Palestinean loss of land 1946-2000

Hassan Nasrallah: The the Head of Hezbollah

While Israeli forces continued to strike in Gaza, the man leading Hezbollah continued to back Hamas in Lebanon. Could this guy decide the fate of peace in the Middle East? Revisit this profile from Esquire's 75th anniversary issue to find out.

Most terrorist movements go one of two ways: They either fall apart after the top leaders are captured or killed, or they are successfully drawn into the political process and ultimately assimilated by the ruling political forces. Hezbollah's rise within Lebanon increasingly looks like the latter, except it is Lebanon's splintered political system that is being assimilated into Hezbollah's radical Islamic agenda rather than the other way around. Now in control of close to a dozen ministries and capable of forcing the installation of its preferred president (a feat Hezbollah pulled off this summer), this Shiite militia--backed extensively by Iran--has become Lebanon's de facto ruling party.

Forty-eight-year-old Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's charismatic secretary-general since 1992, is part Yasir Arafat (he earned his stripes as a guerrilla commander fighting Israel's occupation in the 1980s) and part Ayatollah Khomeini (then spent years abroad burnishing his meager religious street cred and honing his skill for mob-igniting fiery sermons). And, oh, part Huey Long, because he has proved that he can deliver services to a desperate people that the government couldn't or wouldn't. Israel long ago decided that it can't live with him (attempting to assassinate him just like his predecessor) but eventually may come to the conclusion--along with Washington--that it can't live without him.

Nasrallah, who currently holds no public office, wants to rule Lebanon openly, but with Shiites constituting roughly a third of the population, his only route to Supreme Leadership replicates Iran's long-standing strategy of emphasizing a staunchly anti--Israeli/U. S. front. In this quest, Nasrallah has succeeded brilliantly, presiding over both Israel's embarrassing withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 and its failed military effort to reduce Hezbollah's southern state-within-a-state in the summer of 2006, yielding a 34-day war that shell-shocked Beirut's fragile ruling coalition, not to mention the world.

With Israel staring at two unthinkable long-term scenarios (South African--style apartheid rule over a soon-to-be majority Muslim population in Palestine and a nuclear Iran), the diplomatic race may soon be on to capture Nasrallah's support for the mythical two-state solution in exchange for Western acceptance of Hezbollah's achievement of clear rule in Lebanon. In effect, banking on the notion that Nasrallah is more a power-hungry nationalist than he is Tehran's ideological puppet.

The United States helped turbocharge the Middle East's ongoing Shiite revival by clumsily creating the first modern Arab Shiite-dominated state in post-Saddam Iraq. In a "one man, one vote" world, that means learning to live with the likes--and dislikes--of Hassan Nasrallah.

SOURCE

'Lipstick on a pig': Attack on Palin or common line?

I would like you to read this news I read in CNN:

Sen. Barack Obama's reference to "lipstick on a pig" has Republicans demanding an apology and Democrats accusing Sen. John McCain of a "pathetic attempt" to play the gender card.

Barack Obama used the "lipstick" line at a campaign event in Lebanon, Virginia, on Tuesday.

McCain's campaign said Obama's remarks were offensive and a slap at Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin -- despite the fact that the Arizona senator himself used the phrase last year to describe a policy proposal of Hillary Clinton's.

Obama shot back Wednesday and accused the McCain campaign of engaging in "lies" and "swift boat politics."

"I don't care what they say about me. But I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and swift boat politics," he said in Norfolk, Virginia. "Enough is enough." Watch Obama deliver his harsh words »

The phrase "swift boat" comes from the 2004 presidential election, when the group "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" launched an attack ad campaign against Democratic candidate John Kerry. Read more about what Obama said

Obama made his controversial "lipstick" remarks at a Virginia campaign stop late Tuesday afternoon. Watch what happens with politics and lipstick collide »

"John McCain says he's about change too, and so I guess his whole angle is, 'Watch out George Bush -- except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics -- we're really going to shake things up in Washington,'" he said.

Don't Miss

• Palin backed 'bridge to nowhere,' then opposed it
• Biden's comments on special needs kids called 'new low'
• Ticker: Is Palin influencing white women?

"That's not change. That's just calling something the same thing something different. You know you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. You know you can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change, it's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough of the same old thing." Watch how tensions are rising on the trail »

The crowd erupted in applause when Obama delivered the line.

The Illinois senator then praised both McCain's "compelling story" and Palin's "interesting story," and said his "hat goes off" to anyone who's looking after five kids -- "I've got two and they tire Michelle and me out. ...

"That's why John McCain's campaign manager [Rick Davis] said this campaign isn't going to be about issues, this campaign is going to be about personalities."

Within minutes, the McCain campaign announced a conference call focused on the remark, which they said was a deliberate reference to Palin's line: "You know the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick."

Palin used the line in the opening remarks of her convention speech, and she frequently uses it on the campaign trail.

In Iowa last October, McCain drew comparisons between Hillary Clinton's current health care plan and the one she championed in 1993: "I think they put some lipstick on the pig, but it's still a pig." He used roughly the same line in May, after effectively claiming the Republican nomination.

McCain spokesman Brian Rogers told CNN the campaign saw a "big difference" between the two references: "McCain was referring to a policy proposal. Obama was referring to [Alaska] Gov. Sarah Palin. It's obviously disrespectful and offensive. ...

"Who has been talking about lipstick lately? It was obvious. The crowd went crazy because of it."

It wasn't the first time Obama used the line. In a phone interview with The Washington Post last September, he used it in reference to the situation in Iraq.

"I think that both Gen. [David] Petraeus and Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker are capable people who have been given an impossible assignment," Obama told the Post. "George Bush has given a mission to Gen. Petraeus, and he has done his best to try to figure out how to put lipstick on a pig."

Other politicians have also used the phrase in recent years, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state, Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Rep. John Mica of Florida and Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, among others.

Torie Clarke, a former McCain adviser, even wrote a book called, "Lipstick on a Pig: Winning In the No-Spin Era by Someone Who Knows the Game."

Still, the McCain campaign says Obama's use was intentional, and they want an apology.

"Barack Obama's comments today are offensive and disgraceful. He owes Gov. Palin an apology," said Maria Comella, a McCain-Palin spokeswoman.

Obama's campaign said "enough is enough" and accused McCain of running a "dishonorable campaign."

"The McCain campaign's attack tonight is a pathetic attempt to play the gender card about the use of a common analogy -- the same analogy that Sen. McCain himself used about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's health care plan just last year," said Obama campaign senior adviser Anita Dunn. "This phony lecture on gender sensitivity is the height of cynicism and lays bare the increasingly dishonorable campaign John McCain has chosen to run."

McCain ally Mike Huckabee took Obama's side on the issue, saying he didn't think it was a swipe at Palin.

"It's an old expression, and I'm going to have to cut Obama some slack on that one. I do not think he was referring to Sarah Palin; he didn't reference her. If you take the two sound bites together, it may sound like it," he said on Fox's "Hannity and Colmes."

Former DNC Chair Laughs About Hurricane Gustav

A blogger caught Don Fowler, the former national chairman of the Democratic National Committee, joking about Gustav hitting New Orleans on Monday and saying, “That just demonstrates God’s on our side.” Just some dark humor or a career-ending scandal? Is it fair to use a hurricane as a political tool?

Miss Buffalo Chip

John McCain suggests his wife enter a topless beauty contest at a Biker Rally in Sturgis, SD. The rash of John McCain making sexist jokes about his wife (and in general) makes me think that misogyny might actually be a calculated campaign tactic.

Do You Feel Safe Now?

	Do You Feel Safe Now?

August 8, 2008
by Paul Craig Roberts

Now that military officers selected by the Bush Pentagon have reached a split verdict convicting Salim Hamdan, a onetime driver for Osama bin Laden, of supporting terrorism, but innocent of terrorist conspiracy, do you feel safe?

Or are we superpower Americans still at risk until we capture bin Laden's dentist, barber, and the person who installed the carpet in his living room?

The Bush Regime with its comic huffings and puffings is unaware that it has made itself the laughing stock of the world, a comedy version of the Third Reich.

Hamdan was not defended by the slick lawyers who got O.J. Simpson off, and he most certainly did not have a jury of his peers. Hamdan was defended by a Pentagon appointed US Navy officer, and his jurors were all Pentagon appointed US military officers with an eye on their careers. Even in this Kangaroo Court, Hamdan was cleared of the main charge.

The US Navy officer who was Hamdan's appointed attorney is certainly no terrorist sympathizer. Yet even this United States officer said that the rules Bush designed for the military tribunals were designed to achieve convictions. He also said that the judge allowed evidence that would not have been admitted by any civilian or military US court. He said that the interrogations of Hamdan, which comprised the basis of the Bush Regime's case, were tainted by coercive tactics, including sleep deprivation and solitary confinement. [Split verdict in first Guantanamo war-crimes trial, AP, August 6, 2008]

Does this make you a proud American?

Do you think you are made more safe when you stand there while "your" government implements its own version of Joseph Stalin's show trials?

The trial and conviction of Hamdan has made every American very unsafe.

The one certain fact about US law is that it is expanded until it applies to everyone. Consider RICO, for example, the asset freeze law that was intended only in criminal cases involving the Mafia; it wasn't long before RICO found its way into civil divorce proceedings.

Bush's multi-year, multi-billion dollar "War on Terror" has been reduced to railroading a low level employee, a driver, for "terrorism."

One would hope that the Hamdan verdict would be enough shame and ridicule for the US in one day. But no, Bush didn't stop there. On his way to the Beijing Olympics, President Bush expressed "deep concerns" for the state of human rights in China.

But not in Guantanamo, nor in Abu Ghraib, nor in the CIA's torture dungeons used for "renditions," nor in Iraq and Afghanistan where the US is expert at bombing weddings, funerals, children's soccer games, and every assortment of civilians imaginable.

As the good book says, clean the beam from your own eye before pointing to the mote in your brother's eye.

But Americans, the salt of the earth, have neither beams nor motes. We are the virtuous few, ordained by God to impose our hegemony on the world. It is written, or so say the neocons.

What would President Bush say if, heaven forbid, the Chinese were as rude as he is and asked Mr. Superpower why the land of "freedom and democracy" has one million names on a watch list. China with a population four times as large doesn't have a watch list with one million names.

What would President Bush say if China asked him why the US, with a population one-fourth the size of China's has hundreds of thousands more of its citizens in prison? The percentage of Americans in prison is far higher than in China and is a larger absolute number.

What would President Bush say if China asked him why he used lies and deception to justify his invasion of Iraq. China, unlike Bush, is not responsible for 1.2 million dead Iraqis and 4 million displaced Iraqis.

China's human rights policy is not perfect. China's greatest human rights failing is that China is the Bush Regime's prime enabler of its war crimes and human rights abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan. By financing Bush's budget deficit, China is financing Bush's gratuitous wars. Indeed, China can be said to finance the weaponry that the US gives Israel to enable the suppression of the Palestinians and with which to bomb the civilian population of Lebanon.

China is a serious human rights abuser, because China is complicit in Bush's human rights abuses.

If we are honest about who is actually murdering and abusing people, it is the US, Israel, and the UK.

There's your "axis of evil."

Cheney wanted cuts in climate testimony

Some of the government's top scientists were forced by Vice President Cheney's office to downplay the health dangers of global warming when testifying before Congress, a former senior EPA official said Tuesday.

The White House denies any coverup and the agencies involved say they still got their message across.

Jason Burnett, 31, who resigned last month as the Environmental Protection Agency's associate deputy administrator, refused to name who forced the deletion of health concerns.

The testimony was part of an October Senate hearing on the impact of global warming.

Before the hearing, Cheney's office and the White House's Council on Environmental Quality wanted "any discussions of the human health consequences of climate change" deleted, said Burnett, a Democrat who supports Barack Obama, speaking at a news conference.

FIND MORE STORIES IN: Congress | White House | United States Senate | Barack Obama | Centers for Disease Control | Environmental Protection Agency | Vice President Cheney | Tony Fratto | Climate Change | Intergovernmental Panel | Sen. Barbara Boxer | Burnett | Public Works Committee | Environmental Quality | Tom Skinner | United Nations-sponsored

A White House spokeswoman explained in fall — when the changes were first revealed — that the edits were meant to make it consistent with a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations-sponsored consortium of scientists who examined global warming.

But some of the passages deleted from the testimony of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Julie Gerberding included health risks — hazards of poor air quality, for instance — that are in the IPCC report, said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee.

Boxer called it "a coverup being directed from the White House and the office of the vice president."

White House spokesman Tony Fratto called her claim "absurd" and said Cheney's office weighed in as a matter of routine amid "conflicting views of scientists."

CDC spokesman Tom Skinner said Gerberding conveyed her message to the committee in October despite the changes.

"Any edits that were made to the written testimony were made during the routine editing process," he said in an e-mail.

Cameron crackdown on MEPs' expenses

Conservative leader David Cameron has launched a "deep clean" of expense claims by his party's MEPs, which, he said, would bring new transparency and honesty to the system.And he warned that anyone refusing to sign up to a new code on allowances would not be permitted to stand as a Tory candidate in next year's elections to the European Parliament.

Mr Cameron's move came a few weeks after the former leader and chief whip of the Conservative group in Brussels lost their positions amid a row over payments to their families from the public purse.

Mr Cameron said that controls on expenses at the European Parliament were "inadequate" and that his own party would operate a more stringent code than that applying to other MEPs. He urged Labour and the Liberal Democrats to follow his lead.

Under the new rules, coming into effect on September 1, Conservative MEPs will be required to publish the names of any family members they employ and their approximate salary, as well as details of any other staff members paid from public funds.

Twice each year, Tory MEPs will be required to publish a breakdown of their expenditure under European Parliament allowances on the internet.

Unveiling the new code at a London press conference, Mr Cameron said the current system under which MEPs rarely have to account for the money they claim is "unacceptable".

Mr Cameron said he had agreed the new rules with the acting leader of the Tory group in Brussels, Philip Bushell-Matthews, who would be signing up to the code along with the "vast majority" of the party's MEPs.

But he acknowledged that negotiations with his sleaze-buster, Hugh Thomas, had been "robust" at times and some MEPs who plan to step down at next June's elections may choose not to sign up.

He said that current European Parliament investigations into the party's former leader in Brussels, Giles Chichester, and chief whip Den Dover should be allowed to take their course, although he indicated he was ready to take action if wrongdoing was uncovered.

Atheist soldier sues Army for 'unconstitutional' discrimination

Like many Christians, he said grace before dinner and read the Bible before bed. Four years ago when he was deployed to Iraq, he packed his Bible so he would feel closer to God.

He served two tours of duty in Iraq and has a near perfect record. But somewhere between the tours, something changed. Hall, now 23, said he no longer believes in God, fate, luck or anything supernatural.

Hall said he met some atheists who suggested he read the Bible again. After doing so, he said he had so many unanswered questions that he decided to become an atheist.

His sudden lack of faith, he said, cost him his military career and put his life at risk. Hall said his life was threatened by other troops and the military assigned a full-time bodyguard to protect him out of fear for his safety. Video Watch why Hall says his lack of faith almost got him killed »

In March, Hall filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, among others. In the suit, Hall claims his rights to religious freedom under the First Amendment were violated and suggests that the United States military has become a Christian organization.

"I think it's utterly and totally wrong. Unconstitutional," Hall said.

Hall said there is a pattern of discrimination against non-Christians in the military.

Two years ago on Thanksgiving Day, after refusing to pray at his table, Hall said he was told to go sit somewhere else. In another incident, when he was nearly killed during an attack on his Humvee, he said another soldier asked him, "Do you believe in Jesus now?"

Hall isn't seeking compensation in his lawsuit -- just the guarantee of religious freedom in the military. Eventually, Hall was sent home early from Iraq and later returned to Fort Riley in Junction City, Kansas, to complete his tour of duty.

He also said he missed out on promotions because he is an atheist.

"I was told because I can't put my personal beliefs aside and pray with troops I wouldn't make a good leader," Hall said.

Michael Weinstein, a retired senior Air Force officer and founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, is suing along with Hall. Weinstein said he's been contacted by more than 8,000 members of the military, almost all of them complaining of pressure to embrace evangelical Christianity.

"Our Pentagon, our Pentacostalgon, is refusing to realize that when you put the uniform on, there's only one religious faith: patriotism," Weinstein said.

Religious discrimination is a violation of the First Amendment and is also against military policy. The Pentagon refused to discuss specifics of Hall's case -- citing the litigation. But Deputy Undersecretary Bill Carr said complaints of evangelizing are "relatively rare." He also said the Pentagon is not pushing one faith among troops.

"If an atheist chose to follow their convictions, absolutely that's acceptable," said Carr. "And that's a point of religious accommodation in department policy, one may hold whatever faith, or may hold no faith."

Brown says Zimbabwe G8 statement strongest possible

TOYAKO, Japan (Reuters) - Prime Minister Gordon Brown said on Tuesday that a Group of Eight statement on Zimbabwe showed the international community was united against President Robert Mugabe's government.
(Advertisement)

"This is the strongest possible statement. It shows the unanimity of the whole international community, reflecting the outrage people feel about the violence and the intimidation and the illegitimate holding of power by the Mugabe government," Brown told reporters.

PM's Promise On Knife Crime

Gordon Brown says the Government will take "any legislative measures necessary" to tackle knife crime, as Sky News reveals the extent of the problem.Speaking at the G8 summit in Japan, the Prime Minister said it should be "completely unacceptable" for young people to carry a knife on the streets.

It comes as a survey of police officers has found more than 80% believe knife crime has got worse in the last five years, in stark contrast to official statistics.

According to the British Crime Survey, the level of knife crime in the UK has remained stable over recent years.

But a new report published by the Policy Exchange has labelled those findings "misleading", saying they bear no relation to the reality experienced by communities and police forces across the UK.

Speaking to Sky News, one of the report's authors, Jonathan McClory, said: "We polled 1,200 police constables and they've all said that gun and knife crime is much worse than official statistics are saying.

"We need to look at the long-term trends not the year-on-year trends. It's quite easy to manipulate year-on-year shifts which is I think what the Home Office have done".

The report comes as knife crime is already under the media spotlight. So far this year, 15 people under the age of 20 have been stabbed to death in London.

That is just one short of the 16 killed with knives in the capital during the whole of last year.

Just last night Wiltshire Police attended a knife-related incident in which a 13-year-old suffered minor injuries and another 13-year-old was arrested.

Last week, the Metropolitan Police announced they had increased the number of officers working in their specialist anti-knife crime task force - Operation Blunt 2.

Sky News has become the first news organisation allowed out on patrol with these units.

Last night, a fleet of vans from the Met's Territorial Support Group launched a high-visibility stop-and-search operation in Thornton Heath, south London, where 16-year-old Shakilus Townsend was fatally stabbed last week.

Over several hours, the teams carried out numerous stops. In one incident, a group of young men were seen acting suspiciously in a doorway.

When officers searched them, they found 25 wraps of cannabis in a vehicle belonging to one of the men. He was arrested for possession of a controlled substance with intent to supply.

Sergeant Darren Birmingham told Sky that drugs were linked into a vicious cycle, which often ends in knife or gun violence.

A short distance away, the team stopped three 14-year-old boys. One was carrying the sharp metal shaft of a dismantled umbrella.

When questioned, the boy revealed he had been slashed in face by another youth a week earlier. The blade narrowly missed his eye.

He is one of hundreds of youngsters across Britain whose brush with knife crime is not recorded in official statistics.

It is one of the errors highlighted by the Policy Exchange in the way knife crime figures are collated.

Under 16s are not included in the British Crime Survey but the latest hospital admission figures show the number of children under the age of 16 being treated for knife wounds has increased by 62% in the last five years.

The Royal London Hospital has been collating its own figures on patients treated by their trauma unit for serious and potentially serious knife wounds.

Consultant trauma vascular surgeon Mike Walsh said: "Our experience here is that the number of people suffering knife injuries is increasing year-on-year.

"If we took the figures for 2007, we had a total of 185 injuries in the year, so far in the first half of this year we've had 140."

British Soldier Killed in Afghanistan

A British soldier killed in Afghanistan when the vehicle in which he was patrolling overturned was named by the Ministry of Defence.

Warrant Officer Dan Shirley, 32, from Leicester, serving with the 13th Air Assault Support regiment, was on patrol from Sangin to Camp Bastion in Helmand Province when he died on Friday.

The news comes as the Ministry of Defence revealed another British soldier was killed on Saturday in Afghanistan by a mine explosion.

Warrant Officer Shirley leaves two young children.

Defence Secretary Des Browne praised WO Shirley's professionalism and determination. He said: "I know that he will be sorely missed by everyone who knew him. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends at what must be the most difficult of times."

The soldier killed on Saturday in Afghanistan by a mine explosion was from B Company 5th Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland. He was on patrol in the Lashkar Gar area when he stepped on a "legacy" anti-personnel mine.

He was killed instantly. Next of kin have been informed.

The MoD spokesman said: "He was part of a vehicle checkpoint patrol operating in the Lashkar Gar area when they received a report of an RPG attack on a civilian aircraft at Bost airfield in Lashkar Gar.

"When investigating this they dismounted their vehicles and that is when what is believed to have been a legacy anti-personnel mine detonated, killing the soldier instantly. The soldier's next of kin have been informed and have requested a 24-hour period of grace before further details are released."

The latest death takes to 110 the number of British service personnel who have lost their lives since the start of operations in Afghanistan in November 2001.

Reporting Religion

The former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has unveiled his Faith Foundation in New York.

In this special edition of Reporting Religion, Dan Damon talks exclusively to Tony Blair about his mission to promote respect, friendship and understanding between the major religious faiths.

The organisation which is named the 'Tony Blair Faith Foundation' will attempt to bring religions together to tackle global issues such as the UN's eight Millennium Development Goals.

Those goals cover issues which range from eradicating extreme poverty to ensuring environmental sustainability and one of Blair's first priorities will be to fight the spread of malaria.

The three key aims for the foundation are:

• To promote respect and understanding between the major religions

• To make the case for faith as a force for good

• To encourage inter-faith initiatives to tackle global poverty and conflict

On the launch of the foundation, Tony Blair who is now a peace envoy to the Middle East said:

"Religious faith will be of the same significance to the 21st Century as political ideology was to the 20th Century.

"In an era of globalisation, there is nothing more important than getting people of different faiths and cultures to understand each other better and live in peace and mutual respect; and to give faith itself its proper place in the future."

Dan Damon also talks to the former Prime Minister about his recent conversion to Catholicism and how religion influenced his time in power.

MoD faces huge bill for destroying cluster bomb arsenal after ban agreed

Britain and the other signatories to a treaty banning cluster bombs will have eight years in which to destroy all their stocks but are forbidden to use the weapons during that period.

However, under the terms of the convention, which was formally adopted in Dublin yesterday by 111 countries, British Armed Forces will be allowed to fight alongside American troops who are armed with cluster bombs.

The United States took no part in the treaty negotiations.

One of the key sticking points of the convention, which was published in full yesterday after 12 days of negotiations, is Article 21.

It says that armed forces of those countries signed up to the treaty “may engage in military co-operation and operations” with nations “not party to this convention”, which might fire cluster munitions in a joint campaign.

Britain’s stocks of artillery-fired M85 and helicopter-launched M73 cluster bombs are covered by the agreed definition of these weapon systems, which embraces all explosive submunitions weighing less than 20kg (44lb).

The Ministry of Defence has not revealed how many cluster bombs are held in stock and has not yet worked out what it will cost to destroy them. However, it is acknowledged that this process will run to many millions of pounds.

The treaty text says that all cluster munitions must be kept separate from other weapon systems still in operational use and should be marked “for the purpose of destruction”.

The MoD confirmed that it did not have any other cluster-type weapon systems. However, a spokesman said that development work was currently under way to produce a replacement system that would not breach the convention but would provide a capability to hit enemy armour – the principal role of the cluster bomb.

The proposed system is the ballistic sensor-fused munition (BSFM) which will be fired by the Army’s self-propelled AS90 artillery. The munitions will be dropped by parachute and use sensors to seek out enemy targets such as tanks and other armoured vehicles as they drift down. Each weapon will have two submunitions.

The Army says that this new “smart” weapon will enable gunners in the artillery regiments to target the enemy with much greater accuracy, thus reducing any “collateral damage” (civilian deaths), although it will still be an indirect-fire weapon, like the cluster bomb.

However, the BSFM will not be ready for operations until 2012, which means the Army will have a capability gap of about four years.

Yesterday’s landmark international convention obliges each signatory “never under any circumstances” to use cluster munitions, or to “develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer” these weapons to anyone else.

The signatories to the convention, which will need to be ratified by Parliament, are also obliged to clear and destroy the remnants of cluster munitions located in areas under its jurisdiction or control. In Britain’s case, this will entail clearance operations in southern Iraq where more than 100,000 M85 submunitions were fired by British forces in the 2003 invasion. Campaigners described the convention as “hugely significant”, despite the absence of countries such as the US, Russia and China.

Results in Oregon and Kentucky

Clinton isn´t happy

Salmond backs Sir Tom's comments

First Minister Alex Salmond has said he agrees with one of the SNP's biggest donors that independence should not be the "be-all and end-all".

Sir Tom Farmer, the multi-millionaire founder of Kwik-Fit, said Mr Salmond should concentrate on improving the quality of life for people in Scotland.

The tycoon said he did not think it was the time for major discussions about referendums on independence.

The first minister said he agreed that the SNP government had to prove itself.

Quality of life

Sir Tom, who donated £100,000 to the SNP ahead of last year's Holyrood election, was writing in the Sunday Times Scotland on the anniversary of the party's victory.

He said: "I don't think we should be talking about referendums at this time.

"For me, quite simply, the question of more power coming to Scotland is almost inevitable.

"But change should happen at a pace that we can cope with."

He called on Mr Salmond to prove himself by improving the quality of life for Scottish people.

The tycoon also rejected "separatism" and called for a "higher degree of independence" but with a close relationship with England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Mr Salmond told BBC Scotland's Politics Show: "I agree it [independence] is not the be-all and end-all.

"I have always argued that we have to demonstrate our competence and authority in government before the referendum question.

"In that so far, I agree with Tom."

He added: "One of the most exciting phrases in Sir Tom's article was this concept of United Kingdoms, as opposed to United Kingdom - why he didn't want separation, he wanted a continued relationship.

"I am delighted he is highlighting a concept that I have been trying to put forward about independence, that particularly with the same Queen as head of state, it cannot be defined as separation.

"It is a new equal relationship between the partner countries of these islands."

McCain should adopt more 'hopeful' approach

Sen. John McCain has been on the Republican equivalent of a Bed-Stuy tour. Bedford-Stuyvesant was once a frequent campaign stop for Democratic candidates who stood in front of destroyed or rundown buildings amid some of the worst poverty in New York City, promising to fix the place with more government spending.

McCain has been touring poor neighborhoods, where the likelihood of his winning votes is nil. In New Orleans, which was devastated by Hurricane Katrina, he stood with the new Republican governor, Bobby Jindal, and pledged to the residents of the 9th Ward, "the people of New Orleans, and the people of this country that never again, never again will a disaster of this nature be handled in the terrible and disgraceful way it was handled."

All of this is fine, and it might even help diminish the usual slurs Democrats use against Republicans about how they care nothing for the poor. The answer to this is that if Democrats care about the poor, why haven't they solved the problem of poverty?

And the answer to that is that Democrats need people to remain poor and, thus, dependent on them so they can get their votes. McCain has repeatedly said he wants a "civil" campaign so don't look for him to offer such a response.

Here is some advice for McCain: Stop identifying with failure and begin identifying with success. Before the era of entitlement and low expectations, there were Horatio Alger stories about people who overcame difficult circumstances and prospered. McCain should begin identifying people who have overcome poverty and let them tell their stories of how they did it.

Those stories are better than the stories of people mired in poverty, largely because of wrong decisions, who are doomed to remain there because they've been told the best they can hope for is a government check. Success becomes an example for others to follow. Stories about poverty inspire no one.

Victory not defeat, achievement not failure, ought to be McCain's strategy. These American stories are really the story of America.

One doesn't "tackle poverty," like a football player. One shows the way of escape and provides sufficient role models along with capital and moral and educational structures that serve as ladders so people who want to climb out of the hole can do so.

Here's one way it might work, based on strategies developed for the Third World by the humanitarian organization World Vision and the micro-loan vision of Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus.

McCain could announce the formation of H.O.P.E.F.U.L., which would stand for Helping Other People Enjoy Full and Useful Lives. Churches (the moral structure), businesses (some capital and training) and individuals (more capital and encouragement) would be involved in H.O.P.E.F.U.L.

Every American participating would "adopt" a poor person who would be screened for drug and alcohol addiction, criminal backgrounds and interviewed to determine whether, if given a chance, they were – or might be – motivated to escape poverty.

Individuals would contribute, say, $20 per month to a privately managed account in the recipient's name. The money would be managed by H.O.P.E.F.U.L. to help the poor person with a private school education, job training, capital for starting a small business, and whatever else it takes to help.

The sponsor would be urged to meet and serve as a mentor to the poor person, or at least correspond with encouraging words. Regular progress reports would be sent to the sponsor(s) and when the person is declared a success, all would rejoice and the nation would be better off. This would not be a government program, improving its chance of success.

If you're reading this newspaper, chances are you are not poor. Do you know any poor people? If your life has been built around pursuing happiness by the accumulation of material goods and wealth, investing yourself in another human being and seeing him triumph might be the greatest gift you could give yourself and your nation. I know this from personal experience.

If John McCain rallied the good nature of Americans behind such a vision, it could be his top achievement should he become president. And it's a good idea, no matter who wins

Election latest: voters out in force in battle to be London mayor

Londoners were today thought to be turning out in their biggest numbers ever for a mayoral election, as the battle between Ken Livingstone and his maverick rival Boris Johnson went right to the wire.

Early projections put voter turnout as touching the 50 per cent mark - far higher than the 37 per cent and 35 per cent turnouts in 2004 and 2000 - amid indications that the closeness of the conflict between two of British politics' most colourful characters has caught the public's imagination.

A key indication of the high turnout came at a polling station in Streatham, south London, where 85 people were reported to have voted by 9.15am, out of 1,970 in total. If traditional voting patterns were repeated during the day this would give a final poll of just under 50 per cent.

The turnout was projected to be high in advance because opinion polls have put the mayoral conflict as too close to call, while the campaign between Mr Johnson and Mr Livingstone has also been one of the most personalised and most colourful ever.

Mr Livingstone upped the rhetoric yesterday when he described Mr Johnson, the former Spectator editor and newspaper journalist, as a "joke" and "celebrity" unable to take major political decisions.

The stakes in London could not be higher, with the winner being placed in charge of an £11.3billion budget to run public transport - much of which requires modernisation - police and fire services and promote the capital's economy. The elected mayor will also act as London's figurehead in the build-up to the Olympic Games in 2012.

Voting got off to a rocky start in the London borough of Barnet, however, when about 10 polling stations did not receive ballot papers until just after the election officially began, at 7am. Barnet Council said it "sincerely apologised" to voters for the slip-up.

As the London electorate cast their ballots, Labour councillors all over the country were holding their breath for a huge national backlash against the Prime Minister in local elections, in which some 4,000 seats on 160 councils were at stake.

Labour strategists fear that the party could record its lowest share of the vote since the 1970s, falling as low as 25 per cent and finishing third behind the Tories and Liberal Democrats. The Conservatives expect to secure more than 40 per cent with strong gains in northern England.

Results are expected overnight for more than 100 councils, but voters elsewhere - including London - will only have the results on Friday night.

Faced with the possibility of a heavy defeat, the Prime Minister is already planning an aggressive "relaunch" campaign, with new policies, a contrite and listening tone and a fresh attempt to expose divisions with the Conservatives, party sources said. His closest advisers have been drawing up plans to limit the damage.

In particular, Mr Brown is planning to unveil a draft Queen’s Speech at the end of this month to show that he is not running out of steam. It is expected to include measures on welfare, education reforms and involving the community in tackling crime.

Full list of candidates to be London Mayor:

Ken Livingstone (Labour Party)

Boris Johnson (Conservative Party)

Brian Paddick (Liberal Democrats)

Sian Berry (Green Party)

Gerard Batten (UK Independence Party)

Richard Barnbrook (British National Party)

Alan Craig (Christian Peoples Alliance and Christian Party)

Lindsey German (Left List)

Winston McKenzie (Independent)

Matt O'Connor (English Democrats)

Litter

LITTER louts are being named and shamed in a drive to keep the streets of Greater Manchester clean.

Councils in Manchester, Bury and Stockport have turned to the web to publish details of offenders.

Litterbugs caught dropping any type of waste can be hit with a fixed penalty notice. Those who fail to pay the fine can be prosecuted in court and fined hundreds of pounds.

Stockport is the latest council to take on the idea of naming and shaming offenders online.

Anyone now refusing to pay the £75 fixed penalty fine and convicted in court will have their name and address published on the council's website.

A new team of officers is spearheading the clean up drive, which has the message `waste will not be tolerated'.

It comes weeks after a man and woman, both from Reddish, were fined £334 each at Stockport magistrates following separate incidents of littering.

The man was in his car outside a pie shop and seen to throw several wrappers under the vehicle. The woman was seen dropping cigarette wrappers and walking off.

Stockport council's Stuart Jackson said: "The council takes littering offences very seriously and we will issue a fixed penalty notice to anyone caught dropping litter. It is a disgusting, anti-social habit."

Details of people convicted of a littering offence will also be sent to the local media.

Bury and Manchester have already introduced `name and shame' schemes in a bid to cut down on litter louts.

A spokeswoman for Bury council said: "We get a lot of complaints and we want the people of Bury to know we take this seriously. If we name and shame then hopefully they will not do it again."

Other Greater Manchester councils do not have a policy of publicising details of people convicted of litter offences.

But the M.E.N revealed in February how Oldham had introduced a scheme where litter louts were given the option of paying the fine or spending a day sweeping the streets.

The first person to take part was Gary Stevenson, from Delph, who was caught dropping chip wrappers.

This month the M.E.N reported how Samuel Grundy, 23, of Edmund Street, Seedley, Salford, was hauled before the courts and fined £200, plus £215 costs, after pleading guilty to littering and knowingly giving false details to an officer after being tracked down using CCTV.