Scores of mosques and private addresses have been checked for radiation, the US News and World Report says.

A Justice Department spokesman said the programme was necessary in the fight against al-Qaeda.

Last week, President George W Bush admitted allowing the wiretapping of Americans with suspected terror links.

Mr Bush has defended the covert programme and vowed to continue the practice, saying it was vital to protect the country.

No warrants

According to US News and World Report, the nuclear surveillance programme was set up after the attacks of 11 September 2001.

It began in early 2002 and has been run by the FBI and the Department of Energy's Nuclear Emergency Support Team.

The Associated Press news agency said federal law enforcement officials have confirmed the programme's existence.

The air monitoring targeted private US property in the Washington DC area, including Maryland and Virginia suburbs, and the cities of Chicago, Detroit, Las Vegas, New York and Seattle, the magazine said.

At its peak, three vehicles in Washington monitored 120 sites a day.

Nearly all of the targets were key Muslim sites.

"In numerous cases, the monitoring required investigators to go on to the property under surveillance, although no search warrants or court orders were ever obtained, according to those with knowledge of the programme," the publication said.

"The targets were almost all US citizens," an unnamed source involved in the programme told the magazine.

"A lot of us thought it was questionable, but people who complained nearly lost their jobs," the source said.

Muslim anger

Federal officials cited by US News and World Report said that monitoring on public property, such as driveways and parking lots, was legal and that warrants were not needed for the kind of radiation sampling it conducted.

They also rejected the claim that the programme specifically targeted Muslims.

A spokesman for the Department of Justice said the programme was necessary as al-Qaeda remained committed to obtaining nuclear weapons.

An FBI spokesman declined to confirm or deny the report.

Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the news "comes as a complete shock to us and everyone in the Muslim community".

He added: "This creates the appearance that Muslims are targeted simply for being Muslims. I don't think this is the message the government wants to send at this time."

Seven men have been charged with plotting to blow up the Sears Towers in Chicago, and attack FBI offices.

The men, five from the US and two from Haiti, hoped to wage a "full ground war" against the US, according to the charges brought against them.

Officials said the men were foiled at an early stage and posed no danger.

Mr Gonzales said the group of "home-grown terrorists" were inspired by "a violent jihadist message".

"They were persons who for whatever reason came to view their home country as the enemy," he told reporters.

'Dangerous'

According to charges brought against the men, the group of men aged 22 to 32 had sworn allegiance to al-Qaeda, but had no contacts with it.

They have been charged with conspiring to blow up both the Sears Tower and the FBI building in North Miami Beach. A federal indictment says they were conspiring to "levy war against the United States". They were arrested at a warehouse in Miami, during an undercover operation after their group was infiltrated by an agent posing as an al-Qaeda member

Mr Gonzales said the lack of direct link to al-Qaeda did not make the group any less dangerous.

"Today terrorist threats come from a smaller, more loosely defined cells not affiliated to al-Qaeda," he said.

"Left unchecked these home-grown terrorists may prove as dangerous as groups like al-Qaeda."

'Wannabes'

Five of those charged appeared at a Miami federal court on Friday.

They wore ankle chains and were chained together at the wrists, the Associated Press reported.

Alleged ringleader Narseal Batiste apparently asked an undercover agent he thought was from al-Qaeda for help to build an "army to wage jihad", the indictment said.

He is said to have told the agent he and his "soldiers" wanted al-Qaeda training and planning for a "full ground war" against the US in order to "kill all the devils we can". His mission would "be just as good or greater than 9/11", Mr Batiste said, according to the indictment.

No weapons were found in the Miami warehouse, and the seven had not posed any immediate danger, the FBI said.

Deputy FBI leader John Pistole said the plot had been "aspirational" rather than "operational".

Neighbours in Miami's poor Liberty City area said the men apparently slept in the warehouse where they were arrested.

"They would come out late at night and exercise. It seemed like a military boot camp they were working on there. They would come out and stand guard," said Tashawn Rose.

However a man claiming links to the arrested men told the news channel CNN that they were a peaceful religious group, who studied Allah.

The cautionary document was a product of the Business Roundtable, whose 160 corporate members include companies ranging from Hewlett-Packard, IBM and Sun Microsystems to General Motors, Home Depot and Coca-Cola. All told, the group's high-rolling membership counts $4.5 trillion in annual revenues, more than 10 million employees and nearly a third the total value of the U.S. stock market.

Experts remain divided on the likelihood that a "cyber Katrina" will occur, as the round table itself acknowledges. But many sectors of the economy continue to urge the government to be better prepared should such an event occur

transportation to financial services--could face devastation if a natural disaster, terrorist or hacker succeeded in disrupting Net access, they said.

"There is no national policy on why, when and how the government would intervene to reconstitute portions of the Internet or to respond to a threat or attack," the report said. Private-sector companies may have individual readiness plans, but they aren't prepared to work together on a wide scale to restore normal activity, the businesses said.

The report called for the government to take a number of actions:

? Set up a global advance-warning mechanism, akin to those broadcasted for natural disasters, for Internet disruptions

? Issue a policy that clearly defines the roles of business and government representatives in the event of disruptions

? Establish formal training programs for response to cyberdisasters

? Allot more federal funding for cybersecurity protection

The U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team, or US-CERT, which bears primary responsibility for coordinating responses to cyberattacks, receives on average $70 million per year, or about 0.2 percent of the entire U.S. Department of Homeland Security budget, the report noted.

The suggestions drew praise from the Cyber Security Industry Alliance. That organization, composed of computer security companies, has long been lobbying for additional actions by Congress and the Bush administration in the cybersecurity realm.

"A massive cyberdisruption could have a cascading, long-term impact, without adequate coordination between government and the private sector," said Paul Kurtz, the alliance's executive director. "The stakes are too high for continued government inaction."

Homeland Security has borne the brunt of the criticism for alleged inaction, though the agency did lead a mock cyberattack and response earlier this year. An analysis of that exercise is expected this summer.

A new video on the website of the Palestinian terrorist and governing group Hamas promises the eventual defeat and subjugation of Western nations under Islam.

Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in the face of terrorist attacks is present as the prototype for future Israeli and Western behavior in the face of Islamic force, reports Palestinian Media Watch.

The video is a collection of statements by Hamas terrorist leader Yasser Ghalban, who was killed last week by Palestinians among ongoing internal fighting.

Ghalban declares, "We will rule the nations, by Allah's will, the U.S.A. will be conquered, Israel will be conquered, Rome and Britain will be conquered ? ."

Identifying itself as coming from the "Al-Qassam Brigades Media Office," Hamas' "military wing," the leader states on the video:

"The Jihad for Allah ... is the way of Truth and the way for salvation and the way which will lead us to crush the Jews and expel them from our country Palestine. Just as the Jews ran from Gaza, the Americans will run from Iraq and Afghanistan and the Russians will run from Chechnya, and the Indian will run from Kashmir, and our children will be released from Guantanamo. The prisoners will be released by Allah's will, not by peaceful means and not by agreements, but they will be released by the sword, they will be released by the gun."

Palestinian Media Watch comments that the ideology expressed in the video is similar to the al-Qaida ideology, "anticipating battles with other religions throughout the world," as seen in this example

Hamas, officially considered a terrorist organization by the U.S. government, now governs the Palestinian Authority.

As WorldNetDaily reported last month, the Hamas' children's website included comic strips encouraging hatred of Israelis, who are defined as "evil Zionists."

One strip featured two boys who come upon supposed toys in the street.

"Don't take any of them!" warns one boy. "These are not toys, but booby-trapped bombs that will explode in the hands of those who touch them. They are placed here by the evil Zionists to kill innocent Palestinian children."

The Hamas' children's website was launched in 2002, encouraging kids to follow the example of terrorist suicide bombers.

The Pope received the bishops today, at the close of their five-yearly visit to the Vatican, and spoke on a topic of "great present importance ... the family."

"Alongside exemplary family nuclei," the [Pontiff] said, "there are frequently others that are characterized by, unfortunately, the frailty of conjugal bonds, the plague of abortion and the demographic crisis."

Other sources of concern for the Bishop of Rome include the "lack of care in the transmission of authentic values to children; ? the precariousness of work; ? social mobility that weakens the bonds between generations; ? [and] young people's growing sense of inner emptiness."

"A modernity that is not rooted in authentic human values is destined to be dominated by the tyranny of instability and the loss of points of reference," Benedict XVI said. "For this reason, every ecclesial community, with its own faith and supported by the grace of God, is called to be a point of reference and to dialogue with the society in which it is integrated.

"The Church, teacher of life, draws from the natural law and from the word of God those principles that present the irreplaceable basis to build the family, according to the design of the creator."

The Pontiff encouraged the bishops to always be "courageous defenders of the family and life," and to continue with the efforts undertaken "in favor of the human and religious formation of engaged couples and young families."

Benedict XVI added: "It is an extremely meritorious work, which I hope will also be appreciated and supported by the institutions of the civil society."

Passed on Thursday, the bill, which also includes a 2.2 percent pay raise for troops, will have to be reconciled with the House of Representatives' 427.6 billion dollar military budget passed Tuesday that also includes 50 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan. The US government's fiscal year 2007 starts October 1.

The Senate measure was preceded by an often passionate debate on two Democratic resolutions that attempted to set a deadline for the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq.

The Republican-controlled Senate rejected one resolution, proposed by former presidential candidate Senator John Kerry, calling for combat troops to be withdrawn from Iraq by July 1 next year, by a 86-13 vote.

The second bill, calling for troops to begin moving out of Iraq this year but without setting a hard timetable for final withdrawal, was dismissed by a 60-39 vote.

Neither bill had been given much chance of passing the Republican-controlled Senate, but lawmakers said they nevertheless reflect the deep public disaffection with the US military engagement in Iraq.

Republicans, for their part, welcomed the chance to make the case, just a few months ahead of critical midterm elections, that they are the party with strong, coherent view on defense and security issues.

With the Iraq war increasingly unpopular with the US public, Democrats hope to take control of the Senate or House of Representatives in the November elections.

The Senate passed by voice vote an amendment by Democratic Senator Joseph Biden that would ban establishing permanent US military bases in Iraq and prevent the United States from controlling Iraq's crude oil resources.

"The Iraqi people remain suspicious of our intentions and are growing increasingly impatient, putting our men and women in uniform in greater danger," Biden said in support of his resolution.

"I do believe that we have a duty to proclaim -- and proclaim regularly and clearly -- that we have no intention of either maintaining permanent American military bases in Iraq or controlling its oil," he added.

"Osama bin Laden and like-minded jihadists use the US occupation and their assertion that we aim to steal the region's oil as rallying cries in their regular calls to arms," said the Senator from Delaware.

The Senate Thursday also unanimously adopted an amendment to the budget bill proposed by Republican Jeff Sessions calling for a 45 million dollar increase for the US missile defense system.

A test of a sea-based missile shield was carried out successfully Thursday when a US warship shot down a target missile warhead over the Pacific, the US military said.

The test came amid tension over North Korea's preparations to launch a long-range missile. A senior defense official told lawmakers Thursday that if the missile launch went ahead "we would seek to impose some cost on North Korea."

Not long after the group began their activity, members of the Pink Angels, which the statement describes as "a militant mob of homosexuals," confronted the protesters and attempted to drown out their message with whistles, while hiding the signs with large sheets of pink Styrofoam.

"Even though the Christians obeyed all laws, city ordinances and lawful requests by the Philadelphia police officers on hand," said Life and Liberty Ministries, "they were promptly and without warning arrested and hauled off to jail, where they spent 21 hours before being released on Monday morning."

Eight charges were filed against the protesters, including three felonies and five misdemeanors. The charges were: criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct, and obstructing highways.

The ethnic intimidation charge, explains Robert Knight, writing for Concerned Women for America's Culture and Family Institute, was made possible by Pennsylvania's Ethnic Intimidation and Institutional Vandalism Act that state's hate crimes" law to which the newest "victim" category of "sexual orientation" was recently added.

Although some of the charges reportedly have been dropped since the 11 defendants were released, the Culture and Family Institute report quotes Philadelphia Police spokeswoman Officer Maria Ibrahim as saying the remaining charges are "criminal conspiracy," "failure to disperse," "disorderly conduct" and "obstructing a highway."

Responding to the riot charge, the group's statement said: "Despite the fact that our behavior was above reproach and we were attacked by a mob of whistle-blowing, obscenity-screaming God haters, the Christians, and only the Christians, were charged."

Said Dennis Green, director of Life and Liberty Ministries: "The Scriptures are filled with accounts of faithful followers of the Messiah who proclaimed the Gospel despite severe persecution. We are called upon and commanded to do no less. To shrink back would not be biblical Christianity."

The organization Repent America sponsored the protest.

"This is one of the most remarkable and unlawful actions by police that I have ever witnessed," said Michael Marcavage, director of Repent America. "Their blatant disregard of the law by allowing hecklers to impede our way, block our message and then arrest us, is inexcusable, especially by police officers who are specially trained to protect civil rights.

"Christians are now being labeled as 'haters' and any speech that homosexuals perceive to be intimidating, such as our Christian witness at OutFest, makes them a prime target for 'hate crimes legislation.'"

Continued Marcavage: "We are clearly 'not guilty' of these crimes, and with the help of our video footage, we shall be vindicated of these trumped-up charges."

The CFI account quotes Brian Fahling of the American Family Association's Center for Law and Policy, a public interest law firm which is representing the Christian defendants.

"We're going to do whatever it takes to ensure that the Philadelphia Police Department and the city are held accountable for this," Fahling told CFI. "As far as we can tell, this was utterly uncalled for and has no legal justification."

The group is scheduled to be arraigned Oct. 18 at the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center.

Jefferts Schori, bishop of the Diocese of Nevada, was elected on Sunday as the first woman leader of the 2.3 million-member Episcopal Church. the U.S. branch of the worldwide Anglican Communion. She will formally take office later this year.

Interviewed on CNN, Jefferts Schori was asked if it was a sin to be homosexual.

"I don't believe so. I believe that God creates us with different gifts. Each one of us comes into this world with a different collection of things that challenge us and things that give us joy and allow us to bless the world around us," she said.

"Some people come into this world with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender and some people come into this world with affections directed at people of the other gender."

Jefferts Schori's election seemed certain to exacerbate splits within a Episcopal Church that is already deeply divided over homosexuality with several dioceses and parishes threatening to break away.

It could also widen divisions with other Anglican communities, including the Church of England, which do not allow women bishops. In the worldwide Anglican church women are bishops only in Canada, the United States and New Zealand.

Three years ago when the Church last met in convention, a majority of U.S. bishops backed the consecration of Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in more than 450 years of Anglican history.

The Robinson issue has been particularly criticized in Africa where the church has a growing membership and where homosexuality is often taboo.

Jefferts Schori, who was raised a Roman Catholic and graduated in marine biology with a doctorate specialization in squids and oysters, supported the consecration of Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in more than 450 years of Anglican history.

The 52-year-old bishop is married to Richard Schori, a retired theoretical mathematician. They have one daughter, Katharine Johanna, 24, a second lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force and a pilot like her mother.

Asked how she reconciled her position on homosexuality with specific passages in the Bible declaring sexual relations between men an abomination, Jefferts Schori said the Bible was written in a very different historical context by people asking different questions.

"The Bible has a great deal to teach us about how to live as human beings. The Bible does not have so much to teach us about what sorts of food to eat, what sorts of clothes to wear -- there are rules in the Bible about those that we don't observe today," she said.

"The Bible tells us about how to treat other human beings, and that's certainly the great message of Jesus -- to include the unincluded."

Hank Dittmar is an American transport expert and head of the Prince's Foundation for the Built Environment, which was set up by Prince Charles to promote traditional building design.

.In 2050, I would hope to see cities that restored a more intimate relationship with the countryside around them both in the use of local materials in building construction and local traditions of architecture.

We should be moving towards cities that are based around walking than around the motor car, and around living in a way that relies on the sort of energy budget and food budget that's available to us close by.

One way to move in that direction is to start to think about some timeless patterns of how cities ought to be. And that means thinking about cities as being typological [examples of different types of buildings, streets, squares and spaces] rather than a series of one-off sculptural objects that generate the "wow" factor.

We need to think of ways of having our workplace close to where we live. If we do that, we reduce transport intensity and make it easier for people to be close to their families. You will then see polycentric cities emerging rather than mono-centric cities, where everyone leaves their home to go to work.

The thing that I worry about most for the future is if energy becomes unaffordable and more scarce. We could move into a situation where those who can afford energy sort of withdraw and continue to use it and those who don't move into more deprivation.

This could lead to further destabilisation. A lot of the cities where people are urbanising are being fed by petroleum-based agriculture and petroleum-based economies - and that's mighty scary.

Michael Dear is Professor of Geography at the University of Southern California. He is also author of The Postmodern Urban Condition.
One of the effects of global capitalism is the creation of an increasingly polarised world. On the one hand, you have what my colleague Mike Davis calls a planet of slums, and on the other hand, you have what we call cities of gold.

While these terms can apply on a global scale, they can also apply to cities, such as Los Angeles and Mexico city, where there is a lot of slum and a lot of gold.

We don't build a city and towns with city centres any more you add city centres afterwards as an aesthetic afterthought or as a consumption opportunity.

What this polarisation within cities creates is what I call post-modern urbanisation and I think we're going to see a lot more of it by 2050. Basically, in conventional cities - modernist cities - the norm has been for the centre to organise the hinterland.

However, in post-modern urbanism, this has been reversed - the hinterland organises what's left of the core. Look at Southern California, the Pearl River Delta, or Barcelona, there is a huge decentralised spread of urban development and no real single core to speak of.

LA, for example, has 20 or 30s downtowns - there isn't the conventional pattern of people travelling into the city and out of the city in the morning. People cross the city in a wide variety of ways and this means a lot more choices - a lot more dispersed patterns of behaviour. It also means a lack of central authority in organising a city region or its government.

We don't build a city and towns with city centres any more you add city centres afterwards as an aesthetic afterthought or as a consumption opportunity. We simply have a collage or pastiche of almost random urban spread which ultimately collides and creates cities and then we start adding the trappings of conventional cities.

So, you have an extraordinary fragmented urban region which extends in the case of LA over 14,000 square miles.

This offers up opportunities for intense local autonomies - on the one hand you have the rich succeeding but on the other, you have poorer people claiming their spaces.

Local autonomies develop in a metropolis. In our region that tends to be Hispanics, and that's one of the most important demographic trends that you can imagine.

Nigel Thrift is vice-chancellor of the university of Warwick and one of the leading human geographers and social scientists.
In the developed world my guess is by 2050 energy sustainability will have become a big deal and the result of that will be that the kind of sprawl that we have seen in the United States in particular will actually be halted, on the grounds of energy costs.

In Europe, things ought to be better because on the whole, European cities are much more compact and should be able to last out some of problems that the larger sprawling cities in the developed world will have. Even if you look at London - it doesn't spread over a vast area.

What I would really like to see is some kind of a Marshall Fund, but for cities around the world.

I think the issue then becomes whether the more severe forecasts on global climate change do start to bite and if they did then some cities especially coastal cities like London would start to have problems in terms of flooding and so on - indeed that has already been forecast.

I don't think that this means doom or anything of the kind. But it will involve some quite substantial government action at some point to start thinking about the way that cities ought to be and at the moment it seems to me that that thinking is only being half done.

There are some important urbanists, like Richard Rogers, who are quite right when they say we need to do more thinking in this area about the form of cities in the future and how they link up. Some types of transport will turn out to be really problematic. We may have seen the heydays of certain kinds of air travel over the next 10 to 15 years.

With regards to other parts of the world, the future looks patchy. In parts of Asia and Africa, you can see examples of countries and cities that will be able to weather the worst - as well as some of the worst weather. On the other hand, there are some cities that are highly vulnerable - what is needed is worldwide action to prevent some of the problems there.

What I would really like to see is some kind of a Marshall Fund, but for cities around the world.

Stephen Graham is a professor of human geography at the University of Durham. He is editor of The Cybercities Reader.

There was a lot of hype in the last 30 or 40 years somehow implying that the more important your technology and more important your information technology, the less and less you need to move around, the less and less that you need to meet face-to-face with people and the less and less you need to rely on the city.

There was an assumption with the shift towards broadband, virtual reality would somehow allow people to withdraw. The evidence seems to go completely against that expectation.

I think there is a radical democratisation going on based on much lower cost access and based on things like wireless technologies which are much cheaper to lay out across cities.

This may seem paradoxical but the evidence indicates that the more economies, social interactions and cultures rely on advanced technologies, the more cities seem to grow. I think there is a demand to be face-to-face with people no matter how capable the technology - and, of course, by 2050, we will have had fairly radical technical shifts. Those processes of change seem to go together rather than in opposition.

In India, China and Africa, the picture has been very polarised. Only a small number of elite people have been connected to the new technologies. However, I think there is a radical democratisation going on based on much lower cost access and based on things like wireless technologies which are much cheaper to lay out across cities.

It is also based on all kinds of interesting entrepreneurship where people in informal settlements or squatter settlements set up little internet spaces. These bring whole communities that have an awful amount of energy and into the digital age.

I think there are signs for optimism based on this extraordinary rapid democratisation.

Walden Bello, Executive Director of the Bangkok-based research and policy institute Focus on the Global South and professor of sociology at the University of the Philippines.

An urban nightmare in less than 50 years' time is certainly what will engulf us if current trends continue.

In the South, urban populations are growing at twice the rate of national populations. People continue to be expelled from the countryside in large numbers, and a key reason for this is that agriculture has simply been made unattractive

by the lack of agrarian reform the dumping of cheap subsidised agricultural products from the North courtesy of the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Agriculture decades of city-biased and industry-first economic development policies that consistently pushed down the price of grain and other farm products. At the same time, the capacity of industry and manufacturing to absorb the influx from the countryside is being eroded by de-industrialisation.

Local manufacturers are being driven out of business by radically lowered tariffs on foreign products under economic programmes imposed by the International Monetary Fund and WTO, and foreign investors are closing up shop and moving to China to take advantage of dirt-cheap wages.

One of the results of this migration-without-absorption is the mushrooming of vast shantytowns populated by what some have called a "subproletariat."

Assaulted by climate change, massive air pollution, and biologically dead rivers, the cities of the South are becoming environmental disaster areas. The urban poor living in such settlements under terrible conditions of squalor, crime, and insecurity now make up 30-40% of the population of cities such as Manila, Jakarta, Mexico City, and Lagos.

With their budgets gutted by austerity programs pushed by the IMF and World Bank and unable or unwilling to tax the rich, city governments cannot provide basic services needed by this swelling urban mass such as water, electricity, and infrastructure.

Northern cities have their equivalent of these third world shantytowns: inner city ghettoes, overcrowded housing projects, and suburban slums where racial minorities and immigrants and their children cluster, unable to find jobs or able to find only low-paying unskilled jobs unwanted by the dominant society.

The capital of the empire is becoming a paradigm for the rest of the urban America: Washington, DC, is a predominantly black city dominated by white minority that works in the city by day but lives in the suburbs of Virginia and Maryland by night.

Assaulted by climate change, massive air pollution, and biologically dead rivers, the cities of the South are becoming environmental disaster areas.

Manila, Shenyang, Mexico City are the rule. In the North, the gains registered in restoring the environments in some cities in the last few years are now threatened by the combination of climate change, tight city budgets imposed by fiscal conservatives, and influential pro-development lobbies.

The urban landscape depicted by Paul Theroux in his classic 1986 novel O-Zone, where the rich live in artificial "green" enclaves protected by private corporate armies from the environmentally devastated areas surrounding them that are populated by the rest, will soon move from fiction to fact.

These trends can be reversed, but only by moves that would truly be revolutionary, among them a rigorous regime of very deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions; an end to the poverty and inequality creating programs of the World Bank, IMF, and World Trade Organization; a new economic relationship based on justice and equity between the North and the South that would involve strict controls on the operations of transnational corporations.

If the 20th century is any indication, sceptics say, such deep-seated changes can only come after terrible wars and social turmoil.

But perhaps the increasingly common realisation among the rich and well-off that their privileges can no longer be purchased at the expense of the misery of the many and the destruction of the planet might just be the spectre that can bring about a relatively peaceful transition this time around.

Saskia Sassen is a leading theorist of globalisation and its impact on cities. She is the author of the newly published: Territory, Authority and Rights - from Medieval to Global Assemblages. The urban landscape, no matter where we are, will look different from what it does today. This will certainly be the case in the big cities that are also powerful economic centres.

I think we are moving in that direction and that means there will be a lot of innovation - it will be a bit more of a free-for-all and we will invent new political forms of membership.

The way we experience the city today in Europe will be very rare in the future. European cities will feel more like cities of the global south. Europe will see a lot more immigration and more big cities - and they will have a sense of the frontier town. The city will be a frontier space.

We will have dreadful situations in some of these cities because there will be an awful lot of dispossessed people and a lot of struggle. The centre will not hold, necessarily.

We are just at the beginning of the future - but we can't quite see it. We are entering a phase in which the political will be profoundly changed - in the same way that when citizenship and secular statehood was implemented and there were no more divine monarchs.

What we are going to see is the reinvention of the notion of political. The notion of rights will become rights to the city and that will mean rights to things like housing and rights to water.

Here, in London, for example, you have a sense that things are really governed - in New York less so, in Mexico City even less so and in Sao Paulo, even less so.

I think we are moving in that direction and that means there will be a lot of innovation - it will be a bit more of a free-for-all and we will invent new political forms of membership, which will enable people who are truly marginal to claim their rights to the city.

Political turmoil in the Middle East has caused sharp fluctuations in petroleum prices since the 1970s.

Crisis after crisis, from confrontations between Israel and Arab nations to the unsettling situations in Iran and Iraq, have unsettled the Middle East and the world.

These conflicting interests have become even more complicated in recent times.

The United States, although a key player in preventing armed conflict in the Middle East, has found some of its strategies have cast a shadow over the petroleum market.

Iran is a case in point.

If Iran develops nuclear weapons, Israel along with Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations will strongly object. Tensions in the Middle East will intensify rapidly.

Hoping to avoid such an outcome, the United States has argued for economic sanctions as a way to resolve suspicions over Iran's nuclear weapons development.

However, a visit to the Strait of Hormuz clearly shows the limits of that strategy.

The gateway to the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz is an important passage for oil tankers. About 80 percent of Japan's petroleum imports pass through this narrow, sharply curved sea lane between Iran to the north and the United Arab Emirates and Oman to the south.

On Oman's northern tip is the small port of Khasab. At around 8 a.m. each day, about 200 small boats from Iran race across the strait to dock in Khasab.

The boats usually carry a contraband cargo of sheep and goats. The smuggled livestock can be sold in Oman for three times the price it fetches in Iran. Using Japanese-made outboard motors, the boats cut across the paths of huge oil tankers to unload their cargo in Khasab.

For the return trip, the boats load up on Chinese-made clothing and shoes brought in via the United Arab Emirates. They sail in fleets back to Iran.

With many Iranians now settled in Oman and the UAE, this illicit trade has gone on for years. Omani authorities do little to clamp down on the smuggling.

A harbor official, a man originally from Iran, explains:

"The Strait of Hormuz has always been a lifeline for Iran to get around economic sanctions," the harbor official said. "Regardless of how strongly the United States calls for such sanctions, it is meaningless here."

The small boats are not only used for smuggling. They also sometimes present a military threat.

In the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war, boats were equipped with small missiles that were used to attack American ships.

A rubber raft was used in the 2000 suicide bombing of the USS Cole in waters off Yemen.

Even though the United States has a huge military advantage, there are no assurances it can win a guerrilla war. That, in a nutshell, is the problem the United States faces in the Middle East.

Key to the stable supply of Middle Eastern oil has long been friendly relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia, the world's largest petroleum exporter.

However, key events have loosened the tight bonds of what was once dubbed the "Washington-Riyadh axis."

Topping the list is 9/11. Of the 19 terrorists who carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, 15 were from Saudi Arabia.

Public outrage in the United States led to charges that the Saudi Arabian government was being "too soft on terrorists."

Yet, Saudi Arabia has also taken new steps in its own "petroleum diplomacy" with overtures to China, an increasingly influential consumer of oil.

In January, after King Abdullah ascended to the throne in Saudi Arabia, his first official overseas destination was not the United States, but China.

That decision was symbolic of a new age in petroleum geopolitics.

In April, Chinese President Hu Jintao paid a return visit to Riyadh. Reports said he and his Saudi counterparts talked about natural gas development in Saudi Arabia and the construction of oil refineries in China.

The slogan of the energy security seminar held in January in Dubai was "Look East." The Middle East is clearly interested in looking toward the Asian market, and especially China.

As a researcher from Saudi Arabia put it: "Our anti-American feelings fit perfectly with the appeal of the fast growing Chinese market. Differences in political systems are irrelevant."

While Saudi Arabia will not likely immediately sever ties concerning mutual interests with the United States, questions will certainly arise over what might happen to petroleum supplies should cracks appear in the relationship between the two nations.

Iraq is the second major headache for the United States. Prior to the Iraq war, the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush predicted the conflict would be quickly concluded with a stable new government soon in place.

That would bring Iraq's petroleum production within three years to its levels before the first Persian Gulf War in 1991, reaching 3.5 million barrels a day, according to U.S. senior officials. However, security in Iraq is still precarious. Today, three years on, petroleum production remains at about 2 million bpd, in part because of terrorist acts that sever pipelines.

U.S. calls to turn the Middle East into a democracy, part of its strategy in the war on terrorism, have had the reverse effect to what was expected.

Washington assumed that as democratization progressed, fewer people would be sympathetic to terrorism because of the disruption it causes society. With order and balance restored, a pro-American government would have naturally emerged.

That strategy has collapsed.

Instead, we are seeing an even more virulent form of anti-American sentiment in nations across the Middle East that are still controlled by strong-armed rulers.

In democratic elections held in Palestine, Hamas won the most seats. The radical Muslim organization is decidedly anti-American.

While a U.S. presence remains necessary for stability in the Middle East and a stable oil supply, the future of the region is growing increasingly unclear as Washington's control over the region declines.

"The international community seems almost to be sleepwalking down that latter path - not by conscious choice, but rather through miscalculation, sterile debate and paralysis," he said.

He was speaking amid heightened international tension over North Korea's nuclear programme and western fears that Iran may be trying to develop an atomic bomb.

North Korea says it is preparing to test a long-range missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead as far as Alaska in what the United States, South Korea and Japan have called a grave threat to regional security.

"I hope the leader of North Korea will listen to what the world is telling them," Mr Annan said in his speech to the 65-state conference in Geneva. He added that Iran needed to reassure the world of its peaceful intentions by co-operating fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Labour had a manifesto commitment to retain an independent nuclear deterrent but it only applies until the next general election.

Mr Brown, seen as the most likely next prime minister, has sparked new debate on the issue by highlighting his personal commitment to replace Trident.

In his Mansion House speech in the City of London, He said Britain would show a "national purpose" in protecting its security.

"Strong in defence in fighting terrorism, upholding NATO, supporting our armed forces at home and abroad, and retaining our independent nuclear deterrent," he said.

"In an insecure would we must and we will always have the strength to take all necessary long term decisions to ensure both stability and security."

'No moral reason'

It is thought Mr Brown wants anti-nuclear campaigners to know he is just as committed to replacing Trident as Tony Blair.

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said Mr Brown's words would take the heat off the prime minister, who could have produced "uproar" if he had made the same announcement.

The government's position is that decisions on updating or replacing Trident are likely to be needed during the current Parliament.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "No decisions have been taken on the replacement of Trident, either in principle or detail."

But the decision is expected to be taken in months rather than years.

Anti-nuclear groups, Labour backbenchers and trade unionists voiced their alarm at Mr Brown's words.

Kate Hudson, chairwoman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said: "We were hoping that any potential future prime minister would stick by the commitments made last year by then Defence Secretary John Reid for a full public and parliamentary debate.

"Our feeling is statements like this from someone as significant as Gordon Brown pre-empts that debate."

Statesman's spin?

Ms Hudson said this was the moment to start multi-lateral disarmament talks.

"At this point, when we face no nuclear threat, to decide on a new Trident replacement is beginning a new nuclear arms race," she said.

Labour MP Ian Gibson, an opponent of Trident, said many young Labour backbenchers had been weaned on CND and had not lost those early political views.

"So it may not be as easy [to agree to replace Trident] as people might think because the chancellor says so," he told BBC News 24.

Another Labour backbencher, Gordon Prentice, asked: "How are we going to persuade other countries not to go for nuclear weapons when we are spending millions of pounds not disarming but upgrading our nuclear weapons?"

Keith Sonnet, deputy general secretary of Unison, the country's biggest trade union, also urged Mr Brown to think again.

'Smothering debate'

The Conservatives accused Mr Brown of "spin" designed to make him look statesmanlike when he was in fact just repeating Labour's 2005 manifesto.

Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said: "The chancellor is reheating an old pledge to retain the current nuclear deterrent but he is not committing to replacing the independent nuclear deterrent when it reaches the end of its current life."

Liberal Democrat defence spokesman Nick Harvey said: "Gordon Brown's posturing on Trident is smothering the national debate that this government promised to the British people," he said.

Earlier, Tony Blair promised the "fullest possible debate" on Trident, but stopped short of promising a vote.

The choice could prove controversial - most other Anglican Churches around the world do not allow women to be bishops.

The bishops voted 95-93 to back Bishop Jefferts Schori after a number of ballots, AP news agency reported. A total of seven candidates were in the running for the post.

Gay row - It is the second contentious issue for the convention.

KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI
Born 1954 in Pensacola, Florida
Consecrated Bishop of Nevada in 2001
Supporter of ordination of gay bishops

A separate row has been raging over gay bishops, nearly three years after the Americans sparked fury from African Churches and other traditionalists by ordaining the first openly gay bishop, Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. The convention in Ohio is under pressure to "repent" of its decision to ordain him, to ban future openly gay bishops and to end the blessing of same-sex unions in church services.

A compromise is being considered to offer repentance only for the effect on the wider Church.

As well as facing possible opposition to her election, Bishop Jefferts Schori faces challenges within the Church too.

Membership has been shrinking for years, and a quarter of the remaining 2.3m parishioners are 65 or older.

Some conservative sections of the Church are also threatening to break away.

The new resolution is a watered-down version of a proposal, rejected on Tuesday, to stop electing gay bishops.

The compromise will not satisfy traditionalists who regard gay sex as sinful, says the BBC's Robert Pigott.

The traditionalist majority within the Anglican Church had been calling for stricter measures against the ordination of gay bishops.

It had also demanded curbs on church blessings for same-sex couples.

Divisive issue

The non-binding resolution, approved on Wednesday at the US Episcopal Church's convention in Ohio, stops far short of meeting their demands.

The resolution says the church must "exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate [for bishop] whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion".

Earlier, the outgoing Presiding Bishop, Frank Griswold, and the woman who becomes his successor in November, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, had appealed for a compromise.

They called for the convention to show it recognised just how divisive the issue of gay bishops was for Anglicans.

"Unless there is a clear perception on the part of our Anglican brothers and sisters that they have been taken seriously in their concerns, it will be impossible to have any genuine conversation," Bishop Griswold said on Wednesday.

Bishop Schori acknowledged the resolution was "far from adequate" but, she said, "it is the best we can do at this convention".

"This church, the body of Christ, is not wholly one and not wholly two," she said.

'Careful reflection'

Our correspondent says the likelihood of a formal schism within the church depends on the degree to which the compromise offered by the US Episcopals divides the traditionalists who have been calling for their expulsion.

Much of the Anglican communion, dominated by traditionalist churches in the developing world, is unlikely to be satisfied, he says.

The Anglicans' religious leader, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, said it was not yet clear how far the resolutions adopted by the Episcopal Church meet demands for a moratorium on gay bishops.

"The wider communion will therefore need to reflect carefully on the significance of what has been decided before we respond more fully," he said on Wednesday.

Statistics for its 280,000 customers for 2005 showed people aged between 40 and 59 had the highest level of debt - owing an average of £34,456.

But increases in the amount of money owed were greatest among the over-60s.

The CCCS said the amount of money owed by people over 60 who contacted the group had soared by 25% to an average of £33,658.

The Foundation for Credit Counselling, which is responsible for the CCCS, said it hoped to use the statistics to help people in debt.

Chairman Malcolm Hurlston said: "The aim of this yearbook is to make use of the knowledge and experience of CCCS in improving our understanding of people in debt, alleviating their problems and anticipating future needs."

The CCCS also saw the number of young people struggling with debt increase. It was contacted by more 18 to 24-year-olds and found they owed an average of £15,079 in 2005, compared with £11,935 two years earlier.

Overall, of people on one of the group's debt management plans - under which interest is frozen in exchange for a set amount being repaid each month - the average amount owed was £30,763 in 2005, as against £29,340 the year before.