‘Dancing With the Stars’: Normani Kordei tops Disney Week

Twice a ratings season, there’s a magical night that blesses our screens. Sambas sparkle more brightly. Waltzes have more romance. But maybe most magical is how Alfonso Ribeiro manages to remind us how he’s completely revamped his career through this show, dancing with children, and singing to kick off… wait for it, Disney Night.

But Alfonso has had his moment—tonight is for Disney and our dancers. The three in jeopardy are a bit of a surprise: Normani, Erika Jayne, and Nick Viall face elimination. Unfortunately, even on Disney night, we have to say goodbye to one, and this week, it was Erika Jayne whose wish upon a star got returned in the mail.

Normani Kordei and Val Chmerkovskiy

Disney Song: I’ll Make a Man Out of You from Mulan

Judges Score: 39/40

Normani has been traveling, so it was a mystery if we’d seen her best. But after that Paso, it’s clear we had possibly the best performance of the season, Normani was ALIVE. Trading in the traditional Paso cape for FIGHTING STICKS, Normani’s focus was grounded in performance and footwork. And her scored reflected that.


Simone Biles and Sasha Farber

Disney Song: How Far I’ll Go from Moana

Judges Score: 38/40

First and foremost, the dance gets a 10 for having Auli’i Cravalho present to sing the Oscar-nominated song. It should get four more for the performance. Simone and Sasha are perfection in their contemporary — a style that suits Simone’s gymnastics background perfectly. The judges agree, but somehow she still doesn’t lock in that perfect score.

Nancy Kerrigan and Artem Chigvintsev

Disney Song: That’s How You Know from Enchanted

Judges Score: 36/40

Sparkle points: 4.5/5

There’s always one person who comments on their age, and it shocks you because they’re typically one of the best in the game — this season that’s Nancy Kerrigan. Dancing a pitch perfect jazz with some spot on lip syncing, Nancy is this season’s traditionalist who has a very real chance of making the final three. The judges completely see the potential and award in accordingly.

Heather Morris and Alan Bernstein

Disney Song: For the First Time in Forever from Frozen

Judges Score: 34/40

Max is still down y’all, so he’s decided to teach Alan and Heather crazy lifts he’s never actually done himself. But for jazz to be Heather’s specialty, it doesn’t feel nearly as jazzy as anyone anticipated. There’s a ton of turns and lifts, but Disney night takes precedent. Good news, though, Maks comes back next week. Thank you for your under appreciated service, Alan.

Best of the Rest

Disney Night brought the best out in the stars with Nick Viall landing near the top with a 34. Both Rashad Jennings and Erika Jayne clock in with 32s, Bonner Bolton lands a 30, and David Ross comes in just under the rest with a 29.

Sparkle Points

Normani Kordei: 5/5

In a week where hair was, um… sometimes questionable (ahem, Julianne), both Val and Normani sported high ponytails along with fighting sticks and muted bedazzled black fighting ensembles. Often docked for anything muted, it was too fierce not to get full credit.


Bonner Bolton: 4.5/5

Throw a bull rider in some sparkly overalls, give him a fake medal, tell him that he’s stronger than he is and watch him come to life! Bonner’s orange and brown sparkle-alls are the fall staple piece you didn’t know you needed.

Nick Viall: 4.5/5

Detachable skirts? Check. Lederhosen? Check, check. Strong use of cane? We’re done here. Nick may have been in the bottom this week, but that execution was nothing short of Pinocchio-perfect.




Why China is beating the U.S. at innovation?

For decades, America lost factories and jobs to China but retained a coveted title: the world’s leader in inventing and commercializing new products.

Now, even that status has been eroded, and it’s hurting the economy.

While the United States is still at the top in total investment in research and development — spending $500 billion in 2015 — a new Boston Consulting Group (BCG) study released Monday has made a startling finding: A couple of years ago, China quietly surpassed the U.S. in spending on the later stage of R&D that turns discoveries into commercial products. And at its current rate of spending, China will invest up to twice as much as the U.S., or $658 billion, by 2018 on this critical late-stage research.

In other words, the U.S. Is doing the hard work of inventing new technologies, and China, among other countries, is reaping the benefits by taking those ideas and turning them into commercial products,the report says.

“Other countries are free-riding on the U.S. investment,” says Justin Rose, who co-authored the BCG study.


The slippage is a significant blow for the U.S. economy, costing the country tens of billions of dollars a year in manufacturing output and hundreds of thousands of factory jobs over the past decade or so, BCG says. Companies that lead in commercializing ideas also typically build factories near their research centers so scientists can test products before making them.

The burgeoning commercial drone market is a prime example of the shift. The U.S. military developed drone technology throughout the 20th Century for reconnaissance and other purposes, adding microchips for better wireless control and longer-lasting batteries. But China’s Da-Jiang Innovations has refined the unmanned vehicles to better avoid obstacles and has become the world’s largest builder of commercial drones. It sells them to U.S. real estate and construction firms for applications such as aerial photography and mapping. DJI has three factories in Shenzhen.

The U.S. has also given birth to a Smithsonian-worthy collection of breakthrough technologies — including flat-panel displays, digital mobile handsets, notebook computers and solar panels — only to fumble away their development to other countries, particularly China and Japan.

The next big thing: Drones supplying U.S. troops
The BCG study concludes the U.S. has the potential to reverse the trend through better collaboration among private industry, universities and research consortia. Such a shift would increase annual manufacturing output by 5%, or $100 billion, and add 700,000 factory jobs and another 1.9 million in other sectors through ripple effects.

Yet while President Trump is focused on narrowing the nation’s trade deficit, his proposed budget would slash federal funding for R&D, potentially snuffing out a significant source of U.S. manufacturing jobs that could help accomplish that goal. Last year, the U.S. had an $83 billion trade gap in advanced technology products, according to the Census Bureau.

The country is still the global leader in “basic and applied” R&D, which makes early discoveries and further refines them. About a third of the $500 billion the country spends on R&D is funneled to those activities. But while two-thirds of the total goes to later-stage “development” R&D, China invests 84% of its R&D money on advances that yield commercial products. For the past decade, “development” R&D has been growing 20% a year in China, versus 5% in the U.S., the BCG report says. As recently as 2004, the U.S. spent four times as much as China.

In China, many technology companies are state-owned and so they don’t have to worry if massive R&D spending yields losses until a product is commercialized, and even the research of private firms is often subsidized by the government, says Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. The Chinese government, he says, also gives the private sector specific timetables for achieving dominance in areas such as solar, printers, robots and drones. And China routinely steals technology and fails to enforce patent laws, Atkinson says

“They have huge advantages,” he says.

China eyes global economic leadership as U.S. turns inward
There’s ample opportunity for a U.S. turnaround, BCG says, with 75 of the world’s 200 highest-rated universities located in the U.S. But there’s little cooperation among the schools, which do the lion’s share of basic and applied research, largely through federal grants, and private companies, which do most of the development research.

The Study:

An Innovation-Led Boost for US Manufacturing
Among the obstacles BCG identified:

• Schools do a poor job of promoting their latest research and putting it in a digestible form for manufacturers. And researchers are focused on securing tenure, while companies are seeking a return on their investment. When companies do partner with universities, it’s often for a limited, product-specific purpose rather than for developing industry-wide solutions that take longer to bring to fruition but can create many more jobs.

“Companies are being gun-shy and risk-averse and not wanting to make big bets on transformative technology,” Atkinson says. Instead, the’re focused on quarterly profits, which typically determine executives’ bonuses.

• U.S. manufacturers are reluctant to collaborate with other companies because they don’t want to share the fruits of their research with competitors.

• Manufacturers are reluctant to work with suppliers to establish industry-wide standards that can reduce costs and speed implementation of technologies, fearing the suppliers would share the information with competitors.

Why China matters in Trump’s economic policy
The study says the government should set up a central repository for federally-funded university research; school research should be geared toward commercializing products; manufacturers should build long-term relationships with universities, such as Procter & Gamble’s link-up with the University of Cincinnati; and public-private research consortia should focus on developing industry-wide solutions. Since 2008, P&G has invested millions of dollars in a university computer simulation center to enhance its consumer household products, their packaging and manufacturing processes.

“If we want to be the leader in product development for things that matter in people’s lives, pushing money into developing important (products) is what we should be focused on,” BCG’s Rose says.

Credit: Usatoday.com

Josh Brolin as Cable in ‘Deadpool 2’?

Brolin, whose name never came in casting rumors for the character, has snagged a four-movie deal to portray Cable. USA TODAY

Josh Brolin has signed on to play comic-book character Cable, opposite Ryan Reynolds’ foul-mouthed mercenary in Deadpool 2, The Hollywood Reporter and The Associated Press confirmed Wednesday.

But, wait, wasn’t Brolin already cast in the Marvel Cinematic Universe?

Indeed. Brolin plays Thanos, a supervillain who has a major role in the forthcoming Avengers: Infinity War.


Josh Brolin’s first Marvel character, Thanos, first appeared in ‘Guardians of the Galaxy.’ (Photo: Marvel)

Reynolds, himself, made light of the fact that Brolin’s been cast as a second character based on Marvel Comics (though Deadpool is a Twentieth Century Fox film, as opposed to Disney’s Avengers). He tweeted, sarcastically, “You can’t play 2 characters in the same universe!! Josh Brolin was in Sicario and I was in Sabrina The Teenage Witch.”

By Wednesday afternoon, news of Brolin playing Cable in a four-picture deal had lit up social media, with “Josh Brolin” as a top national Twitter trend. Though many online complained about the casting decision, others tweeted in defense of Brolin.

To be fair, Brolin isn’t the first actor to play two Marvel characters. Both Chris Evans and Michael B. Jordan played Human Torch in Fox’s Fantastic Four movies, before going on to play hero Captain America (Evans) and supervillain Erik Killmonger (Jordan, in 2018’s Black Panther) in Disney/Marvel films.


The ‘Outlander’ Season 3 teaser is breaking our hearts

The unlucky lovers of Starz Outlander return in the show’s Season 3 trailer, which aired on the channel before the premiere of new show The White Princess. Things are not looking very good for the Frasers, who have been ripped apart by time and space. And it looks like they’ve been apart for a very long time.

The new season finds Claire having returned to her present in 1948, with Jamie left in the past after a failed stand at Culloden, each trying to reform their lives without the other. But as Claire’s new fashion and hair suggest, it’s been years (even decades) since the two were together. Fans who have been anticipating this long-awaited season, may be able to relate.



Melissa McCarthy went ‘Live’ as Sean Spicer from L.A.

At 77-years old, Ruthie has taken care of over 50 children throughout her life – most of them not related to her.HUMANKIND

This weekend, Saturday Night Live gave Sean Spicer a bunny suit – and a hall pass on showing up to its New York set.

During Saturday program (the show’s first to air live coast-to-coast) Melissa McCarthy gave an Easter-ific rendition of her now-legendary impression of the press secretary, but here’s something you didn’t see on TV: she performed the sketch via satellite in Los Angeles.

McCarthy referenced the switch in an Instagram post Monday. “Spicey gone wild!!!” she wrote, along with the hashtag #LiveFromLA.

“Everybody shut up so I can apologize,” McCarthy’s Spicer said in the spoof, channeling the press secretary’s latest gaffe. “Yes, you all got your wish this week. Spicey finally made a mistake.

“Yeah, I know they’re not really called ‘Holocaust centers’ – duh, I know that,” McCarthy’s Spicer continued. “I clearly meant to say, ‘concentration clubs,’ ok? Let it drop.”

Though it’s rare for SNL to break away from its stage at 30 Rock, it’s no surprise the show is bending over backwards to accommodate McCarthy, a guest star who, along with Alec Baldwin, has been delivering some of the season’s most epic political sketches.

NBC did not say whether McCarthy will shoot sketches out of Los Angeles in the future. Three episodes remain this season, scheduled for May 6, 13 and 20


Facebook video of shooting prompts debate over sharing graphic images

In the hours before Facebook announced that video of a murder prompted the social network to examine its practices surrounding the reporting of graphic images and offensive content, the platform was flooded with impassioned pleas — “please take down this video” and “please have respect for this innocent man killed in cold blood” among them.

Those were some of the emotional reactions from members of the public after suspect Steve Stephens, 37, allegedly posted video of himself shooting and killing Cleveland grandfather Robert Godwin Sr., 74, and after many others opted to share it. Although Facebook removed the graphic video, it continued to be shared across the social media platform. That led some Facebook users to complain of being disturbed and heartbroken by the contents and to ask posters to remove the video. One woman wrote that the scene automatically began playing on her Facebook account before she realized what was happening. After viewing the video, she wrote, she had been crying non-stop.

When media personality Donnie Simpson posted a link to the video, warning followers of its graphic nature, Facebook user Mary Bradley asked him to delete it, w. She wrote, “Please remove this post, Donnie Simpson. I am in Cleveland. Mr. Godwin’s family is distraught.”

Neither Simpson nor Bradley could be reached on Monday, but Simpson later took down the post, offering condolences to the Godwin family and saying he deleted the video “because it’s so disturbing and upset a lot of people.” Simpson further explained, “I understand that and feared that it would — that’s why I warned people about watching it — but decided to post it because it was all over the internet and every TV station in the country.”

Media experts said Facebook’s move on Monday afternoon was the right thing to do and that allowing the sharing of the video only served prurient interests and morbid curiosity. Facebook said it was examining its current process in which users may report inappropriate or offensive content, looking at how technology can better help identify similar situations and how Facebook can hasten the reporting process.

The social network said that it never received a report of an initial video posted by Stephens in which he reported that he was going to commit murder, and that reports of the second video that included the killing did not reach the network until more than an hour and 45 minutes after posting. Facebook reported that it disabled Stephens’ account 23 minutes after receiving a report of the murder video.

“It was a horrific crime — one that has no place on Facebook, and goes against our policies and everything we stand for,” read the post from Justin Osofsky, Facebook’s vice president of Global Operations. “Keeping our global community safe is an important part of our mission. We are grateful to everyone who reported these videos and other offensive content to us, and to those who are helping us keep Facebook safe every day.”


Benjamin Mullin of the Poynter Institute told USA TODAY that when similar situations have cropped up, Facebook has stressed it is not a media company, but circumstances such as the one involving the Cleveland video are forcing Facebook and other social media sites to address the same questions as media and news organizations.

“I think that we’re already seeing that the outcry has elicited a response from Facebook,” said Mullin, Poynter’s managing editor. “Facebook has enormous power given its massive user base — 1.8 billion people per month — and that massive reach can be used for good but it can also be used, as Sunday evening showed, to broadcast some terrible things. I think you’re seeing Facebook go through some of the same issues that news organizations did.”

Mullin referred to situations such as the live shooting suicide on television of Pennsylvania state treasurer R. Budd Dwyer in 1987 and the live shooting suicide of Florida television anchor Christine Chubbuck in 1974. In 2015, WDBJ-TV television journalists Adam Ward and Alison Parker were fatally shot on live television by gunman Bryce Williams. In all these situations, media organizations grappled with separating news from unnecessary and tragic pictures.

“It’s clear to me that Facebook is going through some of the growing pains that media companies experienced,” Mullin said.

Author and media observer Eric Schiffer also applauded Facebook’s move. He tweeted on Monday that Facebook has a “duty” to monitor video of “cold blooded murders.”

“I think it’s great,” Schiffer told USA TODAY regarding Facebook’s decision. “This is a guy who’s sick and who I think was partly inspired by his ability to get notoriety.”

Members of the public should complain and not share graphic videos if they want to help change the culture surrounding such videos, Schiffer said. “I think that this is an all-out war that needs to happen against these types of videos being easily spread so that those who intend to do this are not going to get secondary benefits.”


Trump’s new rules could swamp already backlogged immigration courts

In San Antonio, an immigration judge breezes through more than 20 juvenile cases a day, warning those in the packed courtroom to show up at their next hearing — or risk deportation.

A Miami immigration lawyer wrestles with new federal rules that could wind up deporting clients who, just a few weeks ago, appeared eligible to stay.

Judges and attorneys in Los Angeles struggle with Mandarin translators and an ever-growing caseload.




Coast to coast, immigration judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys are straining to decipher how the federal immigration rules released in February by the Trump administration will impact the system — amid an already burgeoning backlog of existing cases.

The new guidelines, part of President Trump’s campaign promise to crack down on illegal immigration, give enforcement agents greater rein to deport immigrants without hearings and detain those who entered the country without permission.

But that ambitious policy shift faces a tough hurdle: an immigration court system already juggling more than a half-million cases and ill-equipped to take on thousands more.

“We’re at critical mass,” said Linda Brandmiller, a San Antonio immigration attorney who works with juveniles. “There isn’t an empty courtroom. We don’t have enough judges. You can say you’re going to prosecute more people, but from a practical perspective, how do you make that happen?”


Today, 301 judges hear immigration cases in 58 courts across the United States. The backlogged cases have soared in recent years, from 236,415 in 2010 to 508,036 this year — or nearly 1,700 outstanding cases per judge, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data research group at Syracuse University.

Some judges and attorneys say it’s too early to see any effects from the new guidelines. Others say they noticed a difference and fear that people with legitimate claims for asylum or visas may be deported along with those who are criminals.

USA TODAY Network sent reporters to several immigration courts across the country to witness how the system is adjusting to the new rules.


Cynthia Adriana Gonzalez stood before Immigration Judge G.W. Riggs and awaited instructions. She’s an undocumented immigrant from Mexico with no criminal record and three children born in the U.S.

Gonzalez’s attorney asked for “prosecutorial discretion,” a common practice under the Obama administration in which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) didn’t push to deport undocumented immigrants with no criminal record.

The new directives vastly broaden the pool of undocumented immigrants considered for deportation. The result has been a jarring shift in which the government seeks deportation in nearly every immigration case, said Clarel Cyriaque, a defense attorney who represents Haitians in South Florida. Dozens of his clients were under consideration for prosecutorial discretion based on their years in the U.S., steady employment and clean records.

“That’s off the table now,” he said. “As soon as Trump took office, everything stopped. They got new marching orders. Their prime directive now is enforcement, as opposed to exercising discretion that would help good people.”

Homeland Security says its attorneys can still practice discretion on a case-by-case basis. But a statement released after Trump signed his executive order on immigration in January states, “With extremely limited exceptions, DHS will not exempt classes or categories of removal aliens from potential enforcement.”
In another courtroom, Judge Rico Sogocio rescheduled until September the hearing of a young Haitian man to give him time to find an attorney. Through a Creole translator, the man asked the judge what would happen if he gets picked up by enforcement agents before then.

Sogocio pointed to a sheet in the man’s stack of documents that proves he has been attending his court hearings. “I suggest, sir, if you want to be as safe as possible, you carry that with you,” the judge said.

The man clutched the document, whispered “Thank you” and walked out.


On the eighth floor of a skyscraper in downtown Los Angeles, Judge Lorraine Muñoz hears cases with such efficiency that immigration lawyers nicknamed her list of cases the “rocket docket.”

Immigrants, clad in the orange jumpsuits of federal custody, answer questions about how and why they entered the country. Lawyers for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) aggressively examine their explanations.

One case involved a Chinese man who allegedly flew to Tijuana, Mexico, on a tourist visa, climbed over the border fence and turned himself in to U.S. Border Patrol agents. He was seeking asylum in the U.S., claiming he was persecuted for being a Christian in his rural farming village.

At his hearing, the ICE lawyer asked him to repeat his story multiple times, pointing out changes in the narrative. At one point, the man said, police officers hit him in the head after arresting him.

“Last time you told us you were only hit in the stomach and chest,” the lawyer said. “So at the last hearing you forgot where you were struck?”

His lawyer, who was filling in for another attorney and had not met this client before, did not object to the questioning.

Ultimately, the judge denied the man’s asylum request, but he had a chance to file an appeal.


Muñoz heard more cases. One detainee didn’t have a lawyer and was given time to find one. One woman didn’t have a lawyer and started to cry. Another had a sponsor but was declared a flight risk.

Translators were a problem. In one case, confusion erupted over whether people had changed their stories or misheard the translation.

Yanci Montes, a lawyer with El Rescate, a non-profit that offers free legal services, said that since the new rules were announced, prosecutors are more likely to pursue charges and deportations, and judges set higher bonds for immigrants at detention centers.

“Before Trump became president, things were a lot smoother,” she said.

Meanwhile, the cases mount. The backlog at immigration courts has spiked over the past decade as resources poured into immigration enforcement, said Judge Dana Leigh Marks, president of the National Association of Immigration Judges.

Funding for immigration courts increased 70% from fiscal years 2002 to 2013, from $175 million to $304 million, and budgets for ICE and Customs and Border Patrol rose 300% — from $4.5 billion to $18 billion — in the same period, according to the Migration Policy Institute.

“There is concern and frustration” among the judges about the latest guidelines, Marks said. “The people in the field are feeling very disconnected from the decision-makers and are not aware of much, if any, of the specifics of how these broad, aspirational goals will be implemented.”


Courtroom 7 at the San Antonio Immigration Court is a small room on the fourth floor of a nondescript building near downtown, with the few wooden benches almost always full.

On a recent afternoon, Judge Anibal Martinez heard case after case of juvenile immigrants seeking asylum. They were from Honduras, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico.

Martinez smiled at the youngsters and, through an interpreter, thanked them for their patience. Of the 25 juveniles listed on the docket, just four had legal representation. About half of the kids didn’t show up.

“You’ve been excellent in bringing your daughter to court today,” the judge told one woman. “But if she misses the next hearing, I may order her removal in absentia. Whether or not you have an attorney, you must show up.” The mom nodded in agreement.

Brandmiller, the immigration attorney, said many immigrants are too scared to appear in court. “I try to tell them it’s the opposite — if you don’t show, there’s a greater chance you’ll be deported,” she said. “But there’s such a deep fear out there right now.”

A floor below Martinez, in Courtroom 4, Judge Daniel Santander called adult cases until all 20 had been heard in the course of a morning. He spent just a few minutes on each; most were rescheduled for later dates.

Then, at 1:30 p.m., he heard the case of Juliana Navarro, 51, of Chimbote, Peru, his only hearing of the day involving an immigrant in custody. Navarro said she had escaped from an abusive husband last year with her two grown children and crossed the Mexican border into the United States.

Speaking by video conference from the T. Don Hutto Residential Center in Taylor, Texas, where she was being held, Navarro detailed how her ex-husband would beat her with an extension cord and sexually assault her during their 25 years of marriage. Through sobs, she said she was afraid that if she stayed in Peru he would find her, and he frequently threatened to kill her and himself if she ever left him.


She explained how it took six attempts to cross the Rio Grande into the U.S. and how she initially gave border agents a fake name and said she was from Mexico so they wouldn’t return her to Peru. She described being held in a federal detention facility nicknamed el hielero — “the cooler” — for the frigid temperatures of the holding cells before she was transferred to Hutto.


Santander listened intently through her testimony, pausing several times to allow Navarro to sip water and regain her composure. “Take a deep breath,” he said through an interpreter. “It is not my intention to embarrass you. It is my intention to find the truth.”

After 1½ hours of testimony, Santander asked a few questions, followed by questions from the prosecutor representing ICE who wanted to know why Navarro didn’t move into one of her siblings’ homes in Peru or Chile and what role, if any, the Peruvian government played in her ordeal.

Santander thanked Navarro for her testimony and said he would write his decision and have it delivered to her. The process could take 30 to 60 days.

“What do I do now?” Navarro asked.

“You can hang up the phone, drink some water and let the officers take you back to your room,” Santander said. “Just relax. It’s in my hands now.”

Jervis reported from San Antonio and Gomez from Miami. Solis, who writes for The (Palm Springs, Calif.) Desert Sun, reported from Los Angeles.


Syria photographer picks up injured boy

Every so often, a photograph cuts through the grim cacophony of the war in Syria and pierces viewers’ hearts.

It happened in 2015 with an image of the lifeless body of Alan Kurdi, face down on a beach in Turkey, who drowned in the Mediterranean fleeing the war.
It happened last year when a photographer captured little Omran Daqneesh sitting in an ambulance, his body bloodied and dusty after his home was bombed in Aleppo.
And it happened again last weekend, when a bomb hit a convoy of buses carrying evacuees from besieged Syrian villages, killing 126 people.

Syria photographer

Photographer Abd Alkader Habak captured this image of the bombing aftermath.
Photographer and activist Abd Alkader Habak was there working and was briefly knocked out by the blast. When he came to, he began trying to help the wounded.
“The scene was horrible — especially seeing children wailing and dying in front of you,” Habak told CNN. “So I decided along with my colleagues that we’d put our cameras aside and start rescuing injured people.”
The first child he checked on was dead.
He ran towards another. Someone shouted at him to stay away — the child was already dead, they said.
But he wasn’t. Habak could see the boy was barely breathing.
He picked him up and began to run towards safety. His camera was still on, recording the chaos.
“This child was firmly holding my hand and looking at me,” he said.
An image taken by another photographer, Muhammad Alrageb, shows Habak dashing towards an ambulance, the child and his camera in his arms.
Algareb said he also helped some of the injured but then began taking photos.
“I wanted to film everything to make sure there was accountability,” he said. Also, he added, “I feel proud that there was a young journalist there helping save lives.”
Habak said he left the injured boy, who must have been only 6 or 7, at the ambulance. He doesn’t know if the boy survived.
Then he ran back to scene of the bombing to help others. He came across another child on the ground. This one, too, was dead — one of 68 children killed in the attack.


After rescuing one boy, Habak is overcome with grief beside the body of another victim.
Overwhelmed, Habak collapsed.
An image, shot by another photographer, shows him on his knees sobbing near the boy’s body.
“I was overcome with emotion,” he told CNN. “What I and my colleagues witnessed is indescribable.”

Credit: Cnn.com