Thứ Bảy, 27 tháng 1, 2018

Auto news on Youtube Jan 27 2018

Trump: Respect Must Be Shown To The U.S.

President Donald Trump demanded that other countries respect the United States during

his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the World Economic Forum in Davos.

�I have to say, on the United Nations, we were pretty much out in the wilderness by

ourselves, the United States, and we heard every country was going to be against us,�

Trump said.

�And it was very interesting.�

�I said, you know, we give billions and billions of dollars to these countries, it

amounts to hundreds of millions and sometimes into the billions for certain countries and

they vote against us,� he continued.

�And I made a very simple statement that I�m watching.

I�m watching.�

Trump noted that after letting countries know that he was �watching,� 68 countries voted

with the United States or neutrally on moving the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

He also asserted that the United States will not continue to give money to Palestine unless

they sit down with Israel for peace talks.

�So we�ll see what happens with the peace process, but respect has to be shown to the

U.S.,� he concluded.

�Or we�re just not going any further.�

For more infomation >> Trump Respect Must Be Shown To The U S - Duration: 2:04.

-------------------------------------------

Star Wars: US preparing for WAR in SPACE with China or Russia says Trump Defence Secretary - Duration: 3:29.

Star Wars: US preparing for WAR in SPACE with China or Russia says Trump Defence Secretary

BILLIONS of dollars are set to be spent by the US to prepare the superpower for a space

war with China or Russia, US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis has announced.

The news comes following the release of America's 2018 National Defence Strategy titled "Sharpening

the American Military's Competitive Edge".

The Trump representative said detailed plans were being drawn up to help retain the dominance

of the US in outer space following concerns that China and Russia are catching up.

Mr Mattis said: "Our competitive edge in every domain of warfare — air, land, sea,

space, and cyberspace — is eroding.

"We will modernise key capabilities, recognising we cannot expect success fighting tomorrow's

conflicts with yesterday's weapons or equipment."

International tensions have risen in recent months with the Doomsday Clock striking closer

to midnight this week, after the world's leading scientists announced their concerns

for the safety of the world.

The ominous clock is now two minutes from midnight after researchers from The Bulletin

of the Atomic Scientists unveiled just how close humanity has come to ending the world.

Mr Mattis implied the next big war could be fought over spacecraft.

In a speech, he said: "Space is like any other domain of war."

"Military uses of space are emerging.

"During a conflict, attacks against our critical defence, government, and economic

infrastructure must be anticipated."

However, the US Government official added any war for control of space was likely to

happen on Earth rather than in outer-atmosphere.

He said: "It's not about what you might think, guns in space shooting at each other."

There are a number of important satellites in space that help countries with everything

from predicting the weather to monitoring flights of enemy planes.

In a warning threat to any countries that may consider launching an attack on the US's

assets above the Earth the Defence Secretary added: "Don't try it."

As part of the plans announced the US is said to be considering investing in cheaper satellites

that can quickly replace any space equipment taken out by an enemy force.

He said: "For every satellite up, we'll have a hundred more that could launch as fast

as they're taken out."

Continuing in his announcement on how the US would approach any military threat in space

he said there was a need to come to an agreement on arms control.

Mr Mattis explained: "In space we will do our best to deter.

"But for right now, it's about sizing up the problem and making certain that our diplomats

will be negotiating from a position of strength.

"We'll come up with arms control agreements at some point, and we'll start getting this

under control."

For more infomation >> Star Wars: US preparing for WAR in SPACE with China or Russia says Trump Defence Secretary - Duration: 3:29.

-------------------------------------------

Defense chiefs of South Korea, U.S. hold talks in Hawaii - Duration: 1:23.

South Korea and the United States have wrapped up their latest round of high-level defense

talks.

No details have been released yet, but it's thought they discussed the upcoming Olympic

Games in South Korea as well as their military alliance.

Oh Jung-hee has more.

The defense chiefs and high-level officials of South Korea and the United States sat down

for talks in Hawaii on Friday afternoon, local time.

According to Seoul's Defense Ministry,...

South Korean Defense Minister Song Young-moo and U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis...

discussed the peaceful hosting of the PyeongChang Winter Olympics... and the Seoul-Washington

alliance.

Issues like the transfer of wartime operational control are also expected to have been covered.

The talks come just three months after the two defense chiefs met last October.

Seoul's Defense Ministry says Song and Mattis agreed during a phone conversation earlier

this month to meet face-to-face as often as possible.

Ahead of the talks,... Mattis told reporters that there's an "absolute trust" between South

Korea and the U.S. Mentioning the meeting he would hold his South

Korean counterpart, Mattis stressed that the two allies have been continuing transparent

communication on a daily basis.

He also highlighted that military options against North Korea are always on the table,

though they're to back diplomatic solutions.

Oh Jung-hee, Arirang News.

For more infomation >> Defense chiefs of South Korea, U.S. hold talks in Hawaii - Duration: 1:23.

-------------------------------------------

We will NOT comply Russia refuses to impose North Korea sanctions set by United States - DAILY NEWS - Duration: 2:56.

'We will NOT comply' Russia refuses to impose North Korea sanctions set by United States

RUSSIA has announced it has no intention of

imposing sanctions on North Korea set by the United States, insisting it is under "no

obligation" to comply with them.

Deputy Foreign Minister Igor Morgulov said yesterday Moscow did not recognise "one-sided

American sanctions" and would only enforce those passed by the United Nations (UN) Security

Council.

Russian news agency RIA quoted Mr Morgulov as saying: "We will carry out only sanctions

which are adopted by the UN Security Council.

"We don't recognise one-sided American sanctions, we have no international obligations to comply

with them."

He added officials would not expel citizens from the rogue state living in Russia who

are subject to punitive measures drawn up by President Donald Trump's administration.

This comes as the US State Department urged the Kremlin to "do more" to uphold UN

sanctions and strangle Kim Jong-un's regime of the funds, oil and coal it needs to further

its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.

Relations between Russia and the United States have soured in recent months, despite Mr Trump's

desire to repair the strained relationship with President Vladimir Putin.

And now the Kremlin stands accused of breaching UN sanctions by assisting Pyongyang by purchasing

coal from the hermit state, which is one of its biggest cash sources, then shipping it

to South Korea and Japan.

The Security Council banned all exports of coal from the secretive state in August.

But Western European intelligence sources say the secretive state has since shipped

coal to Russian ports on at least three occasions.

One of the sources, who spoke to Reuters on the condition of anonymity, said: "Russia's

port of Nakhodka is becoming a transhipping hub for North Korean coal."

In response, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov insisted Russia abided by international law.

He told reporters: "Russia is a responsible member of the international community."

Asked about the shipments, a US State Department spokesman said: "It's clear that Russia needs

to do more.

"All UN member states, including Russia, are required to implement sanctions resolutions

in good faith and we expect them all to do so."

For more infomation >> We will NOT comply Russia refuses to impose North Korea sanctions set by United States - DAILY NEWS - Duration: 2:56.

-------------------------------------------

US Approved Ukrainian War Crimes - Duration: 17:41.

Hello,colleagues! I introduce the participants in Donetsk and Lugansk.

In Donetsk the ombudsman in the DPR Daria Morozova - Hello

The deputies of the National Council of the DPR Miroslav Rudenko and Vladimir Bidyovka -Hello

and Elena Shishkina. She is an advocate, the member of the collection and recording of war crimes by the Ukrainian authorities in the Donbass commission  - Hello

I would like to say that Alexander Hug stated that OSCE SMM fixed 478 victims of the conflict in 2017. There are 86 people killed and 392 injured. Do you agree with this numbers or you have another numbers?

- Donetsk, please. Who will start?  - Let me do it - Daria, please

Hello dear journalists, dear colleagues It's true, the numbers are usually very different especially with the reports of OSCE.

We work very close with the United Nations Human Rights Council. If we are not agree with the numbers we usually meet the head of the mission in Ukraine Fiona Frazer.

We usually discuss the statements we don't agree with

Right now I would like to give an information not only from the last report but from the previous reports. I want to talk about the situation in Donbass and in Ukraine

Last year in Kiev the government didn't care much about the human rights. Authorities use many different antidemocratic practices

I am sorry I am very nervous.This is such an important topic for us  ...to destroy the main freedoms

In 2017 the Minsk agreements were violated. Thereby the constant threat was made for the civilians and for the infrastructure as well

The Government of Ukraine  bring to responsibility no one for the events that took place in Donbass and in Kiev

It says in the report that a government of Ukraine made several steps in 2017 to reduce the freedoms like а freedom of expression, freedom of opinion, freedom of mass media and freedom of association

In march 2017 the new law against anti-corruption activists was adopted. Reports says that Ukraine authorities didn't make any steps in investigating the work of MIROTVORETS web-site.

You know there are many people from the DPR and LPR, citizens of the Russian Federation and other countries.

We are trying to ask them to start any investigation, not only we are. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights tries too but no steps were made.

No one was brought to account for the tortures, non-official detain and other violation in the conflict contexts.

The heads of the Ukrainian Security Service despite of the witnesses statements didn't admit the non -official detain and violent disappearing. The investigations started by the Military Procuracy didn't bring any results.

You know that on 27 th of December we had a long-aviated exchange. We are having conversations with the ex-POWs and we are  documenting all the tortures they've passed through.

The minimum that the detained person spent in the dungeons of USS was 6 month. Some people spent there 3-4 years.

Thanks to the collaboration with the United Nations Human Rights Council we could find out a secret prison 1.5 year ago.

13 people were set free from there

According to the interviews with released people we know that on the Ukrainian side there is a secret prisons practice.

We are trying to make an interview with the ex-POWs with the UN, OSCE, the International Committee of the Red Cross representatives to document this.

We understand that there are not much International society reaction. You can have a free access to all our reports, everyone can take a look.

I would like to tell how Kiev react on these reports

I watch the interviews and Kiev refers to these reports but the phrases are taken out of context and they show them  in a good ways for themselves. They don't show the essence of the Donbass conflict

- Thank you  - Thanks very much. I guess we need to give a speech to Elena

Your public organization are fixing war crimes during three years and sending the cases to the European Court of Human Rights

I want to ask you what interim results are you fixing now?

It's true that on the territory of the DPR from the very beginning of the war conflict there is the commission of the collection and recording of war crimes by the Ukrainian authorities in the Donbass

I would like to tell you what is the commission and what is the difference between our commission and the government organizations in the DPR and LPR

The commission of the collection and recording of war crimes by the Ukrainian authorities in the Donbass is some kind of an intelligence center.

There are specialists in the field of law, criminalistics, ballistics and other citizens of our territory.This is a public, the representatives of a civil society

What is the main target of our commission? It's a fixation of a war crimes, crimes against humanity on the Donbass territory.

It's fixing and sending the materials to the International Criminal Court and European Court of Human Rights

The international organizations are fixing the Kiev authorities' crimes, but we are facing the Ukraine politics which is directed to the public and mass-media.

They give fake news. The part of our commission's work is to inform the word public, to give its true information and facts

I would like to talk about the results of work of our commission

In total our specialist sent 585 materials which are fixed and formalized in an appropriate way to the International Criminal Court.

There are annexes with the expert opinions who used the criminalistics methods to establish the directions for artillery shelling

I would like to focus on this

On the 27th of October 2016 the crime were made on the DPR territory. The heavy artillery shelling took place

We have one expert-ballist in our commission. On the basis of scientifically based methodology he determined the direction of the shell. It was from the Ukraine's territory

The conclusions of our commission were introduced in Minsk. The conclusions of the OSCE Mission and our expert are the same. In our case the conclusions are more detailed.

So 585 cases are sent. I want to say about the reactions of the International Criminal Court.

We have answer on 332 cases. We have materials from the criminal prosecutor that the cases are under the studying

This is our big victory because we began from one answer. The cases weren't accepted from us in 2015 and now we have 332 registrated cases

The information about numbers of the victims from the Ukrainian actions. The UN and OSCE reports give underestimate numbers. The categories are bad qualificated.

Our commission fixed that from August 2014 there were more than 1500 appeal sent to European Court of Human Rights

From December 2016 to December 2017 our commission fixed 272 episodes of crimes against humanity and war crimes

As the result 437 people are sufferer, 141 of them are minors, 36 died, 105 were injured and 404 adults from which 158 died, 246 were injured 

- Can you repeat these numbers? - Yes,of course

- To the International Criminal Court 585 materials were send  - NO, I mean the European Court of Human Rights

From December 2016 to December 2017  the 272 episodes of war crimes were fixed.  As the result 437 sufferer,141 of them are minors, 36 died, 105 were injured. From 404 adults 158 died, 246 were injured

I would like to notice that these are not the numbers of victims. These are the numbers of materials which we've sent to the International Criminal Court and European Court of Human Rights.

The numbers of the victims are much more higher

The population of the DPR want to help us very much. They come to us and give voluntarily explanations and evidences. We ask them about the war crimes.

Before in the very beginning of a war people react different. But now it's an active civic position and people want to bring responsibles to justice

During the whole conflict on the DPR territory 4572 people died, 605 of them are women, 3967 men, 76 children.

From the 1st of January to 31st of December 2017 595 people were injured on the DPR territory. 14 children are among them.

From the 1st of January to 31st of December 278 people died, 2 of them are children. Thank you

The question is for Daria Morozova. Not so long time ago the plans about the POWs exchange were voiced.

May be you have approximate numbers of the people you'll exchange? What are the terms?

Unfortunately the POW exchange on the 27 th of December wasn't the exchange all to all.

We can't do it until the end of a conflict, before the 5th paragraph of the Minsk agreement will be accepted.

This paragraph is about the prohibition of a the pursuit and the amnesty of the ones who took part in the Donbass conflict.

We made and exchange but the arrests are continuing I want to say about the non-extradition of the foreign citizens, it's about Russian citizens.

The list was approved by the heads of Republic and supported by the Russian's president and Patriarch Kirill. We are grateful for their support and work.

All the people from the list had to be exchanged. These foreign citizens that weren't given back, they are mostly from Russian Federation.

We have cases where the citizens of the other countries like Brazil, Afghanistan were given back into the embassies

We require to send this people to our territory or to the Russian Embassy. Why was this exchange organized?

There was a category of already convicted people. They wrote a petition on Poroshenko's name to pardon them.

For those people who were under the pre-trial preventive measure was changed to the home arrest

When they pass the line they won't have any possibility to go back to Ukraine. One of the main condition in Minsk was the returning of the documents to the POW

But the documents weren't returned back

We see no difficulties to do  the next stage of the exchange.   We are calling the Ukrainian side to the dialogue

I believe we can exchange people within a month

Right now we want to take all that are confirm.They are 80 people.They were 84. We had correspondence with Mr Medvedchuk yesterday

He sent proves that 4 people were set free. We agree, we want to have a dialogue

So we took away these four people and now we have 80 people to take back

The reports of the UN, the OSCE, the International Committee of the Red Cross are the base for us

We wil certainly meet in Hague the respondents who are guilty in this war. War crimes do not have a statute of limitations

For more infomation >> US Approved Ukrainian War Crimes - Duration: 17:41.

-------------------------------------------

North Korea WW3 WARNING: US will STRUGGLE to win drawn-out bloody ground conflict - expert - Duration: 3:08.

North Korea WW3 WARNING: US will STRUGGLE to win drawn-out bloody ground conflict - expert

A TOP US nuclear expert has revealed that any military campaign against North Korea

could trigger a prolonged ground campaign that the US would struggle to win.

Peter Kuznick, director of Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, has warned

those pursuing conflict with North Korea that a war would be a struggle without any winners.

Mr Kuznick had echoed remarks earlier this week from the top US marine general, Robert

Neller, who said that a North Korea war would be "an exceptionally bloody ground conflict".

This follows the shock US move to deploy two nuclear-capable stealth bombers to Guam, amid

fears of an impending tactical nuclear strike.

The US military acknowledged that their B-2 and B-52 stealth bombers, known as the air

leg of the country's nuclear triad, had been sent to the Pacific territory.

Speaking to RT today, the nuclear expert suggested that President Donald Trump had been bluffing

about his country's military capabilities in taking out Kim Jong-un's regime.

He said the difficult terrain on the Korean peninsula combined with the country's military

resources as the fourth biggest army, would spark a drawn-out and bloody war.

Mr Kuznick explained: "The US is threatening a military strike - however, the top marine

general this week said a military action would be really tough on the Korean peninsula.

"In reality, we would be bogged down in very difficult terrain against the fourth largest

army in the world, which is quite capable of striking Seoul very very easily.

"This would be far from a cake walk or a march to victory.

If there was a military solution, Trump would have acted on it long ago.

"The reality of using the military capabilities is not as great as Trump would like it to

be."

General Robert Neller, head of the US Marine Corps, warned on Thursday that a conflict

with North Korea could set off an exceptionally bloody ground war.

He said: "It will be a very, very kinetic, physical, violent fight over some really,

really tough ground and everybody is going to have to be mentally prepared."

General Neller said the US would have to be ready for unexpected circumstances given the

amount of ground artillery North Korea has.

He said that US troops are continuing to train with a focus on night operations and moving

without being detected as well as maintaining communications in unknown territory.

For more infomation >> North Korea WW3 WARNING: US will STRUGGLE to win drawn-out bloody ground conflict - expert - Duration: 3:08.

-------------------------------------------

US Olympic Committee scrutinized for handling of abuse - Duration: 3:18.

For more infomation >> US Olympic Committee scrutinized for handling of abuse - Duration: 3:18.

-------------------------------------------

Washington FPC Briefing: Spokesperson Nauert State Briefing at FPC - Duration: 44:08.

MS. NAUERT: How are you all?

Thank you so much for coming today, and thank you for your patience.

I'm so sorry to have been delayed so much.

We had a lot of stuff going on at the State Department.

We are redoing some of our press briefing room with some new lights there, and so hopefully

government lights will be more like private sector television lights in the future.

But we'll see.

So we're glad to be back here with you today.

I did a little gaggle with our bullpen, our press at the State Department earlier, so

that's what delayed me.

So my apologies.

A few announcements I'd like to make at the top, so get comfortable, because this

might take a little bit.

First, I'd like to read out part of the Secretary's travel to Europe.

This is his fourth day on the trip.

He's in Davos today accompanying President Trump as part of the U.S. delegation.

As you all know, when the Secretary travels with the President, he pretty much follows

the President's schedule.

I know the White House put out a schedule of the President's events, so I'm going

to have to refer you to the White House for most of the details about the specific schedule

today.

But I did want to let you know about two bilateral meetings that the Secretary conducted in addition

to the schedule that he has with the President.

Shortly after arriving in Davos, Secretary Tillerson was able to sit down with Nechirvan

Barzani, the prime minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq.

And then in the evening, the Secretary met separately with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider

al-Abadi.

I don't have the details of that readout, but if we get them, I'll be sure to pass

them on along to you.

The Secretary will remain in Davos tonight before he heads to Warsaw tomorrow afternoon.

In Poland, he'll meet with senior Polish officials to discuss a range of issues on

the strong U.S.-Poland bilateral relationship, including global challenges, regional security,

and economic prosperity.

On Saturday, the Secretary will lay a wreath at the Warsaw Ghetto Heroes Monument in honor

of International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Later Saturday, we expect he will return to Washington after what we see as a very productive

trip.

In addition to that, I'd like to mention something that was of concern to the United

States.

We've seen some new troubling media reports that Russia intends to sell Su-30 fighter

jets to the Burmese armed forces.

The reports, if confirmed, serve as another reminder of Russia's continued efforts to

arm militaries that flagrantly violate human rights.

While the majority of the world is seeking a peaceful resolution to conflicts in Burma,

the Russian Federation is actively taking steps that may lead to greater suffering and

instability.

It is longstanding U.S. policy not to provide Burma's military with training, weapons,

or other military technology.

This is a consensus that is shared by the majority of the international community, and

that's been in place for decades.

During the most recent crisis in Burma's northern Rakhine State, ethnic cleansing and

other abuses involving security forces prompted the flight of 680,000 ethnic Rohingya to Bangladesh.

That's just since the month of August of 2017.

The United States has provided nearly 95 million in humanitarian assistance since the start

of the Rakhine State crisis, and many other governments have contributed to that effort

as well.

Russia could demonstrate its support for peace by providing humanitarian assistance rather

than aggravating the situation with weapon sales.

While the Russian Federation has said it favors constructive dialogue to resolve the crisis

in Burma, the reports of plans to sell advanced military technology, if true, show otherwise.

We urge the governments of both Russia and Burma to reconsider a further buildup in arms

and fully commit their efforts to finding a peaceful and stable solution to that crisis.

Since you're all journalists, I wanted to touch on this issue in particular.

We are committed to protecting and promoting the exercise of freedom of expression by advancing

and advocating for a free press around the world.

We continue to engage governments to address specific cases of abuses against journalists

and on laws and practices that unduly restrict freedom of expression.

At the United Nations Human Rights Council, the UN General Assembly, the United States

sponsors and supports resolutions calling for the promotion and protection of freedom

of expression and the safety of journalists both online and offline.

We continue to engage with and support the mandate for the UN special rapporteur and

freedom of opinion and expression.

We are a leading voice in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the

OSCE, in defense of freedom of expression -- both online and offline -- and support

the OSCE's representative on freedom of the media.

In Burma, for example, we have repeatedly raised our concerns at the highest levels

of that government with plans to charge two Reuters reporters under the Official Secrets

Act.

We urgently call for their immediate and unconditional release.

In China, we have repeatedly called on authorities to unblock U.S. media websites, eliminate

restrictions that impede the ability of journalists to practice their profession, and allow all

individuals in China to express their views without fear of retribution.

In Turkey, we remain seriously concerned about the widespread arrest and pretrial detention

of journalists critical of the Turkish Government.

We urge Turkey to end its state of emergency, respect and ensure freedom of expression,

fair trial guarantees, judicial independence and other human rights and fundamental freedoms,

and release those journalists and others who are held arbitrarily under emergency rule.

In Pakistan – and this is something new that's taking place now – we are very

concerned about the Pakistani Ministry of Interior's decisions to close the offices

of Radio Free Europe/Radio Free Liberty's[1] Radio Mashaal in Islamabad on January 19th.

We have conveyed our concerns to the Government of Pakistan and we urge Pakistan to swiftly

and unequivocally revoke the closure decision and restore Radio Mashaal's operations.

The Sudanese Government must improve its performance in protecting fundamental freedom of expression.

The United States condemns the recent harassment, the arbitrary detention, and attacks on journalists

in their country simply for doing their jobs.

The negative trends reflect continued actions by governments to stifle dissent and increase

government control over free expression in print and online.

The United States supports freedom of expression, including for members of – freedom of the

press, and fundamental to any democracy.

We reiterate that the same rights that individuals have offline must also be protected online

– in particular, freedom of expression.

Thank you for allowing me to do that.

I'm proud of the work that all of you do.

One more thing I'd like to mention, and that is a private partnership that the United

States Government has with – between USAID, one of our sister agencies, and also the company

Mastercard.

Yesterday, the United States Agency for International Development, USAID – the administrator,

Mark Green, and Mastercard Executive Vice President of Public-Private Partnerships Tara

Nathan co-launched – co-chaired the launch of the Smart Communities Coalition at the

World Economic Forum in Davos.

It's a new coalition that will address technology challenges that refugees and host communities

face and increase their internet connectivity, digital payment capabilities, and energy access

within refugee settlements.

Power Africa – that is a U.S.

Government-led initiative coordinated by USAID – will spearhead efforts to provide energy

access to refugees in a more cost-efficient manner, and USAID's Global Development Lab

and other partners will increase internet and mobile connectivity.

I'd be happy to connect any of you who are interested in that with some of my USAID colleagues,

who will be able to provide greater detail on that, but we're proud of that partnership.

With that, I'd be happy to take your questions.

And we're going to go by region again today; that just makes it all go a lot more smoothly.

MODERATOR: If I can very quickly remind everyone, please wait for a microphone and then please

do identify yourself by name and outlet.

In the gray shirt.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS NAUERT: Hi, sir.

Where would you like to start today?

QUESTION: Philippe Gelie with Le Figaro, France.

I have two questions, if I may, one on Syria.

Is it the case that the United States sees the Euphrates River as a red line not to be

crossed by Turkey?

Secondly, on the peace process in the Middle East --

MS NAUERT: Okay, let me get to your first question first.

I'll come back to you for the second question, because I'd like to break it down by region.

That's typically how we --

QUESTION: It's not far.

MS NAUERT: -- typically how we handle things, okay?

So in terms of the Euphrates River, the vast majority of our engagement in Syria has been

in areas where ISIS is extremely prevalent, and that would be east of the Euphrates River.

That is where the United States and coalition partners are working in conjunction with the

Syrian Democratic Forces.

Those forces are comprised of multi-ethnic groups, including Arabs, including Kurds,

including Christians, Turkmen, and we're working very hard with them to prevent ISIS

from coming back.

But ISIS is still a threat.

The Department of Defense put together a press statement – I believe it was today or yesterday

– that referred to 150 ISIS fighters being detained or killed.

So that shows just how serious the situation is.

That is where the most – the vast majority – of the work is being done, east of Euphrates,

and I'd be happy to come back to you again on Israel.

Okay?

QUESTION: Can you say if that's a red line or not?

MS NAUERT: Look, people love to use that term, "a red line."

I'm not going to go there and say anything about a red line.

I'm just telling you where the vast majority of the work is being done.

And we are there – and let me remind you, we are there, the United States along with

the coalition – we are there to defeat ISIS.

We are there to fight ISIS and to prevent ISIS from coming back once it is defeated.

Okay, go ahead.

MODERATOR: Staying with Syria.

QUESTION: Thank you, Heather.

I have two questions.

The local authorities in Afrin canton in Syria asked the Syrian regime to go to the area

to protect the area from Turkish aggression.

What's the U.S. view on that?

And the second, did U.S. propose a safe zone to Turkey?

And Turkey's claiming it was proposed, but Turkey is rejecting.

What was that about and – if you can give us anything.

MODERATOR: If you could give your name and outlet, sir.

QUESTION: Sorry.

I'm Roj Zalla with Rudaw.

MS NAUERT: Right.

The United States has had a lot of conversations recently with the Turkish Government.

As you know, the President had a phone call yesterday with President Erdogan.

Secretary Tillerson was on that call.

The White House provided a readout of that call, and it was a very firm and I would say

a stern call, because we're extremely concerned about the situation in Afrin.

We believe that everyone should keep their eye, the focus on ISIS, and not get distracted

by other things.

That being said, we understand and we share Turkey's concerns about the PKK.

The United States likewise considers the PKK to be a terror organization.

Turkey is an important NATO ally and partner.

However, if Turkey gets focused on what is going on in Afrin, which we're very concerned

about, that takes the eye off of ISIS.

The whole reason we are in Syria, that we are engaged there – not just the United

States, but everybody else in the coalition – is to take out ISIS, the very organization

that was beheading people and crucifying people.

That is why we are there.

We have had a series of conversations.

The Secretary spoke with his counterpart – I believe it was just yesterday in Europe – expressing

those very same and very considerable concerns.

QUESTION: What about the Syrian regime going back to Afrin?

MS NAUERT: I don't have any comment on that.

I don't have any information on that, as well.

I saw the report, but I have not seen it being any – something that's been officially

requested of the United States Government.

QUESTION: Still on Syria?

MS NAUERT: Okay.

MODERATOR: Yes, okay.

Here and there.

QUESTION: Thank you.

Rahim Rashidi from Kurdistan TV.

MS NAUERT: Yeah, hi.

QUESTION: Thank you.

Do you think that you have done enough to stop Erdogan's attacks on the Kurds?

MS NAUERT: Well, that's why we're having such serious conversations with President

Erdogan and others in the Turkish Government.

We are urging Turkey to de-escalate, and that's a serious thing.

When we call on a country, especially a NATO ally, to de-escalate, we hope that they're

taking that – those concerns very seriously.

President Trump's readout of his call with President Erdogan, I would characterize that

as fairly stern.

I'd be happy to read part of that for you.

But in the call he relayed concerns about escalating violence in Afrin; it risks undercutting

our shared goals in Syria.

The President urged Turkey to de-escalate, to limit its military actions in that area,

avoid civilian casualties.

We note that a few people were just killed as a result, a few civilians were.

That is a tremendous concern of ours.

We've also asked for them to do more to try to avoid civilian casualties, increases

in displaced people and refugees.

We see that people now have to flee an area that was previously considered pretty stable.

I mean, what a shame that is.

Think about all that this country has been through, and now we're looking at another

disruption in northwestern Syria because Turkey has taken its eye off the ball, ISIS, and

going after the PKK at this time?

Again, I mention we share our concerns, but we want stability in Syria and we would eventually

like to be able to have a political resolution, and have people be able to come back home.

So we're not just there yet.

In addition, I'd like to mention the President also urged Turkey to exercise caution and

avoid any actions that might risk conflict between Turkish and American forces.

That is obviously an enormous concern for ours.

The President reiterated that both nations must focus all parties and – on the shared

goal of achieving the lasting defeat of ISIS.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: We're going to take one more in the back here, and then we'll go to New

York, if you're on Syria.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

QUESTION: Some – what --

QUESTION: Kinana --

QUESTION: What role would a reinstated --

MODERATOR: One second.

QUESTION: -- JIM play in sort of the --

MODERATOR: You're next.

QUESTION: -- strategy in Syria?

MS NAUERT: Oh, he can't hear you.

QUESTION: And are there any conditions that the U.S. would accept from the Russians on

reinstating the JIM?

MS NAUERT: Okay.

So I'll take his question.

We'll skip around because I think he can't --

MODERATOR: Hear.

MS NAUERT: -- perhaps hear Benjamin.

So his question is about the Joint Investigative Mechanism, which we've addressed this before

and, as many of you probably know, the Joint Investigative Mechanism out of the United

Nations was something that Russia had vetoed on three occasions.

They stood in the way of the Joint Investigative Mechanism.

That is the entity that puts accountability on a country or an entity who is engaged in

some sort of chemical weapons attacks or attacks on people.

Not only do you have to know what has caused the deaths of people, but – and there's

another to entity that handles that – but you also need to be able to assign responsibility

for that.

Russia stood in the way.

Secretary Tillerson put out a very clear, very firm statement on that just recently.

Ambassador Haley has spoken to this as well.

She said that Russia should take action to uphold existing international norms against

the use of chemical weapons rather than continuing to impede action.

Now, to your question, you asked about a new Russian proposal.

We believe that that newly Russia – pardon me.

We believe that the new proposed Russian mechanism does not have the same standards for investigation

and attribution that were included in earlier UN Security Council versions that would have

extended the JIM mandate back in November.

The Russian proposal would include Russia – Russia's ability to veto it.

So if you're trying to name a country responsible, but yet you have Russia that can step in and

veto it, I would think that that would be a tremendous concern to many countries around

the world.

It would have the ability to take away the independent authority of the JIM, making attribution

determinations the responsible[2] of the UN Security Council, which obviously, as I just

mentioned, Russia or other countries could veto that.

So if Russia truly cares about holding parties accountable for using chemical weapons, it

should not have vetoed the three occasions the UN Security Council resolutions to extend

the JIM mandate, or the UN Security Council resolution to establish a sanctions regime

to designate those responsible for chemical weapons use in Syria.

We also note the timing that Russia brought this up earlier this week.

That is the same time that the Secretary and many other countries were announcing the French-led

partnership on this very same issue.

So I think what they were attempting to do is try to distract attention from the good

work that was being done with many countries on the issue of weapons.

Okay.

QUESTION: Kinana al-Shareef, Orient News Channel.

My question is: Will the United States support Moscow's bid for Sochi's – Sochi success,

whether a larger slice of Syrian refuse it?

MS NAUERT: I'm sorry, you're asking about Sochi?

QUESTION: Yes.

MS NAUERT: Okay, okay.

So I'm sorry.

I thought you were referring to some news.

QUESTION: Will the United States support it?

MS NAUERT: Will we support Sochi talks?

QUESTION: Sochi – yes.

MS NAUERT: So regarding Syria, we support the Geneva talks, and that is our strong preferred

approach.

It's not just ours, it's shared by many other partners and allies of the United States.

Staffan de Mistura has been hard at work on Geneva talks to resolve the crisis in Syria

for about six years now.

So we stand firmly behind those talks.

We certainly understand that Sochi talks are taking place following that.

We believe that that – the Sochi talks may be a one-time deal.

Maybe something will come out of it.

But we stand firmly behind the Geneva talks, which, by the way, ironically are being held

in Vienna.

So maybe we call them Vienna talks.

MODERATOR: Still on Syria?

QUESTION: Yes, please.

MODERATOR: Okay.

Sir, in the blue jacket.

QUESTION: Hello, this is Ediz Tiyansan from TRT World.

MS NAUERT: Hi.

QUESTION: So I'm curious, you said – you showed tremendous concern for the civilian

lives lost across the border in Syria, and you said that Turkey is being distracted.

But in the past couple of days, there are several reports about people in southeastern

villages and towns in Turkey being distracted by rockets and mortars that are fired by the

YPG, and potentially by some of the weapons that have been provided by the United States.

I'm just wondering how much of tremendous concern do you show towards the attacks coming

from YPG to a NATO ally?

MS NAUERT: I think I was clear about that, that we regard the PKK as a terror group,

and we share Turkey's concerns, and as a NATO – as a NATO partner – pardon me,

as a NATO ally.

So we understand their concerns.

But let's keep the eye on the ball of defeating ISIS, and not get distracted by other things.

So in terms of weapons, the United States has provided weapons to the Syrian Democratic

Forces for use in Raqqa, okay, in Raqqa, Syria, to retake Raqqa from ISIS, and they've been

successful in doing so.

Those weapons were mission-specific.

We are not providing anything to any other groups in the area.

I want to be clear about that.

But anything beyond that, I'd have to refer you to the Department of Defense.

QUESTION: Are you looking into some of these attacks at all to check whether those weapons

you provided, the United States has provided, is being used by YPG?

MS NAUERT: Look, that is something that our Department of Defense is involved with, so

I don't have any additional detail to provide you about weapons use.

Okay.

MODERATOR: We'll take one more on Syria.

Sir.

The gentleman in the sweater.

QUESTION: On President Trump and --

MODERATOR: Sir, can you give your name and your outlet, please?

QUESTION: Voice of America Turkish Service.

MS NAUERT: Hi.

QUESTION: My name is Toroglu.

On President Trump and President Erdogan call yesterday, there were deep differences between

the White House readout and the accounts given by the Turkish officials.

On many of the things in the White House readout, the Turks gave a different version.

Can you comment on this?

MS NAUERT: Yeah, it doesn't surprise me.

I think the President was clear.

I think the President was tough with President Erdogan.

Secretary Tillerson has been as well, because we are tremendously concerned about the escalation

of violence and what that could mean for Syria.

So we stand by – and when I say we, at this point I can say on behalf of the State Department

and also the White House – we stand by that statement.

We stand by the readout and the contents of that call.

MODERATOR: Okay, why don't we switch topics?

QUESTION: Asia?

MODERATOR: Okay, let's do from Poland first and then we'll come back.

QUESTION: Thank you, Heather.

Marcin Wrona, TVN Poland.

MS NAUERT: Hey.

QUESTION: You mentioned the Secretary's visit to Poland, which starts tomorrow, and

you talked what's on the agenda.

I wanted to ask you about the general message that the Secretary is coming with to Poland

and then that he wants to deliver to the Polish officials.

But I also understand that he will deliver some kind of remarks on Saturday, so also

what's the message --

MS NAUERT: Sure, and let me go over a little bit of the schedule with you.

I have some of that, so I can provide some of that information if I can find it in this

monster-size book here.

Pardon me.

Okay.

So the Secretary travels to Warsaw tomorrow, where he will participate in a multilateral

meeting and then will – I'm sorry.

He'll meet with our ambassador there.

He'll meet with the president of Poland as well.

And I can go over this with you one-on-one if you like.

He'll also meet with the Polish prime minister and the foreign minister, where they will

later do a press availability.

There will be a wreath-laying remarks at the Warsaw Ghetto Heroes Monument, and then the

Secretary will hold a regional chiefs of mission meeting in Warsaw and meet with some of our

mission personnel at our embassy in Warsaw.

Our relationship with Poland is very important to the United States.

It's one of our closest NATO allies.

We have so many areas where we work together and where we are in close agreement.

The purpose of the Secretary's trip is really to underscore the importance and the deep

alliance and friendship that we share with Poland and the Polish people, especially as

one of our closest NATO allies.

The President has said that Poland is one of the most committed members of the NATO

alliance, and we want to use the trip as an opportunity to strengthen that strategic partnership

that we have with the country.

The Secretary will be speaking about issues closely tied to NATO, also bilateral issues;

will work on strengthening cooperation in all of these areas in ways that improve the

safety and security of the American people.

And we're looking forward to that.

We also do a lot of energy exchanges, if you will, with Poland.

And so we look forward to have greater discussions with them.

MODERATOR: All right.

Staying in Europe for now.

Other questions for Europe?

MS NAUERT: In the back.

MODERATOR: In the far back.

Yeah.

MS NAUERT: In the back.

QUESTION: Yes.

Hi, my name is Nikki Kazimova, and I want to stay somewhat in Russia's neighborhood

in Eastern Europe.

My questions are related to Azerbaijan.

So tomorrow Russian army chief of staff and NATO commander will be meeting in Baku, and

do you know anything?

Do you – can you share any details on what subjects they will be discussing?

Another question is, in its recently updated travel advisory, State Department included

Azerbaijan in the category two, citing threat of terrorism, which surprised many in Baku.

And do you have, again, any information on the specific reasons for this classification?

And the last question so far --

MODERATOR: Okay, can we limit that for right now?

Just two.

QUESTION: Yeah.

Just very briefly --

MS NAUERT: I'm going to have to get back with you on the meeting that you asked about

in Azerbaijan and also the travel advisory.

I don't have all that specific information.

But regarding the travel advisory, you can find more information on our website about

Azerbaijan or any other country around the world by going on our state.gov website.

QUESTION: And also the U.S. co-chair of the Minsk Group took part in the recent meeting

between foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Krakow, Poland, and also they will

be traveling to the region in early February.

Again, do you --

MS NAUERT: You're referring to Ambassador Kurt Volker?

QUESTION: No, the --

MS NAUERT: Oh.

QUESTION: I'm referring to the Minsk Group, the peace talks on Nagorno-Karabakh.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

QUESTION: And again, if there is any feedback on whether the U.S. co-chair considers those

peace talks, the last round, successful or not.

MS NAUERT: I'm sorry, I don't have anything for you on that, but I'd be happy to get

you an answer later.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

My apologies.

MODERATOR: All right, let's take one from New York, please, and then we'll come back.

Sir, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Heather, for this briefing.

My name is Ahmed Fathi of ATN News in New York.

My question is about Egypt and the development that is happening with regard to the upcoming

presidential elections.

Reports have confirmed that serious contenders have been either intimidated, threatened,

and some have been disqualified under some made-up pretenses, and all of this leading

into a direction of having a play or a theater of an election.

But without real substance, we ended up with potential candidates.

One is a belly dancer, and the other one is quite an animated character.

Does the U.S. and the Secretary of State feel at all embarrassed that they go to the Congress

to certify that Egypt is undertaking serious reforms in areas of human rights in areas

of political reform, without any real substance?

You spoke earlier about U.S. position from Russia that they are intending to sell military

weapons to Burma, which is violating human rights.

And you spoke about the freedom of expression, which is Egypt is the third-largest jailer

of journalists around the world.

Yet there is no clear position, clear and concise position of the U.S.

Government and about the military aid that's going to Egypt paid, financed by the U.S.

taxpayers.

And again, the war against terrorism is not going into the right direction.

MODERATOR: Sir, can we respond to some of those questions?

QUESTION: The hardware that Egypt receives gets into the hands of people who are oppressing

the people.

Thank you.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

Let me try to break that down just a little bit, and I thank you, sir, for asking that

question.

With regard to the detention of presidential candidates in Egypt, we are following that

situation very closely and very carefully.

We are concerned about those developments.

We're concerned about reports of detention, withdrawal, exclusion from the election process

of presidential candidates amid complaints of unfairness.

We support a genuine and credible electoral process and believe that this should guarantee

the right and opportunity for all citizens to participate freely and fairly.

Earlier this week, we had clearly stated that we support a credible electoral process, so

I want to assure you that we are keeping a close eye on what is going there.

Secretary Tillerson just spoke with Egypt's foreign minister yesterday; we provided a

readout of that call.

And the Vice President, as you all know, was just in Egypt a few days ago.

Among the things that the Vice President said – and I can't speak for the Vice President,

but I can provide some kind of high-level detail – he said, "I leave Egypt more

encouraged."

He said that they spoke significantly, as did Secretary Tillerson, about security issues.

I know a major issue for Egypt – of Egyptian concern – is the situation in Syria.

Secretary Tillerson had an extensive conversation with the Egyptian Foreign Minister about that

very issue.

I know that's something that we are very focused on, as is the Egyptian Government

as well.

Back to the Vice President – they've talked about areas of great concern to the United

States and people who care about freedom.

Among those things, Egypt's NGO law, which is of concern to us.

He also spoke about religious freedoms, as we've seen attacks – that horrific attack

on a mosque that took place late last year.

That was something that the Vice President expressed his condolences.

The attacks on Coptic Christian churches in Egypt – horrific.

So we're paying close attention.

You may not hear our comments all the time.

Frankly, we don't get that many questions from the press about Egypt.

I'm glad you're asking today and I'm glad to be able to address some of these,

so I hope that answers some of your questions.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Okay, and we spent a lot of time in the Middle East, so I do want to move around

a little bit, and I heard DPRK.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

MODERATOR: Okay.

DPRK?

QUESTION: Hi, Heather.

Chen Liu from China's Xinhua News Agency.

And since the start of this new year, we've seen some positive momentum going on in the

Korean Peninsula – the high-level talks between DPRK and South Korea, and the DPRK's

delegation to the Winter Olympic Games.

So there are just – seeing that it's kind of a window of opportunity for all the parties

concerned to sit down and have a serious political talk.

So China has already just proposed to restart the Six-Party Talks.

So I'm just wondering that – what is the response from the U.S. side?

MS NAUERT: I think we're not there yet.

The United States's position has not changed on the matter of North Korea.

We want a denuclearized Korean Peninsula.

That is our goal for North Korea and we keep pushing ahead with that goal with many other

countries from all around the world.

We are willing to have talks with the North Korean regime, but the time is not right,

not right now.

Not right now.

They know what they need to do.

They need to be serious about denuclearization and we are not seeing that they are serious

about denuclearization.

In terms of the Republic of Korea and also North Korea having conversations about the

Olympics, we certainly would support those kinds of contacts and conversations.

We think it's good to have conversations and be able to pick up the phone and have

a conversation with your neighbor.

So that we support, and we look forward to having a terrific Olympics in Seoul – or

in Korea.

QUESTION: (Off-mike)

MODERATOR: Can I – we – get a few more people --

MS NAUERT: Let's just try to – let's just try to move around a little bit.

MODERATOR: In the far back, red – red blouse, please.

QUESTION: Hi, Heather.

MS NAUERT: Hi.

QUESTION: Haye-ah Lee with South Korea's Yonhap News Agency.

There are concerns that the Trump administration's attacks on the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement

could actually play into North Korea's hands and help them drive a wedge in the bilateral

alliance.

Could you address those concerns?

MS NAUERT: Yeah.

So, I could refer you to our trade office for more information about the Korea alliance,

but what I can say overall is that we have a very strong alliance, partnership, and friendship

with Korea.

That will not change.

I can't imagine that anything with regard to change is going to – or is going to deteriorate

or lessen our bond with the Republic of Korea.

MODERATOR: We'll take one more on DPRK.

Sir.

MS NAUERT: Oh.

Oren, I'm going to have to – we'll have to talk later.

I mean, we were trying to keep this limited to foreign press.

QUESTION: So I wasn't at the gaggle because I didn't know about it.

MS NAUERT: We don't get a chance to talk to the foreign press, but I'd be happy to

talk with you one-on-one later, okay?

QUESTION: All right.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

MODERATOR: Okay.

Still on DPRK.

We'll go in the back, please.

QUESTION: Hi, Heather.

MS NAUERT: Hi.

QUESTION: Francesca with the Yomiuri Shimbun.

Is the U.S. looking to verify for itself the photos taken by Japan of a ship making a delivery

to a North Korean tanker?

And if so, what actions are you going to take?

It's allegedly a Dominican ship.

MS NAUERT: Yeah.

So we're aware and certainly following those reports very closely.

Some information, just as a general matter, can come in from satellite photos, some from

other countries, and all of that.

So it's something that the U.S.

Government takes a very close look at those types of photos of ships that could be false-flagged

ships, for example.

In terms of any kind of intelligence matters, I just can't get into those on that.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: North Korea?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MODERATOR: Okay.

Let's do Latin America, and then we'll take one more.

MS NAUERT: Are we done with Asia?

MODERATOR: Are we done with the DPRK?

QUESTION: DPRK.

MS NAUERT: Yeah.

Okay.

MODERATOR: Okay.

One DPRK here.

QUESTION: Thank you, Ben, and thank you, Heather.

Bingru Wang with Hong Kong Phoenix TV.

Yesterday, Secretary Tillerson had a phone conversation with Mr. Lavrov, and they discussed

Vancouver North Korea conference.

I wonder if Secretary Tillerson also discussed with his Chinese counterpart on this meeting,

as the United States said they going to do it before.

And also on this topic --

MS NAUERT: Let me answer your first – the first part of your question first.

DPRK is always an issue that we are speaking about with the Chinese Government.

That is our top foreign policy priority.

The things that we always say – safety and security of Americans, our top concern; our

top foreign policy priority is denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula because we see that

as such a incredible international threat, and frankly, so does the world.

So I can tell you our Acting Assistant Secretary Susan Thornton was recently in Mongolia, Indonesia,

and also China, and that was one of the issues that she discussed there.

Beyond that, I don't have any new updates for you.

Okay.

QUESTION: And the recent --

MS NAUERT: I want to get around to as many people as possible, so.

MODERATOR: Okay.

So let's take the Latin America question, and then we're going to come back to Middle

East.

MS NAUERT: Oh, are we – are we done with Asia, though?

QUESTION: No.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

Let's do a couple more on Asia, and then we'll go on to it.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS NAUERT: Yeah.

Hi.

QUESTION: I have a question about --

MS NAUERT: I'm sorry, your outlet is?

QUESTION: Chia Chang from United Daily News Group Taiwan.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

QUESTION: I have a question about Taiwan that we recently noticed that the Taiwan flag on

State Department and USTR was removed.

Can you tell us the reason to remove it?

And if it's a technical mistake, will you put it on – put it back on?

Thank you.

MS NAUERT: So I can tell you our policy regarding Taiwan has not changed.

The United States remains committed to our "one China" policy based on three joint

communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act.

We consider Taiwan to be a vital partner, a democratic success story, and a force for

good in the world.

Taiwan shares our values and has earned our respect and continues to merit our strong

rapport – our strong support.

That's all I have for you on that.

Thank you.

Okay.

MODERATOR: Okay.

So back to Asia, or can we move on?

MS NAUERT: All right.

Nope, we can move on.

MODERATOR: Okay.

We'll take this question here.

And then I know we have a bunch of Middle East that we haven't answered, and we're

going to swing back.

QUESTION: Hi.

I'm Cristina Garcia with Spanish Newswire EFE.

So Peruvian foreign affairs minister said when he visited Washington that Secretary

Tillerson is planning a trip to Latin America early this year, and that he'll visit Peru

among other countries.

Could you confirm this?

And also, is he going to attend the Americas Summit in Lima this April?

Thank you so much.

MS NAUERT: I can confirm you that – for you that the Secretary is planning a trip

to the region.

I know he looks forward to it.

It's coming up in a few weeks.

Do we have all the specifics for a readout on that?

MR GREENAN: Soon.

A couple days.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

Okay, we'll have something for you in just a couple days.

This will be Secretary Tillerson's first trip as Secretary of State to the region.

I know it's long overdue, and I know he's really looking forward to that.

Okay.

Anything else Latin America?

MODERATOR: Okay.

Anything else Latin America?

MS NAUERT: Okay.

MODERATOR: And we'll finish that and then we'll go back to Middle East.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

MODERATOR: Okay.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS NAUERT: Oh, right.

What did you – sir, what did you want to ask about?

QUESTION: Thank you.

On the Middle East peace process, I listened to Ambassador Nikki Haley this morning.

I really wonder what exactly does the U.S. diplomacy intend to achieve by systematically

blaming one side, aligning entirely with the other.

On what ground would you argue that the U.S. remains an honest broker?

MS NAUERT: Okay.

Well, I wouldn't accept the premise of your question.

I can tell you that one of the top priorities for the President is Middle East peace, and

that is the reason why he put people that he trusts and is very close to, and who are

passionate about the issue in charge of handling Middle East peace.

It is something that we are committed to.

The United States recognizes that achieving Middle East peace will, in fact, be difficult.

We have gone decades and decades without seeing Middle East peace work thus far.

Hopefully now things will change.

We would like to bring both sides to the table to have conversations about that and we're

optimistic about it going forward in the future.

Sure, talk can sometimes be tough, but look, I think the administration views it this way:

that things haven't worked for so many years; we're going to try a slightly different

approach.

MODERATOR: Okay.

Still in Middle East, we'll take one back --

QUESTION: Thank you, Heather.

Mounira Al Hmoud, i24 News.

The PLO ambassador to Washington spoke actually this morning for the first time after the

U.S. decision was made on Jerusalem, and he said he does want – he doesn't want to

remove the U.S. as negotiator, but he wants an international framework which, first up,

would be the UN Security Council.

I'm just wondering if the State Department has any reaction to this.

MS NAUERT: Yeah, I'm not aware of his comments, so I would hesitate to comment on that without

having seen them myself and having our experts take the opportunity to review them.

MODERATOR: To Laurie.

QUESTION: Yeah, Laurie Mylroie, Kurdistan --

MS NAUERT: Hi, Laurie.

MODERATOR: Wait for the mike, please.

QUESTION: Oh.

Laurie Mylroie, Kurdistan 24.

I wonder if you're confident that Turkey has gotten your message.

The Turkish deputy prime minister said today that those – talking about the United States,

"Those who support the terrorist organization will become a target in this battle," and

"The U.S. needs to review its soldiers and elements giving support to terrorists."

What is your response to that, and do you still have a continuing concern about a possible

conflict around Manbij between U.S. and Turkish troops?

MS NAUERT: Well, I think that's exactly why the President and the Secretary urges

Turkey to de-escalate and make sure that they're not coming into contact with U.S. and other

coalition forces.

I think the Secretary and the President have been very clear with President Erdogan and

with the Secretary's counterpart about that matter.

QUESTION: And do you have any specific response to that statement threatening U.S. troops?

MS NAUERT: Look, a lot of countries will say outrageous things, leaders will say outrageous

things.

I'm not going to comment on any comment – on every comment by a world leader.

Okay.

MODERATOR: Okay.

Still in --

QUESTION: China?

MODERATOR: -- still in Middle East.

Middle East?

MS NAUERT: Okay.

We're done with the Middle East.

Okay.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS NAUERT: Okay.

Go right ahead.

QUESTION: Hi, Heather.

Thank you for coming back.

Nadia Tsao, Washington correspondent for Liberty Times.

I think in last phone conversation, President Trump and President Xi talk about this year

they should resume the four dialogue they established last year.

Just wondered, do you have any agenda about the U.S. and the Chinese dialogue?

Besides DPRK, are there anything else to talk about?

MS NAUERT: Well, this past year, or 2017, I should say, we had the Strategic Dialogue,

which was started at Mar-a-Lago in March or April of last year, and that was one of the

President's, I believe it was – this predates my time at the State Department, but I believe

that was the President's first real formal sit-down with another world leader.

I think that shows the importance of our relationship with the Chinese Government.

I don't know if we have another one planned for this year, but I know we view last year's

Strategic Dialogue as having been successful.

We talked about a range of issues.

The last one, I believe, was about our – strongly about our people-to-people and cultural ties

with the Chinese.

So there were different issues.

There was the security dialogue as well that was held, I think, a month or two prior to

that, and so we cover a range of topics.

I just don't have any meetings or schedules to provide you right now.

MODERATOR: Okay.

I think we have time for one more and let's stay with China, then.

MS NAUERT: Okay.

QUESTION: China?

MODERATOR: Okay, China.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS NAUERT: Wait, you already got a question.

QUESTION: Yes, on China.

MODERATOR: Okay.

QUESTION: Just on Tuesday, Chinese Ambassador to United States Cui Tiankai just said in

an interview that he characterized current China-U.S. relations like the partner and

saying that maybe the two countries will – just will never run out of problems or questions,

but the relationships – the relationships will still going on, just in the process of

this problem-solving.

So I'm just wondering that how would you characterize the current bilateral relations

and – yeah, that.

MS NAUERT: Look, China is obviously an important regional and world power.

We work closely with China on issues related to North Korea, on issues related to trade,

and many other issues as well.

It's an important relationship.

It's a broad relationship.

We don't seek an adversarial relationship with China.

We simply identify actions China has taken that we view as undermining rules-based order

that has been fundamental to the success of the overall Indo-Pacific region as well as

China's own economic development.

So our relationship with China hasn't changed.

It's a broad relationship.

But similar to other countries, when we have areas of disagreement, we will have conversations,

and we will have frank and firm conversations, but we also have areas of cooperation.

As it pertains to the DPRK, one of the top issues that we discuss with China, we always

say China can do more.

We expect China to do more.

MODERATOR: I think that's it for time.

PARTICIPANT: Qatar (inaudible).

MS NAUERT: Oh, yes, some information for you on a strategic dialogue that we are holding

here in Washington next week which was just announced right before I came over here.

The U.S. is hosting a U.S.-Qatar strategic dialogue next week.

I'm happy to announce that we will hold that at the State Department on Tuesday, January

the 30th.

Secretary Tillerson and Secretary Mattis will co-chair the opening session of the dialogue

jointly with their Qatari counterparts.

We're pleased to be hosting the senior Qatari officials at an event that reaffirms our close

ties and our commitment to cultivating a strategic relationship with the state of Qatar.

They are a strategic partner and we will use the dialogue to deepen our collaboration with

Qatar.

We look forward to discussing many important areas of cooperation between our countries,

including trade and investment, defense, security and law enforcement, counterterrorism, and

also aviation.

We'll also focus on the critical regional issues on defeating ISIS, the Gulf dispute

which is still ongoing, Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) Asia?

MODERATOR: And that is probably time.

MS NAUERT: Okay, okay.

MODERATOR: Yeah, it's --

MS NAUERT: We got to --

MODERATOR: We're at time.

Thank you very much. I'm sorry that we couldn't get around to everybody.

MS NAUERT: I'll see you at the State Department another time.

Alright. And if any American journalists have any questions, you can come on up, but

this is the Foreign Press Center, so we are trying to cater to foreign press today.

For more infomation >> Washington FPC Briefing: Spokesperson Nauert State Briefing at FPC - Duration: 44:08.

-------------------------------------------

BREAKING News Outside U.S. Capitol – He's Just Been ARRESTED! Prison WON'T Be Fun For Him! - Duration: 5:23.

For more infomation >> BREAKING News Outside U.S. Capitol – He's Just Been ARRESTED! Prison WON'T Be Fun For Him! - Duration: 5:23.

-------------------------------------------

How the U.S. became the hip-hop nation - Duration: 8:27.

JUDY WOODRUFF: The Grammy Awards for music will be given out Sunday night in New York,

and this year's nominees are the most diverse ever.

Many hip-hop artists have been nominated in several categories, including song of the

year and album of the year.

Some believe the Recording Academy is finally catching up to public opinion.

Tonight, special correspondent Charlayne Hunter-Gault explores the history and evolution of the

hip-hop nation, as part of our ongoing series Race Matters Solutions.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Here on the hallowed grounds of Harvard University, hip-hop is

alive and loud at the Hiphop Archive and Research Institute.

But music like this is being used in a unique way, and that's to encourage the pursuit of

knowledge, art, culture and responsible leadership, as Professor Marcyliena Morgan, head of the

16-year-old Hiphop Archive, told her overflowing class.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN, Harvard University: When you think about hip-hop, it's from the core

of the culture of America.

How do we really represent in the world?

And to have a soundtrack for that becomes very important.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: To that end, the institute has archived hundreds of the most influential

hip-hop albums, and features examples of the kind of hip-hop now being recognized at the

Grammys.

The archive also includes long-overlooked female hip-hop artists and the highly popular

Eminem.

To get more insight into the role hip-hop is playing in society, I met up with Marcyliena

Morgan at the institute.

I want to get to why hip-hop at Harvard in a minute, but first I want to take a few steps

back and, to use a hip-hop phrase, if I can, when you first got woke to hip-hop and how

a professor of anthropology went there.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: I was an assistant professor, just starting my career at UCLA, and I'm a

linguistic anthropologist, so I look at language and culture in particular.

So, when hip-hop starts, it's absolutely something I notice, because people are rhyming.

And instead of rhymes on the street that you heard in the African-American community, the

Last Poets or some group like that, you began to hear a different form of rhyme with young

men and women, and it seemed as though something was going on.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: About what year was that?

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: That was in the late '80s.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: How, then, in that context, or in any context, do you define

hip-hop?

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: Well, at that particular time, hip-hop was clearly about representing

who you are in a context where people seem to be trying to bury you, trying to destroy

you, because, remember, this is the time when you're removing all arts programs from public

schools.

It's back to basics.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: So, you define hip-hop sort of in the same way that you define the

kung fu movies, right?

Tell me about that.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: It's a battle, and the battle is really important in hip-hop.

But so is the critic.

And the critic is the one who is constantly talking about what is going on in society.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: I remember the early days of rap.

There were the b-boys, pop, locking, and rocking, and break-dancing on cardboard pallets.

There was gangsta rap.

And some critics saw some of the same words they were using to define women or prolific

use of the N-word.

Take us briefly from there to where you have seen hip-hop evolve.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: That happens really at a point of evolution when hip-hop takes over

the entire country.

I immediately noticed how people rhymed, what kinds of words and expressions they created

or used, things like the word woke, the use of irregular verbs, and then trying to make

them regular verbs in some ways, because if you think about when someone says woke, you

know, it's not wake.

Woke.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: It means you're hip, you're open, you're cool, you're enlightened.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: Right.

Exactly.

And how that works -- right.

And the sort of linguistic creativity that occurs that at the time many people thought,

those people don't know their grammar, they don't know their language, when, in fact,

they're playing a game with it, and they're playing it beautifully.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Yes, but beautiful, as I said, some of the critics didn't like

the way women were referred to.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: Throughout all musical genres, I didn't like the way women were referred

to.

I didn't even like the way women were referred to in opera in terms of the woman who is sought

after is one that is supposed to die in the end.

You look at M.C.

Lyte, you look at Salt-N-Pepa, women really led that move to talk about taking care of

yourself, protecting yourself from the spread of HIV.

The hip-hop community has always been very interested in health.

Using condoms actually really becomes a big topic within all that.

If you remember TLC and the Left eye and the condoms that she used to wear and things like

that on her face, and all of that is happening with a generation who is listening and learning

and presenting that information to their generation.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Using words that the generation deals with, like the N-word.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: That's right.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: I know there continues to be a debate about it, but you're saying

there's a different way to look at it.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: Well, if you think about it, when black people use the term, there's

a range of what it means, OK?

And it is possible that it is not a bad thing to say.

If, in fact, I'm a hip-hop artist and I'm using it in a really negative way as part

of a an argument, that's a performance.

That's a persona of an anger and argument.

But if all you have is that one note, that's just racist.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: I hear you.

Let's to get back to Harvard, where you established the Hiphop Archives.

For those who might find this an odd fit for Harvard, tell us why not.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: Harvard really understands itself as highest level.

When you think about hip-hop, we're talking about kids who nobody, for the most part,

said to them, you are brilliant, you are magnificent, you are going to be the most amazing artist

or physician in the world who are coming from these communities.

They aren't hearing that.

But they say it to each other.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: The Grammys this year are clearly acknowledging diversity.

What does that say to you?

And do you have any predictions?

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: I think it's really exciting.

It's different.

So, you have got someone like Jay-Z, who not only has incredible skills and background

and longevity.

And you have Kendrick Lamar, Cardi B.

We can go on and on and on..

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Are there lessons within the hip-hop world that help the larger

society that's so racially divided and in the rest of the world?

You say that hip-hop sends out a different message.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: Well, hip-hop's message is to build.

It comes from not being prejudiced, not seeing race, but seeing the content of the character,

right?

That is what really hip-hop is focused on.

It's, who are you really?

Do you know who you are?

Do you know where you're from?

This culture is supporting you.

It's believing in you.

It's here because of you.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Professor Marcyliena Morgan, I have learned so much from you.

Thank you for joining us.

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: It's been a pleasure.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: You think I'm woke?

MARCYLIENA MORGAN: I think you definitely are woke.

(LAUGHTER)

JUDY WOODRUFF: You can find the full list of Grammy nominations on our Web site, PBS.org/NewsHour.

And, on Monday, join us for a Twitter chat on the hip-hop nation and a review of Sunday's

Grammy Awards.

For more infomation >> How the U.S. became the hip-hop nation - Duration: 8:27.

-------------------------------------------

Fmr. U.S. Atty. Guy Lewis Breaks Down Trump, Mueller Investigation - Duration: 5:20.

For more infomation >> Fmr. U.S. Atty. Guy Lewis Breaks Down Trump, Mueller Investigation - Duration: 5:20.

-------------------------------------------

1/27/18 10:52 AM (7581 US-77, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:01.

For more infomation >> 1/27/18 10:52 AM (7581 US-77, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:01.

-------------------------------------------

Turkish president Erdogan slams US (English Subtitles) - Duration: 0:40.

It's been just 7 days since the beginning of the operation and they (Americans) are telling us that the operation must be kept short.

I want to ask them: How many years the Americans are operating in Afghanistan? Almost 20 years.

How many years in Iraq? Almost 18 years. You are still there.

Libya? How many Years? Mali, Rwanda?

And they say we should end it in a short time. Those who try to 'give us mind' (lecture us) should use their mind before giving it to us.

For more infomation >> Turkish president Erdogan slams US (English Subtitles) - Duration: 0:40.

-------------------------------------------

1/27/18 10:57 AM (401-411 US-40 BUS, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:11.

For more infomation >> 1/27/18 10:57 AM (401-411 US-40 BUS, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:11.

-------------------------------------------

1/27/18 9:51 AM (9137-9199 US-77, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:05.

For more infomation >> 1/27/18 9:51 AM (9137-9199 US-77, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:05.

-------------------------------------------

1/27/18 9:08 AM (381-431 US-40 BUS, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:02.

For more infomation >> 1/27/18 9:08 AM (381-431 US-40 BUS, Junction City, KS 66441, USA) - Duration: 5:02.

-------------------------------------------

CNN 10 - January 27, 2018 | U.S. troops and equipment are on the move throughout Eastern Europe - Duration: 10:01.

This is CNN 10. Ten minutes of world news explained. I`m Carl Azuz.

And leading things off this Wednesday, January 18th, a mystery, one of the biggest in the

history of aviation may go unsolved. The underwater search

for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has been called off. On March 8, 2014, the flight left

Kuala Lumpur and headed for Beijing, China. It had 239

people onboard.

At some point during the journey, military radar indicated that the plane changed course

and headed west. Investigators believe it eventually turned

south, toward the southern Indian Ocean. After that, the train went cold. A few pieces of

the plane have washed up on islands near the east coast of

Africa. But despite years of searching 46,000 square miles and spending millions of dollars,

no one knows what happened to the plane. Its black

box, its flight data recorder may hold some answers, but it`s missing with the flight.

And Malaysia, China, and Australia, the three countries leading the search announced yesterday

they were suspending it. They said the decision was

not made lightly or without sadness.

But a group that represents family members of the flight`s passengers says stopping it

at this stage is nothing short of irresponsible.

Following a plane crash, the search for survivors always comes first. But just as important

is a search for

answers, the why and the how. Often, those answers are found in a black box.

What is a black box?

CRANE: Since the `60s, all commercial airplanes have been required to have one on board. Now,

the name is a little misleading because they`re

actually orange. And when we`re talking about a black box, we`re talking about two different

boxes -- one being the cockpit voice recorder, the

other being the flight data recorder. Together, they weigh anywhere between 20 to 30 pounds,

and they have to be crash-proof.

Black boxes can survive just about anything: temperatures up to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit

for an hour, forces that are 3400 Gs. Now, that`s 3400

times the force of gravity. They`re waterproof and they can save recorded data for two years.

And it`s a lot of data.

The cockpit voice recorder records that crew`s conversation and background noise. By listening

to the ambient sounds in the cockpit before a crash,

experts can determine if the stall took place, the RPMs of the engine and the speed of which

the plane was traveling. When these sounds are cross-

referenced with ground control conversations, they can even help searches locate a crash

site.

Then, there`s the flight data recorder. It gathers 25 hours of technical data from airplane

sensors, recording several thousand discreet pieces of

information. Data about the airspeed, altitude, pitch, acceleration, roll, fuel, and the list

goes on and on.

But to make sense of the data, first, you have to find it. Not an easy thing to do when

a plane crashes into the ocean.

Both black box components are outfitted with underwater locator beacons, which self-activated

the moment they come into contact with water. They

sent pings once per second to signal their location and can transmit data from as deep

as 20,000 feet for up to 30 days, when their batteries then

run out.

But on land, there`s no such pinging to help guide the search. Investigators have to sift

through the wreckage until they find it.

Up next, it`s a force of 4,000 U.S. troops, plus 2,400 pieces of military equipment, including

tanks, artillery and armored trucks. It`s

all part of a deployment lasting nine months and it`s moving throughout Eastern Europe

on training exercises.

The Americans who recently arrived in Poland received a welcome ceremony and a greeting

from the country`s prime minister.

A commander of the U.S. land forces in Europe says their presence was a concrete sign of

the continued U.S. commitment to the defense of Poland and

the NATO alliance.

But Russia said it saw the deployment as a threat, an action that threatens Russian interest

and security. Here`s why there`s tension over this.

The one thing you need to know about U.S. troop deployment across Europe is the word

"collective defense".

Let`s take this example, say, Russian tanks crossed the border and invaded Latvia, well,

then, it would be U.S. soldiers that rushed to the frontline

in Latvia`s defense. That`s the basis of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or NATO,

an alliance of 28 countries guaranteeing their

region`s security. An attack on one is an attack on all.

But the United States has, by far, the most powerful military in the alliance.

The NATO was formed in 1949, just after World War II, in order to contain the Soviet Union.

But in 1991, the USSR collapsed. In the next decade or

so, NATO grew to include some of those former Soviet states. Then, in 2014, Russian forces

entered Ukraine, seizing the Crimean Peninsula, a

violation of international law.

Now, Ukraine is not a member of NATO. So, the United States and other NATO allies did

not mobilize troops to defend Ukraine, but many of Ukraine`s

neighbors are members of NATO.

Poland, Estonia, and Latvia are just some of the NATO allies that have called for more

troops to come to their defense. And this is why we see

thousands of U.S. troops now deployed across Eastern Europe, to create a strong deterrent

against any further Russian aggression.

Ten-second trivia.

Which U.S. president gave the shortest inaugural address? George Washington, William Henry

Harrison, Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Delano

Roosevelt?

Delivered in 1793, George Washington`s second inaugural address was the shortest ever in

135 words, just two paragraphs.

Two hundred twenty-four years later, a presidential inauguration is a massive event. No matter

how short or long the speech might be. The

price tag can ring up at $200 million.

That`s not just this year`s event, that`s what inaugurations can typically cost in the

21st century. According to the Washington Post", both parties,

Democrats and Republicans, tend to spend the same amount for inaugurations.

Private donations can cover $70 million of the cost, give or take. The rest comes from

taxpayers and the money goes to everything from security,

the biggest expense, to the swearing in ceremony, the parade, the parties, and the inaugural

ball.

Inauguration day is a long one for the new leader of the free world.

Traditionally, the president-elect wakes up at Blair House, the president`s guest house.

President-elect Trump is planning to stay at Blair House, even with his hotel just down

the street.

Then the president-elect takes a ride around the corner to St. John`s Church.

Then it`s time to take the oath.

I, George Herbert Walker, Bush --

That I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States.

Next: deliver a killer speech.

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

Do whatever needs to be done to preserve this last and greatest bastion of freedom.

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

Grab lunch with the Senate.

Thank you for a president who knows you and seeks your through Scripture.

The lunch has been a thing since 1953.

That`s followed by a brisk walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. (Or a drive. It`s cold in January.)

Then it`s time to thaw out and watch the parade. (Or take a selfie.)

Finally, it`s time to have a(n inaugural) ball.

Optional: Show off.

There`s a quick, easy and free way to find out in advance what`s coming up on CNN 10,

by signing for our daily email. From our home page,

all you got to do is click on "sign up for daily emails". Enter your email address, your

first name, your state, that`s it.

The night before each day`s show, you get a quick summary of our major stories sent

right to your inbox.

For "10 out of 10" today, you`d expect to see a polar bear playing in the snow. So,

no surprises here. But when you see an Asian elephant

doing the same thing, you know something is up.

This ain`t the Arctic, it`s the Oregon Zoo. It shut down one day last week for an unusually

strong snow storm, but some of the animals looked like

they love it. They took advantage of a snow day to play like kids on a day off from school.

Of course, the polar animals could bear it. As far as complaints went, the marine mammals`

lips were sealed, and it didn`t seem like it bothered the

elephant`s pachydermis. So, even if snow wasn`t part of their natural habitat, it wasn`t zoo

cold for them to luzooriate in near blizood

conditions.

I`m Carl Azooz for CNN 10.

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét