^^remember the days that followed. A scary experience.

Time to re-read this thread me thinks,,,,,, :cool:

Paragon, I know what you mean. I was watching the men's Wimbledon final last night until it was held up by rain and I decided to have an early night. Today I find out it was a 5 set thriller, best of all time, drama, Feds came back to make it 2-2 and nearly took the 5th only for Rafa to come back and win 10-9 in the 5th!!!! Blighty ey?

Its my nephew's birthday,,,,,,,just remembered.

I’m no conspiracy theorist but from the video (click on link) it is obvious a controlled explosion toppled the building. How anyone could argue otherwise (even if the building was engulfed by fire) is beyond me. 9/11 third tower mystery 'solved' By Mike Rudin BBC, Conspiracy Files The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center. The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers. Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse. Conspiracy theorists have argued that the third tower was brought down in a controlled demolition. Unlike the twin towers, Tower Seven was not hit by a plane. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, based near Washington DC, is expected to conclude in its long-awaited report this month that ordinary fires caused the building to collapse. That would make it the first and only steel skyscraper in the world to collapse because of fire. See World Trade Center 7's location and structure The National Institute of Standards and Technology's lead investigator, Dr Shyam Sunder, spoke to BBC Two's "The Conspiracy Files": "Our working hypothesis now actually suggests that it was normal building fires that were growing and spreading throughout the multiple floors that may have caused the ultimate collapse of the buildings." 'Smoking gun' However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition. The founder of the group, Richard Gage, says the collapse of the third tower is an obvious example of a controlled demolition using explosives. "Building Seven is the smoking gun of 9/11¿ A sixth grader can look at this building falling at virtually freefall speed, symmetrically and smoothly, and see that it is not a natural process. "Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance", says Gage, "they don't go straight down through themselves." Conspiracy theories There are a number of facts that have encouraged conspiracy theories about Tower Seven. Although its collapse potentially made architectural history, all of the thousands of tonnes of steel from the skyscraper were taken away to be melted down. The third tower was occupied by the Secret Service, the CIA, the Department of Defence and the Office of Emergency Management, which would co-ordinate any response to a disaster or a terrorist attack. The destruction of the third tower was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. The first official inquiry into Tower Seven by the Federal Emergency Management Agency was unable to be definitive about what caused its collapse. In May 2002 FEMA concluded that the building collapsed because intense fires had burned for hours, fed by thousands of gallons of diesel stored in the building. But it said this had "only a low probability of occurrence" and more work was needed. But now nearly seven years after 9/11 the definitive official explanation of what happened to Tower Seven is finally about to be published in America. The National Institute of Standards and Technology has spent more than two years investigating Tower Seven but lead investigator Dr Shyam Sunder rejects criticism that it has been slow. "We've been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That's the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years." With no steel from Tower 7 to study, investigators have instead made four extremely complex computer models worked out to the finest detail. They're confident their approach can now provide the answers. Dr Sunder says the investigation is moving as fast as possible. "It's a very complex problem. It requires a level of fidelity in the modelling and rigour in the analysis that has never been done before." Other skyscrapers haven't fully collapsed before because of fire. But NIST argues that what happened on 9/11 was unique. Steel structure weakened It says Tower Seven had an unusual design, built over an electricity substation and a subway; there were many fires that burnt for hours; and crucially, fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn't have enough water and focused on saving lives. Investigators have focused on the east side where the long floor spans were under most stress. They think fires burnt long enough to weaken and break many of the connections that held the steel structure together. Most susceptible were the thinner floor beams which required less fireproofing, and the connections between the beams and the columns. As they heated up the connections failed and the beams sagged and failed, investigators say. The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away. Tower Seven came down at 5.21pm. Until now most of the photographs have been of the three sides of the building that did not show much obvious physical damage. Now new photos of the south side of the building, which crucially faced the North Tower, show that whole side damaged and engulfed in smoke. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7485331.stm

They will inevitably come to their own conclusion as to why he wears those sun glasses

^^Did you see Ahmed? You’re probably right. It will more than likely turn out to be yet another pre-election gimmick to get some votes from the minorities. Do the Tories actually realise 90% of the people they want to help by banning the thing don’t actually bother to vote (Islaamaha iyo faaraxiinta). I think they need a Marcus Smith video to get them inspired, off the sofa and down to the local school come election day.

Mental health fears over khat use There are fears that the stimulant khat is contributing to mental health problems within the UK's east African communities. Dil Neiyyar of the BBC's Asian Network reports. In a courtyard, two men sitting on a bench are staring intensely at a pond. The pair appear mesmerised by the gentle and repetitive splash of the water from a small fountain. This walled oasis in London's East End is the Tower Hamlets branch of the mental health charity Mind. In one of its many rooms, Abdi Rahman is playing pool with a friend. He explains why he thinks the stimulant khat is responsible for the loss of his job and subsequent slide into mental illness. "While I was working as a postman I got depressed and stressed, so I was admitted to hospital, and at the same time I was using khat as well, so they all added up and eventually I ended up mentally ill." Roukiya Omar is one of the workers whose job is to educate the community about the dangers of khat use and encourage people to stop chewing. She believes the stimulant is moving away from its traditional use as a social pastime because of unemployment and social exclusion. She says it's a growing problem, particularly with women. "[They are] resorting to khat to seek any comfort from the real problems they are having," she says. "It's like with any addiction, when people can't handle life they just go and get a drink or go for drugs, so khat is becoming something like that." About 15 minutes' walk from Mind is a building which was once home to Captain James Cook. Out of its dilapidated basement, Ahmed Abdillah runs a "khat house" where the plant can be bought and consumed. Today there are three men sitting on the floor. They all have a tell-tale vacant stare and their clothes have seen better days. One of the men describes how chewing khat can feel. "It gives a little bit of a high but not as high as a drug or high as alcohol, it just makes you relaxed and comfortable and then you just enjoy yourself." Ahmed, the owner of the khat house, has no reservations about selling the substance that he says isn't harmful if used in moderation. "When you do it 24 hours, chewing, you become like an alcoholic... I eat four pieces a day, and no problem for me. When I eat, wake up in the morning, go to work - no problem." Twice a week, Ahmed drives to Heathrow to pick up a fresh delivery. Social lives Around seven tonnes of khat is flown into Britain every week from Ethiopia, Kenya and Yemen and then sold in cities with large east African communities like London and Birmingham for about £4 a bunch. The khat plant, Catha edulis, has been chewed by east Africans for hundreds of years and plays a large part in the social lives of both men and women. A typical session might consist of consuming several bundles. Cathinone and cathine are the main ingredients of the plant. Both are class C drugs in the UK, but the plant khat itself is not classified and can be bought openly in shops. Cathinone is almost identical to amphetamines and it is this that creates a high. It's known to cause mental health problems like psychosis and depression. At the Mile End Hospital in Tower Hamlets, consultant psychiatrist Dr Eleni Palazidou treats many people from the Somali, Yemeni and Ethiopian communities, and claims khat is a serious factor in many of these cases. She says it exacerbates existing mental health problems but believes it can also directly trigger psychosis if used in excess. One of the main problems facing treatment of these effects is habitual usage. "They may have a new episode triggered off by the use of khat or they may get better from an episode of illness and they chew khat and go back to square one," she says. "It's difficult to effectively control their illness, because it stimulates those particular chemical systems in the brain that we are trying to control with the medication." The Home Office says it is aware of the concerns surrounding the side-effects of khat but that it stands by the decision in 2005 not to classify it after it took advice from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. It reported that "the extent of khat use in the UK is relatively low" and that the evidence of harm resulting from khat use is "insufficient, relative to those drugs that are under control". However, it continues to keep an eye on the matter, with plans to improve understanding of khat misuse and the impact on communities. But that doesn't go far enough for the Conservative Party, which plans to ban the plant if it gets into power. Tory spokesman for social cohesion, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, believes that advice and education about khat is simply not enough to tackle the problem. "When there are barriers to the equality of opportunity and when there are barriers to integration - like a drug which is disproportionately affecting a certain community - then it is the responsibility of government to deal with that. "This government's not dealing with it and that's why we're setting a very clear direction as to what we in government will do." The Tories will get in. Question is will they ban khat? I hope they do.

^^We were the first there mate I used to live in TH and rent off an old Somali man who had been there since the 60s. He was a nightmare landlord I tell ya :rolleyes:

Is it me or is she quaking in her boots?

It's true, we Muslims keep our heads down Tomorrow night, on the eve of the third anniversary of the 7/7 bombings, Channel 4's Dispatches returns to one of its favourite subjects - Muslims. The programme, called It Shouldn't Happen to a Muslim, looks at how life has changed for Muslim families in the UK since 9/11. It recounts vicious stories of horrific, racist brutality against Muslims, not the extremist ones, but the ordinary, law-abiding ones; stories that are rarely reported in the press. I imagine this will annoy a hell of a lot of people. They'll probably post comments on websites of all political hues about how insensitive it is to focus on the so-called plight of Muslims, asking what right 'they' have to play the victim card and speak out about the attacks they've suffered when it was 'they' who started it in the first place. When people start talking about 7/7, 9/11, terrorism and Osama, rationality is lost and prejudice and stereotype emerge. Most people are so (understandably) full of rage at what happened and what's still happening that they don't want to hear that not all Muslims are terrorists, illegal immigrants or uneducated illiterates that the rest of the nation has to 'respect'. Ultimately, it's far easier to lump us altogether. Peter Oborne, the well-known right-wing columnist who is behind the Dispatches programme, pointed this out in two pieces published last week, one in the Daily Mail, the other in the Independent. He spoke out against Islamophobia and how the press is to blame for producing ridiculous stories about Muslims, like the one that appeared last week (funnily enough in the Mail) about how a police advert featuring a puppy sparked 'outrage' from Muslims who find dogs offensive. For the record, I'm Muslim. Trust me, we don't have an issue with puppies. Oborne says: 'We should all feel ashamed about the way we treat Muslims, in the media, in our politics and on our streets. We do not treat Muslims with the tolerance, decency and fairness that we often like to boast is the British way.' He was brave to say this. It's obvious that many 'get-back-from-where-you-came-from' people will see him as some sort of 'sympathiser'. Some of what he said rings true. If you're a Muslim, even a middle-of-the-road one, you don't have to have been a victim of an Islamophobic attack to realise that things have changed. Sometimes, it's subtle, like how my hijab-wearing mother had to justify to colleagues why she'd started wearing a headscarf. At other times it isn't. Every Muslim can probably tell you a story or two of how they got held for hours of interrogation by immigration on the way to the US for no apparent reason other than because they had a Muslim-sounding name or an Arab/Asian face. My elder brother, an orthodontist, once told me that the best thing for us (for Muslims in general) to do right now was to 'keep our heads down; don't draw attention to yourself unnecessarily'. Even the open-minded, educated, Muslim contingent worries about the misperceptions people have of us, largely because of the fear factor people tend to use when talking about Muslims. 'If people know I'm Muslim, will they judge me differently because of it?' is something that worries me. Every year, I fast for Ramadan, but (until now at least) probably only one of my colleagues actually knows. I'd rather not shout about it because then it saves the questions, the quizzical looks, the feeling you get from other people that you're different. Pieces such as Oborne's and tomorrow's Dispatches programme will upset some who don't think Muslims deserve the sympathy. But this isn't about Muslims asking for pity. It's about asking for understanding and the recognition that it's a minority that has ruined our names - and that most of us really aren't that different. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/06/islam.religion

^^I only take offence at the thought of being associated with Peckham (sp) of all places :rolleyes: But I guess Tower Hamlets isn't far behind

^^ Who is uncle Albert then?? ps if such a meeting does take place be sure not to offend anyone saxib

Originally posted by Adam-Zayla: It's morphing time..... I think my younger siblings would have known

Superman?

Originally posted by Ceyrow jr.: Watch this vid: Prof. Ibbi was a member of the TFG parliament. He confesses what really went down and who derailed the Khartuom peace agreement. Here is part. 4 Confirmation if ever there was such a thing. Needless to say some will still 'blame ICU'

Originally posted by Baashi: I am not implying anything. I want to find out where you stand on the critical issues. So you are a Somali nationalist! Your support for Al Shabaab is based on your opposition against Ethiopian occupation? You are not for what Al Shabaab, as a movement, stand for . You are just against TFG and Ethiopians. I am for the cause of ridding Somalia of Ethiopians AND applying a rule of law based on Sharia. Your question is one of methodology. Not being in favour of the methodology you raised (forced implementation of Sharia) does not mean one is against the cause. Dabshid, I'm in favour of a referendum in the SSC regions. Those who are in favour of the occupation should not really be complaining about that though should they?

^^Didn't say that. Again, you're indirectly implying things.

Will you allow Al-Shabaab after they kick Tigre's behind and liberate parts of the South to turn around and spread the message by force to other parts of Somalia that once existed. Al Shabab are fighting an occupation awoow. Lets make that crystal clear. Any spread by force is obviously wrong and I will never agree to it but you're implying that Islam is being spread by force as we speak! Lets not mislead the gallary odayga.

^^you're all over the place mate.

^^That needs an in depth discussion and you know it awoow.

^Always been receptive to a viable alternative pal. An alternative under an Islamic unbrella without criminals at the helm can only be a good thing.

NB 1)Is everyone who hails from or supports PL a qabiilist and a traitor...as you eluded to in your above post I didn’t allude to that. I alluded to those who questioned my position as somewhat suspect with a wiff of ‘tolka’ training mindset. But hey I could be wrong,,,,, 2)where is your evidence people from the south were refused entrance to PL. Plane load back in 2006. Look it up.

Originally posted by Baashi: Are you for dismembering Somalia that once existed into fiefdoms on the bases of what European power colonized what corner once upon time? At the moment there is no alternative. There was an alternative June-Dec 2006.

Originally posted by Baashi: Al Burcaawi, awoowe I agree with Duke in saying that there is conflict of interest between secessionsts' end goals and what Al Shabaab have in mind. If you can reconcile these two diametrically opposing objectives awoowe I am all ears. Awoow, the ICU/Asmara group/Al Shabaab have the best interests of Somalia at heart whereas the TFG doesn't. One has more respect for the former however imperfect they may be. When it comes down to finally sitting down and thrashing out a deal one hopes to sit down with reasoned, principaled men and not sell their mother warlords. Having said that, when one chooses right from wrong, none of that comes into play.