WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Investigators had a "significant break" in tracking the salmonella outbreak when they found the bacteria on a jalapeño pepper imported from Mexico at a Texas food supplier, the Food and Drug Administration announced Monday. The FDA has discouraged all consumers from eating raw jalapeño peppers. The FDA also warned consumers not to eat fresh jalapeños and products made with fresh jalapeños. The discovery may provide a clue to the source of a recent outbreak of Salmonella Saintpaul. The bacteria have sickened more than 1,200 people in 42 states, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.    "One of the jalapeño peppers has tested positive with a genetic match to the Saintpaul strand," said Robert Tauxe, deputy director of the CDC's Division of Foodborne, Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases. Consumer Tips Blog: Hold the jalapeños  He said officials are "looking at the chain that the peppers would have passed through to decide if any of them are a point of contamination."   Watch more on the salmonella outbreak »  Tauxe called the discovery a "significant break."   "While this one sample does not give us the whole story, this genetic break is very important," he said. "This will hopefully help us pinpoint the source of this outbreak." The bacteria were found at a distribution center in McAllen, Texas, and the distributor has agreed to recall the products. Although the pepper was grown on a farm in Mexico, Tauxe said, investigators are not yet certain where the bacteria originated.  Read food safety tips »  "This does not mean that the pepper was contaminated in Mexico," he said. "We aren't only looking for the source, but the reason for the spread [of the outbreak]." The news comes just days after the FDA lifted its ban on consumption of certain raw tomatoes. The FDA has not ruled out tomatoes as the source of the original outbreak, but investigators have determined that tomatoes currently in fields and stores are safe, Dr. David Acheson, the FDA's associate commissioner for food protection, said Thursday.  Learn about the differences between salmonella and E. coli »  The FDA is still investigating fresh tomatoes as a possible source of the outbreak. It is possible that tomatoes were paired with another food that was contaminated, Tauxe said.  Watch more on the FDA investigation » Before Monday's warning, the agency had discouraged high-risk people -- elderly people, infants and those with impaired immune systems -- from eating serrano and jalapeño peppers.  Two elderly men with pre-existing conditions died while infected with Salmonella Saintpaul, and the FDA said the infection could have contributed to their deaths.

Question: What strain has caused hundreds to fall ill?

Question: What kind of produce was the cause of the outbreak?

Question: Where did the bacteria originate?

Question: Where was the pepper grown?

Question: Which strain of salmonella has sickened hundreds?

Question: Where was the bacteria found?

Question: What was found at a distribution center?

Question: What strain has sickened hundreds?

Question: What city was the distribution center in, that caused the outbreak?

Question: What strain of bacteria was found?

Answer: Salmonella Saintpaul.

Answer: jalapeño pepper

Answer: on a jalapeño pepper imported from Mexico

Answer: Mexico

Answer: Saintpaul.

Answer: on a jalapeño pepper imported from Mexico

Answer: bacteria

Answer: Salmonella Saintpaul.

Answer: McAllen, Texas,

Answer: salmonella


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Investigators with bomb-making components in their luggage and on their person were able to pass through security checkpoints at 19 U.S. airports without detection, according to the Government Accountability Office. Passengers pass through security at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago, Illinois. GAO officials are expected to testify about the investigation Thursday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The investigators reported that most of the time security officers followed Transportation Security Administration policies and procedures, but investigators were able to take advantage of "weaknesses in TSA procedures and other vulnerabilities." "These weaknesses were identified based on a review of public information," the planned GAO testimony says. Investigators concluded that if they had attempted the same test at other airports, they would have evaded detection. But the GAO did not detail the weaknesses because they "are sensitive security information." The investigators obtained the bomb-making components at local stores and over the Internet for less than $150, according to testimony.  Watch a tester point out a TSA mistake » The GAO said its investigators also tested the devices that could be built with the components they smuggled and discovered that "a terrorist using these devices could cause severe damage to an airplane and threaten the safety of passengers." The GAO investigators devised two types of devices: an "improvised explosive device" made of a liquid explosive and a low-yield detonator, and an "improvised incendiary device" that could be created by combining commonly available products prohibited in carry-on luggage. The GAO said it found the instructions for creating the devices "using publicly available information," including Internet searches. According to the testimony, a transportation security officer barred one of the investigators from bringing an unlabeled bottle of medicated shampoo through the checkpoint. But the security officer allowed a liquid component of the improvised explosive device to pass through undetected, although that item is prohibited by the TSA. In another test, the investigator put coins in his pockets to assure he would get a secondary inspection. But the officer, using a hand-wand and a pat-down, failed to detect any of the prohibited items the investigator was carrying. The GAO said it had briefed the TSA on its findings "to help them take corrective action." In testimony to be provided to the same congressional committee, TSA chief Kip Hawley defends the administration's policies and procedures, saying that the screening checkpoints are but one of a "multilayered approach to security." "We recognize that, despite our efforts to make each layer as strong as possible, a concerted effort may target any one layer," according to the testimony. "Our ongoing success is a result of the tremendous power in the reinforced, multiple layers. Truly, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts -- and together, they are formidable." Hawley sketches for members of Congress 19 security steps the TSA employs before, during and after checkpoint screening. "Each and every one of these 19 security layers is important and strong in its own right," he says. "Linked together, they are effective and daunting." Although it would not discuss the specific nature of its recommendations, the GAO said it recommended establishing special screening lines based on risk and passengers with special needs. The TSA should introduce more "aggressive, visible and unpredictable" measures to detect concealed items and develop new technology for screening at checkpoints. Hawley's said the TSA concurs with the GAO's recommendations and specifically discussed several "new technology" items that he said were "greatly improving our effectiveness in detecting prohibited items." Among the new technology, he said, were whole body imagers, bottled liquids scanners, hand-held explosives scanners and advanced technology X-rays. And, he added, "our pursuit of new technology is not limited to what I described today." He also said the TSA is constantly conducting covert tests of the screening process, including detection of prohibited liquids and IEDs. "The nation's aviation system remains secure," he said, "but requires

Question: what did terrorists use?

Question: who took advantage of weaknesses?

Question: what did GAO say about terrorists?

Question: Were the weaknesses detailed?

Question: What does GAO stand for?

Question: What did the investigators take advantage of?

Question: what does TSA stand for?

Question: What wasn't detailed because of security reasons?

Answer: "improvised explosive device"

Answer: investigators

Answer: "a

Answer: the GAO did not detail the

Answer: Government Accountability Office.

Answer: "weaknesses in TSA procedures and other vulnerabilities."

Answer: Transportation Security Administration

Answer: the weaknesses

Summary:
GAO: Investigators took advantage of "weaknesses in TSA procedures"
GAO: Those "weaknesses" were not detailed for security reasons .
GAO said terrorists using same items could seriously compromise a flight .
Transportation Security Administration: Checkpoints only part of total security .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran may be holding a former FBI agent in a bid to exchange him for Iranians seized by U.S. troops in Iraq in 2007, a U.S. senator suggested Tuesday.

Christine Levinson, wife of Robert Levinson, went to Tehran in 2007 to try to learn her husband's fate.

Robert Levinson disappeared from Iran's Kish Island in March 2007. Iranian authorities have repeatedly said they don't have any information on him, but that is widely doubted in the United States.

"On several diplomatic occasions when Bob Levinson's name has been brought up to Iranian officials, the standard answer is, 'We don't know anything about that.' But the next thing out of the Iranian officials' mouths are to discuss the matter of the Iranians held by the Americans in Irbil, Iraq," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida, told reporters. "You can draw your own conclusions."

U.S. troops arrested five Iranians accused of being members of an elite Iranian military unit during a January 2007 raid in the Kurdish city of Irbil. They were accused of supporting Shiite militias in Iraq, but Iran said they were diplomats and accused the United States of violating international law by raiding a consulate.

The United States said the men were taken at a liaison office that lacks diplomatic status. Two were released the next November.

Nelson and Florida Democratic Rep. Robert Wexler, whose district includes Levinson's Coral Springs home, are trying to jump-start efforts to find the missing man. Wexler said Iranian authorities have not assisted the Levinsons, saying they have "zero knowledge" of his whereabouts and are stonewalling "any effort to gain pertinent information."

Levinson's wife, Christine, said her husband was working as a private investigator on a cigarette smuggling case when he disappeared.

"It's been extremely difficult for my family," she said. "We hope to resolve this as soon as possible."

Wexler and Nelson said they plan to introduce legislation in their respective houses calling on Iran to cooperate with the United States and come up with information about Levinson. Nelson said Iran could use Levinson's case as a show of good will toward the incoming Obama administration, which has said it wants to engage Iran after three decades without diplomatic relations.

"We hope that Iran will take this moment in time to show a change in the relationship with the United States by doing this humanitarian gesture for this family," he said.

In a January 22 letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Wexler asked that the case be raised "at the highest levels." Nelson raised Levinson's status during Clinton's confirmation hearing.

Nelson said the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations has discussed Levinson's case with him under the "fiction" that he represents the people of Florida, not the U.S. government. But he said the Iranians have never acknowledged holding the former federal agent.

Levinson had been working as a private investigator in Dubai and was last heard from on March 8, 2007. His family said he checked into a hotel on Kish Island and then checked out the next day to go back to the United States, but he never boarded his flight.

Levinson family members have met with local Iranian officials and have traveled to Iran to retrace his steps. Christine Levinson also flew to the United Nations in September to ask questions about her husband, whom she says suffers from diabetes and high blood pressure. The family has offered a $5,000 reward for information leading to his safe return.

The State Department and FBI have consistently denied Levinson was working for the government and have demanded Iran free Levinson -- if it is holding him. State Department spokesman Robert Wood said the U.S. government has called on Iran to provide more information about the matter "for some time."

"His family's extremely concerned, as you can understand, that no information has been forthcoming," Wood said. "So, again, we call on the Iranians to provide whatever information they have on Mr. Levinson so that we can hopefully return this gentleman to his family."

Question: Who has been missing nearly two years?

Question: Who disapeared almost two years ago?

Question: Who seeks new attention from Obama administration?

Question: What does the Florida congressman and senator seek?

Question: Who disappeared almost two years ago?

Question: Where did Levinson vanish from?

Question: How long ago  did Levinson disappear?

Question: Where did Levinson disappear from?

Question: What did the Iranians say?

Question: How much knowledge do Iranians say they have about Levinson's whereabouts?

Question: What senator is seeking attention from the White House?

Question: What did the Iranians say about missing man?

Answer: Robert Levinson

Answer: Robert Levinson

Answer: Christine Levinson,

Answer: bid to exchange him for Iranians

Answer: Robert Levinson

Answer: Iran's Kish Island

Answer: March 2007.

Answer: Kish Island

Answer: 'We don't know anything about that.'

Answer: "zero knowledge"

Answer: Sen. Bill Nelson,

Answer: "zero knowledge"

Summary:
Robert Levinson disappeared almost two years ago from Iranian island .
Florida congressman, senator seek new attention from Obama administration .
Senator says Iranians caught in Iraq always mentioned in conjunction with Levinson .
Iranians say they have "zero knowledge" of missing man's whereabouts .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iraq is raking in more money from oil exports than it is spending, amassing a projected four-year budget surplus of up to $80 billion, U.S. auditors reported Tuesday. Oil accounted for 94 percent of the Iraq's revenue from 2005 to 2007, a U.S. report says. Leading members of Congress, noting that Washington is paying for reconstruction in Iraq, expressed outrage at the assessment. One called the findings "inexcusable." "We should not be paying for Iraqi projects while Iraqi oil revenues continue to pile up in the bank, including outrageous profits from $4-a-gallon gas prices in the U.S.," said Sen. Carl Levin, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "We should require that U.S. taxpayers be reimbursed for the cost of large projects." Baghdad had a $29 billion budget surplus between 2005 to 2007. With the price of crude roughly doubling in the past year, Iraq's surplus for 2008 is expected to run between $38 billion and $50 billion, according to a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The United States has put about $48 billion toward reconstruction since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, auditors reported. About $23 billion of that was spent on the oil and electricity industries, water systems and security. Iraq spent $3.9 billion on those sectors from 2005 through April 2008, according to the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress. The ongoing fighting there, a shortage of trained staff and weak controls have made it difficult for the Iraqi government to spend its surplus on needed projects, the agency's report concluded. Levin, a Michigan Democrat, has been an outspoken critic of the slow progress of reconstruction and an advocate of a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. His criticism Tuesday was echoed by Sen. John Warner, a Virginia Republican who is the former chairman and now a leading member of Levin's committee. "Despite Iraq earning billions of dollars in oil revenue in the past five years, U.S. taxpayer money has been the overwhelming source of Iraq reconstruction funds," Warner said in a joint statement with Levin. "It is time for the sovereign government of Iraq, using its revenues, expenditures and surpluses, to fully assume the responsibility to provide essential services and improve the quality of life for the Iraqi people." In its written response to the audit report, the Treasury Department said U.S. officials are working with Iraqis to address the issue, "and we believe progress is being made." "The report shows Iraq's budget surplus is likely to grow significantly over the course of 2008, but it is equally important to realize that spending in Iraq is also increasing," Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Andy Baukol wrote to the GAO. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government submitted a $22 billion supplemental budget to the Iraqi parliament in July, including $8 billion in proposed capital expenditures, Baukol wrote. The issue raised the hackles of several members of Congress earlier this year -- particularly because Bush administration officials said on the eve of the war that Iraqi oil money would pay for reconstruction. In 2003, then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz told the House Appropriations Committee: "We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.'' Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, said Tuesday's report "is going to make a lot of American families very angry." "The record gas prices they are paying have turned into an economic windfall for Iraq, but the Iraqi government isn't spending the money on rebuilding," said Waxman, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Levin spokeswoman Tara Andringa said the senator hopes to tighten rules governing U.S. expenditures on Iraqi reconstruction efforts in the next Pentagon authorization bill. The Iraqi surplus has piled up even though the country's oil production has only recently matched prewar levels, according to the Brookings Institution's latest Iraq Index. The country spent about 80 percent of its $29 billion operating budget in 2007, including public services and salaries, but only 28 percent

Question: What is the estimate of Iraq's budget surplus?

Question: What did the report say?

Question: What could Iraq's surplus hit?

Question: What could Iraq's budget surplus hit?

Question: What are the lawmakers upset over?

Question: Who should be reimbursed?

Question: What surplus angered US lawmakers?

Question: What senator said taxpayers ought to be reimbursed?

Answer: $80 billion,

Answer: Oil accounted for 94 percent of the Iraq's revenue from 2005 to 2007,

Answer: up to $80 billion,

Answer: up to $80 billion,

Answer: paying for Iraqi projects

Answer: U.S. taxpayers

Answer: $80 billion,

Answer: Sen. Carl Levin,

Summary:
U.S. lawmakers upset over surplus, noting Washington is footing reconstruction .
U.S. taxpayers should be reimbursed, senator says .
Report says Iraq's budget surplus from 2005 to 2008 could hit $80 billion .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iraq's smaller religious groups have been facing "ongoing severe abuses," and the situation requires a response from the United States, a religious freedom watchdog said Tuesday. In late November, members of a Christian Iraqi family sit in a home in Lebanon after fleeing violence in Mosul. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a report citing "threats and intimidation" against Chaldo-Assyrians and other Christians, Sabean-Mandaeans and Yazidis. The commission wants the U.S. State Department to designate Iraq as a "country of particular concern" -- a status that would allow policy responses, including public condemnations, the denial of state visits, and even sanctions. Spokeswoman Judith Ingram said such a designation would draw attention to the abuses and "encourage a robust policy response." There has been "reconciliation" between Iraq's dominant Shiite and Sunni religious groups, but tensions continue to reverberate and that's a concern, the commission said. But the smaller groups don't have "militia or tribal structures to protect them" and they "do not receive adequate official protection." "Iraq's non-Muslim religious minorities -- particularly Christians, Mandaeans and Yazidis -- have suffered religiously-based attacks and other abuses, and have fled the country, at rates far disproportionate to their numbers, seriously threatening these communities' continued existence in Iraq," the report said. "Lacking militias, and in the case of the Mandaeans unable to defend themselves for religious reasons, they are easy prey for extremists and criminals, and they do not receive adequate protection from the authorities. As in earlier years, they also are caught in the middle of a Kurdish-Arab struggle for control of disputed northern areas where the minorities are concentrated and have been targeted because of this." Examples include Christian protest over provincial election legislation and anti-Christian violence in Mosul this autumn and election intimidation of non-Muslims in Nineveh province in 2005. The Iraqi Constitution also "gives Islam a preferred status, providing a potential justification for abuses and discrimination against non-Muslims." The commission is recommending that the incoming Obama administration ensure "safe and fair provincial elections" and "security and safety for all Iraqis." It calls for making prevention of religious abuse a "high priority" and urging the Kurdish region to support "minority rights." It also urges addressing the displaced persons' and refugee problem. CNN's Joe Sterling contributed to this report.

Question: What do smaller religious groups in Iraq lack?

Question: Who urges protection of Irag's minority religions?

Question: Who doesn't have any militias or tribal structures?

Question: Who is urging that these religious minorities be protected?

Question: What is the U.S administration urged to ensure?

Question: Which US President is incoming?

Question: What don't smaller groups have?

Question: Who urged the incoming U.S. administration to ensure safety for all Iraqis?

Answer: "Lacking militias,

Answer: The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom

Answer: the smaller groups

Answer: Judith Ingram

Answer: "safe and fair provincial elections" and "security and safety for all

Answer: Obama

Answer: "militia or tribal structures to protect them"

Answer: Commission on International Religious Freedom

Summary:
Religious freedom watchdog group urges protection of Iraq's minority religions .
Situation severe enough to merit response from United States, group says .
Smaller groups don't have militias or tribal structures to protect them .
Incoming U.S. administration urged to ensure "safety for all Iraqis"


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Is the United States the "greatest country on earth"? You hear that a lot, or phrases like that, during this presidential campaign. Candidates may attack other candidates, or the sitting president, but they never attack the idea that America is special, a "city upon a hill." "The last, best hope of Earth." It's part of America's ideology and its tradition of political rhetoric. To many Americans' ears, it sounds normal. But to citizens of other countries it's sometimes jarring, as if Americans put their country ahead of any other, as if the United States thinks it has the right to tell the rest of the world what to do. We went to the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. and asked visitors if they agree America "knows best" and the United States has an obligation to spread its values around the world. Almost everyone we talked with did not agree. Rachel Army, a teacher with a Washington, D.C. non-governmental organization, said: "I have a lot of pride in our government however, at the same time, it is ours and I don't think that it is right to force it on other people." Jermane Bonilla, from Los Angeles, said he thinks the United States is a special country, "the most powerful nation on earth and the most beautiful country on earth, in my mind." But, he told us "it might not be the same model that everybody should be using." They're not the exception, it turns out. In their book, "America Against the World," Pew Research Center President Andrew Kohut and journalist Bruce Stokes say it's more often U.S. leaders who want to impose American values in other countries -- not the American people. The authors analyzed international surveys of people around the globe going back to the 1980's as well as more than 100,000 interviews in 60 countries. Their conclusion? "Contrary to widespread misconceptions, Americans' pride in their country is not evangelistic. The American people, as opposed to some of their leaders, seek no converts to their ideology." Citizens of many other countries, too, may think their national way of life is the best but, these authors say, "they don't dominate the globe." Americans may not be that different from others but the differences that do exist are magnified, fueling resentment around the world. E-mail to a friend

Question: What is the USA described as in political rehetoric

Question: In what way are these views described in relation to other countries

Question: who are proud about the country

Question: what is a staple of political rhetoric

Question: what is the view

Answer: "city upon a hill."

Answer: as if Americans put their country ahead of any

Answer: Americans

Answer: America is special, a "city upon a hill." "The last, best hope of Earth."

Answer: Americans' pride in their country is not evangelistic.

Summary:
"U.S.A. the special" is a staple of political rhetoric .
Authors find citizens are proud but not evangelistic about the country .
View is similar to citizens of other countries but it's magnified by U.S. power .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met in President Obama what might be a new chapter in the 60-year relationship between Israel and the United States. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Obama visit at the White House on Monday. Based on interviews with U.S., Israeli and Arab diplomats, no one expects a drastic change in the relationship -- the Obama administration won't waiver from the traditional unshakable commitment to Israel's security. But the Obama administration seems to have a different view from Israel -- and previous U.S. administrations -- on how that security is best achieved. Observers think this administration -- Obama, National Security Adviser Gen. Jim Jones and Middle East envoy George Mitchell in particular -- are predisposed to be tougher on Israel than the Bush administration was. Israelis are concerned the special strategic relationship between the United States and Israel could be in jeopardy. Because Obama has made clear he thinks a Palestinian state better serves Israel's and the United States' security, there were expectations of a showdown between him and Netanyahu. Netanyahu came to Washington refusing to commit to a two-state solution and instead talked of a "Palestinian entity" with promises of beefed-up economic development. Arab states and the United States have said that's not a substitute for a true Palestinian state. Because of the good will and enhanced credibility the election of Obama has brought the United States around the world, he can ask for more, and expect more, on this issue. The United States is working with Jordan's King Abdullah to "sequence" the Arab initiative, a plan proposed by then-Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah in 2003 and endorsed by the Arab League. Under the plan, all Arab states would normalize relations with Israel after it returns former Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese territories. The United States wants Israel and the Arab countries to take simultaneous steps toward peace. For instance, if Israel halts settlement activity or removes outposts, the Arabs could take any number of steps, such as opening trade offices in Israel or allowing telecommunications or air travel between Israel and Arab countries. There is a long list of potential moves and different Arab countries are considering steps from the list. Some are more willing to participate than others. We will probably hear more about this in the coming weeks as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas visit Washington later this month. Netanyahu has also made clear one of his main priorities is dealing with the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program; he's said that if the United States can't eliminate the threat through talking, Israel will do so militarily. He also has threatened to halt progress on the Palestinian issue until the United States takes meaningful steps to curb Iran. The United States has made clear that such threats are a nonstarter. Netanyahu's position is to solve Iran first and then Israel can deal with Palestinian peace. The United States wants the Israelis to make peace with the Palestinians and it will deal with Iran at the same time. In fact, Washington believes progress on the Palestinian issue could rally Arab support for dealing with Iran. Israeli diplomats said Netanyahu is not going to provoke a confrontation with Obama and they expected him to announce some immediate steps to improve the quality of life for Palestinians in the West Bank, including removing illegal settlement outposts. However, Netanyahu made no such announcement during a brief photo opportunity with Obama. Netanyahu was expected to make a statement supporting the idea of a Palestinian state, but most analysts said he would stop short of a full endorsement. Again, sitting next to Obama, Netanyahu spoke of a scenario in which "Israel and the Palestinians live side by side in dignity, security and in peace," but he didn't mention a Palestinian state. No breakthroughs were expected. Monday's meeting was largely expected to be a chance for the two sides to discuss their positions rather than iron out differences. Some might see this as Obama being tougher on Israel, but others say it's an evenhandedness that hasn't been seen from recent U.S. administrations. In short, it seems the Obama administration is going to use more of

Question: What do observers say about the Obama team?

Question: Who is Obama with?

Question: What does Obama have?

Answer: are predisposed to be tougher on Israel than the Bush administration was.

Answer: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Answer: a different view from Israel

Summary:
No one expects a drastic change in U.S.-Israel relationship .
But Obama has different approach from past administrations .
Observers think Obama team is predisposed to be tougher on Israel .
Whether Palestinians or Iranians get attention first is at issue .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated his concern over the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran during meetings with top congressional leaders Tuesday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu walks Tuesday with Reps. John Boehner, left, and Nancy Pelosi. He met with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee first, followed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Minority Leader John Boehner. An Iranian regime armed with nuclear weapons "is a great danger to all of us, to Israel specifically and to the moderate Arab regimes, [and] to America," Netanyahu said after his meeting with Pelosi and Boehner. "Especially if this regime were to arm itself or arm terrorists with nuclear weapons, the consequences could be unimaginable." Netanyahu also reiterated his call for normalizing relations between Israel and the "broader Arab world" while moving forward on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.  Watch where Mideast flash points could be » "We have to do this in tandem," he said. "That's going to be our policy. ... If we do it together, we'll get a lot further, a lot faster." Pelosi said she endorsed a two-state solution for the Israelis and Palestinians, but emphasized that it "must be a solution that provides for a democratic Jewish state of Israel living side by side with her Palestinian neighbors." "The question of Iran is one that is of concern to us in Congress," she said. "... It is an issue for the world. It is important for all of us to work together to be sure that Iran does not develop a weapon of mass destruction." Netanyahu is on his first visit to Washington since becoming prime minister earlier this year -- his second time as head of Israel's government. He met Monday with President Obama at the White House and dined with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama offered the hawkish Israeli leader a small diplomatic victory, warning that he would not allow Iran to drag out talks as a way of buying time while it develops nuclear weapons. Speaking at an Oval Office news conference, Obama again refused to commit to an "artificial deadline" for Iranian negotiations. But he also warned that he would not allow such talks, which he expects to accelerate after the Iranian presidential election in June, to be used as an excuse for delay.  Watch Obama start the clock on Iran » "We're not going to have talks forever. We're not going to create a situation in which the talks become an excuse for inaction while Iran proceeds with developing ... and deploying a nuclear weapon," he said. He said the United States is not "foreclosing a range of steps, including much stronger international sanctions, in assuring that Iran understands that we are serious." The issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions has become increasingly urgent in recent months. Netanyahu wanted a time limit for negotiations relating to such ambitions, with the threat of military action if no resolution is reached. Both Israel and the United States believe Iran is seeking nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear energy program; Tehran denies the accusation. Israeli leaders have pointed to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's calls for the end of Israel as a Jewish state, and argue that quick action is needed. Clinton and Netanyahu also talked about Iran, among other issues, during a 90-minute working dinner Monday night, according to a senior State Department official. "Clinton's messages were entirely consistent with President Obama's," the official said. "She reiterated our support for a two-state solution, and explained our strategy for direct engagement as a means to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapons capability." In his appearance at the White House, Netanyahu emphasized that while "the common goal is peace ... the common threat we face are terrorist threats and organizations that seek to undermine [that] peace and threaten both our peoples." The prime minister called Iran the biggest threat to peace in the region. "If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, it could give a nuclear

Question: What concerns did U.S leaders have?

Question: Who said it was a great danger to us all?

Question: Who does Netanyahu say is a great danger to all of us?

Question: What does Netanyahu say?

Question: Who does the Israeli PM meet with Speaker Nancy Pelosi?

Question: Who is also concerned about Iran's nuclear intentions?

Answer: An Iranian regime armed with nuclear weapons

Answer: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Answer: An Iranian regime armed with nuclear weapons

Answer: An Iranian regime armed with nuclear weapons "is a great danger to all of us, to Israel specifically and to the moderate Arab regimes, [and] to America,"

Answer: House Minority Leader John Boehner.

Answer: Congress,"

Summary:
Israeli PM meets with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader John Boehner .
Iranian regime with nuclear weapons "is a great danger to all of us," Netanyahu says .
He calls for normalized relations with Arab world, peace process with Palestinians .
U.S. leaders also express concern over Iran's nuclear intentions .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- It was an odd collection of vehicles on display on Capitol Hill, ranging from a bucket truck used for repairing power lines to something resembling an enclosed golf cart to a pair of hot-looking, two-seater sports cars.

Lawmakers eyeball one of several alternative-energy vehicles parked this week on Capitol Hill.

What they had in common was alternative energy: The cars run on electricity and biofuels as well as gasoline. Tuesday's display attracted some U.S. senators who couldn't resist taking the vehicles for a spin.

"I'm about to have claustrophobia!" laughed Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, as he folded himself into a yellow, low-slung vehicle known by the initials ENVI, developed by the Chrysler Corporation.

"Evan Bayh [Democratic senator from Indiana] and I were talking about taking a road trip in the van down there," said Carper, pointing to a nearby offering from General Motors. "That's probably better for a road trip than this!"

Carper then spotted Democratic colleague Tom Harkin, and joked that the sports car might draw too much attention in the Iowa senator's corn country.

Undeterred, Harkin climbed in next and asked to take a test drive. But instead of starting with a growling engine and a roar of exhaust, the little yellow coupe simply rolled quietly out of its parking space.

It is an electric vehicle.

The display, titled "The Energy and Environmental Showcase," was intended to demonstrate for lawmakers actual production models of vehicles that may cut the nation's reliance on petroleum-based fuels. An unusual aspect of the show was that traditional Detroit nameplates such as General Motors sat next to competitors from other countries.

The event was organized by Bright Automotive, a small carmaker from Anderson, Indiana, to showcase its IDEA, a new, 100-mpg plug-in hybrid electric vehicle that it hopes to market for government and commercial fleets. In a statement, the company said it has applied for funding through the federal Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program.

Other manufacturers took advantage of the opportunity to bring their own vehicles to the public display, in a parking lot near the Russell Senate Office Building.

During the Bush administration, Japanese automakers complained they weren't invited to a similar demonstration near the Treasury Department, despite having brought their alternative-energy cars more swiftly to the U.S. market than the Detroit automakers.

But neither the competition nor the threat of bankruptcy held back the enthusiasm of a General Motors product spokesman at Tuesday's display. "If anything, it's just a little bit of noise in the background," said Tony Posawatz, a GM vehicle line director.

He told CNN the automaker places high on its recovery agenda the line of Volt electric cars expected to come to market by November 2010. A silver GM sedan on display nearby uses electric batteries and a self-contained recharging engine powered by a variety of fuels.

"I would like people to stop talking mpg," Posawatz said, leading a reporter toward a van powered by a hydrogen fuel cell. The Chevy Equinox on display is one of 100 now in private hands. Instead of miles per gallon, the energy plant supplies electricity and a calculation of cruising range while driving.

For now, however, drivers might still be impressed by the ZENN, a little car claiming 280 miles per gallon. The car's cruising range of about 40 miles translates to about 280 miles per gallon, according to the Canadian automaker.

"ZENN" stands for Zero Emission No Noise, said a worker who was buffing away some tree pollen that had settled on the car during the breezy afternoon. The car's top speed is about that of a strong gust of wind -- 35 mph.

"It's supposed to be your third car in the driveway," explained ZENN spokesman Daniel Stiller. "Most people drive less than 20 miles from home on streets with speed limits of 35 miles per hour or less."

He acknowledged that the car may qualify as street-legal only on local, low-speed roads.

Question: What did the display attract?

Question: Who organised the event?

Question: What hit Capitol Hill this week?

Question: Where is the carmaker who organized the event from?

Question: Which members of Congress tried out the cars?

Question: Where was eclectic assortment of alternative-energy vehicles seen this week?

Question: Did the display attract anyone?

Question: who was the event organized by

Question: who took the cars for a spin

Question: What is happening on Capitol Hill this week?

Question: Who organized the event?

Question: Who  couldn't resist taking the cars for a spin?

Answer: The cars run on electricity and biofuels as well as gasoline. Tuesday's

Answer: Bright Automotive,

Answer: alternative-energy vehicles

Answer: Anderson, Indiana,

Answer: U.S. senators

Answer: Capitol Hill,

Answer: some U.S. senators

Answer: Bright Automotive,

Answer: U.S. senators

Answer: "The Energy and Environmental Showcase,"

Answer: Bright Automotive,

Answer: U.S. senators

Summary:
An eclectic assortment of alternative-energy vehicles hit Capitol Hill this week .
The display attracted U.S. senators who couldn't resist taking the cars for a spin .
The event was organized by a carmaker from Indiana to showcase its plug-in hybrid .
Display included cars from GM, ZENN, Bright Automotive and Smart, among others .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- It was the U.S. government's version of the ticker in New York's Times Square, blasting Havana's main seaside strip with anti-Cuba slogans in 5-foot high crimson letters. It symbolized the tit-for-tat diplomatic row between Washington and Havana. Cuban flags flutter in front of the U.S. interests section building in Havana in 2007. But the ticker at the top of the U.S. interests section in Cuba has gone blank, yet another signal the past half-century of animosity between the two countries is easing. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said the ticker was turned off in June because it was not considered "effective" as a means of delivering information to the Cuban people. The scrolling electronic sign, fitted across 25 windows of the U.S. interests section, ran quotes from American heroes, such as Martin Luther King's "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up," and Abraham Lincoln's "No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent." It also streamed news and political messages that blamed Cuba's everyday problems on the communist regime led by Fidel Castro and the island's socialist economy. The island's transportation woes, for example, were the topics of jabs such as, "Some go around in Mercedes, some in (Russian-built) Ladas, but the system forces almost everyone to hitch rides." The sign -- erected in 2006 by the Bush administration and billed as a way to circumvent censorship and, the administration said, offer hope and freedom to Cubans oppressed by a brutal regime -- fueled a propaganda war with Fidel Castro, who referred to the U.S. interests section as "the headquarters of the counterrevolution." Calling the ticker an assault on Cuba's sovereignty by an imperialist bully, an infuriated Fidel Castro marched 1 million Cubans past the interests section in protest, dug up the U.S. mission's parking lot and blocked the ticker by erecting anti-U.S. billboards and 138 huge black flags to commemorate victims of so-called U.S. aggression. He promised there would be no contact between U.S.-based diplomats in Havana and Cuba's foreign ministry until the sign came down. Fidel's brother Raul Castro, who now rules Cuba, took down the anti-U.S. billboards this year as ties between the two countries improved. In April, President Obama lifted restrictions on Cuban-Americans traveling to the island and sending remittances to relatives there. And this month, U.S. and Cuban diplomats held their first talks since 2003 on Cuban migration to the United States. The State Department's Kelly acknowledged most Cubans couldn't read the ticker because of the counter-propaganda erected by the Cubans. The "dueling billboards," Kelly said, were not promoting a productive U.S.-Cuba relationship. Kelly said measures also announced by Obama in April to allow U.S. cell-phone networks and other telecommunication technology to operate on the island would do more to allow a free flow of information to the Cuban people.

Question: What did Cuba erect to block the sign?

Question: When were the signs erected

Question: what Electronic sign was put on U.S. interests section?

Question: Where was the electronic sign put?

Question: What did Cuba erect

Question: What has been deactivated

Answer: anti-U.S. billboards and 138 huge black flags

Answer: 2006

Answer: scrolling

Answer: across 25 windows of the U.S. interests section,

Answer: erecting anti-U.S. billboards and 138 huge black flags to commemorate victims of so-called U.S. aggression.

Answer: the ticker

Summary:
Sign's deactivation comes as relations between U.S., Cuba improve .
Electronic sign was put on U.S. interests section building in Havana in 2006 .
Sign ran quotes from U.S. heroes, blasted Cuban government's policies .
Cuba erected billboards to block the sign; billboards were taken down this year .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- It's a frightening scenario, almost a staple of action movies: Someone has fallen onto subway tracks, and a train is rumbling into the station.

iReporter Stuart Gordon spotted rescuers after a woman fell onto subway tracks in Washington.

For a heart-stopping moment, the train is certain to strike the fallen person, until rescue comes at the last possible second.

But at a Washington Metro station near the National Mall on Tuesday, it was an all-too-real scenario, and all the more frightening.

A 68-year-old woman from Nashville, Tennessee, in Washington for the inauguration of Barack Obama, fell off the platform at the Gallery Place-Chinatown stop.

Houston Metro Officer Eliot Swainson, deputized to assist with the huge crowds for the inauguration, was aiding another rider when he heard shouts that someone was on the track.  Watch Swainson describe what happened »

"I turned around and saw a lady standing in the track area," Swainson said.

The former Houston police officer rushed into action. He and another Metro rider tried to pull the woman to safety, but with a Red Line train bearing down on the station, they didn't have the time. iReport.com: See photos of the rescue operation

"The train was coming down the tunnel there," Swainson said. "It was coming in closer. I pushed her down and got her tucked down under the platform."

Swainson cited training from Metro staff for giving him the information he used to get the woman out of danger.

The woman, who was not identified, huddled beneath the lip of the granite platform as the train passed. An emergency response crew brought her back up onto the platform and took her to Washington Hospital Center, where hospital staff said she was treated and released. No further details were provided.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority spokeswoman Taryn McNeil said Tuesday that the woman had sustained cuts and bruises from the fall.

The agency said transit officers from 18 locations across the country were in Washington to assist with the inauguration crowds. Ridership records were shattered Tuesday: There were more than 1.5 million trips across all the authority's platforms, including more than 1.1 million on the subway system.

The Tennessee woman's accident was the only one reported on the transit line, the authority said. iReport.com: Are you there? Send your photos

As for Swainson, Metro Transit Police Chief Michael Taborn said he did exactly the right thing.

"Due to Officer Swainson's quick response, the woman was not seriously injured," Taborn said. "He did exactly what was expected, and we are enormously grateful for his actions."

McNeil said the Gallery Place-Chinatown Metro stop was reopened not long after the accident and trains were moving through it, although there were delays.

CNN's Larry Lazo and Kelly Marshall contributed to this report.

Question:
What did the woman huddle beneath?
Where the women huddled from the train?
What did the woman fall off?
Who is Metro Officer?

Answer: the lip of the granite platform

Answer: lip of the granite platform

Answer: the platform

Answer: Eliot Swainson,

Summary:
Woman, 68, fell off platform at Metro's Gallery Place-Chinatown stop .
Houston Metro Officer Eliot Swainson, another rider tried to pull her up .
When they couldn't grab her, Swainson helped tuck her under platform .
Woman safely huddled beneath platform lip as train passed .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso met with President Barack Obama on Tuesday making him the first head of state to be hosted by the new administration.

Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso steps off his Boeing 747 at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland Monday.

It was a long trip -- 6,800 miles (11,000 km) -- for a short meeting -- one hour -- and happened as Obama was preparing his first address to a joint session of Congress.

Sitting next to Aso in the White House, Obama said: "The friendship between the United States and Japan is extraordinarily important.

"It is for that reason that the prime minister is the first foreign dignitary to visit me in the Oval Office."

Obama said the U.S.-Japanese alliance would be crucial in solving international problems including climate change.

"We think we have to work together, not only on issues relating to the Pacific Rim, but throughout the world," Obama added.

Aso said the global economy was also on the agenda at their meeting.

"We are the number 1 and second biggest economies of the world. We will have to work hand in hand.

"I think we are the only two nations which are powerful enough to solve those very critical, vital issue," Aso said.

Japan's Cabinet Secretary Takeo Kawamura said that being the first to visit the Obama White House was an indication of the priority the new president placed on the relationship.

Another topic likely to have been on the agenda was Japan's Asian neighbor North Korea, which U.S. intelligence says is preparing to test a long-range missile. Pyongyang has denied the charge, instead saying it is making preparations to launch a satellite.

A test-fire by North Korea in 2006 failed 40 seconds after launch. The missile is thought to have an intended range of about 4,200 miles (6,700 kilometers), which -- if true -- could give it the capability of striking Alaska or Hawaii.

Aso's visit to Washington comes, as his approval rating stands at a meager 11 percent, the second lowest ever recorded for a Japanese prime minister. Yoshiro Mori, a former prime minister, resigned after his rate bottomed out at 9 percent.

Last week his finance minister Shoichi Nakagawa announced he will step down after coming under fire for appearing intoxicated at a weekend news conference during the G-7 meeting in Rome.

CNN's Chie Kobayashi contributed to this report.

Question: What country is Aso associated with?

Question: What is Aso's approval rating?

Question: Who will Obama give his first address to?

Question: What distinction does Aso hold?

Question: Aso is the first head of state hosted by what?

Question: What was Aso's approval rating?

Question: What foreign leader was hosting Aso?

Question: Who is the first head of state hosted by Obama administration?

Answer: Japanese

Answer: 11 percent,

Answer: a joint session of Congress.

Answer: the first head of state to be hosted by the new administration.

Answer: the new administration.

Answer: 11 percent,

Answer: President Barack Obama

Answer: Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso

Summary:
Aso's approval rating at 11 percent, the second lowest ever for a Japanese PM .
Aso is first head of state hosted by Obama administration .
Obama will give his first address to joint session of Congress hours later .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- John McCain's fight for the White House was a microcosm of his political career and broader life -- full of near-death experiences, stunning comebacks and close calls.

Sen. John McCain gestures as he delivers his concession speech Tuesday night.

The former Navy fighter pilot, who'd been shot down over North Vietnam and held as a POW, had been able to battle back every time until Tuesday night. He regained respect in the Senate after being accused of improperly helping fraudster savings and loan chief Charles Keating in the 1980s; he got back on speaking terms with the Republican Party base after his primary defeat against George W. Bush in 2000; and he revitalized his campaign after its near-death last summer from lack of cash and power struggles to capture the nomination.

What would have been his greatest political comeback -- to seize the White House -- proved to be too difficult. A Republican win in what is being seen as a "Democratic year" was always a long shot.

Whoever was the GOP nominee was going to have to fight against the legacy of the previous eight years of a Republican president who became highly unpopular because of the Iraq war, administration gaffes such as the handling of Hurricane Katrina, and what turned from a credit crunch into a global economic crisis.

The Arizona senator even managed to make the race appear competitive, soaring in the polls on the back of a polished convention and popular VP pick, Gov. Sarah Palin. But he made mistakes, too. Combined with the electorate's disenchantment with his party, it ensured defeat.

Turning points

New Hampshire: McCain's great high point came in January, amid the snows of New Hampshire, when primary voters boosted him from long shot to top-tier candidate, just as they had eight years earlier. He stunned a crowded GOP field -- including Mitt Romney, the well-funded former governor of neighboring Massachusetts, and Iowa caucus winner Mike Huckabee -- and proved himself a force to be reckoned with.

Not Hillary: Democrats weren't the only ones who expected Hillary Clinton to put a quick end to the primary season -- the Republican machine had spent years honing plans to fight the New York senator in a general election. Not only were those plans ruined, but suddenly the challenger was a fresh face with little baggage who captured the public's imagination. And as the epic Democratic primary season gave many headlines to Barack Obama, it also helped him develop networks of supporters in traditionally red states. And millions of new Obama supporters also became donors, financing a record-breaking fundraising effort.

George W. Bush: McCain may never have been a great friend of the president, but he could hardly turn down an endorsement from him at the White House. It was a photo-op that launched a thousand attack ads. Even if the unpopular president was a virtual no-show on the campaign trail, it was easy for the Democrats to remind voters who McCain's party colleague was.

Straight talk: One of McCain's strengths had been his relationship with news groups, gaining appreciation by answering reporters' questions until there were none left. But when asked whether he agreed with campaign supporter Carly Fiorina that health insurance plans that covered Viagra should cover birth control as well, he had no answer. Cameras rolled on his Straight Talk Express campaign bus as he sat silently, looking awkward -- long moments of video that would be replayed again and again. Virtually overnight, news conferences disappeared from McCain's agenda as advisers who believed that an open-door media policy did not help persuaded their man they were right. McCain was left to repeat the rehearsed lines of his stump speech, losing the opportunity to impress in candid moments and his likability numbers began to slip.

VP pick: McCain made his "Hail Mary" pick -- privately acknowledged by some advisers as his only shot of winning -- with the governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin. For a few weeks, it looked like that game-winning touchdown could happen as the base-rousing running mate burst onto the national scene with such power that the GOP ticket took the lead in

Question: Why did the seneator have a tough fight?

Question: What sullied voters' opinons of the senator?

Question: Where is the senator from?

Question: What was his career full of?

Question: Who has a tough fight?

Answer: the legacy of the previous eight years of a Republican president who became highly unpopular

Answer: being accused of improperly helping fraudster savings and loan chief Charles Keating in the 1980s;

Answer: Arizona

Answer: near-death experiences, stunning comebacks and close calls.

Answer: John McCain's

Summary:
Arizona senator had tough fight in a "Democratic year"
In career of stunning comebacks, win eludes him this time .
Missteps and circumstances sullied voters' opinions of him .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Jordan's King Hussein sent a secret message to President Richard Nixon in 1970 pleading with him to attack Syria, according to declassified documents released Wednesday by the former president's library. President Nixon works at his desk in the Oval Office in a June 1972 photograph. The papers are among about 10,000 documents released by the Nixon Presidential Library, some of which offer harbingers of present-day events, such as concerns about terrorism and Saudi Arabia. Library director Timothy Naftali said the documents describe challenges such as how to get the Saudis more involved in solving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, how to get them more engaged against terrorism, how to address the Arab view that the United States always sides with Israel and how to build up moderate Palestinians to counter extremists. A 1973 diplomatic cable cites this objective: "isolate and undermine terrorisms [sic] and commandos [sic] by establishing another, more stable and respectable Palestinian political entity and political personality." Documents detail U.S. efforts to persuade Saudi Arabia to move away from Fatah, the military wing of the Palestine Liberation Organization, because U.S. officials believed the PLO was supporting the terrorist-linked, anti-Israel group Black September, referred to as BSO. The document, a U.S. State Department telegram from the embassy in Jeddah to Washington reads, "BSO and Fatah [are] now linked together in vicious effort to create chaos and uncertainty. One might wonder whether central objective BSO conspiracy was not to erase any slight progress toward Middle East peace." The document release was intended to coincide with Mideast peace summit among Palestinian, Israeli and other Mideast leaders in Maryland, Naftali said. The Nixon White House also was adjusting to Israel's acquisition of a nuclear weapon. "We are declassifying the records today that laid the basis for Richard Nixon's decision in 1969 to accept the fact, a fact of life, that Israel had a bomb, a nuclear device," said Naftali. "That, of course, is very important with what's going on in Annapolis." "Even though it is clear from the documents that the United States government did not encourage Israel to acquire a nuclear deterrent, it became a fact of life," Naftali said. "There are materials here that show how our government, 30 years ago, dealt with this very, very difficult problem." Rather than openly declare itself as a nuclear power, Israel still maintains a strategic ambiguity over its nuclear weapons capability. In 1970, as King Hussein dealt with threats by both Palestinian refugees in his country and Syrian military forces crossing Jordan's border, the king asked "the United States and Great Britain to intervene in the war in Jordan, asking the United States, in fact, to attack Syria," Naftali said. "Syria had invaded Jordan and the Jordanian king, facing what he felt was a military rout, said please help us in any way possible." The telegram indicates that Hussein himself called a U.S. official at 3 a.m. to ask for American or British help. "Situation deteriorating dangerously following Syrian massive invasion...," the document said. "I request immediate physical intervention both land and air ... to safeguard sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of Jordan. Immediate air strikes on invading forces from any quarter plus air cover are imperative." The library has withheld the Nixon documents from public access until Wednesday and have been reviewed for release and/or declassified, Naftali said. Nixon served as president from January 20, 1969, to August 9, 1974, when he resigned under political pressure during the Watergate scandal -- the only U.S. president to do so. He died in 1994 after suffering a stroke at the age of 81. E-mail to a friend

Question: What were the documents about?

Question: When was this strike wanted?

Question: What do the papers discuss the Israeli's acquiring?

Question: Which person wanted the US to strike Syrian troops?

Question: What did papers say the Israelis wanted to acquire?

Question: Who wanted a strike on invading Syrian troops?

Question: What papers discussed the acquisition?

Question: Which library released the papers?

Question: What is the PLO's and its Fatah organization?

Answer: describe challenges such as how to get the Saudis more involved in solving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, how to get them more engaged against terrorism, how to address the Arab view that the United States always sides with Israel and how to build up moderate Palestinians to counter extremists.

Answer: 1970

Answer: nuclear deterrent,

Answer: Jordan's King Hussein

Answer: a nuclear deterrent,

Answer: Jordan's King Hussein

Answer: documents released by the Nixon Presidential Library,

Answer: Nixon Presidential

Answer: the military wing of the Palestine Liberation

Summary:
Telegram: King Hussein wanted U.S. strike on invading Syrian troops in 1970 .
Nixon White House urged Saudis to distance from PLO's Fatah organization .
Papers also discuss Israeli acquisition of nuclear weapon .
Documents among 10,000 papers released Wednesday by Nixon Library .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who rose from the housing projects of the Bronx to the top of the legal profession, made history Thursday when the Senate confirmed her to become the nation's first Hispanic Supreme Court justice. Sonia Sotomayor, 55, will be the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court. Sotomayor was easily confirmed in a 68-31 vote. Nine Republicans joined a unanimous Democratic caucus in supporting her nomination. Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, supported Sotomayor but was not present for the vote because of illness. Sotomayor, a 55-year-old federal appeals court judge, will be the 111th person to sit on the high court and the third female justice. She will be sworn in at the Supreme Court by Chief Justice John Roberts on Saturday. President Obama, who selected Sotomayor on May 26, said he was "deeply gratified" by the Senate vote. "This is a wonderful day for Judge Sotomayor and her family, but I also think it's a wonderful day for America," Obama said at the White House.  Watch Obama's remarks » Watching the final vote with friends and family at the federal courthouse in Manhattan, Sotomayor was confirmed after senators spent a final day of debate rehashing arguments for and against her. Democrats continued to praised Sotomayor as a fair and impartial jurist with an extraordinary life story. Many Republicans portrayed her as a judicial activist intent on reinterpreting the law to conform with her own liberal political beliefs. Among other things, Republican opponents emphasized concerns over her statements and rulings on hot-button issues such as gun control, affirmative action and property rights.  See how Sotomayor measures up with her new colleagues » They also raised questions about some of her most controversial speeches and statements, including her hope that a "wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences" would reach a better conclusion than a white man "who hasn't lived that life." Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, helped close the debate by stressing the historic nature of the nomination. "It is distinctively American to continually refine our union, moving us closer to our ideals. Our union is not yet perfected, but with this confirmation, we will be making progress," Leahy said on the Senate floor. "Years from now, we will remember this time, when we crossed paths with the quintessentially American journey of Sonia Sotomayor, and when our nation took another step forward through this historic confirmation process." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, took aim at what he claimed was Sotomayor's inability to refrain from bringing her personal political opinions to bear on her rulings. "This is the most fundamental test for any judge and all the more so for those who would sit on our nation's highest court, where a judge's impulses and preferences are not subject to review. Because I'm not convinced that Judge Sotomayor would keep this commitment, I cannot support her nomination." Several Republicans, however, bucked party leadership by voting in favor of Sotomayor. Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, announced Thursday morning that he had decided to back Sotomayor after weighing a range of factors, including her education, experience and temperament. "Judge Sotomayor is not the nominee I would have selected if I were president, but making a nomination is not my role here today," Voinovich said. "My role is to examine her qualifications to determine if she is fit to serve. ... Based on my review of her record, and using these factors, I have determined that Judge Sotomayor meets the criteria to become a justice on the Supreme Court." Voinovich was joined by Maine's Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, New Hampshire's Judd Gregg, Indiana's Richard Lugar, Missouri's Kit Bond, Florida's Mel Martinez, South Carolina's Lindsey Graham and Tennessee's Lamar Alexander.  Watch the Senate vote » In a telling political sign, none of the Republicans who voted for Sotomayor is seeking re-election in 2010. Conservative activists,

Question: Who supported the nomination?

Question: How many Republicans supported the nomination?

Question: who win with 68 vote?

Question: Who wins the confirmation?

Question: Who won confirmation

Answer: Ted Kennedy,

Answer: Nine

Answer: Judge Sonia Sotomayor,

Answer: Judge Sonia Sotomayor,

Answer: Judge Sonia Sotomayor,

Summary:
NEW: Abortion opponent praises 31 Republican senators who voted "no"
Sonia Sotomayor wins confirmation by 68-31 vote .
She will be the 111th justice, the third woman and first Hispanic on high court .
Nine Republicans join unanimous Democratic caucus in supporting nomination .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Justice Department officials blocked liberals and people with Democratic Party ties from a highly selective program that funneled young lawyers into government jobs, according to an internal investigation released Tuesday. A bias against liberals existed in a Justice program meant to hire young lawyers, an investigation found. Esther Slater McDonald, a political appointee at the Justice Department, "wrote disparaging statements about the candidates' liberal and Democratic Party affiliations on the applications she reviewed and ... she voted to deselect candidates on that basis," said the report by Inspector General Glenn Fine. McDonald, who has left the department, refused to be interviewed for the investigation. The report, the first official investigation to document politicization of the Justice Department during the Bush administration, is an offshoot of the larger investigation of Justice Department politics triggered by the furor over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys. It found two of three members of a screening committee considered political views and experience when choosing new lawyers for the Justice Department Honors Program and Summer Law Intern Program. The report found that McDonald and Michael Elston, the chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, engaged in misconduct, an administrative violation. The third member of the screening committee, career lawyer Dan Fridman, was cleared of any involvement in the politicization of the process. Elston was interviewed by the investigators, who asked him about the role of former Justice Department official Monica Goodling in politicizing the selection process. Elston told investigators he could not recall Goodling telling him to select lawyers who appeared to share Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' philosophy. Goodling testified before a House panel last year that she had told Elston he should identify such candidates. Goodling directed Elston to lead the selection committee in 2006. She and Elston have both left the Justice Department. She refused to be interviewed for the inspector general's report. As a result of the controversy, the hiring process was changed in 2007 to insulate hiring decisions from political considerations. Both Justice Department policy and federal law prohibit discrimination in hiring for career positions on the basis of political affiliations. The report did not find clear evidence that an earlier screening committee took political considerations into account. It says data from 2002 shows a disparity in the hiring of liberal and conservative candidates, but there were no complaints about the committee's work from 2003 to 2006, when Goodling put Elston in charge of the process. The report Tuesday is the first of perhaps several to be issued as the broad-ranging investigation into the role partisan politics has played in the Justice Department during the Bush administration. Goodling is expected to be a central figure in later inspector general reports examining efforts to increase the influence of conservatives in the department. The Justice Department Office of Professional Responsibility, a separate watchdog office that monitors prosecutorial conduct, joined in the inspector general's investigation. CNN's Terry Frieden contributed to this report.

Question: Who is seleced for the program?

Question: Who changed the hiring process?

Question: What stems from firing of U.S. attorneys in 2006?

Question: Who did the selections committee screen out?

Question: Who screened out liberals and Democrats?

Question: When was the hiring process changed?

Answer: lawyers

Answer: Elston

Answer: larger investigation of Justice Department politics

Answer: people with Democratic Party ties

Answer: Justice Department officials

Answer: 2007

Summary:
Programs used to select young lawyers for summer interns and honors program .
Investigation stems from firing of U.S. attorneys in 2006 .
Members of selection committee screened out liberals and Democrats, report says .
Hiring process changed in 2007 to stop political bias from occurring .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Justice John Paul Stevens is approaching his 40th year on the federal bench -- the last 34 on the Supreme Court, deciding thousands of cases. But he said his love of the law was nurtured decades earlier by a professor's dedication and the enduring power of a political dispute that blossomed into a landmark decision known as Marbury v. Madison. Justice John Paul Stevens swears in Vice President Joe Biden. Stevens has been on the court for 34 years. "It was the beginning, well, of my whole legal career," Stevens told CNN in a recent exclusive interview. "You read it today and you will find some current value in it. For me, that case inspired a lasting appreciation and respect for the rule of law." The 88-year-old justice, who sources said has no plans to step down anytime soon, is not alone in citing the 1803 high court ruling as a cornerstone of federal court authority. The landmark decision for the first time established the power of the Supreme Court to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional. It also helped codify the idea of separation of powers as a lasting hallmark of the American system of government. The case is the subject of a new book, "The Great Decision: Jefferson, Adams, Marshall and the Battle for the Supreme Court" (PublicAffairs Books), which includes Stevens' analysis of the opinion's impact over the years. Written by Clifford Sloan -- a former Stevens law clerk -- and David McKean, it offers an inside look at how the federal judiciary, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, muscled itself into equal footing with the other two branches of government. It is a struggle, Sloan noted, that continues to affect issues today, such as the president's authority in the war on terror, federal bans on late-term abortion and church-state disputes. "There is a view of an enduring role for our courts that rises above the political pressures and cross-currents of the moment," said Sloan. "There are imperfections, there are problems, but it's been the most protective regime for rights and liberties of any country in the world. And it's really attributable to the special role of the [Supreme] Court in safeguarding our rights and liberties that Marbury established." Immersed from the start in Marbury v. Madison Stevens still has his law school notes from Northwestern University, which he entered in 1945. It was just months after leaving the Navy, where he served as an intelligence officer during World War II. At the time, he was thinking of becoming an English teacher, but Stevens said his brother Richard asked him to think about a law career. "At the time I was trying to decide what to do, and it seemed like a sensible move," Stevens said, with his characteristic Midwestern modesty. It was as a freshman that he met his early mentor, Nathaniel Nathanson, who immersed his students in Marbury v. Madison from the start. "I knew nothing about it before I went to law school, but it was a major part of our constitutional law course," Stevens recalled. "We began with the case and we were still on it six or eight weeks later. We spent most of the first semester studying that one case, and the different issues that come out of it." Something must have stuck, because when he graduated two years later, Stevens had the highest GPA in the history of the law school. The justice gives credit for much of his budding success to Nathanson, a former Northwestern dean and faculty member for 47 years. "He was very brilliant, he could ask good questions and get people to think about issues," said Stevens. "He was a very decent and inspiring teacher." From political pot-boiler to legal treatise One thing Stevens admires about Marbury v. Madison is "there are a whole bunch of issues that are discussed in it. When is executive privilege something that the president can rely on; when should there be a remedy for a wrong?" It was

Question:
What is John Paul Stevens' position?
What is the analysis part of?
What is the age of the justice?

Answer: Justice

Answer: Stevens'

Answer: 88-year-old

Summary:
Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says case inspired his career .
88-year-old justice's analysis of case is part of a new book .
Marbury v. Madison is 1803 high court case dealing with separation of powers .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg plans to undergo a "precautionary" course of chemotherapy following her surgery last month for pancreatic cancer, the Supreme Court announced Tuesday. President Obama greets Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on her arrival for his February 24 address to Congress. The treatments will begin later this month at the National Institutes of Health outside Washington, the court said. In a statement, the justice said the treatment is "not expected to affect my schedule at the court. Thereafter, it is anticipated that I will require only routine examinations to assure my continuing health." Ginsburg, who turned 76 on Sunday, has consistently signaled her health outlook is positive. She termed the February 5 removal of her cancer "successful," and was back on the bench 18 days later when the high court resumed oral arguments. Ginsburg's post-op recovery has gone well, and doctors and the family are cautiously optimistic, court sources said. The disease was caught early and had not spread beyond her pancreas, doctors have said. "Cancer patients with no evidence of disease after surgery but who have a statistical chance that there is microscopic spread often get chemotherapy to kill off that disease," explained Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society. Getting back into her regular routine was important to the justice, and it would help her cope with future medical treatment, sources close to her said. She successfully fought colorectal cancer a decade ago. Almost 35,000 Americans are estimated to have died from pancreatic cancer in 2008, making it the fourth leading cause of cancer death overall, according to the American Cancer Society. For all ages combined, the one-year survival rate is 24 percent; the five-year survival rate is 5 percent. The low survival rate is a result of the disease commonly going undetected until it has reached an advanced stage. Ginsburg -- the only woman on the Supreme Court -- entered a New York hospital after a CT scan in January "revealed a small tumor, approximately one centimeter across, in the center of the pancreas," a previous news release said. She has kept a busy schedule, on and off the bench. Since her diagnosis, she has released three opinions, attended President Obama's February 24 address to Congress, gone to an opera production in the company of Justice David Souter, and traveled for several speeches. She told an audience last week in Boston, Massachusetts, that she had no plans to retire, but on the subject of court retirements she hinted cryptically, "We haven't had any of those for some time, but surely we will soon." Ginsburg, Souter and Justice John Paul Stevens frequently have been mentioned as likely to step down in the next few years. Ginsburg also said her former colleague, retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor -- herself a cancer survivor -- had offered her some good advice. "She said when you're up to chemotherapy, you do it on Friday, Friday afternoon. You'll get over it over the weekend, and you'll be able to come to the court on Monday," said Ginsburg, who noted O'Connor returned to work nine days after her breast cancer diagnosis. "So I've been following her advice meticulously." Ginsburg has been on the Supreme Court since 1993.

Question:
Is Ginsburg's health outlook good?
Where was the tumour?
What treatment is she going to recieve?
What was removed from her pancreas?
who is Ruth Bader Ginsburg?

Answer: positive.

Answer: pancreas,

Answer: chemotherapy

Answer: cancer

Answer: Justice

Summary:
Supreme Court justice, 76, will receive chemotherapy treatments .
Doctors removed small tumor from her pancreas in February .
Ruth Bader Ginsburg consistently signals her health outlook is good .
Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor gave Ginsburg advice on chemotherapy .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recovering from pancreatic cancer surgery, plans to be back on the bench when the Supreme Court resumes oral arguments in 17 days. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg also had surgery for colorectal cancer in September 1999. Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said Friday that the 75-year-old justice is expected to be on hand for the next public session February 23, when the court will hear appeals in two cases. Ginsburg remains hospitalized at New York's Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center a day after undergoing surgery for the disease. Sources close to Ginsburg say that she continues to do well after surgery and that doctors and family remain cautiously optimistic. Those sources said she was resting comfortably and speaking with her staff about the court's upcoming caseload.  Watch friends talk about Ginsburg's resilience » The justice could be released from the hospital next week. A court statement Thursday said she will probably remain in the hospital for seven to 10 days, according to her attending surgeon, Dr. Murray Brennan. "Justice Ginsburg had no symptoms prior to the incidental discovery of the lesion during a routine annual check-up in late January at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland," the court said. The justices are on a month-long recess but return for a closed door conference February 20. There is no word on whether Ginsburg will attend that meeting, among just the nine members of the court, to go over pending appeals. President Obama was hoping to speak with Ginsburg by phone later Friday, said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. Ginsburg underwent surgery for colorectal cancer in September 1999. Court sources said she continued to work on pending cases while in her hospital bed and her subsequent recovery. Less than a month later, she appeared in public to give a speech and said, "I am still mending but have progressed steadily." She never missed a day on the bench. The Brooklyn, New York, native has been on the federal bench since 1980, the past 15 on the high court, where she is the he only female justice.

Question: Who is expected to return to the bench by February 23?

Question: When was she last treated for colon cancer?

Question: What is Ruth Bader Ginsburg's current occupation?

Question: When was she last treated for cancer?

Question: What kind of cancer did she develop?

Question: When does Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg expect to return to the bench?

Question: What is Ruth Bader Ginsburg treated for?

Answer: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Answer: September 1999.

Answer: Justice

Answer: September 1999.

Answer: pancreatic

Answer: February 23,

Answer: pancreatic cancer

Summary:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg expects to return to the bench by February 23 .
The only woman on the Supreme Court is hospitalized with pancreatic cancer .
It is her second bout with cancer .
She was treated for colon cancer in 1999-2000 .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Kenneth Bacon, a former reporter and Pentagon spokesman who later served as a top advocate of displaced people all over the world, died Saturday, according to Refugees International. He was 64. Kenneth Bacon was "one of the great voices in humanitarian advocacy," says Joel Charny of Refugees International. Bacon had served as the president of Washington-based Refugees International since 2001, the group said in a statement Saturday. The former Wall Street Journal reporter died Saturday morning from an aggressive melanoma that spread to his brain, the statement said. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called Bacon, who was Pentagon spokesman during the Clinton administration, a "great humanitarian leader." "Most Americans remember Ken as the unflappable civilian voice of the Department of Defense, where he served with distinction as spokesperson for many years," Clinton said in a statement. "But for millions of the world's most vulnerable people -- refugees and other victims of conflict -- Ken was an invaluable source of hope, inspiration and support. Refugees International credited Bacon for doubling the group's size under his leadership and helping it get increased protection and assistance for displaced people in Sudan's Darfur region, Iraq, Pakistan and other troubled areas. In the last months of his life, Bacon shifted his focus toward the issue of climate displacement, the group said. "Ken would walk the corridors of power one day and then meet with refugees in the most remote areas of Darfur the next. His unique mixture of expertise in the media, military affairs, and U.S. government policy, added to his compassion for vulnerable refugees, made him one of the great voices in humanitarian advocacy," said Joel Charny, acting president of Refugees International. "Ken always saw the best in people. His ability to connect with nearly everyone he met made it possible for him to convince officials at the highest levels of government and the United Nations to make the necessary changes to save lives and protect people from harm." In 1994, Bacon became the Defense Department's assistant secretary of public affairs and Pentagon spokesman. He was known for his no-nonsense manner and his signature bow ties. "I first got to know Ken Bacon several years ago when he was the chief Pentagon spokesman. Ken did the job the way its supposed to be done: holding press conferences, answering questions, providing facts, information and context," said CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr. "I know he was often bemused to watch the new era of spin and message, since he so passionately believed that facts stand on their own merit. "Later, Ken became an extraordinary advocate for refugees and displaced persons around the world," she added. "I could ring him up to ask a question about any remote area of the world where people were suffering and he could explain with breadth and depth what was going on." Before working at the Defense Department, Bacon for more than 25 years served as a reporter and editor at the Wall Street Journal, where his assignments included the covering the Pentagon, the newspaper reported. "He came to the Journal in 1965 and scored a rare (for an intern) page-one story about an automated car-repair system that one overheated mechanic described as 'the greatest thing since girls,' " the newspaper said in a story posted on its Web site. He is survived by his wife, Darcy, two daughters, two grandchildren, his brother and his father. Refugees International said a memorial service would be held in September.

Question: What did he do before going to the Pentagon?

Question: what did bacon die of

Question: who was a reporter at the wall street journal

Question: What presidential administration was Bacon a spokesperson of?

Question: What did Bacon die from?

Question: Hw old was Bacon?

Question: Who died from an aggressive melanoma that spread to his brain?

Question: What did Bacon do before going to the Pentagon?

Answer: reporter and editor at the Wall Street Journal,

Answer: aggressive melanoma

Answer: Kenneth Bacon,

Answer: Clinton

Answer: an aggressive melanoma that spread to his brain,

Answer: 64.

Answer: Kenneth Bacon,

Answer: former reporter

Summary:
Bacon, 64, died from an aggressive melanoma that spread to his brain .
He was Pentagon spokesman during the Clinton administration .
Bacon also had been president of Refugees International since 2001 .
Before going to Pentagon, he was reporter and editor at Wall Street Journal .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Key members of Congress from both parties want NASA's internal watchdog fired, arguing he can't be trusted to oversee the $1 billion in additional money the space agency is getting under the Obama administration's economic stimulus package.

Lawmakers say NASA's inspector general cannot be trusted and must go.

Government reports dating back to 2006 have accused NASA Inspector General Robert "Moose" Cobb of ineffectiveness, of profanely berating employees and being too close to the agency's leadership. Calls for his ouster have intensified in the past month, since NASA is getting additional stimulus money for space exploration, research, and aeronautics.

"Apparently, Mr. Cobb thought he was supposed to be the lap dog, rather than the watchdog, of NASA," Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tennessee, told CNN.

Gordon, chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology, has asked President Obama to remove Cobb. In a letter co-authored by Rep. Brad Miller, D-North Carolina, who leads the House Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, the lawmakers argue that "NASA cannot afford another four years with an ineffective inspector general."  Watch NASA watchdog under fire »

"It's incredibly ironic for members of Congress who have scolded the inspector general for lousy oversight to dump a billion dollars into the agency," said Pete Sepp, vice president of the National Taxpayers Union, a nonprofit, nonpartisan watchdog group that monitors government spending. "The first thing you do when you're digging a hole is to stop digging. Congress doesn't seem to get that message."

Cobb declined two requests from CNN to respond to the complaints.

In December 2008, the Government Accountability Office released a report that criticized how Cobb was running the inspector general's office. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, "found that Mr. Cobb is one of the least productive IGs in the federal government," Gordon and Miller wrote.

"His monetary accomplishments reflect a return of just 36 cents for every dollar budgeted for his office. This compares with an average of $9.49 returned for every dollar spent on other IGs' offices. The main reason for this failure is that NASA's audit operation is not working."

Gordon told CNN that Cobb's "own peers said he wasn't doing his job, that he didn't understand the audit process and that he was not carrying out the investigation process. As a matter of fact, he was slowing it down, or even stopping it."

And Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, agreed that Cobb must be replaced.

"Inspectors general are the first line of defense against the waste of taxpayers' money," Grassley told CNN. "And, if he's not doing his job, and you stick another billion dollars into it, then you just know there's another billion dollars that there could be a lot of waste of it."

A 2006 investigation by a presidential integrity council found Cobb "engaged in abuse of authority" and had a "close relationship" with former NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe that "compromised" his independence. The two played golf together and took official trips together on NASA aircraft. Read investigative integrity report (Warning: Report contains explicit language)

The committee also found that Cobb "engaged in an abuse of authority" through his "habitual use of profanity," and recommended disciplinary action "up to and including removal," Gordon and Miller wrote.

Cobb defended himself at a 2007 congressional hearing, arguing that he had upheld his oath of office.

"At NASA, I have taken the responsibilities of office under the Inspector General Act seriously and without compromise to root out and prevent fraud, waste and abuse, and to promote the economy and efficiency of the agency," he said. "I've worked with NASA management in the manner contemplated by the Inspector General Act."

But former staffers told the committee that Cobb created a disturbing work environment.

"One of my early experiences with Mr. Cobb was so disturbing that I considered

Question: Who won't speak to CNN?

Question: What do they do at NASA?

Question: who declined two requests to speak to CNN?

Question: who says NASA watchdog can't be trusted?

Question: Who is Robert Cobb?

Question: Who can't be trusted?

Question: Who is too close to the agency?

Answer: Cobb

Answer: space exploration, research, and aeronautics.

Answer: Cobb

Answer: Key members of Congress from both parties

Answer: NASA Inspector General

Answer: NASA's inspector general

Answer: General Robert "Moose" Cobb

Summary:
Lawmakers say NASA watchdog can't be trusted to oversee $1B in stimulus funds .
Government reports say NASA inspector general is too closely tied to the agency .
IG Robert Cobb "thought he was supposed to be the lap dog," congressman says .
Cobb declined two requests to speak with CNN for this report .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Key members of Congress from both parties want NASA's internal watchdog fired, arguing he can't be trusted to oversee the $1 billion in additional money the space agency is getting under the Obama administration's economic stimulus package. Lawmakers say NASA's inspector general cannot be trusted and must go. Government reports dating back to 2006 have accused NASA Inspector General Robert "Moose" Cobb of ineffectiveness, of profanely berating employees and being too close to the agency's leadership. Calls for his ouster have intensified in the past month, since NASA is getting additional stimulus money for space exploration, research, and aeronautics. "Apparently, Mr. Cobb thought he was supposed to be the lap dog, rather than the watchdog, of NASA," Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tennessee, told CNN. Gordon, chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology, has asked President Obama to remove Cobb. In a letter co-authored by Rep. Brad Miller, D-North Carolina, who leads the House Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, the lawmakers argue that "NASA cannot afford another four years with an ineffective inspector general."  Watch NASA watchdog under fire » "It's incredibly ironic for members of Congress who have scolded the inspector general for lousy oversight to dump a billion dollars into the agency," said Pete Sepp, vice president of the National Taxpayers Union, a nonprofit, nonpartisan watchdog group that monitors government spending. "The first thing you do when you're digging a hole is to stop digging. Congress doesn't seem to get that message." Cobb declined two requests from CNN to respond to the complaints. In December 2008, the Government Accountability Office released a report that criticized how Cobb was running the inspector general's office. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, "found that Mr. Cobb is one of the least productive IGs in the federal government," Gordon and Miller wrote. "His monetary accomplishments reflect a return of just 36 cents for every dollar budgeted for his office. This compares with an average of $9.49 returned for every dollar spent on other IGs' offices. The main reason for this failure is that NASA's audit operation is not working." Gordon told CNN that Cobb's "own peers said he wasn't doing his job, that he didn't understand the audit process and that he was not carrying out the investigation process. As a matter of fact, he was slowing it down, or even stopping it." And Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, agreed that Cobb must be replaced. "Inspectors general are the first line of defense against the waste of taxpayers' money," Grassley told CNN. "And, if he's not doing his job, and you stick another billion dollars into it, then you just know there's another billion dollars that there could be a lot of waste of it." A 2006 investigation by a presidential integrity council found Cobb "engaged in abuse of authority" and had a "close relationship" with former NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe that "compromised" his independence. The two played golf together and took official trips together on NASA aircraft. Read investigative integrity report (Warning: Report contains explicit language) The committee also found that Cobb "engaged in an abuse of authority" through his "habitual use of profanity," and recommended disciplinary action "up to and including removal," Gordon and Miller wrote. Cobb defended himself at a 2007 congressional hearing, arguing that he had upheld his oath of office. "At NASA, I have taken the responsibilities of office under the Inspector General Act seriously and without compromise to root out and prevent fraud, waste and abuse, and to promote the economy and efficiency of the agency," he said. "I've worked with NASA management in the manner contemplated by the Inspector General Act." But former staffers told the committee that Cobb created a disturbing work environment. "One of my early experiences with Mr. Cobb was so disturbing that I considered

Question: What did Cobb decline?

Question: Who can't be trusted to oversee stimulus funds?

Question: What is the amount of stimulus funds?

Question: What is the sum of stimulus funds?

Question: Lawmakers say what about NASA watchdog?

Question: Who declined two requests to speak with CNN about the report?

Question: Who did Cobb decline to speak with?

Question: Who is the NASA inspector general?

Question: Government reports say what about NASA inspector?

Answer: two requests from CNN to respond to the complaints.

Answer: NASA's internal watchdog

Answer: $1 billion

Answer: $1 billion

Answer: inspector general cannot be trusted and must go.

Answer: Cobb

Answer: CNN

Answer: Robert "Moose" Cobb

Answer: ineffectiveness, of profanely berating employees and being too close to the agency's leadership.