Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been vilified in the Western media for daring to imagine "a world without Israel."

But according to news reports, Henry Kissinger and sixteen American intelligence agencies agree that in the near future, Israel will no longer exist.

The New York Post quotes Kissinger "word for word": In 10 years, there will be no more Israel.

Kissinger's statement is flat and unqualified. He is not saying that Israel is in danger, but could be saved if we just gave it additional trillions of dollars and smashed enough of its enemies with our military. He is not saying that if we elect Netanyahu's old friend Mitt Romney, Israel could somehow be salvaged. He is not saying that if we bomb Iran, Israel might survive. He is not offering a way out. He is simply stating a fact: In 2022, Israel will no longer exist.

The US Intelligence Community agrees, though perhaps not on the precise 2022 expiration date. Sixteen US intelligence agencies with a combined budget over USD70 billion have issued an 82-page analysis titled "Preparing for a Post-Israel Middle East."

Director of one of the branches of the Doha Bank disclosed financial documents substantiating the Qatari government's support for terrorist and rebel groups in Syria.

Lebanese Addiyar daily reported on Monday that it had received an e-mail from the Director of one of the Doha Bank branches owned by one of the royal family members, which unveiled the details of how Qatar financed terrorists in Syria.

According to the e-mail, the director suspected the transactions of the two Syrian bank customers Moataz al-Khayyat and Mohammed Moataz al-Khayyat.

The two men owned a small contracting company in Doha, named UCC.

"After they had usual small accounts of deposit, transactions, remittances, and credits, they recently started bringing a large amount of weekly money remittances from various sources," the director informed the Lebanese daily.

Political activists must watch what they say on the likes of Facebook and Twitter, sites which will become the "next big thing in law enforcement", a leading human rights lawyer has warned.

John Cooper QC said that police are monitoring key activists online and that officers and the courts are becoming increasingly savvy when it comes to social media. But, speaking to The Independent, he added that he also expected that to drive an increase in the number of criminals being brought to justice in the coming months.

"People involved in public protest should use social media to their strengths, like getting their message across. But they should not use them for things like discussing tactics. They might as well be having a tactical meeting with their opponents sitting in and listening.

"For example, if antifascist organisers were discussing their plans on social media, they can assume that a fascist organisation will be watching. Social media sites are the last place you want to post something like that," he said.

Mr Cooper QC's warning comes after a New York court ordered Twitter to hand over messages posted on the site by a demonstrator belonging to the Occupy Wall Street movement in America. Malcolm Harris, 23, is accused of disorderly conduct after he was arrested on Brooklyn Bridge during a protest last October.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said the United States violated the international norms by removing the name of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO, also known as the MEK, NCR and PMOI) from the list of terrorist groups.

"The United States suddenly prepares a ground to strike the Monafeqin (Hypocrites, as they are called in Iran) grouplet from their terror list, and they, in fact, disrespected international norms and human criteria by such actions," Larijani told FNA on Sunday.

He said Washington's claims about war on terrorism as well as promotion of democracy and human rights are no more than empty words which meet no action. "As a matter of fact, they (Americans) are looking for servants to obey their orders and if then their actions fall in the domain of terrorism, they won't care."

"Americans took similar measures in Afghanistan and they continue doing so now," Larijani went on saying.

He said the US delisting of the MKO revealed once again to the Iranian nation that "Americans are an accomplice of those who assassinated Iran's leaders and our scholars".

On Sept. 25, Professor-turned President Barack Obama lectured the Muslim World and world leaders during his annual address before the United Nations.

The beautifully crafted speech of the Nobel peace laureate would have been believed - and better received - had it simply been genuine. The president's appeal for rejecting violence, spreading peace among nations, while emphasizing the vital use of diplomacy in international relations, as well as his call for respecting the rule of law, due process, and cultural understanding were remarkable. But unfortunately, they were simply not credible.

In his speech, the president admonished the Muslim World by underscoring the important belief that people must "resolve their differences peacefully" and that "diplomacy" should take "the place of war." Laudable words, but only if America practiced what it preaches.

In his seminal work A Century of U.S. Interventions, based on the Congressional Records and the Library of Congress' Congressional Research Services, Zoltan Grossman chronicled 133 U.S. military interventions by the most active military in the history of the world, between 1890 and 2001. Similarly, William Blum's study A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, covered 67 interventions between 1945 and 2000 that, according to him, resulted in the deaths of 13-17 million people. In his book The Fall of the U.S. Empire - And Then What?, European intellectual Johan Galtung listed 161 incidents of American overt political violence between 1945 and 2001, including 67 military interventions, 25 bombings, 35 political assassinations (or attempted ones), 11 foreign countries that were assisted with torture, and 23 interferences with elections or the political process abroad. And all that was before the 9/11 attacks.

The United States Military conducted top secret experiments on the citizens of St. Louis, Missouri, for years, exposing them to radioactive compounds, a researcher has claimed.

While it was known that the government sprayed 'harmless' zinc cadmium silfide particles over the general population in St Louis, Professor Lisa Martino-Taylor, a sociologist at St. Louis Community College, claims that a radioactive additive was also mixed with the compound.

She has accrued detailed descriptions as well as photographs of the spraying which exposed the unwitting public, predominantly in low-income and minority communities, to radioactive particles.

Guantanamo Bay detainees, including David Hicks, were forced to take high dosages of anti-malaria drug mefloquine despite showing no signs of the disease, a practice likened to ''pharmacological waterboarding'' by a US military doctor.

Questions have been raised about whether the mass administration of the drug to detainees was a secret, illegal experiment after a medical journal article last month by an army doctor, Major Remington Nevin, highlighted the ''inappropriate use'' of the drug and asked if its use had been motivated by the drug's psychotic side effects.

The US Centres for Disease Control issued a warning against the use of mefloquine on anyone suffering psychiatric disturbances or having a previous history of depression. Dr Nevin also warned high doses of the drug could cause brain injuries.

Mr Hicks has long claimed he was drugged against his will. Evidence including previously secret reports and witnesses including a Guantanamo guard and New York lawyer Josh Dratel support Mr Hicks' claims.

New evidence has emerged that all Guantanamo Bay detainees, including David Hicks, were drugged involuntarily with a substance that has a long history as a truth serum.

Recently declassified US documents revealing medical procedures have shown that scopolamine was administered to all detainees taken to the Cuban detention centre.

The documents, which were standard operating procedures for nursing staff, were obtained by the independent US news outlet Truthout, and reveal that the rationale for the drug's use on all detainees was to prevent motion sickness.

However, US military experts have said that scopolamine is not recommended for motion sickness because of its severe side effects.

Here's some context behind the claims that Iran will imminently possess a nuclear weapon.

It started a long time ago (but not, unfortunately, in a galaxy far, far away):

1984: Soon after West German engineers visit the unfinished Bushehr nuclear reactor, Jane's Defence Weekly quotes West German intelligence sources saying that Iran's production of a bomb "is entering its final stages."US Senator Alan Cranston claims Iran is seven years away from making a weapon.

Seven years away? And did they have a bomb in 1991?

1992: Israeli parliamentarian Binyamin Netanyahu tells his colleagues that Iran is 3 to 5 years from being able to produce a nuclear weapon - and that the threat had to be "uprooted by an international front headed by the US."

1992: Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres tells French TV that Iran was set to have nuclear warheads by 1999. "Iran is the greatest threat and greatest problem in the Middle East," Peres warned, "because it seeks the nuclear option while holding a highly dangerous stance of extreme religious militancy."

1992: Joseph Alpher, a former official of Israel's Mossad spy agency, says "Iran has to be identified as Enemy No. 1." Iran's nascent nuclear program, he told The New York Times, "really gives Israel the jitters."

So was there a bomb by the late 1990s?

1995: The New York Times conveys the fears of senior US and Israeli officials that "Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than previously thought" - about five years away - and that Iran's nuclear bomb is "at the top of the list" of dangers in the coming decade. The report speaks of an "acceleration of the Iranian nuclear program," claims that Iran "began an intensive campaign to develop and acquire nuclear weapons" in 1987, and says Iran was "believed" to have recruited scientists from the former Soviet Union and Pakistan to advise them.

1997: The Christian Science Monitor reports that US pressure on Iran's nuclear suppliers had "forced Iran to adjust its suspected timetable for a bomb. Experts now say Iran is unlikely to acquire nuclear weapons for eight or 10 years."

So now we're looking at a nuclear-armed Iran by 2007. Scary stuff, right?

2007: President Bush warns that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to "World War III." Vice President Dick Cheney had previously warned of "serious consequences" if Iran did not give up its nuclear program.

2007: A month later, an unclassified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran is released, which controversially judges with "high confidence" that Iran had given up its nuclear weapons effort in fall 2003.

June 2008: Then-US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton predicts that Israel will attack Iran before January 2009, taking advantage of a window before the next US president came to office.

May 2009: US Senate Foreign Relations Committee reports states: "There is no sign that Iran's leaders have ordered up a bomb."

And Iran still doesn't have a bomb today - all of those reports, all of that scaremongering and warmongering was wrong. Both the CIA and Mossad agree that there is no specific evidence that Iran is working on nuclear weapons today. And many experts believe that even if Iran were working on a bomb it could take up to ten to fifteen years.

With the advent of the internet came the Information Age, where it has become possible to spread and find information about almost anything with unparalleled ease and convenience - information that, as little as a couple decades ago, would have been extremely difficult if not impossible for most people to obtain. More data than any one of us could ever assimilate is now at our fingertips, and news of most global events is available practically instantaneously. Where information is suppressed, it finds its way to the surface, sooner rather than later. We carry the internet around with us in super-powerful laptop computers and handheld devices, and culturally, in our everyday lives, we now spend more time online than not, whether for work or leisure.

Everything is plugged in! In a relatively short time-frame, our global society has become a vast network of information movers, like a giant brain network, processing and sharing data with our counterparts within this greater body of humanity. It's no wonder our collective paradigm is shifting and it's no wonder the deepest patterns of our subconscious/archetypal makeup - understood as ancient mystery teachings and prophecies, tales of power and spiritual allegories, epic adventure stories and legends of old - have emerged in the forefront of our consciousness, becoming compelling topics of interest.