorism. We cannot shy away from confronting Russia in Syria, as Putin expects the administration will do. His intervention has raised the costs and risks of greater U.S. involvement in Syria, but it has not negated the steps we need to take. Indeed, it has made them more imperative. Related video Striving for normalcy in Aleppo, Syria We must act now to defend civilian populations and our opposition partners in Syria. As Gen. David Petraeus and others have advocated, we must establish enclaves in Syria where civilians and the moderate opposition to Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad and ISIS can find greater security. These enclaves must be protected with greater American and coalition airpower and likely foreign troops on the ground. We should not rule out that U.S. forces could play a limited role in this ground contingent. If al-Assad continues to barrel bomb civilians in Syria, we should destroy his air force’s ability to operate. Related article Alison Sweeney: Why Nujeen Mustafa inspires us all We must back up our policy in ways that check Putin’s ambitions and shape his behavior. If Russia attacks our opposition partners, we must impose greater costs on Russia’s interests – for example, by striking significant Syrian leadership or military targets. But we should not confine our response to Syria. We must increase pressure on Russia elsewhere. We should provide defensive weapons and related assistance to Ukrainian forces so they can take a greater toll on Russian forces. To weaken Putin at home and abroad, we should make more information public about the corruption of the Russian leadership, including the president himself, and how Russia uses graft as a tool of state policy. And if Putin continues to strike Syrian civilians and our opposition partners, we should ramp up targeted sanctions on Russia. Low energy prices are battering Russia’s economy and currency. We should increase that pain. The United States must lead these efforts with the broadest possible coalition. We will find many willing partners in Europe, which is reeling from the refugee crisis, as well as the Sunni Arab states, which will view a Russian victory in Syria as an Iranian victory. Rather than play into Putin’s hands by undermining our own international efforts to isolate him, we should enhance those efforts to deepen that isolation and balance against Russia. President Obama thinks Syria will be a “quagmire” for Russia. Perhaps. But the last time Russia faced a quagmire, America had something to do with it. That response was begun by a Democratic president who finally realized late in his administration that his policy was failing and he needed to change course. President Obama could learn a lot from President Jimmy Carter, and he should. This is America’s last opportunity to make a difference in Syria and avert a strategic disaster that now threatens the global balance of power. We cannot afford to squander it. Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.Read CNNOpinion’s Flipboard magazine.


Omar Khader left Jordan to join a militant group in Syria in 2013 Six months later, a disillusioned Khader came home and was arrested Jordan jailed him for five years; his father says Khader the sentence is too harsh Two days after his 18th birthday, Omar Khader disappeared. He left home on a December morning in 2013 with 500 Jordanian Dinars (around $700) from his father to pay his university tuition. But instead he used the money to fly to Turkey – and called his family from Ankara to tell them he was on his way to Syria. “It was a surprise to all of us, especially his mother,” his father, Zaid Khader, says. “She was devastated, we were really impacted, but we helped each other get through it.” The family lived in a constant state of fear. Every time they heard news of an attack in Syria, they feared the worst. Omar, a computer programming student, joined Sham al-Islam – a group in Latakia with links to al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra. His father describes Omar as kind and innocent, not an extremist. Like many other young fighters, it was the images coming out of Syria’s civil war – and atrocities committed by the Bashar al-Assad regime –that lured him into war, his father says. It was through a Syrian who goes by the alias of “Abu Abdullah al-Suri,” a man Omar met online, that his trip to Turkey and onwards into Syria was arranged. Omar spent the first few weeks there learning how to use a pistol and attending religious studies. Soon, he was driving fighters from the militant group around. Six months later came a call his family did not expect: a disillusioned Omar wanted to come back home. “This is not jihad,” he told his father in a call from Syria. “The different factions are killing each other and fighting each other … I do not want to die for nothing.” Smuggled out of Syria and back into Turkey, Omar was on a flight back to Amman on June 5th of last year. His anxious family waited at the airport, but Omar was detained by the Jordanian authorities on arrival. Jordan’s State Security Court, which rules on terrorism-related cases, sentenced Omar to five years in jail for joining a terrorist organization. We met Zaid, Omar’s father, at the family’s home in Al-Zarqa, a conservative city about a half hour’s drive northeast of the capital. A soft-spoken religious man who works for an Islamic charity in the city, Zaid is one of few family members of Jordanian fighters willing to speak about his son’s case. Once a week, Omar’s immediate family is allowed to visit him at Jordan’s al-Muwaqqar prison. After a few months in solitary confinement, he is now with others in a bigger cell. His father says Omar is being treated well, and that he spends his time praying and memorizing the Quran. “He has changed, I feel he is more religious now. He grew a beard, his religiousness is more apparent, he reads the Quran with his friends,” Zaid says. “His spirits are high and he is optimistic now, he does not care anymore.” “‘They can sentence me to 20 years, I do not care,’” Zaid recalls his son saying in a recent conversation. “’Don’t bother yourself father, this is their policy.’” Jordan has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to its broad and wide-reaching anti-terrorism laws – including on social media, in some cases. “We apply the law, the Jordanian laws are saying that you cannot empathize, you cannot sympathize, you cannot do anything that will be perceived as supportive of terrorist or extremist organizations,” Mohammad al-Momani, Jordan’s Minister for Media Affairs, told CNN. “Any Jordanian who would do that would be subject to the Jordanian laws and the Jordanian justice.” But not everyone agrees with the government’s policies or approach. “I do believe they have to go to other solution, which is ideological and thought, to talk to people to solve problems to go toward political reform to go toward real democracy,” said Marwan Shehadeh, a researcher and an expert on jihadi groups. Officials say Jordan has an ongoing political reform process, something that takes time. Shehadeh says young Jordanians are drawn to jihadi groups for different reasons, although ideology and beliefs are the main drivers. Al-Zarqa, Omar Khader’s hometown, has a long history of being a breeding ground for extremist militants. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq – ISIS’s predecessor – came from Al-Zarqa. And in recent years, many of the estimated two thousand Jordanians who left to fight in Syria – the majority joining ISIS or Jabhat al-Nusra – also came from here. Like many parts of Jordan, people in Al-Zarqa complain about the economic situation and the high cost of living. The city’s mayor, Emad Momani, says nearly 20% of his city’s youth are jobless, and tells us about men like Al-Zarqawi who over the years joined al Qaeda in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. “They managed to attract many of the frustrated and desperate young men impacted by unemployment, who lost hope in finding work,” Momani says. “They went to Afghanistan (and) when they came back, they were back with that mentality.” “Many of Al-Zarqa’s youth were killed in Syria, Iraq, other conflict areas (including) Chechnya because of the economic situation, because poverty and neglect create fertile ground for these young men to join terrorist organizations, because they no longer have hope.” The country’s already struggling economy has suffered further in recent times with the rise of ISIS in neighboring Syria and Iraq. Jordan, a staunch U.S. ally, has been at the forefront of the war on terrorism. It is the only Arab country carrying out coalition airstrikes against ISIS targets in both Syria and Iraq. “We want to make sure that Daesh (ISIS) is defeated because this is important not only for the security and stability of the region, but also to affect the economic indicators which have all been hit strongly by terrorism and extremism,” says government spokesman Mohammad al-Momani, “be it transportation, be it foreign direct investment, be it tourism. All of it has been impacted negatively because of the spread of terrorism”. Jordan this year announced a new economic vision and plans that aim to revive the economy. A third of working-age young Jordanians are unemployed, and one of the government’s main priorities is creating tens of thousands of new jobs in the next five years. In the meantime, Omar’s father Zaid says he is advising jobless, disillusioned young men against joining the fight in Syria, regardless of what motivates them. Officials say former fighters like Omar go through a rehabilitation program in prison; Jordan considers them a threat that it has to contain. But Zaid has a message for the government. “Look at these youth with sympathy – my son is a young boy who was deceived into going at the age of 18” he says. “Whether it’s him or others, with what right do you jail these young men for three or five years?” “It is a very harsh sentence, (and) it is in these cases that you are creating real terrorists out of them,” he continues. “How will these young men view the government? They will feel you took away five years or three out of their lives. They made a mistake and went, but (they) did not harm Jordan.”

Jordanian government's anti-terrorism policies


In a late-night TV appearance Friday, former President Jimmy Carter appeared to ding President Donald Trump, suggesting the current commander-in-chief is “a jerk.” “Does America want kind of a jerk as president?,” Stephen Colbert asked the 39th president on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” after inquiring whether Carter had been “too nice” to be commander-in-chief. “Apparently, from this recent election, yes. I never knew it before,” Carter answered. Asked by Colbert about what it takes to be president, Carter said he “used to think it was to tell the truth.” “But I’ve changed my mind lately,” he continued. Although the remarks seemed in jest, they marked a shift from some of the former president’s earlier statements about his successor. In an interview last October, Carter appeared to come to Trump’s defense, saying the “media have been harder on Trump than any other president certainly that I’ve known about.” The 93-year-old former president told Colbert that he prays for Trump, but he wasn’t sure if his prayers would be answered. “I pray that he’ll be a good president, and that he’ll keep our country at peace, and that he’ll refrain from using nuclear weapons, and that he will promote human rights. So, yeah, I pray for him,” Carter said. Carter also offered his thoughts on North Korea, reiterating his opposition to sanctions. He told CBS News last week that he had received a briefing from the Trump administration on North Korea and that he’d be willing to travel to that nation on the current administration’s behalf. CNN’s Nicole Chavez and Betsy Klein contributed to this report.


"As of today we are officially putting Iran on notice," Flynn said Spicer added the US won't "sit by and not act" President Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor Michael Flynn condemned Wednesday Iran’s recent ballistic missile test launch, calling it a “provocative” breach of a UN Security Council resolution. Flynn called the launch the latest in a series of provocative moves by Iran that have included backing Houthi rebels in Yemen, who have attacked US allies. “As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice,” Flynn said from the White House briefing room. Flynn did not say whether the US would take action beyond a verbal warning, and three senior administration officials, speaking on background, said Wednesday that they are still in the early stages of determining what action the US should take in response. “We are considering a whole range of options. We’re in a deliberative process,” one of the officials said. Those options include financial measures and economic sanctions, and the officials said the administration would not take any options off the table, including a military response. They also stressed that a violation of the UN Security Council Resolution on Iranian ballistic missile activity would not impact the Iran nuclear deal. One of the officials said Flynn’s warning on Wednesday delivered from the White House – one that might typically be issued by diplomats – was intended to reflect “the level of importance that this administration believes this issue warrants.” Iran’s Foreign Ministry insisted Tuesday that Sunday’s missile test was “solely for defensive purposes,” and not a violation of the UN Security Council resolution which bars Iran from testing “ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons.” President Barack Obama’s administration one year ago enacted financial sanctions on 11 people and companies involved in Iran’s ballistic missile program after the country conducted two test launches of ballistic missiles. That came after the UN determined in late 2015 that those launches were in violation of the Security Council resolution. The UN Security Council Resolution is not part of the Iran nuclear deal, but a separate security council measure. Flynn did not signal whether the US would take any concrete actions – military or diplomatic – to counter what he described as “provocative” Iranian actions, but he did criticize the Obama administration for having “failed to respond adequately to Iran’s maligned actions.” Flynn added that Iran’s actions threaten stability in the region and place American lives at risk, and said Iran was “on notice.” “The Trump administration condemns such actions by Iran that undermine security, prosperity and stability throughout and beyond the Middle East and place American lives at risk,” he said. White House press secretary Sean Spicer added Wednesday that the US won’t “sit by and not act on those actions.” Related video Tense encounter between US, Iran Flynn’s warning comes as forces from the US, British, French and Australian navies engage in exercises in the Persian Gulf. A total of 17 warships from the four nations are participating in the exercises, named Unified Trident, led by the UK’s amphibious assault ship HMS Ocean, according to a US Navy press release. The drills are designed to “ensure the free flow of commerce” through waterways of strategic interest to the entire world, the US Navy release said. The commander of Iran’s navy, Rear Adm. Habibollah Sayyari, warned the four navies not enter Iran’s territorial waters, according to a report from state-owned Press TV. Iran’s Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehghan referenced the new US administration in telling Iran’s independent Mehr News Agency the allied exercise would not be successful. Related video Donald Trump and Iran: the one thing to know “Under the situation created in the wake of the presidency of Donald Trump, Persian Gulf littoral states are somehow concerned about the future and the European countries are interested in cementing their presence in the region and giving some form of reassurance to their allies,” Dehghan is quoted as saying. “These drills will have no outcome for them,” Dehghan said. Tensions have been on edge around the Persian Gulf this year. In early January, the US guided-missile destroyer USS Mahan fired warning shots at Iranian boats near the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow entrance to the Persian Gulf. The five Iranian boats came “within 900 yards or so” of the Mahan, which was sailing with two other US ships, a Pentagon spokesman said at the time. A US warship also fired warning shots at Iranian vessels in an incident last August.


Trump previously criticized Obama for discussing a "red line" on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad The decision to use military force against Syria marks a remarkable reversal for Trump President Donald Trump’s decision to authorize a missile strike against a Syrian air base Thursday night signals a major break not only with the Obama administration but also with past statements made by the President himself. Fifty Tomahawk missiles were fired at the air base from which the chemical attacks against Syrian civilians were launched earlier this week and left more than 70 people dead. “It is in the vital national security interests of America to prevent and deter the the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons,” Trump said in a statement from his Mar-a-Lago estate. LIVE UPDATESTrump orders barrage of missilesTrump explains why he attackedAnalysis: Change of heart on SyriaThe Tomahawk missiles usedOil prices leapImages that moved Trump to act LIVE UPDATESTrump orders barrage of missilesTrump explains why he attackedAnalysis: Change of heart on SyriaThe Tomahawk missiles usedOil prices leapImages that moved Trump to act The decision to use military force against Syria marks a remarkable reversal for Trump. In 2013, he was a vocal critic of President Barack Obama’s contemplation of strikes in Syria following President Bashar al-Assad’s initial use of chemical weapons against his own people. (Obama had previously said that the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian citizenry would be crossing a “red line” for him). Related article Donald Trump is trolling Donald Trump on Twitter “What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict?” Trump asked in one tweet. “Obama needs Congressional approval.” In another tweet, he wrote: “The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not!” Trump, however, did not seek such authority from Congress before ordering Thursday’s attack. The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not! During the course of his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump insisted that the Obama administration was letting its commitment to political correctness outweigh the fight against terrorism. He specifically targeted Obama’s willingness to accept Syrian refugees as a prime example of misguided policies that he would change. He signed an executive order – blocked by a federal court – that sought to ban all refugees from Syria. What changed for Trump? Judging from his public comments, the images he saw coming out of northwest Syria earlier this week. At a joint news conference with Jordan’s King Abdullah on Wednesday, Trump explained his change of heart this way: “Yesterday’s chemical attack, a chemical attack so horrific in Syria against innocent people including women, small children, and even beautiful little babies, their deaths was an affront to humanity. These heinous actions by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated. My attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.” Related article Trump repeatedly to Obama in 2013: Don't attack Syria There’s no question that some of Trump’s shift is also explained by the massive difference between being a private citizen offering a critique via Twitter and being the president of the United States. The weight of the office changes people. It’s also important to remember how much the shadow of Obama hangs over Trump’s actions. Obama was regarded by most establishment Republicans as feckless after failing to act once his self-described “red line” of chemical attacks had been crossed. It became, in the minds of many, a symbol of everything they disliked about Obama’s foreign policy: He was too timid to act when action was necessary. Trump is ever aware of showing people that he is both a) the anti-Obama and b) a man of action. Whereas Obama let al-Assad cross a red line with no penalty, Trump made clear on Wednesday that the chemical attack “crosses many, many lines – beyond a red line, many, many lines.” And on Thursday night, he turned that rhetoric into action. Trump has often touted his willingness to be flexible in his policy debates. The decision to strike Syria seems to be Exhibit A of that trait.


The new British foreign secretary compared Clinton to 'a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital' He said of Trump: 'I am genuinely worried that he could become president' Boris Johnson is a Conservative British politician famous for some decidedly undiplomatic utterances. But on Wednesday he became the UK’s new foreign secretary, a role in which he oversees the country’s diplomats and discusses sensitive matters with his global counterparts. The New York-born Brit is known for his colorful rhetoric over the years and distaste for political correctness. While the former London mayor has expressed considerable admiration for the U.S. over the years, he has also lit into American political leaders President Barack Obama and presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump. The State Department, however, is welcoming his appointment. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry congratulated Johnson Thursday, and the two pledged to work closely together as NATO allies, according to the State Department. Kerry also stressed U.S. support for a “sensible and measured approach” to the Brexit process” of the the UK’s departure from the EU. “We look forward to engaging with Boris Johnson as the new foreign secretary,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said on Wednesday after his selection. “This is something, frankly, that goes beyond a relationship, that goes beyond personalities.” Here’s a list of statements made by Johnson about his native land and some of its most prominent citizens and practices. The then-London mayor lambasted the U.S. President’s Kenyan heritage in an attack on Obama’s opposition to a British exit from the European Union, a cause Johnson strongly championed. The President had voiced his opposition to the pro-Brexit movement in an op-ed in the Telegraph before holding a press conference in London where he criticized the effort. In an April op-ed in the British tabloid The Sun, Johnson recounted a story of a bust of legendary British Prime Minister Winston Churchill being removed from the White House and sent to the British Embassy when Obama became president. “No one was sure whether the President had himself been involved in the decision. Some said it was a snub to Britain. Some said it was a symbol of the part-Kenyan President’s ancestral dislike of the British Empire – of which Churchill had been such a fervent defender.” In the same op-ed, Johnson justified his case for a British exit from the European Union. “The Americans would never contemplate anything like the EU, for themselves or for their neighbors in their own hemisphere. Why should they think it right for us?” Johnson went on to say a British EU exit would be beneficial to Americans, and make Britain, “even better and more valuable allies of the United States.” While Johnson may find common ground with the presumptive GOP nominee in disparaging Obama’s Kenyan roots, he hit Trump himself in December after the billionaire businessman implied that areas of London were dangerous due to radicalization. ‘The only reason I wouldn’t visit some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump.” Trump on Brexit: America is next Much to Johnson’s chagrin, he was later mistaken for Trump on the streets of New York City. “I am genuinely worried that he could become president. I was in New York and some photographers were trying to take a picture of me and a girl walked down the pavement towards me and she stopped and she said, ‘Gee is that Trump?’ It was one of the worst moments.” Before becoming Britain’s top diplomat, Johnson had an awkward relationship with America’s erstwhile top diplomat and now presumptive Democratic nominee. It started in 2007 when he ridiculed Clinton’s physical appearance in his Telegraph column: “She’s got dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital.” Johnson attempted in the same op-ed to justify a second Clinton presidency with another dig: “For all who love America, it is time to think of supporting Hillary, not because we necessarily want her for herself but because we want Bill in the role of First Husband. And if Bill can deal with Hillary, he can surely deal with any global crisis.” However, more recently Johnson has backed off from his comments, calling the former first lady “particularly gracious and charming” in 2015. “She was so nice and so kind that even in that article she found something to agree with.” The former London mayor did not let Mitt Romney get off easy in 2012 when the GOP presidential nominee questioned London’s preparedness for the summer Olympic games. “I hear there is a guy called Mitt Romney who wants to know whether we’re ready. He wants to know whether we’re ready. Are we ready? Are we ready? Yes we are.” When he was visiting Iraq in 2015, Johnson couldn’t help making fun of former “NBC Nightly News” host Brian Williams when the anchor was under fire for lying about his reporting experiences. “You get in trouble over here. I was nearish to the front line. I wouldn’t say bullets were wanging over my head.” In 2015, Johnson, who was thought to be on track to becoming Britain’s next conservative prime minister, said he would renounce his U.S. citizenship. Part of Johnson’s reasoning was to avoid paying U.S. taxes. “I think, it’s absolutely outrageous. Why should I? I think, you know, I’m not a – I, you know, I haven’t lived in the United States for, you know, well, since I was five years old.” It wasn’t the first time the former London mayor said he would give up his U.S. passport. Johnson threatened to renounce his citizenship in 2006 when he was stopped from entering the U.S. with a British passport. “As far as I can interpret the psychology of the rule, which has only been applied since 9/11, it is part of America’s new them-and-us mentality, the Manichaean division of the world into Americans and non-Americans, obliterating any category in between. ‘Listen, buddy,’ the Americans seem to be saying, ‘you got a right to be American? Then you do us the courtesy of travelling on the world’s number one passport when you come here. What you got to be ashamed of, boy?’” CNN’s Ryan Browne contributed to this report.


Canadian website started as a joke about a possible Donald Trump presidency Site creator: "People are showing a serious interest in moving" to Cape Breton Island Cape Breton If Trump Wins is a website with two top frequently asked questions: “Is this for real?” Yes. “Is this a joke?” No. Rob Calabrese, a local radio DJ who created the site, admits it started as a joke, but two weeks and 800,000 clicks later, he says thousands of his U.S. neighbors are seriously looking to move to Canada if Donald Trump becomes president. “As people have told me, I’m just some bozo up in Canada on an island no one’s ever heard of. What I think of him is irrelevant, but the fact is he makes a lot of people very nervous about the future of the country,” Calabrese says. With its stunning natural beauty, Cape Breton Island – on Canada’s east coast – is a magnet for tourists, but long-term residents have been hard to keep. The island, in the province of Nova Scotia, has coped with economic decline for decades after seeing its steel and coal-mining industries shrink. “As soon as I started getting serious inquiries, then all of a sudden the joke is over and this is serious, and we have a serious problem. People are showing a serious interest in moving here,” Calabrese says. Calabrese gets some backing with cold, hard data from Google. It revealed searches for “How can I move to Canada?” spiked nearly 400% in the United States as Super Tuesday primary results showed Trump cementing his front-runner status in the Republican presidential race. “Now’s the time to plant the seed. Get your affairs in order. That way, the day after the election you’ve got everything all settled, and you can just come on up then,” the DJ says. Mary Tulle, CEO of Destination Cape Breton, says inquiries to her nonprofit tourism association have been unprecedented, whether by email, Internet or phone. “We have a fantastic receptionist who would normally handle maybe two inquiries a day,” Tulle says. “We had five people dedicated full time to manage the inquiries.” She adds her office is fielding serious questions from hopeful American immigrants looking for information about jobs, housing and immigration procedures. The island’s laid-back and peaceful lifestyle is an obvious draw, but Americans are also asking about Canadian programs, such as government-funded health care, education and investment incentive schemes. Cape Breton has an abundance of affordable housing, some even on the water or with stunning island views. Related video Donald Trump: We have expanded the GOP Party “Anybody would come to me and say I don’t see anything I like on the market – I could go knock on a door and find a piece of waterfront for anybody. Give me six hours,” says Valarie Sampson, a real estate agent who says she too has been fielding inquiries from Americans. Immigration lawyer Damien Barry, an Irish immigrant, says it can be tough getting approval to live and work in Nova Scotia, and there is a lot of red tape from both the Canadian and provincial governments. Still, he says some professions, such as in the medical field or technology, are in high demand, as are investment opportunities. “There’s a new entrepreneurial stream here where they’re actively encouraging people to invest in businesses in Nova Scotia or to start up their own businesses in Nova Scotia,” Barry says. The reaction from island residents has been mostly positive and a bit bemused.  Many say that even if the website doesn’t end up attracting more Americans willing to move, Cape Breton will hopefully get a “Trump bump” in summer and welcome more tourists. “Rob’s our hero!! He really is, yeah. I know it started out in fun, but I think he said what we were all thinking,” resident Tracey Boutilier says. “We’re a little bit terrified of what’s going on with your political situation in the States, and Cape Breton is such a haven.”


A study used three ways to test people's level of boredom and their politics Situational boredom, people who felt bored easily and people who wanted more meaning in life tended to have extreme political views Donald Trump, a reality show billionaire, will be the Republican candidate for president. Bernie Sanders, a little known socialist Senator, nearly toppled an American political dynasty. Both expressed views that some have found extreme. Sanders’ desire to break up the banks, or Trump’s suggestion to ban Muslim immigration, for instance. The European Journal of Social Psychology has offered a new intriguing idea that may explain some of the allure of extreme political thinking. Boredom. Related video The Brexit saga in 2 minutes Boredom may sound like a pejorative term, but in social psychology it’s an actual phenomenon that should be taken seriously. It can be debilitating and has been linked to serious problems such as depression, aggression, anxiety, loneliness and hostility, research shows. It also can also motivate people to change their circumstances and end their ennui. The recent study suggests people vote for extreme candidates or take extreme political positions, because they are totally bored. The authors figured this out using three different experiments. The first study took 97 students who were asked their political orientation and given a boring task of transcribing sentences about concrete. Related article Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary Clinton The first “high boredom” group transcribed 10 references. The second “low boredom” group copied two. The students were then asked to rate their level of boredom. They were also asked to rate their political orientation (left-winged, right-winged etc.). People who had the “high boredom” task expressed stronger, polarized political orientations – particularly those students who leaned left – after the task, as compared to those doing the “low boredom” work. Conservatives did not show a significant difference in opinion pre- or post-test, but the authors suggest that may be because their sample of right-wing students was too small. The authors argue that results demonstrated that experimentally induced boredom may trigger people to gravitate toward more extreme political beliefs. The second study involved 859 people who lived in Ireland. Researchers sent them questionnaires that tested them on a boredom-proneness scale. It asked them to rate on a scale how bored they’d be looking at someone’s home movies, for instance. It also tested if they were bored, because they were unable to come up with something interesting to do. They also asked questions about the person’s political orientation. Related article An incomplete list of all the things Donald Trump has taken credit for The results showed that people who are easily bored tended to be on the more extreme end of the political spectrum, for both people on the right and the left, compared to those who are more content and entertained by the world around them. The final study tested 300 people in Ireland who also completed a boredom proneness scale and a questionnaire about how much meaning they found in life. They also assessed the person’s political orientation. Results showed that people who held extreme political views were bored and seeking more meaning from life. Over the years the psychological research on boredom has been limited. Boredom was typically studied by philosophers such as Søren Kierkegaard who describes boredom as a negative experience and evidence that life has no real meaning. Related video Why are young people bored with Facebook? “Boredom is unpleasant, there is no denying it,” said Wijnand A.P. van Tilburg, a lecturer at King’s College London and one of the study’s authors. “But it can also be functional, like anger can be helpful or fear which can motivate people to change their circumstances. It can be good and bad. We wanted to better understand what function does boredom serve in this circumstance.” Related video Emerging depression treatments This latest research builds on earlier studies (PDF) that show people who feel threatened by their environment also tend to turn to more extreme ideologies. The ideologies give them more of a sense of control and it masks their vulnerabilities. Other studies have shown (PDF) that conservatives and liberals rigidly adhere to extreme ideologies when they want meaning in life. Being bored may be that big of a threat to one’s own sense of relevancy. See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter. Ian McGregor, a professor at the University of Waterloo whose research is referenced in the latest study, found the research intriguing. “It fits with the big web of research out there now on how various threats make people more extreme,” McGregor said. “Boredom may not sound like a threat, but if you unpack it, it has a lot of the same features as other threats.” Boredom, McGregor said, works on the same part of the brain that relates to anxiety. Not the anxiety that causes people to “bite their nails and wring their hands,” he said, but the kind of anxiety that someone feels when they are vaguely aware that something bad might happen. “With your anxiety system, it  will make you look around vigilantly to find something that will mute that feeling,” McGregor said. “Boredom can be a deeply profound motivational crisis in a person.” Gravitating toward an extreme philosophy or person can “mute that anxiety” and help that person feel “that then there is no conflict here.” Does that mean we have boredom to blame for our polarized politics? Author van Tilburg said he cannot go there. “These cases are so complex and there is so much more involved when one supports a particular candidate or cause,” van Tilburg said. It’s unclear from the tests how big or how small a role boredom plays in political decisions. “We are by no means wanting to suggest that boredom is the main cause for the rise of a particular candidate or cause, but we do show that it can be an influence.” So, it might be worth asking for opinions on the study’s conclusions over drinks with that Bernie bro, Trump or Brexit supporter. You can bet that conversation won’t be boring.

boredom as a factor in extreme political views


Amid what it sees as an increase in unsafe behavior by the Russian military, the US military is concerned it might have to shoot down a Russian aircraft over Syria if the Russian plane is seen as a threat to US or coalition forces fighting ISIS. “The greatest concern is that we could shoot down a Russian aircraft because its actions are seen as a threat to our air or ground forces,” said Lt. Col. Damien Pickart, the spokesman for US Air Forces Central Command. “As coalition leaders have repeatedly said, we’re here to fight ISIS – not the Russians or anyone else,” he added. The concern comes as the US military has accused Russia and Syrian regime aircraft of violating policies that were agreed to by the United States and Russia to prevent such accidents. “We saw anywhere from six to eight incidents daily in late November, where Russian or Syrian aircraft crossed into our airspace on the east side of the Euphrates River,” Pickart said. “Over the past week or so it has decreased slightly, but the frequency of encounters remains a concern that we address in the daily de-confliction calls,” Pickart added, referring to the pre-established hotline that allows military officers from Russia and the US-led coalition to talk to each other. A senior US defense official told CNN last month that US military aircraft flying over Syria in the last few weeks had been subjected to unsafe flying practices by Russian aircraft on several occasions. The New York Times published additional details of those unsafe encounters on Friday. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin pledged to continue to uphold those de-confliction measures in their recent joint statement issued on the sidelines of the APEC conference in Da Nang, Vietnam. The statement said Trump and Putin “agreed to maintain open military channels of communication between military professionals to help ensure the safety of both US and Russian forces and de-confliction of partnered forces engaged in the fight against ISIS.” Officials have said that part of that arrangement involves defining where Russia and US aircraft operate, with those operations historically being separated by the Euphrates River, which runs through Syria, with US-backed forces operating to the east of the river and Russian/regime forces to the west. But in recent days the Russian Ministry of Defense has publicly said its bombers and other aircraft have increasingly operated to the east of the river, bringing them closer to US operations. Pickart said the area where most of the concerning encounters have occurred is in the airspace over the Middle Euphrates River Valley between the Syrian town of Mayadin and the Iraqi border, where the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces and Iraqi government troops are fighting the remnants of ISIS. He added that this area is “where we aim to annihilate as many of them as possible,” referring to the ISIS fighters. Pickart said that while “the conversations on the de-confliction line continue and have remained professional for the most part,” he added that “what our air crew encounter in the air has not always reflected what was agreed to in those discussions.” “It’s been a challenge for our pilots to discern whether this is deliberate on the part of the Russian pilots, or if these are just honest mistakes,” he added. America’s top military officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, spoke on the phone Wednesday with his Russian counterpart, Gen. Valery Gerasimov, according to a spokesman for the Joint Staff. However, the spokesman would not offer details as to what was discussed. “Both have agreed to keep the details of their conversations private,” US Navy Cdr. John Fage said.