The test looks at the whole DNA of a cell rather than focusing on a specific mutation in one gene, making it quicker to identify diseases in embryos.

It also allows doctors to check for many more potential illnesses.

The team will tell a Prague fertility conference five couples are expecting healthy babies after the test, and IVF.

How the new and existing embryo tests work
However, some campaigners have questioned the morality of such screening tests, as they inevitably lead to the destruction of some embryos.

Simone Aspis, from the British Council of Disabled People, said: "Who is going to make the decision about who should and should not live? We believe all babies have an equal right to life."

The new "DNA fingerprint" test of a cell can spot from a genetic signature that a condition, such as cystic fibrosis, is present, the scientists behind it say.

The team, from the genetics unit at London's Guy's Hospital, have developed a method called pre-implantation genetic haplotyping (PGH), which they expect to offer to over 100 families a year.

The current test is known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD).

50/50 chance
PGH involves testing parents and any existing children or relations carrying or with a genetic condition, to identify the faulty units of chromosomal DNA.

Using this information, it is possible to take a cell from the embryo, treat it in the lab to create more copies of its genetic material and then look for markers that show an embryo carries two copies of these faulty units, or haplotypes.

This would mean it would be affected by the condition.

The technique has been used to test for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD). It primarily affects boys, who inherit the disease through their mothers.

Families with a history of the condition are currently offered embryo sex testing and no male embryos are implanted, as it is not possible to tell if they have the condition - even though they have a 50/50 chance of being affected.

But with the new test, doctors are able to see if an embryo carries the tell-tale DMD haplotypes seen in its parents, meaning more embryos can be selected for use.

Genetic trail
The test also allows detection of any of the genetic mutations which can cause cystic fibrosis.

Like DMD, it is a recessive disease, and means both copies of chromosome 7 must carry a fault for a child to have the disease - but PGD can spot only the most common of the hundreds of faults.

The team have also helped a woman affected by hydatidiform mole - a condition where pregnancy leads to a potentially fatal tumour forming instead of a foetus.

Professor Peter Braude, the fertility specialist who helped develop the test, said: "It doesn't matter what the genetic fault is.

"We can know the same chromosome that has affected a family member, and know the embryo is also affected."

'No flood'
Alison Lockwood, a nurse who is part of the genetics unit team, said the bottom line for couples who came to see her was the wish for a healthy baby.

"Until now, you really had to know the name of the mutation to do a direct test. Now that doesn't matter.

"With sex linked disease, you would currently have to take away probably 50% of embryos because they are male.

"But with this test, you might get up to 75% of embryos for transfer."

However she said the new test would not lead to a flood of people wanting to take advantage of the science.

"Of the patients currently referred for PGD, only a third end up going through a cycle.

"These are, generally, couples who can get pregnant without having to undergo fertility treatment, and when they get to know what it involves, many do not go ahead."

Dr Mark Hamilton, chairman of the British Fertility Society, said: "Any technique which has the potential to reduce the risk of serious, debilitating and potentially life-threatening disease has to be greeted with some enthusiasm.

"We are always striving to maximise the chance that fertility treatment will be successful.

"But not transferring because we are absolutely confident they are affected by a condition, rather than because we suspect they are, is preferable and much less wasteful."

But Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics, warned against further extensions of screening.

She said: "I am horrified to think of these people sitting in judgment on these embryos and saying who should live and who should die."

DENVER Jun 16, 2006 (AP)? With another tinderbox summer shaping up in much of the West, officials issued red-flag fire warnings for Colorado on Thursday, while in Arizona a roaring blaze forced the evacuation of about 1,000 homes.

Wildfires also were burning in Alaska, Utah and New Mexico.

The aggressive 700-acre Colorado blaze had already prompted about 100 people to leave their homes in the rolling hills near Westcliffe, about 100 miles south of Denver.

The fire, which began when a falling tree dragged a power line to the ground, left patches of dense trees and brush "totally nuked, completely black," said Steve Segin, a spokesman for the Rocky Mountain Incident Management Team.

Air tankers became unnecessary Thursday afternoon when the wind direction shifted to push the fire back onto itself, Segin said. Air tankers and helicopters were available if needed.

No structures were reported lost, but a house suffered exterior damage. A six-mile stretch of Colorado 96 was closed.

Judi Coker, who lives about two miles from the fire, said less smoke was visible Thursday than a day earlier. Her subdivision was not threatened and she and her husband, Rod, were not among the residents who left, but their bags were packed just in case.

"It's very dry, more dry than I've seen it since we lived here," said Coker, who has lived in the area for four years.

The Rocky Mountain Area Predictive Services issued a red-flag warning for a huge swath of southern Colorado, meaning conditions were favorable for big, fast-moving fires. The warning spanned the entire width of the state and ranged as far north as the Denver area.

At least 60,604 acres have burned in Colorado this year, said Larry Helmerick, spokesman for the Rocky Mountain Area Coordination Center. That compares with 41,048 acres for all of 2005. It was still far below the 619,029 that burned in 2002.

"It's so dry out here that it doesn't take more than a spark to start a wildfire," said Jamie Moore, director of emergency management for Douglas County south of Denver, where a passing train apparently sparked a 30-acre fire Wednesday.

The job application of the future may require showing would-be bosses a new ID card proving prospective employees are who they say they are.

As Congress debates sweeping immigration and border security reforms, some lawmakers and policy experts say no new system will work without such tamper-proof credentials. Otherwise, immigrants still could come to the United States illegally and use fake documents to get jobs, possibly undermining reforms designed to encourage legal immigration.

How lawmakers deal with verifying workers' identities could determine whether immigration reform succeeds or fails. Experts agree the prospect of finding work in the United States is the lure for more than 500,000 undocumented immigrants who come here every year.

But critics are concerned about privacy issues with an ID card system, adding to worries that the government would be too involved in job applications under any new immigration system.

The House and the Senate have passed competing versions of reform legislation, and both bills would require employers to check whether workers are legally eligible for U.S. jobs. Neither bill would create a new ID document for all workers - the Senate bill calls for ID cards for foreign guest workers, and the House bill would have employers check applicants' Social Security numbers against a federal database. But revisions are expected during negotiations over how to reconcile the two bills. Negotiations have not yet begun, but Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., says a "secure, tamper-proof" ID card is an essential part of reform that he will push for during House-Senate meetings.

"If you (allow immigration) in a regulated manner and you don't close the back door to illegal immigration, it's the same effect," said T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, the union for U.S. Border Patrol agents.

A new system might require a new work authorization ID, or it might combine more secure Social Security cards with more secure driver's licenses to prevent people from using counterfeit cards to pass checks. The government would have to update its databases either way, experts said.

Employers now are required to ask for Social Security numbers, but there's little consequence for most companies even if they find out workers are using fake numbers or numbers that belong to someone else. The Department of Homeland Security, which enforces laws against hiring undocumented immigrants, does not have access to Social Security records that show which companies have received warnings that their workers are using bogus IDs.

The non-partisan Pew Hispanic Center estimates that about 7 million of the 11 million to 12 million undocumented immigrants living here already are working. A Government Accountability Office audit last year found 9 million cases of workers using the Social Security number 000-00-0000 when applying for jobs.

Requiring all employers to check Social Security numbers against a federal database could cost nearly $12 billion a year, another GAO report found last year. The audit didn't study how much a new card might cost.

"As long as people can use documents that U.S. citizens now use, which are highly insecure, it's unlikely that we'll be able to reduce the fraud substantially enough," said Deborah Meyers, a senior analyst at the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C.

The need for a new worksite verification system with secure identifying documents unites lawmakers who often split over immigration, from Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the chief sponsors of reform legislation, to House conservatives like Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., leader of a caucus that pushes for more enforcement of current laws. Business owners might welcome a change that makes it easier to figure out whether workers are in the country legally.

"I think that there should be a card that is read," said Marty Thompson, vice president for human resources at Bar-S Foods, based in Phoenix. "We've got computers, read the card . . . There should be a standard document (for U.S. citizens and foreigners). Why not?"

President Bush, who supports the Senate bill, said recently that all foreign workers should have a secure ID card that proves they are who they say. That might mean U.S. citizens would not need any new documents.

But Latino civil rights advocates, who have played a major role in pushing Congress to act on immigration, say a universal verification system would be more fair. Otherwise, advocates worry that employers would reject hiring hiring anyone who they thought might be a foreigner, for fear of unwittingly accepting phony documentation.

"If we're going to have a system that works and that reforms our immigration system, we need to be able to verify the employment of all eligible workers," said Flavia Jimenez, a spokeswoman for the National Council of La Raza. Conservatives like Bonner agree that letting U.S. citizens prove their identity without a new, counterfeit-proof card could backfire.

"The system (the House bill is based on) relies upon nothing more than matching Social Security names, number, date of birth and a separate form of ID to prove that you are that person," Bonner said. "That's great if every employer were a cop, but the cops are the only ones who have the means to tell the genuine from the fake driver's license."

But critics say any national system to verify identity would effectively mean workers need the government's permission to get a job, and that security flaws in federal databases could leave personal records vulnerable to hackers.

"Our fundamental freedoms should not be undermined through a flawed immigration reform bill," said Caroline Frederickson, director of the national legislative office for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Politically influential business groups, which also are pushing for immigration reform, said they're staying out of the argument about a new ID document, as long as Congress comes up with a system that won't be too expensive or complex for employers to use.

"The issue is, does the system work?" said John Gay, co-chairman of the Essential Immigration Worker Coalition, which represents big hotel chains, restaurant companies and other employers. "There's no out for us if the government doesn't have its end running."

The Europarliament voted today in first reading on the 7th Research Framework Program and called for EU funding of research with human embryos and human embryonic stem cells.

Monsignor Noël Treanor, secretary-general of the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community (COMECE), stressed in a statement that "such research raises fundamental anthropological and ethical problems."

"Many people are uneasy about research manipulating human life and using it as a raw material," he noted. "This is not just a Catholic position.

"Scientifically, there is no reason to make a moral distinction between an embryo at the very beginning of his or her life and after implantation in the womb or after 14 days. Human dignity does not depend -- and must not be made dependent -- on decisions of other human beings."

The European Parliament expressed with a slim majority its support for EU funding of research with human embryonic and adult stem cells. The proposal of the Committee for Industry, Research and Energy was adopted by a vote of 284-249. There were 32 abstentions.

The European Parliament itself was divided on the issue, and a significant number of members voted either to exclude funding for all research on human embryos and human embryonic stem cells or at least to tighten the ethical guidelines in order to avoid the further destruction of human embryos.

The COMECE took advantage of the opportunity to renew its "support for the EU to finance research on adult stem cells."

The British scientist joked he was lucky the pope didn't realize he had already presented a paper at the gathering suggesting how the universe was created.

"I didn't fancy the thought of being handed over to the Inquisition like Galileo," Hawking said in a lecture to a sold-out audience at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. John Paul died in 2005; Hawking did not say when the Vatican meeting was held.

Galileo ran afoul of the Roman Catholic Church in the 17th century for supporting Copernicus' discovery that the Earth revolved around the sun. The church insisted the Earth was at the center of the universe.

In 1992, John Paul issued a declaration saying the church's denunciation of Galileo was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension."

Hawking said the pope told the scientists, "It's OK to study the universe and where it began. But we should not inquire into the beginning itself because that was the moment of creation and the work of God."

The physicist, author of the best seller "A Brief History of Time," added that John Paul believed "God chose how the universe began for reasons we could not understand."

John Paul insisted faith and science could coexist. In 1996, in a message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, he said that Darwin's theories were sound as long as they took into account that creation was the work of God and that Darwin's theory of evolution was "more than a hypothesis."

But Hawking questioned whether an almighty power was needed to create the universe.

"Does it require a creator to decree how the universe began? Or is the initial state of the universe determined by a law of science?" he asked.

Hawking's groundbreaking research on black holes and the origins of the universe has made him one of the best-known theoretical physicists of his generation. He proposes that space and time have no beginning and no end.

The scientist uses a wheelchair and suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a neurological disorder. But he said people shouldn't let physical disabilities limit their ambitions.

"You can't afford to be disabled in spirit as well as physically," he said. "People won't have time for you."

Hawking must communicate using an electronic speech synthesizer, and he was asked why he used a voice with an American accent.

"The voice I use is a very old hardware speech synthesizer made in 1986," Hawking said. "I keep it because I have not heard a voice I like better and because I have identified with it."

But the 64-year-old Hawking said he's shopping for a new system because the hardware is large and fragile. He also said it uses components that are no longer made.

"I have been trying to get a software version, but it seems very difficult," he said. "One version has a French accent. I said if I used it, my wife would divorce me."

The moderator at the lecture told the audience that at a recent dinner, she asked Hawking about his ambitions. He said he wanted to know how the universe began, what happens inside black holes and how can humans survive the next 100 years, she said.

But, she added, he said had one more great ambition: "I would also like to understand women."

Hawking ended his lecture saying, "We are getting closer to answering the age-old questions: Why are we here? Where did we come from?"

The [Pope] is close, especially with prayer, to innocent victims, their relatives and the peoples of that land, hostages of all those who have the illusion of being able to resolve the ever more dramatic problems of the region through force or unilaterally.

The Holy See appeals to the international community to rapidly activate the means necessary for humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian population, and associates itself in urging leaders of both peoples to observe above all due respect for human life, especially that of defenseless civilians and children, and that the path of negotiation be resumed with courage, which is the only path that can lead to the just and lasting peace to which all aspire.

Many of the assets involved were originally state-owned before the wave of privatisations that took place in the 1980s. What are the latest examples of British companies passing into foreign hands?

Before the AB Ports deal, Spanish building group Ferrovial grabbed headlines when it launched a successful £10.3bn takeover bid for BAA, which runs seven UK airports.

Both of the latest British takeover targets used to be state-owned. AB Ports, which began life as the British Transport Docks Board in 1962, was privatised in 1982 and floated on the stock market a year later.

BAA has its roots in the old British Airports Authority, created in 1966. It was privatised 20 years later.

Ferrovial is not the only Spanish company to take an interest in corporate Britain. Last year, the Abbey banking chain was bought by Santander, while mobile phone group O2 was taken over by Telefonica.

What other sectors of the economy have been affected?

The privatisation of gas, electricity and water in the 1980s also created opportunities for foreign firms to enter the UK market.

London Electricity was one of the first utilities to be snapped up when US firm Entergy bought it in 1996 for £1.3bn ($2.1bn).

However, it sold the company two years later for £1.9bn to France's EDF, which later bought up two neighbouring power firms and merged them into a new company, EDF Energy.

The capital's water company, Thames Water, has been owned by Germany's RWE since 2001, while Wessex Water passed into Malaysian hands the following year.

RWE also bought Innogy, Npower and Yorkshire Power, while another German company, E.ON, owns gas and electricity company Powergen.

Among other privatised firms, British Steel, which was sold off in 1988, has been part of the Corus Group since 1999, when it merged with a Dutch rival.

Even companies that are not controlled by overseas firms may have a substantial proportion of their shares owned by foreigners. About 35% of all shares in companies listed on the FTSE-100 index are in the hands of non-UK investors.

What are the political implications of all this?

Opening up Britain's state-controlled monopolies to free-market competition was the aim of Margaret Thatcher's Conservatives in the 1980s.

Far from opposing the consequences of this process, Tony Blair's Labour government has defended them.

Mr Blair said earlier this month, in the wake of the BAA announcement, that foreign takeovers of British airports and utility firms should not be a political issue.

He said what was best for UK consumers was a free market with shareholders, not politicians, deciding who was the best management team.

Back in March, Mr Blair defended foreign ownership of utilities, saying: "Liberalised energy markets and more open markets are good for business and for consumers right across Europe."

Does the rest of Europe agree?

Not necessarily. As far as energy is concerned, Britain is arguably in the vanguard of moves by the European Commission to shake up the sector and offer consumers more choice.

But in other areas of economic endeavour, the issue of who is allowed to own key assets has been fraught with controversy - even for governments that profess to abide by free-trade principles.

France's Veolia is one European company with a stake in the British water industry, owning three companies in south-eastern England. But the French government is happier to let its firms buy assets abroad than it is to allow foreign takeovers of French firms.

Last year, President Jacques Chirac reacted hotly to rumours that US drinks giant Pepsico was poised to bid for food firm Danone. The bid speculation turned out to be unfounded, but the episode prompted Anglo-Saxon free-marketeers to ridicule France as a country where yogurt was a "strategic" industry.

What about the US? Surely Washington is more "laissez-faire" than the French?

Again, not necessarily - as shown by the row in the US earlier this year over the sale of UK-based ports and shipping group P&O to Dubai Ports World, from the United Arab Emirates. US politicians mounted a campaign to stop DPW taking control over management at six key US ports, citing security fears.

President George W Bush said their opposition sent a bad signal to Washington's allies. He was backed by economic pundits who said it would give the impression that no Middle East company was allowed to invest in the US. But it was all to no avail - and DPW eventually had to get rid of its entire US operation in order to placate Congress.

Back in the UK, is there no limit to what Britain will sell to foreign firms?

One possibility which makes UK politicians distinctly uneasy is the prospect that Russia's state-owned Gazprom might enter the UK energy market.

At stake is British Gas, which was privatised in 1986 and is now owned by a company named Centrica.

The deputy chairman of Gazprom's board, Alexander Medvedev, has admitted Centrica is on its list of potential takeover targets.

But Russia's apparent willingness to use energy supplies as a political weapon - as shown by its cutting of gas supplies to Ukraine earlier this year - makes the issue problematic.

Chancellor Gordon Brown has said such a takeover might raise "political issues".

The Conservatives agree, with shadow trade and industry secretary Alan Duncan saying there should be "no question" of Gazprom being able to buy a UK utility without the company's management being decoupled from the Russian government.

The owner of Ipswich, Plymouth, Hull, Swansea, Ayr and Southampton ports, among others, handles about a quarter of the UK's seaborne traffic. The deal is the latest in a string of takeovers of British port owners in anticipation of rising global trade. Although the company's board has accepted the bid, there is talk of other bidders possibly entering the fray.

PORTS BEING SOLD

Ayr, Barrow, Barry, Cardiff, Fleetwood, Garston, Goole, Grimsby, Hull, Immingham, Ipswich, King's Lynn, Lowestoft, Newport, Plymouth, Port Talbot, Silloth, Southampton, Swansea, Teignmouth, Troon

Stockbroker Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein bought a large chunk of ABP shares on Wednesday and, according to the Reuters news agency, it was not acting on behalf of the consortium.

"At this stage, there is one bidder on the table but there are a lot of rumours in the market," said Gerald Khoo, an analyst at Oriel Securities.

However, ABP said it had not received any further approaches.

Foreign buyers

The spectacular growth of the Chinese and Indian economies has fuelled interest in infrastructure and cargo handling assets.

P&O was bought in a controversial deal by Dubai Ports World for $6.8bn earlier this year, while Mersey Docks and PD Ports have also been taken over during the past year.

If approved by shareholders, many of the UK's leading ports - including Tilbury and Southampton - will pass into foreign ownership.

The deal comes only days after BAA, the owner of Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports, agreed to be bought by the Spanish company Grupo Ferrovial.

ABP employs 3,000 staff worldwide, the bulk of which are UK-based.

The company operates container services at Southampton and Tilbury on a joint venture basis while its US business, Amports, handles vehicle imports and exports.

ABP began life as the British Transport Docks Board in 1962. It was privatised in 1982 and floated on the stock market a year later. It expanded into the US in 1998.

Multinational consortium

ABP rejected a 730 pence per share bid from the consortium in March, branding the offer "wholly inadequate".
However, when the consortium returned with an improved offer last month, ABP agreed to open its books to the group.

Other members of the consortium include Canadian investment firm Borealis Infrastructure Management Inc. ("Borealis") and the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation, which invests the island's substantial foreign reserves.

"ABP is a unique strategic asset," said ABP chairman Chris Clark. "The consortium's offer reflects that and recognises the strong operational and financial performance of the business."

Shares in the company rose strongly on the news of the deal, gaining 61.50 pence, or nearly 8%, to 838.50p.

Abu Bakar Ba'asyir was found guilty in March 2005 of conspiracy in connection with the bomb plot, but he was cleared of more serious charges.

Security experts say the cleric is a founding member of a regional Islamic militant group Jemaah Islamiah (JI).

Supporters gathered outside the prison, cheering as he left the building.

Australia, from where many of those killed in the Bali nightclub bombs came, has said it is disappointed by the cleric's release.

The BBC's Rachel Harvey, in Jakarta, says Ba'asyir emerged into bright sunlight and a crowd of supporters, police and journalists.

Ba'asyir's legal wrangles

He was freed about one hour ahead of schedule, surprising many - including his lawyer, who did not arrive at the jail until his client had been whisked away.

He was thought to be travelling straight to his home town of Solo, in central Java, where he runs an Islamic school.

Wearing his trademark white skullcap and thick spectacles, the elderly cleric tried to give a brief speech, but his voice was barely heard among the shouting, our correspondent adds.

"I will continue to fight to uphold the Islamic Sharia," he said, thanking Allah and his lawyers for continuing to support him, the Associated Press reported him as saying.

With the crowd becoming increasingly excited, a group of young men formed a human barrier to allow Ba'asyir to move through the sea of jostling people towards a waiting car.

Back to teaching

Ba'asyir was first arrested shortly after the Bali nightclub bombings in October 2002, although he was never accused of taking part in the attack.

Two bombs ripped through the Kuta area of Bali, a regular haunt for tourists, destroying a nightclub and killing mainly foreigners.

Ba'asyir was held in custody and faced two separate trials, eventually serving two separate sentences, the first for minor immigration offences, the second for being part of what the court called an "evil conspiracy".

In both cases more serious charges were either dropped or later overturned on appeal.

Indonesian and foreign intelligence agencies believe Ba'asyir was, and perhaps still is, the spiritual leader of radical network JI.

Our correspondent says Ba'asyir's power lies in his ability, as a charismatic preacher and teacher, to provide encouragement - and some would argue ideological justification - for violence.

However, many experts believe his influence within JI has waned, and the situation has changed hugely since he was imprisoned.

JI's network is fractured, split between those who espouse violence as part of what they say is legitimate and necessary jihad, and those who believe in a longer term struggle requiring patient proselytizing and military preparation, our correspondent says.

Survivors' outrage

Members of JI are accused of being behind a number of operations in Indonesia, including two suicide attacks in Jakarta and the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings.

But most of these attacks took place while Ba'asyir was in prison and he denies JI even exists.

He claims he was the victim of an American-inspired plot to undermine Islam.

The 68-year-old cleric has said that once released he planned to return to the boarding-school he founded and to continue teaching.

Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer said he feared that Ba'asyir could now incite further violence.

Mr Downer said that Australia and the US regard Ba'asyir as an extremist and want his travel restricted and financial assets frozen.

Survivors of the bombings have expressed their outrage and frustration that Ba'asyir has walked free after just two years in prison.

"I think the Indonesian government need to have a good look at themselves," Peter Hughes, who survived with burns to 56% of his body, told the Associated Press.

But Mr Downer said that Canberra accepted the decision of the Indonesian legal system.

The BBC's Phil Mercer in Sydney says the Bali bombings brought Australia to the front line of international terrorism for the first time, hardening the government's resolve to fight alongside the US in its war on terror.

Now, British investigative journalist Melanie Phillips reveals how widespread Muslim immigration into Great Britain, and the country's paralysis by multiculturalism and fear, has created a fifth column of jihadists plotting against the West from deep inside its bosom.

Londonistan paints a picture of a country so terrified of giving offense to its Muslim minority that it has been cowed by radical clerics. Institutions across British society -- the judiciary, security circles, the Church of England, the universities, the media -- have all been reduced to silence or appeasement. With the resulting license to incite hatred and terror, London's mosques have churned out literally thousands of foot soldiers in Islamic terrorism's war against the West -- including shoe-bomber Richard Reid, 9/11 plotter Zacarias Moussaoui, and the British Muslims who perpetrated last year's hideous London Underground and bus bombings that killed 52 people.

The result, Phillips shows, is an ugly climate in Britain of fear and defeatism, which now threatens to undermine the alliance with America and imperil the defense of the free world. In the end, she argues, British authorities are walking the same path as those who capitulated to Adolf Hitler -- a strategy that is as likely to earn peace as Neville Chamberlain's.

Among the disturbing revelations in Londonistan:

• Why Great Britain can be described as the birthplace of al-Qaeda
• Why Brits can thank Prince Charles for London's leading radical mosque, Finsbury Park
• How the British push toward multiculturalism has provided cover for jihadist forces plotting terrorism
• How British universities are being used as a major recruiting ground for Islamic terrorism
• Plans for a 70,000 person mosque to be erected next to the Olympic Stadium in time for the 2012 games
• Why the legions of Muslims in Britain who are British citizens not only feel no allegiance to their country, but are actively hostile to it
• The newest political party in Europe: both far left and Islamist ... And winning elections
• How Muslim leaders in Britain are demanding -- and are getting -- special rights, along with the special application of Islamic religious law ("Sharia
• How the toleration by British authorities of Sharia law in certain quarters could lead to the effective legalization of polygamy
• How the British Left has endorsed and advanced the grotesque anti-Semitism that infuses Islamism
• The wholesale abdication by the Church of England in the face of this threat
• How the British government is manipulated by the country's radical Muslim clerics
• How leading Brits are bending backwards to appease and accommodate a radical community bent on their annihilation
• Why British police and intelligence services are impotent in the face of this growing threat
• How Great Britain's failure to deal with its radical Islam problem could lead to a breakup of its "special relationship" with the US

"One of the most compelling books you will ever read on the ascendancy of Islamic fundamentalism, violence and intimidation in the West. Melanie Phillips exposes the scandalous appeasement of militant Islam by British officials, the media, even the Church of England, capturing in extraordinary detail how British society and institutions have either ignored or actively fostered the growth of extremist groups on British soil. This book will both enlighten and enrage. Although its story is focused on the United Kingdom, it could be applied to any European capital or to the United States." -- Steven Emerson, author of American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us

"A last-minute warning for Britain and for much of the free world. In the 1930s, Britain was the leading appeaser of the world's most intransigent foe, refusing to see the gathering signs of danger until it was almost too late. Today, the same tendency to appeasement and self-delusion is evident again -- only now, the threat is within. Britain refuses to recognize the clear and present danger of Islamism inside its own borders, which steadily corrodes its social values and moral compass." -- Nathan Sharansky, author of The Case for Democracy.

WASHINGTON: Two years ago, he was as lonely as the Maytag repairman an obscure congressman trying desperately to raise the visibility of an issue he believed threatened the very security of the U.S.

More recently, he has become a force to be reckoned with, the leader of a powerful House caucus, a Republican who has taken on the president, a man respected for outspoken positions and the political force behind what has become the hottest issue in the nation.

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus and the undisputed heavyweight champion of the border security issue in the nation's capital, now tells the whole story of the threats facing the nation, the solutions within its grasp and his own personal quest to awaken the political establishment to the seething discontentment gripping America as a result of illegal immigration.

In his new book, "In Mortal Danger," published by WND Books, Tancredo warns that the country is on a course to the dustbin of history. Like the great and mighty empires of the past, he writes, superpowers that once stretched from horizon to horizon, America is heading down the road to ruin.

English historian Edward Gibbon, in penning his classic "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" (ironically published in the year America's Founding Fathers declared independence from Great Britain), theorized that Rome fell because it rotted from within. It succumbed to barbarian invasions because of a loss of civic virtue, its citizens became lazy and soft, hiring barbarian mercenaries to defend the empire because they were unwilling to defend it themselves.

Tancredo says America is following in the tragic footsteps of Rome.

Living up to his reputation for candor, Tancredo explains how the economic success and historical military prowess of the United States has transformed a nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles of right and wrong into an overindulgent, self-deprecating, immoral cesspool of depravity.

His recipe for turning things around?

Without strong, moral leadership, without a renewed sense of purpose, without a rededication to family and community, without shunning the race hustlers and pop-culture sham artists, without protecting borders, language and culture, the nation that once was "the land of the free and home of the brave" and the "one last best hope of mankind" will repeat the catastrophic mistakes of the past, he writes.

Tancredo, born and raised in Colorado, represents Colorado's 6th district in the U.S. House of Representatives. Prior to his election to Congress in 1998, Tancredo worked as a schoolteacher, was elected to the Colorado State House of Representatives in 1976, was appointed by President Reagan as the secretary of education's regional representative in 1981, and served as president of the Independence Institute. He serves on the International Relations Committee, the Resources Committee and the Budget Committee, and is the chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus. Tancredo and his wife, Jackie, reside in Littleton, Colo.

The trial opened Monday in Bergamo, Italy, and quickly was adjourned, according to the Associated Press. It is set to resume June 26. The 75-year-old Fallaci, who also suffers from cancer, faces a possible three-year prison term. Italian law prohibits "outrage" toward religion.

Although not as well known in the U.S., Fallaci has been recognized as an illustrious journalist in Europe for decades. Known for her aggressive interviews of Henry Kissinger, Yasser Arafat and Ayatollah Khomeini, her books have sold millions.

Italian judge Armando Grasso agreed to hear the case after Adel Smith, president of the Muslim Union of Italy, charged the book is "offensive to Islam and Muslims." Smith also wants the court to conclude the book incites religious hatred.

This is the first time a judge has ordered a trial for "defamation of Islam," and some other judges are concerned.

On his website, Jihad Watch founder and researcher Robert Spencer lists quotes from the book that have angered Smith and his group:

Over the last twenty years, terrorists have killed six thousand people 'to the glory of the Quran in obedience to its verses.'"

"The mutilation that the Muslims force on little girls to prevent them, once they are grown from enjoying the sexual act. It is a female castration that the Muslims practice in twenty-eight countries of Islamic Africa and because of which to million persons die each year from sepsis or loss of blood. "

The revolting, reactionary, obtuse, feudal Right is found today only in Islam. It is Islam."

"The Force of Reason" asserts that by not defending its identity, Europe is giving in to an invasion of Islam. Fallaci discusses how the political history of Europe has caused complacency toward the growing Muslim population. She believes leaders are making accommodations in the name of multi-culturalism, citing stunning accounts of officials looking the other way when Muslim men beat their wives and the allowance of Muslim women to take ID photographs with their heads covered.

Another Fallaci book, "The Rage and the Pride," is a post-9/11 account of why Muslims are determined to conquer the West, with approval from Europe.

In response to Fallaci's books, the Italian Islamic Party has put together a pamphlet, "Islam Punishes Oriana Fallaci," with little outcry from the public.

Some intellectuals in her home country also have expressed contempt toward Fallaci. A Milan art gallery featured a portrait of a decapitated Fallaci in a recent exhibit of Giuseppe Veneziano's "American Beauty," a series of paintings designed to highlight the "weakness and perversity of the American way of life." Spencer calls the display an illustration of the "deep affinity between the Left and the forces of global jihad."

Fallaci is living in hiding in the U.S. because of death threats. She refuses to attend her trial.

The leader, who was dismissed from his Waqf position after he quietly made his beliefs known, said Al Aqsa custodians passed down stories for centuries from generation to generation indicating the mosque was built at the site of the former Jewish Temples.

He said the Muslim world's widespread denial of the existence of the Jewish temples is political in nature and is not rooted in facts.

"Prophet Solomon built his famous Temple at the same place that later the Al Aqsa Mosque was built. It cannot be a coincidence that these different holy sites were built at the same place. The Jewish Temple Mount existed," said the former senior Waqf leader, speaking to WorldNetDaily from an apartment in an obscure alley in Jerusalem's Old City.

The former leader, who is well known to Al Aqsa scholars and Waqf officials, spoke on condition his name be withheld, claiming an on-the-record interview would endanger his life.

While the Islamic leader's statements may seem elementary to many in the West, especially in light of overwhelming archaeological evidence documenting the history of the Jewish temples and description of services there in the Torah, his words break with mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world, which believes the Jewish temples never existed.

"I am mentioning historical facts," said the former leader. "I know that the traditional denial about the temple existing at the same place as Al Aqsa is more a political denial. Unfortunately our religious and political leaders chose the option of denial to fight the Jewish position and demands regarding Al Aqsa and taking back the Temple Mount compound. In my opinion we should admit the truth and abandon our traditional position."

The leader said his conclusion that the Jewish temples existed does not forfeit what he calls "Islamic rights" to the Temple Mount and Al Aqsa Mosque.

"Yes, the temple existed. But now it is the place of the mosque of the religious who came to complete the divine religion [that started with Judaism] and to improve humanity," said the leader.

"We believe that Islam is the third and last religion. It came to complete the monotheistic message. The mosque is here at the place of the temple to serve for the same purpose, for the work Allah"

Al Aqsa Mosque built by angels?

The First Temple was built by King Solomon in the 10th century B.C. It was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. The Second Temple was rebuilt in 515 B.C. after Jerusalem was freed from Babylonian captivity. That temple was destroyed by the Roman Empire in A.D. 70. Each temple stood for a period of about four centuries.

The Jewish Temple, mentioned hundreds of times in the Torah, was the center of religious Jewish worship. It housed the Holy of Holies, which contained the Ark of the Covenant and was said to be the area upon which God's "presence" dwelt.

The temple served as the primary location for the offering of sacrifices and was the main gathering place in Israel during Jewish holidays.

The Temple Mount compound has remained a focal point for Jewish services over the millennia. Prayers for a return to Jerusalem have been uttered by Jews since the Second Temple was destroyed, according to Jewish tradition. Jews worldwide pray facing toward the Western Wall, a portion of an outer courtyard of the Temple left in tact.

The Al Aqsa Mosque was constructed in about 709 to serve as a shrine near another nearby shrine, the Dome of the Rock, which was built by an Islamic caliph. Al Aqsa was meant to mark what Muslims came to believe may have been the place at which Muhammad, the founder of Islam, ascended to heaven during a dream to receive revelations from Allah.

Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran. Islamic tradition states Mohammed took a journey in a single night from "a sacred mosque" ? believed to in Mecca in southern Saudi Arabia ? to "the farthest mosque" and from a rock there ascended to heaven. The farthest mosque later became associated with Jerusalem.

Muslims worldwide deny the Jewish temples ever existed in spite of what many call overwhelming archaeological evidence, including the discovery of Temple-era artifacts linked to worship, tunnels that snake under the Temple Mount and over 100 ritual immersion pools believed to have been used by Jewish priests to cleanse themselves before services. The cleansing process is detailed in the Torah.

According to the website of the Palestinian Authority's Office for Religious Affairs, the Temple Mount is Muslim property. The site claims the Western Wall, which it refers to as the Al-Boraq Wall, previously was a docking station for horses. It states Muhammed tied his horse, named Boraq, to the wall before ascending to heaven.

In a previous interview with WorldNetDaily, Kamal Hatib, vice-chairman of the Islamic Movement, claimed the Al-Aqsa Mosque was built by angels and that a Jewish Temple may have existed but not in Jerusalem. The Movement, which works closely with the Waqf, is the Muslim group in Israel most identified with the Temple Mount.

"When the First Temple was built by Solomon ? God bless him ? Al Aqsa was already built. We don't believe that a prophet like Solomon would have built the Temple at a place where a mosque existed," said Hatib.

"And all the historical and archaeological facts deny any relation between the temples and the location of Al Aqsa. We must know that Jerusalem was occupied and that people left many things, coins and other things everywhere. This does not mean in any way that there is a link between the people who left these things and the place where these things were left," Hatib said.

'True' Islamic tradition affirms temples

But the former senior Wafq leader told WND "true" Islamic tradition relates the Jewish temples once stood at the site of the Al Asa Mosque. He said Al Aqsa custodians passed down history over the centuries indicating the mosque was built at the site of the former Jewish temples.

"[The existence of the Jewish Temple at the site is obvious] according to studies, researches and archaeological signs that we were also exposed to. But especially according to the history that passed from one generation to another ? we believe Al Aqsa was built on the same place were the Temple of the Jews ? the first monotheistic religion ? existed."

He cited samples of some stories he said were related orally by Islamic leaders:

"We learned that the Christians, especially those who believed that Jesus was crucified by the Jews, used to throw their garbage at the Temple Mount site. They used to throw the pieces of cotton and other material Christian women used in cleaning the blood of their monthly cycle. Doing so they believed that they were humiliating, insulting and harming the Jews at their holiest site. This way they are hurting them like Jews hurt Christians when crucifying Jesus.

"It is known also that most of the first guards of Al Aqsa when it was built were Jews. The Muslims knew at that time that they could not find any more loyal and faithful than the Jews to guard the mosque and its compound. They knew that the Jews have a special relation with this place."

Temple Mount: No-prayer zone

Currently, even though the Jewish state controls Jerusalem, the Waqf serve as the custodians of the Temple Mount under a deal made with the Israeli government that restricts non-Muslim prayer at the site.

The Temple Mount was opened to the general public until September 2000, when the Palestinians started their intifada by throwing stones at Jewish worshipers after then-candidate for prime minister Ariel Sharon visited the area.

Following the onset of violence, the new Sharon government closed the Mount to non-Muslims, using checkpoints to control all pedestrian traffic for fear of further clashes with the Palestinians.

The Temple Mount was reopened to non-Muslims in August 2003. It still is open but only Sundays through Thursdays, 7:30 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m., and not on any Christian, Jewish or Muslim holidays or other days considered "sensitive" by the Waqf.

During "open" days, Jews and Christian are allowed to ascend the Mount, usually through organized tours and only if they conform first to a strict set of guidelines, which includes demands that they not pray or bring any "holy objects" to the site. Visitors are banned from entering any of the mosques without direct Waqf permission. Rules are enforced by Waqf agents, who watch tours closely and alert nearby Israeli police to any breaking of their guidelines.

The former senior Waqf leader said the Jewish temples have lost their purpose:

"As we are the religion who are here to correct everything that was before us there is no need for the Temple. Allah chose Islam as its final and favorite religion."

"Globalization makes assimilation seem redundant and old-fashioned . . . [the process] acts as a sort of reverse colonization, where groups of people are self-contained, going back and forth between their countries, exploiting sophisticated networks and using instant communication on phones and the Internet," he said.

Describing the threats as the new Goths and Vandals, Parry said that along with the migrations could come "barbary" pirates from northern African attacking yachts and beaches in the Mediterranean within 10 years.

"At some time in the next 10 years it may not be safe to sail a yacht between Gibraltar and Malta," said the admiral, according to the Times.

Parry, head of the development, concepts and doctrine center at Britain's Ministry of Defense, delivered the warnings at a conference last week of senior officers and industry experts.

He is responsible for identifying the greatest challenges facing national security policy in the future.

Lawmakers in Britain have made ancient Rome a serious subject of discussion this year, the London paper noted, including a book and television series by parliamentary deputy Boris Johnson drawing parallels between the European Union and the Roman Empire.

Various regions of Europe, Parry said, are threatened by factors such as radical Islam, agricultural decline, booming youth populations, water shortages and rising sea levels.

He believes that from 2012 to 2018 the current global power structure likely will crumble as a result of "irregular activity" such as terrorism, organized crime and "white companies" of mercenaries burgeoning in lawless areas.

Meanwhile, nations such as China, India, Brazil and Iran will challenge America's sole superpower status, Parry said.

The effects will be magnified as borders become more porous and some areas lose government control.

"When one thinks of 20,000 so-called jihadists currently fly-papered in Iraq, one shudders to think where they might go next," he said.

The mass population movements could lead to the "Rome scenario," he asserts, referring to the collapse of the western Roman Empire in the 4th and 5th centuries when groups such as Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Suevi, Huns and Vandals flooded its borders.

Rome eventually was taken over in 455 in an invasion from northern Africa by Geiseric the Lame, king of the Alans and Vandals.

Parry estimates in Britain alone there already are 70 diasporas.

Speaking with tongue-in-cheek, Parry said some of the consequences of this scenario would be beyond human imagination to address, including, "No wind on land and sea; third of population dies instantly; perpetual darkness; sores; Euphrates dries up 'to clear way for kings from the east'; earth's core opens."

The most dangerous time in any child's life is his or her first nine months. That's because abortion takes one out of every four children conceived in America, making the route from womb to tomb very short for millions of unborn boys and girls. "Struggling for Life" provides a shocking glimpse into how your tax dollars and twisted biomedical research are targeting the unborn. Written by Dr. Kelly Hollowell, WND contributor and founder of Science Ministries, Inc., this riveting, sometimes personal account details the gushing flow of federal dollars into the coffers of America's leading abortion performer.

It doesn't help that American taxpayers underwrite the nation's leading abortion performer, Planned Parenthood, which took in $265 million in government grants and contracts in 2003-2004 and killed 244,628 unborn children. Now taxpayers are being asked to fund medical research that kills five- to seven-day-old humans in order to harvest their stem cells. We are in an historic struggle to protect life from those who seek to profit from the unborn.

"Struggling for Life" also scrutinizes the inflated claims of those in the scientific community who want taxpayers to pay for research that destroys human embryos. Dr. Hollowell, a Senior Bioethics Strategist at the Center for Reclaiming America for Christ, also lays out an innovative four-step strategy to restore legal protection to unborn children.