The most recent NBC News/Wall Street contained plenty of revealing numbers -- on President Obama, the health-care law, immigration, even affirmative action.

But lost in those numbers and headlines is a noteworthy finding: The American public is extremely hesitant to intervene directly in Syria's civil war.

Asked to pick a response to stop the killing of civilians in Syria, just 15 percent in the poll say they favor U.S. military action, and only 11 percent want to provide arms to the opposition.

By comparison, a plurality of respondents -- 42 percent -- prefer to provide only humanitarian assistance, and 24 percent believe the U.S. shouldn't take any action.

Perhaps more significantly, those attitudes cut across party lines and almost all demographic groups.

"Whether you voted for Romney or Obama, they have the same opinion on Syria," said Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted the survey with the Democratic firm Hart Research.

"It explains the great reticence of the American public," McInturff added.

These numbers come as calls for U.S. intervention in Syria -- after the Syrian opposition's recent losses on the battlefield -- have once again increased.

The New York Times:

So far President Obama has steadfastly resisted even a modest involvement in the conflict, and there was no sign on Monday that a decision to use American force was imminent.

But Hezbollah’s large-scale entry into the fight in recent weeks and the Assad government’s firepower has tilted the battlefield in favor of the Syrian government.

“I think the rebels are in trouble,” said Jeffrey White, a former Middle East analyst with the Defense Intelligence Agency who is now a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “Speed is of the essence. The regime’s momentum needs to be brought to a halt.”

The NBC/WSJ poll was conducted May 30 to June 2 of 1,000 adults (including 300 cell phone-only respondents), and it has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.

Here is how we THINK this program works, based on several calls.

The National Security Agency, with approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court, goes to the phone companies and says: Every day, pump your data about phone calls into our big government tank -- only phone numbers (not names), along with other data about the calls, such as where they came from, how long they lasted, what numbers were dialed, and so on.

The government does this for two reasons. First, the phone companies themselves retain this data only for 30-90 days. Second, having this data aggregated in one place avoids the need, when checking out a specific number, to have to go get a court order for each phone company to track a specific number, when the government does not know what company handled that number.

(USA Today reported on this program back in 2006.)

So the order made public by the Guardian covers part one of this process. 

Part two, however, involves the authority to dive into the government's big tank of phone data to check out a specific number. It does this under protocols and internal controls that are approved in advance and must be reviewed by the FISA court periodically. This means that the tank can be accessed only for specific reasons -- not to generally roam through.

So, for example, when the police in London bust up a terror cell and find a U.S. number was on one of their cell phones, the U.S. government can then check that number against its big tank of phone data, without having to go to every carrier.

But there are several questions for the administration to answer, among them:

-- How does the FOREIGN intelligence surveillance court have authority to order the phone companies to turn over records of DOMESTIC calls, as well as international ones?

-- How does it satisfy the Fourth Amendment to require a company to turn over all its data in advance?

-- And what's the Fourth Amendment authority to tell a court what specific searches were conducted on that data after the fact, instead of in advance?

NBC News has learned that President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping will hold a two-day summit June 7-8 in Rancho Mirage, Calif.

This will be Obama's first meeting with Xi Jinping since he took over as China's president. According to a senior official, the two-day summit will feature a "wide range" of issues focused on security and the economy. National Security Council adviser Tom Donilon travels to Beijing in late May to prepare for this two-day meeting.

NBC News has learned that President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping will hold a two-day summit June 7-8 in Rancho Mirage, Calif.

This will be Obama's first meeting with Xi Jinping since he took over as China's president. According to a senior official, the two-day summit will feature a "wide range" of issues focused on security and the economy. National Security Council adviser Tom Donilon travels to Beijing in late May to prepare for this two-day meeting.

The Boston Globe: “President Obama on Monday evening pledged the full weight of the federal government to figure out who is responsible for Monday’s double bombing at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, and the White House said it is treating the attack as an `act of terror.’ In a three-minute address from the White House, Obama urged caution, saying ‘people shouldn’t jump to conclusions before we have all the facts.’ Significantly, reflecting caution about the unknown motive and perpetrators, the president himself did not call the incident a terrorist attack. However, a White House official speaking after the president’s remarks but only on the condition of anonymity, said that the administration views it that way.”

NBC’s Mike O’Brien has more from Obama’s remarks: "We still do not know who did this or why and people should not jump to conclusions before we have all the facts. But, make no mistake, we will get to the bottom of this," he said. "Any responsible individuals, any responsible groups, will feel the full weight of justice."

Josh Gerstein: “The content of his three-and-a-half-minute speech Monday—in particular his notable aversion to labeling the incident as ‘terror’ or ‘terrorism’—seemed to reflect a continuing desire not to stoke fears or make premature public judgments even as he made sure to offer the public presence that he’d initially avoided during his first experiences managing terrorist attacks as president. … The most searing of the Obama White House’s previous terrorism experiences is likely the Christmas Day 2009 attempted bombing of a Delta airliner headed for Detroit. After that incident, Obama took three days to appear before cameras and talk about the episode. That delay led to sharp criticism from Republicans in Congress and led some in the public to conclude that Obama — who was vacationing in Hawaii at the time — wasn’t taking the incident seriously. Obama and his aides were careful not to repeat that mistake Monday.”

“In addition to receiving updates on the attack, Obama will meet with a foreign leader and welcome a champion NASCAR driver at the White House,” USA Today notes. “Obama -- who received updates on Boston overnight -- is scheduled to be briefed this morning by White House counter-terrorism adviser Lisa Monaco, FBI Director Robert Mueller, and other senior officials on the bombing that has killed at least three people, and injured more than 100 others.”

USA Today has the story of two Newtown, CT, residents who were participated in the marathon.

Some front pages:
The Boston Globe: “Marathon Terror” is the banner headline over a photo showing people down and trails of blood.
The New York Times: “Blasts at Boston Marathon Kill 3 and Injure 100.”
The Washington Post: “An ‘act of terror’ in Boston.”
The L.A. Times: “Terror in Boston.”
USA Today: “Terror returns.”
Philadelphia Inquirer: “Terror in Boston.”
Miami Herald: “Deadly Finish.”
The New York Daily News: “Marathon Massacre” over a blood-strewn photo.
Chicago Tribune: “ ‘We will find out who did this’”
Des Moines Register: “Nation’s fears reawawkened.”
Anchorage Daily News: “Terror in Boston.”
Montgomery Advertiser: “Terror in Boston.”
The Arizona Republic: “Horrific Day in Boston.”
La Nacion (Argentina)
O Povo (Brazil): “Terrorismo.”
BILD (Berlin): “Terror beim marathon!” over a gruesome photo of a bloodied man in a wheelchair.
Kleine Zeitung (Austria): Bombenterror beim Marathon.”
Bresciaoggi (Italy): “Boston, bombe alla maratona Terrore e morte.” (Boston, bombs at the marathon. Terror and death.)
The Guardian (UK): “Terror in Boston as twin blasts hit city marathon.”
The Times of London: “Bombs bring carnage to end of Boston marathon.”

National Journal: “If chained CPI ends up happening as part of a budget deal, the people who would suffer the most could be working people or those in the middle class who do not have private pensions, huge savings accounts, or many assets to sustain them in retirement.”

JERUSALEM -- In a speech he delivered to college students in Israel, President Barack Obama reassured the Israeli people that he understood their plight and connection to the land, saying he believed that Israel is rooted in the “idea that people deserve to be free in a land of their own.”

With Israeli and American flags behind him, the president attempted to reintroduce himself to a reportedly disillusioned Israeli population and convince them he recognized their need to have a safe haven.

In remarks similar to the one he gave at Cairo University at the beginning of his first term, Obama shared some of the African-American story of slavery, as well as his own story. “Growing up in far-flung parts of the world and without firm roots, it spoke to a yearning within every human being for a home,” he said.

And the president received a sustained applause when he said, “Make no mistake: Those who adhere to the ideology of rejecting Israel’s right to exist might as well reject the earth beneath them and the sky above, because Israel is not going anywhere.”

Yet the president spoke plainly about the need for not only a safe Israeli state but also an “independent and viable Palestine" -- which the audience received with applause but also by some stern looks.

“The Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and justice must also be recognized. Put yourself in their shoes,” Obama said.

He went off-script when he talked about visiting students Ramallah earlier today in an attempt to convince those watching him speak that Palestinian children want the same thing Israeli children do. “And talking to them, they weren't that different from my daughters. They weren't that different from your daughters or sons.  I honestly believe that if -- if any Israeli parent sat down with those kids, they'd say, I want these kids to succeed.”

This story played into one of the issues that the president was attempting to overcome in this speech, according to a senior administration official:  That many in the region believe “peace is isn't worth pursuing anymore.“

That sentiment was reflected by a 28-year-old Tel Aviv university student in the audience. “I don’t see how we in the near future have a peace agreement, because I don’t think there’s someone to talk to on the other side,” she said.  

Obama also had tough words for Palestinians. “Palestinians must recognize that Israel will be a Jewish state and that Israelis have the right to insist upon their security,” he remarked.

And the president used a Hebrew phrased to express the overwhelming theme of the speech: “Ah-tem lo lah-vahd.” This means, “You are not alone.”

To back that up, Obama is sending Secretary of State John Kerry back to Israel this weekend to continue discussions about the peace process.

On Friday morning, the president will visit Bethlehem before heading to Jordan to sit down with King Abdullah II.

Jewelry from a Yemeni general, a crystal clock in the shape of a horse jumping over an obstacle from a top Lebanese official, a Swiss bell from the head of Swiss intelligence.

Chalk all of those up to things most people will never be given in their lifetimes. But, like something out of Indiana Jones, they were actual gifts to John Brennan, President Obama’s nominee to be CIA director.

The gifts, all given to Brennan during his time as Obama’s top White House counter-terrorism adviser, are just three of several disclosed by Brennan Wednesday in a Senate questionnaire ahead of his hearing Thursday.

Here’s the full list of gifts: 

- Crystal clock in the shape of a horse jumping over an obstacle (from a former Lebanese defense minister)
- Silver and gold standing plaque (from the director of Israeli counter terrorism)
- Bottle of “Jose Cuervo Platino” tequila from a governor in Mexico
- Green lacquered wood plaque (from the same governor in Mexico)
- 8-piece serving bar utensil set (from the director of the Lebanese Internal Security Forces)
- Swiss bell with a leather strap (from the head of Swiss intelligence)
- Green glass and hold plate (from the head of Turkey’s intelligence)
- White marble bowl (from the Deputy National Security Adviser from India)
- Paper Mache container with gold color inlay, and floral design on lid (from Indian ambassador)
- Navy blue tie (from Minister of Justice of India)
- A circular decorative metal dish (from the head of Turkey’s intelligence)
- Jewelry set of necklace, bracelet, earrings, and a ring (from a Yemeni military general)

For the record, the White House said the acceptance of the gifts are covered by the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act.

“The gifts listed were from foreign dignitaries/governments and thereby accepted under the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act,” an official said. “The ones under $350 he keeps. The ones over $350 the government retains.”

Days after Israel’s air strike on Syria prompted a new round of fiery rhetoric from Hezbollah and objections from Russia, Vice President Biden will meet with key figures in the Syrian conflict while visiting Europe this week, senior White House officials said Thursday.

Biden will attend the 49th Munich Security Conference Saturday, where he will have bilateral meetings with the United Nations envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, as well as the head of the Syrian Opposition Council, Moaz al-Khatib. But White House officials suggested the meeting would not result in any additional U.S. involvement in the conflict beyond the humanitarian assistance it has been providing.
 
“I think the vice president, in his meetings with the leadership of the Syrian opposition as well as other international partners, is going to be discussing how we can continue to provide humanitarian assistance,” said Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, on a conference call with reporters previewing the visit.

Biden will also talk with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov -- a meeting that will take place just days after Russia rebuked Israel for launching a military strike in Syria.

And in the meeting with Lavrov, Rhodes said Biden will stress that it is “very important for the Russians to put their full weight into political transition in Syria.”

The conversation will also likely touch on Russia’s human-rights record, which came to a head when the U.S. Congress passed the Magnitsky Act, which imposes sanctions and denies visas to Russians accused of human rights abuses and corruption. 

Passage of the act set off a series of retaliatory actions from both the Russian and U.S. governments that could complicate U.S. efforts to “reset” the countries’ relationship.

“We have real differences, and we don't hide them,” said Tony Blinken, Biden’s national security adviser. “But going forward, there is a real potential not only to work through those differences, but to continue the agenda that we set over the past four years.”

In addition to Biden's stop in Germany, where he will meet one-on-one with Chancellor Angela Merkel, the vice president also will be meeting with the heads of France and the United Kingdom. Syria will figure into all of those discussions, said Blinken, who will soon move roles to serve as the president’s deputy national security adviser.

THE UNITED NATIONS -- President Barack Obama today urged Arab nations undergoing radical changes to commit to democracy and tolerance, which he said were not exclusively American or Western values but ones to which all successful nations must adhere.

He made his speech here at the United Nations General Assembly against a backdrop of spiking violence in the Middle East and a domestic election with a newfound focus on foreign policy.

Standing in front of the Assembly's familiar green marble, the president condemned the violent reaction across several Arab nations to a video featuring the prophet Mohammed that led to the deaths of U.S. ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three others.

But he said that in order to end such bloodshed, new leaders must support the principles of freedom and self-determination, which Obama called “universal values” -- no matter how tempting the thought of clamping down on protests or funneling anger towards a foreign target.

“True democracy -- real freedom -- is hard work,” he said. “Those in power have to resist the temptation to crack down on dissent. In hard economic times, countries may be tempted to rally the people around perceived enemies, at home and abroad, rather than focusing on the painstaking work of reform.”

The president, who has been criticized by Republican presidential opponent Mitt Romney for not responding to the protests against the video forcefully enough, noted that real change would not come just through putting “more guards in front of an embassy or to put out statements of regret.”

He added that leaders must respect freedom of speech, noting that while millions of Americans took offense to the anti-Muslim video, censuring such expression would be futile in today’s information age, and responding with violence was unacceptable.

“In 2012, at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offensive views around the world with the click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete. The question, then, is how we respond. And on this we must agree: There is no speech that justifies mindless violence."

And Obama said that just as all nations should respect Muslim traditions, the inverse must also be true.

“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied.”

He continued, quoting Gandhi: ‘Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit,’” he said, garnering applause at the last line.

Don Emmert / AFP - Getty Images

President Barack Obama delivers his address during the 67th United Nations General Assembly meeting August 25 at the United Nations in New York.

As he prescribed broad solutions for the entire Middle East, the president also gave his vision for specific conflict-ridden countries, though he did not offer any new policies or changes to existing ones.

Obama said he was committed to stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. “The United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” he said.

And he repeated his call for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad to step down, one year after he stood before the same assembly to urge U.N. Security Council sanctions against the country, which members China and Russia are still blocking.

He also reaffirmed his vision for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: “The road is hard but the destination is clear -- a secure, Jewish state of Israel; and an independent, prosperous Palestine.”

While the president shied away from overtly political rhetoric, he did tout what he perceives as his accomplishments in foreign policy, an area seen as his strong suit but one which Romney has been increasingly critical.

“The war in Iraq is over, and our troops have come home. We have begun a transition in Afghanistan, and America and our allies will end our war on schedule in 2014. Al Qaeda has been weakened and Osama bin Laden is no more. Nations have come together to lock down nuclear materials, and America and Russia are reducing our arsenals.”

And the president urged listeners to put aside “political debates” and focus not on what divides the world but unites it.

“When you strip that all away, people everywhere long for the freedom to determine their destiny; the dignity that comes with work; the comfort that comes from faith; and the justice that exists when governments serve their people -- and not the other way around,” he said.

“The United States of America will always stand up for these aspirations, for our own people, and all across the world.”

DENVER -- Mitt Romney today attempted to shift focus to what he called President Barack Obama's lack of leadership in the Middle East, as world leaders began to gather in New York City for the opening of the United Nations General Assembly.

The Romney campaign this afternoon offered a series of interviews with major U.S. TV networks, in which Romney hammered Obama for referring to a series of flare-ups in the Middle East as "bumps in the road."

"When the president was speaking about 'bumps in the road' he was talking about the developments in the Middle East, and that includes an assassination. It includes a Muslim Brotherhood individual becoming president of Egypt. It includes Syria being in tumult," Romney told NBC's Peter Alexander. "It includes Iran being on the cusp of nuclear capability. It includes Pakistan being in commotion."

Romney continued, "There are extraordinary events going on in the Middle East, and considering those events, either one of them or all of them collectively, as bumps in the road shows a person who has a very different perspective about world affairs than the perspective I have. I think this is a time for America to exert leadership and this is not something that we are doing in the Middle East ... ."

Romney was referring to an answer Obama gave in an interview which aired last night on CBS News' "60 Minutes," in which the president defended his support for emerging governments in the Middle East as a result of the Arab spring.

Charles Dharapak / AP

Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney boards his plane in Denver, Monday, Sept. 24, 2012.

Kroft: Have the events that took place in the Middle East, the recent events in the Middle East given you any pause about your support for the governments that have come to power following the Arab Spring?

Obama: Well, I'd said even at the time that this is going to be a rocky path. The question presumes that somehow we could have stopped this wave of change. I think it was absolutely the right thing for us to do to align ourselves with democracy, universal rights, a notion that people have to be able to participate in their own governance. But I was pretty certain and continue to be pretty certain that there are going to be bumps in the road because, you know, in a lot of these places, the one organizing principle has been Islam. The one part of society that hasn't been controlled completely by the government. There are strains of extremism, and anti-Americanism, and anti-Western sentiment. And, you know, can be tapped into by demagogues. There will probably be some times where we bump up against some of these countries and have strong disagreements, but I do think that over the long term we are more likely to get a Middle East and North Africa that is more peaceful, more prosperous and more aligned with our interests.

The Romney campaign seized on those comments -- in an attempt to chip away at the president's approval rating on foreign affairs, which slid in the last NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll to 49 percent.

(However, a series of NBC/WSJ/Marist polls in the battleground states of Colorado, Iowa, and Wisconsin show Obama enjoying a double-digit lead over Romney when it comes to who would better handle foreign policy.)

The Obama White House fired back on Romney, arguing that it was "offensive" to suggest that the president was minimizing the deaths of four Americans in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador there.

"That assertion is both desperate and offensive," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said. "The president was referring to the transformations in the region, to this process that has -- only began less than two years ago, as we saw in Tunisia, and continues to this day, with remarkable transformations occurring in countries around the region."

Also in the interview, NBC's Alexander pressed Romney on the current polling that shows him trailing Obama.

Romney remained defiant.

"I'm very pleased with the fact that we have a campaign that is taking our message to the people across America,  and look --- we're gonna win," Romney said. "There is no question in my mind. We're gonna win."

NBC's Jordan Frasier contributed to this article.

After last week's political firestorm over attacks on U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that President Obama's approval rating on foreign policy has dropped five points since August.

In the poll, 49 percent approve of the president's job in handling foreign policy, versus 46 percent who disapprove.

Last month, 54 percent said they approved of his foreign-policy handling.

Much of that drop can be attributed to increased political polarization just seven weeks until Election Day. 

Indeed, 86 percent of Democrats approve of Obama on foreign policy, compared with just 10 percent of Republicans. Yet in August, nearly twice as many Republicans -- 19 percent -- approved.

Still, in the current NBC/WSJ poll, only 41 percent of independents approve of Obama's foreign-policy handling, versus 53 percent who did so last month.

The full NBC/WSJ poll -- which was conducted Sept. 12-16 of 900 registered voters (including 270 by cell phone) and which has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.3 percentage points -- will be released at 6:30 pm ET.