Though the majority of Americans continue to claim to be Christians, a Gallup poll discovered 45 percent of us would support an atheist for president. Such a survey is a clear indication that the secularization of society is alive and well.

Today many more antagonist groups and individuals to theism abound, and they are using every means possible for global proliferation from local government to the World Wide Web. Such secular progressives include the Institute for Humanist Studies, Secular Coalition of America, American Atheists, American Humanist Association, Internet Infidels, the Atheist Alliance International, Secular Student Alliance, Society for Humanistic Judaism, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, etc. Of course no list of atheistic advocates would be complete without mentioning the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, as well as the anti-God militancy of men like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.

HOW TO OUTLAW CHRISTIANITY-Step 1: Initiate restrictions and legislation against theism and Christianity

For these liberal groups to win the war of ideological dominance, they know they must minimize the effects of Christianity.
The London Telegraph noted that, while American Christians were praying across the land on the National Day of Prayer, atheists were petitioning the Texas Legislature against the civic display of the words, "In God We Trust." Eroding and erasing theistic language in culture is a growing trend. Earlier this year George Washington dollar coins were not only inscribed with the WORDS "IN GOD WE TRUST" ONLY ON THEIR EDGES, but MANY EXCLUDED THEM ENTIRELY! Such minting modifications are a flagrant defiance against theism and a public reflection of the place GOD IS NOW RELEGATED TO THE FRINGES OF SOCIETY.

Step two: Target younger generations with atheism

Atheists are making a concerted effort to win the youth of America and the world. Hundreds of web sites and blogs on the Internet seek to convince and convert adolescents, endeavoring to remove any residue of theism from their minds and hearts by PACKAGING ATHEISM AS THE CHOICE OF A NEW GENERATION. What's preposterous is that atheists are now advertising and soliciting on websites particularly created for teens. The London Telegraph noted that, "Groups including Atheists for Human Rights and Atheist Alliance International are setting up summer camps and an internet recruiting campaign."

Even Oxford scientist Richard Dawkins is on personal campaign and militant quest to spread his name, books, and atheism all over the Internet by hoping young people will post his graphics on their MySpace page. Rather than question or critique his methods as slick marketing, young atheists are proud to post his links, follow and defend him like a religious sage, AND CITE HIS TEXTS AS INFALLIBLE TRUTH.

Step three: package and promote atheism as reasonable and scientific

Presenting atheism as scientific fact might be secularists' greatest plan and others point of greatest gullibility, in hope of winning the battle for the ultimate view of reality. And hailed as their chief advocates are men like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, Oxford University's ethologist and evolutionary biologist, with his book, "The God Delusion," atheists' newest "bible" or authoritative text.

O what credentials does a man like Dawkins have to discuss the presence or absence of God? Answer: He's "a scientist." And the fact is anyone in our age who is a naturalist professor or wears a white lab coat can virtually speak upon any issue (even God) and their words are received as gospel unless of course they are a theist!

What's interesting is that atheists like Dawkins fall into the same snare they accuse of theists. To make dogmatic assertions about the absence of God and not possess expertise in cosmology, astrophysics, or even theology gives him no more of a credible platform than you and me, except to his devoted followers of course. HE IS AN ETHOLOGIST AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST - SINCE WHEN DOES THAT MAKE ONE AN EXPERT ON GOD? (Similarly, Sam Harris has a bachelor's in philosophy - since when does that make one an expert on the universe?)

Hawkins condemns Christians for being narrow minded and non-adaptive to other cultures which believed in Thor or Zeus, yet he is unwavering in disrespecting any other creation authority except Western science. Just because SCIENCE CAN EXPLAIN MANY THINGS IN THE NATURAL REALM, does that mean it owns the corner market on metaphysics and God? Is it possible that the scientific worldview is inferior to reveal the truths behind the curtain of creation?

Of course for men like Harris, Dawkins, and other atheists, the thought that science cannot provide these ultimate answers must be a horrifying reality to face, as their whole lives depend upon the western-scientific paradigm of reality.

Their predicament reminds me of the words of Robert Jastrow, American astronomer, physicist, and cosmologist, from his work, "God and the Astronomers". " The universe has a beginning. This is an exceedingly strange development, unexpected by all but the theologians. They have always accepted the word of the Bible: In the beginning God created heaven and earth. For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

Once again the Bible is proven correct, "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no god.'

Peter F. Drucker, in one of his dozens of best-selling books, "Post Capitalist Society, published in 1993, wrote that the European Community, the progenitor of the European Union, "triggered the attempt to create a North American economic community, built around the United States but integrating both Canada and Mexico into a common market."

"So far this attempt is purely economic in its goal," wrote the Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree. "But it can hardly remain so in the long run."

Drucker describes in his book the worldwide trends toward globalization that were evident back then the creation and empowerment of transnational organizations and institutions, international environmental goals regarding carbon dioxide and agreements to fight terrorism long before 9/11. But it is insight into what he describes as the advanced stage of North American integration that is striking in the context of so much doubt even today.

In the 40 YEARS SINCE THE MIDDLE EAST WAR OF JUNE 1967, there have been many peace plans and many negotiations. Some of these have been successful, including those between Egypt and Israel and Israel and Jordan, but a settlement has still not been reached in the core conflict, the dispute between the Israelis and Palestinians.

SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 242, 1967. This was passed on 22 November 1967 and embodies the principle that has guided most of the subsequent peace plans - the exchange of land for peace.
The resolution is famous for the imprecision of its central phase concerning an Israeli withdrawal - it says simply "from territories". The Israelis said this did not necessarily mean all territories, but Arab negotiators argued that it did.

CAMP DAVID ACCORDS, 1978. There were several peace plans following the 1967 war, including one by Yigal Allon, an Israeli general who proposed that Israel give back to Jordan the highlands of the West Bank while retaining a defensive line along the Jordan valley.
The second accord was the framework for the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel. This followed in 1979, after an Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai. This was the first recognition of Israel as a state by a major Arab country. They probably stand as the most successful negotiations in the whole peace process.

THE MADRID CONFERENCE, 1991. This conference, co-sponsored by the US and the Soviet Union, was designed to follow up the Egypt-Israel treaty by encouraging other Arab countries to sign their own agreements with Israel. Jordan, Lebanon and Syria were invited as well as Israel and Egypt. The Palestinians were also represented. The symbolism of Arab countries other than Egypt openly negotiating with Israel was probably the main achievement of the Madrid conference.

ISRAELI - SYRIAN TALKS, 1991. After the Madrid conference in 1991, direct talks began between Israel and Syria. Syria's main demand was for a full Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, the plateau overlooking the Sea of Galilee that Israel had captured in 1967. Any Israeli treaty with Lebanon is expected to have to wait until after one with Syria, given Syria's influence in Lebanon.

THE OSLO AGREEMENT, 1993. The Oslo negotiations tried to tackle the missing element of all previous talks - a direct agreement between Israelis and Palestinians, represented by the PLO. Its importance was that there was finally mutual recognition between Israel and the PLO. Hamas and other Palestinian rejectionist groups did not accept Oslo and launched suicide bomb attacks on Israelis.

CAMP DAVID, 2000. Various attempts were made to speed up the withdrawal and self-government provisions of Oslo. The talks took place in July between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. There was no agreement. However, the negotiations were more detailed than ever before. The failure at Camp David was followed by a renewal of the Palestinian uprising or intifada.

TABA, 2001. Although he was about to leave office, Bill Clinton refused to give up and he presented a "bridging proposal" which set up further talks in Washington and Cairo and then Taba in Egypt. With the election of Ariel Sharon in February 2001, time ran out.

SUADI PEACE PLAN, 2002. After the failure of bilateral talks and the resumption of conflict, the Saudi peace plan presented at an Arab summit in Beirut in March 2002 went back to a multilateral approach and in particular signalled a desire by the Arab world as a whole to put an end to this dispute. Its strength is the support given by Arab countries to a two-state solution. Its weakness is that the parties have to negotiate the same issues on which they have failed so far.

THE ROAD MAP, 2003. The road map is a plan drawn up the "Quartet" - the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations. It does not lay down the details of a final settlement, but suggests how a settlement might be approached. The road map has not been implemented. Its timetable called for the final agreement to be reached in 2005. It has been overtaken by events.

GENEVA ACCORD, 2003. While official efforts foundered, an informal agreement was announced in December 2003 by Israeli and Palestinian figures - Yossi Beilin, one of the architects of Oslo, on the Israeli side, and former Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo on the other. The Geneva agreement has no official status.

CURRENT POSITION. There are currently no peace talks. The government of Ariel Sharon decided on a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the construction of a wall and fence to separate the Israelis and Palestinians.
The new government of Ehud Olmert, elected after Mr Sharon's incapacitation, planned a further unilateral withdrawal from parts of the West Bank but the war with Hezbollah in 2006 put that on hold.
The Palestinian Authority is now run by Hamas, which has rejected a full recognition of Israel and refused to endorse previous agreements. It is in a struggle for power with the Fatah movement led by the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who took over after the death of Yasser Arafat.

Full article:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6666393.stm

He has been briefed by White House officials to expect an announcement on British troop withdrawals from Mr Brown during his first 100 days in power. It would be designed to boost the new prime minister's popularity in the opinion polls.Details of the talks came as a close ally of Mr Brown called for a quicker withdrawal of British troops. Nigel Griffiths, a former minister, said: "We should get out of Iraq as soon as is practicable. We should consult the Iraqi government - but they cannot have a veto. This cannot be delayed."

Mr Griffiths, who resigned as deputy leader of the Commons this year over the decision to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system, spoke out as reports suggested that Mr Brown would use an early trip to Iraq to reassess Britain's role and accelerate the withdrawal. Revelation of the US fears will reinforce expectations in Westminster that Mr Brown will make a decisive break with Mr Blair's support for the war.

Senior figures in the National Security Council, the Pentagon and the State Department in Washington have expressed fears about Mr Brown.They believe that cordial relations between the two leaders will be "at an end" if the incoming premier plays "gesture politics" over Iraq.

One senior official said: "There is a sense of foreboding. We don't know if he will be there when we need him. We expect a gesture that will greatly weaken the United States government's position." Mark Kirk, a Republican congressman who discussed Iraq policy at the White House last week, said: "The American view is that he's a much weaker political leader than Blair. There's the fear in Washington that he won't be as strong an ally."

A source close to the Chancellor said last night: "These fears are unfounded. Gordon is a committed Atlanticist who wants to strengthen and deepen our ties with America around our shared values, and who wants to persuade the rest of Europe to work in closer co-operation with America."

The number of British troops in Iraq is being cut from 7,100 at the start of the year to 5,500 - but there is no official timetable for full-scale withdrawal.

The 1,850-ton Kang Song Ho with a crew of 27 anchored near the southeastern port of Busan early Sunday for inspections by South Korean maritime authorities, said Kim Na-young, a coast guard official.

Kim said the ship?the first North Korean cargo vessel to arrive in South Korea for commercial business since the 1950-53 Korean War?would dock at Busan port on Monday.

The North Korean ship will "carry cargoes between Busan and the North's northeastern port of Rajin three times a month," said Lee Won- jae, an official for Kukbo Express Co., a South Korean agent for the North's cargo ship.

The ship was expected to depart Busan as early as Monday after loading 60 empty containers, said Lee.
Officials handling the issue at South Korea's Unification Ministry were not immediately available for comment.

North and South Korea are still technically at war as the Korean War ended in a cease-fire, not a peace treaty. But their relations have warmed significantly since the first and only summit of their leaders in 2000.

His delight at the five-year cruise is chronicled in a letter, available online for the first time.
The note is one of nearly 5,000 from and to the scientist held in a database at the University of Cambridge.
The Darwin Correspondence project includes summaries of a further 9,000 letters, written from the age of 12.
Darwin was a prolific letter writer, exchanging correspondence with nearly 2,000 people during his lifetime (1809-1882). Nearly 14,500 of his letters are known to exist, with the biggest collection residing in Cambridge.

"Letters were absolutely essential to what Darwin was doing," said Dr Pearn. "This is how he gathered data, how he gathered ideas, how he discussed ideas."
The Darwin Correspondence project has existed offline since 1974. It has so far published 15 volumes of the scientist's letters as books.

An agreement with the publisher of the books means the new website will offer digitised versions of the texts freely available to anyone four years behind the hard copies.

Nearly 5,000 pieces of correspondence will be fully searchable when the site launches on Thursday 17 May.
"This is good news for everyone," said Dr John van Wyhe, project director of Darwin Online, a separate project also based at the University of Cambridge.

"DARWIN WAS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT FIGURES IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE. HE CHANGED FOREVER OUR UNDERSTANDING OF LIFE ON EARTH."
Set up in 2002, Darwin Online is putting Darwin's publications and non-correspondence manuscripts on the web. It also has downloadable audio files and images.

The firm had said it would change the whey used in some of its products from a vegetarian source to one with traces of the animal enzyme, rennet. Rennet is extracted from calves' stomachs and was to have been used in the ice cream versions of all Masterfoods' bars too.

The Vegetarian Society organised a campaign against the move, asking members to voice their concerns to parent company Masterfoods. Mars said it became "very clear, very quickly" that it had made a mistake. In just one week, more than 6,000 people bombarded the company, which produces the Mars, Snickers, Maltesers and Galaxy brands, with phone and e-mail complaints. Forty MPs also signed a petition to voice their opposition.

Fiona Dawson, managing director of Mars UK, said the company had listened to customers and decided to reverse its decision. "The consumer is our boss and we had lots of feedback from consumers who were unhappy about the change," Ms Dawson said. "It became very clear, very quickly that we had made a mistake, for which I am sorry.

"THERE ARE THREE MILLION VEGETARIANS IN THE UK and not only did we disappoint them, but we upset a lot of the consumers." The Vegetarian Society had called the move by Mars "incomprehensible" and "a backward step" at a time when consumers were increasingly concerned about "the provenance of their food".
Mars replied that, by admitting its products were no longer suitable for "extremely strict vegetarians", it was making a "principled decision".

Dr Annette Pinner, chief executive of the Vegetarian Society, said she was pleased Mars had been "honest enough" to admit it had "made a mistake". "A Masterfoods representative has made contact with us and we are very pleased that they now recognise the importance of integrity to all their customers, especially vegetarians," she added.

The government has estimated that ID fraud cost the UK £1.7bn last year and according to CIFAS, the UK's fraud prevention service, identity theft has risen more than six-fold from 20,000 cases in 1999 to 137,000 in 2005.
Part of the reason for this dramatic surge is that with our growing addiction to broadband, personal data can increasingly be found online.

In 1996 there were no electronic public records in the UK. Today there are nearly 700 million. Couple that with the fact that ID fraud is such a profitable enterprise, it is no wonder that ID thieves have turned to the web for their data raids.

"Criminals are always looking for new ways to make money, online identity theft and fraud are the latest techniques," said Detective Chief Superintendent Nigel Mawer at the Metropolitan Police Economic and Specialist Crime Unit. "Individuals have an asset called their identity," said Dr Tom Ilube, CEO of Garlik. "It is valuable to you and valuable to those people that want to abuse it. People need to be careful."

TEN POINT GUIDE TO PROTECTING YOUR IDENTITY ONLINE

Operate on the internet in the same way as you do offline
Question why a Web site is asking for information
Never give online security details unless completely necessary
Look after your password
Never click on links in emails
Keep security software up-to-date
Remove spyware
Keep your internet connection secure using encryption
If it seems too good to be true, it probably is

Source: Security Report Online Identity Theft

Virtually everyone in the UK carries a mobile phone which can increasingly pinpoint our location to within 100m.
Satellite navigation devices continue to fly off shelves as we are persuaded to ditch the unwieldy .

Increasingly, mobile phone companies are offering location-based services to allow users to find restaurants and other amenities via their phones. Smartcards, such as Transport for London's Oyster card, are allowing us to travel without the need to fiddle for small change. While all of these technologies are hugely convenient, they are also becoming our very own pocket-based stalkers.

The need to balance the convenience of new technology while preserving our privacy formed the subject of a debate between privacy experts in London this week. "Three-quarters of us have our whereabouts known by mobile operators and, by extension, law enforcement" said one of the panellists, Jonathan Raper, professor of geographic information science at City University, London.

While satellite navigation systems are currently stand-alone systems for our own personal use, IMAGINE A SCENARIO WHERE SATELLITE NAVIGATION COMPANIES OFFER TRAFFIC OR SPEEDING TRANSGRESSIONS TO THE POLICE WITHOUT CONSULTING THE OWNER of the device. "Then ask yourself, whether you are concerned about privacy?" said Mr Raper.

It is not just offline activities that can be mapped. Where we go on the web has become one of the most traceable of all our footprints and we routinely give out personal information which in turn creates vast data trails.
"IT IS VERY EASY TO COLLECT ALL OF OUR DATA AND THE FACT THAT IT IS THERE MEANS GOVERNMENTS WILL COME UP WITH A GOOD LIST OF REASONS AS TO WHY THEY NEED ACCESS"- said Caspar Bowden, Chief Privacy Advisor, EMEA Microsoft

Deputy chief constable of Hampshire Ian Readhead said Britain could become a surveillance society with cameras on every street corner. He told the BBC's Politics Show that CCTV was being used in small towns and villages where crime rates were low. Mr Readhead also called for the retention of some DNA evidence and the use of speed cameras to be reviewed.

His force area includes the small town of Stockbridge, where parish councillors have spent £10,000 installing CCTV. Mr Readhead questioned whether the relatively low crime levels justified the expense and intrusion. There are up to 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people. The UK also has the world's biggest DNA database, with 3.6 million DNA samples on file.

He also said he could go to jail for taking a group of volunteers suffering ill health after helping in the September 11, 2001 rescue efforts on an unauthorized trip to Cuba, where they received exemplary treatment at virtually no cost.

The controversial film maker is back in Cannes, where he won the film festival's highest honor in 2004 with his anti-Bush polemic "Fahrenheit 9/11". In "SiCKO" he turns his attention to health, asking why 50 million Americans, 9 million of them children, live without cover, while those that are insured are often driven to poverty by spiraling costs or wrongly refused treatment at all.

But the movie, which has taken Cannes by storm, goes further by PORTRAYING A COUNTRY WHERE THE GOVERNMENT IS MORE INTERESTED IN PERSONAL PROFIT AND PROTECTING BIG BUSINESS THAN CARING FOR ITS CITIZENS, MANY OF WHOM CANNOT AFFORD HEALTH INSURANCE.

One of the most controversial passages of the film, due to be released in the United States on June 29, compares health care in the United States to that which Islamic militant suspects receive at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. "I think when Americans see this they are not going to focus on Cuba or Fidel Castro," Moore said, referring to the controversy surrounding his trip to Cuba, which has prompted a U.S. government investigation.

"They are going to say to themselves, 'YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THE AL QAEDA DETAINEES ARE RECEIVING BETTER HEALTH CARE, THE PEOPLE THAT HELPED PARTICIPATE IN THE ATTACKS OF 9/11 ARE RECEIVING BETTER HEALTH CARE FROM US THAN THOSE WHO WENT DOWN TO RESCUE THOSE WHO SUFFERED AND DIED ON 9/11?"

Moore added that he was taking the investigation seriously. "I'm the one who's personally being investigated and I'm the one who's personally liable for potential fines or jail, so I don't take it lightly."

Man's contribution to the greenhouse gases was so small we couldn't change the climate if we tried, he maintained. "We're all going to survive this. It's all going to be a joke in five years," he said.

A combination of misinterpreted and misguided science, media hype, and political spin had created the current hysteria and it was time to put a stop to it. "It is time to attack the myth of global warming," he said. Water vapour was responsible for 95 per cent of the greenhouse effect, an effect which was vital to keep the world warm, he explained.

"If we didn't have the greenhouse effect the planet would be at minus 18 deg C but because we do have the greenhouse effect it is plus 15 deg C, all the time." The other greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide, and various others including CFCs, contributed only five per cent of the effect, carbon dioxide being by far the greatest contributor at 3.6 per cent.

However, carbon dioxide as a result of man's activities was only 3.2 per cent of that, hence only 0.12 per cent of the greenhouse gases in total. Human-related methane, nitrogen dioxide and CFCs etc made similarly minuscule contributions to the effect: 0.066, 0.047 and 0.046 per cent respectively. "That ought to be the end of the argument, there and then," he said.

"We couldn't do it (change the climate) even if we wanted to because water vapour dominates." Yet the Greens continued to use phrases such as "The planet is groaning under the weight of CO2" and Government policies were about to hit industries such as farming, he warned. "The Greens are really going to go after you because you put out 49 per cent of the countries emissions. Does anybody ask 49 per cent of what? Does anybody know how small that number is?

"It's become a witch-hunt; a Salem witch-hunt," he said.

Tony Blair, who supported the new constitution, nevertheless said: "What you cannot do is have a situation where you get a rejection of the treaty and bring it back with a few amendments AND SAY, 'HAVE ANOTHER GO.' YOU CANNOT DO THAT."

I'M AFRAID YOU CAN, AND THEY ARE, AND MR BLAIR DOESN'T MIND. In April, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, sent a questionnaire to all the EU heads of government. How could they best get the constitution back on the road, she wanted to know. HOW ABOUT SOME "PRESENTATIONAL CHANGES" AND SCHEMES "TO USE DIFFERENT TERMINOLOGY WITHOUT CHANGING THE LEGAL SUBSTANCE"?

The first thing that Nicolas Sarkozy did after becoming President of France this month was to fly to Mrs Merkel to push forward his variations on this theme. On June 22, there will be a European Council in Berlin. It will try to get a new treaty by Christmas, bringing most of the rejected constitution into effect, though shying away from that painful word. Like my rubbish, the constitution cannot be thrown away, only recycled.

The new treaty will almost certainly provide for a permanent President of the EU, instead of the present system of circulation between member states, so a new central power structure will emerge. There will also be an EU foreign minister with the right to speak "automatically" on behalf of member states. The way in which majority voting is calculated will also change, producing a 30 per cent cut in Britain's blocking power.

A recent poll conducted for Open Europe showed that an average of 75 per cent of voters in EU member states want a referendum on any new treaty. But the EU leaders have learnt their lesson. THE TROUBLE WITH THE FULL-ON PRESENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION WAS THAT IT ENABLED VOTERS TO SEE WHAT IT WAS. The architects of ever-closer Union will try mightily not to make that mistake again.

Already THE ARGUMENT FROM MR BLAIR AND OUR FOREIGN OFFICE IS THAT THE NEW TREATY WILL NOT AMOUNT TO A SERIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE, AND THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED FOR THE VOTERS TO BOTHER THEIR LITTLE HEADS ABOUT THE MATTER. If that is the position of "Euro-sceptic" Britain, the Europhiles hardly need to trouble to open their mouths. AS FOR THE NEGOTIATIONS THEMSELVES, THEY HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED IN PRIVATE. The Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons has tried without success to get a relevant minister to appear before them.

A PROCESS THAT INVOLVES THE VERY BASIS OF LAW - THE INCLUSION OF THE CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN THE TREATY WOULD ENABLE THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE TO FORCE PARLIAMENT TO COMPLY ABSOLUTELY WITH ITS RULINGS - IS BEING CONDUCTED LIKE A PAPAL CONCLAVE. THE BODY ELECTED TO MAKE OUR LAWS KNOWS ALMOST NOTHING ABOUT IT.

WHAT HE WON'T DARE DO, THOUGH, IS LET US VOTE. For the accumulated frustrations of more than 30 years mean that any plan for increasing Europe's powers now wins the full-hearted dissent of the British people.

Clashes between the two neighbours two of the West's biggest allies in the War on Terror began here last Sunday morning when Paki-stani forces fired on an Afghan post at Toorgawe, a strategic point on the border. The fighting is the most serious of its kind for years.

Since Sunday evening there has been a build-up of forces in the contested zone as hundreds of regular Afghan soldiers from the 203rd Thunder Corps, who had been fighting the Taleban, have deployed to the area to reinforce the beleaguered border police, bringing with them heavy artillery sent up from Kabul. "We can't wait any more", Brigadier Sanaoull Haq, a staff officer in the corps, said." Now if anything further happens we will reply in kind."

Each side accuses the other of initiating the bombardments, which so far have left 13 Afghans dead and 51 wounded. Foreign diplomats in Kabul fear that the situation, which has united Afghan nationalist sentiment across every ethnic divide, may escalate. It threatens to wreck any semblance of security cooperation between the countries, to the detriment of Nato's struggle with the Taleban.

Pakistan has recently started building a security fence in selected areas of the border, ostensibly to halt the flow of insurgents. This, in turn, has provoked more Afghan wrath. There was no security fence being built by Pakistan at Toorgawe. Instead, the Afghans say that their police in the post were attacked without warning simply because of its desirable strategic location.

There was no security fence being built by Pakistan at Toorgawe. Instead, the Afghans say that their police in the post were attacked without warning simply because of its desirable strategic location. "Now we have a central government and an army of our own and the Pakistanis are angry. They can't tolerate us or our border." In the initial absence of regular troops hundreds of Pashtun tribesmen from local villages rushed to support the Afghan border police during the attacks on Sunday.

The Prime Minister's trip to Washington this week has coincided with the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz, the head of the World Bank, which manages international development aid for rich countries. Mr Blair, who has been a passionate campaigner for African development, will leave No 10 at the same time, and there was speculation yesterday that he could be a contender for the Washington-based job.

The post traditionally goes to a US citizen, but Joseph Stiglitz, the bank's former chief economist, yesterday said Mr Blair could be a contender. "It wouldn't rule him out, but I would say that if I were going through a first priority list it would probably begin with somebody with real experience in development," he said. "Blair has clearly been a political leader that has the kinds of connections that would be useful as head of the institution."

Political allies say that, despite yesterday's speculation, Mr Blair is more likely to spend his retirement setting up a "BLAIR FOUNDATION" AND ACTING AS A SELF-APPOINTED AMBASSADOR ON DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AND WORKING FOR GREATER UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN DIFFERENT RELIGIONS.
In interviews yesterday, Mr Blair said he wanted to continue working in the Middle East, and said that FAITH RELATIONS ARE "SOMETHING I'VE THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT AND I'D LIKE TO WORK ON".

Asked by Arabic-language television station Al Arabiyah whether he could have done more to push for peace in the Middle East during his decade in power, Mr Blair said: "I've spent a long time working on this myself, and I want to carry on working on it even after I leave office. There are still ways that I can achieve things and do things."

The Prime Minister also told America's National Public Radio: "THIS QUESTION TO DO WITH RELIGIOUS FAITH AND HOW THE FAITHS COME TOGETHER IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF IT. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE TRY TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND DIALOGUE BETWEEN DIFFERENT FAITHS."