Brutally Honest: Is it OK to be naked in front of your kids?

Editor's note: Kelly Wallace is CNN's digital correspondent and editor-at-large covering family, career and life. She is a mom of two girls. Read her other columns and follow her reports at CNN Parents and on Twitter. (CNN) -- Let me say at the start that there is no way around the topic of nakedness in front of your children without getting personal and slightly uncomfortable. I'm already feeling somewhat tense as I type this. I joke that the only person who should have to see me naked is my husband. He signed up for it, right? My kids certainly didn't. A lifetime of body image issues means I'm not one to walk around naked at home. But I don't cover up around my daughters, 7 and 8, when I'm getting dressed or in the bathroom, either. I don't want them to think there is anything wrong with my body or theirs. And when they ask hilarious questions such as "Mom, why do your boobs hang?," I can't help but laugh and use the opportunity as a chance to tell them my body has changed over time and theirs will, too. When is it OK to leave your child alone? What if you don't like your kid's pals? How not to raise a mean girl 'Brutally Honest': When is it OK to leave your teen home alone overnight? In conversations over email with mothers and fathers across the country and in Canada, it's clear there is no "one size fits all'" approach to the questions of whether it's OK to be naked in front of your kids and if there's an age when it's no longer OK. Rhonda Woods, a mother of three, says ever since her children, now 20, 13 and 13, were little, she and her husband have been teaching them not to be ashamed of their bodies. They have also never hidden their bodies from their kids, she said. "As they get older, my husband is more discreet around our daughters and I am more discreet around our son. Not because we are uncomfortable, but because they may be," said Woods, a real estate agent in New Milford, Connecticut. "So when it is time for me to undress, I tell whichever of my kids is in my room talking to me, that I plan to do so and they have the option to leave." 'Brutally Honest': What if you don't like your kids' friends? Comfort is key A common theme I heard from parents is comfort. If both you and your children are comfortable with you being naked in front of them, there isn't anything "inherently wrong with that at all," said Avital Norman Nathman, who says her 8-year-old son is used to seeing her and her husband naked on occasion when they are getting dressed or in the shower. "If my son were ever to say or even act as if he was uncomfortable by it, we would of course respect that," said Norman Nathman, editor of the motherhood anthology "The Good Mother Myth: Redefining Motherhood to Fit Reality" and founder of the blog The Mamafesto. "Nudity, when it's within your home and 100% nonsexualized, isn't going to traumatize a child, especially if you're all on the same page, are all consenting and are all comfortable with it." Nancy Friedman, a New York City mom of two middle schoolers, said while every child is different, most kids make it clear when their mom or dad's nudity no longer works for them. 'Brutally Honest': Mean girls are getting younger "I think your kids let you know when it's time to stop being naked in front of them -- usually about the time they decide they don't want to be naked in front of you," said Friedman, co-founder of the video sharing site for tweens called KidzVuz. As children age, they certainly develop their own sense of modesty around others, said Micky Morrison, a mom of two in Islamorada, Florida, and founder of BabyWeightTV. "But even my 12-year-old son doesn't hesitate to undress in front of me. I figure that he will one day, and that's OK," said Morrison. "Perhaps one day he will avert his eyes or become uncomfortable with my nudity as well. And that's OK, too." Amanda Rodriguez, a mom of three boys in Frederick, Maryland, said she reached a point with each of her sons, usually no later than age 5, when she thought it was no longer OK to be nude around them. "I began to feel uncomfortable being naked in front of them because of the questions and the poking and prodding and search for Mommy's 'inside penis' -- that's what they thought a vagina was," said Rodriguez, founder of the blog Dude Mom. "I don't think it makes them terrible people or scars them for life if they stumble into the bathroom while I'm going, but it's easily avoidable awkwardness none of us really needs to experience on a daily basis." Terry Greenwald, a divorced father of three, puts himself solidly in the no-being-naked-in-front-of-kids' camp. Read: 28 Web abbreviations every parent should know "It would be very difficult to teach children any sort of modesty and humility if a parent thought it OK to be naked in front of their children. It also would bring up questions and conversations they might not be ready to handle," he said. Blogger: Why I want my sons to see me naked A few months back, a post by blogger Rita Templeton about why she wants her four sons -- ages 2, 5, 6 and 9 -- to see her naked, was republished on The Huffington Post and went viral. Templeton said she wanted her sons to see what "real" women look like before they are bombarded with an ideal in the media that doesn't match reality. "Before they are exposed to boobs that are as round and firm as cantaloupes and pictures of taut, airbrushed, dimple-less butts, I'm exposing them to a different kind of female body. Mine," wrote Templeton, who blogs at Fighting Off Frumpy. Her words led to an onslaught of hate mail, nasty tweets and accusations she's sexualizing her sons, she said. Buzz Bishop, a father of two boys in Calgary, wrote a blog post of his own in part as a response to all the outrage. He says he has been playing games called "naked baby" and "naked daddy" at bath time since his children were little while at the same time he teaches his kids not to stare when they are in the open shower in the men's bathroom at their neighborhood pool. "Rita's doing what works for (her). I'm doing what works for me. You're doing what works for you. And we're all just trying to teach our kids a little respect for each other, and themselves," said Bishop, who writes about parenting on his blog Dad Camp. There doesn't seem to be much science to help guide us on whether it's better or worse for your child, or it makes no difference at all, if they see you naked. I couldn't find many studies when I searched for them, and those I found had conflicting findings. For instance, one study found no negative impact on adolescents who regularly saw their parents naked at ages 3 and 6, but another study found that parental nudity when kids were ages 6 to 11 resulted in more permissive attitudes about sex and increased sexual frequency. For some parents, like Maryellen, a mom of two young girls on Long Island, who only wanted to use her first name, it's all about convenience. "I'll be honest. Sometimes it's easier and faster just to pull them into the shower with me," she said. "But my girls are 4 and 6. A year from now I may not be doing it any longer. By then, they may be showering by themselves (dare to hope?)" Do you think it's OK to be naked in front of your kids? Share your thoughts with Kelly Wallace on Twitter or CNN Living on Facebook.

Buying Guide: Home Wireless Networking

A secure wireless network makes sharing files between computers and devices (like a printer or phone) easy. WiFi lets you surf the internet using a modem and router, without messy cables. We look at how Wi-Fi works and the gear you'll need. What Is A Wireless Network? A wireless network connects multiple computers and devices (printers, phones, tablets etc) together, without using cables. The devices "talk" to each other through a central hub called a router. This enables the computers and devices to: Share files and documents. Connect multiple computers to the one printer. Enjoy multi-player gaming. Load files from portable wireless devices, such as What Are The Benefits Of Wi-Fi? Wireless networks do away with messy cables. This leaves you free to wander around the house or office, while staying connected. New computers have Wi-Fi technology built-in, while older ones will require a USB adaptor. Connect To The Internet Most wireless routers come with a modem built into them. This enables all devices connected to the router to be simultaneously connected to the Internet. Is It Hard To Set Up? Not at all. The latest generation of networking gear (routers) comes with easy-to-follow wizards that guide you through the process. Simply plug in, follow the prompts and you're away. Wireless technology (Wi-Fi) is available in a range of standards. These refer to factors such as the data transfer rate and the operating frequency. The standard you choose ultimately affects your network's speed and its range (distance): The top standard today is 802.11n. This offers faster transfer rates and more range than the previous 802.11g format. Important Security Note! If you do not take the necessary security steps, your network will be left wide open to anyone within range. They could gain access to files on your computers (this could include banking details or passwords). They could also download illegal content using your Internet account. Some, but not all, of the ways to secure your network include: Change the default administrator passwords. Turn on the encryption to scramble the messages sent over the wireless network. MAC (Media Access Control) restricts network access to selected devices. Router: The central device that communicates to all connected devices: Choose a router with built-in modem for Internet access. Also look for built-in firewalls for extra security. Ensure it supports the latest 802.11n format. Network cable: While wireless does away with cables, they offer much faster ADSL transfer speeds, so it's always good to have the option. Wireless network adapter: This is Important if the laptop or desktop you want to connect doesn't have Wi-Fi capabilities already built into it, or to upgrade your laptop Wi-Fi standards: It's important to match the adapter to the standard of the router you're using. USB adapters simply plug in, rather than being physically installed inside the computer. Network adaptors are backwards compatible. This means an 802.11g device will work with an 802.11b device etc. Wireless access point: Think of this as a wireless extension cable to give you more range, so you can move further away without the signal being too weak. Extra range antenna: Makes your router signals more powerful, for extra range. Network printer: Connects to the network so multiple computers can print from it. Simple Home Wireless Network Choices Router: A router with an in-built modem will connect to the Internet. Standards: Aim for 802.11n. Security: Make sure you secure your Wi-Fi network to ensure your files are safe. Optional Extras More range: Use a wireless access point or an extra-range antenna to increase the range of the network. Network adapters: If your laptop doesn't have built-in Wi-Fi, you can buy a network adapter. What Next? Now that you are a wireless network expert :-), click on the links below to explore routers, range extenders and wireless adapters available from BambooNaija.com:

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to step down

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama announced Monday that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will step down from his position as soon as the Senate confirms a successor. Hagel, who has served as Defense secretary since February 2013, was forced out by President Barack Obama, CNN confirmed from several sources. During his remarks from the White House, however, Obama praised Hagel as an "exemplary" Defense secretary, calling him critical to a number of national security accomplishments during his tenure, and characterized Hagel's resignation as his own choice. "If there's one thing I know about Chuck it is that he does not make this or any decision lightly," Obama said from the State Dining Room. "This decision does not come easily to him." However, Arizona Sen. John McCain, the expected incoming chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said on local Arizona radio station KFYI 550's "The Mike Broomhead Show" that he spoke with Hagel last week and the Defense secretary was "frustrated." "They're gonna say well it was time for a change and all that...but I can tell you he was in my office last week, he was very frustrated," McCain said, with a lack of strategy to combat ISIS, help the Ukranians and what McCain called "a lack of U.S. influence...unknown in history." McCain said, despite the fact "White House people are leaking, 'Well, he wasn't up to the job,' believe me, he was up to the job" — and that the real issue was the White House itself. "It was the job that he was given where he really was never really brought into that real tight circle inside the White House that makes all the decisions," he said. Behind the scenes, administration officials told CNN there were a series of discussions over the past several weeks with the President, initiated by Hagel. The talks covered a "broader discussion of national security for the next two years," a defense official said. Defense Secretary Hagel to step down White House: Secy. Hagel to resign Sources: Secy. Hagel pushed out The two came to realize that "a different focus was needed and a change is in order," the official added. "It is wrong to conclude that this was a protest by Hagel or it was over policy differences." The New York Times first reported Monday morning that Obama asked Hagel to step down last Friday, seeking to reassure critics of the President's foreign policy with the move. The move, White House officials told the Times, was meant to acknowledge that the new national security threats facing the nation — most notably the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — call for a different kind of leadership in the Defense Department. "The next couple of years will demand a different kind of focus," an administration official told the paper. Obama did not announce a successor Monday. According to a White House aide, the list to replace Hagel includes former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michèle Flournoy and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Ash Carter. Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, a former paratrooper, was initially in the mix, but his spokesman said in a statement that he's not interested in the job. "Senator Reed loves his job and wants to continue serving the people of Rhode Island in the United States Senate. He has made it very clear that he does not wish to be considered for Secretary of Defense or any other cabinet position," spokesman Chip Unruh said. But it's highly unlikely that the confirmation process for Hagel's replacement will occur before next year when the Republican-led Senate convenes, Senate leadership aides from both parties tell CNN. A GOP aide said it would be "logistically impossible" to complete it in the two weeks senators expect to be in session in December before leaving for the holidays. A Democratic aide said that while Democrats are "open" to considering the nomination when they return to session next week, doing so would require consent from Republicans. "It's not impossible for this year but would require a nominee before we come back Monday and complete cooperation from Republican leadership, committee members and rank and file," the Democratic aide said. The move, White House officials told the Times, was meant to acknowledge that the new national security threats facing the nation — most notably the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — call for a different kind of leadership in the Defense Department. "The next couple of years will demand a different kind of focus," an administration official told the paper. At the White House press conference, Hagel thanked the President and his colleagues, pledged to work "just as hard as I have over the last couple years" until his successor is confirmed. And he evaluated his tenure at the Pentagon as a success. "I believe we have set not only this department, the department of Defense, but the nation on a stronger course towards security, stability and prosperity. If I didn't believe that I would not have done this job," he said. A critic of the Iraq war, Hagel was brought on to oversee withdrawal from Afghanistan and a smaller Pentagon budget than ever before. Hagel, a former senator of Nebraska, was the last Republican still serving in Obama's Cabinet and was a Vietnam combat veteran. Hagel's tenure was rocky before it even began. During his confirmation hearings, Hagel drew sharp criticism from pro-Israel Republicans concerned with his opposition to aggressive sanctions against Iran and for his criticism of the Defense Department as "bloated." His confirmation was filibustered before he ultimately won approval. And his two years at the Pentagon have been marred by gaffes that occasionally undercut the President and an inability to sell the administration's national security policy. He at one point called ISIS an "imminent threat to every interest we have," contradicting the President's comments just months before that the group was simply "junior varsity." The administration has taken persistent criticism over the past few months as a series of national security crises roiled the nation, and the President's response was seen by many as flat-footed and inconsistent. Hagel's departure has been rumored to be coming for weeks, and as recently as last week he dodged questions about his continued tenure at the Pentagon. "First of all, I serve at the pleasure of the President," Hagel told PBS, asked whether he'd continue in the position. "I'm immensely grateful for the opportunity I've had the last two years to work every day for the country and for the men and women who serve this country. I don't get up in the morning and worry about my job. It's not unusual by the way, to change teams at different times." Pressed on whether he felt he still had Obama's confidence, Hagel said, "Well, I don't think I would be here if I didn't. But you'd have to ask him that. I mean I see him all the time."

Why Vladimir Putin thinks it's still 1985

Moscow (CNN) -- The first frosts of winter have already dusted the spectacular city of St. Petersburg with a powder of glistening ice. The air outside feels sharp and crisp. Russians hurry along the elegant boulevards, wrapped up tight against the biting cold. Russia's winter, its annual deep freeze, has begun. But this year there's more than just a bitter chill in the air. For the past nine months relations with the West have become decidedly frosty too. On the face of it the problem is Ukraine. The West backed a popular uprising there in March, which toppled a Kremlin-friendly government. Infuriated, Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, annexed the strategic Crimean Peninsula, where it has a key naval base. Since then he has been accused of fuelling a separatist rebellion in the mainly Russian-speaking east of the country. That unrest has already cost more than 4,000 lives. The United States and Europe have imposed costly sanctions and travel bans. It threatens more. On the international stage, Russia has been excluded from the G8 group of industrialized nations. At the recent G20 summit in Brisbane, President Putin was cold-shouldered by his Western counterparts. But the Russian leader appears unmoved, his Ukraine policy unchanged. One fascinating explanation for the failure of Western sanctions and rebukes to change this vast country's behavior may be in the mindset, the world view, of its strongman president. I'm one of the few Western journalists to have sat down with Vladimir Putin. I met him at his residence outside Sochi in 2008, just after Russia's invasion of Georgia. I asked him back then if he could guarantee that Russian troops would not invade other former Soviet states, like Ukraine. He reacted quite angrily, saying he objected to my question. It was Russians, he said, who should be given guarantees that no one attacks us. The comment sheds light, I think, on how Vladimir Putin sees the world outside the walls of the Kremlin. For him, Russia is under constant threat from the West. NATO expansion into former Eastern Bloc nations has eroded Russia's security. The prospect of Georgia joining the western military alliance, let alone Ukraine, is unthinkable for him. The Cold War, from this perspective, has never really ended; we're still living in the 1980s. The West, in particular the United States, still strives to "subjugate" Russia. President Putin repeated this just a few days ago in Moscow. Sanctions are an inevitable consequence of Russia's resistance to this subjugation. Ukraine was the motive, but if it had not been Ukraine it would likely have been something else. From a Western perspective, this seems like a cynical distortion of the facts, a Kremlin ploy to confuse and obfuscate. But it may help explain why Russia is doing what it is doing, and why sanctions are not changing -- and may never change -- Kremlin policy. It may also help to explain why, at a time of growing economic hardship, Russia's president remains so utterly popular at home. His world view is theirs too. Like the harsh cold of the coming Russian winter, confrontation with the West is inevitable and must be endured.

World leaders take Putin to task over Ukraine at G20 in Australia

(CNN) -- For Russian President Vladimir Putin, the G20 summit in Australia didn't prove to be a very amicable occasion. Putin has found himself on the receiving end of a series of sharp verbal jabs from some of his fellow world leaders. The reason? Russia's interference in Ukraine. One of the bluntest rebukes came from Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. "I guess I'll shake your hand," Harper told Putin on Saturday, according to aides of the Canadian leader. But he then quickly warned Putin, "You need to get out of Ukraine." U.S. President Barack Obama also voiced criticism of Moscow, saying in a speech that Russian aggression against Ukraine "is a threat to the world." Amid the strong words, the Russian government denied reports that Putin was going to leave the summit early. He departed on Sunday toward the end of the summit. He attended the final lunch, French news agency Agence France-Presse reported. Putin praised discussions as "constructive," AFP said. How hunt for foreign sub unfolded Criticism over Crimea, MH17 The pressure on Putin continued Sunday, with Obama and the leaders of Japan and Australia issuing a statement expressing opposition to "Russia's purported annexation of Crimea and its actions to destabilize eastern Ukraine." Western countries and the Ukrainian government in Kiev accuse Moscow of sending troops and military equipment into eastern Ukraine to help pro-Russian separatists fighting against government forces. Russian officials have persistently denied their military is involved. The statement also called for the prosecution of those responsible for downing Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine. The MH17 disaster, in which a passenger jet carrying 298 people was shot down over eastern Ukraine, is a particularly sensitive subject in Australia. The country lost 38 of its citizens and residents in the crash. Cool reception Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott had promised ahead of the G20 summit to confront Putin over the disaster and demand that Russia "fully cooperate with the criminal investigation" to find out who shot down the plane. Putin's standing in Australia was made clear by his reception when he arrived in the country Friday. The Russian leader stepped off his flight from Moscow to be greeted by Australia's deputy defense secretary, a junior minister in Abbott's cabinet. Standing nearby was a much bigger political personage, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis. But Brandis made no attempt to greet Putin. Not long afterward, however, Brandis was filmed enthusiastically welcoming German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Chinese President Xi Jinping. When Abbott and Putin met at the event, they shook hands, exchanged a few words and smiled. Abbott said Sunday that he has "some differences" with the Russian government, but that he was happy to treat Putin "with respect and courtesy" as a guest in Australia. 'Ice Cold War' Meanwhile, the Saturday edition of a local newspaper, The Courier Mail, displayed a giant front page graphic of a Russian bear, complete with fur hat, matching up against a boxing kangaroo, above the headline "Ice Cold War." Inside, splashed across two pages, was quote after quote from Abbott, reportedly revealing details of his 20-minute conversation with Putin on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting in Beijing earlier in the week. Abbott said he told Putin that he should stop trying to "recreate the lost glories of tsarism or the Soviet Union," and he accused Russia of stepping up its aggression, which was part of a "regrettable pattern." Adding an extra edge to the atmosphere, Moscow deployed four naval warships near Australia in the lead-up to the G20 meetings, the semiofficial Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported. One of the ships, the Varyag, was once named "Red Ukraine." The news agency said it was not uncommon for Russian warships to accompany the country's leaders on foreign trips. Warnings from West The Ukraine crisis has led to a broader souring of relations between Russia and the West. Tensions inched up between Moscow and Washington this week following Russia's announcement Wednesday that it plans to send long-range bombers on flights to the Gulf of Mexico. The U.S. government says no present security concerns warrant such maneuvers. British Prime Minister David Cameron warned Russia on Friday to change course over Ukraine. Otherwise, he said, "The relationship that Britain has with Russia, that the European Union has with Russia, the relationship that I hope Australia has with Russia, will be very different." Putin and Cameron met face-to-face in Brisbane on Saturday, and the Ukraine crisis "dominated the conversation," according to a statement from the Kremlin. "David Cameron expressed his views on the current state of affairs in the southeast of Ukraine, while Vladimir Putin provided extensive clarifications," the Russian statement explained diplomatically. Putin met with several other Western leaders, including Merkel and French President Francois Hollande. Obama said at a news conference Sunday that his interactions with Putin had been "businesslike and blunt." If Putin continues down the same path on Ukraine, Russia will continue to be isolated, Obama said. "It is not our preference to see Russia isolated the way it is," he said. Putin blasts sanctions The United States and European countries have imposed economic sanctions on Russia over its involvement in Ukraine. Putin criticized those measures in comments Thursday to the Russian news agency TASS, saying they undermine "the whole system of international economic relations." "They run counter to the very principle of G20 activities, and not only the activities of the G20 and its principles, they run counter to international law, because sanctions may be introduced only through the United Nations and its Security Council," Putin said. The G20's job is actually to focus on financial and economic matters. Ukraine is not officially on the agenda, but it has loomed large over the gathering, overshadowing Australia's plans for the meetings. Abbott tried to get the tough talk with Putin out of the way earlier in the week at APEC, in an attempt to keep the G20 focused on economic growth, said Michael Kofman, a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center. Australia "did not want the summit ruined by the Russia issue," Kofman told CNN. "But quite the opposite happened." READ: Brisbane welcomes G20 to paradise

Which Mideast power brokers support Hamas?

(CNN) -- If the Gaza truce holds and Israel's Operation Protective Edge comes to its conclusion, some things are certain. Both Israel and Hamas will declare military victory -- Israel pointing to the destruction of militants' tunnels and depletion of Hamas' rocket supply; Hamas pointing to dozens of dead Israeli troops and the survival of Hamas leadership in Gaza. But unlike in previous conflicts, when Hamas had the support of many Arab nations, things have changed. This time, as CNN has reported, the fighting between Israel and Hamas has been a proxy war for the Mideast. Key regional players Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have their own reasons to want to fend off the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is part, experts say. And Europe, like the United States, lists Hamas as a terrorist organization for its numerous attacks on civilians. But the group does have the support of some countries. "It's no longer the Muslims against the Jews," said Danielle Pletka, vice president of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. "Now it's the extremists -- the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, and their backers Iran, Qatar and Turkey -- against Israel and the more moderate Muslims including Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia." A look at some key Hamas supporters: Turkey Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan openly supports Hamas. "Erdogan has tried to use the cause of the Brotherhood to bolster his own Islamist credentials at home," says Eric Trager, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Turkey also has "more of an ideological sympathy with the Brotherhood," Trager says. Qatar Qatar supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt -- which was toppled from power in a coup last year. Qatar funds many Muslim Brotherhood figures in exile, including Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal, who is believed to have orchestrated numerous terrorist attacks. "Qatar has a long history of providing shelter to Islamist groups, amongst them the Muslim Brotherhood and the Taliban," Shashank Joshi of the Royal United Services Institute tells Time. Advocating for Hamas is beneficial to Turkey and Qatar in their political objectives because the cause draws popular support at home, says world affairs writer Frida Ghitis in a CNN.com column. But some question whether Qatar's support still is for Hamas is still strong. The country's financial support to the group "largely dried up" as Qatar sought "to mend ties with its neighbors, with whom it had fallen out in part for backing the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt," the Council on Foreign Relations said. While Qatar and Turkey are powerful allies, "Hamas might wish for more support given the breadth of the Arab world," Time reported. Iran and Syria In the past, Iran and Syria supported Hamas. Iran supplied the group with weapons; Syria was home to Meshaal. But Meshaal did not support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the country's civil war. In 2012, Meshaal left for Qatar, causing a breakdown in his relationship with both Syria and its ally Iran, says Firas Abi Ali, head of Middle East and North Africa Country Risk and Forecasting at the global information company IHS. And while Iran still professes to support Hamas, such claims "are more ostentatious, showy, exaggerated and theatrical rather than genuine and practical," writes Majid Rafizadeh, an Iranian-American scholar at Harvard University, in a column for al Arabiya. Iran, which is a Muslim but not an Arab nation, "uses Hamas (as well as Tehran's support for the Palestinian cause) as a tool to project its power and influence in the Arab world," he argues. The Council on Foreign Relations says Iran, while cutting its funding to Hamas in recent years, "sought to bolster its ties to other resistance groups in the region, such as Islamic Jihad." Hezbollah The Lebanese militant group based in Lebanon is aligned with al-Assad's regime in Syria. During the conflict, Hezbollah reached out to Hamas, praising its "steadfastness." This does not mean the relationship is repaired to where it stood before Syria's civil war, but "a new realignment might happen," Farwaz Gerges of the London School of Economics told Time. Popular support Hamas' greatest support in the wake of the conflict with Israel may be from the public in Gaza and other parts of the Arab world. "Hamas is not a monolith, nor is it only a terrorist group," Ed Husain of the Council on Foreign Relations writes on CNN.com. "It is a social movement, with a mass membership, a popular message of resistance that resonates across the Muslim world, and a political party with which we must negotiate." Some analysts believe Hamas will emerge stronger from the fight with Israel. The conflict "will only further radicalize the Palestinian population -- and alienate frustrated friends in the United States," Mark Perry of Foreign Policy argues. Before Operation Protective Edge, a poll by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that most Palestinians in Gaza oppose a two-state solution and want to work toward abolishing Israel -- a goal that is in line with Hamas' charter. It's no longer the Muslims against the Jews. Now it's the extremists -- the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, and their backers Iran, Qatar and Turkey -- against Israel and the more moderate Muslims including Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute But the poll also found most Palestinians support nonviolent methods of achieving their goals. Support could affect arms supply While Hamas' recruitment might soar now, militarily the group "is on the ropes," with tunnels destroyed and much of its rocket supply depleted, writes Rick Francona, retired U.S. Air Force intelligence officer and CNN military analyst. "After similar conflicts in the past, Hamas has been rearmed and resupplied by its supporters, primarily Iran and to some extent Syria. The most efficient method for the rearming and resupply effort has been via the large number of smuggling tunnels between Gaza and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. "That is not likely to be the case this time -- another blow to Hamas, which it must factor in to its assessment of this conflict as well as its future planning."

Bring Hamas to the table

(CNN) -- "Who do you want to see?" asked the Salafi Jihadists holding their AK-47s at the gate. "Hamas leaders," I replied. "Why Hamas? Why not our Jihadi brothers?" the guard asked. "Well, Hamas are in government in Gaza." "They won't be in future," he responded. "They have sold out and become agents of the Israelis, and in years to come we will govern Gaza. Be sure to meet our brothers here in the camp, too." The guard then gave me directions to a safe house where someone could take me to Hamas. This was last summer. I was visiting a Palestinian refugee camp in Beirut for book research. It took me two more days to locate Hamas leadership. Inside the camp, just as in Gaza, Hamas had a wide network of schools, financiers, mosques, makeshift hospitals, readily available doctors, banking services, and support for orphans and widows. We in the West deem Hamas a terrorist organization. Yes, one part of it is committed to terrorism, killing innocent civilians in the pursuit of political aims, but we are mistaken if we continue to limit our definition by one aspect of Hamas. Unless we better understand Hamas, we cannot help halt the killings of Israelis and Arabs in the Middle East. Hamas is not a monolith, nor is it only a terrorist group: It is a social movement, with a mass membership, a popular message of resistance that resonates across the Muslim world, and a political party with which we must negotiate. "When the Israelis were fighting Yasser Arafat and the PLO, the Arabs were losing," the Hamas leader -- whose name I must withhold -- told me. "We saw them abandon anti-aircraft missiles here in Beirut in the 1980s. But now, with Hezbollah and Hamas, we fight to die, to kill. We believe in martyrdom. We don't flee from the battlefield." To my Hamas hosts, Israel's operation in Lebanon in 2006, or its attack on Gaza in 2009, were huge victories. "We are now winning. We fight Israel and want to fight again and again." This strong belief that they are victorious is in itself a loss for Israel: It has failed to weaken Hamas. Fighting and killing have been a curse to Israel's existence over the last six decades. The trajectory has been to make Israel weaker and more hated around the world; to popularize the ideology of radicalism amid Muslims and fuel anti-Americanism in the Middle East. Israel cannot kill itself into security or survival. It must learn the language of peace and co-existence. For how much longer will we in the West continue to damage our own standing in the nearly 2 billion-strong Muslim world as our ally Israel delivers dead children and destroyed schools to Muslim television screens? Israel killed Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in 2004, along with several bodyguards, and then his successors, promising us that this would help reduce violence and terror. Almost a decade later, Hamas is not only strong and vibrant, in government since 2007, but lobbing rockets at Jerusalem and kidnapping Israeli soldiers. In short, Hamas is strong and growing psychologically stronger, while Israel has failed to achieve its peace and security. Worse, contrary to what many believed, Hamas was not weakened when Egypt's President Mohamed Morsy, a supporter, was toppled in July 2013. Morsy made many mistakes, but President Obama's telephone calls to him helped bring Hamas to the table and secure a cease-fire in 2012 much sooner. Israel does not deserve all the blame. Arab political and religious leaders, despite historic grievances, have a duty to recognize that Israel is their neighbor. Israel is part of the mosaic of the modern Middle East. A change in tone and tenor and a public embrace of Israel by religious leaders will calm the nerves of an anxious Israeli population. In the end, Israel has limited options. Peace is not possible without Hamas, and Hamas is not a simple terrorist outfit. Its political arm, its leadership inside and outside Gaza, despite their tensions, are open to indirect talks with Israel. Just as the British and American governments negotiated peace in Northern Ireland by reaching out to IRA terrorists through their political wing of Sinn Fein, we must tame Hamas through politics, not the failed strategy of war. Hamas and Islamic Jihad were among the Palestinian groups that met in Cairo Sunday and reached a 72-hour humanitarian cease-fire agreement brokered by Egyptian officials. Here, the European Union and the United States can work through Fatah, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and negotiate along the 2002 Arab peace plan suggested by Saudi Arabia. Hamas must be brought in. Almost 2 million people in Gaza need our support. If we fail to bring in Hamas and create a sustained peace that leads to prosperity for Palestinians and Israelis, then we must prepare for an enemy who is worse: Salafi Jihadis. And with Gaza, the popularity of the Salafi Jihadi message will spread far and wide. My guard at the refugee camp insisted I speak with his brothers-in-arms. I did not, but I fear he might be right. Will Israel help itself and us, or hinder?

Nine aviation mysteries highlight long history of plane disappearances By Faith Karimi and Mariano Castillo, CNN

(CNN) -- While such situations are rare, the puzzling disappearance of the Malaysian jetliner is not the first time a plane has vanished without a trace. Here are nine cases of mysterious plane disappearances and disasters. Some remain unsolved, decades later. 2014: Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 The Boeing 777 passenger jet vanished early Saturday, about an hour into its flight from the Malaysian capital to Beijing. There was no distress call before contact with it was lost over the sea between Malaysia and Vietnam. Search teams from various nations are combing the waters on the Malay Peninsula for traces of it, but so far, nothing has been found. The mystery over the fate of the jet and the 239 people aboard has baffled government officials and aviation experts. 2009: Air France Flight 447 The Airbus A330 took off from Rio de Janeiro en route to Paris on May 31, 2009. A few hours later, as it crossed the Atlantic, it told control center its position. Using high-tech tools to find flight 370 No debris found in South China Sea The anguish of waiting That was the last contact with the plane. Its last known position -- two to four days by ship from the nearest ports -- and the ocean's depth hindered searches. It took almost two years before the bulk of the wreckage, the majority of bodies, and the voice and data recorders were recovered. All 228 aboard died. In 2012, French authorities said ice crystals disrupted the system used to determine the plane's airspeed, causing the autopilot to disconnect. The plane plunged into the ocean. 2003: Boeing 727 Eleven years ago, a Boeing 727 vanished in the Angolan capital of Luanda. The plane took off from the Quatro de Fevereiro International Airport on May 25, 2003, headed for Burkina Faso. It departed with its lights off and a dysfunctional transponder. There are conflicting reports on the number of people in the company jet, but flight engineer Ben Charles Padilla is believed to be one of them. Some reports say he was alone, while others say three people were aboard. The plane has not been heard from since. Its whereabouts are unknown to this day. 1999: EgyptAir Flight 990 Fifteen years ago, EgyptAir Flight 990 made a rapid descent, plunging almost 14,000 feet in 36 seconds. The 767 jet, en route to Cairo from New York City, crashed into the Atlantic Ocean off the Massachusetts coast. Though its debris was later found, speculation remains on the cause of the October 1999 crash that killed all 217 people aboard. Theories included a possible suicide by the pilot or co-pilot, complete with tales of a chaotic struggle for controls in the cockpit. Egypt said it was a mechanical failure. 1996: TWA Flight 800 The Paris-bound plane exploded in midair shortly after takeoff from New York City, killing all 230 people aboard. Witnesses said they saw a streak of light and a fireball, leading to suspicions that terrorists struck the plane with a rocket. Others blamed a meteor or a missile. The National Transportation Safety Board ruled that the explosion was caused by an electrical short circuit, which detonated the fuel tank and caused the Boeing 747 to break into pieces in the waters off Long Island. Despite the explanation, conspiracy theories of a government coverup abound. 1947: British Stardust Sixty-seven years ago, a British aircraft vanished in the Argentine Andes after takeoff from Buenos Aires, headed to Chile. After searches for the plane named Stardust turned up nothing for more than 50 years, conspiracy theorists jumped into action. But theories of aliens, among others, were invalidated in 2000, when the wreckage of the plane was found buried deep in a glacier. The crash on August 2, 1947, killed 11 people, the BBC reported. Stardust's final Morse code transmission was the word "STENDEC." Decades later, the meaning of the word remains a mystery. 1945: Flight 19 Navy bombers Flight 19 does not refer to a single plane, but to five Navy bombers that disappeared off the Florida coast on December 5, 1945. A flight instructor flew one plane, and qualified pilots with 350 to 400 hours of flight time were in the others, according to the Naval History and Heritage Command. Radio transmissions indicated that the instructor got lost when compasses malfunctioned. Radio contact was lost before the exact problem was determined, and no traces of the planes were ever found. Adding to the mystery, a search aircraft sent to look for Flight 19 also disappeared. The patrol plane, which took off later that day, has not been seen or heard from since. Flight 19 was reported in the area informally known as the Bermuda Triangle. 1942: British fighter A stray Royal Air Force fighter crashed in the blistering sands of the Egyptian Sahara on June 28, 1942. Its pilot was never heard from again, and the damaged P-40 Kittyhawk was presumed lost forever. But two years ago, an oil company worker discovered it 70 years after the accident. Surprisingly, it was extraordinarily well-preserved, and most of its fuselage, wings, tail and cockpit instruments were intact. Back then, experts say, planes flew with basic supplies, so its pilot's chances of survival were not good. 1937: Amelia Earhart The disappearance of Amelia Earhart is possibly the most famous unsolved aircraft mystery. The groundbreaking aviator was on her most ambitious flight, vying to become the first woman to fly around the world. In 1937, she attempted the voyage in her twin-engine Lockheed Electra. With about 7,000 miles left to go, she made a challenging landing at Howland Island in the mid-Pacific. Her radio transmissions became unclear, and the last thing she reported over her radio was, "We are running north and south," according to her biography. After spending $4 million and searching 250,000 square miles of ocean, the U.S. called off its search. Many theories exist today, but her fate and that of navigator Fred Noonan remain unknown. READ: Officials deny report that Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 kept flying for hours READ: Missing Malaysia airliner: Questions and answers INTERACTIVE: What happened to Malaysia Airlines Flight 370? READ: Transponder's fate may prove key to solving Malaysia Airlines puzzle

ISIS: The first terror group to build an Islamic state?

(CNN) -- The face of a balding, middle-aged man stares unsmilingly into the camera. He is dressed in a suit and tie and could pass for a midlevel bureaucrat. But the photograph is that of Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, who has transformed a few terror cells harried to the verge of extinction into the most dangerous militant group in the world. The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria has thrived and mutated during the ongoing civil war in Syria and in the security vacuum that followed the departure of the last American forces from Iraq. The aim of ISIS is to create an Islamic state across Sunni areas of Iraq and in Syria. Terrorists gain ground in Iraq fighting ISIS' enigmatic terror leader Militants seizing control in Iraq ISIS leader called the new bin Laden With the seizure of Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city, and advances on others, that aim appears within reach. ISIS controls hundreds of square miles where state authority has evaporated. It ignores international borders and has a presence all the way from Syria's Mediterranean coast to south of Baghdad. How to respond to the ISIS threat What are its origins? In 2006, al Qaeda in Iraq -- under the ruthless leadership of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- embarked on seemingly arbitrary and brutal treatment of civilians as it tried to ignite a sectarian war against the majority Shia community. It came close to succeeding, especially after the bombing of the Al-Askariya Mosque, an important Shia shrine in Samarra, which sparked retaliatory attacks. But the killing of al-Zarqawi by American forces, the vicious treatment of civilians and the emergence of the Sahwa (Awakening) Fronts under moderate Sunni tribal leaders nearly destroyed the group. Nearly, but not quite. When U.S. forces left Iraq, they took much of their intelligence-gathering expertise with them. Iraqi officials began to speak of a "third generation" of al Qaeda in Iraq. Two years ago, a former spokesman for the U.S. military in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan, warned that "if the Iraqi security forces are not able to put pressure on them, they could regenerate." The capability of those Iraqi forces was fatally compromised by a lack of professional soldiers, the division of military units along sectarian lines and a lack of the equipment needed for fighting an insurgency, such as attack helicopters and reconnaissance capabilities. The new al Qaeda was rebranded in 2006 as the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI). It would add "and Syria" to its name later. The group exploited a growing perception among many Sunnis that they were being persecuted by the Shia-dominated government led by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, starved of resources and excluded from a share of power. The arrest of senior Sunni political figures and heavy-handed suppression of Sunni dissent were the best recruiting sergeants ISI could have. And it helped the new leader re-establish the group's influence. Who is its master of terror? Abu Bakr al Baghdadi graduated to the top job in 2010 -- at the age of 39 -- after Abu Omar al Baghdadi was killed in a joint U.S.-Iraqi operation. Al Baghdadi's group was in a pitiful state. But with U.S. forces and intelligence on the way out, he launched a revival. Photos: Iraqi civilians flee Mosul Photos: Iraqi civilians flee Mosul Map: Unrest in IraqMap: Unrest in Iraq War games or war? Very little is known about Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, but a biography posted on jihadist websites last year said he held a Ph.D. in Islamic studies from a university in the capital. He formed his own militant group in the Samarra and Diyala areas, where his family was from, before joining al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Baghdadi even served four years in a U.S. prison camp for insurgents, at Bucca in southern Iraq -- a time in which he almost certainly developed a network of contacts and honed his ideology. He was released in 2009 and went to work. What is ISIS trying to accomplish? It wants to establish an Islamic caliphate, or state, stretching across the region. ISIS has begun imposing Sharia law in the towns it controls. Boys and girls must be separated at school; women must wear the niqab or full veil in public. Sharia courts often dispense brutal justice, music is banned and the fast is enforced during Ramadan. Sharia law covers both religious and non-religious aspects of life. Where does the group's money come from? In the beginning, al Baghdadi focused on secrecy -- with loosely connected cells making it more difficult to hunt down the leadership -- and on money. Extortion, such as demanding money from truck drivers and threatening to blow up businesses, was one revenue stream; robbing banks and gold shops was another. It seemed the group had become little more than gangsters, but the income would help finance a growing stream of suicide attacks and assassinations that would poison the political atmosphere. It would also aid the recruitment of Sunni tribal fighters and finance spectacular prison raids that liberated hundreds of fighters, as well as attacks on police patrols and the assassination of officials. Now, al Baghdadi has a new strategy for generating resources: large-scale attacks aimed at capturing and holding territory. Ayham Kamel of the Eurasia Group, a U.S.-based consultancy, says that in the latest iteration of this strategy, ISIS will "use cash reserves from Mosul's banks, military equipment from seized military and police bases and the release of 2,500 fighters from local jails to bolster its military and financial capability." What's been its key to survival? Al Baghdadi avoided al-Zarqawi's mistakes by avoiding the alienation of powerful tribal figures. When it captured Falluja, west of Baghdad, in January, it worked with local tribal leaders rather than raise its black flag over the city. One of the group's ideologues, Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, even admitted: "As for our mistakes, we do not deny them. Rather, we will continue to make mistakes as long as we are humans. God forbid that we commit mistakes deliberately." How is it drawing support? ISIS is, in essence, trying to capture and channel the resentment of the Sunni street. And in both Syria and Iraq, it is trying to win favor through dawa -- organizing social welfare programs and even recreational activities for children, distributing food and fuel to the needy, and setting up clinics. Again, having the money matters. The price it demands is enforcement of the strict Sharia code. How does Syria fit into the picture? A senior U.S. counterterrorism official told CNN this week that ISIS looks at Syria and Iraq as "one interchangeable battlefield and its ability to shift resources and personnel across the border has measurably strengthened its position in both theaters." The explosion of violence in Syria was a gift to al Baghdadi. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad lost control over large parts of the North and the long border with Iraq. The group, still known as ISI at the time, could build a rear base where it could recruit foreign fighters, organize and escape from any Iraqi army operations. Al Baghdadi may have sent operatives across the border as early as the autumn of 2011, and the group later changed its name -- adding "al Sham" for Syria. It moved swiftly to take control of the Syrian province of Raqqa, aided by the al-Assad regime's focus on Homs and Aleppo. What is its relationship with other al Qaeda groups? Its ambition extended to declaring early in 2013 that it was absorbing another militant group in Syria, the al-Nusra Front. According to some accounts, al Baghdadi had been instrumental in creating the group; now he wanted its obedience. The declaration -- and al-Nusra's rejection of it -- set off a rare public clash between two groups that both saw themselves as part of al Qaeda. From his hideout somewhere in Afghanistan or Pakistan, al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri at first tried to mediate between the two, and then disowned ISIS when it refused to concentrate on Iraq. Rather than seek reconciliation, ISIS has hit back. Earlier this year, the group's spokesman, Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, told al-Zawahiri in a recording: "Sheikh Osama (bin Laden) gathered all the mujahideen with one word, but you divided them and tore them apart." "You make the mujahideen sad, and make the enemy of the mujahideen gloat because you support the traitor, and you make the heart bleed," he said -- referring to the leader of the al-Nusra Front, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani. It was another sign of the extraordinary confidence of the ISIS leadership. Mosul: Militants storm Turkish consulate Cities under siege in Iraq ISIS attacks force Iraqi citizens to flee Despite the rift, ISIS' success against what are seen by militant Sunnis as loathsome Shia regimes in Syria and Iraq has attracted thousands of foreign fighters to its ranks, enabling it to continue battling al-Nusra in Syria while preparing for its big offensive in Iraq. What is its strategy? For Western counterterrorism agencies, the combination of fanaticism and disciplined organization is the nightmare scenario. ISIS has plenty of both. While the world was shocked by its sudden capture of the city of Falluja, ISIS was still focused on a bigger prize: Mosul and the province of Nineveh. Operations in Falluja and elsewhere in the western province of Anbar were meant to (and did) draw Iraqi forces away from the north. It has developed an ability to conduct operations -- from suicide bombings and attacks on the security forces to wresting control of towns -- in several regions at once, keeping the demoralized Iraqi army off balance. And battle experience has created a resilient force capable of ever more sophisticated attacks. In raids on Samarra, for example, its fighters used bulldozers to remove barriers that had been in place since the U.S. occupation. Some analysts expect critical parts of the Iraqi oil infrastructure around Mosul to be among its future targets. Where does its weakness lie? ISIS runs the risk that its rapid expansion -- and threat to the Iraqi state -- will overstretch the group. In northern Syria, it has retreated from some towns it held after clashes with al-Nusra and other groups. Al-Nusra is making common cause with other groups in an anti-ISIS front. And by taking Mosul, which Iraq's Kurds see as in their sphere of interest, ISIS may invite greater cooperation between the Iraqi army and experienced Kurdish fighters. A U.S. counterterrorism official told CNN that ISIS "still has significant weaknesses. It has shown little ability to govern effectively, is generally unpopular, and has no sway outside the Sunni community in either Iraq or Syria." To many analysts, that smacks of complacency. How significant is its threat? The weakness of the governments ISIS is confronting -- and the hatred for those governments among Sunnis -- means that a few dozen truckloads of fighters can seize towns and cities, overcoming forces many times larger by their sheer ferocity and battle experience. In the words of the Soufan Group, a political risk consultancy, "ISIS has become indisputably the most effective and ruthless terrorist organization in the world." "It now challenges the authority of two of the largest states in the Middle East, and has attracted significant numbers of fighters, not just from Iraq and Syria, but also from Saudi Arabia and other Arab states including Jordan." There is no doubting the group's confidence and ambition. ISIS spokesman al-Adnani took to Twitter Wednesday to declare, "The battle is not yet raging it, but it will rage in Baghdad and Karbala. Put on your belts and get ready," according to a translation by the SITE Intelligence Group. Al-Adnani openly mocked al-Maliki as an underwear salesman who had lost Iraq for the Shia. "You lost a historic opportunity for your people to control Iraq," he said, "and the Shi'ites will always curse you for as long as they live." As it has grown in strength, the group's vision of a caliphate under its control has expanded.