COLMES: I keep hearing this inflamed rhetoric, like World War III. When you say that, it implies as though the United States somehow has to be involved in a ground or air war when you say World War III. Are you suggesting that the United States is just weeks or months away from being a participant in a world war?

HUNT: I think we have been. I'm not talking about attacking all the nations of the world, Al. I am saying this: The War on Terror is a world war. It involves nations all other the world, like Syria, and Iran. It involves the Russian mafia, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah. It's a different type of war. It doesn't mean we have to invade all these countries. We've got a lot more killing of bad guys to do and a lot more recognition of what this about, holy war, in countries sponsoring terrorism.

SEAN HANNITY, CO-HOST: Hey, Colonel, welcome back to the program. It's amazing to me how many people don't understand the nature of Islamic fascism and how widespread this movement is and how they want to destroy Israel, Europe and the United States.

The Iranians we now discovered today - from the capture of one of the people responsible for the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers, Iranian trained - we now know Iran is supplying the weaponry to Hezbollah. So this really - they're using Hezbollah as a proxy for them to wage their own war, isn't that true?

HUNT: Yes, and they're also running Hamas. They're the ones - there's $100 million a year going into Hezbollah out of Iran. Iran, as we know, are killing American soldiers in Iraq, and they're controlling a militia. They're controlling Muqtada al-Sadr there. So they have very bad guys, and they're doing it by proxy. You're right, Hezbollah is just one of their main armies, and they're well trained and well financed.

HANNITY: How naive is this notion - The New York Times editorial today - that the idea that we can talk to Syria, talk to these terrorist regimes. Can you talk to Ahmadinejad? Can you talk to an Assad? Can you talk to Usama bin Laden? Can you get anywhere? Is that an...

HUNT: I think we can talk to them when we line them up and kill them. The only reason to talk to some of these guys is to just do that. However, we're not going to wipe out, as we talked offline, the entire country, but we have to directly talk to these guys to find out what they want. If they're not going to cooperate, yes, they have to go.

HANNITY: Regime change.

HUNT: Absolutely, 100 percent.

HANNITY: All right, thanks. Good to see you, Colonel.

COLMES: All right, Colonel, we thank you very much, Colonel.

Lewis continues: "What is the significance of August 22? This year, August 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to 'the farthest mosque', usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (cf, Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and, if necessary, of the world."

This sort of quasi-religious scaremongering always finds a receptive audience in the United States, especially among Christians of the jihadist persuasion. At 90 years old, Professor Lewis may have completely lost his marbles, but he is still feted by the White House (vice-president Dick Cheney was guest of honour at his birthday party in April), and the Wall Street Journal describes him as "a sage". He is credited with coining the phrase "clash of civilisations" back in 1990 and now seems intent on making it a reality.

Nevertheless, Prof Lewis does manage to spot a few drawbacks in his alleged Iranian attempt to obliterate Israel. "An attack that wipes out Israel would almost certainly wipe out the Palestinians too," he writes.

This "might well be of concern to the Palestinians", he says, "but not apparently to their fanatical champions in the Iranian government." (He seems to be assuming here that Iran already has a fully primed nuclear arsenal, which is plainly not the case, despite what many Americans imagine.)

He then suddenly demolishes his own argument with this caveat: "It is far from certain that Mr Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for August 22."

So why, exactly, did the Iranians choose August 22 as the date for giving their answer to the US about nuclear development? Probably for bureaucratic convenience. When they promised a reply "by the end of August", they didn't actually use the word "August", but the Iranian equivalent. If you look up the Persian calendar, you'll see that August 22 just happens to be the end of the month known as Mordad.

I don't suppose this will discourage the neocons from continuing to write such loopy, prophetic nonsense. Here's another of them, Michael Ledeen, formerly a key figure in the Iran-Contra scandal, and the Iraq-Niger yellowcake affair, predicting an Iranian nuclear test by November 5:

"The Iranians believe they now have all the necessary components for a nuclear bomb. The only question is how long it will take them to assemble and test it. Khamenei had hoped to be able to test an atomic bomb by the third week in October, but his scientific advisers recently told him they could not make that deadline. They are now aiming for November 4 or 5, the anniversary of the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran during the revolution.

"There is another November date our leaders should take seriously: the 25th, the anniversary of the disappearance of the twelfth imam, and thus the most significant date in the Shiite calendar. Reports from Tehran suggest that the mullahs would like to celebrate that anniversary with a big-time terrorist attack against America."

Utter tosh. Don't believe a word of it. Ledeen was not talking about this coming November, but November 2003. His original article is here.

The interview, which was to be broadcast in full on Sunday on the "60 minutes" program, coincides with rising tensions between Washington and Tehran over Iran's disputed nuclear program and Israel's offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The hardline Iranian president said the administration of
President George W. Bush had adopted a condescending attitude towards Iran over its nuclear program and criticized a UN Security Council resolution requiring Tehran suspend uranium enrichment activities or face the prospect of sanctions.

"Well, please look at the makeup of the American administration, the behavior of the American administration. See how they talk down to my nation. And this recent resolution passed about the nuclear issue, look at the wording."

The July 31 resolution was pushed through after Iran ignored a previous non-binding deadline and failed to respond to an international offer of a package of incentives in exchange for a moratorium on nuclear fuel work.

Ahmadinejad said Iran was still reviewing the package of incentives.

Western powers had "presented us with a package which we are studying right now," the president said. "We even gave them a date for our response. Ignoring that, they passed a resolution."

Ahmadinejad also expressed disappointment that the US administration had not responded to a letter he sent to Bush in May, which Tehran had presented as an important diplomatic initiative.

"Well, (with the letter) I wanted to open a window towards the light for the president so that he can see that one can look on the world through a different perspective," he said.

The Bush administration, however, dismissed the 18-page letter as little more than a rambling philosophical treatise that offered nothing new on the nuclear crisis.

Ahmadinejad scoffed at Bush for refusing his "invitation" in the form of his letter.

"We are all free to choose. But please give him this message, sir: Those who refuse to accept an invitation will not have a good ending or fate," he said.

"You see that his approval rating is dropping every day. Hatred vis-a-vis the president is increasing every day around the world."

CBS said the interview was conducted on Tuesday.

The bombing occurred at about 10:30 a.m. in a market packed with pilgrims and shoppers in front of the Imam Ali mosque, which contains the tomb of Prophet Muhammad's son-in-law, Ali. It is one of the world's most sacred shrines for Shiites, the minority sect of Islam.

Shakir Obeid Hassan, who was injured in the blast, said the suicide bomber was stopped at the last police checkpoint before the shrine, which was untouched, though all the stores facing the shrine were damaged, he said.

"Before I reached the checkpoint, only a few (feet) from the shrine, I heard a huge explosion. Something hit me on the head and I fell. I couldn't hear for a while but I saw bodies and human flesh everywhere," Hassan, 51, said from his hospital bed.

The Grand Market, directly in front of the shrine's entrance, is a wide road with shops lining both sides selling perfumes, jewelry, clothes and religious souvenirs, including rings with pictures of Ali and his son Hussein.

The aftermath of the bombing was a scene of carnage. Indistinguishable debris, boxes of perfume bottles, sandals and worry beads littered the bloodied street. Volunteers picked up human remains and washed away the thick pools of blood.

Najaf, 100 miles south of Baghdad, is a major pilgrim destination for Shiites around the world, especially from neighboring Iran, which is predominantly Shiite like Iraq.

Najaf was the scene of heavy fighting in 2004 between U.S. forces and the Mahdi Army of radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, until the Shiite clerical hierarchy convinced the militiamen to give up.

Since then the city - considered the world center of Shiite theology - had been tightly controlled by police and Shiite guards, including former militiamen. The late Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini lived for years in exile in Najaf and Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, studied there.

Generations of tensions between Shiites and Sunnis turned into bloodshed after a Feb. 22 bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra. Extremists among both communities have been embroiled in tit-for-tat attacks since then, fueling fears that Iraq was on the verge of civil war.

A bombing near another Shiite shrine in Kufa, the twin city of Najaf, on July 18 killed 53 people. Thursday's explosions is the first time that an attack has taken place near the Imam Ali shrine.

The Shiite Endowment urged people not to be incited by "this terrorist and criminal attack." The attack shows "blind hatred and insistence on blasphemy," the endowment said in a statement, and called on people "to remain united" to thwart sectarianism.

Sectarian clashes have largely occurred in the Baghdad area, where about 1,500 violent deaths were reported last month, a dramatic rise from about 1,000 deaths in January. Most of the deaths were believed to be the result of sectarian feuding.

The bloodshed has dashed U.S. hopes for an early drawdown in the 127,000-member U.S. military force here. Instead, the U.S. military is rushing about 12,000 American and Iraqi soldiers to Baghdad.

Iraq's National Security Adviser Mouwaffak al-Rubaie announced Thursday that Iraqi police arrested 20 al-Qaida members and killed one around the country in the past few days.

He said five top al-Qaida terrorists were arrested in Baghdad and one was killed. He announced their names and showed photos of five.

In scattered violence, 11 people were killed Thursday, including three policemen in a gunfight between Interior Ministry forces and insurgents in Baghdad. Five bodies were also found Thursday.

Six British-bound flights from the Mediterranean city of Nice - four operated by British Airways and two by the low-cost carrier Easyjet - were also cancelled, leaving hundreds of passengers stranded, the airport said.

The British government was scrambling to tighten airport security as the country went on its highest state of terror alert, following the discovery of a foil plot to bomb a place between Britain and the United States.

The terror alert level in French airports was so far unchanged at 'red', the third highest on a four-colour scale, but security was stepped up at British airline check-in counters at Paris Charles de Gaulle airport, police said.

Sarkozy cut short his holiday to chair a meeting Thursday afternoon with national police chiefs and top officials from the intelligence and national security services, who were to decide on possible extra security measures.

France's civil aviation authority was to hold a separate meeting at midday to discuss the security threat.

British Home Secretary John Reid said the foiled plot discovered early Thursday was "very significant" and designed to "bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions, causing a considerable loss of life."

Police said it involved hiding explosive devices in hand luggage and that many arrests had been made, although the number was unclear.

Barely enough room was left at Heathrow's Terminal One check-in for people to line up as some queues reached out the door.

Inside many passengers were going through hand luggage to remove those items they could take on board.

A bmi representative said they were trying to stop families and friends entering the airport with passengers.

They were also recommending passengers rebook their flights.

She said: "Many business travellers have just turned around and gone home because they take one look at these queues and know that they're not going anywhere. But we have had trouble with people returning home to long haul destinations because they haven't got anywhere else to stay if they are delayed."


The delays were caused by a new Department for Transport policy stating, with immediate effect, that all cabin baggage must be processed as hold baggage.

Travellers are only being allowed to take a limited number of items on board by hand - in a single transparent plastic carrier bag - and nothing may be carried in pockets.

Items which can be taken on board by hand in the bag include pocket sized wallets and purses, travel documents and prescription medicines.

All passengers are being hand searched and footwear is being x-ray screened.

Pushchairs and walking aids are also being x-ray screened and only airport-provided wheelchairs are allowed to pass through the screening point.

The DoT said: "Regrettably, significant delays at airports are inevitable.

"We hope that these measures, which are being kept under review by the Government, will need to be in place for a limited period only."

"The MoD (Ministry of Defence) must address equipment shortages and capability gaps as a matter of urgency. Our forces cannot wait for long-term procurement projects to come to fruition; they need the kit now.

"We cannot send them on operations without giving them the tools they need to do the job."

British involvement in the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq is still a controversial subject here, particularly with the mounting death toll: 115 British personnel have since been killed in Iraq.

Concerns about equipment are equally long-standing: US troops nicknamed their British counterparts "The Borrowers" because of their frequent requests for kit while other problems date from the 1991 Gulf War.

Chief among the MPs' worries was the ineffectiveness of so-called "Snatch" Land Rovers against the increasing use of road-side bombs.

Defence Secretary Des Browne has already ordered an urgent review after several soldiers died while on patrol; he has pledged to send more heavily-protected vehicles to both Iraq and Afghanistan.

But the members of parliament said: "It is unsatisfactory that the lack of capability was not addressed with greater urgency much earlier."

On helicopters, they said there was a "deeply concerning shortage" and if not addressed, "the effectiveness and coherence of UK operations on the ground will suffer".

The committee also said it was "alarmed" that explosive-suppressant foam may not be fitted to aircraft, despite the deaths of 10 personnel in a missile attack on their Hercules C-130 transport plane in January 2005.

Former defence secretary John Reid conceded in May this year that the foam -- which stops fuel tanks exploding when pierced by bullets and has been standard on US planes since the Vietnam War -- may have saved their lives.

On repeated tours of duty, the MPs said official denials of overstretch "contrasts with what we are hearing from service personnel on the ground".

"The issues raised in this report give rise to a fundamental question: are our armed forces structured, trained and equipped to fulfil the role envisaged for them...

"This is a question that goes to the heart of the government's defence policy. We believe this question needs to be addressed."

In response, Browne said many of the report's recommendations were already being carried out.

"There is no room for complacency, and I welcome the committee's scrutiny. I will respond to the report in full when I have studied it in more detail," he added.

US ambassador John Bolton acknowledged that there are "disagreements" and "areas of uncertainty", but insisted both sides were working hard to draw up a new resolution.

Officials said a Security Council vote on the resolution was now unlikely before
Friday.

France's President Jacques Chirac has hinted that his country may present its own resolution if there is no agreement with the United States.

"It seems indeed that there are American reservations towards adopting the proposal," Chirac said of the Lebanese demands for amendments to the French-US text.

Beirut's demands for an Israeli withdrawal from its territory and its plan to send 15,000 Lebanese troops to take control of Hezbollah-dominated southern Lebanon have caused the new split between the transatlantic allies.

Bolton indicated however that the United States, Israel's main ally, remains concerned about how to disarm and keep Hezbollah fighters out of positions to launch attacks on Israel.

He told reporters "everybody wants to see this (resolution) used to transform the situation in the region, which means fundamentally that we don't want Hezbollah to reinfiltrate the southern part of Lebanon."

Bolton added: "The question remains how to have an effective security presence in the southern part of Lebanon as the Israeli forces withdraw, when that becomes appropriate, and how you put that together, how you arrange that politically, how that becomes part of the overall transformation of Lebanon."

"Positions have changed; there are new circumstances unquestionably that do have an effect," said Bolton. "But it doesn't change the basic objective that we have and we are struggling now to make sure that the first resolution goes as far as we can to accomplish those objectives."

The US ambassador said the Lebanese offer to deploy troops was "significant" and that it would be taken into account in the new draft, but did not say how.

Speaking of the talks with France, Bolton said: "The disagreements, the areas of uncertainty, are things that we are working very hard on and I don't think a purpose would be served exposing all of them in public."

France and the United States face strong Arab resistance to their current draft text which does not specifically call for an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon after any end to hostilities.

An Arab League delegation warned the Security Council on Tuesday there would be civil war in Lebanon if Israel's troops did not leave. More than four weeks into conflict, the Arab ministers also criticised the delay in Security Council action.

"It is most saddening that this council stands idly by, crippled and unable to stop the bloodbath, which has become the bitter daily lot of the unarmed Lebanese people," Qatar's foreign minister told a special council debate on the conflict.

"If we adopt a resolution without fully considering the reality of Lebanon, we will face a civil war and, instead of helping Lebanon, we will destroy Lebanon," added the minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani.

Israel's UN ambassador Dan Gillerman told the Security Council there has to be a "strong, robust and effective international force" in southern Lebanon to counter Hezbollah.

He also called for international action to stop Iran and Syria - which he called "the merchants of terror in Damascus and Tehran" - from supplying arms to Hezbollah.

The problem is that such cracks exist and no one is really making an effort to hide them anymore. Rifts between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz. Rifts between Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz. And those between the head of the Mossad, Meir Dagan and Head of the Imtelligence Corps, Amos Yadlin. And between Peretz and his predecessor, Shaul Mofaz and between Mofaz and Avi Dichter. One of those present summed the situation up by saying, "everyone was involved in at least one quarrel."

The prime minister does not like the master plan prepared for him this week by Peretz and Halutz. He feared that sending in several divisions to operate for a month, possibly two, in the hostile territory of southern Lebanon would entail multiple casualties, an ongoing occupation and would gnaw at the already dwindling remnants of Israel's international support. It is doubtful whether the Katyusha fire on northern Israeli towns would cease, even after such an operation. There will always be some Hezbollah man on donkey-back, poised and ready to launch a rocket into the Galilee, just like the Palestinian Qassam launchers are doing in Gaza.

But Olmert's reservations clash with his original position, that the political echelon should not interfere with operational decisions, and that it should follow the army's recommendations. What should he do? Olmert found two ways to solve this dilemma - he allowed Mofaz to present before the ministers his plan for a swift, limited operation, a plan that would enable Israel to announce victory quickly and with a minimal casualties. Mofaz met with Olmert on Tuesday and presented his plan. According to one version of the story, he also told the chief of staff about it before the meeting.

The ministers reacted enthusiastically to the plan, and Peretz realized he had been ambushed. It was an obvious trick: The minister who has the most military experience in the government, Lieutenant General (res.) Shaul Mofaz, proposes an elegant and mischievous scheme, to counter the weighty, clumsy and danger-riddled plan proposed by his heir. If there are any complications, the public will know there was a simpler, cheaper solution.

Then Peretz burst reminding that Mofaz had been the one who neglected to deal with Hezbollah's massive arming during his tenure in the past few years. When the meeting was over, the accusations continued - on the one hand, voiced claimed that even if you have a new operational plan, you shouldn't wave it at a cabinet meeting just to demonstrate your superiority. Others counterclaimed that Mofaz had been opposed to Israel's unilateral pullout from Lebanon in the spring of 2000, and had also warned Israel of the dangers of the rocket arsenal there.
Olmert made efforts to restore calm in the meeting and explained that since he must maintain authority and responsibility, he can only bring the defense establishment's proposal up to a vote.

In the end, his salvation came from Condoleezza Rice. The U.S. Secretary of State called to inform the cabinet of expected progress in talks over a UN resolution which have so far been unfruitful. Livni had earlier conditioned her support for the proposal on a "timeout" to pursue a diplomatic resolution first before going ahead with the operation. As a result of Rice's news, Olmert and Livni managed to convince Peretz that the operation should be postponed for at least 48 hours.

And so the cabinet meeting ended in a rather predictable compromise: Approval of an outline of the operation in principle, while postponing its implementation to allow for development in the UN talks. Troops, however, will take up positions in preparation for the operation. Israel is telling the UN "hold me back," in efforts to prevent itself from getting swept up in any one decision and hoping for the best. Olmert's moment of truth has been postponed, at least until Friday.

Multiple flights to multiple American cities were put on alert. Specifically, these airlines included United Airlines, American Airlines and Continental Airlines Inc., the two counterterrorism officials said. American and United flights were turned into terrorist weapons on Sept. 11, 2001, when they were hijacked and crashed.

It is the first time the red alert level in the Homeland Security warning system has been invoked, although there have been brief periods in the past when the orange level was applied. Homeland Security defines the red alert as designating a "severe risk of terrorist attacks."

"We believe that these arrests (in London) have significantly disrupted the threat, but we cannot be sure that the threat has been entirely eliminated or the plot completely thwarted," said Homeland Security Secretary
Michael Chertoff in announcing that the threat level for flights from Britain to the United States has been raised to the highest "severe or red" level.

"To defend further against any remaining threat from this plot, we will also raise the threat level to high, or orange, for all commercial aviation operating in or destined for the United States," Chertoff said.

A statement issued by Chertoff said "currently, there is no indication ... of plotting within the United States."

A U.S. law enforcement official said there have been no arrests in the United States connected to the plot.

A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said authorities believe dozens of people and as many as 50 were involved or connected to the overseas plot that was unraveled Wednesday evening. The plan "had a footprint to al-Qaida back to it," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

It was not believed to be connected to the Egyptian students who disappeared in the United States more than a week ago before reaching a college they were supposed to attend in Montana. Three of the 11 have since been found and the
FBI has said neither they nor the still-missing eight are believed to be a threat.

The plan involved airline passengers hiding masked explosives in carryon luggage, the official said. "They were not yet sitting on an airplane," but were very close to traveling, the official said, calling the plot "the real deal."

U.S. intelligence has been working closely with the British on the investigation, which has been ongoing for months, the second official said.

Authorities have not yet arrested or detained all suspects who are believed to be involved in the plot, the official said, prompting Chertoff's alarm.

"Consistent with these higher threat levels, the Transportation Security Administration is coordinating with federal partners, airport authorities and commercial airlines on expanding the intensity of existing security requirements," Chertoff said.

"Due to the nature of the threat revealed by this investigation, we are prohibiting any liquids, including beverages, hair gels, and lotions from being carried on the airplane."

He said the changes take effect at 4 a.m. local time across the United States and will be undated as warranted.

The metal detector and X-ray machines at airport security checkpoints cannot detect explosives. At many, but not all airport checkpoints, the TSA has deployed walkthrough "sniffer" or "puffer" machines that can detect explosives residue.

As part of the foiled Bojinka Plot to blow up 12 Western airliners simultaneously over the Pacific Ocean in the mid-1990s, terrorist mastermind Ramzi Youssef planned to put together an improvised bomb using liquid in a contact lens solution container.

Chertoff said travelers in the United States "should also anticipate additional security measures within the airport and at screening checkpoints."

Multiple airlines with flights to multiple U.S. airports were at risk, according to a western counterterrorism official. Another official refused to identify the airlines because they were still being notified of the threat but referred to them as the "usual suspects." In the past, U.S. cities with terrorism threats or plots have included Washington, New York, Boston and Los Angeles. Airlines whose planes were hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001, were United Airlines and American Airlines. British Airways has also dealt with numerous threats in recent years.

"These measures will continue to assure that our aviation system remains safe and secure," Chertoff added. "Travelers should go about their plans confidently, while maintaining vigilance in their surroundings and exercising patience with screening and security officials."

At U.S. Northern Command, the military headquarters established in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to improve coordination of the defense of U.S. territory, spokesman Sean Kelly declined to comment on any precautionary steps taken in response to the heightened threat levels.

"It is inappropriate to speculate or comment on any current operational activities or discuss future force protection measures," he said.

Prime Minister Tony Blair's office said in London that the prime minister, vacationing in the Caribbean, had briefed
President Bush on the situation overnight.

There was no immediate public reaction from the White House. Bush is spending a few days at his ranch near Crawford, Texas.

The Homeland Security Department devised the alert system after the Sept. 11 attacks. The last time the U.S. government raised the terrorist risk here to orange, or high, was in July 2005 after the subway bombings in London. It was lowered to yellow a month later, the elevated risk status that has been the norm since the system was created.

U.S. authorities, including the Transportation Security Administration, planned a news briefing early Thursday.

In London, Britain's Home Secretary John Reid said the alleged plot was "significant" and that terrorists aimed to "bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions, causing a considerable loss of life."

Police arrested a number of people overnight in London after a major covert counterterrorism operation that had lasted several months, but did not immediately say how many. Heathrow airport in London was closed for most European flights.

The national threat level in Britain was raised to critical - a warning level that indicates the likelihood of an imminent terrorist attack. The threat rating was posted on the Web site of Britain's MI5 - the British domestic spy agency.