>> hi, everyone, this is aljazeera america, i'm john seigenthaler in new york. new threats, a group called khorasan, linked to al qaeda, but the white house says that it could be more dangerous lan isil. airstrikes, and u.s. bombs falling in syria, and why this could be just the beginning. >> this is not america's final

moment. >> the coalition, america and five arab nations join the fight, and how it's changing the region. seed change, world leaders demand action to save the environment. in the climate debate. and america votes. 2015. six weeks of special coverage, the issues that matter most in the middle term elections. we begin tonight with the new enemy inside of syria, as coalition bombs fell on isil sights in the country, and the u.s. acted alone against another target. firing some 40 missiles at positions near aleppo, fighters known as the khorasan group are based there. according to the pentagon, the

group is made up of al qaeda veterans. >> the department of homeland security said that the group was close to executing an attack, and that's why they felt they had to go after them with these airstrikes, and homeless has issued a new security bulletin to state and local law enforcement, telling them what they know about 24 group, what the latest intelligence shows, and assuring them that the security will be updated as appropriate. meantime, of course, as you can imagine, the u.s. continues to keep a close watch on this khorasan organization. the first waves of strikes in syria targeted not just isil. but an organization that few americans have heard of before now, it's name, the khorasan group, made up of al qaeda

veterans. the group, which has set up shop near aleppo, poses an immediate threat to the united states. >> the khorasan group, these strikes were given to disrupt imminent attack against the united states and western targets. >> the head of the group is long time al-qaeda leader, a confident of psalm, he has been on the u.s. radar for a decade. they plan to use the fighters on get onboard airplanes with concealed bombs. >> three months ago, u.s. officials began to hear credible rumblings about the fact that they were exiting the design and testing phase of some pretty exotic explosives, and moving into the next phase, which was the execution phase. it's a very potent group. so this group is an extreme danger, and certainly i

understand why these airstrikes had to take place sooner than later. >> america's arab partners didn't participate in the strikes against the khorasan group, but did against isil. secretary of state, john kerry and the president said the u.s. would not go it alone. today he said thank you to the general assembly. >> to say thank you to all of them for their participation and commitment to going back against the violent extremism. >> you have a situation here, where four arab countries, with a high sunni-islam majority, plus bahrain, have joined forces with the people often denounced as crusaders and imperial resists, to fight other sunni muslims. >> senior officials say that

the coalition jelled in just the last few days. now one country noticeably absent from the coalition, was turkey. they had been holding back because 49 of its citizens have been held hostage biles, and they have now been released. and turkey is now reevaluating it's role. and it will take a more active role. and now we're hearing from the turkish president, adding that turkey may be able to add to the military efforts against isil. so the coalition changes and possibly grows. the u.s., long with its arab partners, have already carried out nearly 200 airstrikes in syria and iraq, and president obama is promising a sustained fight against the iraq state of iraq and lavant. mike viqueira is here tonight. >> headquarters, buildings, and

infrastructure against isil, came sooner than many people thought was possible. it was two weeks after president obama said it would happen, and another week since he signed off on the plan. but a day after, it came as dramatic news. >> last night on my orders, america's armed forces begin strikes against isil targets in syria. >> the first waves came in the early morning darkness in syria, tomahawks, targeting areas, their targets, isil training camps and manufacturing workshops, f-15s, and for the first time in combat, f-22s. military officials stressed the precise nature of the strikes. >> now, the intended target was the communications array on the roof of the building. the top hawk cruise missiles detonated with the effects

focusing on the communications array. >> the last two waves from past attacks in the region, and an unspecified number of combat by arab states. officials said their involvement was a key to going forward with strikes in syria. at the white house, president obama called out the countries by name. >> saudi arabia, united arab emertus, and qatar. >> though there's still doubt, this was called a success. and the fight is far from over. we will not allow borders from keeping us from fighting against isil. >> did the united states actually notify the assad

regime that these strikes would be going forward, the state department said that no how, no way, no coordination, we didn't give them advanced notice, just told them to get out of the way. > way. the president is convening with some of the arab nags part of the coalition, and one of the things that the officials want to stress this afternoon, in the meeting, everybody here is in this for the long haul and you'll see the president today and tomorrow, the reaso there ty and the next day, to address the security council, and he's going to address a meeting as head of state and talk specifically about it. >> change the focus of the un assembly meeting happening this week. mike viqueira, thank you very much. nelson, a.

>> how do attacks change like this. >> well, you want the element of surprise, and the u.s. was going to strike at the time and didn't know when. but now they have struck, and they will try to save the equipment that they can,. >> how does the u.s. know where to strike them? >> well, striking the targets, they need what they're discussing, and they need accurate intelligence, and the united states is going to use the full intelligence assets, everything from cellphones, to aerial photographs, and working with our partners in the regions, with the gcc nations to get the exact intelligence that they need. >> let's talk about khorasan. this has not been on the radar

for the american public so far, and why is this strike different, how is it important? >> the name may be new, but the individuals who make up this group are not new. they're seasoned al qaeda operatives, and the u.s. intelligence has been tracking them for many years, and they have happened to come together inside of syria, where they can operate safelily up to this point, for the recruit, and what makes them different, they are seasoned. they have bomb making capabilities, and they know how to plan operations and they have the international reach, and that makes them more lethal. >> more dangerous than isil? >> to the u.s. and the west, sure. they are basic right now, and the beheads are grizzly and

sophisticated. and khorasan has much more sophisticated attacks, like the toner bombings, and 9-1-1. >> any surprise after last night's attack? >> the biggest surprise, they attacked both the isil and the khorasan simultaneously, i think the fact that the khorasan, this al qaeda off shoot, was so close to attacking the united states. >> so you think that the united states in some ways moved faster than it might have? >> well, i think that the united states needed that. we kind of took our eye off the gal after osama bin laden was killed, and we knew there were still elements of al qaeda out there, that were going to be continuing to plan against the united states. >> so did the u.s. use isil as a cover to get to the other

group? or did they decide to do these at the same time. >> that's a good question. i think there are two different problems, two very different problems, and what you have, groups like khorasan, and isis, exploring this instability in syria and iraq. it's a safe haven, and it's attractive to terrorist groups, to go this and operate and equip. and as long as the groups are living there, the united states and the regional powers have to continue to put pressure on them. >> all right, rick, ozzy nelson, we appreciate it. the pentagon said that keeping the civilian deaths to a minimum. >> there is anger in western aleppo. syrians there are blaming the u.s. military for the deaths of civilians. we can't independently confirm this, but opposition activists say that the u.s. was responsible for hitting this

residential building, which is not far from a known headquarters of syria's al qaeda branch. they say 11 people, including four children, were killed. early on tuesday, the obama administration expanded their operations against the islamic state of iraq and lavant, to syria, and dozens of strikes were carried out in positions in the north of the country. the u.s. defense department did confirm a strike in aleppo, but the khorasan was the target. >> my home is on the border of turkey and there are no isil positions here. so why did they use these missiles? we have never seen these missiles ever. this is the first time. >> the air campaign is part of the u.s. administration's strategy to defeat and destroy isil, with territory in iraq and syria. many of its fighters have

reportedly been killed. but unlike in iraq, the u.s. doesn't have any partners on the ground in syria. isil is a strong and well armed force, and the so-called moderate rebels are no match for them. and the u.s. doesn't recognize the legitimacy of the syrian government. this is the beginning of what many people expecting to a long war. unless they have a way to replace isil on the ground, the u.s. may benefit from the campaign. it is already benefiting politically, by reiterating it's narratives of fighting a war on terrorism. >> the u.s. ambassador received a letter, saying that they would strike against them in syria. syria is fighting. >> this will not be an easy fight, isil controls urban

centers. especially when the fighters live among the people. isil managed to gain ground by exploiting the conflicts in iraq and syria, but even the group will require political settlements in both countries. >> five nations were part of the strikes on isil. saudi reb rain ja, and the country is home to the 5th fleet. they committed four f-16s to last night's operation. >> good to be here. bahrain's foreign minister has called for no less than the

complete annihilation of this terrorist group, and that's not possible, is it? >> i think it is, and it's going to take a long time. >> want u.s. suggests that you can't destroy isil, but you can just push it back. >> i guess it depends on what destroy means. there's a military component and a political component. militarily, you can't destroy them, that's clear, you can't use force alone to destroy a popular mosquement. you have to have political change in order to defeat t that's only a piece of the puzzle. but the other piece, separating the sunni and muslim populations from supporting the islamic state. and to do that, you have to have a government in iraq that has sunni support. >> why did it take awhile to form this coalition, and is there fear of a backlash in the united states? >> i don't think there's fear

of a backlash. one of the reasons it took a long time to form the coalition is because the united states was slow to act. >> why did they take the first action when it's not in their backyard. >> the united states is the leader of the free world. and many countries don't have the wherewithal or the gumption to do t >> so these countries willing to put in money, and willing to help with air support, no boots on the ground? >> probably not. and i don't think boots on the ground remove necessary. >> you think we can do it all by airstrikes. >> no, i don't think that foreign boots on the ground are necessary. for example, when president obama talked about his strategy for defeating isis in iraq, he talked about the national guard units that the iraqis conform themselves in the sunni parts of the country where isis is making gains. that's the kind of boots on the ground that you need. ie, local groups that will secure the territory.

outside of the support to give them the cover they need,. >> these arab countries support the united states, but they're quiet about it. they don't speak with a strong voice that's always heard in their region. is this going to be different or not? >> it already is, and in fact, i was amazed to read today that the saudi government has officially acknowledged the participation of the strikes. >> why were you amazed? >> well as you say, they traditionally like to keep a low profile, and not stick their heads too far above the parapets so they're not struck themselves. and as we look back at the history of the region ten years from now, people will point to this campaign as a turning point. >> you point to this, and how

significant is this time in the middle east. >> oh, gosh. it is a millennial change. and by mill penial, i mean every 1,000 years, you see something just seismic. and i would argue that the events that began with the arabs in tunisia, have changed things forever in the middle east. and what we're seeing now is an example of that playing out. > >> well, ambassador, it's agreed to get your insight on all of this, we appreciate it. now, the fight against isil and the obama foreign policy, is our special report coming up in the half hour, america votes 2014, and the in-depth issues this season. other news, israel claims to have shot down a fighter jet in the goalen heights, possibly by accident, when it was taken

down by a patriot missile. technically, israel and syria have been at war for decades, but israel said that it had no intention of getting involved in syria's civil war. the israeli army, after the kidnapping of israel teens last june, in hebron, abductions have led to weeks of intense violence between israel and gaza. coming up next, a climate call to action. what president obama wants world leaders to do. and plus, separating myth from reality on climate change. how convinced scientists really are that the earth is warming up.

>> we are the first generation to feel the affects of climate change, and the last generation that can do something about it. >> president obama said there's another growing and urgent

threat that needs the world's attention. he spoke today at the united nations climate summit. and he said that other countries must join in the battle against global warming. in a recent poll, half said that humans are to blame, but jay is here to separate fact from fiction. >> global warming is a complicated term. it has gotten scientists into trouble. some who don't believe it are pointing to cold snow winterers, and they say the theory must be wrong. here's what's going on, we have put so much carbon into the air that we have wrapped our planet into a big blanket, but our climate is a jumble of systems. for instance, the polar vortex which usually stays above the

north pole s. wobbling off of its base, and this creates colder winterses, blocking patterns that keep heat in place longer, and that's why the weather is getting more extreme. it's making its way into the oceans, and it's changing the ocean's chemistry, and killing off ocean and fish and not plant life there. though the general warming of the planet is the overall trend, there's a lot more going on. and that's why climate change is a better term to use. some people point to cycles in the earth's history which points to the changes, some say that it's a natural variation over millions of years. actually, there are only three factors that it scientists know can change the planet. the sun, and the orbit. and the greenhouse gases. the orbit should have us in a

cooling trend. it began 6,000 years ago, and it should continue for the next 23,000 years. so we know it's not that. when scientists look at the output levels of the sun right now, they say if anything, it points to a cooling friend. and that should be the case if it's just the sun. that leaves greenhouse gases, carbon emissions in it the air, and for the past 1 million years, they have hovered between 17 on and 300 million parts, and for the first time in history, that number is above 400 parts per million. so the scientists are telling us that greenhouse gases or emissions are the primary causes of climate change. there's no such tinge as sure in science. it's a constant process of reviewing and testing and revising our findings. nevertheless, 97% of scientists say that climate change is

likely caused by human activities. and this is as close to certainty as you'll ever come. >> president obama spokes about america's changing climate. reward hot temperatures, and extended drought and flooding, and now he turned to what the united states has done. >> we harness 10 times more electricity from the wind and the sun as when i came into office. the united states has reduced our carbon pollution by more than any other nation on earth. >> the president said that the u.s. is lending it's expertise to other countries. >> we are helping nations skip past the dirty phase of development, partnering with african entrepreneurs. >> india, the world's third largest polluter, has already installed small energy stations as part of its grid. >> rather than build long,

inefficient power lines across that vast couldn'tnant, instead, distributed energy is going to provide power to places that never had electricity and couldn't turn on the light at night. there are so many opportunities to do this with new technologies where it's not an economic sacrifice, but instead, it's an engine for growth. >> by sharing new technologies and data, the united states hopes to fuel a new green economy around the world. john a lot of talk today, but not a lot of commitment on paper. >> you made a very good case for the science, so is there a momentum? >> that's the great question, as we have reported throughout the day, neither china or india sent their to leaders, and as we have said before in climate change, the u.s. manufactures to countries like india and china, and china makes 90% of the computers and cellphones, so we ex sported all of our

pollutants to them. and we have preached a certain kind of change to countries that just the beginning, the posturing. >> there was a huge turnout of protests in new york, in advance of this climate change. but at the same time, there's not -- you get the sense in some of the countries you're talking about, there's not the popular support for these sorts of programs. >> the turning point that we're seeing here is a moment where the political difficulties are becoming more real, and the trading chips are being put out on the table. that is something to be excited about. i was heartened by just how many people came out and are obviously convinced enough of the science that it's time to change. >> all right, thank you very much. coming up next, our in-depth special, america votes 2014.

a lot riding on this election. the energy and the environment, and plus, how the fight against isil is the rhetoric on the campaign trail.

>> u.s. bombs fall on syria. six weeks before the midterm elections, how will it impact the vote? the balance of power? >> there's no reason for not to do what the president has asked us to do. >> with the u.s. senate up for grabs, the biggest issues affecting america's lives. he. >> congress just cut it, and went on vacation, and the american people are suffering. >> our special report, verb votes 2014. i'm john seigenthaler in new york, and tonight, we're taking a closer look at how the crisis around the world will effect who gets elected here in the united states. less than two months before election day, president obama has committed the u.s. to

possibility of years of war in the middle east. >> it must be clear to anyone who would plot against america and do americans harm, that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people. >> just a few weeks ago, foreign policy was not a big midterm issue, but now that changes that. >> john, the crisis with isil is without question the big foreign policy issue as we head into the midterms, but ut president and the u.s. have facing the a range of issues across the globe. close to home, violence in america has sent a flood of children across the u.s.' southern border, turning to the outbreak of the worst ever of the ebola virus, which shows no sign of slowing, and in the middle east, the off-again on again violence between israel and the palestinians, if a ceasefire holding there.

but no doubt, the biggest issue that the u.s. is grappling with, isil. the rapid rise and the atrocities that have stunned the world. but also, russia, it's actions in the ukraine, putting it squarely at odds with the u.s. russia's response to the new u.s. response against isil has been relatively muted, saying that airstrikes should not have been launched without approval from the security council and syria itself. but this comes at a time when the relations between the u.s. and russia are chillier than they have been since the cold warp. the disagreements are long, and the two have been at odds over libya, al-assad, russia is sheltering him. and edward snowden, the annexation of crimea, and russia's ongoing role in the ukraine. >> ukrainians and russians

worked together peacefully, and we didn't think of our nationalities, and now we're just thinking of how to divide. >> following the downing of malaysian 17, vladimir putin responded with a veiled threat to conquer kiev. recent days have been somewhat calmer in ukraine, and the u.s. assault against isil may be the first sign of a thaw. meanwhile, the u.s. has just begun what it says are years of fighting to destroy isil. >> we are going to do what's necessary to take the fight to this terrorist group. >> a group whose brutal fight is adding to an enormous refugee crisis. >> we feel we have lost everything. we have been tortured. and isil took our women and cut off people's heads. >> scattering isil forces,

damaging their infrastructure, president obama made sure to mention that arab nations are joining in the fight. >> the strength of the coalition makes it to the world that this is not america's night alone. >> reporter: but what's not clear, how this new level of america's involvement in the drawn out civil war, will be on the home front, and how it will be on the global stage. with the midterm elections right around the corner. >> so where do the voters stand when it comes to dealing with the most critical foreign policy issues? jonathan betts has been looking at the poll numbers. americans are torn what to do internationally when it comes to isil. 15% of americans are actually okay with u.s. forces fighting on the ground in iraq, and even more, a third support sending troop trainers to help the iraqis fight.

but most prefer what happened last night. airstrikes, whether it's in iraq or syria. the numbers are nearly equal, nearly half of americans are okay with weighing into the fight with the air. another crisis, the ukraine, in july, only 1/3 of americans said that the u.s. should do something. most, by far, 60 perfection, said that america should stay out. which is interesting considering that half of americans think russia is a threat to the united states, and only 10 perfection say that the country is harmless. but without question, americans are clear about isil. it is a bigger concern. nearly 77% say that the group poses a serious threat to the u.s., and few people, 4 perfection, say that isil threatens america. >> the race against isil could be a big factor, and mike viqueira says that, how do these issues play in the campaign. >> it's as obvious as cynical.

it depends on how the campaign goes. if you want to go to conventional, its impossible to say six weeks out on the day before the election, but what are the democrat's biggest problems in midterm elections? turnout. they don't turn out. the democratic basis, anti-wash, and here is president obama, who ran on ending the iraq war, and getting involved in what he said was a sustained long-term effort. and so the danger for the president and the lead democratic leaders in congress, the base is going to be turned off and they're going to stay home. >> striking isil, and khorasan, what impact is that likely to have on some of these races? >> it's interesting, because the president has, time and time again, sent votes to congress for what the president is doing, but simply to arm the

free syrian army as a proxy to fight syria when that time comes, and remember, that's not for a year now, but the president is stressing the bipartisan support. and obviously that's to the benefit of the united states, because they need to show the world this is happening, but the question about it, you know scott brown, the former republican senator in massachusetts, running in new hampshire against sheheen, calling him soft. >> radical islamic terrorists are threatening the country. president obama and senator sheheen said he's confused about the nature of the threat, not me. >> it's a bonus for republicans here. what you saw in congress, a bipartisan vote. and a lot of hawkish republicans voted with the president. >> so this could cut both ways. against and for republicans, and against democrats for democrats. >> i mentioned that politics

involves a lot of cynicism. and one of the things that i think you'll hear from the president's opponents in the next few days, it "imminent attacks." the execution stage. they were talking about the homeland, and a lot of republicans, we can be guaranteed, are going to raise the question, why didn't we hear about this before. >> the bush administration -- >> 2002, the iraq war. and the bottom line, we have a president who is approval ratings are reaching lows. and it's very much an uphill fight for democrats. >> amica was a foreign policy adviser to president kennedy, and amica, you welcome. >> thank you for having me. >> let's just start with these strikes in syria.

is this a game changer for the election? >> i think it will change the conversation, and i don't think that it will change the outcome. we find that for the american voter, this year in particular, national issues have not played. >> but in some ways, this is -- i mean, it's not just in a american lives will be at risk. those who are flying over those areas, and those advisers, but also, the enormous cost. president obama has now launched this campaign that many say is going to last at least five years, and how will that play in this election? >> i think it's a little soon to make the cost to the voters, and the republicans are going to criticize him for this, but what you see with the khorasan strike, this president is not doing a lot of talking, but just taking a lot of action, same with the strike, he was underfire for a long time.

prior to the raid about how he didn't fight bin laden. he didn't talk about it of, he just planned it and did it. i think that the voters give the benefit of the doubt to the president stopping terrorism. you just see him taking swift action on that threat. >> a lot of republicans and democrats have fought about the war. democrats complained that the bush administration got the united states involved in a quagmire. and has president obama risked getting the united states involved in another quagmire in syria and iraq? >> i think it's definitely his preference not to. thank you see that in the choice of engagement here, with the top hawk missiles, and not putting boots on the ground, and using pesh miles per gallon a this is not about trying to get the u.s. back into iraq, but finding other ways to solve the problem. the other problem of sending troops into iraq, once you're

in, you own it completely and everyone blames you, and that's the problem that we have we have in iraq now. so it would have allowed them to plot and to grow. >> this is about fear, but economic fear, and while they grip us now in the moment, they tend to fade very quickly from the consciousness of voters, and we have seen that happen over and over again. we have done field research on this, and it's harder in them to remember things that happened even as early as three weeks ago. >> how does this play for the democrats, considering that president obama has been in charge for 1 and a half terms. >> for the democrats, national security issues are a weakness, share soft on security. and people are concerned that they spend too much time

deliberate on what to do instead of taking action. president obama, specifically on counter terrorism, a lot of questions arise about his response on syria and russia, but on counter terrorism, he moves quickly and precisely, and you've seen that in pakistan and yemen. >> how about the economy? >> the economy is the bigger issue, and that's the driver in this cycle. how are people feeling about local issues? the education and economy and entitlement spending? people vote their pocketbooks. they're nervous about it, about the future. >> and who gets the blame for that? >> well, certainly the president's approval ratings indicate that he's getting the blame for that, but when you see in these congressional races, people working very hard to distinguish themselves from the president, and they have been focused on larger issues, and they have been successful >> so two weeks out, airstrikes on syria, and encore core and od

syria, and is this the issue or not? >> all right, thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. >> coming up next, on america votes, other issues on the campaign trail including green money. why voters are seeing so many political adds about energy and the environment, and campaign attacks. one candidates cougses the other of funding dangerous groups.

>> hubs of thousands of voters have taken to the street this week, to call attention to climate change. global warming, the environment and green energy th the topics

under debate in the midterm elections, and issues with environment are expected to reach record levels this year. we will follow the money and track the campaign spending. tonight we're in washington state where the environment issues are big. spending a lot of so-called green money on the campaign. >> if i was doorbelling a gnat, they would see me, wouldn't they? >> when jan jumped into an election for state senate last fall, she noticed deep pocket support. >> we kept wondering where all of this money was coming from, to hire all of the people, and the canvassing being done, flyers gal or and tv gal or. >> television ads like this one. >> to reduce access to mammograms and cancer

screenings. >> many funded by a political action committee, called she's changed. coming from billionaire california activist, tom steyer and next gen. they put in a lot of money. >> it's fire's passion, and something that he shares with jane encley. they have held a series of meetings, and he has met with steyer for political races. republicans hold a one seep edge, with democrats who have jumped the aisle. the special election in the angel's district could have tipped the balance. and threw a record amount of campaign money. steyer and his pact contradicted half a billion-dollar, huge for such a race. >> do you welcome that?

>> yes, anybody who has an optimist and an activist. >> it's happening at the local elections. >> peter quist of the national politics, said that the amount of outside money flowing to local races has jumped since the 2010 citizens united supreme court ruling, which loosened restrictions on independent spending >> so if you're trying to affect policy change, sometimes the state approach is more efficient, and certainly those races are less expensive than the federal race is. >> jan won the special election, and tells us that she spent 3/4 of a million dollars doing it. most of that money raised outside of her district. looking ahead, the governor has no concerns about getting help from steyer and nextgen. >> it's not going to be a debate, the oil and gas industry has a few dollars to rub together. and they will be able to get that as well.

>> well funded, they are around the country. when we talked that day, governor encley made it clear that the carbon is on the top of his priority list, and the next gen money, the tom steyer money, has began arriving here in washington. $100 million went from mr. steyer to his political action committee yesterday. exactly where that money goes, to who it's targeted we don't know yet, but it's likely going to flow into tight senate races >> so not only in the northwest, but alaska as well. what will you be working on there. >> there's a battle that alaskans will consider, involving a huge mine, a proposed mine for the bristol bay area, and two other issues

on pot. and minimum wage. a senate seat that could have a big impact on republicans and democratic controls in washington. so we're going up to alaska and checking out all of those issues, and we'll have a week-long special in an important swing state. >> thank you. and can climate change and other environmental issues make a big difference in the environmental issues? david schuster is here, and talk about the campaign money being spent by these environmental groups. >> that group that tom steyer is promoting, other groups that are ratcheting up. and this is going to be the biggest amount of spending for environmental advertising in any campaign in u.s. history. and here's the problem, though it's as much as 2012, all of these other issues are twice as much, education, and social security and medicare and

taxes, the spending is across the board. so the question is, is this a wedge issue? and you do have environmental groups that are trying to convince voters to hold republicans accountable for the keystone pipeline, but for the most part, the candidates themselves are not jumping into environmental issues. democrats for the most part are saying, we don't want to support climate change, because we'll get hit on economic issues, and republicans don't want to deny climate change because they get hit by environmental i was. so it's a wash on other races, and you also have have the keystone pipeline. and a lot of democrats, for example mark pryor of arkansas, or mary landrieu, they support the keystone pipeline because they don't want to be hit on the anti-economy message, so there's not that wedge on other stories that tend to drive voters to make another decision. >> so how enthusiastic are we

able to get out and campaign for democrats? you saw hundreds of thousands of people march, and are they going to be voters this time? >> that's the thing. talking to other activists, the pictures are amazing to see people out there, but the fact of the matter is that environmentals are disappointed with president obama and the democratic party, because he said that he was going to curb carbon emissions and some said that that was a war coal and environmentalists said that there was a lot more that he could have done. so the democratic party, particularly in the midterms, is not taking a very courageous stand on a lot of these issues. and the environmentalists are energized with each other, but not going out for the democratic party. >> where does this issue rank when it comes to the economy? or to airstrikes in syria, and

the so-called war on terrorism? >> that's the thing, for the groups spending more than ever on talking up the environment, it's a huge amount of money, but for the minds of voters, it's far down on the list in terms of what they're seeing as part of the ads. >> coming up next, getting ugly, we're looking at one key senate race where accusations are flying over homeland security and the treatment of women.

>> it gets bigger and nastier because so much is at stake. >> this is the nasty we're talking about. michelle nun's own plans, that she fulled organizations that went to terrorists, she's for amnesty, but terrorists say that the border break down could provide entry for groups like isis. >> the plan was actually a 140 page nunn campaign portfolio that was leaked to press and it did exactly what it has done,

cues nunn for funding terrorists. points of light, the charity that nunn used to run, gave money to the u.n. affiliate for islamic relief worldwide. and israel claims that it has ties to hamas, but is it true. >> they're looking for any ads that they can possibly get, even walking the line or crossing the line of what's true or not true. >> according to various fact checking websites, plitifact.com, or fact check.org, the claims are false, it's a separate entity from a organization, and it's a federally approved charity. it's website describes it as an independent humanitarian organization, one that's dedicated to fighting poverty and injustice, with no evidence to hamas, the group denies it.

if they wanted to give their proceeds to any one of 20,000 charities, one of those options was islamic relief usa. in other words, point of light was just the middle man. it was actually ebay users that donated $14,000 to islamic relief. >> it doesn't make too many people comfortable. but as a result, it makes for good political fodder. this is a cynical time in u.s. politics, and cynical time for candidates running in various tight races. >> to make it more interesting, the thousands point of light chairman is neil bush, the son of george bush. she's not stepping down

without a fight, female employees and it's outsourcing of american jobs. >> two weeks to go, and they're already going at each other. let's talk about george h.w. bush, when he was backing perdue, he was critical of the points of light foundation, but i understand that his son, neil is not too happy. >> he said i'm going to give you the pass, it's okay, but his son, neil, said that it made his blood boil that someone would make these shameful allegations against my father. >> that's our special america votes 2014, next week, the focus is jobs. thank you for joining us.

>>

on "america tonight" - going it together. [ gunfire ] launching a full-on assault on terror targets inside syria - the president crosses a new line and hails the partners that steps up to join in. >> america is proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with these nations on behalf of