"I know that Colin Powell wants to beat the terrorists too," he said.

The latest sign of GOP division over White House security policy came Thursday in a letter that Powell sent to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of three rebellious senators taking on the White House. Powell said Congress must not pass Bush's proposal to redefine U.S. compliance with the Geneva Conventions, a treaty that sets international standards for the treatment of prisoners of war.

The campaign-season development accompanied Bush's visit to Capitol Hill, where he conferred behind closed doors with House Republicans. His plan would narrow the U.S. legal interpretation of the Geneva Conventions treaty in a bid to allow tougher interrogations and shield U.S. personnel from being prosecuted for war crimes.

"The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," said Powell, who served under Bush and is a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk."

Bush said that "there's all kinds of letters coming out" and he cited letters from the Pentagon that support his argument.

Snow said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has weighed in on the issue.

"In a case where the treaty's terms are inherently vague, it is appropriate for a state to look to its own legal framework, precedents, concepts and norms in interpreting those terms and carrying out its international obligations," Snow quoted Rice as saying in a letter to lawmakers. "Such practice in the application of a treaty is an accepted reference point in international law."

Republican dissatisfaction with the administration's security proposals is becoming more prominent as the midterm election season has arrived. The Bush White House wants Congress to approve greater executive power to spy on, imprison and interrogate terrorism suspects.

Leaving his closed-door meeting with the House GOP caucus, Bush said he "reminded them that the most important job of government is to protect the homeland."

In an effort to drum up support, the White House released a second letter to lawmakers signed by the military's top uniformed lawyers. Saying they wanted to "clarify" past testimony on Capitol Hill in which they opposed the administration's plan, the service lawyers wrote that they "do not object" to sections of Bush's proposal for the treatment of detainees and found the provisions "helpful."

Two congressional aides who favor McCain's plan said the military lawyers signed that letter after refusing to endorse an earlier one offered by the Pentagon's general counsel, William Haynes, that expressed more forceful support for Bush's plan.

The aides spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. Asked if Haynes had encouraged them to write the letter, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said, "Not that I'm aware of."

Bush was forced to propose the measure after the Supreme Court ruled in June that his existing court system established to prosecute terrorism suspects was illegal and violated the Geneva Conventions. The White House legislation would create military commissions to prosecute terror suspects, as well as redefine acts that constitute war crimes.

For Bush, the election season visit capped a week of high-profile administration pressure to rescue bills mired in turf battles and privacy concerns. It also gave GOP leaders a chance to press for loyalty among Republicans confronted on the campaign trail by war-weary voters.

"I have not really seen anybody running away from the president," House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters this week when asked about the caucus' split. "Frankly, I think that would be a bad idea."

At nearly the same time Bush met with House Republicans, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on Thursday was asking his panel to finish an alternative to the White House plan to prosecute terror suspects and redefine acts that constitute war crimes.

Warner believes the administration proposal would lower the standard for the treatment of prisoners, potentially putting U.S. troops at risk should other countries retaliate.

The 41-year-old author had participated in an Aug. 1 book reading for charity with fellow writers Stephen King and John Irving. Security was drastically tightened after Aug. 10 when British police said they had intercepted a plot to blow up U.S.-bound airliners.

"The heightened security restrictions on the airlines made the journey back from New York interesting, as I refused to be parted from the manuscript of book seven.

"A large part of it is handwritten and there was no copy of anything I had done while in the U.S."

Eventually, she added, "They let me take it on, thankfully, bound up in elastic bands."

America's Transportation Security Administration has "never implemented a ban on carryon luggage for flights originating in the United States," TSA spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said. "A manuscript would certainly be allowed to be carried on."

British Airways did ban carryon baggage on flights between the U.S. and Britain last month when the threat alert was raised because a terror plot was broken up in England.

Rowling said she was still considering two possible titles for the last of the boy wizard's adventures.

"I was quite happy with one of them until the other one struck me while I was taking a shower in New York," she wrote.

"They would both be appropriate, so I think I'll have to wait until I'm further into the book to decide which one works best."

In one of the illegally taped conversations broadcast Tuesday, which apparently date back to 2004, the governor of the state of Veracruz, Fidel Herrera of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), and Emilio Gamboa, head of the party's bloc in the lower house of Congress, can be heard talking on friendly terms with textile mogul Kamel Nacif.

Nacif, a Mexican of Lebanese origin, who in the obscenity-laced conversation can be heard asking Gamboa to block a gambling bill to be debated by Congress, is suing Cacho for libel.

In her 2004 book "Los demonios del Edén" (The Demons of Eden), Cacho -- who is a journalist and writer as well as the director of a women's shelter in Cancún -- links Nacif with Jean Succar, a Lebanese-born hotel owner who is in prison facing charges of arranging paedophile parties in that Mexican resort town.

In another of the anonymously recorded conservations leaked to the press and broadcast Tuesday, Nacif can be heard talking with Succar.

Succar, under arrest in Mexico since July, after he was extradited from the United States, can be heard asking Nacif for a seven million dollar loan to purchase a hotel in Cancún, to which Nacif responds in the affirmative.

Later, the two exchange information on "the girl from Miami," who they refer to as "putita" (little whore), and who they say they have paid 2,000 dollars. Succar asks Nacif when it would be best to bring the girl to Cancún, and the latter responds that "next week, you son of a b***h, but you bring her to fornicate."

In Cacho's book, Succar is identified as the head of a ring of adults who subjected underage girls to sexual abuse in Cancún, in which Nacif allegedly took part.

Succar was arrested in February 2004 in the United States on child abuse charges and was extradited to Mexico in July, where he also faces charges for money laundering and organised crime.

"Los demonios del Edén" contains the personal accounts of minors who talk about the sexual abuse they suffered at the hands of a ring in which prominent figures were allegedly involved. The youngsters describe how the hotel owner sexually abused them himself, set up a prostitution ring to allow others to abuse them, and photographed them in order to sell the pornographic images on the Internet.

A 2004 study by researcher Elena Azaola, which estimated that some 17,000 children under the age of 18 are victims of the sex trade in Mexico, is also based on interviews with minors who managed to escape, as well as visits to establishments where underage girls and boys are forced to work as prostitutes.

The two PRI politicians, Herrera and Gamboa, denied having any illegal ties with Nacif, and said they did not even know Succar. From their point of view, the airing of the tapped phone conversations was a low political blow aimed at their party.

The PRI, which ruled Mexico from 1929 to 2000, came in third in the Jul. 2 presidential and legislative elections.

Gamboa is one of the lawmakers who have approached Felipe Calderón of the conservative governing National Action Party (PAN) over the last few days, since he was confirmed as president-elect by the electoral court.

Javier González, a leader of the leftist Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) legislators, said the leaked conversations between Nacif and the PRI politicians showed that the political system "is rotten."

The PRD argues that its candidate, Andrés López Obrador, lost the elections to Calderón because of fraud.

Cacho agrees that corruption is rife. "Many businessmen like Nacif have amassed huge fortunes in exchange for dark favours to politicians."

So far, no direct link between politicians or prominent businessmen and child porn or sex rings has been proven. But there are suspicions, which are fuelled by Nacif and his web of contacts.

Cacho, who has been under police protection since last year, when she began to receive death threats, was referred to in earlier leaked conversations, between Nacif and Mario Marín, governor of the state of Puebla, near the capital.

In the tapped conversations, Marín, a member of the PRI, can be heard telling Nacif that "I just gave a bump on the head to that old witch."

The two men also discussed how they had the activist arrested and thrown into a cell with "nutcases and dykes (lesbians)," so that she would be raped -- something that did not occur, because in the prison, "the prisoners themselves and the guards protected me," the writer said in an earlier conversation with IPS.

The tapes, which were sent to the press anonymously and broadcast in February, were apparently recorded in December 2005, after Cacho was thrown into jail for 30 hours, after a grueling 20-hour drive from her home in Cancún to Puebla.

The activist was arrested in connection with the libel suit brought against her by Nacif.

But when the news of her arrest broke, the rights watchdog Amnesty International, the World Organisation Against Torture, the Inter-American Press Association and other international groups raised an outcry, and Cacho was released on bail.

After the scandal triggered by the leaked phone conversations in February, in which the governor of Puebla and Nacif -- who owns factories in that state -- are heard discussing actions to teach Cacho a lesson, the Supreme Court initiated an investigation to determine whether or not Marín had engaged in criminal activity.

A source close to the case however downplayed the significance of the case. "It is purely administrative," he said.

Britain, which suffered a deadly multiple terrorist attack in London in July 2005, is on a high state of alert since the discovery last month of an alleged plot to blow up transatlantic airliners.

A Home Office spokeswoman said: "A foreign national who had been identified as representing a threat to the national security of the UK was yesterday deported to France.

"The individual has dual French-Algerian nationality," it said, adding that he was the third suspect to be deported from Britain on national security grounds since last year's London bombings, which killed 56 people.

She added: "Our priority is to protect public safety and national security. The British government is grateful to the French authorities for their co-operation in facilitating the deportation of this individual."

The suspect was detained under immigration rules on September 23, 2004.

He had lodged an unsuccessful appeal to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, which hears appeals from foreigners facing detention, deportation or exclusion on national security grounds, but was granted bail.

During those hearings it was alleged that he had links with the Abu Doha terror group, an Algerian group connected with al-Qaeda.

The man then appealed to the Court of Appeal, which deals with cases where people feel they have been unfairly sentenced, in June this year but on August 4 that appeal was also dismissed.

Siac heard that the man has a "common-law wife" who is British and a daughter. The couple had undergone a form of Islamic marriage.

According to judicial sources, he had protested that deportation to France would "disrupt his life."

The Home Office spokeswoman said that authorities have a commitment to protect British citizens. "Where a foreign national living in the UK is a threat to this country we will seek to deport them," she said.

Critics warned that allowing sensitive financial information to be viewed by all public bodies would leave it wide open to identity fraud. And pensioners who take stands against soaring council tax bills by refusing to pay could have their rights to pension credit withdrawn.

Data-sharing powers would also allow the electoral roll to be used to police the ID card database - allowing residents to be fined up to £2,500 for not registering their name or address.

Data protection laws - which are supposed to safeguard individuals' rights to information held about them - will be changed to force the moves through.

Ministers want the changes in place by April next year. The plans would see a massive sharing of all state databases including the electoral roll, benefits records and information collected by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency - but taxpayer, medical and criminal records would be exempt.

MPs and civil liberties campaigners condemned the moves as a further erosion of individual's privacy by the Big Brother state. The plans were published yesterday in a blandly-worded 'vision statement' by Lord Falconer's Department for Constitutional Affairs.

The document says civil servants and council workers must 'fully understand that the Data Protection Act is not a barrier to appropriate information sharing'.

The Government insisted the database would help people moving house avoid contacting local authority, driving licence and the Inland Revenue separately because records would be updated automatically.

Information should be routinely shared 'to expand opportunities for the most disadvantaged, fight crime and provide better services' and in other instances 'where it is in the public interest'.

Constitutional Affairs Minister Baroness Ashton said the Government was 'committed to more information sharing between public sector organisations and service providers'.

But Ministers have already made inroads into individual freedoms, including the creation of a £200 million Children's Index which will create a file containing information on the health and education of every child in England and Wales.

A report last month warned that a database holding the personal details on ten million children will hand a 'dangerous weapon' to paedophiles.

The Valuation Office Agency is building a detailed property database of every home - including information on conservatories, scenic views and gardens - in preparation for the shake-up of council tax.

Microchips are being fitted in household dustbins by councils to pave the way for a new rubbish tax, imposed on householders who do not meet recycling targets.

And the DVLA was criticised this year after it emerged it had sold the driving licence details of more than 100,000 motorists to private firms. But Simon Davies of Privacy International said the plans were 'alarming', adding: 'Who will decide what is in the public interest?'

Gareth Crossman, policy director of Liberty, said: 'The Government seems set on moving from a situation where information is not shared unless there is a reason to do so, towards one where information will be shared unless there is a reason not to. 'This is an information free-for-all which is very worrying.' Shadow Constitutional Affairs Secretary Oliver Heald said: 'Step by step, the Government is logging details of every man, woman and child - and their home - in "Big Brother" computers. For all of Labour's talk of human rights, it's clear their state inspectors have little respect for people's privacy.

'There is a case for Government agencies to share data to tackle crime and prevent fraud. But I fear the wholesale weakening of Data Protection laws will merely be used as a sinister excuse for bureaucrats to snoop in people's homes and Gordon Brown to increase taxes by stealth.'

Phil Booth, of the NO2ID campaign, said: 'From now on, you can assume that anything you tell to an official or public servant will not only go on your record, but be passed on to anyone at all in "the public interest" - which has already been neatly redefined to mean 'official convenience'.

'How many thousands of officials will now have free rein to snoop on your personal, business and children's lives?'

The House's bill last December and one passed by the Senate last May are so far apart on issues that Republican leaders haven't even tried to negotiate a compromise.

The main difference is that the Senate bill would provide legal status to millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S., a concept supported by President Bush but opposed by most House Republicans. The Senate bill calls for 370 miles of fencing along the Mexican border.

Supporters of the new House bill said the new fencing would let Border Patrol agents focus more on apprehending illegal immigrants crossing from Mexico rather than having to man the entire border.

"We have to come to grips with the fact that our Border Patrol agents need a border fence on our southern border ... where we're now facing infiltration by members of terrorist organizations like Hezbollah," said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif.

The bill passed Thursday doesn't pay for the fence. Republicans, estimating the cost at more than $2 billion, said that will be covered in a later spending bill. Democrats estimated the fence would cost $7 billion, based on information from the Department of Homeland Security on costs per mile of a double-layer fence.

"This is nothing more than political gamesmanship in the run-up to the midterm elections. Sounds good. Does nothing," said Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla.

Democrats accused Republicans of playing upon voters' fears to score political points. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, said Republicans were trying to confuse Americans into thinking "Osama bin Laden is heading north in a sombrero."

The bill also directs the Homeland Security Department to take control of the border in 18 months and gives border agents new authority to stop fleeing vehicles. It also calls for a study of the need for a fence on the U.S.-Canadian border.

Meanwhile, the House Administration Committee approved a bill to require states to ask for photo identification from voters by November 2008 and proof of citizenship by 2010. The full House could vote on it as early as next week.

House leaders unveiled other border security bills addressing immigrant gangs, speedier deportations and other issues they plan to consider.

Senate Republicans said its unlikely the fence proposal would pass in that chamber as a single bill, but might win approval if attached to spending bills.

Defying the White House, three senior Republican senators - John McCain, John Warner and Lindsey Graham - drafted alternative legislation in line with the Conventions. It would end the CIA interrogation of suspects abroad.

General Powell then broke ranks with Mr Bush yesterday, publishing a letter he sent to the senators in which he wrote: "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism. To redefine Common Article 3 [of the Conventions] would add to those doubts. Furthermore it would put our own troops at risk."

Mr Bush's proposal is part of a broader Bill aimed at setting up military tribunals for terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay. The Republican senators also rejected Mr Bush's proposal to restrict the amount of evidence available to defendants in terrror trials.

The White House presented the legislation after the Supreme Court declared the current tribunal system as unlawful and in breach of the Geneva Conventions.

Mr Bush is pushing for his tougher legislation seven weeks before November's mid-term elections, in which the White House is trying to paint the Democrats as weak on terrorism. "It is very important for the American people to understand that in order to protect this country, we must be able to interrogate people who have information about future attacks," the President said.

There are many good things that New Labour has done since 1997, mostly things Labour committed itself to before the New Labour coup, but I have reached a stage where I am profoundly ashamed of the Government. Blair's craven support for the extremism of US neoconservative foreign policy has exacerbated the danger of terrorism and the instability and suffering of the Middle East. He has dishonoured the UK, undermined the UN and international law and helped to make the world a more dangerous place. The erosion of the rule of law and civil liberties has weakened our democracy and increased Muslim alienation.

Gordon Brown's commitment to a replacement of Trident, in one throwaway sentence, is an insult to democracy. The approach of New Labour to public sector reform has demeaned the precious value of public services. And in addition to the arrogance and lack of principle of New Labour, there is an incredible incompetence. Policy is announced from Number 10 to grab media attention and nothing is properly thought through.

Cabinet government has gone, the House of Commons - with guillotines on all business - is weak and ineffective, and the rise of the third party means our electoral system is ever-more distorted. The vote in 2005 of 9.54 million was the second-lowest Labour vote in post-war Britain. With the support of only 22 per cent of the electorate, we see power more concentrated in a Number 10 that consults no one, engages in deceit over matters of profound importance and is not held to account by Cabinet, parliamentary party or the wider party. The Prime Minister's powers of patronage turn too many MPs into obedient ciphers who await the call to ministerial office or quiet elders who await the House of Lords.

The Labour Party has lost its way, our constitutional arrangements are broken and the gap between the political elite and the country grows ever wider. At the same time, Britain has become more unequal, violent and unhappy. And the world is in desperate trouble. The situation in the Middle East will get worse, and global warming threatens massive disruption.

There are answers to these enormous challenges, but not on the path we are on. To improve the quality of life in the UK, we need to look to the Scandinavian model. On foreign policy, we need to try to work with the EU and others so that the world is capable of reaching agreement to face the challenge of global warming, population growth and environmental strain.

Stay and fight, some argue. But there is no discussion of policy any more. The challenge to Blair and discussions of a new leadership are confined to personalities and all commit to continue the Blair errors.

My conclusion is that the key to the change we need is a hung parliament which will bring in electoral reform. Then we would have a second election. Labour - with existing levels of support - would have one-third of the seats in the Commons, the Tories something similar, and we would be likely to see some Greens and others added, creating a plurality of voices and power centres in the Commons. British politics would then change profoundly. Parliament, and in turn the people, would have to be listened to, Cabinet government would return, the error-prone arrogance of Number 10 would end, and we would have a chance of creating a new politics, a more civilised country and a more honourable role in the world.

The Chief Whip has warned me that I cannot recommend a hung parliament because it would mean Labour MPs losing their seats. I am standing down so that I can speak my truth and support the changes that are needed. Sad to say, it is now almost impossible to do this as a Labour MP.

The writer is Labour MP for Birmingham, Ladywood