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

What does prevent President Bush from doing?

What sessions will democratic senators hold over the holidays?

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

What did Bush refuse to do after Democratic offer?

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.

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.

What type of threats did Thomas receive?

Tuason threatened to blow up what building?

Children of what lineage also received threats?

Who threatened to blow up the Supreme Court?

Who received racially motivated threats?

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.

What is the Treasury Department targeting?

What prohibits Americans from doing business with FARC?

What targets members of a Colombia rebel group?

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.

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

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

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

Who ordered the court to reconsider its ruling?

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.

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

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

What did Viktor Bout offer to sell to FARC?

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

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

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

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.

What did the Israeli spokesman indicate?

Who erred when it rescinded scholarships?

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

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

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

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

What are U.S. NATO forces now targeting?

How many Afghan drug traffickers 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.

What did the group say government could do?

What is the name of the nonprofit think tank?

What did the September 11 attacks renewed calls for?

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

What two groups are included in another option?

What does the group say the government could do?

What prompted renewed calls for domestic Intel?

What did the September 11 attacks renew?

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 [

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

Who promises to continue aid and support for Pakistan?

What countries promise to continue aid and support for Pakistan?

What country besides the U.S. praised Musharraf?

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.

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

What was the revolutionary guard accused of supporting?

Who put sanctions on Iran's Revolutionary Guard?

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

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

Who was accused of supporting nuclear proliferation?

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,

How far was the captured district from the capital?

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 .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States is providing weapons and ammunition to Somalia's transitional government as it fights al Qaeda-linked Islamic militants, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Thursday. Somali government soldiers, who are fighting Islamic militants, patrol Mogadishu. "At the request of that government the State Department has helped to provide weapons and ammunition on an urgent basis," he said. "This is to support the Transitional Federal Government's efforts to repel the onslaught of extremist forces which are intent on destroying the Djibouti peace process." Kelly said the weapons shipments are in accordance with U.N. Security Council resolutions, which ban some arms shipments to Somalia. There is growing concern that Somalia could be the next base for al Qaeda as U.S. forces pound their positions in Afghanistan and Pakistan. CIA Director Leon Panetta recently said that the intelligence agency is keeping tabs on the region as a possible destination for fleeing al Qaeda operatives. "Our concern right now is that likely safe havens are areas in the Horn of Africa, like Somalia and Yemen, that are countries that because of their political status can be attractive to al Qaeda in order to operate there," Panetta said earlier this month. "We are focusing on those countries as well in order to ensure that there is no safe haven for al Qaeda as we continue to pressure them, continue to push them, and hopefully continue to make the effort to destroy them, not only in Pakistan but throughout the rest of the world." Somalia is not new territory for al Qaeda, according to CNN's terrorism analyst Peter Bergen. "Al Qaeda was running training camps in Somalia in the early and mid-1990s," he said. "If this is now coming back, this is something that al Qaeda has already done and it's worrisome for the future. ... "The fact that we're seeing evidence of this already happening in both Yemen and Somalia suggests that, A, the drone program in the tribal areas of Pakistan has been effective, but, B, you know it's pushing al Qaeda into areas where they'll build up larger operations." Somalia recently called on its neighbors to send military forces to help government troops stop hard-line Islamist militants from taking over. The call for help came hours after a third top politician was killed this month in ongoing fighting. The deaths included Mogadishu's police chief and Somalia's internal security minister, who was killed in a suicide car bombing in the central city of Beledweyne. A Pakistani militant who is a high-ranking official in al Qaeda is leading the fighting in Somalia against the government, said Sheikh Adan Madowe, Somalia's parliament speaker. Madowe warned that militants will spread fighting into the rest of the region if they topple the government in Somalia. The United States is concerned that Somalia's weak government could fall to the Islamist insurgency, as it did in 2006 before Ethiopian forces ousted the militants from power later that year. "We think this government ... represents Somalia's best chance for peace, stability and reconciliation," Kelly said Thursday. "This government is the best chance they've had in the last 18 years." Somalia's current President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed is a former member of the Islamic Courts Union, which took part in the 2006 coup. His decision to renounce the bloody insurgency and try to establish peace in Somalia has put him at odds with Islamist hard-liners who are still battling for control of Somalia. Residents and journalists in Mogadishu, Somalia's capital, have reported seeing foreign fighters among Al-Shabaab, the radical Islamic militia that is battling to overthrow the weak transitional government. Those foreign fighters recently distributed recorded messages from al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden calling for the overthrow of the government. Al-Shabaab, also known as the Mujahideen Youth Movement, was officially designated as a terrorist organization by the United States in March 2008. It is waging a war against Somalia's government in an effort to implement a stricter form of Islamic law, or sharia.

The shipments are in accordance with what?

What could be the next base for Al Qaeda?

Which country could be the next base for al Qaeda?

What is in accordance with UN Security Resolutions?

Answer: U.N. Security Council resolutions,

Answer: Somalia

Answer: al Qaeda-linked Islamic militants,

Answer: Somalia

Answer: weapons shipments

Answer: al Qaeda-linked Islamic militants,

Summary:
State Department: Weapons for fighting al Qaeda-linked Islamic militants .
Weapons shipments are in accordance with U.N. Security Resolutions, Kelly says .
There is growing concern that Somalia could be the next base for al Qaeda .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States needs a new law requiring that the president consult with Congress before going to war, a blue-ribbon panel led by two former secretaries of state said Tuesday. James Baker, left, and Warren Christopher led a panel that recommended a new War Powers Act. The current War Powers Resolution is "ineffective, and it should be repealed and it should be replaced," James Baker said in a joint appearance with Warren Christopher, announcing the results of the study they led. The recommendation follows failed efforts by Democrats in Congress to put a stop to the war in Iraq or to put conditions on President Bush's conduct of it. Congress passed a joint resolution to authorize armed force against Iraq in 2002, but some Bush opponents say it should not have been interpreted as a blank check for the United States to invade and occupy the Persian Gulf nation. Baker, who served in George H.W. Bush's administration, and Christopher, who served under President Bill Clinton, said their project was not prompted by any specific war, with Christopher adding that the commission had "tried very hard not to call balls and strikes on past history here." "We didn't direct this report at any particular conflict," Baker added. The existing law, the War Powers Resolution of 1973, has been regarded as unconstitutional by every president since it was passed as a response to the Vietnam War, Baker and Christopher said. It requires presidents to report regularly to Congress about ongoing conflicts, but the provision has been flouted. "No president has ever made a submission to Congress pursuant to the War Powers Resolution since 1973," former Sen. Slade Gorton, a Republican member of the committee, said Tuesday. The panel, formally called the National War Powers Commission, said a new law should be created requiring the president to consult with key members of Congress before sending troops into combat expected to last more than a week, or within three days of doing so in the case of operations that need to be kept secret. It should also make clear exactly who the president needed to consult. The panel suggests that the president talk to "a joint Congressional committee made up of the leaders of the House and the Senate as well as the chairmen and ranking members of key committees." The new committee would have a permanent professional staff with access to intelligence information, Baker and Christopher said. Congress, in turn, would have to declare war or vote on a "resolution of approval" within 30 days, they said. If a resolution of approval failed, any member of Congress could introduce a "resolution of disapproval," but it was not clear that such an act would stop a war in progress. Christopher was unable to say in the news conference what practical effect congressional disapproval would have. Baker said the commission had been in touch with the presidential campaigns of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, as well as leaders of Congress. He declined to reveal what they thought of the proposal, but said: "We haven't gotten a negative reaction." Congress has not officially declared war since 1942, when the United States entered formal hostilities with the Axis powers in World War II. But since then, presidents have sent troops into countries including Korea, Vietnam, Grenada and Iraq. The Constitution makes the president the commander in chief of the armed forces, but gives Congress the power to declare war and approve military budgets. Baker and Christopher's group included both Republicans and Democrats and held seven meetings over 14 months.

What does the panel say about the War Powers Act?

Which former secretaries lead the study?

Answer: new War Powers Act.

Answer: Congress

Answer: a new War Powers Act.

Answer: James Baker,

Answer: "ineffective, and it should be repealed and it should be replaced,"

Answer: The current War Powers Resolution

Answer: before going to war,

Answer: new War Powers Act.

Answer: "a joint Congressional committee made up of the leaders of the House and the Senate as well as the chairmen and ranking members of key committees."

Answer: before going to war,

Answer: War Powers Resolution

Answer: James Baker,

Summary:
War Powers Act is "ineffective" and should be repealed, blue-ribbon panel says .
Former secretaries of state James Baker and Warren Christopher led the study .
They say the project was not prompted by any specific war .
Panel proposes new law requiring president to consult with Congress .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States needs to formulate an "updated strategy" for Iraq, now that the Bush administration's 18-month game plan for the country is completed, the head of the Government Accountability Office told lawmakers Wednesday. U.S. soldiers crouch at their positions during a mission in  Baquba, northeast of Baghdad, earlier this month. Acting U.S. Comptroller General Gene L. Dodaro appeared before a House Armed Services Committee hearing to discuss last month's GAO progress report on Iraq, which reaffirmed the need for a renewed strategy in the war-ravaged country. The report, Dodaro said in prepared remarks, noted that "some gains" have been made in the security, legislative and economic areas since President Bush last year announced "The New Way Forward" -- the near-term goals for Iraq that included the military surge. The surge, or troop escalation, ended this month. "The United States had made some progress in achieving key goals stated in 'The New Way Forward,' " the report said. "Looking forward, many challenges remain, and an updated strategy is essential." Dodaro said the progress report recommended an updated strategy in Iraq to the Departments of State and Defense. He told lawmakers that the departments said they will "review and refine the current strategy as necessary, but asserted that 'The New Way Forward' remains valid." Dodaro also argued that a renewed strategy is important "for several reasons." The goals and objectives for the present phase end this month and they are "contained in disparate documents rather than a single strategic plan," he said in his prepared remarks. "Much has changed in Iraq since January 2007, when the president announced 'The New Way Forward.' Violence is down, U.S. surge forces are leaving, and a new framework for the U.S. presence in Iraq needs to be agreed upon beyond the U.N. mandate," Dodaro said. The GAO report said that while the number of enemy-initiated attacks in Iraq have decreased about 80 percent from June 2007 to June 2008, the "security environment remains volatile and dangerous." The agency noted that not all of the country's provinces have lead responsibility for security and less than 10 percent of Iraqi security forces "were at the highest readiness level." The progress report also cited the enactment by Iraqi lawmakers of measures "to return some Baathists to government, grant amnesty to detained Iraqis and define provincial powers." It said there is an "unfinished" legislative agenda, citing the need for measures on "sharing oil revenues, disarming militias, and holding provincial elections." A provincial election law was passed on Tuesday by Iraq's parliament, the Council of Representatives, but Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has rejected it, his office said Wednesday. The measure was strongly opposed by Kurdish lawmakers and Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government had criticized it, calling for its rejection. It's not clear whether further negotiations may take place to amend the legislation. As for the economic arena, crude oil production is below U.S. goals, even though it has "improved for short periods," the GAO report said. Goals for water service are "close to being reached," but the daily electricity supply "met only slightly more than half of demand in early July 2008." It also noted that Iraq "spent only 24 percent of the $27 billion it budgeted for its reconstruction efforts between 2005 and 2007." Dodaro said the Pentagon, State Department and other agencies should "develop an updated strategy for Iraq that defines U.S. goals and objectives after July 2008." "This strategy should build on recent security and legislative gains, address the remaining unmet goals and challenges for the near and long term, clearly articulate goals, objectives, roles and responsibilities, and the resources needed," he said.

Situation in Iraq remains "volatile and" what?

Answer: General Gene L. Dodaro

Answer: crude oil production

Answer: dangerous."

Summary:
NEW: Head of Government Accountability Office speaks to House committee .
Though attacks are down, situation in Iraq remains "volatile and dangerous"
Report cites "unfinished" legislative agenda in Iraq .
Iraq's oil production remains below U.S. goals, report says .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States on Thursday imposed economic sanctions on a North Korean company that the United Nations said is linked to the country's nuclear weapons program. News comes on day U.S. State Department Envoy Philip Goldberg met with U.N. sanctions committee. A U.S. Treasury Department statement said Korea Hyoksin Trading Corporation is owned or controlled by Korea Ryonbong General Corporation, which has been designated by the United Nations as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction. The order freezes any U.S. assets of Hyoksin and prohibits any Americans from dealing with it, the statement said. It notes that a sanctions committee set up by the U.N. Security Council recently cited Hyoksin for involvement in development of weapons of mass destruction. The announcement came as the U.S. coordinator for implementation of U.N. sanctions against North Korea met Thursday with the Security Council sanctions committee. The envoy, Philip Goldberg, said the talks showed "strong commitment" by all nations to enforcing Security Council Resolution 1874, which authorized sanctions against North Korea's weapons program. "What I found in that room and in my dealings with other governments ... is unity of view," Goldberg said, specifically mentioning China, which is North Korea's longtime supporter. "Commitment to implementation is strong and unified," he said.

What is linked to corporation associated with weapons of mass destruction?

What did the U.N. recently cite Hyoksin for?

Which company does the order prohibits Americans from dealing with?

Answer: Korea Hyoksin Trading

Answer: involvement in development of weapons of mass destruction.

Answer: a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction.

Answer: country's nuclear weapons program.

Answer: North Korean

Answer: The order

Summary:
U.S.: Hyoksin linked to corporation associated with weapons of mass destruction .
Order freezes Hyoksin's U.S. assets, prohibits Americans from dealing with company .
U.N. recently cited Hyoksin for involvement in weapons of mass destruction .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States will allow Americans to send mobile phones to relatives in Cuba under a change in policy that President Bush announced Wednesday. President Bush announces the U.S. policy allowing cell phones to Cuba at the White House on Wednesday. Bush said he is making the change since President Raúl Castro "is allowing Cubans to own mobile phones for the first time." "If he is serious about his so-called reforms, he will allow these phones to reach the Cuban people," Bush said. Bush urged the Cuban government to loosen restrictions further, saying if Cubans can be allowed to own mobile phones, "they should be trusted to speak freely in public." They should be allowed to watch uncensored movies and have free access to the Internet, he said. And he called for the government to implement major free-market reforms. Relations between the United States and Cuba remain tense nearly 50 years after Fidel Castro overthrew the pro-American government in Havana. The United States has maintained an embargo against Cuba for decades. Cuban officials on Monday accused the top U.S. diplomat in Havana of delivering money from private anti-Castro groups in Florida to dissidents in Cuba. U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that "the U.S. government has programs to provide humanitarian assistance to people that are essentially forgotten by the Cuban government and that we ... do not stand in the way of private groups doing that as well." As to how that is done, he said, "I'm not aware of the mechanics; I don't steep myself in these things." Fidel Castro, beset with health problems, handed day-to-day governing power over to Raúl, his younger brother, earlier this year. After being elected president in February, Raúl Castro announced that Cubans who can afford them could buy cell phones and DVD players and stay in hotels previously reserved for foreign tourists -- overturning bans from the Fidel era. The goods and services remain out of reach for most people on the island, where $120 cell phones plus $10.80 calling cards cost about six times the average monthly salary. Bush said Wednesday it is "the height of hypocrisy to claim credit to allow Cubans to purchase appliances that virtually none of them can afford." Though the price may put mobile phones out of the reach of most Cubans, they are affordable for many of those who have access to U.S. dollars -- typically either sent from relatives abroad or earned internally by tourist workers. Bush on Wednesday marked what the White House called a Day of Solidarity with the Cuban People, which the president said he hopes will be an annual event.

what did president bush say about cubans

Who did President Bush say should be trusted to speak freely in public?

what is raul castro allowing cubans to do

What is Cuban leader allowing Cubans to buy?

how long has the U.S. maintained an embargo

What did Bush call for Cuba to implement?

Answer: "they should be trusted to speak freely in public."

Answer: announces the U.S. policy allowing cell phones to Cuba at the White House on Wednesday.

Answer: Americans to send mobile phones to relatives in Cuba

Answer: an embargo against Cuba

Answer: Cubans

Answer: own mobile phones for the first time."

Answer: cell phones

Answer: for decades.

Answer: major free-market reforms.

Summary:
President Bush: Cubans also "should be trusted to speak freely in public"
Bush calls for Cuba to implement major free-market reforms .
U.S. has maintained an embargo against Cuba for decades .
New leader Raúl Castro allowing Cubans to buy cell phones, DVD players .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States will provide $73 million in aid to Zimbabwe, President Obama announced Friday after meeting with Zimbabwe Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai at the White House. President Obama (right) praised Zimbabwe Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai at the White House on Friday. "I obviously have extraordinary admiration for the courage and tenacity that the prime minister has shown in navigating through some very difficult political times in Zimbabwe," Obama said. "There was a time when Zimbabwe was the breadbasket of Africa, and [it] continues to have enormous potential. It has gone through a very dark and difficult time politically." Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe "has not acted oftentimes in the best interest of the Zimbabwean people and has been resistant to the democratic changes that need to take place," Obama said. "We now have a power-sharing agreement that shows promise, and we want to do everything we can to encourage the kinds of improvement not only on human rights and rule of law, freedom of the press and democracy that is so necessary, but also on the economic front." The U.S. aid will not be going to the government directly "because we continue to be concerned about consolidating democracy, human rights and rule of law," Obama said. "But it will be going directly to the people in Zimbabwe." In a CNN interview following his meeting with Obama, Tsvangirai said he is grateful for the generosity. "Whether it is humanitarian aid or transitional support, it adds up to the relief that Zimbabwe is seeking," he said.  Watch Tsvangirai discuss importance of aid to Zimbabwe » Tsvangirai said he told Obama he would like the United States to use its global influence to assist Zimbabwe in dealing with the challenges it faces. Tsvangirai said he understood other nations' reluctance to support the Zimbabwean government, given Mugabe's controversial history. "I think it's fair," he said. "I understand it, given our history, and I'm not going to defend President Mugabe." But, he noted, the two have agreed to work together and help Zimbabwe progress as a nation. In remarks with Obama, Tsvangirai said progress has been made by the transitional government, but much remains to be done. "It is the problems of implementation," he said. "... even by the standard of our own benchmarks, there are gaps that still exist." He said he would continue to strive to meet those benchmarks, not for the international community, but because "it gives [the] people of Zimbabwe freedom and opportunity to grow." The power-sharing arrangement between Tsvangirai, the leader of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, and Mugabe came after contested elections last year. "Of course we cannot brush away that history, that sad history," Tsvangirai told CNN. But he said he is hoping the country will heal and move forward, and wants even those skeptical of Mugabe to appreciate the transition process. Asked whether he believes Mugabe should retire, Tsvangirai said "at the age of 85, I think one needs to retire." But, he said, for his own legacy, it's important for him to be thinking about a "dignified exit." "I think that [the power-sharing government] provides him with this opportunity," Tsvangirai said. Asked about his relationship with Mugabe, he said, "We don't have to fall in love to work together. But we have accepted that we have made an agreement to have a workable relationship between the two political parties." He said there had been acrimony between the two, but they realized it was not helping the Zimbabwean people. "We are inspired by people like Nelson Mandela, who had to go for 27 years in jail but still come out and say, 'Let's forget about the past' ..." he said. He and Mugabe have chosen the process of dialogue rather than violence, Tsvangirai said. "Let history judge whether this historic experiment was the right course of action."

What Tsvangirai said about relationship with Zimbabwe President?

With who is Tsvangirai in power-sharing with?

In total, how much will be aid offered from President Obama to Zimbabwe?

Answer: "Whether it is humanitarian aid or transitional support, it adds up to the relief that Zimbabwe is seeking,"

Answer: Zimbabwe Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai

Answer: he is grateful for the generosity.

Answer: Robert Mugabe

Answer: Mugabe

Answer: Zimbabwe Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai

Answer: $73 million

Answer: Zimbabwe."

Answer: $73 million

Summary:
President Obama praises Zimbabwe PM Tsvangirai, offers $73 million in aid .
Tsvangirai in power-sharing agreement with Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe .
Tsvangirai on Mugabe relationship: "We don't have to fall in love to work together"


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House did not intend to show any disrespect toward Nancy Reagan when it failed to invite the former first lady -- a vigorous supporter of stem-cell research -- to a bill-signing ceremony on the subject, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday. Nancy Reagan watches President Obama sign the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act Tuesday. "I think she speaks in real personal terms about the issue," Gibbs told reporters. "And I think her candor and her courage have been heartening, and we certainly meant no slight to her whatsoever." On Monday, Vanity Fair published an interview with Nancy Reagan on its Web site in which she suggested the Obama administration missed an opportunity by not inviting her to witness President Obama signing a measure in March expanding federal support for stem-cell research. The former first lady has long promoted such steps despite objections from many in the GOP. She has argued that expanded stem-cell research could have helped her husband, who suffered from Alzheimer's disease. "I would have gone, and you know I don't like to travel," she told the magazine.  Watch more on Gibbs' reaction to the controversy » "Politically, it would have been a good thing for (Obama) to do. Oh well, nobody's perfect. He called and thanked me for working on it. But he could have gotten more mileage out of it," she said. Gibbs' comments also come the same day Mrs. Reagan attended a White House ceremony marking Obama's signing of legislation authorizing a Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission. The 11-member commission will plan activities marking Ronald Reagan's 100th birthday on February 6, 2011.  Watch Obama laud Reagan's optimism » Mrs. Reagan is slated to attend the unveiling of a new statue of President Reagan on Wednesday morning at the Capitol and then share a private White House lunch with first lady Michelle Obama. Obama issued an apology to Mrs. Reagan earlier this year after joking in a news conference that she held seances during her years in the White House -- an apparent reference to reports she consulted with astrologists during her husband's presidency.

What is the name of the former first lady?

Who should have invited Reagan to bill signing?

does nancy reagan support stem-cell research

who is a strong supporter of stem-cell research?

Answer: stem-cell research.

Answer: Tuesday.

Answer: Nancy Reagan

Answer: a new statue of President Reagan

Answer: The White House

Answer: a new statue of President Reagan

Answer: the unveiling of a new statue of President Reagan

Answer: stem-cell research.

Answer: "I would have gone, and you know I don't like to travel,"

Answer: "I would have gone, and you know I don't like to travel,"

Answer: a vigorous supporter

Answer: President Obama signing a measure in March expanding federal support for stem-cell research.

Answer: Nancy Reagan

Answer: President Reagan

Summary:
Former first lady Nancy Reagan is a strong supporter of stem-cell research .
Mrs. Reagan tells magazine: Obama should have invited me to stem-cell bill signing .
She's slated to attend the unveiling of a new statue of President Reagan Wednesday .
She witnesses signing of Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission legislation .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House has invoked executive privilege to keep President Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, from having to testify Thursday about the firings of at least eight U.S. attorneys. The White House invoked executive privilege to keep

Karl Rove from having to testify Thursday. Rove, "as an immediate adviser to the president," can't be ordered to testify and has been told not to appear, White House Counsel Fred Fielding told the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee called Rove and his deputy, Scott Jennings, to testify Thursday morning. The White House says it is trying to protect the president's ability to receive candid advice and offered to let top aides discuss the firings only if they were not placed under oath and no transcript was taken. "It is regretted that the committee has forced this action, as the president's offer of accommodation to you and to the House Judiciary Committee could have provided information being sought in a manner respectful of presidential prerogatives and consistent with a spirit of comity," Fielding wrote. But Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, accused the White House of trying to cover up Rove's role in the firings. He questioned why Rove discussed the matter publicly when the issue first made news, but now "is suddenly unable to talk it about when he is under oath." "Mr. Rove has given reasons for the firings that have now been shown to be inaccurate, after-the-fact fabrications," Leahy said in a statement issued Wednesday evening. "Yet he now refuses to tell this committee the truth about his role in targeting well-respected U.S. attorneys for firing and in seeking to cover up his role and that of his staff in the scandal." Mark Paoletta, a lawyer for Jennings, told CNN his client will appear before the Judiciary Committee but would refuse to answer questions he feels are covered by executive privilege. Former White House political director Sara Taylor testified under similar circumstances in July. The White House already has invoked executive privilege to block previous testimony by Taylor and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, who skipped a hearing in the House two weeks ago, and to keep Chief of Staff Josh Bolten from turning over documents subpoenaed as part of the inquiry. The panel voted to cite Miers and Bolten for contempt of Congress for failing to comply with subpoenas. The decision on whether to pursue any action on those citations lies with the Justice Department. The privilege claim can be challenged in court. But Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, has said the courts would be unlikely to resolve any challenge before Bush leaves office. Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed the congressional investigation of the attorney firings as a "witch hunt" during a CNN interview Tuesday. Democratic congressional leaders, however, say administration officials have been unable to answer their most basic questions -- who compiled the list of prosecutors to be dismissed, and why were they selected? While the Bush administration has maintained that the prosecutors' firings were handled properly, the controversy has led to the resignations of at least three top Justice Department officials and triggered widespread criticism of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who repeatedly told a Senate committee in April that he did not recall details of the firings. Critics say the attorneys were forced out for political reasons, such as for failing to bring voter fraud cases pushed by Republican activists, and administration officials have acknowledged that one was fired to allow a Rove protege to take a post in Arkansas. E-mail to a friend CNN's Kevin Bohn contributed to this report.

What did the senator accuse the White House of trying to cover up?

Who invoked executive privilege to block other advisors testimony?

Answer: of

Answer: The White House has

Answer: trying to protect the president's ability to receive candid advice and offered to let top aides discuss the firings only if they were not placed under oath and no transcript was taken.

Answer: President Bush's top political

Summary:
Executive privilege to keep Karl Rove from testifying about attorney firings .
White House says it is trying to protect president's ability to receive candid advice .
White House invoked executive privilege to block other advisers' testimony .
Senator accuses White House of trying to cover up Rove's role in the firings .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House has provided the use of a government airplane to a key Democratic senator in order to ensure the availability of what may prove to be the deciding 60th vote in favor of the $787 billion economic stimulus package.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, could represent the decisive 60th vote on the $787 billion economic stimulus package.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, has returned to his home state to attend a wake for his 88-year-old mother, who died February 2 from complications from leukemia. At the end of the wake, Brown will be flown from Mansfield, Ohio, to Andrews Air Force Base.

After he casts his vote, he will return to Ohio for his mother's funeral early Saturday.

The plane is being provided by the White House, Brown's office said, because the vote is considered "official business," and there are no commercial flights available that would allow him to cast the vote and return to Ohio for his mother's funeral Saturday morning.

A White House official refused to provide a cost estimate for the military plane, but acknowledged "it will be a higher cost than if he were flying commercial."

The official said it is a "small government plane."

"Taking immediate action to save or create 3.5 million jobs and get America's economy moving again is a top priority for Ohio and the nation," said the White House official. "Given that no commercial flights were available that would allow Sen. Brown to make the vote and to attend services memorializing his mother, the administration provided government transportation to ensure that he could do so."

While the final Senate vote on the stimulus plan began at 5:30 p.m. ET, senators are expected to be allowed to vote until after 10:30 p.m., giving Brown enough time to return to the Capitol.

CNN's Ed Henry and Ted Barrett contributed to this report

What is being provided?
Which vote is he possibly representing?
What will he be borrowing?
Who died at age 88?
What is he voting on?
Who will cast the 60th vote?

Answer: the use of a government airplane

Answer: 60th

Answer: government airplane

Answer: mother,

Answer: the $787 billion economic stimulus package.

Answer: Sen. Sherrod Brown,

Summary:
White House provides plane to Democratic senator so he can vote on stimulus bill .
Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, may represent the decisive 60th vote on measure .
Brown will vote between wake and funeral in Ohio for his mother, who died at age 88 .
White House official says loaner is a "small government plane"


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House is blasting Congressional Democrats for not sending a bill that would fund veterans' care programs to the president's desk by Veterans Day.

The White House's Dana Perino accused Democrats of holding veterans care funding hostage.

"There's absolutely no reason that the veterans' bill could not have been signed by the president today, except for the political games that the Democrats decided to play with it," White House press secretary Dana Perino said Sunday in Crawford, Texas.

Congressional Democrats had attached legislation funding veterans programs to a $150.7 billion bill that also funded a number of domestic priorities, including health, labor and education. Democrats also added $3.7 billion to what the president budgeted for veterans programs.

The labor-health-education bill would increase funding by more than $10 billion over last year's funding for those programs. The president has threatened to veto the bill because of the added spending.

The House passed a health-labor-education bill 269-142 last week with the veterans funding attached, but the Senate later voted to strip out the veterans funding and send the health-labor-education bill to the president.

Perino accused the Democrats of "trying to hold hostage our veterans to extra domestic spending or increases in taxes."

"The president wants clean legislation, a clean bill to fund the veterans," Perino said.

On Saturday, the Democratic congressional leadership sent a letter to President Bush saying they welcomed a dialogue on spending, sayings disagreements over funding levels "have never been so great that we cannot reach agreement on a spending plan that meets the needs of the American people."

"Key to this dialogue, however, is some willingness on your part to actually find common ground," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said in the letter.

The leadership said last year's Congress, which was still under Republican control, had never passed a separate bill funding veterans programs.

Congress also sent to the president legislation that would fund veterans care at the levels requested by the president through December 14, the leadership said.

The current funding level "is still below the $3.9 billion extra that we passed," said Nadeam Elshami, spokesman Pelosi. "We are committed to getting the extra funding that the Congress already voted on the president's desk for his signature."

The leadership blamed Republican members of Congress for stalling the funding for the veterans programs by blocking its inclusion in the larger spending bill.

Perino, though, said the Democrats could still send a separate bill to the president funding the veterans program that passed both chambers of Congress.

"The Democrats decided not to send the president this bill," Perino said. "That has to be laid at their feet." E-mail to a friend

CNN's Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report.

What did the democrats call the White House for?

Who wants a clean bill only funding veterens programmes?

What are Democrats accused of by White House?

What did the White House accuse Democrats of?

What dispute is going on in the White House?

What do White House officials say they want?

what is the health-labor-education bill?

What did the White House accuse the Democrats of?

What does the White House accuse Democrats for

Who does the White House want the clean bill to fund?

What do Democrats want to discuss with the White House?

Answer: of holding veterans care funding hostage.

Answer: veterans' care programs

Answer: "The president

Answer: not sending a bill

Answer: welcomed a dialogue on spending,

Answer: would fund veterans' care programs

Answer: holding veterans care funding hostage.

Answer: Democrats

Answer: veterans' bill

Answer: legislation funding veterans programs

Answer: a number of domestic priorities, including health, labor and education.

Answer: clean legislation, a clean bill to fund the veterans,"

Answer: veterans funding

Answer: not sending a bill that

Answer: that also funded a number of domestic priorities, including health, labor and education.

Answer: holding veterans care funding hostage.

Answer: veterans' care programs

Answer: spending,

Summary:
White House accuses Democrats of holding hostage funding for veterans care .
Funding was attached to large health-labor-education bill .
White House says it wants a clean bill that only funds veterans programs .
Democrats call on White House to engage in a dialogue on spending levels .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House refused to indicate Monday whether President Obama will issue a posthumous pardon for Jack Johnson, the African-American boxing champion convicted in 1913 for dating a white woman. Jack Johnson's 1910 defeat of Jim Jeffries, the "Great White Hope," sparked riots. The House of Representatives on July 29 unanimously passed a resolution urging Obama to grant a pardon; the Senate passed a similar measure by a voice vote on June 24. The push for a rare posthumous pardon has been spearheaded for years by Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York, two of Congress' top boxing enthusiasts. "It is our hope that you will be eager to agree to right this wrong and erase an act of racism that sent an American citizen to prison," they wrote Friday in a letter to Obama. Johnson, the first African-American to win the heavyweight title, was convicted for violating the Mann Act, which outlawed the transportation of women across state lines for "immoral" purposes. He served 10 months in prison on charges "brought forward clearly to keep him away from the boxing ring, where he continued to defeat his white opponents," McCain and King said. Almost a century after Johnson's conviction, his compelling saga has continued to capture the interest of sports writers, civil rights activists and historians. It provides, they agree, a unique window into American politics and culture at a time when Jim Crow-style racism reigned supreme. Johnson was first arrested for breaking the Mann Act in 1912, four years after winning the heavyweight crown. That case fell apart, but investigators soon after charged him with a similar offense involving a woman he had dated years earlier. Justice Department lawyers argued it was a "crime against nature" for him to have a sexual relationship with a white woman. Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, later to become the first commissioner of Major League Baseball, set Johnson's bail at $30,000, the equivalent of more than $660,000 today. When a bail bondsman showed up, Landis jailed him, too, according to an account that filmmaker Ken Burns relays in his documentary "Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson." An all-white jury convicted Johnson in less than two hours. "Mr. Johnson was perhaps persecuted as an individual, but ... it was his misfortune to be the foremost example of the evil in permitting the intermarriage of whites and blacks," one of the prosecutors later said. Johnson's real crime, in the eyes of many, was committed on July 4, 1910, when he successfully defended his boxing title against Jim Jeffries, a white boxer who came to be called the "Great White Hope" because many white fans saw him as the best chance to wrest back a boxing title from the African-American champ. Johnson beat Jeffries, who had come out of retirement for the fight, before a stunned, almost entirely white crowd in Reno, Nevada. Race riots followed. More than 20 people were killed and hundreds were injured. Most victims were black. So when they "couldn't beat him in the ring, the white power establishment decided to beat him in the courts," Burns said in his documentary. Johnson fled to Europe in 1913 while free on appeal. But after years of fights overseas, including the eventual loss of his title in Havana, Cuba, in 1915, Johnson came home. He turned himself over to U.S. authorities at the Mexican border in 1920 and served 10 months in prison. He died in a car wreck in 1946. "Back then, if you were black and you were told that you did something wrong, you really had no recourse," Linda Haywood, Johnson's great-niece, recently told CNN. "You just accepted what was done because black people were basically powerless and voiceless. Jack may have been a rich boxer, but he couldn't fight the system." McCain and King introduced resolutions calling for a presidential pardon

What number of months did Johnson serve in prison?

Answer: Jack Johnson,

Answer: 1913

Answer: July 29

Answer: African-American boxing champion

Answer: 10

Answer: The House of Representatives

Answer: violating the Mann Act,

Summary:
Jack Johnson, the African-American boxing champion, convicted in 1913 .
Sen. John McCain, Rep. Peter King back posthumous pardon .
Resolutions passed House and Senate this summer .
Johnson served 10 months in prison for dating a white woman .


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House released the text Monday of a controversial back-to-school speech to students from President Obama. The uproar over President Obama's back-to-school speech led the White House to release the transcript Monday. Many conservatives have expressed a fear that the address would be used to push a partisan political agenda. In the text of the speech, however, Obama avoids any mention of controversial political initiatives. He repeatedly urges students to work hard and stay in school. "No matter what you want to do with your life, I guarantee that you'll need an education to do it," he says. "This isn't just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country." The text of the 18-minute speech was posted on the White House Web site so people can read it before its scheduled Internet broadcast to schoolchildren Tuesday. Read text of Obama's speech to students (pdf) Some of the president's critics have been adamantly opposed to the idea of an address by Obama to children. "The president's speeches tend to be [about] what's wrong with the country and what can we do to fix it," said Bill Hogsett, a parent from Dallas, Texas. "I believe this is the greatest country on Earth, and I try to teach that to my children. ... I don't want them hearing that there's a fundamental flaw with the country and the kids need to go forward to fix it." Hogsett, who spoke Monday shortly before Obama's remarks were released, said he wanted to read the speech before making a final judgment. Amy Veasley, another parent from the Dallas area, said she was surprised by the controversy. "The president of our country wants to call our students to action. I'm not sure why parents wouldn't want their students to hear out the leader of our country," she said. A Baltimore, Maryland, teacher who asked not to be identified bemoaned the fact that the country has "become so polarized that we believe that our president is an enemy and not our leader." During Bush's presidency, she said, "whether I disagreed or not, I still saw him as a leader." On Sunday, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said that parents who are threatening to keep their children home Tuesday to avoid Obama's speech were being "silly." Appearing on the CBS program "Face the Nation," Duncan emphasized that it is up to school officials whether to include the speech in the day's activities and that the message of the speech is simply to encourage children to finish school. "That's just silly," he said of anyone planning to have their kids stay home because of the speech. "They can go to school. They can not watch." The speech is about "the president challenging young people," Duncan asserted. Some school administrators have decided to show the president's speech, but others will not.  Watch CNN's Ed Henry talk about school speech uproar » Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a possible contender for the GOP's 2012 presidential nomination, said Sunday that Obama's speech would disrupt an already-hectic first day of school for many students. "I think there's concerns about the disruption," he said on CNN's "State of the Union," calling the scheduling of the speech a "little ham-fisted" by the White House.  Watch school reject Obama's speech on education » "There [are] also concerns about is this going to be done in an appropriate manner. I trust and hope that the White House will have a content that is not political and they're not using the public school infrastructure for that purpose." Duncan, however, noted Obama's speech is not unprecedented. President George H.W. Bush delivered a nationally televised speech to students from a Washington school in fall 1991, encouraging them to say

What does Secretary of Education Arne Duncan think?

who says "No matter what you want to do ... you'll need an education"?

what Speech posted on Web site Monday for parents?

What are the thoughts of  Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty?

Which State Gov. said speech could cause first day disruption

What is the Secretary of Educations's name?

Answer: parents who are threatening to keep their children home Tuesday to avoid Obama's speech were being "silly."

Answer: "This isn't just important for your own life and your own future.

Answer: President Obama.

Answer: "This isn't just important for your own life and your own future.

Answer: President Obama's back-to-school

Answer: that Obama's speech would disrupt an already-hectic first day of school for many students.

Answer: The White House

Answer: you want to do with your life, I guarantee that you'll need an education to do it,"

Answer: on the White House Web site

Answer: Arne Duncan

Answer: Minnesota

Answer: Tim Pawlenty,

Answer: Arne Duncan

Answer: Minnesota

Summary:
Speech posted on Web site Monday for parents, pundits to view .
Obama says, "No matter what you want to do ... you'll need an education"
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan: "Silly" of parents to keep kids out of school .
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: Speech could cause first-day "disruption"