Definitely a
political problem but I wonder, George Will, do you think it’s a
manageable one for the White House especially if we don’t know whether
Fitzgerald is going to write a report or have indictments but if he is
able to show as a source close to
this told me this week, that President Bush and Vice President Cheney
were actually involved in some of these discussions.

In March 2004, [the
NY Times] published an astonishing mea culpa, singling out six articles
that had given credence to the administration’s claims about weapons of
mass destruction without sufficient evidence. Four of those were
written by Ms Miller.

Coincidentally, it was in the pages of the New York Times that this
whole saga first started. There, in the summer of 2003, a former US
ambassador to Gabon, Joseph Wilson [Valerie Plame's husband], wrote an
article directly criticising Mr Bush for one claim he had made prior to
the invasion - that Saddam had been trying to import uranium from West
Africa to help him build nuclear weapons.



Some facts are now known, notably that the contacts in the White House
who were free with Ms Plame’s name appear to have included Lewis
“Scooter” Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, and Mr
Bush’s ever-powerful top aide, Karl Rove.



It is not beyond anyone’s imagination that both men could soon be facing criminal charges.

Doubts about Ms Miller’s version of events continue to intensify. She
said last week that she changed her mind because Mr Libby told her - in
a letter and on the telephone - that he was releasing her from any
confidentiality agreement and that she was therefore free to appear
before the grand jury.



But letters exchanged between lawyers seem to show that Mr Libby made exactly the same offer to Ms Miller exactly a year ago.



Even the New York Times, in a lead editorial, was forced yesterday to
ask the question: if that’s the case, why did she wait until Friday to
testify, and why did she spend most of her summer in a prison cell?

Critics speculate the following, however: Ms Miller’s reputation was in
shreds after the Iraq invasion. Going to prison on behalf of
journalists everywhere provided a good distraction.

A village in Israel
established jointly by Jews and Palestinian Arabs of Israeli
citizenship and engaged in educational work for peace, equality and
understanding between the two peoples.

To what extent is NSWAS generally known in Israel and abroad?

In Israel, many people are acquainted with the existence of the
village, and certainly the majority of those who take an interest in
Jewish – Arab relations have heard of it, and draw some inspiration
from it. In general, the Israeli public tends to remain skeptical about
the possibility that Arabs and Jews can ever live and work together
successfully in equality.

Are there other villages/projects similar to Neve Shalom - Wahat-as-Salam in Israel? If so, where, and how do they work?

There are many organisations working to improve understanding between
Palestinians and Jews, and there are bilingual Arabic/Hebrew primary
schools that emulate our example. Though there are a number of mixed
Arab – Jewish towns (such as Jaffa, Acre and Ramle), NSWAS remains
unique as a community established jointly by Jews and Palestinians, in
equal number.

Does NSWAS have a view on how peace can be established? What role, if any, does the village hope and expect to play in the process?

NSWAS and its institutions operate mainly at a grass roots level. It
maintains that despite the value of such efforts, the conflict requires
a political solution. The School for Peace believes that the dynamics
that occur in the encounter groups reflect the dynamics that occur
outside it, (in the macrocosm of Jewish - Palestinian relations).
Conclusions derived from this work could make a valuable contribution
to higher level negotiations. Central to the approach in the village
and its educational work is the idea that the two peoples can coexist
successfully when there is acquaintance with and respect for each
other’s separate cultures, a sharing of responsibility and authority,
and an acknowledgement of each person’s role in the conflict and its
resolution.