World News For All

Sunday, May 13, 2018

Surabaya: Suicide bombers attack Indonesia police headquarters

Police outside the station following the blast

Attackers on motorbikes carried out a suicide bombing at a police headquarters in Surabaya, a day after a wave of deadly blasts in the Indonesian city.

Authorities said a young girl who was with the group, survived the attack, which wounded at least 10 people.
It comes after another family carried out bomb attacks on three churches on Sunday.
The Islamic State group has said it was behind those attacks.
Indonesia, the most populous Muslim-majority country, has seen a resurgence of Islamist militancy in recent months.
President Joko Widodo described the string of attacks as "cowardly, undignified and inhumane".
"There will be no compromise in taking action on the ground to stop terrorism."
Authorities on Monday said police, backed by military forces, would increase security across the country.
It was not yet clear whether the latest attacks were connected to deadly blasts on Sunday.
East Java police spokesman Frans Barung Mangera could not yet identify the four attackers, and revised an earlier report that two bombers carried out the bombing.
"A child who was with them, an eight-year-old girl... has been taken to the hospital," he said.

Family of bombers 'sent to Syria'
Why is Indonesia a target for IS militants?
Sent out to die: The young women used in militant attacks

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for Monday's attack

What happened in Sunday's attacks?
The latest attack follows four separate suicide bombings in Indonesia's second largest city on Sunday.
Three took place at churches in Surabaya, carried out parents and their children.
Police have said the family were among hundreds of Indonesians who had returned from Syria, where IS has been fighting government forces. No details were given about the family's alleged involvement in that conflict.
The father has been identified as Dita Oepriarto. Police say he was the head of local branch of Jemaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD), and Indonesian IS-inspired network.

A burnt-out car in front of one of the bombed churches in Surabaya

In the first attack, the sons - aged 16 and 18 - rode motorcycles into Santa Maria Catholic Church at around 07:30 local time (00:30 GMT) and detonated explosives they were carrying.
The father then reportedly dropped off his wife, Puji Kuswati, and their two daughters at Diponegoro Indonesian Christian Church, where they blew themselves up. The girls - aged nine and 12 - had bombs strapped to them, as did their mother.
Oepriarto then drove off, launching his own bomb-laden car into the grounds of Surabaya Centre Pentecostal Church, police said.
Thirteen people were killed and more than 40 injured, making it the deadliest attack in Indonesia in more than a decade.
Later on Sunday, a bomb exploded at an apartment complex in Surabaya, killing three people, according to AFP news agency.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility for that attack.

What is the history of militancy in Indonesia?
The South East Asian country has long struggled with Islamist militancy. Its worst ever terror attack was in Bali in 2002, when 202 people - mostly foreigners - were killed in an attack on a tourist nightlife district.
That attack was carried out by the Jemaah Islamiah (JI) militant network.
But recent years have seen a number of attacks claimed by Islamic State (IS).
Four civilians and four attackers were killed in a series of explosions and shootings in central Jakarta in January 2016; the first attack claimed by the group.
In February this year, a number of people were injured in a sword attack at a church in Sleman, Yogyakarta. Police said that the attacker had previously tried to join IS in Syria.
Related Topics
- Islamic State group
- Indonesia

Rohingya Muslims respond to claims they set fire to their homes

Unknown12:21:00 AM No comments

The Myanmar government said that villagers set fire to their own homes - the BBC's Reeta Chakrabarti tracked them down in Bangladesh and asked the refugees what happened.
Antonio Guterres, the UN secretary general, said the alleged attacks by security forces on Rohingya Muslims were completely unacceptable. Read More

Who's Winning the 2016 US Presidential Election

Unknown2:35:00 AMElection 2016 No comments

The 2016 race that began 595 days ago and involved 22 major candidates is expected to end Tuesday as millions of voters head to the polls across the U.S. to cast their ballots for president, vice president, their representatives in Congress and other elected officials.
On Monday, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, a former secretary of state and former first lady, held a small 4-percentage-point lead over GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, according to a CBS News poll measuring the state of the race before the polls opened. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, is Clinton’s vice presidential nominee and Republican Gov. Mike Pence is Trump’s running mate. Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein are two independent candidates who will appear on some or all ballots. Evan McMullin is another independent candidate who could perform well in his home state of Utah.

In order to win the presidency, a candidate must win 270 electoral votes -- a majority of the 538 electors. CBS News will be keeping an eye on 13 battleground states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

3:12 a.m. ET CBS News projects Trump wins the 2016 presidential election.
3:04 a.m. ET Donald Trump just finished speaking to his reporters at the Hilton hotel in midtown Manhattan, declaring victory in the presidential race and confirming that Clinton had conceded.
“I just received a call from Secretary Clinton. She congratulated us on our victory and I congratulated her and her family on a very, very hard-fought campaign,” he said. “To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people.”
“I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be president for all Americans and this is so important to me,” he added.
Trump pledged to fix the “inner cities,” and rebuild highways, cities, airports, schools and more.
“We will double our growth and have the strongest economy everywhere in the world,” he said. “We must reclaim our country’s destiny and dream big and bold and daring.”
He thanked all of his family members and advisers as well as the Secret Service.
“To be really historic, we have to do a great job. I look very much forward to being your president,” said Trump, who then hinted he might be interested in serving as president for two terms.
-- CBS News’ Rebecca Shabad
2:52 a.m. ET CBS News projects that Trump has won Pennsylvania.
2:49 a.m. ET CBS News projects Trump wins Wisconsin.
2:42 a.m. ET CBS News’ Major Garrett reports that Clinton called Trump to concede, per a senior Trump aide. The Clinton campaign has not confirmed it yet.
2:21 a.m. ET CBS News projects that Trump wins Maine’s 2nd congressional district, which means he’s won one electoral vote so far in the state.
2:01 a.m. ET Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta just came out to speak to reporters at the Javits Center and said they’re going to wait it out until the votes are counted.
“It’s been a long night and it’s been a long campaign. I can say we can wait a little longer. They’re still counting votes and every vote should count. We’re not going to have anything more to say tonight,” he said.
2:00 a.m. ET CBS News projects Clinton wins Maine.
1:55 a.m. ET Trump effect? Canada’s immigration website crashes amid U.S. election uncertainity
The Canadian government website for immigration crashed Tuesday night as Americans on both side of the political divide experienced anxiety over the presidential election. And Google reported web search terms like “Canada immigration” spiked as the GOP candidate did unexpectedly well in the presidential election.

“It’s been a long night and it’s been a long campaign. I can say we can wait a little longer. They’re still counting votes and every vote should count. We’re not going to have anything more to say tonight,” he said.
2:00 a.m. ET CBS News projects Clinton wins Maine.
1:55 a.m. ET Trump effect? Canada’s immigration website crashes amid U.S. election uncertainity
The Canadian government website for immigration crashed Tuesday night as Americans on both side of the political divide experienced anxiety over the presidential election. And Google reported web search terms like “Canada immigration” spiked as the GOP candidate did unexpectedly well in the presidential election.

In New Hampshire, where the number of votes separating Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump has been as low as 34 votes at one point Tuesday night and remains locked at 47 percent each, the rules are fairly liberal. Any candidate can call for a recount if the margin is within 20 percent.
“Any candidate for whom a vote was cast for any office at a state general election may apply for a recount, provided that the difference between the votes cast for the applying candidate and a candidate declared elected is less than 20 percent of the total votes cast in the towns which comprise the office to be recounted,” according to New Hampshire election law.
Pennsylvania demands a margin of 0.5 percent, and a recount would be triggered by the secretary of state. “A candidate for a public office which appears on the ballot in every election district in this Commonwealth was defeated by one-half of a percent or less of the votes cast for the office,” the law says. Nearing 1 a.m. Wednesday morning, Trump led Clinton there 48.5 percent to 47.9 percent.

In Michigan, there’s a mandatory recount triggered by a difference of 2,000 votes or less. But any candidate suspecting there’s either fraud or a mistake can petition for a recount. At 12:52 a.m., Clinton lagged behind Trump by 52 thousand votes -- 1.785 million to 1.837 million.
Like Michigan, Wisconsin also allows any candidate to request a recount if fraud or a mistake is suspected. The candidate has three days to make the request and has to foot the bill if the margin between the candidates exceeds a half percent.
Minnesota has tight requirements for a federal recount -- a losing candidate can request a recount if the margin is a razor thin quarter of a percent. Also, since 2008, all recounts in Minnesota are to be conducted manually.

Colombia referendum: Voters reject Farc peace deal

Unknown1:06:00 AMLatin America & Caribbean No comments

Voters in Colombia have rejected a landmark peace deal with Farc rebels in a shock referendum result, with 50.24% voting against it.

The deal was signed last week by President Juan Manuel Santos and Farc leader Timoleon Jimenez after nearly four years of negotiations.
But it needed to be ratified by Colombians in order to come into force.
Addressing the nation, President Santos said he accepted the result but would continue working to achieve peace.
He said the current ceasefire remained in place and that he had ordered negotiators to travel to Cuba to consult Farc leaders on the next move.
"I won't give up," he said. "I'll continue the search for peace until the last moment of my mandate because that's the way to leave a better country to our children."
Meanwhile the Farc leader, known as Timochenko, said the group remained committed to securing an end to the war.
He also criticised the No campaign.
"The Farc deeply regret that the destructive power of those who sow hatred and revenge have influenced the Colombian people's opinion," he told reporters.
The rebels earlier agreed to lay down their weapons after 52 years of conflict to join the political process.
But critics said the deal treated the Farc, which the US still considers a terrorist group, too leniently.
The deal would have allowed rebel leaders to avoid a prison sentence if they confessed their crimes. The rebels were also promised 10 seats in congress for the next two elections.

Who are the Farc?
President Santos: From hawk to dove
Guerrilla leader who talks peace
Contentious points in peace deal

he deal would have brought an end to one of the world's longest-running insurgencies

The result of the vote was much closer than expected and shocked many Colombians

The agreement was rejected with 50.2% of voters against it and 49.8% in favour - a difference of less than 63,000 votes out of 13 million ballots.
The surprise result means the peace process is now shrouded by uncertainty.
Former President Alvaro Uribe, who headed the "no" campaign, said all Colombians wanted peace, but that the deal needed "corrections".
"We want to contribute to a national accord and be heard," he said.

Analysis - BBC South America correspondent Wyre Davies
This was arguably the most important vote in Colombia's history and the government had hoped that the promise of peace would have persuaded a majority of voters to accept the agreement.
But with fears that too many concessions have been made to the guerrillas, by less than half of 1%, the people of Colombia rejected the agreement (although voter turnout, at only 40%, was remarkably low).
Speaking on national television shortly after the result was announced, President Santos said that a previously announced ceasefire will hold and that both sides would meet in the Cuban capital, Havana, to decide on a way forward.
While there's clearly a will across Colombia to end more than half a century of violence, the terms of the deal still worry many Colombians.

President Santos had previously warned that there was no plan B for ending the war, which has killed 260,000 people.
The result of the vote is a major setback to the president, who since his election in 2010 had pledged to end a conflict blamed for displacing about eight million people.
Less than a week ago, he was celebrating with world leaders and Farc commanders the end of Latin America's last and longest-running armed conflict at a ceremony in the historic city of Cartagena.

Some people began celebrating as soon as it was clear the no vote had prevailed in the referendum

Supporters of the peace deal with Farc rebels were left dumbfounded by the referendum result

The rebels were making plans to lay down their weapons and become a political party within six months.
But the president is now facing one of the most difficult moments in Colombia's recent history, says the BBC's Americas Editor Leonardo Rocha.

The Farc's 52-year fight

Image copyright Reuters 1964: Set up as armed wing of Communist Party
2002: At its height, it had an army of 20,000 fighters controlling up to a third of the country. Senator Ingrid Betancourt kidnapped and held for six years along with 14 other hostages
2008: The Farc suffers a series of defeats in its worst year
2012: Start of peace talks in Havana
2016: Definitive ceasefire

The 297-page peace deal is a deeply divisive issue in Colombia, and the government has been accused of taking victory for granted.
The referendum campaign spent heavily on television adverts in addition to staging concerts and peace rallies throughout the country in a bid to get people out to vote.
It called on the support of U2's Bono and former Beatle Ringo Starr - and for the first time in an election made ballots available in Braille so blind Colombians could vote.

US election: Who won the first debate?

Unknown1:14:00 AMUS & Canada No comments

It was a battle between the lawyer and the salesman, and for the most part the lawyer came out on top.

It may be hard to remember, but before Mrs Clinton was a secretary of state, or a senator or a first lady, she was a lawyer - and, by all regards, a talented one.
And after all these years, she still campaigns like one. Meticulous, cautious, controlled. What works in the courtroom, with its rules and customs, often doesn't fly in free-wheeling political debates, however.
Mr Trump, on the other hand, is the consummate salesman. Rules, tradition, even the truth are only relevant in so much as they help seal the deal.
The weakness of this approach is the perception that the salesman is all talk and no substance - a problem that can be exacerbated by 90 minutes under the debate spotlights.
In the end, the lawyerly preparations paid off for Mrs Clinton, as she controlled the evening with forensic precision.
While Mr Trump had a strategy - and pursued it on occasion - he was often blown off course by the former secretary of state and torpedoed by his own sometimes badgering performance.
While Mrs Clinton was occasionally prone to know-it-all-ness - particularly in her repeated appeals to outside fact-checkers - she largely maintained the upper hand.
Here are three ways she scored points, two times Mr Trump gained an edge and one very important wildcard.

Tax dodge

After a give-and-take on economic plans, the topic turned to one specific set of tax returns - Mr Trump's - and why he won't follow longstanding presidential candidate precedent and release his own.
After the Republican repeated an old, since debunked excuse that he can't release them while he's being audited by the Internal Revenue Service (which, he says, has been auditing him for 15 years, by the way), Mrs Clinton went on the attack.
Her key line: "I think probably he's not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are, because it must be something really important, even terrible, that he's trying to hide."
Takeaway: The lawyer did her homework.
What's in Donald Trump's tax returns?

Trading blows

Jump media player

Media player help

Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue.

Media captionTrump: Nafta is 'Single worse deal ever approved'

Before Mr Trump got derailed on his taxes - and after Mrs Clinton's jab, he spent much too long trying to explain himself - the debate was actually going pretty well for him.
The economic discussion featured the kind of give-and-take on trade deals, including Mrs Clinton's past support for the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, that will work to Mr Trump's advantage in industrial states hollowed out by manufacturing jobs moving overseas.
His key line: "You go to New England, you go to Ohio, Pennsylvania, you go anywhere you want, Secretary Clinton, and you will see devastation where manufacture is down 30, 40, sometimes 50%. Nafta is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere, but certainly ever signed in this country."
Takeaway: A salesman knows a bad deal when he sees it.

Birther blues

If Mrs Clinton had the upper hand in the first round of the debate by putting Mr Trump on his heels when it came to tax returns, the second round proved to be equally inhospitable terrain for the Republican.
The issue was race relations in the US, and it was at that point that Mr Trump had to answer for being the leading voice questioning the authenticity of President Barack Obama's US citizenship.
Mr Trump once again tried to blame Mrs Clinton's 2008 campaign for starting the rumours - an assertion roundly dismissed by fact-checkers - and said he deserves credit from Mr Obama and black voters for settling the issue.
Mrs Clinton would have none of it, using the moment to turn up the heat on her opponent.
Her key line: "He has really started his political activity based on this racist lie that our first black president was not an American citizen. There was absolutely no evidence for it, but he persisted, year after year, because some of his supporters, people that he was trying to bring into his fold, apparently believed it or wanted to believe it."
Takeaway: The lawyer had the chance to come to the defence of Mr Obama, whose popularity is currently higher than either of the two candidates on the stage.

Inside-out

Throughout the debate, when he wasn't being goaded into responding to Mrs Clinton's carefully planned barbs, Mr Trump played up that he is the outsider and Mrs Clinton is too closely tied to the unpopular establishment and the status quo.
With polls showing upwards of 70% of the American public unhappy with the direction of the country, being the agent of change is in the political sweet spot. Add to that the natural inclination of the American public to switch direction after one party has been in the White House for eight years, and it is clear this is a potentially winning way for Mr Trump to frame the ballot-box choice for Americans.
Mr Trump's key line: "You've been doing this for 30 years. Why are you just thinking about these solutions right now?"
Takeaway: A good salesman knows when the customer wants a new product.

Temper, temper

Toward the end of the debate, discussion turned to the question of presidential temperament and stamina. Who had it, and who didn't? Mr Trump, who seemed increasingly frazzled as the evening stretched on, saw this as a moment to attack. He questioned Mrs Clinton's judgement, her "look" and her stamina.
Mrs Clinton, after saying that her international travels as secretary of state, her efforts in diplomatic negotiations and her marathon congressional testimony showed she had the endurance to be president, asserted that Mr Trump's attacks were evidence of his sexist behaviour.
Mrs Clinton's key line: "You know, he tried to switch from looks to stamina. But this is a man who has called women pigs, slobs and dogs, and someone who has said pregnancy is an inconvenience to employers, who has said women don't deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men."
Takeaway: The lawyer had the salesman sputtering, complaining about her negative advertising, how she wasn't being nice and how was still doing well in the polls. It wasn't a good look for him.

The Holt factor

And for the final X factor. The Lester Holt factor. Much had been made of how the NBC presenter would handle the debate and whether he would serve as a real-time fact-checker or take a more hands-off approach. One NBC staffer said Holt wouldn't be a "potted plant" - and that was definitely the case.
In all the above points, the opening for Mrs Clinton's advantage was set by the moderator. He first brought up Mr Trump's taxes. He asked about the Obama "birther" controversy. He pushed Mr Trump on the Iraq War and brought up his comment about her "look", which led to the extended discussion of presidential temperament and judgement.
Mrs Clinton's weaknesses - particularly her use of a private email server and potential conflicts of interest in her charitable foundation - were barely discussed.
If the winner of political conflict is dictated by the ground on which it is fought, then most of the debate was contested on terrain that was favourable to the Democrat.
Some of that was her own effective strategy and preparation; the lawyer's advantage. Some of it was Mr Trump's missteps and meandering; the salesman's failure to move his product.
A lot of it, however, was Holt's doing. That will have Democrats smiling and Trump supporters howling.
Who is moderator Lester Holt?

'Deeply disappointed'

Earlier, Mr Singh said on Twitter that "there are definite and conclusive indications that the perpetrators of the Uri attack were highly trained, heavily armed and specially equipped".
"I am deeply disappointed with Pakistan's continued and direct support to terrorism and terrorist groups," he said.
Indian army military operations head Lieutenant-General Ranbir Singh said there was evidence the attackers were members of an Islamist militant group in Pakistan.
The terrorists had "some items which had Pakistani markings on", he said.

Image caption India has blamed Pakistan for the attacks

Image caption The attack has caused anger in India

Pakistan's latest statement said that the situation in Indian-administered Kashmir was "not of Pakistan's making but a direct consequence of illegal Indian occupation and a long history of atrocities".
It added that India's decision to blame Pakistan without conducting an investigation was "deplorable".
The attack has caused a great deal of anger in India, with many calling on the government to "strike back".
#UriAttacks was trending on Twitter in India for much of Sunday and Monday, with many calling for action against Pakistan.

The militants infiltrated across the Line of Control from Pakistan before attacking the base, west of Srinagar, an army officer told the BBC on Sunday.
Gunfire and explosions were heard for several hours.
All four of the attackers were killed. Carrying guns and grenades they stormed a base in Uri, close to the Line of Control with Pakistan-administered territory in a pre-dawn ambush.

Image copyright EPA

Image caption An India army helicopter flies above the base after the attack

Image copyright AP

Image caption Street demonstrations were sparked in July after a popular militant leader was killed

Many tents and temporary shelters caught fire during the attack, according to the army's Northern Command.
Twelve soldiers were killed by fires and the others died on Sunday in gun battles, the Hindustan Times reports, citing army sources.
Disputed Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 60 years, causing two wars between the neighbours.
A militant attack on an army camp in Uri in December 2014 saw at least nine members of the security forces killed.
The last attack of this scale on the Indian army was in June 2015 in Manipur, north-east India, when at least 20 soldiers were killed in an attack on a troop convoy.

Cheap trick

Farook and his wife killed 14 people in the California city last December before police fatally shot them.
The FBI believed his iPhone 5C contained information about collaborators, but its security system prevented easy access.
The agency pressured Apple to give it a software backdoor into the phone, and, when it refused, reportedly paid $1m to a security company to retrieve data from the phone.
Now, Dr Sergei Skorobogatov, from the University of Cambridge computer laboratory, has spent four months building a testing rig to bypass iPhone 5C pin codes.
In a YouTube video, Dr Skorobogatov showed how he had removed a Nand chip from an iPhone 5C - the main memory storage system used on many Apple devices.

The iPhone hack demanded a high level of electronics expertise

He then worked out how the memory system communicated with the phone so he could clone the chip.
And the target phone was modified so its Nand chip sat on an external board and copied versions could be easily plugged in or removed.
In the video, Dr Skorobogatov demonstrated locking an iPhone 5C by trying too many incorrect combinations.
He then removed the Nand chip and substituted a fresh clone, which had its pin attempt counter set at zero, to allow him to keep trying different codes.
"Because I can create as many clones as I want, I can repeat the process many many times until the passcode is found," he said.
Known as Nand mirroring, the technique is one FBI director James Comey said would not work on Farook's phone.
Finding a four-digit code took about 40 hours of work, Dr Skorobogatov said.
And finding a six-digit code could potentially take hundreds of hours
Using a slightly more sophisticated set-up should make it possible to clone memory chips from other iPhones, including more recent models such as the iPhone 6.
However, Dr Skorobogatov said, more information was needed about the way Apple stored data in memory on more recent phones.
The different techniques could make it "more challenging to analyse and copy", he added.
Apple has not responded to a request for comment on Dr Skorobogatov's research.
Susan Landau, on the Lawfare news blog, said the work showed law enforcement agencies should not look for software backdoors to help their investigations but should develop or cultivate hardware and computer security skills.
"Skorobogatov was able to do what the FBI said was impossible," she said.