In this task, you are given news articles and you need to generate a highlight, i.e., a short summary, with a maximum length of 10 lines.

Q: Former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic once again faces two genocide charges instead of one in his long-running trial over ethnic violence during the 1990s Balkan wars. Appellate judges at a U.N. war crimes tribunal in the Netherlands on Thursday reinstated the second genocide charge, ruling that the tribunal improperly dismissed the count in June 2012. Karadzic, whose trial began in 2010, also faces nine other charges related to ethnic violence during the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. The reinstated charge accuses Karadzic of trying to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Croats from parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992. The charge was thrown out last year after the prosecution rested its case, with the tribunal ruling that there wasn't enough evidence for a genocide conviction on that particular allegation. But the appellate judges Thursday ruled that the evidence of serious abuse against Bosnian Muslims and Croats -- including detaining them in overcrowded, squalid conditions where they were starved and left vulnerable to disease -- could be shown to be genocidal acts. The judges cited allegations that Karadzic and officials loyal to him decided on a plan to rid Bosnia of Muslims, in part by killing a third of them and converting another third to Orthodox Christianity. Thursday's decision came exactly 18 years after the notorious 1995 Srebrencia massacre, for which Karadzic faces the other genocide charge. Nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys were killed in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica in July 1995. Srebrenica became an emblem for the dissolution of Yugoslavia -- once a multiethnic state of Serbs, Croats, Muslims and others -- into six countries during a bloody and brutal conflict. On Thursday, more than 400 victims of the massacre were to be reburied at a memorial center in Potocari in Bosnia and Herzegovina, adding to the more than 5,000 victims already buried there, the country's state-run news agency FENA reported. Victims of the massacre have been buried at the site periodically as officials locate and identify more victims in mass graves. "Sadness and pain, I have no words. It is so hard," said Fadila Efendic, who was set to bury her son Fejzo at the site Thursday, according to FENA. "This is beyond any human comprehension what they did to us and what we are experiencing." The 1992-95 Bosnian conflict was the longest of the wars spawned by the breakup of Yugoslavia. Karadzic was removed from power in 1995, when the Dayton Accord that ended the Bosnian war barred anyone accused of war crimes from holding office. Karadzic was captured in 2008 after more than 13 years of hiding in plain sight in Belgrade. He had adopted an elaborate disguise that included long hair and a full beard, and was practicing alternative medicine in the Serbian capital. His former military commander, Ratko Mladic, was captured in 2011 and is also on trial for charges including genocide. Both men would face life in prison if convicted. The court cannot impose the death penalty. Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic also faced charges connected with the Balkan wars, but he died in 2006 while on trial at The Hague.

A: The reinstated count accuses Radovan Karadzic of trying to remove Muslims from Bosnia .
He was the leader of the breakaway Serb Republic in Bosnia in the 1990s .
Karadzic, on trial since 2010, also faces a charge of genocide over the Srebrenica massacre .
****
Q: (CNN) -- Explorer Dennis Schmitt found an island nearly two years ago near Greenland. Fishermen pass by Greenland's Ilulissat fjord in this September 2004 picture. Such a discovery would usually elicit curiosity, even wonder perhaps, but it evoked mixed feelings for the explorer. The island was once thought to be a peninsula attached to Greenland by an ice shelf or a glacier. But such a large amount of ice melted, it revealed the distinct island. "I very quickly realized two things," he told CNN's Anderson Cooper during a visit to the island earlier this year. "One [was] that this was going to be significant because it was going to be an example of climate change." "The other thing was that it meant it was really happening. It wasn't a joke. It wasn't just statistics. It was really happening." He calls his discovery Warming Island. Many climatologists and scientists say arctic ice melt and other changes in the Earth's climate are the result of an increase in the world's temperature, a trend widely called global warming. Many global warming experts say the phenomenon, if unchecked, is capable of altering the world's climate and geography. In the worst-case scenario, experts say oceans could rise to overwhelming and catastrophic levels, flooding cities and altering seashores. Other scientists and observers, a minority compared to those who believe the warming trend is something ominous, say it is simply the latest shift in the cyclical patterns of a planet's life. Most of the scientific community believes that some warming is occurring across the globe and through some layers of the atmosphere. But why it is occurring and what that means for the future is scientifically and politically contentious. The Earth's temperature averages about 60 degrees Fahrenheit (about 16 degrees Celsius). The average surface temperature has warmed one degree Fahrenheit (0.6 degrees Celsius) during the last century, according to the National Research Council. The temperatures were relatively unchanged from 1880 to 1910, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. They rose till about 1945, cooled until about 1975 and have risen steadily to present day. There are several possible reasons for the warming, scientists say. A change in the Earth's orbit or the intensity of the sun's radiation could change, triggering warming or cooling. The reason most cited -- by scientists and scientific organizations -- for the current warming trend is an increase in the concentrations of greenhouse gases, which are in the atmosphere naturally and help keep the planet's temperature at a comfortable level. The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, for instance, has increased by 35 percent since the dawn of the industrial age, according to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, commonly referred to as the IPCC. The presence of methane is now 151 percent above pre-industrial levels, but the rate of increase has slowed in recent decades, according to the EPA. Meanwhile, nitrous oxide increased by about 18 percent during the past 200 years. Many scientists and experts who have studied global warming believe the increase is primarily the result of human activities, like the burning of fossil fuels, emissions from vehicles and the clearing of forests. "For the last 30 years, there's no way there's anything natural that can explain it," Stephen Schneider, a professor of environmental studies at Stanford University in California, said. "A vast bulk of the knowledgeable and honest community ... will say the science is settled and humans are at least a majority of the reason behind the warming," he added. Many scientific organizations share Schneider's view, ranging from the national academies of the countries that comprise the G8 to the National Research Council, the American Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Union. But there are those who do not share his view, and among the skeptics is Richard Lindzen, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "We've suddenly taken to reading tea leaves," he said. "When we saw cooling from 1940 to 1970, we were proclaiming global cooling. Since then, there's been a few tenths of global warming, so we're proclaiming global warming." He believes the current warming trend is the result of natural variability, where a planet goes through phases of warming and cooling and the human contribution to it is minimal. "The Earth is always getting colder and warmer," he said. "It's always changing. In fact, this is true of any fluid-covered planet." Asked about glacial melt, which many observers point to as evidence of global warming, Lindzen said the way glaciers change and move are phenomena largely unexplained. "We don't know why, but it's perfectly clear that glaciers change even though the temperature is cooling at the place that they've occurred," he said. "What we're doing is cherry picking any event that occurs and then saying that's occurring due to global warming." Yet, for Schneider, it is a cause for concern and alarm. "We're already in serious melt, nobody can explain it. The models don't predict it," he said. "We don't know what's going on up there. All we know is that we could be triggering something really nasty." The greatest point of contention is the possible implications for future political and economic policies for the world's nations. The IPCC in February 2007 projected that if carbon dioxide levels doubled relative to pre-industrial levels, temperatures could rise between 3.6 to 8.1 degrees Fahrenheit (2 to 4.5 degrees Celsius) by 2100. The lower end of the range could cause more intense hurricanes, droughts, wildfires and flooding, Schneider said. The higher end could lead to the catastrophes commonly associated with the visions of Hollywood filmmakers. Uncertainties, however, plague such forecasts, which are based on computer simulations and models. The models contemplate factors associated with how the atmosphere, oceans and continents interact, all natural elements that have unpredictability intrinsic to them. "Exactly how much it's going to warm up, we don't know," Schneider said. "That it's going to warm up? I'd bet anything on that." E-mail to a friend .

A: Earth has warmed one degree in past 100 years .
Majority of scientists say greenhouse gases are causing temperatures to rise .
Some critics say planets often in periods of warming or cooling .
****
Q: (CNN) -- American journalist James Foley was murdered, beheaded by an English-speaking member of ISIS, the extremist group that calls itself the Islamic State and has already conquered large swaths of two Middle Eastern countries. The sickening execution, recorded and released online for the world to see, came with a warning to the U.S.: ISIS showed another captive American journalist, believed to be Steven Sotloff, and threatened to kill him too if the U.S. does not stop helping those fighting to stop ISIS advances. The killing and the threat, along with all the evidence ISIS is leaving as it gouges its way across the region, are a direct challenge to the American people, to the U.S. government and to the international community. As it makes increasingly clear what kind of an organization it is, ISIS is sending a message: "Stay out of this, so we can keep driving toward our objective." President Obama said Wednesday that "We will do everything we can to protect our people ... The entire world is appalled by the brutal murder." The U.S. government has crucial steps to take now. First, obviously, it cannot give into ISIS threats and must continue helping dislodge ISIS from northern Iraq where it is engaging in ethnic cleansing against Christians and other minorities; kidnapping, raping and selling women; and massacring people. The U.S. effort should keep a special focus on helping America's loyal and ideologically moderate friends, the Kurds of Iraq. At the same time, the U.S. should make a strong diplomatic push to obtain international legitimacy for the campaign to defeat ISIS. It is important to prevent ISIS from scoring a recruiting victory among Muslims and anti-Western and anti-American camps by portraying this as a war between Islam and the West, which it is not. There are few people on Earth who are not horrified by ISIS. That includes the overwhelming majority of Muslims. The grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, called ISIS and al Qaeda "Enemy No. 1" of Islam. Countless Muslims have criticized and condemned them. ISIS is the enemy of anyone who does not belong to ISIS. They kill minorities, Shiite Muslims and Sunnis who don't abide by their views. They are virulently opposed to the West, to the U.S., to modernity and to anyone who sees the world differently from their narrow medieval perspective. The U.S. should seek a U.N. resolution declaring that the international community, including the Muslim world, considers ISIS and its methods repugnant. Any country that disagrees, any government that is not revolted by ISIS and troubled by its methods and its goals, should go on record saying so. Before ISIS, we knew that human beings are capable of unspeakable brutality. But anyone who thought man's inhumanity to man had eased after the mass crimes of the 20th century now knows better. ISIS didn't just remind us how cruel humans can be; it has taken the use of brutality as a weapon of intimidation, extermination, genocide and recruitment propaganda to new levels. ISIS is not the first to murder victims in large numbers; it is not the first to kill those who disagree with its beliefs or who belong to different ethnic or religious groups. But it seems no group has advertised its bloodlust with such relish and effectiveness. More important, those using these methods, embracing this philosophy, are in control of enormous territories. When ISIS calls itself a state, it is not hyperbole by very much. ISIS has taken over a a tract of land bigger than many countries, something that al Qaeda, its comparatively mild-mannered inspiration, never came close to achieving. ISIS has established and gained full dominion not only of cities and populations but of wealthy oil-producing lands. It is now financially self-sufficient, collecting millions of dollars every day from oil smuggling operations. If not stopped, it could continue its push toward the oil fields of southern Iraq at the edge of the Persian Gulf, which remains the epicenter of oil and gas production that allows the global economy to function. If Osama bin Laden weren't dead, he would die of envy. ISIS views the videos of mass executions, of severed heads on poles and of crucified men, as a way to keep its enemies frightened and weakened, and a way to tell prospective recruits that it is fearless in its war to create an Islamic caliphate ruling over all the world's Muslims. Its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, incidentally, claims to rule over all Muslims and believes the ultimate goal of ISIS is to take over huge sections of Asia, Europe and Africa. The killing of Foley, an idealistic journalist, sharpens our understanding of the organization seeking to dominate the Middle East. That the man who murdered him might have been British should erase any remaining fantasy in the West that this gruesome war, now raging in Syria and Iraq, will stay within any country's or any region's borders. Those who seek to downplay the risk to the United States should think again. Britain has confirmed that Foley's killer was most likely a British citizen. There have been reports of hundreds, even thousands, of Europeans training, fighting and killing alongside ISIS. In June 2013, a video from Syria surfaced, showing men cutting off another man's head. To the shock of Europeans, they were heard speaking Dutch. The ISIS members who hold European passports are able to travel freely across Europe and the U.S. and are prepared to do the unthinkable. There are hundreds of Germans, Spaniards, Belgians, French. Graduates of the Syria war, from where ISIS pushed into Iraq, have killed in Europe. And ISIS ideology is gaining support in the continent. Last month, ISIS flags flew in an anti-Israel demonstration in the Hague, chanting against America and the West and most enthusiastically, "Death to the Jews." ISIS can simply not be allowed to keep a foothold in the Middle East. If it does, the consequences will become even more catastrophic. In Iraq alone, 1.2 million people have been displaced, thousands killed. It is politically and strategically complicated, because ISIS is also fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah, and defeating ISIS would also be enormously pleasing to Iran. But the group is a growing threat. The strategy of supporting the Kurds and the Iraqis in the front lines is a good one. It must be bolstered with material and diplomatic support. If it proves insufficient to turning back the bloody ISIS tide, then it must be revamped. Foley's mother said her son gave his life trying to expose to the world the suffering of the Syrian people. That suffering has now extended to Iraq, and it will only become more widespread if ISIS is not stopped.

A:
Frida Ghitis: U.S. cannot give in to ISIS threats, must focus on helping Kurds of Iraq .
Ghitis: U.N. resolution should declare that Muslims, rest of the world find ISIS horrific .
Ghitis: U.S. should make sure this is not framed as a war against Islam and the West .
She says ISIS is a threat to the whole world; Europeans are joining in big numbers .
****