Western continues not to see which is the problem? please we don´t have to see more blind and deaf, we have to see and challenge the truth. Now!

Posted by: Franze at June 5, 2006 9:26 AM

Canadian Islamic Congress Criticizes Canadian Government For Not Funding Research on "Home Grown" Effects of Imported Extremism - Dr. Mohamed Elmasry who is also noted for saying on Canadian television that all Israelis are legitimate targets for suicide bombers
http://www.canadianislamiccongress.com/mc/media_communique.php?id=775
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=13648&only

Posted by: jeffreyimm at June 5, 2006 9:37 AM

Growing Islamist Terror Threat in Canada
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/06/growing_islamist_terror_threat.php

(Canada) More terror arrests expected, top lawmakers say - several of the accused attended the same two mosques in the Greater Toronto area - Al-Rahman Islamic Centre and Salaheddin Islamic Centre
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=bb2633ca-0f56-46a4-9591-b087e32be896&k=89471&p=1

(Canada) Plot targeted Peace Tower, police say - targets of the alleged plot included political and economic symbols such as the Parliament Buildings and Peace Tower in Ottawa, along with the CN Tower and Toronto Stock Exchange in Toronto
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060605.wxterror05/BNStory/National/home

Canadian parliament 'was target of fertiliZer bomb'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2211228,00.html

(Canada) After escaping war in Somalia, terror suspects grew up in Toronto
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=2e8f5170-6f5d-451a-857f-938d3b93d532

(Canada) Frightened rural Ontario residents describe 'terror-training camp'
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=9ee0b6bc-6d12-4fde-bd13-85d1cd6b71c5

(Canada) Schoolkids to terror suspects - many were drawn to Wahhabism
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1149460818261&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

(Canada) Plot began in chat room
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1149460818073&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home

Foiled Canada terror plot raises US security concerns
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1033453

Posted by: jeffreyimm at June 5, 2006 9:39 AM

Wanna save billions?

Wanna save innocent lives?

Wanna keep your freedoms?

Wanna have your kids grow up in a more safe and secure country?

Then stop importing Muslims.

Posted by: Prickzilla at June 5, 2006 9:41 AM

When you read something like this you want to yell out " it's the religion stupid"!!! that generates such hate. One likes to believe that police officers are trianed to find the source of the crime and that can only be the teachings in the Quran and the Hadiths.

No question about it; Chief Blair knows what the problem is whether he has gained some knowledge about the teachings in the quran or not. He is simply trying to passify or appease those Muslims he was addressing at the time, however having said that, wouldn't it be great to see a public servant come out just once and tell the Muslim community that they better get their act together and change their attitude about non-muslims and what your religion teaches about them. "Fat chance of course on that one.

Notice that the one Muslim is more concerned about how his business will be affected because non muslims may not patronize it. His greatest concern should be; how to stop the Islamic attitude towards infidels first if he wants to live in the western world and yet it is quite clear that some of these Muslims if not most of them are all home grown into this non- assimulating jihadist attitude toward infidels.

Posted by: Mackie at June 5, 2006 9:55 AM

A man of many hats is the Chief. It's too bad the grey matter beneath them wasn't of a higher quality.

Posted by: popsiq at June 5, 2006 9:59 AM

“The big issue is going to be societal, that’s clear.”...
- from the Toronto Chief of Police

No further questions, Your Honor.

Posted by: Hugh at June 5, 2006 10:06 AM

Of course Islam IS an ideology inextricably entwined with politics, hatred and terrorism - so he's not entirely off-base in that statement.

Posted by: Caroline at June 5, 2006 10:10 AM

I salute the Cannadians; their professionalism in police work, proactive approach, use of high technology to moniter the scum speak to their competance. But scum only have to be 'right' a single time. This comment of the chief this is an ideology and not faith is simply weird. The dumbest dhimmi knows it to be false. It is an insult to Muslims who believe in their faith. It even goes further than the King of Orwellian speech, George W Bush who said that "a great religion has been hijacked." Here, the chief is apparently saying it isn't a religion, just a violent ideology and not a faith. So Islamists do not have faith in a faith? I think this is an area that Jihad Watch and Islamists and most people would agree with: Islam is a religion; it's adherants have 'faith' in it.

Wouldn't it be bizarre to here commentators speak of W's Christian ideology or the ideology of George Gershwin or Irving Berlin? But has our language sunk to such a level where 'Islamists are youths who adhere to an extreme belief system' Now, truncate my last sentance to 'youths who adhere to an extremist belief system.' And, don't forget about those 'Asians.'

Strunk and White teach us that active writing is best(advice I don't live by). So, Strunk and White might say:

"Muslim wackjobs wanted to blow up half of Canada." Maybe wackjobs should be deleted, but I think it adds something to the statement.

Posted by: biorabbi at June 5, 2006 10:28 AM

"No muslims, no mosques." A quote from Havoc

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 5, 2006 10:34 AM

The police have already commented that those arrested 'come from all walks of life in Canadian society', which indeed is true. The one thing that binds them is that they are all muslim, and most of them attended the same storefront mosque...which by the way has an "islamic education" center above it....coincidence? I'm sure they received formal education in the public school system, but what kind of 'education' did they receive in that center? Unfortunatly the police are bound by 'sensitivity' training and wouldn't be able to speak the truth if it involves stating that islamic teaching was indeed a major influence.

Posted by: USAgirl at June 5, 2006 10:34 AM

It’s going to be a pretty hard time now,” Oryakhim said. ``After this incident, people are going to look at the Muslims from a dangerous view.”
Oryakhim said he fears that non-Muslim customers will stop patronizing businesses in the area that are run by Muslims.
“It’s going to hurt our businesses,” he said. “Our life.”

Of course you know this will make them very mad and the Muslims will have to open a can of Jihad on all you Canadians.

Posted by: JanuaryMan at June 5, 2006 10:48 AM

"motivated by an ideology based on politics, hatred and terrorism, and not on faith"

Correct me if I'm wrong (but I'm not), but political ideology, hatred and terrorism are all taught in the Qur'an and the Hadith....

Someone send that police chief a copy of each.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 5, 2006 10:51 AM

“motivated by an ideology based on politics, hatred and terrorism, and not on faith,” Blair told a gathering of Muslim leaders and concerned community members.

Meanwhile, imagine what is going through the heads of these Muslim leaders as this idiot Blair stands there and contradicts the foundational premise of Islam: Jihad is a test of faith*, and those who don't do it go to hell (see below)

*read, gangster-style loyalty.

Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4696:
It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'Abdullah b. Mubarak said: We think the hadith pertained to the time of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).

47:31. “And surely, We shall try you till We test those who strive hard (for the Cause of Allah) and the patient ones, and We shall test your facts (i.e. the one who is a liar, and the one who is truthful).”

tafsirs:

Ibn Abbas, 47:31. “(And verily We shall try you) through fighting (till We know) until We distinguish (those of you) O group of hypocrites (who strive hard (for the cause of Allah) and the steadfast) and those of you who are steadfast in war, (and till We test your record) and until We bring to light your secrets, hatred, enmity and contravention against Allah and His Messenger; and it is also said this means: until We bring to light your hypocrisy.”

Al-Jalalayn, 47:31. “And We will assuredly try you, We will assuredly test you by way of [commanding you to participate in] the struggle and in other ways, until We know, with knowledge outwardly manifested, those of you who struggle [for God's cause] and those who are steadfast, in [adhering to] the struggle and in other ways, and We will appraise, We will reveal, your record, in terms of [whether you acted with] obedience or disobedience in what concerns the struggle (all three verbs may be read with the [third person singular] yā' or with the [first person plural] nūn).”

No doubt, the Jalalayn (authors died 1459 and 1505) and Ibn Abbas (authors died 687 and 1414) tafsirs are due to a biased, al-Qaeda-inspired cherry-picking(!) The Jalalayn tafsir in particular continues to be one of the most popular and well-respected.

Believers must honour their duty to Allah and fight the disbelievers in battle, or be punished in hell (2:216, 8:15-16, 9:39). In the Koran, fighting in the way of Allah, or fighting in Allah’s Cause (see 4:76, etc.), means fighting to make Islam supreme, victorious, dominant in the world.

4:74. “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.”

Al-Jalalayn, 4:74.“So let them fight in the way of God, to elevate His religion, those who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of God and is slain, dies a martyr, or conquers, overcomes his enemy, We shall give him a great wage, a plentiful reward.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125:
Narrated Abu Musa: A man came to the Prophet and asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah's cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness." The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, “He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause.” {Also see Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 355; and Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Number 4684 (also 4685, 4686, 4687)}.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 35:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). Had I not found it difficult for my followers, then I would not remain behind any sariya going for Jihad and I would have loved to be martyred in Allah's cause and then made alive, and then martyred and then made alive, and then again martyred in His cause.” {Also see Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 352}.

Yes, Mohammad is also guilty of cherry-picking.

Posted by: Archimedes at June 5, 2006 10:55 AM

Why can't the police in Canada allow these muslims to describe their own religion and it's tenets. What the hell does he know about it?
Three steps forward and 2 steps back for the police officials.

Posted by: pismopal at June 5, 2006 10:59 AM

CIC did an excellent job by breaking windows of a mosque to divert attention away from them. Why would someone just break windows? This is old tactic and no one notices this.

Posted by: Crusader at June 5, 2006 11:01 AM

It's going to be a pretty hard time now,” Oryakhim said. ``After this incident, people are going to look at the Muslims from a dangerous view.”
Oryakhim said he fears that non-Muslim customers will stop patronizing businesses in the area that are run by Muslims.
“It’s going to hurt our businesses,” he said. “Our life."

You know, he just gave me the greatest, most simple idea for North America. If everyone of us refuses to see even a dime of our hard-earned $$ get into the hands of a Muslim, whether through charities we might normally donate to, or if we simply refuse to patronize places where they work, that they own or that they fund, then we could put them all out of business. In a way, it would be our own form of the very same tax strategy that the jihad has been putting upon infidels for centuries.

Starve these people off the continent.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 5, 2006 11:02 AM

For a moment, assume for the sake of argument, the Police officials are correct when they say the cause is not about religion. If that is true, then why are Muslims being interviewed by the Canadian MSM for comments on the comments? I think the Ostrich was bumped, and he only took his head out of the sand to see who it was...whew, close call...(head back in sand). The "Jedi mind trick" doesn't work on the conscious.

Posted by: SickBoy at June 5, 2006 11:09 AM

It was interesting to note that one of the 17 accused Shareef Abdelhaleen's father, is an engineer on contract with Atomic Energy of Canada and is now vehemently trying to defend his son who apparently had been living alone in a house in a middle class neighborhood. Police found several propane bottles scattered in his back yard when it was searched after the arrest.

Posted by: Mackie at June 5, 2006 11:12 AM

Allah's Apostle said:

"I have been made victorious with terror" Bukhari 4:52:220

Posted by: Caroline at June 5, 2006 11:13 AM

The 17 suspects who were arrested Friday, men and youths alike, were allegedly “motivated by an ideology based on politics, hatred and terrorism, and not on faith,” Blair told a gathering of Muslim leaders and concerned community members.

Is that what the 17 suspects said?

The suspects will be considered innocent until proven guilty, Blair said, who noted that any anger or fear spawned by allegations of a home-grown terrorist ring should not be directed at the Muslim community.

Then to whom should any anger or fear be so directed?

The proposition thus advocated by this sad authority on all things islamic -- is every bit as dangerous as the suicide murders themselves.

No actually more so -- because the proposition thus advanced serves only to protect the ideology that spawned the would-be suicide murderers in the first place -- islam.

Why deny what the koran teaches?

Is it shameful to publicly quote verbatim what the prophet said to do with non-believers?

If “smiting the necks of the unbelievers”; and “the people of the book” are pigs and monkeys”; are the teaching of islam – then why hide it if there is nothing to be ashamed of?

Where in the koran does it say to love one’s enemies? Or to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you?”

Where in the koran are such lovely things written?

Moreover had the murder plan come to fruition, the proposition advanced by Blair would have survived the suicide murderers after the fact, and encouraged further killings; since the root cause of these nefarious acts would then be protected by the veneer of false legitimacy in the guise of denial.

It would seem then, that those who knowingly advance such suppositions as these would-be criminals were “motivated by an ideology based on politics, hatred and terrorism, and not on faith” under the circumstances, are themselves co-participates by extension, with the suicide murderers in the taking of innocent life.

How are they morally any less guilty of the blood of innocents since they refuse to acknowledge the teachings of the koran for what they are and prosecute a just and lasting resolution in the interest of public safety?

Posted by: witness at June 5, 2006 11:19 AM

the cause is not about religion,

If they rationalize it in those terms anyone of any ideology could be a potential terrorist. So we all end up smeared with the same slimy brush. Multi Culti at its worst. Those like this chief are the most dangerous of our foes. And they are everywhere. Or as it is said, they come from a broad strata of society.

Posted by: tgusa at June 5, 2006 11:27 AM

Good to know that Canadian police chiefs can read into human souls.

What's his next gig?

As The Amazing Krez-nadian -Mentalist at your service!

He plumbs the minds of men to determine religious motivation, if any!

Enough of the p.c. sleeping pills.

If they don't want to arouse too much anger and suspicious of Muslims at large, just say: "As far as we can tell, it wasn't any members of the 'mainstream Islamic faith'...".

That' if the Canadian cops want fudge on top of their b.s.

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 5, 2006 11:43 AM

Don't waste time getting angry: get even. Hit the Muslim community where it counts: in the wallet.

http://www.foehammer.net/2006/06/how-to-peacefully-remove-muslims-from.html

Let it never be said that I was not one open to ideas from others. Thanks, Farhad!

Posted by: Foehammer at June 5, 2006 11:55 AM

[Refusal to patronize Muslim-owned businesses, or to hire Muslims] would be our own form of the very same tax strategy that the jihad has been putting upon infidels for centuries."
-- from a posting above

No, it would not be the same. Muslims imposed a severe (for how severe, see S. D. Goitein's "A Mediterranean Society" and his other late works) tax on those non-Muslims who at least were able to avoid immediate death or conversion by being granted the status of dhimmi (from ahl al-dhimma, the "People of the Pact," the people who were "protected" by a kind of systematic, legalized extortion racket, from the dangers posed by the Muslims themselves).

In the West, choosing not to buy goods or services from those whom one has every reason to believe pose a danger to one's own society, to its laws and customs and easygoing ways, and who do not have to be active participants in a plot here at home to represent a threat, for the mere swelling of Muslim ranks, and the inhibitions that puts on vote-craving politicians, on the truthful teaching of Islam in colleges, in the increased ability of Muslims to shut up those who would speak certain uncomfortable truths, from the mobs that shut out speakers at Montreal's Concordia University or at San Francisco State, to whose who infiltrate into the ranks of those who put on talk-shows, who select the guests and the topics for these radio and television shows, and who at every level prove themselves adept at deploying an army of apologists to perform what is a remarkable feat: keeping nearly a billion Infidels, in Europe and North America, still largely unaware of the contents of Qur'an and Hadith, of the real role of Muhammad and what the figure of that Perfect Man (uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil) offers.

Imagine that you were a Muslim, and who lived in the United States, or Canada, or Great Britain. You would have to constantly work to keep Infidels -- those around you, those at work, those at school -- from finding out too much about Islam. It would seem to be an impossible task. Yet look how well Muslims have done so far in preventing Infidels from discussing openly what Islam teaches, what the immutable and canonical texts contain.

An extraordinary feat -- so far.

But there is still time to undo the effect of so much nonsense and lies. And nothing helps to undo it as much as the behavior of Muslims themselves. Not only those arrested, charged, and tried. But all those who keep repeating irrelevancies, who keep up a steady patter of taqiyya-and-tu-quoque, and who refuse to admit that there is something in Islam itself that explains the behavior, and the beliefs and attitudes that prompt that behavior. And it is not "Al Qaeda." It is the Qur'an, it is the Hadith, it is Islam itself.

The more those "peaceful" apologists for Islam continue to show that they are playing their role in the Jihad -- an essential role -- and the more Infidels come to understand that Da'wa, demographic conquest, and the kind of propaganda these apologists offer are a much greater threat than terrorism, the more the anger will grow, and grow, with consequences.

But to go back to the simple and obvious notion: one need not give one's custom to those who are taught to hate you. One is under no obligation to support those who who continue to call themselves Muslims because at this point, such a self-identification is no longer innocent. It means the following: despite everything, despite knowing what Muslims are taught, despite knowing now (ignorance of the law is no excuse, and ignorance of Islam by Muslims cannot be an excuse, not now, not at this point) the world is divided, in the Islamic worldview, between Believer and Infidel, Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb, and between the two there must be unceasing hostlity, until the former swallows up the latter.

No. There is no reason to eat out at the chain "La Shish." There is no reason to buy your oriental rugs from a "smiler with the knyf under the cloke." There is no reason to be deluded about Islam on the basis, say, of some ostentatiously affable and friendly co-worker, a devout Muslim who may be all smiles but whose veil can be pierced by a few pointed questions,which should evoke the nonsense, the hysteria that so often lies just below the surface, and once it comes out -- once you have satisfied yourself of what had been hidden from view, you can begin to see things more clearlly.

The Naive and Sentimental Infidel is a danger to himself and to his fellow Infidels. His numbers need to diminish. And Infidels should start thinking of ways to make their countries less attractive for those who may exist geographically within the Lands of the Infidels, but mentally, morally, spiritually, exist in a place that is quite different, and that represents, has always represented, a threat to Infidels.

Take your custom elsewhere, and perhaps those to whom you deny it will be encouraged to take their customs (and beliefs) elsewhere -- right out of the Lands of the Infidels. And do not support those who would, if they could, do harm to you and to your civilizaational legacy. You owe it to those who created, and left you, that legacy.

Posted by: Hugh at June 5, 2006 12:18 PM

Hugh:

Well, you know that I was not making a literal comparison between the jizya and boycott, but the common denominator is still $$. I'm glad to see that we are in agreement on this crucial point, Hugh: when given the choice between goods, I'll take the non-Islamic, thank you.

(I'm kicking myself right now for buying a certain rug, but at the time I was not so clear-minded and zealous as I have now become. Times they are a-changin' indeed.)

Posted by: Foehammer at June 5, 2006 1:16 PM

Whoa! Not so fast Foehammer! They might wind up on the dole and we'll wind up paying for them anyway. Isn't socialism great! I love it!

Posted by: Sheik er' Bouti at June 5, 2006 1:25 PM

That's why true Welfare Reform is a must. Oh, and we have to overturn this ludricous law that makes babies born in the United States to illegals, foreigners, etc., automatic U.S. citizens. Nobody is American by default until their families have earned citizenship. That's how I view it.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 5, 2006 1:34 PM

Take your custom elsewhere, and perhaps those to whom you deny it will be encouraged to take their customs elsewhere?.. Rubbish!! They'll end up on wealthfare costing the infidel even more. The only solution is knowing, knowing the koran and the mind of the musulman who are "motivated by an ideology based on politics, hatred and terrorism, and not on faith"

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at June 5, 2006 1:36 PM

Foehammer,

I agree, but it will not happen until we stop voting for candidates who continually sell out the very people they are elected to represent.

Posted by: Sheik er' Bouti at June 5, 2006 1:51 PM

Sheik er' Bouti:

Well, that time is coming in the next elections. If I'm reading the tea leaves correctly, I think the currently elected elitist scum are in for one helluva wakeup call. The "Let them eat cake!" attitude just isn't going to cut it with Americans any longer.

First things first though, great pains and attention must be paid to making sure that the House kills bill S. 2611 when it comes before them soon.

http://www.foehammer.net/2006/05/listing-of-senators-that-b_114867403187197261.html

When that bill dies, then we're going to see dozens of representatives in Congress suddenly scramble to reword speeches and cover-their-asses. But, it should be too late.

If you want to find out which Senators need to get removed, just follow the bouncing vote. Many Senators that are far too confident in their own re-elections need to be the first to go. Examples: McCain (yes, the man I once supported), Clinton, Schumer, Kennedy, Feinstein, Feingold, Nelson, Specter, Lugar and Leiberman.

We are overdue for a political revolution at the polls. Let it begin with the next elections. CLEAN HOUSE.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 5, 2006 2:04 PM

Hugh wrote: "Imagine that you were a Muslim, and who lived in the United States, or Canada, or Great Britain. You would have to constantly work to keep Infidels -- those around you, those at work, those at school -- from finding out too much about Islam. It would seem to be an impossible task."

Actually, it has been not only a possible task, but a rather easy task, as documented day in and day out, for three years now, here at dhimmiwatch -- made easy by Western dummies and proto-dhimmis. One sadly sees little evidence that it will not continue to be a relative cakewalk for Muslims to dissemble and deceive the West about Islam.

Posted by: Television at June 5, 2006 2:32 PM

Oh Canadians, do yourselves and your dear ones a favor, please check out on the internet info about the Koran and Hadaiths and you will see they are full of commands for Muslims to do violence against non-Muslims.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 5, 2006 2:36 PM

Foehammer

Good point - good point. That is the first place to start. Those people who are working for their own benefit instead of the country should not only be voted out, but charged for treason - sedition etc..etc. If these people were doing their jobs, the US wouldn’t have near the problems. There would be people solving problems instead of causing them.

Posted by: THSIMJ at June 5, 2006 2:53 PM

I wish cleaning house politically was so easy. I have resigned myself to the belief that no western country will ever tackle islam as an enemy. It just won't happen. Hell, even in Israel where the Jews are under constant physical attack elect guys that sell them out, too. Nobody is willing to tackle the race/culture element inherent in islam. It is taboo. Totally off the table.

Foehammer, I wish you and me could form a political party. I would love to form a party opposed to islam right here in Canada, but it would get 10 votes. This is the problem. No political party can effect change unless it can garner the enthusiasm of at least 40% of the population, and the tacit support of at least 10% more. I fear that goal in unattainable. Canadians, love voting liberal. And those that vote conservative, will elect another dhimmi like Harper, not someone of my ilk, or yours. We are radicals in a sea of politically correct moderates. But Canada is a moderate nation, always has been, and it will die a moderate nation. And it will die. Soon.

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 5, 2006 9:41 PM

"Nobody is willing to tackle the race/culture element inherent in islam. It is taboo. Totally off the table. "

Someone in the public eye needs to have the guts to really react when falsly accused of 'racism' after criticising islam. They should attack back immediately and charge the accuser with libel/slander, and take it to court. It is a slanderous accusation if the person has never expressed a racist thought, only a criticism of the islamist ideology.

But people are too easily intimidated by the 'racist' label.

Posted by: Lili at June 6, 2006 12:52 AM