all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. the pentagon reported the incident today in a video briefing. russian air strikes have been hammering targets across syria. a u.s. military spokesman says the close encounter underscores the risk. >> i mean, it's dangerous if two sets of aircraft come into the same piece of airspace without very clear, laid-out protocols for safety of all involved, which is why we have sat down with the russians to establish some safety protocols. >> woodruff: meanwhile, at a moscow event, president vladimir putin blamed washington for a lack of coordination on the competing air campaigns. >> ( translated ): we asked the u.s. on the military level to give us the targets which they consider to be the terrorist ones for sure, 100%. but the answer was: 'no, we are not ready to do that'. then we thought and asked another question: 'then could you tell us where we should not hit?' again, no answer. so, what should we do?! >> woodruff: the next round of talks between the u.s. and russia militaries will be tomorrow. meanwhile, the islamic state called today for muslims to launch a "holy war" against both countries. the appeal was in an audio message posted online. in afghanistan, the taliban announced it's pulling back from kunduz, in the north, to avoid further civilian casualties. taliban fighters held kunduz for three days last month, and the fierce fighting forced thousands of people to flee. now, fighting has shifted south to ghazni, a city that lies along the main highway between kabul and kandahar. iran's parliament voted today to approve a nuclear deal with the u.s. and other world powers. it came after rowdy debate and objections from hard-liners who argued the deal concedes too much to the west. now, the bill goes to the guardian council of 12 clerics, for ratification. the stance of supreme leader ayatollah ali khamenei is still unknown. he has the final say on all matters of state. the world's top two beer makers are joining forces. anheuser busch-in-bev sealed a deal today to buy s.a.b.-miller for $106 billion. in a company video, the head of a.b.-inbev said it's all about consumer choice. >>and local brands would provide more choices for beer drinkers in new and existing markets around the world. consumers would have more opportunities to taste a wide range of beers, ranging from specialty and craft beers to local champions and global flagship brands. >> woodruff: the new company will control about a third of the global beer market. but the sheer size of the deal could run into resistance from regulators, especially in the u.s. and china. and, wall street had a down day after china reported its imports fell 20% last month, over a year ago. the dow jones industrial average lost 50 points to close back near 17,080. the nasdaq fell 42 points and the s&p 500 dropped 13. still to come on the newshour: digging into the evidence of what shot down the malaysian passenger plane over ukraine. how a possible joe biden run could influence tonight's democratic debate. a new book reveals untold dimensions of president nixon's white house. and much more. a 15-month-long investigation into what brought down malaysian airlines flight 17 last year is over. and as most expected, it concluded a missile targeted the plane. the airliner was traveling from amsterdam to kuala lumpur, when it was struck over eastern ukraine. no one has taken responsibility, but today's report set sharpened suspicions, and denials. >> reporter: like a giant jigsaw puzzle, the pieced-together wreckage of the plane's front fuselage loomed over the chairman of the dutch safety board, as he announced the findings: >> flight mh-17 crashed as a result of the detonation of a warhead outside the airplane, above the left-hand side of the cockpit. >> woodruff: in short, as this dutch animation depicts, a russian-built missile, identified by shrapnel and paint, blew the malaysian airliner apart on july 17th last year. the report says the missile exploded less than a meter from the cockpit, spraying metal fragments into the plane. all 298 people on board were killed, as wreckage, luggage and bodies rained down over eastern ukraine. investigators say some passengers might have stayed alive for a minute or so after impact, but were too dazed by shock, cold and loss of oxygen to know what was happening. barry sweeney's son was one of those who died. >> because of the impact of the missile, the explosion, the confusion and everything else, it sounds that everybody died peacefully. and that's comforting me, and i would think, all other families of flight mh-17. >> woodruff: the investigation also plotted simulated flight paths and concluded the missile was launched from a 124-square mile region. russian-backed separatists controlled that area, but the report does not address who fired the weapon. still, the russian state arms producer that makes the "buk" missile disputed those findings. it said its own experiments prove a much older missile took down the plane. >> ( translated ): the general engineer of missile 9m38 decided that the safety period for using this missile including all extensions is 25 years. use of these missiles was prohibited after that, and they were retired from the russian army. >> woodruff: the arms manufactuer said that kind of missile is still used by ukraine's military-- and that, in fact, it was launched from ukrainian-controlled territory. either way, the dutch investigators said today the plane never should have been in that air space to begin with. >> ukraine's position is that there was insufficient reason for closing the airspace above the eastern part of the country. we have, however, concluded that, as a precaution, there was sufficient reason for ukraine authorities to close the airspace above the eastern part of their country. >> woodruff: ukraine's foreign minister took issue with that conclusion, speaking today in we look at some of the details of today's findings with a long- time investigator. peter goelz is a former managing director of the national transportation safety board. he oversaw the investigation of t.w.a. flight 800 that crashed off long island 20 years ago and speculation then of whether a missile brought it down. peter goelz, welcome back to the program. how good a job did this international team do, do you think, of piecing together what caused this crash? >> i think they did an extraordinary job. i read the report late last night and this morning. it's almost 300 pages in length. it is detailed. it is factual. and it's very sober. >> woodruff: so among other things i'm struck by how it describes pieces of shrapnel from this missile, paint from the missile embedded in the bodies of the crew and people who were sitting in the front of the plane. does it leave any doubt of the kind of missile that hit right at what they said, a meeter from the plane? >> there's no doubt about the type of missile or where it struck. when a missile detonates in that proximity to the aircraft, it leaves very distinctive marks, as you can see on the nose of the aircraft. these holes, these hundreds of holes, they have microscopic bits of the metal, of the piece of shrapnel sometimes in the hole. and you can trace it back to the source. >> woodruff: and we heard the dutch investigator call it the "9n314m missile." what does it tell you, adrian peterson, -- what does it tell you, peter goelz, that is a missile that blew up just outside the plane? it didn't hit the plane. it blew up before it hit the plane? >> more recent missiles have proximity fuses. they are driven by radar. it sense when they're in close proximity to the far get and they explode and disperse a shrapnel in a very defined way. we did tests in 1997 at the china lake missile center in which the u.s. detonated warheads near pieces of aircraft skin, the metal, the aluminum. we saw the very distinctive patterns that they left. so the investigators knew what they were looking for and knew what they had when they found it. >> woodruff: it is possible to say one side or another would have had this kind of missile? we know the russians are saying, new york we don't have this missile in our arsenal anymore. the ukrainians were using this. >> i think investigators that i've spoken to who were involved in this time-consuming effort have indicated that there is other information available from intelligence sources that indicate where this missile was launched from, and that it's very clear that it was well inside the separatist territory. >> woodruff: so is it possible, do you think it will eventually be possible to say this was the source, this is who fired that missile? >> yes, i think the truth comes out. after kaloo7 was shot down off the soviet union, it took years, and it took years of activism on the part of family members, but eventually the russians admitted what happened. i think it will take time, but the truth will come out in this case, as well. >> woodruff: and one other thing, the discussion today about whether this passenger plane should have been flying over an area of conflict. >> that is probably the most important recommendation that the dutch made. you know, that day there had been almost 150 aircraft traveling along that airway, the same one that malaysia... >> woodruff: passenger planes. >> that's right. these were passengers planes. they said there was very poor coordination between the civil aviation authorities and the government, and the governments at play, and they probably shouldn't have been there in that area of conflict because planes at lower altitudes, mind you, had been shot down. greater attention has to be paid to the safety of the airways. >> woodruff: peter goelz, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: we will hear a great deal from the five democrats vying to be president tonight as they take to the debate stage for the first time in this campaign. but hovering over them are questions about a potential sixth candidate: vice president joe biden. some democrats are getting impatient and say it's time for him to decide whether or not he's going to run. the newshour's political director lisa desjardins reports from las vegas on the biden factor. > reporter: the man not on stage tonight -- >> i'm joe biden. >> reporter: has had plenty to stay this month. going off script at an hispanic heritage event, he took aim at donald trump and the republicans on immigration. >> mr. trump and the stuff you're hearing on the other team, and this isn't about democrats and republicans, it's about a sick message. >> reporter: with union workers on labor day, he went after tax breaks for the rich. >> why in god's name should man or woman making $50,000 a year pay at a higher rate than someone who makes tens of millions of dollars on wall street? >> reporter: and at a solar convention, it was climate. >> make no mistake about it, folks, climate change is caused by human endeavors, and it's an existential threat. what's at stake is whether we have a future at all. >> reporter: the topics are from man on pause. biden has been mourning the death of his son. he told "the late show" and stephen colbert he's not sure if he has the heart to run for the white house again. >> i'd be lying if i said i knew i was. there. >> reporter: as biden carefully consideration whether to enter the race, democratic voters and funders focus on the debate stage here in las vegas tonight and the declared candidates, and some political experts say biden's window to jump in the race may be phi mite. >> he doesn't have a long time. but he's got several weeks more. >> reporter: hillary rosen, a democratic strategist. >> there are some filing deadlines coming up next month that he has to deal with. but we're going to have a debate a month for the next six months. we have to get in. >> reporter: what would it mean if biden gets in? here's a look at how those on stage tonight did in the latest national nbc/"wall street journal" poll without biden. it's a race between clinton and sanders, but hypothetically, beam biden into the mix, and he would get nearly one in five democratic votes, taking some from sanders, but the biggest chunk would come from camp clinton. at the same time, clinton faces dropping favorability ratings, meaning a debate without biden is a key opportunity for her. >> if hillary does really, really well and democrats end up rallying around her, you know, that might take some of the air out of the biden balloon. and so there's a lot of pressure on hillary. >> things can change in a heartbeat. >> reporter: adding to the pressure is the super pac draft biden. >> six weeks after the election, my hole life was altered forever. >> reporter: they ran an ad stressing how biden coped with the stress of the loss of his wife, daughter and now son. biden asked the group not to run the ad. it's part of the mood around biden right now, but that could change. >> primary voters love what they can't have. there's always the what if. what if this person were to run or this person were to run? i think you're getting that right now with vice president biden. i think it's a lot different once you become a declared candidate. >> reporter: look at biden's work on the 1994 crime bill, no criticized for propelling overincarceration. in addition, biden supported the trans-pacific trade deal, unpopular with democrats and opposed by clinton and sanders. and with 36 years in the senate, biden is an insider in the year of the outsider. the vice president has indicated it all comes down to a personal decision, but some think tonight's debate might matter. >> should vice president biden or his consultants see a debate where none of the candidates are truly resonating with the voters or the audience, that might be something that factors into his decision as to whether or not he runs. >> woodruff: and lisa joins us now with the latest from the wynn hotel in las vegas, the site of tonight's debate. lisa, welcome. so vice president biden is not there. you've been talking to a lot of people. what are they saying about the two front-runners and what they need to do tonight? what is their strategy, hillary clinton and bernie sanders? >> i think that's right. most people are looking for that matchup tonight in particular. let's start with. >>bernie sanders. i just talked to him campaign spokeswoman, simone sanders, no relation. she says he will not go on the attack. but they are saying he will give -- differentiate himself from health care. expect him to talk about trade, and that will come back to that interview that you had with hillary clinton in which he announces she opposes the transunion partnership. bernie sanders talks about his consistency. this is a relatively new position for hillary clinton. hillary clinton is saying her campaign wants her to stay on message but also stay positive, but same thing, expect her to differentiate herself, especially on the issue of guns. we can talk about the debate stage, but the truth is, judy, the fight between these two democrats has already started in las vegas over unions. here you see hillary clinton yesterday speaking at a protest of culinary workers. that is the largest union in nevada, and it's a group that has not endorsed yet. they endorsed barack obama in 2008. hillary clinton certainly wants them this time, and she showed that yesterday. it is a very tense fight over unions. expect a lot of talk about workers tonight in the debate. >> woodruff: of course being a huge part of the democratic base, the labor unions. will let's talk about some of the other candidates on the stage. we haven't heard a great deal, lisa, about the former governor of maryland, martin o'malley. he's been trying to get his voice heard. but it's been tough in this campaign. what are we looking for from him? >> . >> that's right. he may be the one with the most at stake tonight, judy. martin o'malley in some polls is under 1%, just barely above 0. that's something i don't think anyone expected a few months ago. he has a lengthy resume. he's personable. he's a good campaigner, but he hasn't taken hold. judy, tonight we expect if anyone goes on the attack, it will be martin o'malley. he will try the look as though hi is more of a progressive than health care. as i say, the stakes are very high, judy, so high, in fact, if he doesn't improve in the polling, judy, he may not make future debates because of a 1% or higher cut-off established by different networks. >> woodruff: lisa, the other two on the staining are candidates we hear even less about. that's the former senator from virginia, jim webb, and the former senator and governor of the state of rhode island, lincoln chafee. what are their campaigns saying about what they need to do tonight? >> right. both of them are stressing the home-spun nature of their campaigns. part of that is they are more low-funded campaigns. they say they're proud of that. for example, with jim webb, talking to his folks, we know that those who will be speaking for mr. web here in the spin room are just friends of his, some of them friends of his through the military and his experience there, but people who have never been in a spin room before. i think those two men in a way have nothing to lose, and so we should expect to see if one of them has an unexpectedly strong moment tonight. i think one thing overall for all of these candidates is this debate is especially important because it's the first in a long season, and if our viewers will remember new york 2008, by this point, there were already 13 debates. can you imagine? it's sort of hard to understand, but this being the first at the start of the cycle, it's very important. >> woodruff: just very quickly, lisa, difference between a republican debate and a democratic debate? you covered both of them now. what does it look like? what does it feel like? >> it is a vast difference, judy. i think tonight we think because there are fewer candidates, and to be honest, because their disagreements are a birth more nuanced, we think we might have a more serious policy debate. a lot of us love those, and hopefully we'll get one tonight. we'll see. >> woodruff: lisa desjardines, our political director. i know you'll be there and we'll be talking to you tomorrow all about it. >> yes. >> woodruff: thank you. >> reporter: cinema virunga is just another shell of a building, on another unpaved street in the democratic republic of congo. >> here is where we used to buy our tickets from. >> reporter: oh this is the ticket booth. >> yeah, but now it's the main entry. >> reporter: yet filmmaker petna ndaliko still sees something special behind these rusty gates. he remembers the time he snuck in as a boy. do you remember the first time you came to watch a film? >> oh yeah, i remember. i was still young and i got in illegally. i was not even supposed to be in here to watch that film. >> reporter: what was the movie? >> the film was "black jim le magnifique." it was a film about kung fu. the main character was a black guy and it was so good for me to see a film where a black guy was the main character and it was like-- he was, like, kicking everybody. >> reporter: cinema virunga was a rare sight. the only modern theater for hundreds of miles. it had opened in 1955, when congo was a belgian colony, to serve the booming population of goma-- a city in the shadow of a volcano that beckoned tourists. inspired by cinema virunga, ndaliko became a filmmaker. yet by the 1990's, cinema virunga itself was no more. the rwandan genocide had forced a million refugees into goma and the cinema became refugee housing. after the crisis, a series of civil wars kept it closed. what's lost when you don't have cinema? >> not having a cinema, it is missing that moment of a "wow". that wow. dream and it is that dreaming big. being capable of imagine things from just your room and then come up with this crazy beautiful idea and that's that is what cinema brings to people. >> reporter: now ndaliko wants to bring that "wow" moment back to the congo. it needs a little work. the building briefly housed a nightclub, then government offices, now storage. ndaliko has raised just $30,000 of the $500,000 he needs for it to become a cinema. how much work does bringing back the cinema require? >> wiring of installation for the power, we have to redo all of it. we have to also insulate so that we can have a good sound isolation inside here. and then all this speakers-- we have to put new ones. we have to add all the curtain. the roof, we sort of have to re- do the entire roofing. >> reporter: ndaliko is not the only one dreaming of a cinema. he started a film school in goma ten years ago, yole africa, where there are dozens of students with a message in search of an audience. >> i dreamed one day to become a filmmaker to change the way of thinking of my people. >> reporter: young filmmakers like yannick chishibanji have a new narrative to share: that goma, their city, is coming back. >> when you have 20 years, 25 years, all this generation was grown in the war. we didn't have so much good examples. >> reporter: this new goma is emerging from war. the students' films touch on modern issues like women in the workplace, and reconciliation. a cinema would bring those stories to life. do you think it makes a difference if they see a film here, or if maybe one day there was a big cinema where the community could go? >> if there is one cinema, i think that every night we can hope that 100 persons who have been changed. >> reporter: you think that cinema is powerful enough to change the hearts and minds of people? >> of course. >> reporter: getting there is half the battle. to make a film, the school uses a gas-fueled generator to power cameras and computers because the electricity often goes out. the wi-fi is also unreliable. so lay out for me, the things that are the daily challenges to being a filmmaker, jannick. >> if you want to go somewhere and you want papers, because everywhere you will find policeman, soldiers, it's very hard because you have to give money to everybody. >> reporter: chishebanji made a film anyway, all about his country. it's about a man choosing between reconciliation and revenge after his family is attacked. >> sometimes we think that it is the other person who is our problem. >> reporter: and in your film, who is the problem? >> the problem is the way of seeing things, the communitarianism, the tribalism. >> reporter: communitarianism and tribalism. without cinema virunga, the only public space for a film about those issues might be a street cinema with blaring sound and blurry images. there are places to watch films now. there are sort of makeshift movie houses if you will. why is a cinema better than that, or different from that? >> because the cinema take you into the film itself. and watching on the dvd, the quality is not the same. and also create this space where a family can sit and enjoy and have their popcorn. it is a different experience and also be in a cinema and feel safe with other people. it is very important psychologically for the people around here. >> reporter: what do you mean? >> yeah, like, be in this dark place. you are with more than 20 people and then you still feel safe. >> reporter: does that not happen in goma? >> not often, not often. >> reporter: and is that because of all the conflict. >> because of all the conflicts. >> reporter: yole africa tries to create that feeling with an annual festival of film and art, with dj's pumping and music thumping, kids spinning wildly in the air, with a dance contest. ndaliko's wife, cherie, sees the difference public art can make. >> it changes people's lives. it's incredible to see people come in having no sense of confidence, no sense of their own self-worth, because they've only seen images of themselves that portray them as worthless. and, it's incredible to see what happens when they learn that they can tell their own story, and in their version of the story they can be the hero. >> reporter: without cinema, the best yole africa can do is fly in a blow up screen from north carolina. it deflates if the power fails, fights to be heard over street noise, and ndaliko's worry about being out at night. but as that familiar rectangle of light appears something magic is happening too. a wow moment-- even if just once a year. for the pbs newshour, i'm soledad o'brien in the democratic republic of congo. >> woodruff: tomorrow night, soldedad concludes our series "congo's hope" with a story about the gorillas in the congo's virunga national park. ever since edward snowden released a mountain of information about the extent of u.s. government secret surveillance, the battle has been growing between tech companies and the government over access to data. one of the major fronts in that battle has been the decision by apple, google, microsoft and others to lock down, or encrypt, data on smartphones and digital devices. but new reports say the obama administration may be backing down on its demands. william brangham has the story. >> brangham: for months now, the obama administration has said it's essential to be able to occasionally access messages, texts and photos that sent on today's smartphones. but many of the latest devices give individual users the power to control their data and block others from seeing it. until recently, law enforcement has argued that this encryption is making it increasingly hard to track terrorists or criminals who are using these devices to communicate with each other. for example, this is what deputy attorney general sally yates told a senate hearing this summer. >> isil currently communicates on twitter, sending communications to thousands of would-be followers right here in our country. when someone responds and the conversations begin, they are then directed to encrypted platforms for further communication, and even with a court order, we can't see those communications. this is a serious threat, and our inability to access these communications with valid court orders is a real national security problem. >> reporter: this past week the obama administration has apparently backed off on some of its demands to gaining access to our digital devices. david sanger has been reporting on this for "the new york times." david sanger, welcome. >> thanks. good to be with you, william. >> brangham: for those of us who haven't been following this debate, can you tell us, what is encryption? >> encryption is a sophisticated version of what you did when you made codes when you were a kid. it is taking the data that's in your phone and wrapping it in a code so that if somebody got ahold of that phone, if they didn't know the key, they couldn't deencrypt it. sometimes conversations are encrypted or data is encrypted when it's moving across a telephone wire, as well. >> brangham: so the obama administration, as you reported, has recently changed its position on this. could you tell me, what was it they were originally wanting, and why have they changed cows? >> well, for years now the f.b.i. has worried about what they call "the going dark problem." and that is that as more and more information is encrypted, they feared that if a kidnapper had photographs of say a victim, if they were going after a terrorist suspect, if the special forces landed someplace, grabbed some iphones from a group of al qaeda, for example, that they wouldn't be able to know what was in those phones. and so the director of the f.b.i. made a very passionate case last year for forcing apple, google, microsoft, others to build a back door, a way with a court order that somebody could get into these phones, and apple objected to this, along with google and others, saying, if we build that back door, someone else is going to pry it open, and it's probably going to be the chinese or the russians, and so that was one of many reasons that they opposed this, and in the end it looks like they're winning the argument. >> brangham: but if law enforcement doesn't have that back door, then as you mentioned, it seems to make it more difficult for them to do their job. >> it does. that's why, to borrow your iphone here, this is a national security problem in your pocket, and in everybody's pocket. so for 99.9% of communications, the government wants you to encrypt more because they don't want criminals to be able to get into your bank account. your whole life is on this phone, medical data, financial data, conversations back and forth with family members. and they're protected by that four-digit code you type in, which in turn creates a much longer encryption key. so the question is: who gets to hold on to that key? and apple said, we don't want it. we want you to have your own key. well... >> brangham: "you" being the individual. >> yes. so if the f.b.i. wanted your data or the n.s.a. wanted it because they thought you were communicating with a terrorist, what apple is saying, don't bring that warrant to us. bring it to william and have him give you the key. of course, the f.b.i.'s view is drug dealers, terrorist, they're not likely to turn over the key. >> brangham: in your reporting, you mentioned that apple c.e.o. tim cook said to president obama, if you make me build a back door for the u.s. government to get into, then it's very likely that the chinese are going to ask the same. is that really a concern these companies have, that other companies are going to say, if you did it for the americans, you're going to do it for us. >> it's a very real concern. it may happen even without the obama administration doing this. look, what mr. cook, what microsoft, what google wanted was an affirmative statement from the u.s. government, which they've not gotten yet, which said, we're not going to force these companies to bid back doors, and therefore you shouldn't either. now, the back door in the united states is based on the fact we have a court system that you fundamentally trust. if the chinese forced a back door, then almost any user, including an american user who goes over and is visiting in china, might have their data taken right out on the basis of a court order in china and the impartiality of that court you don't quite trust. >> brangham: obviously this is all on the ongoing fallout from the snowden revelations and the tension we have between our needs for privacy and the government's need to be able to be good law enforcers and to track criminals and terrorists. apart from this particular issue, how do you see this fight going forward from this point on? >> there is an old saying in washington that nothing's ever over, rights? so right now all you have is a set of decisions that the obama administration has made, not to press this issue, not to go for legislation. we have a presidential election coming up. who knows if the next president will see it the same way, which is why privacy advocates wants there to be a law in congress that says the government shall not get a back door, and why law enforcement wants to go fight that. i think what you've seen happen here is a truce for the next 15 or 16 months until a new president comes in. but this issue is going to come back, because that tension that you describe between privacy and security is one where it's always a pendulum back and forth. and after a a new terror attack, some large incident where somebody couldn't get the data, you can imagine the f.b.i., the n.s.a., others coming back and saying, see, we really do need this data. >> brangham: david sanger of "the new york times," thank you so much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: fears of a third intifada in the middle east. a recent surge in attacks have left at least eight israelis and 28 palestinians dead, including many of the attackers themselves. after another deadly day, many are thinking the worst is yet to come. newshour special correspondent martin seemungal reports from jerusalem. a warning: some images may be disturbing. >> reporter: palestinians proclaimed it a "day of rage," and a new string of attacks attested to the fury that's fueled nearly a month of stabbings and shootings. today, a pair of palestinian men shot and stabbed passengers aboard this bus in jerusalem. police said two israelis were killed, along with one of the attackers. >> two terrorists carried out an attack. one of them had a pistol, the second one had a knife. the terrorists were shot. one of them was shot and killed, the second one was shot and captured at the scene. >> reporter: within minutes, another assailant rammed his car into a crowded bus stop in an ultra-orthodox jewish neighborhood in downtown jerusalem. then, he leaped out and hacked at bystanders with a cleaver, killing an israeli man before he was shot dead. meanwhile, north of tel aviv, two more stabbing attacks wounded five israelis in raanana. several were in serious condition. trouble also broke out across the west bank, where hundreds of palestinian youths confronted israeli troops. soldiers used tear gas and rubber bullets, but in bethlehem, the army said it shot and killed a palestinian before he could toss a gasoline bomb. in turn, israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu convened an emergency security cabinet meeting, and condemned palestinian president mahmoud abbas. >> ( translated ): i am calling on the head of the palestinian authority, abu mazen, to stop lying. stop the incitement. a real leader must show responsibility. you must stop the incitement coming from the palestinian authority. >> ( translated ): time is running out and running out fast. >> reporter: nabil shaath is a senior member of the ruling fatah party in the west bank, and an advisor to abbas, also known as abu mazen. >> i know abu mazen and all the leadership is extremely alarmed and afraid of this going out of hand. >> reporter: the upsurge in clashes between young palestinians and israeli soldiers has opened a heated debate-- is this a so called 'third intifada?' and that's what shaath is calling it. >> this intifada is totally unorganized, unplanned for. it is the natural and spontaneous reaction of people who cannot take israeli despotism anymore. >> reporter: the demonstrations near the israeli checkpoints in ramallah happen almost daily now. 21 year old mahmoud ayala attends most of them. >> ( translated ): i am ready to sacrifice my soul, my blood for palestine, he says. i want to be free. >> reporter: palestinians in the west bank, in gaza, are following events in jerusalem. in a violent assault on a 13 year old jewish boy yesterday, the alleged attacker was also 13. according to police he was hit by a car as he ran away. a video surfaced showing the young teen on the ground, broken and bleeding-- he was allegedly denied medical assistance. people can be heard on the video shouting obscenities at him. that video was widely seen on social media. it had a profound impact here on the streets of east jerusalem. it added to the frustration and anger and created even more tension between palestinians and israelis. this palestinian told us he was afraid these invitations might be mistaken for a knife in his pocket. >> ( translated ): i am afraid. the soldier see it like a knife. to shoot me! >> i'm worried. yeah, i'm worried for both of the people. if i were to go to market, let's say, or if i were to go to any place, i'm afraid for some people to shout, "this is arab people," and some security or government that didn't understand what the situation would be. they are afraid, they shoot the people without nothing. >> reporter: you're afraid they would shoot you for no reason. just because you're palestinian. >> yeah. just because i'm palestinian. >> reporter: the al-aqsa mosque and the temple mount in the old city are at the heart of what is happening. al-aqsa is the third holiest site in islam. the temple mount is the holiest site in judaism. david horovitz says that when israel captured the old city in the 1967 war it didn't want to provoke a war with islam-- jews were not allowed to pray on the temple mount. but certain right wing israeli leaders have been pushing recently to change the so-called status quo. >> the notion that israel might be changing the arrangement, which israel says it is not going to do, has been utilized by people who want to stir up trouble and we are now seeing the trouble. president abbas has disavowed the violence but has also called for al aqsa to be defended from israel. it's a display of defiance against terror. >> most people are looking over their shoulder. they're more aware. it's not just a lone incident. we have a lot of enemies evenge amongst us. >> reporter: and then suddenly a republicanon appears with an act of defiance of his own. >> there is nothing here. there's never been a republicanon country here. -- there's never been a palestinian country here. thank you very much. >> go. go over there. >> reporter: it was a heated debate, but it ended peacefully. benjamin netanyahu is vowing to take aggressive action, calling up more soldiers, threatening to set up checkpoints in east jerusalem. but there is great concern tonight that this recent cycle of violence is beyond the control of leaders on both sides. judy? >> woodruff: that was martin seemungal reporting for us from jerusalem. late this evening u.s. secretary of state john kerry said he will travel to the region soon to help ease tensions. finally tonight, the latest addition to the newshour bookshelf. it's a look back at one of the more turbulent political eras in our country's modern history. i sat down last week with a key chronicler of the times and a principal player. we thought we knew him, his political career with its high, lows and reinventions have been scrutinized in hundreds of books. now a whole new richard m. nixon emerges from bob woodward's new book "the last of the president's men." bob joins me now along with alexander butterfield, the man he calls the ultimate insider in the nixon white house. welcome to both of you. so bob woodward, we really did think, and you say you thought we knew everything there was to know about richard nixon, but after talking to the man sitting next to you, you learned differently. >> for 46 hours and thousands of documents that alex took out of the white house, and i went to his place in california and started looking at things. >> every memo that i wrote in the month of january. >> quite frankly, i was shocked, particularly about some of the memos about vietnam and the lies and the contradictions. >> woodruff: you kept this quiet for decades, four decades. why finally talk? >> i was lured into talking by my friend here. bob was the one who approached me. i knew he was interested because i had been in the white house, but that was a relatively unknown part of the nixon inner sanctum, which i actually was. the more we talked, the more he got interested. i knew that a lot of it was history in a way. a lot of it is history. >> woodruff: but you have insights into richard nixon that no one else has shared. you were the top aide to the man closest to richard nixon in the white house, bob haldeman. >> yeah, i was haldeman's deputy, uh-huh. haldeman knew far more than i knew. >> woodruff: but you bring a side... we already knew this was man of many layers, many complication, bob, but what we see here was someone who was, for one thing, very socially awkward. i mean, the first meeting that mr. butterfield had with the president was extraordinary. >> and nixon couldn't speak in that first meeting. and haldeman told alex, he said, look, he hasn't met you yet. he doesn't like new people. you have to hide. and in the first month or two in the white house, you were sneaking around and hiding behind walls and pillars. >> for almost a month, yeah. one of the first days he said, "it will take a while. i have to wait for just the right time because he's a funny guy, and new people spook him, new faces." i thought, now you tell me. >> woodruff: and there's so much about his interactions with other people. there was state dinner where he said there are only five people on this list of 180. i want to have any kind of conversation with. bob, you mentioned vietnam. that was a moment i think that will resonate more than any other probably. >> and there's this hand-written memo that was in alex's 20 boxes from nixon to kissinger on a top secret memo saying, "we've had ten years of air operations in vietnam. what's the result? zilch. nothing. it's been failure." now just the night before nixon had told cbs news that it was very, very effective. and you go into this and you connect it with the dots of the tapes and other documents, and you see what was driving nixon with the bombing was not to win the war, but the bombing was popular according to the polls, and so nixon intensified more bombing because it won the election and kissinger actually tells nixon, that's when you won the election. and you read this and it's shocking and chilling, and you see the deceit here for the purpose of winning reelection, it's the other side of watergate. >> woodruff: alexander butterfield, how did you deal with that? what were you telling yourself when these things were happening? >> i was an integral part of the staff. i wasn't too shocked by the things i saw. i wasn't naive, although it was totally different environment than the military. a lot of it was very petty. we had big meetings about the president's image, and that sort of thing, but things i had to do, i did. >> you said some of it was a cesspool, that there was this obsession with these deceptions. >> you're sort of exploiting everybody. how will it play this pee umenyiora, we said that. another thing i heard all the time, "we can always say that. " it was national security, we can always say that. we're always covering up. there was a lot of that. >> woodruff: you also say there were some good things about the nixon presidency. >> oh, yes. >> woodruff: the country didn't completely suffer as a result of him. >> absolutely not. also, he was not a bad guy. i came to like him very, very much. partly because i understood these vulnerability, the fact that he was so awkward, there were times when i pitied him. it seems odd to pity the president, but i truly pitied him because of this awkwardness. >> woodru: does that surprise you, bob? >> no. but this is the kind of last piece of the nixon puzzle, and you wonder, all of the people in the white house had affiliations with nixon. alex did not. he was an outsider. he became this ultimate insider. and then he left with all of these documents at a time when documents were being destroyed, when there was that sense of the unraveling. and i... some of the stories alex told me, i just didn't quite believe, frankly, until i saw the documents. and there it was, things that you did not think possible even in the nixon white house. >> woodruff: you are best known for revealing the taping system inside the white house. why did you do that? >> i certainly didn't want to do it. just three or four people knew. we kept that secret for over two years. but when i was called before the committee, i decided i would answer only the most direct question relative to the tapes. the most direct question. and suddenly that question came. >> mr. butterfield, are you aware of the installation of any listening devices in the oval office of the president? >> i was aware of listening devices, yes, sir. >> are you aware of any devices that were installed in the executive office building office of the president? >> yes, sir. at that time. >> were they installed at the same time? >> they were installed at the same time. >> woodruff: have we now answered all the questions about richard knickson and his presidency? >> i think one of the lessons here is history is never over. you never get the full story. and particularly now in 2016. next year when we're going to elect another president, and there are always people running. we don't know much about. we need to know. and i think it's going to be our job in the media to really dig in and explain so there's not a surprise. >> woodruff: what question should we be asking based on your experience in the white house? what do we need to know about the people who want to be president? >> well, obviously we didn't know enough about richard nixon, but frankly, judy, i'm not sure that the american electorate is going to do much more. i think bob feels differently. but would we have elected richard nixon had we known about these odd behavior? he did a great many good things, domestically as well as as in foreign affairs. >> but it wasn't just odd. it was illegal, and it, particularly in vietnam, the idea that the president is going to conduct a war and drop three million tons of bombs in southeast asia and know and write secretly that it's achieving zilch and failure and, you know, i think people are going to say, hey, wait a minute. we can't have a president like that. >> woodruff: well, it is an extraordinary book, an extraordinary story. bob woodward, alex butterfield, we thank you very much. "the last of the president's men." >> thank you, judy. >> woodruff: thank you very much. >> woodruff: on the newshour online, it's the perfect example of a cross-cultural exchange. more than 60 graphic artists from seattle, havana and tehran participated in a traveling exhibit where politics and prejudices were checked at the door. see some of their designs, and hear from the show's curators. we have a video from seattle pbs station kcts, on our home page, pbs.org/newshour. and tune in later tonight for the finale of "frontline"'s three part documentary "my brother's bomber" that investigates the lockerbee, scotland bomber mystery. and on "charlie rose": actress juliette binoche on her role in "the 33," the story of the chilean mine rescue that ended five years ago this week. and that's the newshour for tonight. on wednesday, we recap the highlights from the first democratic presidential debate. i'm judy woodruff. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change worldwide. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org this is "nightly business report." with tyler mathisen and sue herara. >> one beat, one miss. earnings season is here and late today, two dow components reported results that could impact trading tomorrow. >> it's the economy. where the democratic presidential hopefuls stand on issues important to your money. the smart money. but how much of an advantage to investors have by putting their cash with hedge funds? all that and more tonight on "nightly business report" for tuesday, october 13. >> good evening, everyone. welcome. glad you could join us. ready or not, folks, it is earnings season big-time, the time of the year when companies tell investors how much money they made or didn't. the two dow components that reported today two of the biggest, jpmorgan and intel.

Related Keywords

Vietnam , Republic Of , Jerusalem , Israel General , Israel , West Bank , Nevada , United States , Tel Aviv , China , California , Syria , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , Kabul , Kabol , Afghanistan , Ukraine , Kunduz , Kondoz , Netherlands , Havana , Ciudad De La Habana , Cuba , Tehran , Iran , Ramallah , West Bank General , Belgium , New York , Kuala Lumpur , Malaysia , Moscow , Moskva , North Carolina , Rwanda , Rhode Island , Virginia , Kaloo , Az Arbayjan E Sharqi , United Kingdom , Las Vegas , Gaza , Ghazni , Maryland , Chile , Americans , Rwandan , Ukrainians , Chinese , Russian , Scotland , Belgian , Israelis , Soviet , Dutch , Malaysian , Israeli , Chilean , Palestinian , Russians , American , Hillary Rosen , Bob Haldeman , Simone Sanders , Congo Virunga , Joe Biden , Jim Webb , Vladimir Putin , Adrian Peterson , Abu Mazen , Tim Cook , Richard M Nixon , Stephen Colbert , Mahmoud Abbas , John Kerry , Mahmoud Ayala , Alexander Butterfield , Al Qaeda , Alex Butterfield , Gwen Ifill , Nabil Shaath , Benjamin Netanyahu , Bernie Sanders , Temple Mount , David Sanger , Barry Sweeney , Ali Khamenei , Lisa Desjardins , Bob Woodward , Sally Yates , David Horovitz , Judy Woodruff , Edward Snowden , Barack Obama , Lincoln Chafee , Richard Nixon , Hillary Clinton ,