Image copyright Facebook

A Canadian television personality is getting pilloried on social media after posting a photo of himself next to a cougar that he had killed.

Steve Ecklund, who hosts the outdoor show The Edge, bragged about killing the large Alberta mountain cat online.

Photos of him next to the dead animal have sparked outrage, including some harsh words from Laureen Harper, the wife of Canada’s former prime minister.

“Must be compensating for something,” she tweeted.

Mrs Harper is the wife of former prime minister Stephen Harper, who was also an MP for Alberta, the province where the animal was hunted.

The couple are noted animal lovers, especially cats. She and her husband rescued many cats throughout his tenure in Ottawa.

Her uncensored reply caused a shock, since she was known to be quite reserved when she was in the public eye.

But Mr Ecklund showed no sign of remorse.

“If you can guess what post has 900 likes, 450 comments, 13 confirmed death threats, 754 swear words and one very happy hunter in it…….I will enter your name into the draw for the new cougar cook book, filled with mouth watering recipes for your next mountain lion,” he wrote on Facebook.

He defended the kill by explaining that he will use every part of the animal.

More like this:

• US woman mauled to death by own dogs
• Row over “obese” lion in Russian circus

Not everyone felt outrage over the kill. Some defended it, saying the animals are predators and dangerous to humans. Cougars are not endangered in Alberta, and are legal to hunt.

“SO JEALOUS…maybe next year,” wrote one commenter on his Facebook page.

Note: This story is auto-generated from BBC syndicated feed and has not been edited by AFRICA PRIME NEWS

Media playback is unsupported on your device

The UN General Assembly has decisively backed a resolution effectively calling on the US to withdraw its recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

The text says that any decisions regarding the status of the city are “null and void” and must be cancelled.

The non-binding resolution was approved by 128 states, with 35 abstaining and nine others voting against.

It came after US President Donald Trump threatened to cut financial aid to those who backed the resolution.

How did UN members vote?

• The nine who voted against the resolution were the US, Israel, Guatemala, Honduras, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and Togo
• Among the 35 abstaining were Canada and Mexico
• Those voting in favour included the other four permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia and the UK) as well as key US allies in the Muslim world
• There were 21 countries who did not turn up for the vote.

Read more: How did your country vote?

What is so contentious about Jerusalem’s status?

The status of Jerusalem goes to the heart of Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians.

Israel occupied the east of the city in the 1967 Middle East war and regards the entire city as its indivisible capital.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

The Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of a future state and its final status is meant to be discussed in the latter stages of peace talks.

• Anger in Ramallah and delight in West Jerusalem

Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem has never been recognised internationally, and all countries currently maintain their embassies in Tel Aviv. However, President Trump has told the US state department to start work on moving the US embassy.

What does the UN resolution say?

The 193-member UN General Assembly held the rare emergency special session at the request of Arab and Muslim states, who condemned Mr Trump’s decision to reverse decades of US policy earlier this month.

The Palestinians called for the meeting after the US vetoed a Security Council resolution that was similar to the text approved on Thursday.

The text put forward by Turkey and Yemen does not mention the US, but expresses “deep regret at recent decisions concerning the status of Jerusalem”.

It also says “any decisions and actions which purport to have altered the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council”.

What do Israel and the Palestinians say?

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had promised to reject the results of the vote, calling the UN a “house of lies”.

Afterwards he said in a statement: “Israel thanks President Trump for his unequivocal position in favour of Jerusalem and thanks those countries that voted alongside Israel, alongside the truth.”

• The view from one street
• Trump Jerusalem shift puts counter-terror efforts at risk

A spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called the vote “a victory for Palestine”.

How does the US see it?

In a speech before the vote, US permanent representative Nikki Haley stressed that the US decision did not prejudge any final status issues, and did not preclude a two-state solution if the parties agreed to that.

“The United States will remember this day, on which it was singled out for attack in the General Assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation,” she said.

“America will put our embassy in Jerusalem. That is what the American people want us to do. And it is the right thing to do. No vote in the Untied Nations will make any difference on that.”

Media playback is unsupported on your device

On Wednesday, Mr Trump warned he might cut financial aid to states who voted in favour of the resolution.

“They take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars and then they vote against us,” he said. “Well, we’re watching those votes,” he added. “Let them vote against us. We’ll save a lot. We don’t care.”

Will Trump act in retaliation?

Analysis by Sebastian Usher, BBC Arab affairs analyst

The result of the UN General Assembly vote was inevitable: the US knew that the majority of states would vote for the resolution. But there may have been slightly more abstentions and votes against than had been expected – which will be some comfort to the Trump administration.

There’s little surprise in the countries that voted against – the likes of Micronesia, Nauru and Togo had nothing to gain from voting against the interests of the US, which helps support them.

Canada, Mexico and Poland were amongst those that abstained, in a move that will do nothing to harm their relations with the US.

The votes for the resolution from powerful US allies, such as France, Germany and the UK, could be seen as a slap in the face for President Trump – but all would argue that they simply voted in line with the existing status quo at the UN. There was no pressing reason for them to switch from this stance.

But the real test of the vote will be whether the Trump administration acts on its threats to reconsider financial aid to some of those who backed the resolution. Key, too, will be whether the resolution will give fresh impetus to the protests against the US decision that have been going on ever since it was announced, but have yet to really catch fire.

Note: This story is auto-generated from BBC syndicated feed and has not been edited by AFRICA PRIME NEWS

Image copyright Florida State University

Fraternity students engaged in a “conspiracy” as they waited to call police when a student died from acute alcohol poisoning, says a court.

Florida State University’s social club tried to obstruct the investigation, said the Leon County grand jury.

The panel was convened to decide if there is enough evidence to press criminal charges in the death of Andrew Coffey, 20, last month.

His family said he “died alone in a room full of people”.

The 16-page grand jury presentment says there is sufficient evidence to prosecute fraternity members.

It is now up to the state attorney to decide whether to pursue the case.

• The deadly problem with US fraternities

The university suspended all so-called Greek life on campus after Mr Coffey’s death.

More than 80 people, including two paid strippers, attended the members-only “Big Brother” party of the Pi Kappa Phi fraternity on 3 November.

Mr Coffey was given a bottle of bourbon to drink before passing out on a couch.

The fraternity did not force him to drink, but he probably would have been ostracised if he had not joined in, the grand jury said.

It added that the party “occurred in an environment of hazing”.

The grand jury was highly critical of the fraternity members’ actions after they discovered Mr Coffey had no pulse.

His “so-called brothers” wasted 11 minutes calling and texting each other before alerting authorities, the presentment found.

‘Shocking apathy’ to fraternity drinking

Ten charged for fraternity hazing death

The delay would not have saved his life, but it showed the fraternity “were more concerned about getting in trouble than they were about trying to save Coffey’s life”, jurors wrote.

During the investigation, the majority of students refused to speak to police, and those that did seemed to give “rehearsed” and “self-serving” testimonies.

The student’s behaviour points to “elements of conspiracy and obstructionism”, the grand jurors wrote.

They “repeatedly made the choice not to speak out, but rather to remain loyal to a culture of secrecy that cannot be allowed to continue,” the report says.

Sandy Coffey, the young man’s mother, said the grand jury presentment was disturbing.

“The Pi Kappa Phi creed uses words like loyalty, responsibility, standards, conduct,” Mrs Coffey wrote in a statement.

“Easy words to put down on paper. Obviously more difficult to live by.”

She said her son had wanted to join the US Navy.

Note: This story is auto-generated from BBC syndicated feed and has not been edited by AFRICA PRIME NEWS

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Note: This story is auto-generated from BBC syndicated feed and has not been edited by AFRICA PRIME NEWS