Monday, November 29, 2010

The Day the Dollar Died

Video

A hypothetical look at how the collapse of the US dollar may affect the world. Continue


The Stench of US Economic Decay Grows Stronger

By Paul Craig Roberts

On Thanksgiving eve the English language China Daily and People’s Daily Online reported that Russia and China have concluded an agreement to abandon the use of the US dollar in their bilateral trade and to use their own currencies in its place. Continue


Beware fake acts of "terrorism"!
The Real Terrorists Are Us!

FBI Thwarts Own Car Bomb
Will Americans recoil in yet more contrived fear?

The United States' Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) claims to have thwarted their own car bomb Friday, November 26, 2010 at a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon's Pioneer Courthouse Square.

Oregon: FBI Thwarts Own Car Bomb

Will Americans recoil in yet more contrived fear?

The Portland Patsy
Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer -- Activist Post

The United States' Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) claims to have thwarted their own car bomb Friday, November 26, 2010 at a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon's Pioneer Courthouse Square.

A 19 year old man, Mr. Mohamed Osman Mohamud, was in contact with undercover FBI agents since June of 2010. FBI agents claim they were acting as an accomplice of a supposed Pakistani terrorist that Mr. Mohamud had been in contact with as early as 2008. Unlike the supposed Pakistani terrorist Mr. Mohamud was in contact with, the FBI actually supplied him with a bomb.

According to the FBI, their undercover agents had decided to meet with Mr. Mohamud in Portland in July 2010, where Mr. Mohamud expressed a desire to conduct "Jihad" against non-Muslims. The story fast-forwards to Friday, November 26, 2010, when Mr. Mohamud was arrested after trying to detonate an inert bomb supplied to him by the FBI, on the corner of Southwest Yamhill Street and Sixth Avenue -- in full view of the ceremony.

Perplexing is why the FBI, knowing Mr. Mohamud's criminal intent, and upon delivering the bomb to the willing would-be terrorist, would allow him to approach a large public venue and attempt to detonate the device in public view. While the US Attorney's Office maintains that "the public was never in danger," they apparently didn't read the news about a recent stampede in Cambodia that cost 450 panicked people their lives.


Maximum bloodless terrorism upon a public increasingly skeptical about the official narrative of the "War on Terror" comes to mind. This skepticism, of course, comes from the fact that the only groups that seem to be actually building bombs and conducting terrorist operations are within our own Western governments. This is reinforced by shocking revelations that Anwar Al-Awlaki dined at the Pentagon, months after 9/11 while listed as Al Qaeda's #3. Al-Awlaki has since been linked to the the "Underwear Bomber," the "Fort Hood Shooter," the "Times Square Bomber," and the "Shoe Bomber," as well as the recent Yemeni parcel "bombs."

Parallels between Portland's staged terror stunt can be seen with a very similar FBI operation that went "wrong" on February 26, 1993 at New York City's World Trade Center. The FBI was also in contact with willing terrorists whom they assisted in building an inert bomb. Inexplicably, the FBI agents switched the inert explosives with a real device which was then delivered to the WTC and detonated, killing 6 and injuring 1,042.

These revelations were made public after FBI informant, former Egyptian army officer Emad Salem, revealed recordings he made of his conversations with the FBI agents. He became suspicious of their motives and feared for his own safety upon realizing real explosives were being used. The recordings were published by the New York Times.

While the mainstream media attempts to downplay the outrage of Americans concerning the government's latest choice for air passengers -- a hazardous ineffective x-ray machine or an equally ineffective, humiliating, and un-Constitutional groping -- the stage was set for another high-profile terrorism story to reinforce the establishment's faltering propaganda.

Will Americans recoil in fear from a bomb the FBI admits they constructed, gave to a patsy, and sent to disrupt Portland's Christmas celebrations? Will Americans continue to be dragged into the staged "Clash of Civilizations?" Or will their fury over a failed, dictatorial government bent to the will of foreign bankers be compounded by this latest, juvenile attempt at stoking fear and compliance across the population? That story must be written by the American people.

Additional Note: The Justice Department's official statement found here , says Mohamud attempted to detonate the device remotely, which is not "in public view," though apparently the van was indeed parked next to the square and contained an explosive device described as "inert." Additionally, it states that FBI agents constructed and detonated a real device with Mohamud on November 4, 2010 in a run-up to the actual event. The implications of FBI agents posing as terrorists, constructing and detonating real explosives are frightening.

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer.

RELATED VIDEO:
The FBI Has A History of Creating Terrorists, to Terrorize Americans


Friday, November 26, 2010

ANSWER National email banner
Subscribe Forward this email Donate

No New Korean War!
Emergency Protest at the White House -- Saturday, Nov. 27 at 12 Noon
Show your support for the rally by signing this statement!
Stop the Provocations – U.S. Military Out of Asia Now!


Forward to a friend Facebook button Twitter button
Korea war threats

The Obama administration and its South Korean client government led by the rabidly anti-communist President Kim Myung-bak are blaming the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) for the latest escalation of hostilities in the Korean Peninsula.

But in reality the crisis there is the result of a policy of deliberate provocation by the U.S. and South Korea over the past several months. These provocations are targeting both the DPRK and the People’s Republic of China, countries where the often-concealed but very real aim of U.S. leaders -- Democrats and Republicans alike – is “regime change.” They could also lead to a new Korean war, one that could expand to wider regional, and potentially nuclear, conflict.

While hypocritically calling for “calm” in words, Washington is escalating the crisis by its actions. A U.S. naval group led by the nuclear “super-carrier” USS George Washington is on its way to carry out joint military maneuvers with South Korean warships in the Yellow Sea, menacing both China and the DPRK. By moving this huge aircraft carrier into the Yellow Sea the Pentagon and White House are sending a direct, threatening message of escalation since China considers these waters to be part of its sovereign territory.

On November 24, an unnamed “senior administration official” confirmed that the U.S. is escalating pressure on China: “China clearly does not like to see U.S aircraft carriers, for example, in the Yellow Sea.” (NY Times, Nov. 25, 2010)

What's needed to resolve the crisis

The DPRK wants direct talks with the United States, a formal Peace Treaty ending the Korean War, and a normalization of relations with the United States. This seemed like a realizable goal in the last months of the Bill Clinton administration in 1999 and 2000. George W. Bush scuttled these efforts shortly after taking office in 2001. The Obama administration continued this policy with new sanctions and endless war games simulating the invasion and bombing of North Korea.

The anti-war movement and all progressive people and organizations should stand against any new war, and demand an end to the U.S.-South Korean provocations.

In the latest incident, the North and South Korean armies exchanged artillery fire on November 23. Two South Korean soldiers and two civilians were reported killed and others wounded. Casualties on the North Korean side have not been reported. As in all such previous incidents, U.S. and South Korean leaders condemned the DPRK. But, as even a close reading of the universally anti-North corporate media here reveals, the first shells were fired by the South during military exercises staged in a disputed sea area close to the west coast of North Korea.

The North Korean government stated that it was "reacting to the military provocation of the puppet group with a prompt powerful physical strike," and accused Seoul of starting the skirmish with its "reckless military provocation as firing dozens of shells inside the territorial waters of the" North.

The roots of the crisis


The western sea border between the North and South is not recognized as legitimate by the DPRK. It was unilaterally created by the United States, using the mantle of the United Nations as a fig leaf and cover for its actions, at the end of the 1950-53 Korean War. The U.S. and allied forces fought the DPRK under the UN flag, slaughtering millions of Korean people and leveling the northern half of the country by massive bombing. That war further divided a historically unified society into competing states. While an armistice was signed in July 1953, the U.S. has refused the demands of the DPRK to sign a Peace Treaty formally bringing the war to an end.U.S.

“War Games” = Preparation for Real War

In recent years there have been at least three clashes in the same area as the November 23 incident. The DPRK had repeatedly warned South Korea against carrying out the latest “war games” the area. In fact, the term “war games” is a misnomer -- these maneuvers should correctly be called dress rehearsals for war. No one knows, moreover, whether any particular military exercises is practice or the real thing, until it is over and done with. This is especially true when the “war games” take place in extremely close proximity to an enemy state.

The U.S. and South Korea annually stage such exercises close to both China and the DPRK. The latest and largest joint drills were held this past summer despite strong protests from both the PRC and DPRK. Those “games,” labeled “Invincible Spirit,” included a simulated invasion of the North.

China’s defense ministry especially objected to the presence of a U.S. aircraft carrier close to its coast. In typical arrogant fashion, a U.S. Defense Department spokesperson responded: “Where we exercise, when we exercise, with whom and how, using what assets and so forth, are determinations made by the U.S. Navy, the Department of Defense, by the United States government.” (Agence France Presse, July 15, 2010)

Imagine for a moment the reaction in Washington if the Chinese navy announced that it was planning to hold similar maneuvers right off-shore of New York or Los Angeles.

The Number 1 Provocation – U.S. Military Presence

The biggest provocation of all is the massive presence of U.S. military bases, troop, nuclear and conventional weapons in the region. In 2010, 65 years after the end of World War II, there are scores of U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine bases in Korea, Okinawa, and all across Japan. The U.S. has provided high tech weaponry of all kinds to Taiwan. Trident submarines, each of which can launch hundreds of nuclear warheads, and nuclear-armed aircraft carriers prowl the eastern Pacific round-the-clock.

This vast deployment of military power halfway around the world far exceeds that of any other country. It and the tens of billions of dollars it burns up every year is justified to the people here as being for “defensive purposes.” But that is just another Big Lie.

The real purpose of this monstrous military machine is to secure and further the interests of the U.S. corporate power and strategic domination in Asia and around the world. It is the enemy of the people of Korea, China, Japan and the people of the United States.

There will be an emergency anti-war rally on Saturday, Nov. 27 at 12 Noon in front of the White House. If you live too far away or can't make it, please take a moment to sign an anti-war statement in support of the rally.

Please help the ANSWER Coalition continue this vital work.
Make an urgently-needed tax-deductible donation by clicking this link.
ANSWERLA donate

A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
http://www.AnswerCoalition.org/
info@AnswerCoalition.org
National Office in Washington DC: 202-265-1948
Boston: 857-334-5084 | New York City: 212-694-8720 | Los Angeles: 213-251-1025
San Francisco: 415-821-6545 | Chicago: 773-463-0311

If this message was forwarded to you and you'd like to receive future ANSWER updates,
click here to subscribe.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

ANSWER National email banner
Subscribe Forward this email Donate

Pentagon blows up thousands
of homes in Afghanistan


Repeating the horrors of the Vietnam War


By Brian Becker, ANSWER Coalition National Coordinator

Forward to a friend Facebook button Twitter button

Father and child in Afghanistan near soldier

Borrowing a page from its infamous “pacification” effort in South Vietnam, where peasant villages were napalmed and burned to the ground to “save them from the communists,” the Obama-ordered surge in Afghanistan has been secretly blowing up thousands of homes and leveling portions of the Afghan countryside.

As tens of thousands of U.S. troops have surged into southern Afghanistan, villagers have fled. Then the Petraeus-led occupation forces have determined which homes will be destroyed.

“In Arghandab District, for instance, every one of the 40 homes in the village of Khosrow was flattened by a salvo of 25 missiles, according to the district governor, Shah Muhammed Ahmadi, who estimated that 120 to 130 houses had been demolished in his district,” reported the New York Times, Nov. 16, 2010.

The Pentagon asserts that they must destroy the homes because some of them may have explosive devices inside.

The Pentagon’s murderous rampage and terror campaign 40 years ago against South Vietnamese villages, in areas that were considered sympathetic to the resistance forces, used much of the same kind of explanation. In fact, the New York Times in a throw back to Vietnam quotes the Arghandab District Governor, who is working with the occupation forces: “We had to destroy them to make them safe.”

That this tactic is part of a high-tech terror campaign against Afghan villages and the people who inhabit them is evident even by the descriptions and accounts of western media outlets that are supporting the war.

Again, from the New York Times, Nov. 16, 2010, which describes weapons as tools:

“American troops are using an impressive array of tools not only to demolish homes, but also to eliminate tree lines where insurgents could hide, blow up outbuildings, flatten agricultural walls, and carve new “military roads,” because existing ones are so heavily mined, according to journalists embedded in the area recently.

“One of the most fearsome tools is the Miclic, the M58 Mine-Clearing Line Charge, a chain of explosives tied to a rocket, which upon impact destroys everything in a swath 30 feet wide and 325 feet long. The Himars missile system, a pod of 13-foot rockets carrying 200-pound warheads, has also been used frequently for demolition work.

“Often, new military roads go right through farms and compounds, cutting a route that will keep soldiers safe from roadside bombs. In Zhare District alone, the 101st Airborne’s Second Brigade has lost 30 soldiers since last June, mostly to such bombs.”

Activists at the organization Afghanistan Rights Monitor described the destroyed homes. “These are all mud houses, quite humble houses.”

When Gen. David Petraeus describes his counter-insurgency strategy, he always puts in a few diplomatic words about the need of surging troops to win the “hearts and minds” of the people in Afghanistan’s poverty stricken villages. That is purely for public consumption—a message echoed endlessly by the complicit corporate-owned media and the politicians of both parties that serves as a mask for the Pentagon’s campaign of systematic terror employed to subdue an occupied people.

On Dec. 16, 2010, anti-war veterans and people of conscience will stand up in a dramatic action in opposition to the terror campaign waged from the White House and Pentagon. Join us in Washington, D.C. on Dec. 16 and be part of history.


Join the U.S. veteran-led civil resistance to the wars
Take a Stand for Peace
December 16 ● Washington, D.C. ● The White House
Gather at Lafayette Park at 10am

Peace on Earth flyer 300In 1932, during the depths of the Depression, WWI veterans descended on Washington, D.C., to demand their promised bonuses. General Douglas MacArthur and his sidekick Dwight Eisenhower burned their encampment down and drove the vets out of town at bayonet point.

We are today’s bonus marchers, and we’ve come to claim our bonus—PEACE. Join activist veterans marching in solidarity to the White House, refusing to move, demanding an end to U.S. wars, whether waged by occupation troops, drones, or proxy in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, or Palestine.

Not Another Day! Not Another Dollar! Not Another Life!

Mr. Obama: End These Wars!
Not tomorrow. Not next year. Now!

Endorsed by: Veterans For Peace, ANSWER Coalition, CODEPINK, Fellowship of Reconciliation, March Forward!, Peace of the Action, United National Antiwar Committee, Voices for Creative Nonviolence, War Resisters League, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, World Can’t Wait

A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
http://www.AnswerCoalition.org/
info@AnswerCoalition.org
National Office in Washington DC: 202-265-1948
Boston: 857-334-5084 | New York City: 212-694-8720 | Los Angeles: 213-251-1025
San Francisco: 415-821-6545 | Chicago: 773-463-0311

If this message was forwarded to you and you'd like to receive future ANSWER updates,
click here to subscribe.


What If NATO Is Defeated In Afghanistan?


By Eric S. Margolis

Amazing as it sounds, NATO, the world’s most powerful military alliance, may be losing the only war the 61-year old pact ever fought.

Continue



The Cowardice of America at War

By Richard Reeves

So, cry the beloved country. Shed tears for the brave. And for the cowards, too, the men and women in Washington who refuse to admit we cannot impose our will on the world. Continue



4 Common Myths about the War on Terrorism

By Reese Erlich

The US will never win the War on Terrorism. Continue



Evidence of Iran Nuclear Weapons Program May Be Fraudulent

By Gareth Porter

The evidence that documents at the center of the case for a covert Iranian nuclear weapons program are fraudulent suggests the need for a strategic reset on Iran policy.

Continue


Thursday, November 11, 2010

Bombs Away:
Afghan Air War Peaks With 1,000 Strikes in October

By Noah Shachtman

The U.S. and its allies have unleashed a massive air campaign in Afghanistan, launching missiles and bombs from the sky at a rate rarely seen since the war’s earliest days.
Continue



Why George W. Bush Should Still Worry

By Bill Quigley

Bush Pens True Crime Book, No Justice for CIA Destruction of 92 Torture Tapes. Continue


Former British intelligence chairman all but calls Bush liar, says waterboarding didn’t stop terror plots

Amnesty International wants Bush on trial over torture: The London-based Amnesty International (AI) has called for a criminal investigation into former US President George W. Bush's admission of torture.

*

Thank a Vet?

By Laurence M. Vance

It is high time that Americans stop holding veterans and current members of the military in such high esteem. Continue

*

Public Like A Frog: "Where All Are Guilty, No One Is"

By Phil Rockstroh

Millions have been murdered worldwide so that these entitlement-maddened monsters can keep their SUVs topped-off with gas, and their fat brats' greedy gobs stuffed with Hot Pockets & Juicy Juice." Continue

*

America’s Devolution Into Dictatorship

By Paul Craig Roberts

This Justice (sic) Department, which routinely frames and railroads the innocent, argued in Federal Court on November 8 that the US government, if approved by the president, could murder anyone it wishes, citizens or noncitizens, at will.

Continue


Tuesday, November 09, 2010

Butchers Persecute and Accuse Their Victims

Former president of the UN General Assembly, calls to free Tariq Aziz

Video

I am, extremely sad and angry to see yet another great injustice perpetrated by the United States, who, in my country alone Nicaragua, recently promoted, directed, armed and financed an undeclared war of aggression that resulted in the death of 50000 people...

Continue


*

Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority To Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones


By ACLU

The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat.

Continue


*
What Did WikiLeaks Really Tell Us about Iran?


By Ali Gharib

Use caution in reading the Iraq war logs—and news coverage of them.

Continue


*

Finance Has Become a New Form of Warfare

An interview with professor Michael Hudson - By Democracy Now!

"The object of warfare is to take over a country’s land, raw materials and assets, and grab them," Hudson says. "In the past, that used to be done militarily by invading them. But today you can do it financially simply by creating credit, which is what the Federal Reserve has done."

Continue


*

Chomsky: US-led Afghan War, Criminal

By Press TV

Noam Chomsky says US invasion of Afghanistan was illegal since to date there is no evidence that al-Qaeda has carried out the 9/11 attacks.

Continue


Tuesday, November 02, 2010

Who's Afraid of Shariah?

By Sumbul Ali-Karamali
Author of "The Muslim Next Door: the Qur'an, the Media, and that Veil Thing"

"Repeating a lie over and over again doesn't make it true; but it certainly results in people believing the lie. That's what the Islam-haters are counting on. That, and the ignorance about Islamic tenets."


October 31, 2010 "Huffington Post"
Sept, 23, 2010 - -

Hasn't the whole notion of shariah in America gotten a bit out of control? No, it hasn't -- it's gotten hugely, obscenely, ignorantly out of control. How many of those anti-Islam protesters holding "NO SHARIA LAW" signs (as if anyone were advocating shariah law in the U.S.) actually know what the word means? I'd say, oh, none. Roughly.


Shariah (also spelled shari'ah or sharia or shari'a) is the Arabic word for "the road to the watering place." In a religious context, it means "the righteous path." Loosely, it can mean simply, "Islam."

There are six principles of shariah. They are derived from the Qur'an, which Muslims believe is the word of God. All Islamic religious rules must be in line with these six principles of shariah.

Aha! The six principles must be about killing infidels, veiling women, stoning people for adultery, honor killings and female genital cutting, right? Nope.

Here they are, the six principles of shariah:

1. The right to the protection of life.
2. The right to the protection of family.
3. The right to the protection of education.
4. The right to the protection of religion.
5. The right to the protection of property (access to resources).
6. The right to the protection of human dignity.

Well, bless me, as a pledge-of-allegiance-reciting, California-raised Muslim girl, these six principles sound a lot like those espoused in my very own Constitution of the United States. Except that these were developed over a thousand years ago.

This is the core of shariah -- these six principles. The term "shariah law" is a misnomer, because shariah is not law, but a set of principles. To Muslims, it's the general term for "the way of God."

But how do we know what the way of God is? Early Muslims looked to the Qur'an and the words of the Prophet Muhammad to figure this out. They filled books of interpretive writings (called fiqh) about how to act in accordance with the way of God. They rarely agreed -- the fiqh is not just one rule, but many differing opinions and contradictory rules and scholarly debates.

Sometimes, shariah also refers to the whole body of Islamic texts, which includes the Qur'an, the sayings of the Prophet, and the books of interpretive literature written by medieval Muslim scholars. The first two are considered divine. The interpretive literature, the fiqh, is not.

The fiqh was meant to develop and change according to the time and place -- it has internal methodologies for that to happen. It is not static, but flexible. No religion gets to be 1400 years old and the second largest in the world unless it's flexible and adaptable.

The Qur'an is old. The fiqh books of jurisprudence are old. To modern eyes, they can look just as outdated as other ancient texts, including the Bible and Torah. That's why, just like the Bible and the Torah, the Islamic texts must be read in their historical context.

Assuming all Muslims follow medieval Islamic rules today is like assuming that all Catholics follow 9th century canon law. Islam, like Christianity, has changed many times over the centuries, and it continues to change. Focusing only on the nutcases who advocate a return to medieval times is ignoring the vast majority of modern Muslims.

For example, stoning for adultery is a punishment that appears in fiqh, as well as early Judaic law. But it does not appear in the Qur'an. In Islam, therefore, stoning was a result of cultural norms imposed on the religious texts. Moreover, in the fiqh, though the punishment for adultery was stoning, adultery was made such a fantastically difficult crime to prove that the punishment was impossible to apply. Historically, stoning was very rarely implemented in the Islamic world, which is ironic, since today the Saudi and Iranian governments apply it as though they'd never heard of the strict Islamic constraints on it.

The vast majority of Muslims today do not believe in stoning people for adultery, and many are working hard to eradicate it. Stoning is horrific and has no place in our world. The miniscule percentage of Muslims who advocate it are imposing the medieval penalty while ignoring all the myriad limitations meant to make it inapplicable.

As for other scary stories attributed to shari'a, like honor killings, veiling of women, and female genital cutting, these are cultural practices and not Islamic. They are practiced by non-Muslims of certain cultures as well as Muslims.

Shari'a is a set of religious principles and is not the law of the land anywhere in the world. The 50-some Muslim-majority countries are all constitutional states and nearly all of them have civil codes (many of these based on the French system). Being Muslim does not require a governmental imposition of something called "shari'a law," any more than being a Christian requires the implementation of "Biblical law" (though there are, of course, a tiny minority of both Christians and Muslims who do advocate such things, including Sarah Palin).

As for Islam being a political system, there is nothing in the Qur'an about an "Islamic state," and the Prophet himself never tried to implement an "Islamic state," despite hysterical accusations to the contrary. Those under his leadership practiced a variety of religions.

Traditionally, in the Islamic world, the institutions that governed were always separate from the institutions that developed religion. In fact, they often checked and balanced one another. Although no civilization has been free from all conflict, every Islamic empire was a multi-religious, multicultural empire, in which religious minorities were governed by their own laws.

The term "Islam as a religion and a state" really only became popular in the 1920s, as a reaction to Western colonization of the Muslim world. In fact, Islam contains plenty of concepts consistent with modern democracy -- for example, shura (consultation) and aqd (a contract between the governed and the governing). In other words, Muslims can be perfectly comfortable in America, following state and federal laws.

The Qur'an contains many verses advocating religious tolerance, too, though the anti-Islam protesters won't believe it. The Qur'an says that: God could have made everyone into one people, but elected not to (11:118); God made us into different nations and tribes so that we can learn from one another (49:13); there is no compulsion in religion (2:256); and that we should say, "to you your religion, to me mine" (109:6).

The only verses about fighting in the Qur'an refer specifically to the polytheistic Arab tribes who were trying to kill the Prophet in the 7th century. So the Islamophobes who look in the Qur'an for the fighting verses and assume that these verses refer to them personally are simply being narcissistic. Contrary to counting Jews and Christians as "infidels," the Qur'an repeatedly commands particular respect of Jews and Christians. It is established in Islam that you don't need to be Muslim to go to heaven.

Repeating a lie over and over again doesn't make it true; but it certainly results in people believing the lie. That's what the Islam-haters are counting on. That, and the ignorance about Islamic tenets.

So the best thing to do is find out what Islam really is about.

Talk to a Muslim in person. Read an introduction to Islam (try a fun one like mine). Read Loonwatch to read about the holes in the anti-Islamic rhetoric. Or take a look at the University of Georgia's informational website on Islam, for some quick answers and further reading.

If you read the anti-Islam fear-mongering websites, all you'll learn will be tall tales.


Bigotry may be a human tendency, but America has never stood for bigotry. I believe in an America that stands for pluralism and multicultural understanding. The hysteria and hate toward Muslims - resulting in several acts of violence against Muslims just this week, such as a stabbing and arson - is un-American. We must stop it, and the first step is understanding and education.


Sumbul Ali-Karamali is an attorney with an additional degree in Islamic law, as well as the author of "The Muslim Next Door: the Qur'an, the Media, and that Veil Thing."


Monday, November 01, 2010

ANSWER National email banner
Subscribe Forward this email Donate

Sign the 'Solidarity with Iran' Appeal!
No economic sanctions on Iran!
Stop military threats against Iran!




solidarity with iranClick here to sign on to a new international appeal.

Initial signers joining the ANSWER Coalition in support of the International Appeal include former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark; Fr. Roy Bourgeois; peace activist Cindy Sheehan; Denis Halliday, former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, 1994-98; Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, civil rights attorney; Gloria La Riva, Coordinator of the National Committee to Free the Cuban Five; and Brian Becker, National Coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition, among many others.

Click here to sign the "Solidarity with Iran" Declaration.