Obama's high-stakes gamble on peace deal that eluded predecessorsHe has invested much in succeeding where others have failed, but doing so could fatally harm his re-election bidBy Rupert CornwellThursday, 2 September 2010
EPABarack Obama appeared with Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday to condemn the 'senseless' slaughter near HebronRead Article   

 Iran and Arab countries 'enemies of the Internet,' says report Read Article    

 In plain sight?
Unheeded red flags surrounded Maj. Nidal M. Hasan.Thursday, November 12, 2009
HINTS OF POTENTIAL trouble from Maj. Nidal M. Hasan were there for all to see. There was his troubling presentation at Walter Reed Army Medical Center on Islam and the U.S. military, and questions among colleagues about the psychiatrist's competence and even his sanity. And there was the e-mail correspondence with a known radical Muslim cleric that caught the attention of the FBI. In isolation, they may have appeared less than actionable. Unfortunately, the massacre at Fort Hood last week that killed 13 and wounded 38 others was the tragedy that linked the puzzle pieces. It's easy to point fingers with the benefit of hindsight. But it's fair to ask whether red flags should have become red alerts. Two joint terrorism task forces became aware in December that Maj. Hasan had sent 10 to 20 e-mails to Anwar al-Aulaqi, a radical cleric who knew three of the Sept. 11 hijackers and who has advocated holy war against the United States. He responded at least twice. But a Defense Department analyst determined that the communication was in keeping with Maj. Hasan's research interests. No other action was taken. Perhaps that information could have been useful to officials at Walter Reed. Senior physicians are reported to have been upset in June 2007 when Maj. Hasan, a senior-year psychiatric resident, eschewed a medical presentation in favor an hour-long lecture on the Koran, Muslims in the U.S. military and the danger of "adverse events," such as suicide bombings, if Muslims weren't allowed to leave military service as conscientious objectors. Maj. Hasan had expressed concerns about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he was set to be deployed. National Public Radio reported Wednesday that at a series of meetings in the spring of 2008, officials at Walter Reed and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences discussed whether Maj. Hasan was psychotic. NPR earlier reported that Walter Reed psychiatrists may have been deterred from trying to dismiss the psychiatrist because of onerous procedures; an official on a review committee reportedly asked whether the termination of a doctor who happened to be a Muslim would create an appearance problem. All this raises several questions, including whether the failures of communication among federal agencies that were identified in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks persist. Should the Army have been informed about whom Maj. Hasan was in contact with? If so, what were the impediments? And when serious questions are raised about key personnel at Walter Reed, are administrators capable of acting? A serious investigation must probe these issues, among others.   

 The US needs troops – straight and gayBarack Obama must move quickly if he is to repeal the law denying gay Americans the right to serve in the armed forcesSean Duggan guardian.co.uk, Thursday 28 January 2010 Article history President Obama announced in his first state of the union address last night that this year he will "work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love". The president was referring to the law commonly known as "don't ask, don't tell", a law that mandates the discharge of openly gay and lesbian service members regardless of how their sexual orientation became known.The announcement was an important and historic step towards ending this outdated and discriminatory policy. The United States has discharged nearly 14,000 patriotic men and women from military service since the law was enacted more than 16 years ago. And it has led many thousands of talented gay and lesbian Americans to leave the services every year of their own volition or to not join at all. This is despite the fact the US military needs every qualified service member it can get for us to complete our missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.As those returning from both theatres of war frequently attest, it doesn't matter on the battlefield if you or gay or straight – it only matters if you can get the job done. A survey of 545 service members who served in Afghanistan and Iraq found that 73% are comfortable in the presence of gay men and lesbians.Moreover, the American people recognise that the ban does not make sense: recent polling shows that the American public supports repealing "don't ask, don't tell" by a 55% to 35% margin. Perhaps most importantly, no reputable or peer-reviewed study has ever shown that allowing service by openly gay personnel will compromise military effectiveness. Indeed, the militaries of some of the US's closest allies – including Britain, Canada and Israel – have successfully integrated openly gay men and women into their ranks without incident.There is enough evidence to confirm that reversing the ban on gay people in the military will not undermine unit effectiveness or unit cohesion – the primary reason cited in support of the policy.Now that President Obama has set a goal of repealing the law this year, the administration should immediately begin planning for how – not whether – to overturn the ban. Those in favour of the status quo will undoubtedly note that there are numerous administrative questions that need to be answered before openly gay men and women can serve in the military. What will the military's housing policy…

  Cyclists Bear Down on Lance Over Doping Read Article