Like you hotmail was my first email that I ever had however after a while the same scenario started, I have tried different methods such as blocking all did not work I had no option but to switch to yahoo and they proved to be better since they did not flood these junk emails but you do not know whether they would also adopt the hotmail policy and start their commercial advertisements. Also a friend of mine told me that mail.com is a good as they dont advertisement but I do not know. However nobody can miss hotmail.com cause they have msn messenger which i still use

In here they think differently and when this subject come out the first word you here is "ENGLISH ROSES" and off course Diana would be the top of the list not only on the category of beauty but also among the GREATES BRITON ever lived. To my dissapointment they voted Winston Churchill as the greatest Briton ever lived.

Having seen grown up guys who are half Somali half Indonesian they look average Somali to me but I dont know how they looked when they were children but as many of you have already said all children are beautiful regardless of what race they are

Here in England we also share with you with the "flag-carrying fever" but on during the WORLD CUP and the QUEEN'S JUBILEE which both passed us for at least another few years. But generally being a political observer I find that even American "Intelegensia" are more emotional than average Europeans. While Europeans adhere more to the principle of reason the Americans adhere to the principle of "patriotism" Here is an article by the Palestinian academic Edward Said in which he contasts America to Europe Europe versus America In comparison with US war fever, Europe has struck a more moderate, thoughtful tone. But when will it assume a countervailing role to America, asks Edward Said Although I have visited England dozens of times, I have never spent more than one or two weeks at a single stretch. This year, for the first time, I am in residence for almost two months at Cambridge University, where I am the guest of a college and giving a series of lectures on humanism at the university. The first thing to be said is that life here is far less stressed and hectic than it is in New York, at my university, Columbia. Perhaps this slightly relaxed pace is due in part to the fact that Great Britain is no longer a world power, but also to the salutary idea that the ancient universities here are places of reflection and study rather than economic centres for producing experts and technocrats who will serve the corporations and the state. So the post-imperial setting is a welcome environment for me, especially since the US is now in the middle of a war fever that is absolutely repellent as well as overwhelming. If you sit in Washington and have some connection to the country's power elites, the rest of the world is spread out before you like a map, inviting intervention anywhere and at any time. The tone in Europe is not only more moderate and thoughtful: it is also less abstract, more human, more complex and subtle. Certainly Europe generally and Britain in particular have a much larger and more demographically significant Muslim population, whose views are part of the debate about war in the Middle East and against terrorism. So discussion of the upcoming war against Iraq tends to reflect their opinions and their reservations a great deal more than in America, where Muslims and Arabs are already considered to be on the "other side", whatever that may mean. And being on the other side means no less than supporting Saddam Hussein and being "un-American". Both of these ideas are abhorrent to Arab and Muslim-Americans, but the idea that to be an Arab or Muslim means blind support of Saddam and Al-Qa'eda persists nonetheless. (Incidentally, I know no other country where the adjective "un" is used with the nationality as a way of designating the common enemy. No one says unSpanish or unChinese: these are uniquely American confections that claim to prove that we all "love" our country. How can one actually "love" something so abstract and imponderable as a country anyway?). The second major difference I have noticed between America and Europe is that religion and ideology play a far greater role in the former than in the latter. A recent poll taken in the United States reveals that 86 per cent of the American population believes that God loves them. There's been a lot of ranting and complaining about fanatical Islam and violent jihadists, who are thought to be a universal scourge. Of course they are, as are any fanatics who claim to do God's will and to fight his battles in his name. But what is most odd is the vast number of Christian fanatics in the US, who form the core of George Bush's support and at 60 million strong represent the single most powerful voting block in US history. Whereas church attendance is down dramatically in England it has never been higher in the United States whose strange fundamentalist Christian sects are, in my opinion, a menace to the world and furnish Bush's government with its rationale for punishing evil while righteously condemning whole populations to submission and poverty. It is the coincidence between the Christian Right and the so-called neo-conservatives in America that fuel the drive towards unilateralism, bullying, and a sense of divine mission. The neo-conservative movement began in the 70s as an anti-communist formation whose ideology was undying enmity to communism and American supremacy. "American values", now so casually trotted out as a phrase to hector the world, was invented then by people like Irving Kristoll, Norman Podhoretz, Midge Decter, and others who had once been Marxists and had converted completely (and religiously) to the other side. For all of them the unquestioning defense of Israel as a bulwark of Western democracy and civilisation against Islam and communism was a central article of faith. Many though not all the major neo-cons (as they are called) are Jewish, but under the Bush presidency they have welcomed the extra support of the Christian Right which, while it is rabidly pro-Israel, is also deeply anti-Semitic (ie these Christians -- many of them Southern Baptists -- believe that all the Jews of the world must gather in Israel so that the Messiah can come again; those Jews who convert to Christianity will be saved, the rest will be doomed to eternal perdition). It is the next generation of neo-conservatives such as Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleeza Rice, and Donald Rumsfeld who are behind the push to war against Iraq, a cause from which I very much doubt that Bush can ever be deterred. Colin Powell is too cautious a figure, too interested in saving his career, too little a man of principle to represent much of a threat to this group which is supported by the editorial pages of The Washington Post and dozens of columnists, media pundits on CNN, CBS, and NBC, as well as the national weeklies that repeat the same clichés about the need to spread American democracy and fight the good fight, no matter how many wars have to be fought all over the world. There is no trace of this sort of thing in Europe that I can detect. Nor is there that lethal combination of money and power on a vast scale that can control elections and national policy at will. Remember that George Bush spent over $200 million to get himself elected two years ago, and even Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York spent 60 million dollars for his election: this scarcely seems like the democracy to which other nations might aspire, much less emulate. But this is accepted uncritically by what seems to be an enormous majority of Americans who equate all this with freedom and democracy, despite its obvious drawbacks. More than any other country today, the United States is controlled at a distance from most citizens; the great corporations and lobbying groups do their will with "the people's" sovereignty leaving little opportunity for real dissent or political change. Democrats and Republicans, for example, voted to give Bush a blank check for war with such enthusiasm and unquestioning loyalty as to make one doubt that there was any thought in the decision. The ideological position common to nearly everyone in the system is that America is best, its ideals perfect, its history spotless, its actions and society at the highest levels of human achievement and greatness. To argue with that -- if that is at all possible -- is to be "un-American" and guilty of the cardinal sin of anti- Americanism, which derives not from honest criticism but for hatred of the good and the pure. No wonder then that America has never had an organised Left or real opposition party as has been the case in every European country. The substance of American discourse is that it is divided into black and white, evil and good, ours and theirs. It is the task of a lifetime to make a change in that Manichean duality that seems to be set forever in an unchanging ideological dimension. And so it is for most Europeans who see America as having been their saviour and is now their protector, yet whose embrace is both encumbering and annoying at the same time. Tony Blair's wholeheartedly pro-American position therefore seems even more puzzling to an outsider like myself. I am comforted that even to his own people he seems like a humourless aberration, a European who has decided in effect to obliterate his own identity in favour of this other one, represented by the lamentable Mr Bush. I still have time to learn when it will be that Europe will come to its senses and assume the countervailing role to America that its size and history entitle it to play. Until then, the war approaches inexorably.

What was the prime aim of its creators. The BBC releases nearly fifty language to the Third World on a daily basis and it is funded by British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. As to the aim of its creation, I had the opportunity to talk to a and old Englishman who happened to witness when the Somali section of the BBC was created in 1957 and he told me that "Britain created the BBC Somali section in order to counter the pro-independence prgrammes released from Cairo by SYL members who were in Egypt and supported by Gamal Abd Nasir" it seems that it is still doing its main task. I happen to know that the BBC used to release some East European languages as well as German during the Cold War era, however after the demise of the Soveit and communism the BBC stopped all the programmes aimed at those countries by mid 1990s

Since we are in a height of a tenstion, this subject needs to be revived and discussed properly

What an interesting debat this was...I regret that I have missed this

It is indeed sad, the other day I was watching a BBC interview with Donald Rumsfeld and when asked about his previous comment on "so-called Ocuupied territories" his response was "If you dont like it dont say it" also when you hear George W Bush saying "some of the history of the world have already been written but the rest will be written by us" Such remarks prove that they are going to the path of NAZI Germany in a speedier way Sister Fatima you are right but the question is 'do we have leaders? I though we only have puppet followers

Dear MMA, I agree with many of what you have said and no one is doubting that Xamar Cadeey was the most important, rich, multi-ethnic. But all of these happened after it was chosen to become the seat of government. However, the reality is that Xamar today is the most unstable, ghastly city where the most growing economy i sbecoming a warlord. Every day you hear a new name that joing the "The League of Warlords" as it is the highest title that exists there. I am not singling out Mogadisho and I am aware this is a nationwide dilemma however there is nowhere like Mogadishu and seems unlikely that it can restore its former pride as the former capital of Somalia in the near future. Also bear in mind that there are another cities who share Mogadishu with the the same weather and sea-coast of Indian Ocean and are reasonably are multiethnic - Marka and Kismayo so dont think that these things are only unique to Mogadishu

Datuk Seri Mahatir Mohamed is one of the still able speakers that we have in the Muslim World though he only uses retorick instead of deeds but still better than others who oly have one option and that is yes to the West. Here is another speech he gave during his latest visit to Tokyo Japan Mahathir asks Japan to urge U.S., Europe to understand Islam TOKYO — Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad suggested Friday Japan can play a role in attaining peace in the world by urging leaders of the United States and European countries to have a better understanding of the Islamic community. In a keynote address at a United Nations symposium on Islam at U.N. University in Tokyo, Mahathir also called for a halt to oppression of Muslims around the globe, saying democratic powers should allow for more differences and plurality. The outspoken prime minister also emphasized that while people have come a long way in advancing technologies, including development of weapons of mass destruction, the growth in their moral values have not been able to catch up with the speed of globalization. "I think Japan has a very good role to play," said Mahathir, who is visiting the country for five days through Monday. "What we expect of Japan is to balance. You have no quarrels against the Arabs, you have no quarrels against the Jews, you have no quarrels against anybody." He emphasized, however, that Japan should see the situation in a rational way and figure out the true reason behind the animosity that exists between Muslims and non-Muslims, particularly the U.S., Europe and Jews. "If the Arabs who before were not terrorists are today willing to commit suicide in order to fight against the Israelis or Americans, there must be a reason for it. And the reason is that they feel that Americans and the Jews and the Europeans have been unjust to them," Mahathir said. As an exemplification of such injustice, he said the long-standing conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is a result of Europeans opting to create a Jewish state in Palestine and creating Israel by "forcibly expropriating Arab land and property and expelling the Palestinians from their country and their homes." He recommended Japan persuade the U.S. and Europe that building a security and defense system is not the "total answer" and that they should also resolve the problems involving perceptions among Islamic people that they are being oppressed. The 76-year-old leader said he believes Muslims around the world, particularly Palestinians, are being subject to much injustice and oppression by powerful nations, causing some to resort to extremist and "senseless" terrorist activities. "We seem to be living in a very unfair and unjust world," Mahathir remarked, adding the large and powerful democracies are forcing their ideas on the weaker members of the world community. "Today, you are only allowed democracy. 'If you are not democratic, I will starve you to death, I will apply sanctions, I will bomb your countries.' But is bombing a country democratic?" he asked. He said the reason the strong have come to dominate the weak rather than trying to protect and make life better for them is that civilizations have not caught up with scientific advances. "Human values have not kept pace with human scientific capabilities. Despite the technological advances, we are still thinking in terms of might is right. If you're strong, then you take everything. If you are weak, you lose everything," Mahathir said. "That is the kind of thinking that would be compatible with a very uncivilized world," he added. "We can build atomic bombs which can destroy millions and millions of people, but we have not got the culture to control our impulses, our desires, our emotions." "And as the capacity increases, we are going to live in a more and more dangerous world," he lamented. At the outset of the symposium titled "Islam: Fostering Peace and Dialogue in an Interdependent World," Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi made opening remarks, saying the different cultures in the world should make multifaceted efforts to understand one another. "It may take time for people with different historical and cultural backgrounds to attain mutual understanding, but I believe we can realize international peace by continuing long-term efforts to promote understanding among people in various fields through various methods," Kawaguchi said. (Kyodo News)

Opinionated He has not forgot the A Link but as you know that the letter A is common in English whereas Q is much more Arabic and therefore is a proof that it means something fishy such as terrorism for example check properly when they pronounce AL QAEDA and IRAQ it is AALKAYDA and IYRAAK which means that they are pronounced differently and therefore that itself a proof of terorrism

There is a lot of tricks in there nevertheless I didnt do neither well nor very bad just in between

Lol it is funny but I have heard a slightly different verstion my verstion is that both the wife and husband were Somalis and they have been getting some difficulties together and she decided to take him to court and when he got ther he said "I OPEN MY WIFE BECAUSE SHE CUT MY LEGS AND SHE ENTER MY OCEAN" He meant Naagtayda ayaan furayaa maxaa yeelay way i lug gooysay waxayna faraha la soo gashay badahayga

Dear OGUN, A Centralised system where everything from passport to planning authorised in Mogadishu. As a result, it became the only city we had due to the system we inherited and as aware, Somalis culturally are independent and therefore need a loose system of governance as noted by the late British traveller Burton when he noted that Somali are “fierce race of republicans” In addition, federalism would not do any harm as it has been practiced by most of the developing and developed world.

Welcome back Sophist bro/sis We have missed your luminous, visionary English and your aptitude to write an excellent piece of arts. We are looking forward to more writing so we can benefit from you and learn new terminologies

I think that Allah has blessed us with one of the most beautiful languages on earth. I mean when you look at our oral heritage and extensive poetry why do we need to have another language as our national. However, we have to also keep in mind that the world is getting smaller they after they and if we need to compete we have to learn some other languages. I believe that Englisha nd Arabic are both important since English has become the language of the "world" and Arabis is somehow important whether its religous also the Gulf Arab state have become our important trade partners though that relationshsip is not equal. Also some other languages such Swahili and Spanish have influence in the world and is spoken by millions of people. Coming back to the question of choosing which language we choose to learn as a second I belive we should the individuals the right to chose whether they should learn another language and what that should be wasalam

I think that there is no illusion that many of us want to go back home and visit at least if not go there permenantly but there are many barriers that would not let everyone to do so. There is economical reason in which makes many people unable to visit also the question of stability where we know that many places especially in the south are unsafe and makes less likey to go.

I cannot imagine of what Siad Barre made though Mr Nasralah said he was in charge of the treasures of the nation (whatever that meant) But Mr. Salat-Boy makes only what he can snatch away from Arab rulers. whoever watched last Arab League summit in Sharm-Al-Sheikh which he attended was his most testing and difficult he attended so far since his main financiers were divided into two camps. those "with" the George Dubya Bush ie Gulf States and those "against" Bush ie Qadhafi. I was told that Mr Salat-Boy decided which one would feed him with more money and he went to the Qadhafi camp since he could not get both of them he decided (I presume) the one with more.

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846. John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946. Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860. John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960. The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters. Both were particularly concerned with civil rights. Both their wives lost their children while living in the White House. Both Presidents were shot on a Friday. Both were shot in the head. Both were shot in the presence of their wives. The Secretary of each President warned them not to go to the theater and to Dallas, respectively. If you are like me...you will trip out over the following history lesson! Enjoy... Lincoln's Secretary was named Kennedy. Kennedy's Secretary was named Lincoln. Both were assassinated by Southerners. Both were succeeded by Southerners. Both successors were named Johnson. Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808. Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908. John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939. Both assassins were known by their three names. Both names have 15 letters. Booth ran from the theater and was captured in a warehouse. Oswald ran from the warehouse and was captured in a theater. To cap it all off, Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trial.

Dear Gedid, I think that the simple aim of this was to air who you believe is the greatest and simply air it instead of questioning opinions of other SOL users everyone has the intelect to think and decide who s/he thinks is the greatest

Dear Baashi, Kaakici wadaadkii Jihad laguna kaalmee e I disagree with your interpretation of the poem of the Great Mujahid Ismail Mire who was indeed the commander in cheif of the Dervish Army. This passage is from his famous poem RAGOW KIBIRKA WAA LAGU KUFAA in this passage he simply mentions a specific battle where Sayidka disagreed with the rest and as a result a fatal mistake happened which unfortunately costed the lives of many mujahids but in this he is no way implying that the Sayid has commited an intentional mistake Wasalam

The debate over the moral criticism of capitalism is quite a lively and on going one The main features of capitalism and what it entails are entirely based upon the concept of the free market and its advocacy of freedom of ownership. It has come to symbolise financial and economic liberalisation, including the abolition of tariffs and protectionism, the free movement of capital and the privatisation of state assets. Capitalism can therefore be simply described by an internationalising of the aforementioned doctrine and its components as nearly all countries economies have become linked via many ways such as through stock markets which has given rise to the term of a global economy. The concept of a free market is a central tenet of the Capitalist ideology. Japan, the European Union and America have been the most ardent supporters of globalisation. Some of the major financial institutions within America have demonstrated their immense influence over the government and its policies. The United States like many European countries actively seek openings for these groups. This can be clearly seen in the appointment of Robert Rubin, the former head of Goldman Sachs a major financial institution as the American Treasury Secretary with considerable influence within the administration. Clinton and Rubin, who became his Treasury Secretary in 1995, took the American passion for free trade and carried it further to press for the freer movement of capital. Along the way they pushed harder to win opportunities for American banks, brokerages and insurance companies With the demise of the Soviet Union, Communism ceased to exist within Russia as well as to be propagated internationally. It has been discredited as an ideology as the majority of its former adherents have adopted Capitalism. America has also used various international institutions to promote her global agenda. The most notable of these are the IMF and the World Bank; two institutions which America was instrumental in establishing after the Second World War. For example the IMF in the name of promoting economic prosperity has reached deep into areas once thought to be none of its business - such as labor markets, banking rules and competition policy further encroaching on national sovereignty Furthermore American influence and grip over various country economies will be strengthened and consolidated. The United States will probably find its international economic and political dominance enhanced. Richard Robinson (the current governor of New Mexico) who used to be a member of the National Security Council in America has said that, "…the world is witnessing the dawn of a new financial Pax Americana that could extend U.S leverage over China and Russia as well as the rest of Asia The solution to the ills of Global Capitalism in all its manifestations can never be solved by reforming it, because Capitalism is the root of the problem. The solution can only be rectified by the abolition of such an exploitative system. It needs to be replaced by a system which is build upon a sound intellectual basis, which recognises the nature of human beings and has systems and rules which work in harmony with them not against them. Only then can people be delivered from the awful state in which Capitalism has left them.

This is interesting topic and there are some facts though also there are some questionable elements and needs to be verified On the issue of slavery I dont think that Somalis were involved slave trade in principal but there were slaves in Somalia who were brough from south-east Africa by the Arab traders and they settled some areas of the south as well as northe east Somalia but there were no evidenceof somalis enslaving their fellow Somalis Going back to the topic THE EARLY HISTORY OF SOMALIS here is a some research I have made long time ago about the history of Somalia The history of Somali people goes back to at least 1500 BC, known as the Land of Punt; it had close commercial links with ancient Egyptians during the reign of Queen Hatshepsut. This relationship between Egyptians and Puntites is mentioned in the Temple of of Deir Al-Bahri as the queen sends an expedition to their land, on their arrival back from Land of Punt, they bring gifts to the pharaoh. The Phoenicians also had contacts with this land and called it as the ‘region of incense’. This shows that Somalis had always maintained trade relations with outside world. Numerous Chinese manuscripts are mentioned in Somalia as an important commercial centre as it imported ivory, cloths and spices. It is believed that as early as the 7th century that Islam reached the Somali coast as Arabs started to settle the southern coastal areas of Mogadishu, Merca, Brava, Kismayu as well as Zeila, Berbera and Bandar Qasim in the north and Harar in the interior. These Arab immigrants brought the Islamic faith with them and since Islam became and essential part of day-to-day matters in Somalia. Some of the first scholars to write about Somalis were some of the most renowned writers of their time such al-Masudi 935AD, Al-Bakri 1067AD, Al-Idris 1154AD, and Ibn Batuta 1331AD. When Ibn Battuta visited Mogadishu reported seeing cloth being exported from Mogadishu to places as far off as Egypt and China. The Sultanate of Ifat was one the earliest Somali sultanates and was found in 14th century in the area north of Awash Valley of what present day is Djibouti, Northwest Somalia and parts of Ogaden. Ifat’s neighbours on the west were Kingdom of Shoa in the highlands. As both states vied for supremacy and expansion, their relations were never affable. This meant that they were constant war at each other. Abyssinians defeated the sultanate and it moved its headquarters to Harar. Ifat was inherited by the state of Adal. The Adal state with Zeila as its headquarters and whose influence at the height of its power and prosperity in the sixteenth century extended through the fertile valleys of the Jijiga and the Harar plateau to the Ethiopian highlands. Adal's fame derived not only from the prosperity and cosmopolitanism of its people, its architectural sophistication, graceful mosques, and high learning, but also from its conflicts with the expansionist Christian Abyssinians. This era is believed to when the first Somali Nationalism began as a result of confrontation erupted between the two states. The Sultan of Adal at that time Ahmed Ibrahim Al-Ghazi (nicknamed Ahmed Gurey meaning ‘the left handed’) and his forces were able to repulse numerous attacks launched by Abyssinians and their Portuguese allies. Ahmed Gurey was able to penetrate the Abyssinian highlands and effectively occupied the whole of it in more than two decades. It was this joint Portuguese-Abyssinian force who used cannon to route out the Somalis, whose imam died on the battlefield. These historical events were recorded in the Somali and Abyssinian folklore and since then, there were animosity, mistrust and hatred between the Somalis and Amharic-speaking highlanders in Ethiopia. Sir Richard Burton was the first British explorer to visit the Somali Peninsula when he visited in 1854. In his famous book ‘First Footsteps in East Africa’ he described the Somali country as occupying the whole of the Eastern Horn. On his travel to the interior, he described the Somali people as “Fierce and turbulence race of republicans”.

Indeed there are many things that irritate me which if I begin I can carry on and on and on But I want to say two things that are personal and make sick and hate QURBO First the winter kills my moral and sometimes when I am about to go out of my flat and look at my windows I feel vow that I would never stay another winter here. The second is the DOGS when they run to you wanting to play with you and sometimes you can do nothing other than shouting

MMA I agree with most of what you have siad, however, not the capital. Why Mogadisho should be the Somali capital frever?? had it been 15 years ago I would have agreed with you but today Mogaidisho is not the same as how it was then. Mogadishu was the most multiculutural multiethnic and prospereous and peaceful city in Somalia What is it today? It is the most anarchic place on earht and to rebuilt it will cost a lot of money and will mean rewarding those warlords and inviting them to destroy again. We can have any other city in Somalia that most Somalis agree it doesnt matter where it is located. The largest city doesnt have to be the capital look at Washington is the largest city?