WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court on Wednesday lifted sanctions placed on the Navy over its underwater sonar testing, a setback for environmental groups that claimed the warfare technology was harming whales and other marine mammals. An endangered blue whale surfaces off the coast of Southern California in July. At issue in the 5-4 ruling was whether the Navy's need to conduct exercises to protect the country from enemy submarines outweighed concerns raised by environmental groups. The case focused on whether the president had the power to issue executive waivers allowing such tests and whether federal judges can issue preliminary injunctions blocking them. The high court ultimately sided with claims of national security over environmental concerns. Those environmental interests, said Chief Justice John Roberts for the majority, "are plainly outweighed by the Navy's need to conduct realistic training exercises to ensure that it is able to neutralize the threat posed by enemy submarines." Roberts said a lower federal court "abused its discretion" by imposing a 2,200-yard perimeter for testing and ordering a shutdown of sonar use during surfacing exercises. But in dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg warned that the ecological damage was significant. "This likely harm cannot be lightly dismissed," she said, "even in the face of an alleged risk to the effectiveness of the Navy's 14 training exercises." Justices David Souter, Stephen Breyer and John Paul Stevens also questioned the Navy's arguments. The exercises have continued while the case was under appeal. Environmentalists had sued the Pentagon over the practice, and a federal judge ordered major changes to the Navy's annual offshore training exercises in March. President Bush had issued an emergency waiver to allow the exercises to go on without the filing of an environmental impact study, but the lower court ruling blocked the use of sonar. That federal judge, in ruling against the government last March, said it was "constitutionally suspect" for Bush to issue the national security exemption to allow skipping the impact study. Military officials argued that the restrictions could hamper readiness in time of war, because new sonar technology is needed to detect increasingly sophisticated enemy submarines. "This case was vital to our Navy and nation's security, and we are pleased with the Supreme Court's decision in this matter," Navy Secretary Donald Winter said. "We can now continue to train our sailors effectively, under realistic combat conditions." One of the environmental organizations that sued the Defense Department told the justices that the exercises had been planned in advance and that the Navy was required under law to conduct more extensive environmental tests than it had. The waters of southern California are home to dozens of species of whales, dolphins, seals and sea lions, nine of them federally listed as endangered or threatened. Federal courts have cited scientific studies and the Navy's own conclusions that high levels of sonar can cause hearing loss and disorientation in the animals. In February, the U.S. Navy demonstrated for CNN its onboard procedures for turning down mid-frequency sonar when whales come within 1,000 meters and shutting it off completely when they approach 200 meters. The sonar sounds like a "ping, ping" noise, and it can be reduced as necessary, officers said. But environmentalists say that the sonar can hurt whales much farther than 1,000 meters away and that the noise created by the sonar "was like having a jet engine in the Supreme Court multiplied 2,000 times, compensating for water," attorney Richard Kendall told the justices. Reacting to the ruling, Kendall said, "It is gratifying that the court did not accept the Navy's expansive claims of executive power and that two-thirds of the injunction remain in place." In 2000, 16 whales beached themselves in the Bahamas, and the Navy concluded that too many sonar ships had been operating in a narrow underwater channel. The service says it is funding $16 million in independent research to minimize sonar's effect on marine mammals.

Question: What does the Navy ruling allow

Question: Can sound waves permanently harm sea mammals?

Question: what was the outcome of the vote

Question: What are realistic conditions?

Answer: to conduct exercises to protect the country from enemy submarines outweighed concerns raised by environmental groups.

Answer: cause hearing loss and disorientation in the animals.

Answer: 5-4 ruling

Answer: combat conditions."

Summary:
NEW: Navy secretary says ruling allows sailors to train under "realistic" conditions .
By 5-4 vote, Supreme Court allows Navy exercises in whale habitat .
Sound waves can permanently harm sea mammals, environmentalists argue .
Fleet's safety and need to train trump concern for whales, chief justice writes .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court voiced deep free speech concerns Tuesday about a law designed to stop the sale and marketing of videos showing dog fights and other acts of animal cruelty. Selling depictions of animal cruelty like this amateur dogfighting video may be illegal under a 1999 statute. The justices heard an hour of lively debate about the scope and intent of the decade-old statute that supporters say has done much to stop the spread of profiting from the torture and abuse of animals. But media groups and the National Rifle Association were among those who say the law is overly broad. "It's not up to the government to decide what are people's worst instincts," said Justice Antonin Scalia. "One can contemplate a lot of other areas, where government could say: You are appealing to people's worst instincts, and, therefore, movies cannot be made" showing dramatized depictions of animals being abused, for example. "What about people who like to see human sacrifices?" asked Justice Samuel Alito, somewhat sarcastically. "Suppose that is legally taking place someplace in the world. I mean, people here would probably love to see it. Live, pay-per-view, you know, on the Human Sacrifice Channel. They have a point of view they want to express. That's okay?" He seemed to indicate strongly it was not, and that lawmakers would have discretion to block it. The specific case before the court dealt with tapes showing pit bull dogs attacking other animals and one another in staged confrontations. Watch an excerpt of the tapes » A federal appeals court had thrown out the conviction of Robert Stevens, a Pittsville, Virginia, man who sold videos through his "Dogs of Velvet and Steel" business. According to court records, undercover federal agents found he was advertising his tapes in "Sporting Dog Journal," an underground magazine on illegal dogfighting. Among the products Stevens advertised was "Catch Dogs," featuring pit bulls chasing wild boars on organized hunts and a "gruesome depiction of a pit bull attacking the lower jaw of a domestic farm pig," according to the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-based appeals court. Stevens was charged in 2004 with violating interstate commerce laws by selling depictions of animal cruelty. He was later sentenced to 37 months in prison, and promptly appealed. He argued his sentence was longer than the 14 months given professional football player Michael Vick, who ran an illegal dogfighting ring. It was the first prosecution in the United States to proceed to trial under the 1999 law. The divided appeals court concluded that when it came to the federal law in question, "research and empirical evidence in the record before us simply does not support the notion that banning depictions of animal cruelty is a necessary or even particularly effective means of prosecuting underlying acts of animal cruelty." Nearly every state and local jurisdiction have their own laws banning mistreatment of wild and domesticated animals. Several media organizations have come out in support of Stevens, worrying the federal law was too broad and could implicate reports about deer hunting, and depictions of bull-fighting in Ernest Hemingway novels. A number of justices too had concerns, raising a number of hypotheticals, a possible sign a majority of the court remains uncomfortable with allowing the law to be reinstated. "Why not do a simpler thing?" suggested Justice Stephen Breyer. "Rather than let the public guess as to what these words mean, ask Congress to write a statute that actually aims at those frightful things that it was trying to prohibit. Now, that can be done." "You have to look at the content to determine whether or not the speech is prohibited," said Chief Justice John Roberts. "How can you tell these aren't political videos? With organizations like PETA [People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals] and others, depictions of the same sort of animal cruelty that is used to generate support for efforts to prohibit it. Why aren't these videos the exact opposite of efforts to legalize it?" Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned the distinction between Stevens

Question: how long did the judges listen to the debate

Question: What will the statue help stop, according to supporters?

Question: when was the law passed?

Question: What is the age of the statute?

Question: What did the NRA say about the law?

Question: what do the media groups say about the law?

Answer: an hour

Answer: the sale and marketing of videos showing dog fights and other acts of animal cruelty.

Answer: 1999

Answer: decade-old

Answer: is overly broad.

Answer: overly broad.

Summary:
The justices heard an hour of debate about scope and intent of decade-old statute .
Statute supporters say it helps stop profiting from the torture and abuse of animals .
Media groups, National Rifle Association say the law is overly broad .
Case is first prosecution in the United States to go to trial under the 1999 law .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court will decide whether it is cruel and unusual punishment for young criminal offenders to be sentenced to life in prison with parole. Joe Sullivan, now 33, was convicted of burglary and rape when he was 13. He is serving life without parole. The justices agreed without comment Monday to accept appeals from two Florida inmates convicted as teenagers of criminal offenses. Oral arguments will be heard in the fall. One of the men is Joe Sullivan, 33, serving a life term without the possibility of parole in a Florida prison while confined to a wheelchair. He was sentenced for a rape committed when he was 13. The man's lawyers say he is one of only two people his age in the world who was tried as an adult and sentenced to "die in prison" for a non-homicide. The justices also accepted a case dealing with Terrance Graham, who was 17 when he took part in a violent home-invasion robbery while on parole for another felony. Outside a death-penalty context, the high court has offered little recent guidance on how to treat the youngest of underage criminal defendants. The appellate record for rapists younger than 15 is almost nonexistent, legal experts say. Child legal advocates say many states lack adequate resources to handle young inmates given long sentences, including a lack of proper jailhouse counseling. Few studies have been conducted on the psychological effects of young defendants facing life in prison at such a young age, said the Equal Justice Institute, which is representing Sullivan's high court case. "We have created a forgotten population with a lot of needs," said Bryan Stevenson, Sullivan's lawyer. The crime happened in 1989, when, Sullivan admitted, he and two friends ransacked a home on Seabrook Street in West Pensacola. But he denied the prosecutor's claim that he returned with a knife and sexually assaulted the 72-year-old female homeowner. An older co-defendant claimed that Sullivan was the rapist. After a daylong trial, Escambia County Circuit Judge Nicholas Geeker sentenced Sullivan to life without parole. "I am going to try to send him away for as long as I can. He is beyond help," the judge said. "The juvenile system has been utterly incapable of doing anything with Mr. Sullivan." Sullivan, who had a lengthy juvenile record, continues to deny that he committed the attack. At the time, state prosecutor Larry Kaden -- who retired this year -- said, "It was a brutal crime, and he had an extensive record. This was a bad, bad crime." The Florida attorney general's office told the high court that prosecutors should have the discretion they have long been given to decide how harshly young criminals should be prosecuted. Sexual battery remains a crime punishable by life imprisonment in Florida. A study by the nonprofit Equal Justice Initiative found eight prisoners serving life terms for crimes committed at age 13, all in the United States. Among them is another Florida inmate, Ian Manuel, who was 13 when convicted of attempted murder and robbery in 1990. The Justice Department reports that no 13-year-old has been given life without parole for a non-homicide in a decade. And although about a thousand people under 15 are arrested for rape every year, none has been given life without parole since Sullivan. Only a handful of states -- including Alaska, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico and Oregon -- prohibit sentencing minors to life without a chance for parole, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The Equal Justice Initiative says 19 states have laws allowing the possibility of life without parole for those younger than 14. In 2005, the Supreme Court banned the death penalty for underage killers. The justices cited evolving "national standards" as a reason to ban such executions. Sullivan is in deteriorating health from multiple sclerosis and is confined to "close management" for dangerous or trouble-prone inmates, state corrections officials say. His lawyers admit that he has had more than a 100 incidents of fighting and threatening inmates and guards, plus

Question: When were teens convicted?

Question: Who will justices hear appeals from?

Question: Joe Sullivan committed his crime at age?

Question: What do attorneys say about life without parole?

Question: Where is florida?

Question: At what age was Joe Sullivan when he committed his crime?

Answer: 1990.

Answer: two Florida inmates convicted as teenagers of criminal offenses.

Answer: 13.

Answer: many states lack adequate resources to handle young inmates given long sentences, including a lack of proper jailhouse counseling. Few studies have been conducted on the psychological effects of young defendants facing

Answer: United States.

Answer: 13.

Summary:
Justices will hear appeals of two Florida inmates sentenced as teens .
Joe Sullivan committed his crime at age 13; Terrance Graham was 17 .
Attorneys say life without parole is too harsh a punishment for young offenders .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Taliban in Afghanistan -- whose government was toppled by U.S.-led forces after the September 11 attacks in 2001 -- has strengthened its military and technical capabilities even while suffering heavy combat losses, says a State Department report released Wednesday. Afghan policemen stand Wednesday outside the ruins of a house destroyed during clashes with Taliban insurgents. "The Taliban-led insurgency remained a capable, determined, and resilient threat to stability and to the expansion of government authority, particularly in the Pashtun south and east," according to the "Country Reports on Terrorism 2007." The Taliban's information operations have become "increasingly aggressive and sophisticated," and their ability to obtain al Qaeda support and recruit soldiers from the Taliban base of rural Pashtuns is "undiminished," the report says. But new civilian-military counterinsurgency approaches in the east, particularly Nangarhar, have begun to yield successes, the report says. The Taliban is funding its terror activities with money from supporters in neighboring Pakistan and from narcotics trafficking and kidnappings. Kidnappings of foreigners have increased, the report says. The group also has increased its use of improvised explosive devices, and suicide bombings have become more frequent and more deadly, it says. Quoting U.N.-compiled figures, the State Department said terrorists launched about 140 suicide-bomb attacks in 2007. The number of terror attacks in Afghanistan increased from 969 in 2006 to 1,127 last year, and the number of people killed, injured or kidnapped as the result of terrorism rose from 3,557 in 2006 to 4,673 in 2007, the report says. In the face of attacks by the Taliban and related groups on coalition forces and others, Afghanistan has struggled to build a stable, democratic government. However, it has taken steps to build strong relationships with neighboring Pakistan and address problems such as poverty that help fuel terrorism, the report says. The Program for Strengthening Peace and Reconciliation has persuaded more than 5,000 Taliban members and other insurgents to stop their lives of violence, it says. The shifting situation in Afghanistan prompted the top U.S. military officer to say in early April that he is "deeply concerned" about the situation there, and that maintaining troops in Iraq is harming overall U.S. military capabilities. "The Taliban is growing bolder, suicide attacks are on the rise, and so is the trade in illegal narcotics," said Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the United States needs more troops to hold areas of southern Afghanistan -- the region of highest concern -- and to train local army and police personnel. The two men testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The United States recently sent an additional 3,500 troops to Afghanistan, but commanders in the region would like 10,000 to 12,000 more, Gates said. He said he doubted NATO would make up the difference. Although 25 NATO allies and 13 other countries have contributed forces, the bulk of the recent fighting in Afghanistan has been done by U.S., Canadian, British and Dutch troops. Canadian troops are based in the southern province of Kandahar, once a Taliban stronghold. E-mail to a friend

Question: What increased from 2006 to last year?

Question: Where does funding come from?

Question: What is stronger?

Question: What does the State Department report?

Question: Who funds narcotics trafficking?

Question: What did the number of terrorist attacks increase to last year?

Question: Who is called a determined threat to Afghan stability?

Question: Where does the funding com from?

Question: What does the Taliban threaten?

Answer: number of terror attacks in Afghanistan

Answer: supporters in neighboring Pakistan and

Answer: military and technical capabilities

Answer: has strengthened its military and technical capabilities

Answer: Taliban

Answer: 1,127

Answer: "The Taliban-led insurgency

Answer: supporters in neighboring Pakistan

Answer: stability and to the expansion of government authority,

Summary:
State Department report: Taliban military, technical capabilities stronger .
Taliban called a determined threat to Afghan stability .
Funding comes from Pakistan supporters, narcotics trafficking, abductions .
Number of terror attacks increased from 969 in 2006 to 1,127 last year .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Transportation Security Administration is looking into a report that Louisiana Sen. David Vitter had an angry altercation with an airline worker at Washington Dulles International Airport last week.

Louisiana Sen. David Vitter reportedly went into a "tirade" with a Washington Dulles International Airport worker.

The agency is not doing a formal investigation, TSA spokesman Sterling Payne told CNN, but it is gathering information to determine if one is needed.

"We are looking into the reported incident," Payne said.

An aide to Vitter said Friday morning the Republican senator had not been contacted by the TSA and maintains the media account of the incident is overblown.

Roll Call had a report in its gossip column earlier this week, based on an unnamed eyewitness, that Vitter arrived at the airport 20 minutes before his United Airlines flight was scheduled to depart.

The door to the boarding bridge was already closed, but Vitter opened it anyway, triggering an alarm. The paper said an airline worker warned him not to enter the walkway, which led to a "tirade" by Vitter who "remained defiant."

The source told Roll Call the senator left the area before airport police arrived.

Vitter has refused to answer reporters' questions about the incident, but in a statement Wednesday described his actions more innocently and the Roll Call report "silly."

"After being delayed on the Senate floor ensuring a vote on my anti-pay raise amendment and in a rush to make my flight home for town hall meetings the next day, I accidentally went through the wrong door at the gate," he said. "I did have a conversation with an airline employee, but it was certainly not like this silly gossip column made it out to be."

Vitter has been the subject of unwelcome headlines before. In 2007, he was linked to a Washington, D.C., prostitution ring. He denied allegations he had relationships with prostitutes, but apologized for "a very serious sin."

Joel DiGrado, Vitter's spokesman, said the congressman would not comment further on the issue.

CNN's Mike Ahlers contributed to this report.

Question: Who does the incident involve?

Question: Who is gathering information?

Question: What does Vitter say about it?

Question: What did Vitter have with a worker?

Question: What is overblown?

Question: What does TSA gather?

Question: Which Louisiana Sen. was involved?

Question: Who did the reportedly have an angry confrontation with?

Answer: Sen. David Vitter had an angry altercation with an airline worker

Answer: TSA

Answer: has refused to answer reporters' questions

Answer: had an angry altercation

Answer: the media account of the incident

Answer: information

Answer: David Vitter

Answer: Washington Dulles International Airport worker.

Summary:
TSA gathers information about alleged incident involving Louisiana Sen. David Vitter .
Vitter reportedly had angry confrontation with airport worker .
Vitter says media account of incident is overblown .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Air Force is grounding more than 100 planes used to support ground troops in Iraq and Afghanistan because of fatigue cracks in the wings, Air Force officials said Friday.

Aircraft like this A-10 Warthog provide close support to ground troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The officials said 127 A-10 Thunderbolt IIs, including some used in the United States, will be grounded until they are each inspected for the cracks.

"The inspections are a necessary step in addressing the risk associated with A-10 wing cracking, specifically with thin-skin wings. This risk is of great concern to the Air Force and is representative of a systemic problem for our aging Air Force fleet," the Air Force said.

The A-10 Thunderbolt II, nicknamed the "Warthog" because of its unique un-aerodynamic look, is one of the Air Force's older aircraft, having first been delivered to the service in 1975. The average age of the A-10 fleet is now 28 years, but the entire Air Force fleet has an average age of 25 years, according to Air Force statistics.

The Air Force has more than 400 A-10s in its fleet. The cracks in the older A-10 A-models and A-10 C-models were discovered at Hill Air Force Base in Utah during routine maintenance.

No A-10 has had an accident because of the cracks just discovered, according to Air Force officials.

The inspection of the 127 planes will give priority to the planes in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of battle, officials said.

The plane was designed as a tank killer, with a front-mounted Gatling gun that fires 30-mm armor-piercing ammunition capable of destroying a tank.

The planes are now primarily used in Iraq and Afghanistan to protect ground troops in close combat situations, flying low and slow and with the ability to target individuals hidden on mountainsides or rooftops.

Last year, the Air Force grounded hundreds of F-15 fighter jets after one fell apart during a training mission.

The culprit was a fatigued longeron, a part that holds the fuselage together. Numerous F-15s flying in Iraq and Afghanistan also were grounded until they were inspected, forcing the service to fly other aircraft in their place. The Navy was also asked to help cover the F-15 missions during the weeks they were grounded.

Question: What is the reasoning behind the grounding?

Question: what caused the cracks

Question: What is the normal age for the plane?

Question: What countries were the planes used in?

Question: where were the planes used

Question: what will be grounded?

Question: what are the planes?

Answer: fatigue cracks in the wings,

Answer: fatigue

Answer: 28 years,

Answer: Iraq

Answer: Iraq and Afghanistan

Answer: 127 A-10 Thunderbolt IIs,

Answer: A-10 Thunderbolt IIs,

Summary:
127 A-10 Thunderbolt IIs will be grounded because of fatigue cracks in wings .
A-10s first delivered to Air Force in 1975; average age is 28 years .
None of the cracks has been attributed to accidents .
Planes used in Iraq, Afghanistan to protect ground troops in close combat situations .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Wednesday that laboratory tests on popular smoking devices known as electronic cigarettes have found they contain carcinogens and other toxic chemicals dangerous to humans. E-cigarettes are battery-operated and contain cartridges filled with nicotine and other chemicals. Known as "e-cigarettes," the devices are battery-operated and contain cartridges filled with nicotine and other chemicals, spiced with flavors such as chocolate, cola or bubble gum. While manufacturers tout e-cigarettes as a "healthy way" to smoke, federal health officials say the devices turn nicotine, which is highly addictive, and other chemicals into a vapor that is inhaled by the user. "The FDA is concerned about the safety of these products and how they are marketed to the public," said Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, commissioner of the FDA. CNN contacted Florida-based Smoking Everywhere, one of the largest manufacturers of e-cigarettes, after the FDA announcement, and a spokeswoman said the company had no comment. Because e-cigarettes have not been submitted to the FDA for evaluation or approval, the agency had no way of knowing the levels of nicotine or the amounts or kinds of other chemicals that the various brands of these products deliver to the user. That is why the FDA began to test them. The FDA's Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis analyzed the ingredients in a small sample of cartridges from two leading brands of e-cigarettes. In releasing its information, the FDA did not identify the two companies, but said in one sample, diethylene glycol -- a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans -- was detected. Other samples detected carcinogens that are dangerous to those who smoke them, the FDA said. The FDA has been examining and seizing shipments of non-U.S.-made e-cigarettes at the U.S. border since summer 2008. To date, 50 shipments have been stopped. The products examined thus far meet the definition of a combination drug-device product under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. "We know very little about these devices, said Dr. Jonathan Samet, director of the Institute for Global Health at the University of Southern California, "but to say they are healthy -- that's highly doubtful." Samet and other health experts attended the FDA announcement on its findings. Dr. Jonathan Winickoff, chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics Tobacco Consortium, said parents need to be aware of e-cigarettes. "It is very important that parents let their children know these are not safe and to make recommendations, or even enforce rules that they not be used," he said. "Children who use these products may also be using other tobacco products," said Dr. Matthew McKenna, director of the Office of Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "It's a good idea to make sure the child is aware of the dangers of tobacco in products in general." The FDA has been challenged regarding its jurisdiction over certain e-cigarettes in a case pending in federal court. The FDA suggested health care professionals and consumers report serious side effects or product quality problems with the use of e-cigarettes to the FDA's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting Program either online, by regular mail, fax or phone. CNN's Valerie Willingham contributed to this report.

Question: What did the FDA lab test find on e-cigarettes?

Question: Are e-cigarettes safe?

Question: What is battery operated and contains cartridges filled with nicotine and chemicals?

Question: They turn nicotine, chemicals into?

Answer: they contain carcinogens and other toxic chemicals dangerous to humans.

Answer: contain carcinogens and other toxic chemicals dangerous to humans.

Answer: E-cigarettes

Answer: a vapor

Summary:
FDA lab tests on e-cigarettes find carcinogens and other toxic chemicals .
E-cigarettes are battery operated, contain cartridges filled with nicotine, chemicals .
They turn nicotine, chemicals into a vapor that is inhaled by the user .
Product had not been submitted to the FDA for evaluation or approval .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a resolution Friday that says it supports "all Iranians who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law." Throngs in Tehran cheer Thursday for defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Moussavi, center. The resolution was approved by 405 lawmakers, while one -- Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas -- voted against it. Two others, Reps. Brad Ellsworth, D-Indiana, and Dave Loebsack, D-Iowa, voted "present." In a statement on his Web site, Paul said he voted against the measure because he is "always very cautious about 'condemning' the actions of governments overseas." "I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little," said Paul, who attracted attention last year during his unsuccessful bid for the Republican presidential nomination. "And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran." The resolution, which also "condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators," was sponsored by Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman, D-California, and two Republicans, Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. Speaking shortly after the resolution passed, Pence called it a message from Americans to the Iranian people. "As Americans have done throughout our history, this Congress today, on behalf of the American people, has spoken a word of heartfelt support to all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law," he said. He urged U.S. senators to support the identical resolution that Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, introduced Friday. Both Pence and McCain have been outspoken in their criticism of President Obama's response to massive rallies in Iran against the results of last week's presidential election.  Watch as Obama walks a fine line » Supporters of Iranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Moussavi have taken to the streets this week calling for a new election after the results of the June 12 vote showed an overwhelming victory for hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The rallies also have denounced the Iranian government's crackdown on the protests in which at least eight people have died. Obama has said he is "deeply troubled" by the violence, but he has avoided siding with Ahmadinejad's opponents, telling reporters, "It is up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran's leaders will be." "It's not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling, the U.S. president meddling in Iranian elections," Obama said this week. But several Republicans, particularly McCain -- Obama's opponent in last year's presidential race -- have criticized the administration's position. McCain introduced a resolution on the Senate floor Friday morning that he said would be "an expression of support by the government and the people of the United States of America" for those protesting the election results. "It is unfortunate in a way that this resolution is required since the administration does not want to 'meddle' and has refused, the president has refused to speak out in support of these brave Iranian citizens, most of them young, who are risking their very lives to protest what was clearly an unfair and corrupt election," McCain told his fellow senators.  Watch what else McCain said about Obama » The resolution passed Friday states that the House: On Thursday, Cantor joined the critics of the White House, saying the United States has a "moral responsibility" to condemn attacks on protesters. "The administration's position that what's going on in Iran is a 'vigorous debate' is absurd," he said. "People are being brutalized and murdered by the regime in Tehran. We have no idea exactly how many have died or have been seriously injured since the regime has restricted journalists. In no way do these actions constitute a 'vigorous debate.' " Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House

Question: What is John McCain's job?

Question: Who offered a similar resolution in the Senate?

Question: What did McCain criticize?

Question: What was the house vote count?

Question: What did President Obama warn against?

Question: Who offered the resolution in the Senate?

Question: Who said that, we know very little about what is happening in Iran?

Answer: Sen.

Answer: Sen. John McCain,

Answer: President Obama's response to massive rallies in Iran

Answer: 405

Answer: meddling in Iranian elections,"

Answer: The U.S. House of Representatives

Answer: Rep. Ron Paul,

Summary:
NEW: Lone dissenter: "We know very little ... about what is happening in Iran"
House votes 405-1 for resolution supporting democracy in Iran .
Republican Sen. John McCain offers similar resolution in Senate .
McCain, other Republicans criticize President Obama's warning against "meddling"


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Marine commander on Wednesday warned of a "growing" insurgent threat in Afghanistan, but he said forces would have to be cut in Iraq to send more Marines to Afghanistan. Marines could be pulled from Iraq's Anbar province, Gen. James Conway said Wednesday. "To do more in Afghanistan, our Marines have got to see relief elsewhere," said Gen. James Conway in a briefing for Pentagon reporters. Conway said the Corps' two regimental combat teams -- about 10,000 Marines -- in Iraq's Anbar province could be removed as there are only two or three insurgent attacks a day in what was once the hotbed of the Iraqi insurgency. The U.S.-led coalition is scheduled to hand over security control in Anbar to Iraqi troops next week. Despite the progress, Conway said, he doesn't expect any decisions on troop withdrawals until Gen. David Petraeus -- the head of the U.S. military in Iraq -- makes his recommendations on troop deployment in Iraq to President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert Gates. There are more than 3,000 Marines in Afghanistan, and Conway said that the Marine Corps would be willing to help bolster the fight against the Taliban in that country. "I think that a battalion of Marines in Afghanistan count for more than a battalion of Marines in Iraq, if you will, just in terms of the impact that they can have," he said.

Question: Where is Anbar Province?

Question: What did the General say?

Question: Where could the Marines have a greater effect?

Question: What area did Conway claim should be focused on?

Question: Where could the Marines leave?

Question: What type of ground troops are mentioned here?

Question: How many attacks a day are there in Anbar?

Question: What is James Conway's rank?

Question: How many attacks are taking place in Anbar?

Question: What did Gen. James Conway say about attacks?

Question: Who would have a greater effect in Afghanistan?

Answer: Iraq's

Answer: "To do more in Afghanistan, our Marines have got to see relief elsewhere,"

Answer: Afghanistan,

Answer: Afghanistan,

Answer: Iraq's Anbar province,

Answer: Marines

Answer: two or three

Answer: Gen.

Answer: two or three

Answer: forces would have to be cut in Iraq to send more Marines to Afghanistan.

Answer: a battalion of Marines

Summary:
Marines in Iraq's once-volatile Anbar province could leave, general says .
Anbar attacks down to a few a day, Gen. James Conway says .
Marines could have greater effect in Afghanistan, Conway says .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Navy has moved the guided-missile destroyer USS Cole and other ships to the eastern Mediterranean Sea off Lebanon, Pentagon officials said Thursday. A file image of the USS Cole, which the U.S. Navy moved to the Mediterranean Sea off Lebanon. The deployment comes amid a political standoff over Lebanon's presidency, but the Navy would not say whether the events are linked. "It's a group of ships that will operate in the vicinity for a while and as the ships in our Navy do, the presence is important," Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday. "It isn't meant to send any stronger signal than that," he said. "But it does signal that we're engaged and we are going to be in the vicinity, and that's a very important part of the world." The Cole was badly damaged by an al Qaeda bombing during a port call in Yemen in 2000, killing 17 sailors. It returned to service in 2002. The destroyer and two support ships are close to Lebanon but out of visual range of the coast, Pentagon officials said. Another six vessels, led by the amphibious assault ship USS Nassau, are close to Italy and steaming toward the other three, the officials said. Mullen would not say whether the deployment has anything to do with the upcoming Lebanese parliamentary vote on a new president, which was postponed for a 15th time earlier this week. But he said the vote was "important," and Washington was waiting for it to take place. And a Bush administration official told CNN the decision to move ships to the region was a message to neighboringSyria that "the U.S. is concerned about the situation in Lebanon, and we want to see the situation resolved." "We are sending a clear message for the need for stability," said the official, who was not authorized to speak for publication. The ships "should be there a while," the official added. Lebanon's pro-Western majority in parliament and the pro-Syrian opposition have battled for power over the last three years. The country has been without a president since November, when pro-Syrian leader Emile Lahoud's term expired and parliament was unable to agree on a replacement. Despite general agreement among the factions to award the post to army chief Gen. Michel Suleiman, disagreements over how to share power in a future Cabinet have kept the issue from coming up for a vote. Parliament speaker Nabih Berri's office announced Tuesday that the next planned session has been pushed back to March 11. Berri's office said the Arab League needed more time to break the deadlock. Lebanon has been wracked by a sometimes-violent power struggle since the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, whose supporters blamed Damascus for his killing. The resulting outcry eventually drove Syrian forces out of Lebanon, where they had been stationed since the 1970s. E-mail to a friend CNN Correspondent Zain Verjee contributed to this report.

Question: Who do the majority in parliament struggle with?

Question: The presence is important," says chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff

Question: Is Joint chiefs of Staff chairman?

Question: What did the US Navy do?

Question: Which Country's Navy?

Question: Is the presence important?

Answer: pro-Syrian opposition

Answer: Mike Mullen,

Answer: Adm. Mike Mullen,

Answer: moved the guided-missile destroyer USS Cole and other ships to

Answer: The U.S.

Answer: "We are sending a clear message for the need for stability,"

Summary:
U.S. Navy makes move amid a political standoff over Lebanon's presidency .
The presence is important," says chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff .
Lebanon's pro-Western majority in parliament struggles with pro-Syrian opposition .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Navy is having hundreds of its older F/A-18 fighter jets inspected, including some flying operations over Afghanistan, for cracks in part of a wing assembly, officials said Friday. Inspectors looking at F/A-18 fighter jets have found 15 with stress crack problems on the wings. Some 636 F/A-18 A through D model Hornets in both the Navy and the Marine Corps are being inspected for stress cracks on a hinge connecting the aileron to the flaps on the back side of the wings, according to Navy spokesmen. Inspectors started looking at the planes Thursday and have found 15 aircrafts with the problem. A panel on the wing can be swapped out with a new one to get rid of the problem. The Navy is still looking at the hinge in question to see whether the problem is severe enough to ground the Hornets and come up for a permanent fix for the hinge. Navy officials said there are no immediate plans to ground the 636 planes. This month, a post-flight inspection of one F/A-18 found a crack, and it was determined to be systemic enough to warrant an inspection of the older F/A-18s, according to Navy officials. The Navy also flies the Super Hornet, a newer version of the F/A-18. That plane is not part of this inspection. Navy flight operations around the world will not be interrupted because of the inspections, officials said.

Question: What model Hornets are being inspected for stress cracks?

Question: How many planes were discovered to have a problem?

Question: What did  Navy officials say about the plans for the planes?

Question: Who said there are no immediate plans to ground the planes?

Question: When did inspectors begin to look at the planes?

Question: What are Hornets being inspected for?

Question: Did Air Force officials also plan to ground planes?

Question: What did Navy officials say?

Question: How many have been found with problems?

Question: How many models have been found with problems?

Answer: F/A-18.

Answer: 15

Answer: no immediate

Answer: Navy officials

Answer: Thursday

Answer: stress cracks

Answer: the 636

Answer: said there are no immediate plans to ground the 636 planes.

Answer: 15

Answer: 15

Summary:
636 F/A-18 A through D model Hornets being inspected for stress crack .
Inspectors started looking at planes Thursday and have found 15 with problem .
Navy officials said there are no immediate plans to ground the planes .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Navy released nine of the 16 suspected pirates it was holding on a ship for the last few weeks, according to defense officials. The U.S. Navy apprehends suspected pirates February 12 in the Gulf of Arden. The pirates were released because the Navy did not have enough evidence to hand them over to Kenya for prosecution in court, in accordance with a recent agreement between the United States and Kenya, the officials explained. The nine were brought into Somali waters and then handed over to the Puntland coast guard. Puntland is the self-proclaimed Somali state that includes the point of the horn of Africa. The suspected pirates were detained by the Navy after the captain of the Indian-flagged ship Premdivya broadcast a distress call to all ships in the area that it had come under attack by a small boat. The Navy saw a small boat meeting the description given by the Premdivya, and the occupants were detained and moved to the nearby USS Vella Gulf, where they were held.

Question: The Navy lacked what to hand over suspects to Kenya?

Question: What happened to the suspected pirates?

Question: How many people were brought into Somali waters?

Question: What did the navy not have?

Question: Who were brought into Somali waters?

Question: What didn't the Navy have?

Question: How many people were brought into Somali waters and handed to the Coast Guard?

Answer: evidence

Answer: were released because the Navy did not have enough evidence

Answer: nine

Answer: enough evidence to hand them over to Kenya for prosecution in court,

Answer: suspected pirates

Answer: enough evidence to hand them over to Kenya for prosecution in court,

Answer: nine

Summary:
Navy didn't have evidence to hand suspected pirates to Kenya for prosecution .
Nine people were brought into Somali waters, handed to coast guard .
Suspected pirates were detained after a captain broadcast a distress call .
Captain said he was under attack by pirates in small boat .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Senate was called to order for 11 seconds on Wednesday as the last political scuffle of the year between the White House and the Democratic-led Congress played out. Democratic senators will hold short "pro forma" sessions over the holiday break to prevent recess appointments. Nearly all the senators left the Capitol for the Christmas holiday last week, but Democrats are keeping the Senate in session to block President Bush from making any recess appointments -- a constitutional mechanism that allows the president, during congressional recesses, to fill top government posts for up to one year without Senate confirmation. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia, opened and then immediately gaveled the Senate session to a close. He spent 57 seconds in the chamber. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, announced December 19 that he would keep the Senate open with a series of "pro forma" sessions through mid-January. Talks had just broken down with the White House on a deal that would have allowed the president to make dozens of those appointments if he agreed not to appoint one controversial official, Steven Bradbury, as the permanent head of the influential Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department. Bush declined to accept the Democrats' offer, and Reid refused to approve Bradbury because of concerns about his involvement in crafting legal opinions for the administration on interrogation techniques of terrorism suspects. Similar sessions were conducted over the Thanksgiving recess. Webb also did the duty Friday, but he won't be the only senator tasked with presiding over the shortened sessions. Other Democrats -- including Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Chuck Schumer of New York -- will share the duty.  E-mail to a friend CNN's Ted Barrett and Vandana Kilaru contributed to this report

Question: What does the move prevent?

Question: What does prevent President Bush from doing?

Question: Sessions usually under one minute long

Question: What sessions will democratic senators hold over the holidays?

Question: Who is meeting?

Question: Who will hold short "pro forma" sessions over the holiday break?

Question: What did Bush refuse to do after Democratic offer?

Question: Who refused to withdraw one controversial nominee ?

Answer: recess appointments.

Answer: recess appointments.

Answer: "pro forma"

Answer: short "pro forma"

Answer: The U.S. Senate

Answer: Democratic senators

Answer: accept the Democrats'

Answer: Reid

Summary:
Democratic senators will hold short "pro forma" sessions over the holiday break .
Sessions usually under one minute long .
Move prevents President Bush from making recess appointments .
Bush refused to withdraw one controversial nominee after Democratic offer .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court delayed a decision on whether to accept an appeal from a Georgia death row inmate who has gained international support for his claims of innocence in the the murder of a Savannah police officer two decades ago. Troy Davis' case has earned the support of leaders including the pope and former President Jimmy Carter. The justices were scheduled to announce Monday whether they would take the case of Troy Davis, but no order was released. The court is expected to take up the matter again in September. Last fall, the Supreme Court granted Davis a stay of execution two hours before he was to be put to death. A month later, the justices reversed course and allowed the capital punishment to proceed, but a federal appeals court issued another stay. The high court's latest delay means Davis will continue to sit on death row.  Watch a report on Davis' long fight » His supporters Monday delivered about 60,000 signatures in petitions to Chatham County, Georgia, District Attorney Larry Chisolm, calling for a new trial. "This delay is an indication that the Supreme Court is concerned by the gravity of Troy Davis' innocence claims," said Laura Moye, director of Amnesty International USA's Death Penalty Abolition Campaign. "We will continue to call on all authorities, including the Supreme Court, to finally hear the evidence that has motivated hundreds of thousands of people worldwide to raise their voices and demand justice." Davis has always maintained his innocence in the 1989 killing of Officer Mark MacPhail. Witnesses claimed Davis, then 19, and two others were harassing a homeless man in a Burger King restaurant parking lot when the off-duty officer arrived to help the man. Witnesses testified at trial that Davis then shot MacPhail twice and fled. But since his 1991 conviction, seven of the nine witnesses against him have recanted their testimony. No physical evidence was presented linking Davis to the killing of the police officer. The Georgia Pardons and Parole Board last year held closed-door hearings and reinterviewed Davis and the witnesses. The panel decided against clemency. MacPhail's mother, Annaliese, told CNN at the time, "This is what we were hoping for, and I hope pretty soon that we will have some peace and start our life, especially my grandchildren -- my grandson and granddaughter. It has overshadowed their lives." After the justices in October refused to grant a stay of execution, Davis' sister, Martina Correia, told CNN she was "disgusted" by the decision. "It doesn't make any sense," she said. "We are praying for a miracle or some kind of intervention. We will regroup and fight. We will never stop fighting. We just can't be discouraged. The fight is not over 'til it's over." Ten days after the high court refused last October to intervene, a federal appeals court in Georgia granted a temporary stay of execution. Since then, further appeals by Davis' legal team have dragged on for eight months. Prominent figures ranging from the pope to the musical group Indigo Girls have asked Georgia to grant Davis a new trial. Other supporters include celebrities Susan Sarandon and Harry Belafonte; world leaders such as former President Jimmy Carter and former Archbishop Desmond Tutu of Cape Town, South Africa; and former and current U.S. lawmakers Bob Barr, Carol Moseley Braun and John Lewis.

Question:
Who was the officer murdered?
Did the Court hear the davis appeal?
Where is Davis on death row?

Answer: Mark MacPhail.

Answer: delayed a decision on whether to accept an

Answer: Georgia

Summary:
Supreme Court ends session without hearing Troy Davis' appeal .
Davis is on Georgia's death row; says he's innocent .
Davis was convicted in 1991 of murdering of off-duty Savannah police officer .
Seven of the nine witnesses against Davis have recanted .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court's only black justice was the target of a racially motivated threat by an Ohio man who has been indicted in Cleveland, Justice Department officials announced Wednesday. Racially motivated threats were made against Justice Clarence Thomas, according to a federal indictment. An eight-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury charges David Tuason of Pepper Pike, Ohio, with making multiple threats against Justice Clarence Thomas and with threatening to blow up the Supreme Court building. Tuason had made the threats in e-mails and mailed letters to the Supreme Court, as well as to Thomas personally, according to a source close to the case. Tuason "engaged in an elaborate scheme of sending racially motivated threatening communications ... intended to threaten and intimidate with bodily injury African-American males known to affiliate with white females," said U.S. Attorney Frank Filiuzzi Wednesday in Cleveland. "The indictment alleges that an associate justice of the Supreme Court, athletes, and entertainers received threatening communications," Filiuzzi said. Thomas's wife is white. "The indictment also alleges that at times, children of mixed racial parents were also targeted," the prosecutor said. The indictment says that "Tuason, at times, threatened to blow up the facility or building in which the targeted victim was located." If Tuason is found guilty, he faces up to 10 years in prison for the count targeting Thomas and five years imprisonment for each of the other counts. E-mail to a friend CNN's Bill Mears contributed to this report.

Question: What type of threats did Thomas receive?

Question: What happened to Clarence Thomas?

Question: Tuason threatened to blow up what building?

Question: Children of what lineage also received threats?

Question: Who threatened to blow up the Supreme Court?

Question: Who received racially motivated threats?

Question: Which children received threats?

Question: What did Tuason do?

Question: Who threatened to blow up a Supreme Court building?

Answer: Racially motivated

Answer: was the target of a racially motivated

Answer: Supreme Court

Answer: of mixed racial parents

Answer: David Tuason

Answer: Justice Clarence Thomas,

Answer: mixed racial parents

Answer: had made the threats in e-mails and mailed letters to the Supreme Court, as well as to Thomas personally,

Answer: David Tuason

Summary:
Justice Clarence Thomas received racially motivated threats, indictment says .
David Tuason also threatened to blow up Supreme Court building, indictment says .
Indictment: Tuason threatened black males known to affiliate with white females .
Children of mixed-race parents also received threats .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Treasury Department on Tuesday froze the U.S. assets of eight members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, which it has deemed a narco-terrorist organization. The Treasury's action, termed a "designation," also prohibited Americans from conducting business with FARC. "Today's designation exposes eight 'International Commission members' of the FARC," said Adam Szubin, director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control. "Through their service to the FARC as international representatives and negotiators, these persons provide material support to a narco-terrorist organization." The organization, comprised of Colombian leftist rebels, is best known as FARC, its Spanish acronym. The eight in Tuesday's designation represent the FARC in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela, Panama, Mexico and Canada, the Treasury Department alleged. "As representatives of the FARC and members of its International Commission, these individuals work abroad to obtain recruits, support and protection for the FARC's acts of terrorism," the department said in a written statement. "Some are also themselves violent criminals." One, Jairo Alfonse Lesmes Bulla, was arrested in August for allegedly plotting the assassinations of some South American officials, Treasury said. Bulla represents FARC in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay, according to the department. Another, Orlay Jurado Palomino, who represents FARC in Venezuela, is wanted in Colombia on charges of kidnapping, rebellion and terrorism, the department said. And Francisco Antonio Cadena Collazos, who represents FARC in Brazil, was arrested in August 2005 at the request of Colombia on charges of rebellion, the Treasury statement said. A fourth, Nubia Calderon de Trujillo, was recently granted asylum by Nicaragua, the department said. The other four are Ovidio Salinas Perez; Jorge Davalos Torres; Efrain Pablo Rejo Freire; and Liliana Lopez Palacios, according to the Treasury statement.

Question: what does FARC stand for?

Question: What is FARC's goal?

Question: What is the Treasury Department targeting?

Question: What prohibits Americans from doing business with FARC?

Question: What targets members of a Colombia rebel group?

Question: What has been deemed a narco-terrorist organization?

Answer: Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia,

Answer: obtain recruits, support and protection

Answer: U.S. assets of eight members of

Answer: Treasury's action,

Answer: U.S. Treasury Department

Answer: FARC,

Summary:
Treasury Department targets members of Colombia rebel group .
The group, known as FARC, has been deemed a narco-terrorist organization .
Action also prohibits Americans from doing business with FARC .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. attorney general is trying to prevent immigration authorities from sending a Muslim woman to her home country, where she was a victim of female genital mutilation. Attorney General Michael Mukasey ordered an immigration court to reconsider an African woman's case. In a stinging order overriding federal immigration courts, Mukasey blasted a decision that said a 28-year-old citizen and native of Mali should be expelled "because her genitalia already had been mutilated [so] she had no basis to fear future persecution if returned to her home country." Calling the rationale "flawed," Mukasey sent the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals with orders to reconsider. The woman, a native of Mali, begged the court not to send her back to her Bambara tribe. The 28-year-old said if she returned and had a daughter, the child also would be subject to mutilation. The woman also said she faced forced marriage if she had to go home. Mukasey cited what he concluded were two significant factual errors in the court's rejection of her appeal. "Female genital mutilation is not necessarily a one-time event," Mukasey said. He noted that the board in a previous case had granted asylum in to one woman whose "vaginal opening was sewn shut approximately five times after being opened to allow for sexual intercourse and child birth." He also concluded that the Board of Immigration Appeals was wrong to assume that the woman "must fear persecution in exactly the same form [namely, repeat female genital mutilation] to qualify for relief." Mukasey had been urged to look into the matter by angered members of Congress in the wake of the January decision. "This recent action taken by the Board of Immigration Appeals is a step backward for the rights of women worldwide," declared Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, in a January letter. "Female genital mutilation is a gross violation of a woman's human rights and has traditionally been grounds for the granting of an asylum claim," Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-California, said in the letter. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, issued a statement applauding Mukasey's action, and declaring female genital mutilation a "barbaric practice widely regarded as a human rights abuse." The Justice Department acknowledged it is extraordinarily rare for an attorney general to jump into a relatively low-level immigration case. The immigration courts decide about 40,000 cases a year, and an attorney general has issued an opinion on a case only three times in the past three years. Female genital mutilation is common in parts of Africa, Asia and in some Arab countries, according to the United Nations. The operation is viewed by some ethnic groups as a means to control a woman's sexuality and is sometimes a prerequisite for marriage or the right to inherit. The procedure can cause tissue injury, severe infection and fever, among other complications. The U.N. has recorded cases in which hemorrhaging and infection lead to death.

Question: The fear of the Mali woman for her daughter was of what?

Question: What did the Attorney General say about the court's ruling?

Question: What did the court rule because the woman had already had surgery?

Question: Who ordered the court to reconsider its ruling?

Question: Who said the court ruling was flawed?

Question: Who is Michael Mukasey?

Question: What sort of mutilation?

Question: What will the Mali woman's daughter be subjected to?

Answer: female genital mutilation.

Answer: Calling the rationale "flawed,"

Answer: should be expelled

Answer: Attorney General Michael Mukasey

Answer: Mukasey

Answer: Attorney General

Answer: female genital

Answer: female genital mutilation.

Summary:
Court ruled that because woman already had surgery, she should not get asylum .
In rare move, Attorney General said court's ruling was "flawed"
Michael Mukasey ordered court to reconsider its ruling .
Mali woman said she fears any daughter she had would be subject to mutilation .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. government has charged an international arms dealer with conspiring to sell a rebel group millions of dollars in weapons "to be used to kill Americans in Colombia," federal prosecutors announced Tuesday. Viktor Bout is accused of selling missiles, rockets and other weapons to FARC, a Colombian rebel group. Viktor Bout, who was recently captured in Thailand, had agreed to sell the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) surface-to-air missiles, armor-piercing rocket launchers, "ultralight" airplanes, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other weapons, the U.S. Department of Justice said in a news release. There was no immediate public response from Bout, who remains in custody in Thailand. Federal authorities unsealed an indictment charging Bout with four terrorism offenses: conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals, conspiracy to kill U.S. officers or employees, conspiracy to acquire and use an anti-aircraft missile, and conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization. FARC is designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department. Justice Department officials said they are seeking Bout's extradition to the United States. The indictment alleges that Bout made agreements with FARC between November 2007 and March of this year. In their news release, federal prosecutors said Bout agreed to sell weapons "to two confidential sources" working with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, who had "represented that they were acquiring these weapons for the FARC, with the specific understanding that the weapons were to be used to attack United States helicopters in Colombia." The news release also refers to a "covertly recorded meeting in Thailand on March 6, 2008." "With the unsealing of this indictment, we are one step closer to ensuring Bout has delivered his last load of high-powered weaponry and armed his final terrorist," DEA Acting Administrator Michele M. Loenhart said in the news release. Attorney General Michael Mukasey last month singled out Bout as a leading example of a new breed of organized crime leaders who operate across international boundaries to amass wealth without regard to political ideology. "Viktor Bout has long been considered by the international community as one of the world's most prolific arms traffickers," U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia said in the news release Tuesday. Bout's assets in the United States were frozen in 2004 after he allegedly shipped weapons to Liberia in violation of U.S. government restrictions.

Question: Who says Bout is an example of a new breed of organized crime leaders?

Question: What did Viktor Bout try to sell?

Question: Where was arms dealer captured?

Question: Who offered to sell surface-to-air missiles, rockets to FARC?

Question: Is Bout an organized crime leader?

Question: What did Viktor Bout offer to sell to FARC?

Question: Who was captured in Thailand that the US wants to extradite?

Question: Where was the arms dealer captured?

Question: Who offered to sell surface-to-air missiles and rockets to FARC?

Question: What did Bout offer to sell?

Question: What is Bout an example of?

Question: What is the FARC?

Question: What country is Bout associated with?

Question: Where was the arms dealer captured?

Question: what arms dealer seeks extradition?

Question: Who offered to sell surface-to-air missiles to FARC?

Question: Bout is a new bread of what?

Answer: Attorney General Michael Mukasey

Answer: surface-to-air missiles, armor-piercing rocket launchers, "ultralight" airplanes, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other weapons,

Answer: Thailand,

Answer: Viktor Bout

Answer: as a leading example of a new breed of

Answer: selling missiles, rockets and other weapons

Answer: Viktor Bout,

Answer: Thailand,

Answer: Viktor Bout

Answer: weapons

Answer: new breed of organized crime leaders

Answer: a Colombian rebel group.

Answer: Thailand,

Answer: Thailand,

Answer: Viktor Bout,

Answer: Viktor Bout

Answer: organized crime leaders who operate across international boundaries

Summary:
Viktor Bout offered to sell surface-to-air missiles, rockets to FARC .
Arms dealer captured in Thailand. U.S. seeks extradition .
U.S. says Bout is an example of a new breed of organized crime leaders .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. has restored Fulbright scholarships to seven Gaza-based students, saying it erred last week when it rescinded the awards because of travel restrictions that Israel imposes on the Palestinian territory. Student Hadeel Abukwaik, 23, says she hopes to have an exit visa to leave Gaza for the U.S. by August. In e-mails to the students on Sunday, the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem said the United States was working with Israeli authorities to let them leave the Hamas-ruled zone to study at American universities. The scholarships were reinstated after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed outrage about the initial decision, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Monday. McCormack said the initial decision was partly the result of a "faulty decision-making process" by the State Department. "The secretary saw it when it got to her level. She said, 'Fix it,'" McCormack said. "We hope that it has been fixed and that we are working with the Israelis to get these exit permits so that these individuals, again, can have a visa interview."  Watch how the students learned about the scholarship loss » U.S. officials had said the scholarships were rescinded because Israel had denied them exit visas. But McCormack said Monday that U.S. authorities did not take up the matter with Israel until after the matter became public. Israel, which has been criticized for banning hundreds of students from leaving Gaza to study abroad, said it considers each application individually. Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev indicated Sunday that his country would be willing to grant the students visas. "This can happen," Regev said. "No one has to pressure Israel on this issue. We have an interest. A real interest." Citing security concerns, Israel imposed an embargo on the movement of people and goods from Gaza after Islamic militant group Hamas took over the territory last year. Palestinians can leave Gaza only with Israeli permission. Hamas has refused to recognize Israel's right to exist, and Israel, the United States and the European Union have designated it a terrorist organization. McCormack said the seven Gaza Fulbright students must be interviewed by Israeli authorities before they can get visas to the United States. "Should they have a successful visa interview -- and by law I can't prejudge an outcome of a visa interview -- then they would be able to come to the United States and pursue their program," he said. If the seven are allowed to leave, it would be the first time Israel has let students do so from Gaza since January, according to Palestinian advocacy group Gisha. One of the Gaza Fulbright scholars, Hadeel Abukwaik, 23, said she "laughed like crazy" from sheer joy when she received Sunday's e-mail. "I was really hoping for this, but I didn't want to want it too much," the software engineering student said by phone Monday. "I didn't want to be disappointed again. "This is really good news." Fulbright scholarships are awarded on the basis of academic merit and leadership potential under the U.S. government-funded Fulbright program, which was started in 1946. The scholarships allow U.S. citizens and foreign nationals to study and teach abroad to promote the "mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries of the world." More than 279,000 participants have been chosen for Fulbright scholarships. Abukwaik said the e-mail she received Sunday gave no indication about when the students might be able to travel. She is waiting to hear back from several universities, including ones in California and Florida. She said academic programs start in August and she hopes to have a visa to leave Gaza by then. CNN's Atika Shubert in Gaza City and Elise Labott in Washington contributed to this report.

Question: Who is the U.S. trying to persuade?

Question: Who undicated visas could be granted?

Question: What did state department say?

Question: What did the Israeli spokesman indicate?

Question: Who erred when it rescinded scholarships?

Question: What is the U.S. telling students?

Answer: Israeli authorities

Answer: Mark Regev

Answer: The scholarships were reinstated after Secretary of

Answer: his country would be willing to grant the students visas.

Answer: The U.S.

Answer: it erred last week when it rescinded the awards because of travel restrictions that Israel imposes on the Palestinian territory.

Summary:
NEW: State Department says U.S. erred when it rescinded scholarships .
U.S. tells students it is trying to persuade Israel to let them leave Gaza .
U.S. cited Israeli travel restrictions on territory when it rescinded awards last week .
Israeli spokesman indicates his country would be willing to grant visas .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. military hopes to kill or capture some 50 Afghan drug traffickers with financial ties to the Taliban in an effort to shut down one of the insurgency's biggest sources of revenue, a U.S. Senate report says. Afghan men smoke heroin in the city of Herat on August 7, 2009. The new plan is the first time the U.S. military has been directly involved in anti-narcotics efforts in Afghanistan, and commanders say it is an essential part of the overall plan to stabilize the country, which is under heavy Taliban influence. Until now the U.S. military has left the eradication programs to other U.S. agencies and the Afghan military, keeping its "most wanted" list to insurgent leaders tied to bomb making, weapons smuggling or facilitating foreign fighters into the country. "The change is dramatic for a military that once ignored the drug trade flourishing in front of its eyes," according to the report. "No longer are U.S. commanders arguing that going after the drug lords is not part of their mandate." It does not name the 50 targets, but says they are on a list of 367 names of Taliban and other insurgents targeted by the U.S. military. "Some" of the 50 have already been apprehended or killed, according to a senior military official. The official would not quantify the amount further and would not speak on the record because of the sensitive nature of the issue. The yet-to-be released report was prepared by staff for members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A copy was provided to CNN. It is based on testimony by U.S. military officials to the committee. Bush-era efforts by the United States and the U.S.-trained Afghan Army to eliminate poppy farms did very little to solve the problem, with numerous farmers' crops flourishing while other farmers were left with no source of income and bitterness toward the Afghan government, the report concludes. It criticizes former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for failing to push forward on a military role in drug eradication even after being shown proof of the connection between the drug lords and the Taliban. The change in the U.S. military's approach to fighting the drug war came last fall after the United States told NATO members that the drug trade was a threat to NATO troops because there was a direct connection between it and Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan. "There is what we call a nexus of insurgency. There's a very broad range of militant groups that are combined with the criminality, with the narco-trafficking system, with corruption, that form a threat and a challenge to the future of that great country," then-U.S. commander in Afghanistan Gen. David McKiernan told reporters at the Pentagon last October. But with a new approach to the war by the Obama administration, the United States has started attacking the drug problem head on. According to the report, this year U.S. and NATO combat forces started attacking militants, drug labs and buildings connected to insurgents with ties to drug lords for the first time since the start of the war in 2001. Referring to people tied to narcotics and militants, the report says, "The military places no restrictions on the use of force with these selected targets, which means they can be killed or captured on the battlefield." The Pentagon's spokesman said the effort is still focused on fighting terrorism. "There is a well-established link [between] the drug trade and financing of the insurgency and terrorism," said spokesman Bryan Whitman. "It's important to delineate that we target terrorists that are connected to the drug trade. ... Terrorist do interface with drug networks and we know they provide finance for the insurgency, and it's this nexus that creates the security and force-protection issues that make them a legitimate target." A major U.S. Marine offensive against the Taliban was launched last month in the southern Afghan province of Helmand, home to the majority of the poppy farms and opium trade. The report says the Taliban make about $70 million a year on the drug trade. The report concedes that counter-narcotics alone

Question: Who are NATO forces now targeting?

Question: what are those new initiatives to shut down big revenue source for insurgency?

Question: how many afghan were the U.S. military pursuing?

Question: Who are the drug dealers tied to?

Question: Who is now targeting insurgents?

Question: How many Afghan drug traffickers tied to the Taliban are U.S. military pursuing?

Question: What are U.S. NATO forces now targeting?

Question: Who are the drug traffickers tied to?

Question: What are NATO forces now targeting?

Question: How many Afghan drug traffickers is the U.S. military pursuing?

Question: What is the U.S. military pursuing?

Answer: militants, drug labs and buildings connected to insurgents with ties to drug lords

Answer: kill or capture some 50 Afghan drug traffickers

Answer: 50

Answer: the Taliban

Answer: U.S. military.

Answer: 50

Answer: militants, drug labs and buildings connected to insurgents

Answer: the Taliban

Answer: militants, drug labs and buildings connected to insurgents with ties to drug lords

Answer: 50

Answer: hopes to kill or capture some 50 Afghan drug traffickers

Summary:
Report: U.S. military pursuing 50 Afghan drug traffickers tied to Taliban .
New initiative strives to shut down big revenue source for insurgency .
Report: "The change is dramatic for a military that once ignored the drug trade,"
U.S., NATO forces now targeting insurgents tied to drug lords, report says .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United Kingdom has MI-5, which roots out spies and terrorists in the British Isles. The RAND Corporation said one option would be for domestic intelligence to operate under the FBI. Canada has CSIS -- the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. Now Congress is asking: Should the U.S. have its own domestic intelligence agency? On Monday, at the request of Congress, the RAND Corporation outlined the pros and cons of establishing a domestic intelligence agency. It also discussed different ways to organize a new entity, either as part of an existing department or as a new agency. But there's one thing you won't find in the report -- a recommendation on what to do. "We were not asked to make a recommendation, and this assessment does not do so," the report says. Instead, says RAND's Gregory Treverton, the report provides a "framework" for policymakers to use when deciding whether and how to reorganize counter-intelligence efforts at home. RAND is a nonprofit think tank seeking to help improve policy and decision making through objective research and analysis. Collecting intelligence domestically always has been a sensitive issue, at least partially because of episodic abuses by the government, notably against civil rights leaders, unions, antiwar organizations or even communists and hate groups. But the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks renewed calls for increased domestic intelligence to prevent future attacks. Critics said that in the lead-up to the attacks, the FBI devalued counterterrorism agents and failed to heed signs that an attack was imminent. "If you didn't carry a gun, you didn't count so much," Treverton said. After the attacks, the FBI moved to transform its primary mission from law enforcement to counterterrorism intelligence and prevention. It now focuses on terrorism through its National Security Branch and the National Counterterrorism Center. The RAND report focuses on two options to the current system. In one, a new agency would be created using intelligence agencies from the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and intelligence community. A second option is to create an "agency within an agency" in the FBI or DHS. The first option would result in an organization with a clear, unambiguous mission, and might be able to draw on a more diverse recruitment pool, such as linguists and historians who are not normally attracted to law enforcement. On the flip side, such massive reorganizations typically involve political compromises that could affect its performance. The second option -- an "agency within an agency" -- could involve less short-term disruption, but could be hindered by a "lack of clarity of a single mission," the report says. RAND also suggests a range of actions short of reorganization that could improve domestic intelligence gathering, such as increasing resources, improving leadership and changing bureaucratic cultures. The report does not assess the FBI's performance since 9/11, Treverton said, but he believes Congress should seek an independent assessment. A panel of experts that RAND convened guessed that the probability of a terrorist attack had decreased about one-third since the September 11, 2001. But "they were not enthusiastic about alternatives" to current counterterrorism organizations. In a cautionary note, the report says that while public acceptance of domestic intelligence activities is imperative, public attitudes about what is considered acceptable "can both be fragile and shift significantly over time." "Public demand for domestic intelligence is driven by the perceived threat, and those perceptions can change much more rapidly than the threat itself," the report says. For instance, immediately after the 9/11 attacks, 49 percent of people surveyed were worried "a great deal" about more attacks. Two years later, that had dropped to 25 percent.

Question: What did the group say government could do?

Question: What is the name of the nonprofit think tank?

Question: What did the September 11 attacks renewed calls for?

Question: What did RAND outline pros and cons at the request for?

Question: What two groups are included in another option?

Question: What does the group say the government could do?

Question: What is the think tank called?

Question: What prompted renewed calls for domestic Intel?

Question: What did the September 11 attacks renew?

Question: What would the agency operate under?

Answer: increasing resources, improving leadership and changing bureaucratic cultures.

Answer: RAND

Answer: increased domestic intelligence to prevent future

Answer: establishing a domestic intelligence agency.

Answer: DHS.

Answer: create an "agency within an agency"

Answer: RAND

Answer: September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks

Answer: calls for increased domestic intelligence to prevent future

Answer: FBI.

Summary:
Nonprofit think tank RAND outlines pros and cons at request of Congress .
Group says government could create new agency specifically for domestic intel .
Other option includes agency operating under Homeland Security or FBI .
September 11 attacks renewed calls for domestic intel to help prevent future ones .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States and Britain praised Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's contribution to the war on terror while the Bush administration claimed no role in the leader's resignation Monday. Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf has until now stubbornly resisted pressure to quit. A senior State Department official familiar with the situation told CNN U.S. officials were in touch with Musharraf in the week leading up to the resignation. However, the official said, the United States made it clear that it would not get involved in the struggle between Musharraf and the newly elected Pakistani parliament. "If he made a decision to go, or fight against it -- we didn't advise him either way," the official said. "We really did keep our fingers out of this one." Musharraf is viewed as a keen ally of the West in the fight on terror, receiving billions in military aid from both and launching attacks on militant groups near the country's border with Afghanistan.  Watch Musharraf resign » "President Musharraf has been a friend to the United States and one of the world's most committed partners in the war against terrorism and extremism," said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice after Musharraf's announcement. "We will continue to work with the Pakistani government and political leaders and urge them to redouble their focus on Pakistan's future and its most urgent needs, including stemming the growth of extremism, addressing food and energy shortages and improving economic stability," she added. "The United States will help with these efforts to see Pakistan reach its goal of becoming a stable, prosperous, democratic, modern, Muslim nation." The Bush administration's main priority is a crackdown on Taliban and al Qaeda militants in Pakistan's tribal regions. The administration believes Pakistan's intelligence service is full of al Qaeda and Taliban loyalists, an accusation Pakistan denies.  View a timeline of Musharraf's time in power » "There is a great deal of frustration on the part of the U.S. government with Pakistan's inability to follow through on what the U.S. sees as its clear commitments," said Robert Grenier, a former CIA counterterrorism official, now a managing director at risk consultation firm Kroll. "It remains very much to be seen whether this new democratically-elected leadership will really be able to follow through in a sustained and coherent way," he said. "They haven't demonstrated an ability to do that." The United States has stepped up missile strikes inside Pakistan, killing dozens of militants, and head of the Army, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, is now the United States' closest ally in power. But some experts warn that U.S. pressure could go too far. "The U.S. military has to be extremely cautious," said Rick Barton, a director and adviser with the non-profit Center for Strategic and International Studies who is a former U.N. and U.S. official. "It could actually be setting the torch to the kindling inside the country." Musharraf told the nation in a televised address Monday that he would step down -- nearly nine years after he seized power in a bloodless coup in 1999. "I don't want the people of Pakistan to slide deeper and deeper into uncertainty," he said. Until now, Musharraf, 65, had stubbornly resisted pressure to resign. But his once-considerable power eroded significantly since February's election that pushed his party out of power. That pressure increased in the past few weeks as the new ruling party began making plans to impeach him. Only time will tell whether the power shift will benefit Pakistan, but "it puts a lot more responsibility squarely on the government. There is no more excuse any more. They have to stand up and do things. They can't blame Musharraf," the State Department official said. The official said Musharraf isn't expected to try to undermine the government. "I really don't think he has been a factor for six months," the official said. "He hasn't been able to do that while he was in the presidency, and he won't be as well-positioned [

Question: Who will resign as president?

Question: Who does the U.S. and Britain praise?

Question: Who told a nationwide audience that he will resign as president?

Question: who is resigning as president?

Question: What is he praised for?

Question: Who promises to continue aid and support for Pakistan?

Question: What countries promise to continue aid and support for Pakistan?

Question: Who is resigning?

Question: What country besides the U.S. praised Musharraf?

Question: Who praised Musharraf for his contribution to "war on terror"?

Answer: Pervez Musharraf's

Answer: Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's contribution

Answer: Musharraf

Answer: Pervez Musharraf

Answer: contribution

Answer: United States

Answer: United States

Answer: Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's

Answer: Britain

Answer: The United States and Britain

Summary:
Pervez Musharraf tells nationwide audience he will resign as president .
U.S. and Britain praise Musharraf for his contribution to 'war on terror'
Both promise continued aid and support for Pakistan .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States imposed stiff sanctions against Iran on Thursday, targeting two Iranian military groups and a number of Iranian banks and people it accuses of backing nuclear proliferation and terror-related activities. "What this means is that no U.S. citizen or private organization will be allowed to engage in financial transactions with these persons and entities," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said. "In addition, any assets that these designees have under U.S. jurisdiction will be immediately frozen." Rice and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson made the announcement in a brief appearance before reporters on Thursday morning. Rice accused Iran of "pursuing nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon; building dangerous ballistic missiles; supporting Shia militants in Iraq and terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories; and denying the existence of a fellow member of the United Nations, threatening to wipe Israel off the map."  Watch Rice tell why sanctions are being imposed » "Many of the Iranian regime's most destabilizing policies are carried out by two of its agencies: the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or the IRGC, and the Quds force, an arm of the IRGC," she said. She said the sanctions were being imposed "because of the Revolutionary Guard's support for proliferation and the Quds force support for terrorism." The United States also designated three Iranian state-owned banks for sanctions, two of them "for their involvement in proliferation activities" and the other "as a terrorist financier," Rice said. "Iran funnels hundreds of millions of dollars each year through the international financial system to terrorists," Paulson said. "Iran's banks aid this conduct using a range of deceptive financial practices intended to evade even the most stringent risk management controls." The Revolutionary Guard Corps, he said, "is so deeply entrenched in Iran's economy and commercial enterprises, it is increasingly likely that, if you are doing business with Iran, you are doing business" with the corps. "We call on responsible banks and companies around the world to terminate any business with Bank Melli, Bank Mellat, Bank Saderat, and all companies and entities" of the corps, Paulson said. The move marks the first time the United States has attempted to punish another country's military through sanctions. Previous sanctions imposed by the United States have been tied to Iran's nuclear program. The United States has been working with other world powers to halt what they believe is Iran's intent to develop a nuclear arsenal. Iran says it is pursuing nuclear power for peaceful reasons. Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency, said last month that Iran's declared nuclear material has not been diverted from peaceful use and criticized U.S. rhetoric regarding Iran. The Quds Force is blamed by the U.S. military for training and arming Shiite militias in Iraq and smuggling highly lethal explosives into Iraq, where they are used to attack coalition forces. Iran denies the charge. "If the Iranian government fulfills its international obligation to suspend its uranium enrichment and reprocessing activity, I will join my British, French, Russian, Chinese and German colleagues, and I will meet with my Iranian counterpart any time, anywhere," Rice said. "We will be open to the discussion of any issue. But if Iran's rulers choose to continue down a path of confrontation, the United States will act with the international community to resist these threats of the Iranian regime." Last month, representatives of world powers announced that unless a November report shows a "positive outcome" of talks with Iran about its uranium enrichment program, they will move ahead with plans for a resolution imposing additional sanctions on the country. The U.N. Security Council has repeatedly demanded that Iran suspend enrichment of uranium and has imposed limited sanctions on Tehran for refusing to comply. The European Union is weighing its own unilateral sanctions. E-mail to a friend CNN's Kathleen Koch and Elise Labott contributed to this report.

Question: Who put sanctions on Iran's Revolutionary Guard, banks and individuals?

Question: What was the revolutionary guard accused of supporting?

Question: Who put sanctions on Iran's Revolutionary Guard?

Question: Who is said by U.S. to support terrorism?

Question: Who are the sanctions for?

Question: What does sanctions against the finances of the revolutionary guard mean.

Question: What do the sanctions do?

Question: Who is said to support terrorism?

Question: What are they accused of?

Question: Who was accused of supporting nuclear proliferation?

Question: What country put sanctions on Irans revolutionary guard,banks and individuals?

Answer: The United States

Answer: support for proliferation and the Quds force support for terrorism."

Answer: The United States

Answer: Iranian military groups and a number of Iranian banks and people

Answer: Iran

Answer: no U.S. citizen or private organization will be allowed to engage in financial transactions with these persons and entities,"

Answer: no U.S. citizen or private organization will be allowed to engage in financial transactions with these

Answer: Iranian military groups and a number of Iranian banks and people

Answer: backing nuclear proliferation and terror-related activities.

Answer: Iranian military groups and a number of Iranian banks and people

Answer: United States

Summary:
U.S. puts sanctions on Iran's Revolutionary Guard, banks, individuals .
Revolutionary Guard accused of supporting nuclear proliferation .
Guard's Quds force said by U.S. to support terrorism .
Sanctions mean financial assets of Revolutionary Guard, others, are frozen .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States is keeping a close eye on Pakistan after this week's Taliban surge into the Buner district brought them just 60 miles from the capital, Islamabad.

A Taliban fighter in the district of Buner, which is only 96 kilometers from Islamabad.

A Pakistani government official said Friday that the insurgents had completely withdrawn from the district by the end of the week, but a human rights group said people in Buner were reporting that local Taliban remained in the district.

And senior U.S. officials cautioned that any withdrawal by the Taliban was likely meaningless and that the fundamentalist group now holds large areas of the country with the government seemingly unable to stop them.

"We're certainly moving closer to the tipping point," Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff said on NBC's "Today" show Friday.

In the interview from Afghanistan, Mullen said he was "extremely concerned" about indications the Taliban is moving closer to Pakistan's capital of Islamabad.

Syed Mohammed Javed, commissioner of the Malakand Division that includes Buner, said the Taliban withdrew on Friday without any conditions.

Earlier in the day, Taliban spokesman Muslim Khan told CNN that the militants would pull back from the district.

Pakistani Express TV showed live footage of armed and masked Taliban militants in Buner, loading pickup trucks and driving away.

Sufi Muhammed, an Islamist fundamentalist leader who has been negotiating on behalf of the Taliban, was on scene overseeing the withdrawal, police said.

U.S. military commander Gen. David Petraeus credited about 300 Pakistan's Frontier Corps with driving Taliban militants out of Buner.

The U.S. Central Command chief spoke to CNN on Friday after testifying before a Congressional panel about the need for the United States to boost its support for Pakistani counterinsurgency troops such as the Frontier Corps.

But Amnesty International's regional chief said people in Buner are reporting a different situation.

"What we're hearing from people in Buner ... is that the Taliban that have moved out are the non-local ones," Sam Zarifi, Amnesty's Asia Pacific director, told CNN. "So the local branch of the Taliban are still in place in Buner."

Amnesty International is concerned that those local Taliban will continue to enforce the Taliban's "abusive and repressive" control of Buner.

Girls over the age of 7 are forced to wear a burka, a head-to-toe covering that the Taliban say is required of Muslims under its radical interpretation of Islamic law, or sharia.

"I think we're going to see those harsh edicts stay," Zarifi said.

The Taliban installed strict Islamic law when it took over Afghanistan after a two-year fight with warlords, many of whom surrendered without a fight. They fought with a coalition of some of those warlords known as the Northern Alliance from 1996 until U.S. forces, seeking the leadership of al Qaeda after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, added bombing raids to Northern Alliance ground operations and successfully drove the Taliban out of most of Afghanistan. iReport: Should the U.S. intercede in Pakistan?

But the Taliban regrouped in 2004, launching a guerrilla war against the Afghan government while operating from the tribal areas of that country and Pakistan.

Meanwhile, senior U.S. officials said that the "retreat" was likely meaningless. Control was the impetus behind the Taliban move into Buner, and the fundamentalist group now controls large areas of Pakistan, they said.

The officials said, however, that they did not believe the Taliban's goal was to take over the government of Pakistan but rather to create instability by taking advantage of Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari's apparent inability to cope with the situation.

Zardari, they said, does not understand the gravity of the situation, remains distracted by domestic politics and appears unable to make critical decisions to deploy the army to stabilize the country.

State Department envoy Richard Holbrooke has been on the phone "nonstop" with officials in Islamabad and Washington, the officials said, providing frequent information to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama.

Holbrooke's read on the situation,

Question: What is likely meaningless?

Question: Where did Taliban withdraw from?

Question: How far was the captured district from the capital?

Question: What do fundamentalists hold?

Question: What has the Taliban done?

Question: What is happening in Pakistan?

Question: what countries are involved

Question: who is involved in the conflct

Answer: any withdrawal by the Taliban

Answer: Buner district

Answer: 60 miles

Answer: large areas of the country

Answer: installed strict Islamic law

Answer: Taliban surge

Answer: United States

Answer: Pakistan

Summary:
NEW: Pakistan situation "rapidly deteriorating," says senior U.S. military official .
NEW: U.S. officials: Any Taliban withdrawal from Pakistani territory likely meaningless .
NEW: Fundamentalists hold large areas of the country, military officials say .
Pakistan had reported Taliban withdrawal from captured district 60 miles from capital .