 | BookBub brings you free & bargain national bestselling eBooks in the genres of your choice! Sign up now & join 1.5 million happy readers. From our sponsors |
| CNN.com - Top Stories |
| CNN.com delivers up-to-the-minute news and information on the latest top stories, weather, entertainment, politics and more. |
MH370: Search in 'more difficult' phase
5/5/2014 9:05:39 AM
- Officials will review data to see if satellite information has been "accurately interpreted"
- More high-tech devices will be used over an expanded search area
- The search area will expand to deep water that has "never been mapped"
- Australia estimates the next phase will cost $60 million
(CNN) -- More than 300 flights.
Over 3,000 hours in the air.
A staggering 4.6 million square kilometers of ocean.
The numbers speak to the breadth of the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.
The results speak to the fruitlessness of it.
The plane, carrying 239 people, disappeared on March 8. And despite an expansive search involving 26 countries, officials have nothing to show for it.
So authorities are moving on to the next phase of the search -- one that will be even more challenging.
"We know very clearly the area of the follow-up search will be even broader, with more difficulties and tougher tasks," Chinese Transport Minister Yang Chuantang said Monday.
What's next
Australian, Malaysian and Chinese officials will meet in Canberra, Australia, on Wednesday to hash out plans for the next stage of the hunt.
One group will analyze the data and information collected so far. Another will look at the resources needed.
The data audit will look at information gathered since the beginning of the search.
"It will also look again at the satellite information that's been accumulated so that we can make sure that it's been accurately interpreted," Australian Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss said.
Authorities have relied on satellite information and pings believed to be from the plane's flight data recorders in picking their search area.
But with an expanded search area comes the most challenging task ahead: scouring uncharted territory.
A key element of the new phase will be a detailed mapping of the ocean floor.
"We know that the water is very deep," Truss said. "And for the next stage involving sonar and other autonomous vehicles, potentially at very great depths, we need to have an understanding of the ocean floor to be able to undertake that kind of search effectively and safely."
Truss said he's not sure how deep the ocean is in the expanded search area because "it's never been mapped."
The tools
The next stage of the hunt will involved highly specialized technology, including towed side-scan sonar and more autonomous underwater vehicles, Truss said.
"You can count on one hand the number of devices that can do this work, when you talk about towed sonar devices," said Angus Houston, chief coordinator of the joint search effort.
Truss said he's optimistic that the new devices will be in the water within a month or two. In the meantime, he said, the Bluefin-21 drone will continue underwater missions.
The Bluefin-21 has already scanned 400 square kilometers of the Indian Ocean floor, but with no luck. The United States has authorized the use of the drone for another month. The cost? About $40,000 a day.
While the Bluefin-21 provides greater resolution than deep-towed sonar devices, the drone can only go about 4.5 kilometers deep.
The cost
Australia estimates the next phase of the search will cost about $60 million, Truss said. He said officials will consult with Malaysia, China and other parties on how that cost would be shared.
Until now, all countries involved in the search have paid for their own costs.
"Whenever we've asked, people have come forward," Truss said. But "I think we'll be looking at increasing involvement from the manufacturers and their host countries."
Letting others in
The new phase will allow more parties to join the search, acting Malaysian Transport Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said.
"This gives an opportunity to those not involved in the early phase of the search and rescue efforts to come on board," he said.
Those could involve research institutions and more countries, he said.
Truss said most of the new equipment will likely have to come from the private sector.
Lessons learned
It took two years to find the wreckage of Air France Flight 447 in the Atlantic Ocean.
Truss said authorities can learn from that effort.
"There were some quite long gaps in their search, and we don't want that to happen in this instance," he said. "That's why we're starting work this week on actually putting together the next stages of the search."
But as officials from this search have already learned, hope can dash as quickly as it arises.
"We've been confident on the basis of the information provided that the search area was the right one," Truss said. "But in practice, that confidence has not been converted into us discovering any trace of the aircraft."
CNN's Will Ripley and Christine Theodorou contributed to this report.
Spy plane halts flights in California
5/6/2014 4:55:06 AM
- An FAA computer system misinterpreted a spy plane's altitude and path
- The U-2's many flight changes overtaxed system, eventually led to a ground stop
- Flights, especially to Southern California, were delayed and diverted
- The FAA has added memory to prevent a recurrence of the problem, agency says
(CNN) -- A very old spy plane and a very new computer system played pivotal roles in last week's computer glitch that temporarily paralyzed flight operations in southern California, officials tell CNN.
The problem involved a U-2 aircraft, the type famed for conducting reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
A Federal Aviation Administration computer system interpreted the U-2's flight path at a very high altitude as if it were flying in a much lower and more crowded airspace.
The computer -- which anticipates the flight path and looks for possible conflicts such as other aircraft or restricted airspace -- was overtaxed by the many flight changes the U-2 had plotted, officials said.
That work used much of the computer's memory and interrupted its other flight-processing functions, FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said in a statement.
The agency said it has added computer memory to prevent a recurrence, while others said officials are racing to install a more permanent computer patch.
The hourlong computer shutdown Wednesday afternoon led to dozens of delayed, diverted and canceled flights but did not result in any mishaps. It had the most impact in the Los Angeles area, where flights were grounded while experts sought to troubleshoot the problem. The side effects lasted almost half a day.
To resolve the issue, the FAA "has enabled facilities that use the computer system to significantly increase the amount of flight-processing memory available. The FAA is confident these steps will prevent a reoccurrence of this specific problem and other potential similar issues going forward," Brown said.
Two FAA officials, speaking on background Monday, blamed the shutdown on the unlikely convergence of two events.
First, a U-2 aircraft flew a path that involved numerous waypoints and altitude changes in airspace controlled by three facilities. Those facilities were the Los Angeles and Oakland Air Route Traffic Control Centers, and the High Desert TRACON at Edwards Air Force Base.
Simultaneously, there was an outage of the Federal Telecommunications Infrastructure, a primary conduit of information among FAA facilities.
"That (U-2) flight plan, coupled with the FTI outage, in essence created a perfect storm," one official said.
The U.S. Air Force has 32 U-2 aircraft, which are capable of flying at altitudes up to 90,000 feet, according to IHS Jane's.
U.S. stealth and spy planes
The fact the plane was a U-2 was not significant, one FAA official said.
But the plane's many waypoints, or geographic fixes, and its numerous altitude changes overwhelmed a system that projects the flights path and anticipates problems. The situation was complicated by the FTI outage, one official said.
That overtaxed the FAA's flight-processing system, which in turn brought down the FAA's new En Route Automation Modernization system, which manages high-altitude air traffic.
The FAA official likened it to a problem with a software program causing a laptop computer to crash.
CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr contributed to this report.
Russia bans swearing in films, books
5/6/2014 11:56:07 AM
- Putin signs off on new law banning swearing in music, film and books
- Under the law, individuals and businesses can be fined for using foul language
- It covers live arts and entertainment performances, including plays and concerts
- New films containing swear words won't get a distribution certificate
(CNN) -- Thinking about making a film? Better leave out the foul language if you want it to be seen in Russia. The same goes for plays. Even rock stars will need to leave their potty mouths at home.
Russian President Vladimir Putin signed off on a new law Monday that bans swearing at arts, cultural and entertainment events in the country.
Any new film containing obscene language won't be granted a distribution certificate, so there's no chance of seeing it at the movie theater.
And copies of books, CDs or films containing swearing can only be distributed in a sealed package labeled "Contains obscene language," a Kremlin statement said.
According to state news agency ITAR-Tass, individuals caught using foul language face a fine of up to $70, while officials can be fined up to $40 and businesses nearly $1,400. They face a higher fine and a three-month suspension of business for repeated offenses.
Determination of what counts as profane language will be done through "an independent examination," the news agency said.
According to the Kremlin, the legislation "bans the use of obscene language when ensuring the rights of Russian citizens to the use of the state language, and protecting and developing language culture."
The law could come into effect as soon as July 1, ITAR-Tass said, but it doesn't apply to cultural and artistic works that have already been issued.
While some may hail attempts to clean up the nation's language, it will likely be seen by critics as the latest step under Putin's leadership to limit freedom of expression and promote a conservative, nationalist viewpoint.
A report by rights group Amnesty International in January highlighted a denial of "basic freedoms" in Russia, which last year introduced a law barring anyone from talking positively about homosexuality in earshot of minors.
Pussy Riot members attacked in Russian city while eating at McDonalds
CNN's Anna Maja Rappard contributed to this report.
Is U.S. really clueless about rape?
5/6/2014 3:39:42 PM
- A judge gave light sentence to young man who admitted raping a 14-year-old
- Carol Costello says rape is not an 'error in judgment', it's a crime
- She says judges and others seem to have difficulty grasping definition of rape
- Costello: Rape discussion often centers around the victim, rather than perpetrator
Editor's note: Carol Costello anchors the 9 to 11 a.m. ET edition of CNN's "Newsroom" each weekday. Watch the 10 a.m. ET hour of Newsroom Tuesday for a segment on this topic. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- It's 2014, yet many Americans -- including a sitting judge -- apparently don't know how to define rape. They find it difficult to figure out who is an actual victim. They can't even figure out who's a rapist.
Even when the accused pleads guilty to...rape.
I'm not kidding.
It happened in Dallas County, Texas.
A young man named Sir Young admitted, in court, to forcing himself on a 14-year-old classmate.
Young's attorney, Scottie Allen, said the girl expressed interest in having sex with Young, "just not on school grounds."
Apparently Young couldn't wait. As his attorney put it: "he made a very, very bad judgment," and ignored the victim's objections and admitted that to police.
Fancy that! Rape, a "bad judgment."
Apparently that's not out of the realm of sound judicial thinking because Judge Jeanine Howard agreed. She sentenced Young to deferred probation and community service because -- wait for it -- it was partly the victim's fault.
Howard told the Dallas Morning News the girl -- who was in junior high school -- wasn't a virgin and had given birth to a baby.
If that's an invitation to rape, is every girl or woman who's had sex or had a baby fair game?
"Rape is the only crime in which we turn the lens onto the survivor, the victim, and not onto the perpetrator," said Bobbie Villareal, executive director of the Dallas Rape Crisis Center. "When someone gets shot, we don't ever ask them, why didn't you get away from that bullet?"
Lest you think that judge in Texas is the only person on earth who's confused about rape, she's not.
From former Rep. Todd Akin's assertion there's such a thing as "legitimate rape" (as opposed to illegitimate rape?) to Whoopi Goldberg's claim that director Roman Polanski's assault on a 13-year-old girl wasn't "rape-rape," to a defense attorney in Cleveland who called an 11-year-old gang rape victim "a spider" who lured men into her web, all seemed really, really confused about whether a crime even occurred.
Perhaps one of the worst examples happened in Montana. District Judge G. Todd Baugh proclaimed a 14-year-old victim, who committed suicide before the trial started, "older than her chronological age" and "probably as much in control of the situation as the defendant."
The defendant in this case, the girl's 31-year-old teacher, Stacy Dean Rambold. Baugh sentenced Rambold to 15 years, then suspended all but 31 days.
Sure, Rambold's sentence was overturned, but only after massive public outcry.
It's 2014. Why are such things still happening?
Rape is not a "lapse in judgment." And who cares, defense attorney Allen, if an admitted rapist is "very talented, very gifted," and had scholarship offers?
Rape is a crime.
Is murder a "lapse in judgment" that could spoil a killer's bright future?
America actually seems a bit squeamish about calling someone a rapist. Perhaps because there is a perception that women often accuse men unfairly.
Except that's not true. According to a 2012 Justice Department Study, just 4.9% of rape allegations were unfounded.
Opinion: Rape cases -- when judges just don't get it
Jessica Valenti, a feminist writer for the Guardian says it's more complicated than that. She writes: "Part of the problem is that America has never had a clear, accepted cultural definition of what rape is.
Even legal definitions have been confusing. It took until 2013 for the FBI to change its 1929 definition of rape from "the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will" to the new version: "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."
Perhaps the new definition will help. But I'm not convinced. What explanation can there be for sitting judges in separate states to place partial blame on two 14-year-old girls for their own sexual assault?
Unless they believe as Humbert Humbert did in Vladimir Nabokov's "Lolita," a book about a grown man who "fell in love" with a 12-year old girl: "... it was she who seduced me," he said.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
About the GOP's Benghazi obsession
5/6/2014 1:11:08 PM
- Sally Kohn: GOP has been desperately "politicizing" Benghazi since it happened
- Kohn: In the fog of attacks, administration reported what it believed was happening
- Pentagon fed up with repetitive, costly GOP requests, 13 hearings, 50 briefings, she says
- Kohn: Benghazi investigations proved GOP wrong over and over, yet GOP will not drop it
Editor's note: Sally Kohn is a CNN political commentator, progressive activist and columnist. Follow her on Twitter @sallykohn. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- What happened in Benghazi, Libya, was a tragedy -- not a scandal. And no amount of Republican witch hunting or wishful thinking will make it otherwise.
Now a new e-mail "reveals" what was already plainly known, that the White House participated in crafting talking points in the aftermath of attacks in Libya and around the globe. Republicans claim the White House "politicized" the talking points. The irony, of course, is that Republicans have been desperate to politicize Benghazi from day one. Fueled by the relentless conservative message machine, it can be hard to have a reasonable discussion about Benghazi, one that relies on facts. So let's try to have that conversation here.
What exactly are the Republican accusations regarding Benghazi?
The main Republican critique appears to be that the White House and State Department politicized talking points given to U.N Ambassador Susan Rice, who spoke about the attacks on American TV five days later. Republicans argue the White House deliberately downplayed the involvement of al Qaeda and played up the spontaneous nature of the protests as a reaction to an anti-Islam video, to avoid tarnishing President Obama's national security record in advance of the 2012 presidential election. This, despite the fact that the White House talking points matched those produced by the CIA.
Republicans also have criticized the Obama administration for not responding to the attacks more aggressively when they happened, though a bipartisan Senate investigation found that military resources simply weren't in position to help. Similarly, Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican most aggressively pressing Benghazi accusations, says he has "suspicions" that Hillary Clinton gave "stand down" orders to stop military resources from deploying to Benghazi even though a Republican report to the Armed Services Committee says that no such "stand down" order was issued.
In addition, Republicans have criticized the Obama administration for not doing more to prevent the attacks, such as beefing up consular security. Yet it was the same House Republicans who initially denied the Obama administration's request for additional embassy security funding.
What do we believe actually happened that night in Benghazi?
The answer to that question depends on when you're asking it. We know that the killing of four Americans on September 11, 2012, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, was in part the result of pre-coordinated terrorist activity. According to an extensive investigation by The New York Times, "The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs." The Times also reports that the attack was "fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam."
But in critiquing the Obama administration's comments in 2012 in the moments during and after the Benghazi attack, what would seem more relevant is what the White House and intelligence community reasonably believed was happening.
After all, at the same time as the unrest in Benghazi, violent outbursts very clearly in reaction to the anti-Islam video were going on in Egypt, Yemen and Sudan. The night of the Benghazi attacks, Al Jazeera reported they appeared to be spontaneous protests against the anti-Islam film.
Of course we don't know the classified intelligence, but it would not seem preposterous to believe what was happening in Benghazi was more spontaneous protests rather than pre-planned terrorism. And even if affiliates of al Qaeda were suspected to be involved, it's not surprising that the intelligence community would not want to show its hand amid active efforts to track and capture those responsible. It was the CIA that removed the reference to al Qaeda, according to e-mails released to CNN by the White House.
Here is what Susan Rice said, four days later, that in retrospect seems so wildly misleading to conservatives:
"Our current best assessment based on the information that we have at present is that, in fact, what this began as was a spontaneous, not a premeditated, response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.
"We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people, came to the embassy to—or to the consulate, rather—to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then, as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that, as you know, in the wake of the revolution in Libya, are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there."
That seems not only responsibly cautious in the wake of a complicated and still-unfolding national tragedy, but strikingly accurate.
But the talking points were edited! For political motivations!
That's what talking points are, they are the way political figures on both sides of the aisle attempt to tell the facts in the most favorable light. That said, the CIA gave both parties in Congress the same "talking points" it prepared for Rice. And, as noted, there are plausible national security reasons for not wanting to show our entire intelligence hand amid an active investigation.
This responsible caution stands in direct contrast, for instance, to the Bush administration deliberately distorting not only talking points but also actual intelligence reports for political purposes to justify the war in Iraq. Or consider that just hours after the Benghazi killings, even before the White House had made a statement, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney condemned the Obama administration's response. Those talking points were definitely political.
The talking points not only seem consistent with events on the ground at the time but with what we now know, per The New York Times and several congressional reports. Yet that hasn't stopped Sen. John McCain from suggesting that editing talking points amounted to a "cover-up" and Rep. Eric Cantor from saying the White House "misled" the American public.
Can't we have an honest, open investigation and settle this once and for all?
We have. Several times. And then some. So far, Politico reports, Republican congressional investigations on Benghazi have included "13 hearings, 25,000 pages of documents and 50 briefings." In a letter written in March 2014 responding to a request for information from a ranking Democrat in the House Armed Services Committee, the Pentagon notes:
"The department has devoted thousands of man-hours to responding to numerous and often repetitive congressional requests regarding Benghazi, which includes time devoted to approximately 50 congressional hearings, briefings and interviews which the department has led or participated in. The total cost of compliance with Benghazi-related congressional requests sent to the department and other agencies is estimated to be in the millions of dollars."
A bipartisan report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that "there were no efforts by the White House or any other executive branch entities to 'cover-up' facts or make alterations for political purposes." The report did say the attack could have been prevented and blamed the State Department, military and U.S. intelligence community for failing to do so.
What difference does it make?
Great question. And one taken from a quote by Hillary Clinton, made during her testimony on Benghazi to the House Oversight Committee. Conservatives use the line to suggest that Clinton is callous toward the loss of life in Benghazi. No. Here's the full context:
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin: "No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that -- an assault sprang out of that -- and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn't know that."
Clinton: "With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they'd go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again.
"Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. ... But you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backward as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we'll figure out what was going on in the meantime."
"I take responsibility," Clinton said four days after the Benghazi attacks, before Susan Rice ever said a word. "I do feel responsible," Clinton reiterated at the hearings in January 2013. When things went wrong in Benghazi, the Obama administration took responsibility.
But when Republicans have the facts wrong on Benghazi, they don't do the responsible thing and drop it. They keep pursuing their partisan witch hunt, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars desperate to smear Obama and 2016 presidential front-runner Clinton with anything that will stick.
The facts on Benghazi simply do not undercut the Obama administration, but that won't stop Republicans from digging for mud.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
Nigeria kidnap horror: More girls taken overnight
5/6/2014 3:53:55 PM
- Nigerian village residents say armed men took eight more girls late Sunday
- U.N. human rights chief demands that kidnapped girls be returned to their families immediately
- Under international law, slavery is a crime against humanity, Navi Pillay says in a statement
- Islamist group Boko Haram kidnapped hundreds of girls on April 14
CNN anchor Isha Sesay will be live from Abuja on CNN International, Monday to Thursday at 5, 7, 8.30 and 9 p.m. CET.
(CNN) -- More girls have been kidnapped in Nigeria, village residents told CNN, saying that armed men in vehicles abducted eight from Warabe village, which is in the northeast of the country. The Reuters news agency is reporting the kidnappings, citing an unnamed police source and a Warabe resident.
Residents said the gunmen moved from door to door late Sunday and took the girls, who are between 12 and 15 years old.
The latest abductions come amid international outcry over the April 14 kidnapping of hundreds of girls by the Islamist militant group Boko Haram.
On Tuesday the United Nations human rights chief blasted Boko Haram and sent a stern warning to the terrorist organization that U.S. officials say is trained by al Qaeda affiliates. Under international law, slavery and sexual slavery are "crimes against humanity," she said, according to a statement from Rupert Colville, the spokesman for U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay.
"The girls must be immediately returned, unharmed, to their families," the statement urged.
Since Pillay visited Nigeria this year, Boko Haram's actions have "grown increasingly monstrous," the statement said.
A man claiming to be the group's leader, Abubakar Shekau, appeared Monday in a video announcing he would sell his victims. The video was first obtained by Agence-France Presse.
"I abducted your girls. I will sell them in the market, by Allah," he said, according to a CNN translation from the local Hausa language. "There is a market for selling humans. Allah says I should sell. He commands me to sell. I will sell women. I sell women."
Boko Haram's name means "Western education is sin." In the nearly hourlong, rambling video, Shekau repeatedly called for an end to Western education.
"Girls, you should go and get married," he said.
In her statement, Pillay condemned the "violent abduction" of the girls.
According to accounts, armed members of Boko Haram overpowered security guards at a school in Nigeria, yanked the girls out of bed and forced them into trucks. The convoy of trucks then disappeared into the dense forest bordering Cameroon.
Pillay has contacted Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan and urged the government to take all necessary measures to ensure that the girls are freed, her statement said.
Pillay, along with three other African United Nations women leaders, sent a letter reminding the Nigerian government of its "legal responsibility to ensure that girls and boys have the fundamental right to education and to be protected from violence, persecution and intimidation," according to her statement.
Nigeria's finance minister said Monday that her country's government remains committed to finding the girls, but should have done a better job explaining the situation to the public.
"Have we communicated what is being done properly? The answer is no, that people did not have enough information," Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala told CNN's Richard Quest.
It's difficult to release information about the search for the girls, she said, "because you are dealing with people that you don't know, and you don't know ... what they might do to these girls."
The kidnapping has sparked international outrage, much of it expressed on Twitter with the globally trending hashtag #BringBackOurGirls.
'I will sell them,' Boko Haram leader says
What's at stake in war against girls' kidnappers?
6 reasons why the world should demand action
Journalist Aminu Abubakar reported from Nigeria, and CNN's Ashley Fantz wrote this report in Atlanta.
Gunmen make new abductions
5/6/2014 3:36:22 PM
Villagers in northeast Nigeria tell CNN eight more girls have been abducted by Boko Haram gunmen overnight.
If your browser has Adobe Flash Player installed, click above to play. Otherwise, click below.
200 girls 'taken for sex slavery'
5/6/2014 11:59:13 AM
Amara Walker speaks to 2011 Nobel Peace Prize Winner Leymah Gbowee about the response to the kidnapping of 200 girls.
If your browser has Adobe Flash Player installed, click above to play. Otherwise, click below.
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at feedmyinbox.com
If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
No comments:
Post a Comment