One of today's main news, is the total victory of the Democrats in the U.S.A Mid-term election.
They have now both the House of representatives and the US Senate.

Another important news is that Rumsfeld resigned. One of the main architect of the Irak Chaos is now gone (at least that's what they say. In fact he will probably continue greatly to influence US politics.Bush said yesterday in his press conference that Rumsfeld was his friend, therefore, they'll still be talking now and then).

Rumsfeld (as well as various Republicans, Fox news...) must be really angry. He really tried everything during this campain. Not for the republicans to win (They have lost a long time ago) but for the Democrats to loose. He even said incredibly stupid things, such as "The Terrorists in Irak are influencing the election by killing more people in the months of October and November, it is clear that they want the democrats to win this". Those guys are really out their heads. They crave power. They cannot live without it and are ready to say and do the most stupid, evil things just to win.
But they lost this time, and everyone should be damn happy about it......

But wait a second, who replaced him as Secretary of Defence? Robert Gates.

Robert Gates. Let's find out a little bit more about him....Read what follows (from bbc.co.uk) and weep.

"Iran-Contra

Robert Gates, who was born in Wichita, Kansas, joined the CIA in 1966 after attending William and Mary College and completing graduate work at Indiana University (later receiving a PhD in international relations at Georgetown).

He served six presidents, and was the only career officer in CIA history to rise from entry-level position to director.

In his career, Mr Gates also served on the White House national security staff in 1974-79, and became deputy national security adviser to the first President Bush before he became CIA director.

But the most controversial moment in his career was the 1982-86 period when he rose through the CIA's top echelons to become acting director.

As such, he was in a position to know about the so-called Iran-Contra scandal, which involved the illegal diversion of funds from the sale of arms to Iran to fund the Contras, who were fighting against the left-wing Sandinistas who had taken power in Nicaragua.

Mr Gates was investigated by the office of the independent counsel in 1991, but was never prosecuted for any offence."

Here we are with another loosehead at the top of US politics.

Regarding the winning team (The Blues), do not be too happy about it. Nothing big is going to happen. The winning democrats are not from the hardcore, left side of the bridge. They voted to go to war on Irak, they voted to construct a wall at the Mexican border, they are against gun control, weddings for homosexuals...They are, as pretty much of politicians, craving for power, ready to sell their souls for a vote, their only goal being to be re elected next time. They are super rich people, swines that have never worked in their life, they are nothing without politics.
Hillary Clinton has spent 30 millions dollars during this campain even if there was no doubt that she'll be re-elected.

Do not expect any dramatic changes coming from them. Only more of the same.

In fact, Rumsfeld might have been right, even if he forgot one word . "Another terrorist group has w won"!

The U.S congress (D) has just voted in favor of allowing the exporting of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India for the 1st time in 30 years. In the midst of the Iranian "debate" was it really the right thing to do? Of course not. Neighbouring countries (like India long time enemy Pakistan) and Iran (not that far away) can only expect the same treatment now. Remember that India still has not signed the Non Proliferation Treaty (bogus, but still).
Does the world community really expects Iran to sit and wait after news like this? Are they that dumb? Giving India nuclear power MEANS proliferation.
It is like when the neighbour that you have problems with get a dog for protection, you get a gun.....if you know what I mean.
Once more the U.S.A proves that the terrorist, the "axis of evil"...are the ones that are not on their side. Real bad dictators, or dodgy "democratic" governments that are friends with the U.S.A can get whatever they wants.....until one day they become "annoying" (remember Iraq.....).

Article from the B.B.C http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6219998.stm

LONDON (Reuters) - Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, the Sunday Times said.

Citing what it said were several Israeli military sources, the paper said two Israeli air force squadrons had been training to blow up an enrichment plant in Natanz using low-yield nuclear "bunker busters".

Two other sites, a heavy water plant

at Arak and a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, would be targeted with conventional bombs, the Sunday Times said.

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously last month to slap sanctions on Iran to try to stop uranium enrichment that Western powers fear could lead to making bombs. Tehran insists its plans are peaceful and says it will continue enrichment.

Israel has refused to rule out pre-emptive military action against Iran along the lines of its 1981 air strike against an atomic reactor in Iraq, although many analysts believe Iran's nuclear facilities are too much for Israel to take on alone.

An Israeli government spokeswoman, Miri Eisin, declined comment on the Sunday Times report. Israel does not discuss its assumed atomic arsenal, under an "ambiguity strategy" billed as warding off regional foes while avoiding arms races.

"We don't comment on stories like this in the Sunday Times," Eisin said.

In Tehran, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told a news conference that the newspaper report "will make clear to the world public opinion that the Zionist regime (Israel) is the main menace to global peace and the region".

He said "any measure against Iran will not be left without a response and the invader will regret its act immediately."

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and Israel has said it will not allow Iran to acquire a bomb.

The Sunday Times quoted sources as saying a nuclear strike would only be used if a conventional attack was ruled out and if the United States declined to intervene. Disclosure of the plans could be intended to put pressure on Tehran to halt enrichment, the paper added.

It said the Israeli plan envisaged conventional laser-guided bombs opening "tunnels" into the targets. Nuclear warheads would then be used fired into the plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce radioactive fallout.

Israeli pilots have flown to Gibraltar in recent weeks to train for the 2,000 mile (3,200 km) round-trip to the Iranian targets, the Sunday Times said, and three possible routes to Iran have been mapped out including one over Turkey.

An Israeli defence source, who did not want to be identified, wrote off the Sunday Times report as "psychological warfare".

"If we have such capabilities, I find it extremely unlikely that we would use them in a 'tactical strike'," the source said.

"Israel's nuclear option, if it exists, is exclusively part of a second-strike doctrine," the source said, referring to a deterrent strategy whereby a country ensures it can retaliate massively for a catastrophic attack on its territory.

Washington has said military force remains an option while insisting that its priority is to reach a diplomatic solution.

Israel refuses to open talks with Lebanon over Shaba Farms

By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent

Israel has refused a recommendation by a United Nations ambassador to begin negotiations with Lebanon over the disputed Shaba Farms area. According to the envoy, Geir Pedersen, the United Nations is becoming increasingly convinced that Shaba Farms belongs to Lebanon. During a meeting recently with Amos Gilad, the head of the Political-Military Bureau at the Defense Ministry, Pedersen said that "the UN believes that there is merit in the Lebanese claims of sovereignty over Shaba Farms." The Norwegian diplomat stressed it would be beneficial if Israel initiated During the coming weeks the UN Security Council is expected to receive another report on the implementation of its Resolution 1701, which brought the Second Lebanon War to an end. Pedersen authored the first report, which made no mention of Shaba Farms following intense Israeli pressure. However, the several months hiatus this pressure bought Israel may be coming to an end following a series of meetings Pedersen held here recently with senior officials at the foreign and defense ministries and with the Israel Defense Forces. The Shaba Farms, situated in a sensitive spot where the borders of Syria, Israel and Lebanon meet, has long been a point of contention but assumed added significance after Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon, because Hezbollah insists it is Lebanese territory still under Israeli occupation. The farms are part of what was the French Mandate over the territory that today are Syria and Lebanon. The border was established in a 1923 agreement between Britain and France and was not precisely marked on the ground. Following Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon, the Lebanese argued that Shaba Farms is part of their sovereign territory. However, after the IDF pulled out of Lebanon in May 2002 the UN maintained that the territory was part of the Golan Heights (part of Syria) and its future would be decided in negotiations between Damascus and Jerusalem. After last year's war the efforts to clearly mark the border between Syria and Lebanon began. The two countries claim sovereignty over several border areas, including Shaba Farms. Since the border marking process began, Israel's position was that it would not discuss the sovereignty of Shaba Farms until a decision was made whether the area was Lebanese or Syrian. In recent months, both Lebanon and Syria proposed that the disputed land temporarily be placed under UN control, until the demarcation of the border is completed. Israel refused. During his meeting with Gilad, the UN envoy noted that the evidence boosts the Lebanese claims. Pedersen said it may be advisable for Israel to agree to separate negotiations with the government of Lebanon on the Shaba Farms to resolve the issue. Gilad turned down the proposal, saying "we will not agree to resolving this issue separately. Every agreement with Lebanon will be part of a single package." In recent months, Miklos Pinter, a UN cartographer, has been working on determining the size of the Shaba Farms area. His report has still not been completed. However, it may be that in the upcoming report on Resolution 1701, some of the findings of Pinter's report will be included. In a report to UN headquarters, Pedersen wrote that Israeli officials, including Gilad, were critical of Pinter's work claiming "there are technical mistakes in the UN work on the Shaba Farms issue." Nonetheless, in Israel officials are confident that Pedersen's upcoming report to the Security Council will not require Israel to carry out significant steps in the matter. "From our point of view this issue is off the agenda for good," senior political sources said. "There is no point in talking about this any more. We have no room to show flexibility on this matter because that only strengthen's Hezbollah and does not serve [Lebanon's Prime Minister Fouad] Siniora."