Interview with Seyed Mohammad Sadeq Kharrazi Iran's Former Ambassador to France and the United Nations

Recent developments in the region, assassination of Osama bin Laden and a direct call by the US President Barack Obama on Israel to return behind 1967 borders and pave the way for the establishment of a Palestinian state are three sides of a historical triangle not only in the Middle East, but for the whole world. Some analysts believe that recent developments represent awakening of nations as a result of the accumulation of unheeded calls from those nations and suppression of their religious and national requests by despots. Others, however, allude to the hidden influence of the United States on these developments and maintain that they are in line with Washington's plan to form a new Middle East. Anyway, four months after the beginning of the Arab Spring, there are still questions as to the real nature of these uprisings, their temporary and long-term effects on regional stability and their relationship to Obama's concept of smart power and his promise for change. Perhaps, only time will respond to some of those questions. In the following interview with Khabar Online, Seyed Mohammad Sadeq Kharrazi, has discussed regional developments from a whole new angle and has explained position of Iran and its foes in the region. Iran's former ambassador to France and the United Nations maintains that under present circumstances, Iran, Turkey, and Egypt continue to be dominant powers in the region. However, certain players are trying to play a more effective role in power relations of the Middle East by banking on their relations with the United States. One of those players is Saudi Arabia.

They've got form, let's be honest

The UK's Office for National Statistics and Lockheed Martin are racing to check if hacker group LulzSec has got its hands on this year's census data.

Such a massive data loss would be embarrassing even for a government with such an amazing record of data protection failures.

LulzSec's Twitter page has no mention of the supposed hack, but a message on PasteBin - which is open to anyone - suggests they have obtained the records.

The Internet may be about to get a little more chaotic than usual. Over the weekend, a group of hackers declared that they are initiating cyber warfare with governments and security companies around the world.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist James Risen has been subjected to government surveillance and harassment that began under the Bush administration, according to a 22-page affidavit he filed Tuesday.

In his 2006 book, State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration, author and New York Times reporter James Risen describes a CIA effort to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions by secretly providing them with faulty blueprints. In the end, a Russian defector working for the CIA exposed the plot.

Risen was subpoenaed twice to testify about his sources. The first grand jury was dissolved before he could be forced to testify. For reasons that have not been revealed, U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema quashed the second subpoena last year.

France has air-dropped weapons to rebels fighting Col Muammar Gaddafi's troops in Western Libya, the French military has confirmed.

Light arms and ammunition were sent to Berber tribal fighters in the Nafusa mountains in early June, it said.

Earlier, a report in Le Figaro newspaper said the arms included rocket launchers and anti-tank missiles.

France, a leading force in the Nato operation in Libya, did not inform its allies about the move, Le Figarosaid.

"We began by dropping humanitarian aid: food, water and medical supplies," said Col Thierry Burkhard, spokesman for the French general staff.

"During the operation, the situation for the civilians on the ground worsened. We dropped arms and means of self-defence, mainly ammunition," he told AFP news agency.

He said the arms were "light infantry weapons of the rifle type", dropped over a period of several days "so that civilians would not be massacred".

Justice Secretary Ken Clarke has said a householder who knifes a burglar will not have committed a criminal offence under plans to clarify the law on self-defence in England.

He told the BBC people were entitled to use "whatever force necessary" to protect themselves and their homes.

David Cameron recently said the issue should be put "beyond doubt".

Labour said the law was "already clear" and the remarks were a "smokescreen" to hide confusion over sentencing changes.

Mr Clarke has come under attack over proposed changes to sentencing policy, but has denied making a series of U-turns on key elements amid pressure from Tory MPs and sections of the media.

He has said he is committed to axing indeterminate prison sentences, despite opposition from many Tory MPs.

He said indeterminate sentences - where prisoners can be held beyond their original release date if they still pose a danger to society - had been an "unmitigated disaster" since they had been introduced by Tony Blair and suggested an alternative to them would be in place within two years.

On people's rights to self-defence in their homes, Mr Clarke said there was "constant doubt" about the issue and the proposed legislation would make this "much clearer".

Under the terms of the 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, homeowners who use "reasonable force" to protect themselves against intruders should not be prosecuted, providing they use no more force than is absolutely necessary.

Please don't feed the spear phishers

Hackers breached the security of a defense industry news website and stole sensitive subscriber information that could be used in attacks targeting the US military and its contractors.

Gannet Co., publisher of DefenseNews, disclosed the bad news in an advisory published Monday. Data exposed included subscribers' first and last names, usernames, passwords, email addresses, and in many cases military duty status, paygrade, and branch of service.

With a dogmatic loyalty to Israel born out of a literal interpretation of the Bible, is the American Christian Right the new Jewish lobby in US politics? Mixing religion and statecraft isn't just dangerous and unwise. It's sacrilegious.

I recently passed a local evangelical church here in rural New England with a sign that read: "We Love You Israel. Hold God's Land."

The sign is part of a wider phenomenon: the American Christian right's dogmatic support for Israel and the Jewish state's claim to the "Holy Land." It's a loyalty born out of a literal interpretation of the Bible and its apocalyptic narrative and a view that ascribes divinity to a physical place. And this reflexive support for Israel has spread to the broader conservative base and American political scene in general. Look no further than Glenn Beck's "Restore Courage" trip to Jerusalem planned for this August, which at least one GOP presidential contender has noted he will attend.

Such religious attachment isn't an isolated theological agenda. It's at the heart and history of the conflict in the Middle East.

But with a Palestinian bid for statehood planned for September and escalating tensions in the region, there's too much at stake to use God as a real estate broker. To avoid a potentially violent flash point, leaders must look to a peaceful constituency - not the political ploys - of the world's great religions, all converging in this Holy Land.

As the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks approaches quickly, a new Siena poll shows that half of New Yorkers today are in support of a new probe into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.

The poll shows that 1 in 3 New Yorkers were unaware of Building 7′s collapse and, despite the importance of the events of that day, only 25% have ever seen video footage of Building 7 collapsing at free fall. Only 14% could identify the name of the skyscraper.

Moreover, the poll shows that only 49% who were aware of Building 7′s collapse believe fires brought it down. 24% believe it was a controlled demolition, and 23% are unsure.

'Legal Intercept' will allow it to silently record VoIP communications.

A newly patented Microsoft technology called Legal Intercept that would allow the company to secretly intercept, monitor and record Skype calls is stoking privacy concerns.

Microsoft's patent application for Legal Intercept was filed in 2009, well before the company's $8.5 billion purchase of Skype in May. The patent was granted last week.

From Microsoft's description of the technology in its patent application, Legal Intercept appears similar to tools used by telecommunication companies and equipment makers to comply with government wiretap and surveillance requests.

According to Microsoft, Legal Intercept is designed to silently record communications on VoIP networks such as Skype.