By Afshan Khan

A Muslim American Response…

In the wake of recent controversy which has been blown out of proportion by both republicans and democrats who are bent on exploiting this issue to fill up their vote banks in November elections ignoring the most pressing issue of jobs and economy which our country faces today.
when I look at the way the issue of Mosque and religion being exploited by these power hungry politicians by alienating the Muslim American community to further their political goals, I forget that I am in United State of America, the beacon of human rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech and all other basic rights. For a moment I find myself being in some third world theocratic state.

Here are 5 reasons to bulid/ not to build Mosque near Ground Zero…

1. Opponents  of Mosque near ground Zero give the example of building the Japanese shrine near Perl harbor, which they declare should never be allowed. I agree as we were attacked by Japan , a foreign country, of course we do not want any building associated to them build on Pearl harbor, but remember on 9/11, Muslim Americans were not the culprits, they did not attack the twin Towers, it was Al-qaeda. Then why American citizens who happen to be Muslims are denied the right to build their house of worship, why they their religion is being vilified day in and day out all over the mass media in an attempt to create Islamophobia.

Common people including our politicians need to distinguish between  a country and Islam, Islam is not a country and all Muslims do not belong to one particular country. and the fact is that  mosque is not being built by or for any foreign nation or foreigners, it is for American citizens build by Americans, who happen to be Muslims and who have equal right to build their place of worship as any of their Christian and Jews and Hindu fellow citizens.

2. Another important fact we common folks tend to forget and our politicians tend to cover up is that the 9/11 attacks were not in any part religiously motivated. The horrific act of war on our homeland was political in nature. Our homeland was attacked by the AL-Qaeda, a  group of political fanatics, who were getting safe heaven in Afghanistan, we waged war on Afghanistan rightfully so, but alas ,after 9 years we failed to capture the culprit  Bin Ladin . I never heard any of these terrorist calling Christianity or Judaism devil or devilish but I have heard them calling America and Israel devil.  If we Americans want to fight this war on terror we Americans have to get it right, it is not the truly religious Muslims who are hell bent on harming us, it is still a small group of political fanatics who have political motives, these are the ones we need to be after, not the innocent Muslim Americans , or common Muslims around the world, but by showing our prejudice and bias towards our own Muslim fellow citizens  we are emboldening these terrorists and giving them plenty of scoop for recruitment  to carry out their terror plots .

3. Newt Gingrich said that until we are allowed to build Churches in  Mecca till then we in America should not allow any Mosque building. Wow, I am petrified with this statement Mr Gingrich, and I feel ashamed for you.  You are putting Saudi Arabia and United State of America in same league, you have once again proved yourself to be a irrational demagogue. Saudi Arabia is  an undemocratic, theocratic state, which denies many rights to her own citizens, even the 9/11 terrorist are against it, and you Mr Gingrich put the greatest nation on the planet earth, the beacon of freedom, who has secular constitution, who prides herself on the equality, freedom and justice for all irrespective of their faith, color and creed. You Mr Gingrich put the beacon of freedom in the same league with Saudi Arabia.

So the fact remains that Islam or Muslims in general and particularly Muslim American did not attack on 9/11, it is the terrorist group  name al-quaida , which is a non-state entity. Another important fact, Mosque is not for foreign citizens , (General Knowledge is that – all Muslims are not Arabs and all Arabs are not Muslims) it is for Americans who are Muslims.

4. After arguing on bogus grounds, now the right wing conservatives  likes of Sarah Plain and others says that it is not that they (Muslims) don’t have right to build, but the question is, should they build? now it became the matter of sensitivities of majority in this nation, and these right wingers have been joined by some lefties, as their love for power and their need to grab on to their power trumps every principle our nation upholds. We Americans should be able to expect from our leaders both republicans and democrats that they should not forget the quint essential fact that our Constitution which clearly makes the right to practice religion above any sensitivities. In fact our nation was built upon the fact that pilgrims came to America in search of freedom to pray and practice their religion as they deem with out having to face prosecution from tyranny of majority. We can not go back on our own guaranteed fundamental rights while we need to practice at home what we preach to world.

5. Last but not least, our Constitution guarantees these rights and they are not subject to any public, whether majority or minority prejudice. When I hear Sara Palin, Newt Gingrich, Harry Reid and Howard Dean declaring that it is matter of public  sensitivities, or it is an affront,  I see  no difference between them and Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran who had put a bounty on the head of Salman Rashdi, who they accused of blasphemy. And I also see no difference between them and the extremist groups who oppose the Danish cartoonist and South Park creators, on the basis of hurting the sensitivities of Muslims. We the new and young generation has to remember and remind our politicians that we are the nation which upholds the laws of the land and our first amendment rights trumps above all sensitivities, , including the conformity with majority opinions.

For the last 50 days why profit-driven Western media has been referring to the oil company responsible for committing serious crimes as Bee Pee, but never as British Petroleum?

On April 20, British Petroleum’s Deepwater Horizon oilrig in the Gulf of Mexico exploded. The resultant oil spill, now the size of the state of Connecticut, is spreading along the coast of Louisiana and on to coastal Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

Efforts to stop the flow of oil have so far been unsuccessful, and the next effort can only be made after a couple months’ preparation.

In the meantime, wetlands, fish, turtles, birds and other fauna are endangered, and fumes from the spill and the dispersant sprayed on it are also causing respiratory and skin problems.

The immediate cause of the explosion may have been a methane gas bubble, but beyond the methane there are other factors.

At one level we have the American thirst for energy, which to a large extent has been quenched by oil.

The U.S. uses 21 million barrels a day but produces only six. The cry from the political right is “Drill, Baby, Drill!” That cry is somewhat muted now.

Another factor is the lack of oversight.

The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Minerals Management Service gave BP a “categorical exclusion” from the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act.

This exemption was given in spite of BP’s history of violations in its Gulf of Mexico drilling, and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) finding that BP has “a systematic safety problem.”

A staffer from one congressman’s office said that the number of violations by BP on the outer continental shelf was not unusual for major oil companies, yet The New York Times reported that BP has a poorer safety record than other oil companies.

According to the New Orleans Times-Picayune, BP was fined $555,000 from 2001 to 2007.

This leads to the question of whether we can expect more of the same from other companies, but let’s get more specific.

University of California engineering professor Robert Bea charges that important testing to ensure that the well was properly plugged was not done.

This bit of nonfeasance was apparently a cost-cutting measure. One surviving worker from the rig explosion reports that drilling exceeded 22,000 feet, whereas the federal permit did not allow drilling below 20,000 feet.

Daniel Becnel, a lawyer representing surviving rig workers, charges that BP failed to notify Halliburton, which was pouring the cement cap, that they were down below 18,000 feet.

As a result, Halliburton did not pour enough cement on to allow for the additional water pressure.

BP also ordered Halliburton and Transocean, the other company involved, to remove drilling mud, which also lessened the holding pressure. A lawyer for fishermen charges that BP also skimped by not installing a deep-water valve.

It is tempting to use this disaster to argue for reducing our dependence on oil for energy, but that require a basic change of lifestyle, something that is very difficult to imagine.

Nuclear energy has a host of problems, and renewable energies are expensive, and require a good deal more research and development to make them a viable alternative.

Thus, we are likely to have oil in our future for some time, so what can we do to prevent further disasters?

A key element is regulation. Mary Kendall, acting inspector general of the Department of the Interior, found a culture of closeness between personnel of the Minerals Management Service and the industry, including movement from the service to positions with oil companies.

Receiving gifts from the corporations regulated by the Service is common. With such loose oversight and self-regulation, the United States has a system in which the foxes guard the hen house.

Don’t think that this kind of scenario can’t be repeated here.

What could happen in the Beaufort Sea and off Newfoundland and Nova Scotia?

To read more click below…
Why it’s Bee Pee not British Petroleum?

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/06/10/world/10prexyspan-cnd/10prexyspan-cnd-articleLarge.jpg

WASHINGTON — President Obama promised a $400 million aid package for the West Bank and Gaza on Wednesday, as the United States scrambled to come up with a way out of the stalemate in the Middle East exacerbated by the Gaza flotilla incident last week.

Mr. Obama, meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the White House, said that the money would go to housing and schools. White House officials said that the money also would help increase access to drinking water and to help address health and infrastructure needs.

The exact details of how such aid would be used in Gaza remained unclear. Nor was it immediately clear how Mr. Abbas, who has authority in the West Bank but no authority in Gaza, would be able to administer it.

Gaza has been subjected to an Israeli blockade since 2007; an Israeli raid that thwarted a Turkish-led flotilla carrying aid supplies toward Gaza last week led to international protests over the blockade, which Mr. Obama has called “unsustainable.”

Israel contends the blockade is necessary to prevent arms smuggling to Hamas, the militant group that governs Gaza and opposes Israel’s existence.

Administration officials and their European allies have been pressing the Israeli government to come up with some kind of agreement to partly lift the blockade.

“The president has described the situation in Gaza as unsustainable, and it demands a significant change in strategy,” the White House said in a statement.

“While we work with our partners in the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Egypt, and the international community to put such a strategy in place, these projects represent a down payment on the United States’ commitment to Palestinians in Gaza, who deserve a better life and expanded opportunities, and the chance to take part in building a viable, independent state of Palestine, together with those who live in the West Bank.”
To read more click below…
Obama, Meeting Abbas, Pledges New Aid for Palestinians

Israel’s actions drew condemnations or requests for explanation across Europe, the Arab world and the rest of the globe on Monday:

Britain: Foreign Secretary William Hague deplored the killings and called for an end to the Gaza blockade. In London, demonstrators protested the Israeli action.

China: A member of its permanent mission to the U.N. told an emergency Security Council meeting China was “shocked” by the attack on “a multinational convoy carrying international aid to Gaza which resulted in heavy casualties,” and called for Security Council action.

Egypt: President Hosni Mubarak condemned Israel’s “excessive and unjustified use of force against innocent civilians,” state news agency MENA said. The government summoned Israel’s ambassador, demanding an explanation for the violence.

European Union: Foreign-affairs chief Catherine Ashton called on Israel to carry out an inquiry.

France: President Nicolas Sarkozy said he “condemns a disproportionate use of force.” Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said “nothing could justify the use of such violence.” Riot police drove back hundreds of protesters demonstrating outside the Israeli Embassy in Paris.

Gaza: Ismail Haniyeh, leader of the Hamas government in Gaza, condemned the “brutal” Israeli attack and called on U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to intervene.

Germany: Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle called for an immediate investigation by a neutral party. He said the German Embassy was seeking information on six German citizens believed to have been aboard the ships.

Greece: Prime Minister George Papandreou condemned the military intervention. The government suspended a military exercise with Israel and postponed a visit by Israel’s air force chief. In Athens, one of 20 Greek cities reporting protests, riot police used tear gas and stun grenades to disperse an estimated 2,500 Greeks and Arabs protesting outside the Israeli Embassy.

Iran: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the raid “an inhuman act.” Dozens of angry students pelted the United Nations offices in Tehran with stones and eggs, burning Israeli flags and chanting, “death to Israel” and “down with the U.S.”

Jordan: Hundreds of demonstrators urged the government to cut ties with Israel.

Lebanon: Several hundred Palestinian and Lebanese activists protested in front of the U.N. headquarters in Beirut, setting Israeli flags on fire.

Saudi Arabia: The cabinet called on the international community to hold Israel responsible for its “barbaric” policies.

Spain: Summoned Israel’s ambassador, demanding an explanation for the violence, and condemned what it called the disproportionate use of force.

Switzerland: Called for an international inquiry and summoned Israel’s ambassador.

Syria: Called for an Arab League meeting; the League condemned what it called a “terrorist act.”

Turkey: Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Israel of “state terrorism.” The Turkish government said it was withdrawing its ambassador to Israel, canceling three joint military drills and bringing home a Turkish youth soccer team currently in Israel. In Istanbul, a crowd tried to storm the Israeli consulate.

United Nations: Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned the violence and called for a thorough investigation. The Security Council held an emergency meeting.

U.S.: President Barack Obama voiced “deep regret,” and the White House said he urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to quickly collect all the facts about the incident.

West Bank: Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas condemned the “massacre” and declared three days of mourning across the West Bank.

Source: wsj.com

President Barack Obama said on Saturday that authorities would pursue all “responsible” ways to plug a leaking oil well in the Gulf of Mexico now that it was clear that BP’s (BP.L) “top kill” attempt had not worked.

“While we initially received optimistic reports about the (top kill) procedure, it is now clear that it has not worked,” Obama said in a statement. “Rear Admiral Mary Landry today directed BP to launch a new procedure whereby the riser pipe will be cut and a containment structure fitted over the leak.”

He said the new attempt to stop the flow of oil and gas from the sea floor would be difficult and take several days and that it was not activated until now because it posed risks and had never been attempted before at the depth of the BP spill.

“We will continue to pursue any and all responsible means of stopping this leak until the completion of the two relief wells currently being drilled,” said Obama, who has been working to counteract public doubts about his administration’s handling of the oil spill.

The relief wells could take several months to complete.

Critics have said the White House has acted neither quickly nor forcefully enough to protect the Gulf waters and coastline and pressure BP to throw all of its resources into trying to stop the flow of oil.

On Friday, Obama interrupted a family vacation in Chicago to make his second trip to the Gulf during the crisis, including a stop at a local beach to inspect protective barriers and witness oil tar balls washed up from the sea.

On Thursday, he held a rare news conference in which he took responsibility for the U.S. response and extended for six months a moratorium on offshore drilling, dealing a potential setback to his own energy policy.

He said his administration would continue to focus on solving the problem.

“As I said yesterday, every day that this leak continues is an assault on the people of the Gulf Coast region, their livelihoods, and the natural bounty that belongs to all of us,” he said in the statement.

“It is as enraging as it is heartbreaking, and we will not relent until this leak is contained, until the waters and shores are cleaned up, and until the people unjustly victimized by this man made disaster are made whole.”

Source: Reuters

According to the group’s report, Israel isn’t permitting construction of buildings for needy Palestinians and is encumbering on the freedom of movement of aid groups and their staffs.

A United Nations humanitarian relief agency is accusing Israel of deliberately disrupting the international community’s aid efforts for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

According to a special report released by the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA ), Israel is not permitting construction of buildings for needy Palestinians and is encumbering on the freedom of movement of aid groups and their staffs.

The report, which was issued on Thursday under the headline “Impeding Assistance: Challenges to Meeting the Humanitarian Needs of Palestinians,” said that human rights NGOs last year committed a total of $660 million in aid to the territories.

A large portion of the report is devoted to the humanitarian situation in Gaza, where it claims that UNRWA, the UN aid agency for Palestinian refugees, has been unable to build 100 news schools it says are needed to accommodate the fast-growing population.

In May 2009, the UN submitted a request for Israeli approval of a wide-ranging, $80 million plan to provide housing, medical assistance and educational services to Gazans. After nine months of negotiations, the Israeli government permitted a scaled-down version of the original plan, including the construction of 151 residential units in a project in Khan Yunis.

On Friday, a report appeared in the Israel Hayom newspaper which quoted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as saying: “In Gaza, let them build [homes] with wood. Concrete is used to build bunkers.”

The OCHA report claims Israel is interfering with the movement of local Palestinian aid workers. According to the report, 20 percent of requests for West Bank workers to secure passage to Gaza were rejected, while 46 percent of requests for Gaza-based employees to gain entry into the West Bank were turned down. The OCHA report said Israeli constraints have complicated efforts to train workers in Gaza.

Meanwhile, in the West Bank, aid groups have encountered other problems. In 2010, the UN formulated a series of urgent plans aimed at addressing shortages in water, educational services and housing for needy Palestinians living in Area C, the West Bank territories under exclusive Israeli military and civilian administration. According to the report, the international body prepared 15 initiatives that were intended to provide water to 52,000 Palestinians in 17 different locales in Area C, as well as 25 projects for the reconstruction of schools to service 6,000 children. Three months have passed since the UN presented these plans to the Israeli government, which has yet to offer its response.

Another issue cited by OCHA is movement in the West Bank. While the report acknowledged that the lifting of roadblocks and removal of checkpoints have significantly improved NGOs’ ability to work, it stated that difficulties remain. In August 2009, aid agencies were unable to deliver 170 water tankers intended to service 58 families and some 5,000 sheep in the southern Hebron Hills due to mounds of earth that impeded their progress. This forced half the residents of one village to relocate in order to find sources of water, the report stated.

Source: haaretz.com

Israel on Saturday rejected as “flawed and hypocritical” a declaration by signatories of a global anti-nuclear arms treaty that urged it to sign the pact and make its atomic facilities subject to U.N. inspections.

Politics

All 189 parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the United States, called on Friday in a declaration that singled out Israel for a conference in 2012 to discuss banning weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.

“As a non-signatory state of the NPT, Israel is not obligated by the decisions of this conference, which has no authority over Israel,” the Israeli government said in an emailed statement.

“Given the distorted nature of this resolution, Israel will not be able to take part in its implementation,” it said.

The 28-page declaration said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and key states would arrange a conference that would include all nations in the region, by implication including bitter enemies Israel and Iran.

Israel is presumed to have a sizable nuclear arsenal but neither confirms nor denies it. It is the only Middle East state that has not signed the NPT and, like fellow non-members India and Pakistan, did not take part in the review conference.

U.S. officials, irked at efforts to single out Israel, made clear the proposal might go nowhere, saying the Middle East could not be declared WMD-free until broad Arab-Israeli peace prevailed and Iran curbed its uranium enrichment programme.

“HYPOCRITICAL”

Alluding to this point, the Israeli statement said: “This resolution is deeply flawed and hypocritical. It ignores the realities of the Middle East and the real threats facing the region and the entire world.”

Iran was not mentioned in the NPT declaration.

Israel and Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability due to its past concealment of nuclear activity from the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency and continued restrictions on IAEA access.

Tehran says it is enriching uranium only to generate electricity and isotopes for agriculture and medical treatment.

The Israeli statement said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would discuss the NPT declaration with President Barack Obama when the two leaders meet on Tuesday at the White House.

Obama welcomed agreements on a range of non-proliferation issues at the NPT meeting but said he would oppose efforts to isolate Israel and any actions to jeopardize its security.

Israel, whose jets bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981 and mounted a similar sortie over Syria in 2007, has hinted that it could use force to deny Iran the means to build an atomic bomb.

The Israeli government statement said: “The real problem with WMDs in the Middle East does not relate to Israel but to those countries that have signed the NPT and brazenly violated it: Iraq under Saddam, Libya, Syria and Iran.”

Libya in 2003 ended years of international isolation after it promised to give up nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and has followed through on those promises.

Source: (Reuters)

U.S. Mideast envoy George Mitchell meets Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah.

Israel must make the choice between peace and settlements, the Palestinian Authority urged on Friday, following a meeting between U.S. Mideast envoy George Mitchell and PA President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah.

Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said that the Palestinians want to give the negotiations a chance, but that success is mainly up to Israel, whose actions could doom the peace process.

“If the price that we will pay for saying yes to Mitchell will be more settlements and more dictations, that’s a big question mark about the possibility of continuing,” said Erekat.

“Now the Israeli government has a choice, either peace or settlements, and it can’t have both,” he said.

The Palestinians refuse to enter into direct negotiations unless Israel halts all settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians claim as the capital of their future state.

Netanyahu has agreed to a temporary slowdown in the West Bank, but refuses to announce a construction freeze in East Jerusalem.

Mahmoud Abbas has agreed to participate in indirect peace talks with Israel, but has said he still requires the formal backing of the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s executive committee, which is expected to sign off on the negotiations when it meets Saturday.

Mitchell arrived earlier this week, and has already held two days of talks with Netanyahu. He was to meet again with Abbas on Saturday and Sunday, said Saeb Erekat.

Earlier on Friday, President Shimon Peres told visiting U.S. envoy George Mitchell that Jerusalem was committed to reaching a Middle East settlement that would see the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state beside Israel, but that security must be a central focus of these talks.

During their meeting, Peres told Mitchell that Israel placed security at the top of the agenda for the upcoming talks.
To read more click below…Israel must choose – peace or settlements