Netanyahu knows his identity and his nation's. He believes Israel is not merely a Jewish state, but, a giver and guardian of profound civilizing values. As Winston Churchill wrote long ago, "The Hebrew tribes wandering in the wilderness, though indistinguishable from numberless nomadic communities, grasped and proclaimed an idea of which all the genius of Greece and all the power of Rome were incapable." It's no wonder Cal Thomas called Netanyahu's speech "Churchillian". Whether one agrees with Churchill's assessment or not, Netanyahu, as he spoke, pointing at Moses' visage displayed in the congressional chamber, certainly does. He no doubt sees such a legacy as integral to his leadership of Israel. Because he has such a grasp of his country's historic identity he has piercingly clear understanding of its interests.

Netanyahu's speech March 3 showed that he doesn't only know his history, but is passionate about it. It made one yearn to watch an American President at that august podium speaking with such conviction of his nation's historic richness and core identity. Which brings us to the search for Obama. In recent times it has been literal. During the "I Am Charley" marches in Paris – where Netanyahu, by the way, was helping lead the pack whether people wanted him there or not – the world asked, "Where is Obama?" And yet there is a deeper, more urgent question: "Who is Obama?"

I do not mean this in a "birther" sense, but as it relates to presuppositions, worldview, and the philosophies that guide his policies. Captain Queeg was terribly confused about those fundamentals personally, and sailed the good ship Caine toward the shoals and shipwreck. While Netanyahu seeks to steer his ship of state out of harm's way, Obama seems to be guiding America into a collision with the rocky beach. Why does he do this? The question can only be answered against the backdrop of the other, again: Who is Barack Obama?

Here's the harsh reality of the contemporary complicated world: Israel knows who it is and what its interests are. Iran knows who it is and what its interests are. ISIS knows who it is and what its interests are. North Korea knows who it is and what its interests are. In such a world a foreign policy of ambiguity and uncertainty about national interests and identity is irrelevant to the situation – deadly so. As many Americans – and others, Netanyahu, maybe – are searching for Obama, there's a sense in which Obama is searching for America. Let us hope he finds it soon.

March represents a crucial four weeks for Syriza. Greece is due to make a €1.5 billion repayment of its loans to the International Monetary fund this month. Its first €300 million payment is due on Friday, in addition to more than $4.5 billion in short-term bond redemptions that will also mature later this month. Given that the country will not receive its bail-out cash until April at the earliest, the new Leftist government has already hinted that it may have to delay fulfilling its obligations to the IMF.

Should it fail to make its loan repayments, Greece would join an ignominious list of international pariahs and war-torn failed states, and become the only developed economy to renege on its commitments to the Fund in 70 years. But the squeeze on the country's public finances shows no sign of abating. Capital flight accelerated to €64 million last week, according to JP Morgan. Greek bank deposits have reached their lowest level in more than a decade and tax revenues have collapsed since January.

Finance minister Yanis Varoufakis has sought to calm the tensions by vowing to "squeeze blood out of stone" in order to pay back the IMF. "We shall do it," he told the Associated Press earlier this week. But the Greeks are running out of options fast. "Even if Greece can avoid a default over the coming months, they will not be able to honour bonds worth a total of €6.7 billion between July and August without further official funds," said Diego Iscaro at IHS Global.

Taxpayers have had enough of paying for the country’s increasingly crisis-ridden banking sector, and have determined to bail in private creditors to the remnants of this financial road crash instead - to the tune of $8.5 billion in the specific case of Hypo Alpe-Adria. Finally, creditors are being made to pay for the consequences of their own folly.

You might have thought that a financial crisis as serious as that of the past seven years would have ended the world economy’s addiction to debt once and for all. It has not. If anything, the position has grown even worse since the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Where the West left off, Asia has taken up the pace, with a credit-induced real estate bubble that makes its pre-crisis Western counterpart look tame by comparison, much of it fuelled, as in Western economies, by growth in the shadow banking sector.

China’s total indebtedness has quadrupled since 2007 to $28 trillion, according to estimates by McKinsey. At 282 percent of GDP, the debt burden is now bigger, relative to output, than the US. The world is sinking under a sea of debt, private as well as public, and it is increasingly hard to see how this might end, except in some form of mass default. How might the present explosion in debt end? The only thing that can be said with certainty is “badly”.

Genealogists at the number 1 family history website revealed that President Obama's German ancestor was born Johann Conrad Wolflin on January 29, 1729. He immigrated in 1750, sailing to America on the ship Patience. Johann Conrad changed his last name to Wolfley once he settled among other German immigrants in Pennsylvania. His son, Ludwig Wolfley, President Obama's 5th great-grandfather, was born in 1766 in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. This research confirms that President Obama is one of the 17 percent of Americans with German ancestry.

Obama responded in the Oval Office, declaring in a frustrated tone that Netanyahu offered "nothing new." In its response, the Iranian government denounced Netanyahu's 39-minute speech as "boring and repetitive," the state news agency IRNA said.

"If the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran, that deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons - it will all but guarantee that Iran will get those nuclear weapons, lots of them," the Israeli leader said, offering a point-by-point critique of Obama's strategy.

In an appearance boycotted by dozens of Obama's fellow Democrats, Netanyahu said Iran's leadership was "as radical as ever," could not be trusted and the deal being worked out with world powers would not block Iran's way to a bomb "but paves its way to a bomb." "This deal won't be a farewell to arms, it will be a farewell to arms control ... a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare," Netanyahu told lawmakers and visitors in the House of Representatives. His speech drew 26 standing ovations.

Netanyahu said he was grateful to Obama for his public and private support of Israel, including US military assistance and contributions to Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system. "I regret that some see my appearance here as political," he said. "I know that no matter which side of the aisle you sit on, you stand with Israel." Although given the cold shoulder by the US administration, Netanyahu on Monday offered an olive branch, saying he meant no disrespect to Obama by accepting an invitation orchestrated by the Republicans.

“I can guarantee you this: The days when the Jewish people remain passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over,” he told lawmakers. “We are no longer scattered among the nations powerless to defend ourselves, we restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend ourselves have boundless courage. For the first time in a hundred generations, we the Jewish people can defend ourselves. Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”

Netanyahu believes the deal could lead to a “potential nuclear nightmare.” “If anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs, and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare,” he said.

The tensions between US and Israeli leaders will be welcome. Nothing Mr Netanyahu can say will derail a nuclear deal if one is really possible. And if there is no deal, why then Nr Netanyahu may well have to share some of the blame rather than just Tehran. In the short term, it is a win-win for Iran.

This though is a strategic moment for the Iranians and they would do well to disregard the "noises off" from the ebullient Mr Netanyahu. The obituaries for the Israel-US relationship may also be premature. For many years, Iran has been seen in the West as the prime author of instability in the region, given its support for Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and its meddling in a variety of other conflicts.

No matter that it was US policy in destroying Saddam Hussein's Iraq that vaulted Tehran into this position of regional ambition. Iran had suddenly become a player to be reckoned with. And now even more so given the chaos in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. And these same strategic concerns are playing into the debate over its nuclear programme as well. To be clear, a nuclear deal between Iran and the West is still no certainty.

But there is also a downside. What if we rapidly reach a point where one must be connected to the Internet in order to function in society? Will there come a day when we can’t even do basic things such as buy, sell, get a job or open a bank account without it?

And what about the potential for government abuse? Could an “Internet of Things” create a dystopian nightmare where everyone and everything will be constantly monitored and tracked by the government? That is something to think about. Today, the Internet has become such an integral part of our lives that it is hard to remember how we ever survived without it. And with each passing year, the number of devices connected to the Internet continues to grow at an exponential rate.

But there is also a dark side to the Internet of Things. Security is a huge issue, and when that security is compromised the consequences can be absolutely horrifying. The Internet allows us to reach into the outside world from inside our homes, but it also allows the reverse to take place as well. Do we really want to make ourselves that vulnerable? Sadly, we live at a time when people don’t really stop to consider the downside to our exploding technological capabilities.

The Guardian notes that global debt is now more than twice the size of the entire global economy: Total debt as a share of GDP stood at 286% in the second quarter of 2014 compared with 269% in the fourth quarter of 2007. (That’s more than 2.8 times the size of the world economy.)

And it will only keep getting worse: Government debt-to-GDP ratios will continue to rise over the next five years in a number of countries including Japan, the US and most European countries…

As Reuters reports, Athens is running out of options to fund itself despite striking a deal with the euro zone in February to extend its bailout by four months. Faced with a steep fall in revenues, it is expected to run out of cash by the end of March, possibly sooner.

Of course, this public pension fund 'cash' will all be repaid when Greece returns to growth and pays down its debt... We are sure the Greek people will be enthused when they find out what the 'radical left' has in store for their funds...

According to German newspaper reports citing government and intelligence officials in Berlin, the Bundestag’s inquiry into the NSA controversy is being jeopardised by Britain’s refusal to cooperate and its threats to break off all intelligence-sharing with Berlin should the committee reveal any UK secrets.

The weekly magazine Focus reported last month that a national security aide to David Cameron had written to Peter Altmaier, Angela Merkel’s chief of staff, refusing all requests for help in the inquiry and warning that Britain would cease supplying terrorism-related intelligence to the Germans unless Berlin yielded.

It emerged during the NSA revelations that the Americans had hacked into Merkel’s mobile phone, generating outrage in Germany and feeding growing anti-American sentiment.

'At the moment I can say that we are not aware of any plan to attack the Vatican or the [Pope],' he added in the interview, published on the magazine's website on Monday. Giani has a force of some 130 agents protecting most of the Vatican and the Pope, with the help of the more ceremonial Swiss Guard. The Italian police guard the exterior, as well as St Peter's Square. Twenty of his agents, Giani explained, have specialist anti-terror training and guard the Pope when he's abroad.

He told Polizia Moderna: 'Twenty Vatican bodyguards have received special training that makes them suitable also ready to use in anti-terrorist actions. Some of them accompany the Pope during his international travels.' The security operation at the Vatican is aided by a command and control centre that Giani says has a 'high level' of technology, along with thousands of surveillance cameras.

Last month, in a video showing the beheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya, one of the killers said: 'Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for ... We will conquer Rome, by the will of Allah.'

A formal announcement will be made on Thursday when the NPC opens. China has seen several years of double-digit defence spending increases. It is the world's second-highest military spender, but remains far behind the US. Last year, China's defence spending rose 12.2% to $130 billion (£85 billion). In comparison, for the fiscal year 2016 US President Barack Obama has requested a budget of $585 billion.

China says the spending is required to modernise the People's Liberation Army - the world's largest standing military. It is pouring investment into hi-tech equipment such as submarines and stealth jets, reports the BBC's Martin Patience in Beijing. It has also been investing in naval forces, including an aircraft carrier. Recent media reports that a second was being built were swiftly deleted.

China's neighbours are closely watching its military investment. In recent years Beijing has taken a more assertive stance on maritime territorial disputes with both Japan and South East Asian nations, leading to a rise in regional tensions. In response, Japan has begun increasing its military budget, as has India - which has a disputed land border with China.

Most people love ready meals, however; three billion were eaten in Britain in 2012 and they make up the biggest sector of the country's £70 billion annual retail food budget. Processed food is everywhere, despite numerous news stories warning of the dangers. In the past few days headlines, taken from my book, highlighted the risks of eating bagged salad: the greenery can be as much as ten days old and have been submerged up to eight hours in tap water heavy with chlorine, to inhibit bacteria. Citric, tartaric and other fruit acids are also painted on to the leaves to keep them looking fresh. It sounds revolting but it does not stop millions from buying bagged leaves.

The key to the success of processed food is simple: it is not only quick and simple but reliable. As one 'food technology executive' or ready-meal scientist told me: 'Our objective is to see that the consumer gets the same taste experience every time.' This means the ingredients must be identical and that demands mass production; food preparation on an industrial scale, so that it barely looks like food at all. In fact, food manufacturers, the companies that supply ready meals to supermarkets, carry out little or no preparation of raw ingredients. Instead, they buy treated ingredients, mainly frozen or dried, from a range of other companies and cook them. The convenience food chain that supplies the consumer is made up of many links, which often cross continents. The supermarkets sub-contract work to the food manufacturers, who get various food processing plants to do the work for them.

When an ITV investigation on the Tonight programme analysed a typical supermarket 'British lamb hotpot' ready meal, it discovered the ingredients were from ten countries and included New Zealand lamb, Israeli carrots, Argentine beef bones and Majorcan potatoes. Irish authorities were equally shocked to discover that a pizza bearing the label 'country of origin Ireland' in fact contained 35 ingredients that had passed through 60 countries during preparation and packaging.

Their thousands of employees work long, demanding shifts of 12 hours or more, behind walls with no windows. We are told that is to guard the secret recipes from industrial espionage, but if you could peep in, you might understand the immense economies of scale: half a million kebabs processed in one day, or ten tons of chicken tikka, is nothing unusual for a busy plant. The workers tend to be young. They have to be, to withstand the conditions in these usually bone-chillingly cold factories. Typically, 90 per cent of the workers come from Eastern Europe and the Baltic states. There is no chat or camaraderie in these places: to protect their hearing from the din of the gargantuan machinery, they must wear earplugs. The smells are nauseating; a stench of fat in the snack factories, the pungent reek of flesh in the meat plants.

The facilities for microwave meals are worse; the air thick with the scent of tomato sauce and the starchy, sticky béchamel (white sauce) with its fragrance of regurgitated baby milk. A ready-meal factory can be churning out 250,000 portions a day, using 60 or 70 different ingredients, combining ten assembly lines. That means that when problems arise, millions of packets on the supermarket shelves could be affected. The food and drink industry now uses more than 150 GM enzymes, but you won't see them listed on the labels. The European Commission is aware of this, but has granted them 'Generally Regarded As Safe' status: one recent Euro report stated that GM 'might lead to enzymes not present in nature so far'. To the ready-meal scientists, this might sound like a recipe for cheaper foods and bigger profits. But to the people who are buying these products, unaware of what they are putting on their plates, it is more like the plot of a sci-fi horror movie.

The Army, Royal Air Force and Royal Navy have all suffered cutbacks to the extent that they are no longer able to undertake the kind of missions that Britain has historically supported. Now, General Raymond Odierno, the Chief of Staff of the US army, who has fought alongside British forces in several conflicts, including the recent campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, has become the latest senior officer to express his concerns in public, telling The Daily Telegraph when I met him in Washington last week that he is “very concerned” about the impact the cuts are having.

His comments, moreover, came after President Barack Obama had taken issue with David Cameron when he visited the White House in January. He warned the Prime Minister of the dangers of allowing British defence expenditure to fall below the 2 per cent of GDP threshold required by our Nato membership. For there are growing fears that cuts will jeopardise a central tenet of the post-Second World War transatlantic alliance – namely, that Britain can be counted upon to provide military hardware to US-led campaigns in defence of Western interests.

Whether it is dealing with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, or preventing Afghanistan from becoming a haven for Islamist terror groups, it has been a long-standing assumption of US military planning that Britain would deploy a combat force in excess of 10,000 men, as well as the fighter aircraft and naval vessels.

And yet, while the Coalition shows little concern for the damage inflicted on Britain’s military capabilities, it remains committed to ring-fencing the foreign aid budget to 0.7 per cent of GDP, with the result that much-needed resources are being squandered overseas that could usefully be spent on strengthening the nation’s defences. For example, following the Coalition’s decision to scrap the RAF’s Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft, we no longer have the ability to track the activities of Russian nuclear attack submarines in the North Sea. A simple, cost-effective replacement would be to purchase the Boeing P8 Poseidon, with similar capabilities, which the RAF estimates would cost around £200 million a year – a reasonable investment, you might think, given the state of tensions between London and Moscow.

By coincidence, £200 million is exactly the same amount of money Britain donates to India in foreign aid each year. As a result of its generosity, Britain cannot afford the P8; India, on the other hand, has a fleet of the aircraft to protect its own territorial waters.