But he has the ability to indirectly "blackmail" people in high office: in that he puts those who talk to him in favorable light in his narrative, and those who don't talk to him in a very negative light. That is his method. It is the method of yellow journalism of course. You have to know that, to know what you are getting.

Bob Woodward is a close social friend with Prince Bandar, so Bandar always comes across as forceful and important and heroic.

His first two books on the Bush administration are pathatically fawning and hagiographic. He is somebody who knows people in power, and yet is very easily impressed with them, and is easily swayed. He is not a good journalist: and Watergate was not due to diligence or great journalistic skills on his part. He simply was lucky to receive the information from "deep throat." That was all.

When I read the press accounts of the book I knew that there was much more than was reported. Many in the US media will not read the book, but will read the reviews. And the reviews so far simply repeat the same points made in the first account in NYT. Many important things were missed, I felt.

In general, Woodward is different in this book. He atypically inserts himself in the narrative, and offers a point of two but only to resurrect himself from the sagging reputation from the last two books.

You read the book, and several things come to your mind. How incompetent not only is Bush, but the rest of the team: Rice, Rumsfeld (who uses his knowledge and "competence" to scheme and lie and deceive), Pace, Myers, Hadley, etc. There was a scene that said it all for me: it was a meeting with videoconference, and there was Bush instructing Khalilzad on how to best deal with Sunnis and Shi'ites. Yes, Bush opining on Sunnis and Shi'ites: a classic of the bland leading the bland.

There you have Bush (as candidate for president) telling Prince Bandar: "I don't have the foggiest idea about what I think about international, foreign policy." (p. 3). There was a reference about Bandar establishing friendships around the world including with leaders in Israel (p. 4). Bush telling Rice "I don't have any idea about foreign affairs." (p. 6); that same man is now running the world, and wanting to restructure the Middle East. If only the American people, especially those who voted for him, would see the tragic ironies in those admissions. How little American voters ask of their leaders, especially--ironically--when they run for the presidency.

There was a scene in which Bandar was informing Bush about the impressions of "the Arab minds." (p. 46). And this advocate of "democracy" and "liberty"--Bush that is--telling Prince Bandar that "Let me make one thing clear up front: nothing should ever break the relationship between us."(p. 76). No matter how many violations of human rights are perpetrated by House of Saud.

On p. 80 there was a reference to a casual conversation between Bush and Bandar in which the former initiates casually the notorious rendition policy: "If we get somebody and we can't get them to cooperate, we'll hand them over to you."

And then you read about the special secret group that Wolfowitz at the Pentagon formed to advise the US government "well into the Afghanistan bombing campaign." The elite group included such luminaries as Bernard Lewis (he probably regaled them with his numerological predications), Fareed Zakaria, Fouad Ajami, James Q. Wilson, Reuel Marc Gerecht, etc. You get the idea. If those were advising the government on the Middle East and Islam, you know what to expect. They produced a secret document, says Woodward, which had the "insights" that you read in Friedman's columns (I wonder why he was not included), the bunk about the civil war within Islam. They basically urged the government to go to war against Iraq, concluding that such a war is "inevitable." (p. 84).

In the Iraq war (as it was being planned, Bush saw a "public relations opportunity" (p. 107) in the Arab world. You learn that Gen. Abizaid was picked for his command position because he knew "the Arab mind so well." (p. 116). And then the US government got busy: a search was under way. Rumsfeld issued orders: "[f]ind Iraq's Hamid Karzai." (p. 131). Bandar then advised Bush and Rice to retain Saddam's intelligence service: "Look, their intel service was the most efficient."(p. 163)

On p. 167, you learn that when US officials (in preparation for the war) talked about Iraqis, they meant Iraqi exiles; and when they talked about Iraqi exiles, they meant Ahmad Chalabi. On p. 187, you learn that the White House lied when it claimed that it had nothing to do with the Mission Accomplished sign; in fact, it was in the original speech by Bush, but Rumsfeld removed it on time.

Bremer, upon assuming his responsibilities in Baghdad bragged: "I am the Iraqi government for now."(p. 199). If this is not "liberation" what is? The US officials thought that Shaykh Qazwini is "a leading cleric" (p. 222). They never heard of Sistani until the war. And Cheney was so involved in the search for WMDs that he would send location tips: he "seemed to have a conviction that something had gone to Lebanon's Bekaa Valley".(p. 238) In a meeting with Bush, he asked: "Do we have the communications strategy to be able to run with AlJazeera"? Bush asked. We have a network. We're using it," someone said. "We should--Do we have the communications network?" Bush asked. "Yes," someone said again. "We have our network, and we're also trying to use AlJazeera and Al Arabiya to the extent we can."

Later, you learn that the top US official in Iraq, Bremer, "did not try to hide his disdain for the Iraqis. "Those people couldn't organize a parade, let alone run the country," he told Wolfowitz.(p. 249)

On p. 255, you read George Tenet bragging: "We created the Jordanian intelligence service and now we own it."

In 2004, Prince Bandar promised Bush that Saudi Arabia is committed to "reform" but he asked that the US "ease on continuous rhetoric on this issue in order for the Saudi individual not to think that we are doing this because of pressure from the United States."(p. 287) You read this book and it confirms my theory (one of them anyway), that Lakhdar Ibrahimi is a cheap tool of US foreign policy. He does what he is told. No question asked. They order him to go to Iraq, and he goes. He had reservations but when Bush asked him, he was out of the door. How much I disrespect you, Akhdar Ibrahimi: an Arab nationalist in Arabic, and a neo-conservative in English, and pro-Chirac in French. A man for all leaders. He stands for nothing, really.

On Allawi, Woodward says: "So the new leader of Iraq was to be a CIA man who was skeptical of democracy and had little influence with Sistani and the clerics, who held most the power."(p. 313)

After one battle between US troops and gunmen on the Syrian border, Bush inquired excitedly: "How many did we kill"?(p. 319)

In Oct. 2004, Allawi asked Bush for a private jet because he was embarrassed flying in US Air Force planes.(p 333). How patriotic of him.

Also in 2004, King 'Abdullah of Saudi Arabia "sent Bush a prayer, which the president told Bandar he used. "This is the most precious thing I ever got," the president said." (p. 335)

In the last "election" in Iraq, the British took care of "helping" Allawi to avoid any embarrassing involvement by the Americans (p. 371).

You read about Henry Kissinger's advise to the White House: he talked about war and Muslims. "We need to humiliate them", he told a White House official (p. 408).

The account on p. 447 of Bush's letter to Sistani is false: Sistani refused to accept Bush's letter to him. Rice told the Iraqi "prime minister" Ja'fari: "Time to step aside."(p. 458). Puppets. Mere puppets those Iraqi leaders are. A British advisor to the current "prime minister" Maliki asked him "if he would like help writing his inaugural address."(p. 466). This is not a "state of denial". It is nausea.

The WAN's new system, Automated Content Access Protocol, converts print publishers' terms of use into a form that the search engines' robotic "crawlers" can understand. It says the system, to be launched this year, will help avoid future legal clashes between search engines and publishers.

From issue 2571 of New Scientist magazine, 30 September 2006, page 29

Most of the growth is taking place in the South and West, according to the Census Bureau. From 2004 to 2005, U.S. population had a natural increase -- births minus deaths -- of 1.7 million and international migration of 1 million.

Whether the 300 millionth U.S. person is added by immigration or by being born in the United States, the expected absolute number of Americans prompted a report by the non-profit Center for Environment and Population.

The report's author, Victoria Markham, noted that the United States is the only industrialized nation with significant population growth. The vast majority of the world's population rise -- about 98 percent -- is in poor countries, she said.

"In combination with our very high rates of natural resource consumption and the associated pollution, that results in America having the highest per capita environmental impact in the world," Markham said in a telephone interview.

NUMBERS DON'T TELL THE WHOLE STORY

Sheer numbers of human beings don't necessarily have the heaviest impact on the environment; instead, environmental impact is a calculation that involves population, affluence and technology, the report said.

In the areas of land-use, water, biodiversity, forests, fisheries and aquatic resources, Americans are consuming more than they did in the past. The report found:

-- Each American occupies 20 percent more developed land -- housing, schools, shopping and roads -- than 20 years ago.

-- Each American uses three times as much water as the world average; over half the original wetlands in the United States have been lost, mainly due to urban and suburban development and agriculture.

-- Half the continental United States can no longer support its original vegetation; nearly 1,000 plant and animal species are listed by the U.S. government as endangered or threatened, with 85 percent of those due to habitat loss or alteration.

-- The United States consumes nearly 25 percent of the world's energy, though it has only 5 percent of the world's population, and has the highest per capita oil consumption worldwide.

-- Each American produces about 5 pounds (2.3 kilogram) of trash a day, up from about 3 pounds (1.4 kilogram) in 1960; the current rate is about five times that in developing countries.

After U.S. population hit 200 million in 1967, Paul Erlich gained notoriety with a book called "The Population Bomb," which predicted mass starvation due to population growth.

No such dire warnings accompany the center's report, Markham said. "We aren't saying there's too many of us," Markham said. "We were trying to step back and take a look at the broad picture and at the population trends and the scientific data."

Investment analysts and store managers say Wal-Mart executives have told them the company wants to transform its work force to 40 percent part-time from 20 percent, the Times reported.

Wal-Mart denies it has a goal of 40 percent part-time workers, although company officials said part-timers now comprise 25 percent to 30 percent of its workers, up from 20 percent last October, according to the newspaper.

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Sarah Clark told Reuters the company had no specific target for part-timers as a percentage of its work force.

Clark added that it is important that Wal-Mart staff are working at times when customers want to shop.

Roberts, who was not Amish, had dropped his own three school-aged children at their bus stop in the morning, showing no sign of the rampage to come, Commissioner Jeffrey Miller of Pennsylvania state police said at a news conference.

But Roberts had left a rambling suicide note and letter to his wife and children, referring to an event 20 years ago for which he sought revenge, and he planned for a lengthy siege.

"He was angry with life and was angry at God. ... There may have been a loss of a child at some point in his life," Miller said, declining to elaborate.

The Georgetown School classroom had 26 students aged 6 to 13. After Roberts ordered the 15 boys and some adults to leave, the victims were shot "at close range, execution style, firing into the back of the head," Miller said.

One of the dead was believed to be a teacher's aide.

Discussing the state of the wounded victims, Miller said, "It would be a miracle if we were somehow able to have no further loss of life."

The tragedy stunned this peaceful, largely Amish community some 60 miles west of Philadelphia, where descendants of settlers of Swiss-German descent have preserved a religious lifestyle that shuns aspects of modern life like cars and electricity.

Amish farmers live simply, travel by horse and buggy and cultivate the land using old-fashioned traditions.

Roberts fired three rounds from a shotgun and 13 from a 9mm semiautomatic pistol, police said. He also had a rifle, 600 rounds of ammunition, a stun gun, two knives and tools including a hammer, a hacksaw, pliers, wire, eye-bolts, rolls of tape and a bucket with a change of clothes.

While a hostage negotiator was trying to call the man's cell phone, Roberts opened fire and about 10 police troopers stormed the building. They found the gunman dead along with the bodies of three girls.

"One of the children died in the arms of one of our troopers," Miller said.

The town was stunned.

"It was terrible. I felt like crying. I never dreamt that I would see it in a one-room schoolhouse," said Jake King, 56, an Amish man, who lives near the school.

Daniel Beiler, 30, said the incident was having a "severe impact" on the community of about 300 people.

"I just don't know how to react to it yet," he said. "I'm just in a daze. We've never had a problem like this before. It makes us a lot more close-knit community."

There were similarities between the Pennsylvania tragedy and last week's school shooting in Bailey, Colorado, where a schoolgirl was killed. However, Miller said he did not believe it to be copycat attack.

In the Colorado shooting last Wednesday, a drifter took six female high school students hostage, molested them and then shot one dead before killing himself as police closed in. Then on Friday a 15-year-old student killed his school's principal in western Wisconsin.