Originally posted by Johnny: ^ 2Xininyod, --------------------!! So, anyone who doesen´t agree with the specefic idea of life having an extrinsic meaning according to an specific school of thought is in the ( according to Kifaaxiye ) AXC team? PI , Ibtisam, Ahura , Castro and SB are everything but faithless people,i.e Atheists? This is inline with what Ibtisam pointed at at the begining, some wanna be Mullahs just have to put folk into diffrent categories of their liking. Ladies and gentlemen, contribute to the subject matter representing nobody but yourself and cut the personl attacks. If we argue anyone who holds a diffrent idea to either change her/his name , to agree with our narrow view or risk beeing taken out of the fold of specific Religion, we´ll get nowhere. ^^^^ Quackkkk, Quackkkk, Quackkkk, Oooh thats the sound of ducks when they march together.... Johnny, ------------->>>>> LOOK THAT WAYYYY your boss is calling you-go get her coffee and leave nomads who have strong religious inclinations. [ March 02, 2006, 13:28: Message edited by: Kooleey ]

Salamad, Here is a link that shows Fiqh rulings for a person that Insults the Prophet (salallahu caliyhe wasilm) Fiqh ruling for those that Insult the Prophet (sallahu caliyhe wasilm)

Originally posted by Blessed: I agree with Waterlily. On stay at home moms, has anybody noticed how many Somali women treat their children as a burden, it's really sad. When I was having my baby all they did was tell me about the nightmares and a list of all the sacrifices you must make. I was like nadhaafa, miserable lot! Salamad, I can sypmathize with you on that point as I have found folks at work look at me with Bewilderment "What- she is a housewife? You oppressor...poor women....." is what I would imgaine would be in their heads, judging from their facial expression. I agree with the article, Motherhood has become a Hobby for alot of people.

Originally posted by WaTerLily: Most women who decide to have children will be housewifes at some point or another in their life, that doesn't mean their entire life. I don't agree with the way it has been presented in this article but there is nothing shocking behind the idea that children need their mothers. And it's not like all the women in the entire population will be all working at one point. What really annoys me is when women who are housewifes (or domestic engineers as the politically correct word is)are made to feel like they do nothing and watch daytime tv all day. It's a more important and complicated job than anything else. Anyway, who made man the standard? Women shouldn't have to act like men to get the respect they deserve. Every woman will need to decide for herself what is her pirority.

Moms should stay home By Michael Correenn The presidenttt of Harvvard Unniversity, Lawrrrence Summmers, announced this week that he will resign from his position at the end of this academic year. This became almost inevitable after he made a speech last winter claiming "innate differences" between the sexes may well explain why more men succeed in math and sciences than do women. Not the most radical statement in history, perhaps, but bold enough to make him a hated figure on campuses and a punching bag for radical feminists. I don't really know if there is a different aptitude for science between men and women and don't particularly care. I do know, however, that a woman's place is in the home. There, it's been said. The unthinkable has been uttered. I can only wonder what the various highly intelligent women who edit my column are saying as they read this, but that's hardly the point. A woman's place is in the home. No, not every woman and not every home. But one major reason society has lost much of its stability, grace and decorum is because so many women with children have been urged to flee the "incarceration" of the family for the "freedom" of the office. Obviously there are many women who are not mothers to whom this does not apply and also many mothers who are obliged to find employment so as keep the family together. The objection here is to the knee-jerk assumption that somehow it is natural and admirable for women to be in the paid workforce. There is no compelling case that the world would be a better place if more women were lawyers, bankers, soldiers or engineers. There are many such arguments, however, that the world would be a far better place if more women were mothers. Which means more than the mere act of procreation. It means devotion, sacrifice and time. Not quality time, just time. Lots of it. It means refusing to accept that self-esteem can only come through a boss, water cooler gossip and a generous pension scheme. Yes, of course, fathers are a vital part of any family and most of the gun violence in our cities has far more to do with absence of dads than the presence of guns. But a mother is unique and irreplaceable. Nobody is forcing women to become moms, but if they do they should take their new job seriously and not pretend it is some hobby or part-time occupation. Instead, we have created a situation where many women are embarrassed to admit that they are at home with their kids. Recently, a Tory MP told me, in a spasm of political correctness, that Canada needed more women in Parliament. I asked him why, and he reacted as if he'd never been asked the question before. Which, of course, he probably hadn't. I continued: "Could it be argued that raising a child to be a respectful, intelligent, moral and good person is just slightly more important than sitting in a building in Ottawa and obeying the orders of some second-rate prime ministerial assistant?" He called me an ***** . Which may be true, but it does not obscure the point: We've declared war on motherhood in the name of a better, healthier society and declared war on family in the name of women's liberty. So the president of Harvard feels he has to resign because he dared to raise an interesting question. We can only wonder what his mom would have said. Chances are that it would have been something wonderful. Mothers are like that. Source Motherhood-A hobby? Nomads, do you agree with the writer of this article.

Originally posted by Pi: ^^Lool. You know I was looking up Zorastariasim and I came across some frighteningly interesting cults and demon-groups. Cool names too. Time for a name change, innit. Ahura, fine, fine. I knew you were going to repeatedly say Acuudu bilaah while you reach for your tusbax with your eyes shut. I think there is more AJAR in (caption- shiekh bum bum) annoying a sanctimonious person than there is DEMBI in using a devilish name as an online handle. Ya, feel me? Hell, I'd call myself the son of Lucifer if it gave Magac-xade some epileptic seizures. uhmmm, why don't you call yourself Ina Xaar-waayne? It means the same thing as 'son of lucifer' to me.

Originally posted by Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar: quote: Lets try it again: according to your personal opinion what is the Purpose of Life? Is it intrinsic or extrinsic? Waala ogyahay inaad su'aashaan dan kale ka leedahay. Hadaadan diin lahayn, adigee ku jirtaa. Boqolkiiba sagaashan iyo sagaal dadka meeshaan ku jiro waa Muslim, oo diintooda raaca. Diinteena ayaa dhigeyso inaan Eebbaheena caabudno. Wax la yiraahdo "personal" ma jirto. Originally posted by Socod_badne: quote: The purpose of life is to worship the lord that created you. That is the purpose of life whether you believe it or not, accept it or not. How sad! Now you're left with spitting cosmic debris? Waala ogaa inaad diinlaawe ahayd, oo wax badan ayaa is qarisay, oo shib lagaa ahaa. Golaha kale [other Soomaali forums] ee Soomaalida ayaa ka qaraabataa adigoo Rabigeena iyo Nabigeena caay, aflagaado iyo wixii lamid ah ku haayo. [Hadaadan ismoodin in lagula socon, think again.] Intaas dhan waala soconay. Oo intaa banaanka isa soo dhigeysay ayaa la sugaaye. Maanta adigaa barxada isku soo dhigtay to humble, unsuspecting SOL forumers aad isku qarin jirtay. Inaadan diin lahayn waxaas kor ku qoran ayaa dhigaayo. Waxaaba la yaabi jiray kuwa inta ku jiro waligood sidii qof "Muslim" camal kula dhaqmi jiray, adigoo sidii jees jees camalna Rabigooda iyo Kitaabkiis ugu jeesteen jirtay mar walba. Finally, Eebbe mahadiis hadaaba banaanka iskeentay oo wixii kuu qarsanaa soo bandhigtay. Diinta waaka baxdee, adigoo raali ah, inoo daa diinteena aad ku tumaneysid. Anagaa ku qanacsan wax walba ee na fasho, including Eebaheena aan caabudno oo aad ugu wacday "how sad!" and "spitting cosmic debris" whatever it means. MashaAllah!!! MMA and Kashnare, you are On Point! Castro, If one believes that Evolution is True and Creationism False, then they have left the fold of Religion. SB, has stated his position that Evoluation > Creationism, Creationism=False; along with Johnny. If one believes that their Opinion is the APEX of INTELLIGENCE and better then what Ulama say, what is in the Quran and Sunnah, then they are a MUSHRIK. They put their OPINIONATION above what is SACRED and yes, the Ulama are sacred to us because they are the Inheritors of the prophets. Ahura, Isn't it time for a new name change

Salamun caliyka, Saxib, good to see u on sol (SUM SING WRONG) The story is about a chinese couple who had a baby delivered at hospital, the baby had wide eyes, curly hairs and dark skins, his parents named him ( SUM SING WRONG)

Originally posted by Socod_badne: Seriously, I understand your position. A commendable one. Most muslims (not the poor illiterate 3rd worlders but privileged ones) possess inadequate fundamental knowledge about their religion. That is really inexcusable at this day and age. All I'm really saying is a muslim should be active participant, not rely on word of mouth. Best way of ensuring that is to personally go to the sources if unable than selectively screen your interlucators. [/QB] So if an Alim/Islamic Scholar doesn't agree with Evolution-Will you find another one? And if an Alim doesn't think that men and women are equal -Will you find another one? Are you suggesting that your 'Reasoning' and 'Judgements' trumps that of an EXPERT? I hear ya, it's just that I'm so damn smart I have no use for Islamic speakers/experts. I have read the entire Sahih Bukhari collection backwards in Uzbek while hopping on 1 leg and playing chess... do you think I need any one to teach me anything? I don't think so. Just kiddin! Spoken like a True jaaack 'you know what'

Originally posted by BonefieD_CriTic: I say slim chance - Languages just don't disappear because they are no longer spoken but rather that the people who spoke it died out - And af Somali dieing, my great great grandchildren will not betray me like that - I refuse to beleive this absurd ideology - Are we a bit naive here? You are Dreeeaaaammmming!!! Allahu Akbar! Riyoodha macaana!

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: Kheyr, I see no confusion in that hadith. It clearly states that Muslims, the people and their learned scholars, will not agree on a clear deviation. Though stability is very important it should not be used to preserve and justify the rule of monarchy. Islam does not endorse monarchy as it contradicts the concept of Shuura. Though there are concerns about democracy(like Kashafa eloquently stated) but I see no reason for us to be uneasy about a system that provides the means to vote, a platform to debate, and a framework to check and balance the excess of human greed. If the Saudis vote to day do you have any doubt that the outcome will be a fairer and more representative government that not only reflects Islamic values and upholds our principles but also has the legitimacy and confidence of Saudis? Kheyr, I see no confusion in that hadith. It clearly states that Muslims, the people and their learned scholars, will not agree on a clear deviation Salams On the authority of Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) from the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), who said: "Verily my Ummah would not agree (or he said the Ummah of Muhammad) would not agree upon error and Allah's hand is over the group (JAMMAH) and whoever dissents from them (leaves the Jammah) departs to Hell." Reported by Imam al-Tirmidhi and Al-Hakim Nisabouri Imam al-Azizi (d. 1070/1660; Rahimahullah) quoted Imam al-Munawi's (d. 1031/1622; Rahimahullah) commentary to the last Hadith in his al-Siraj al-munir sharh al-Jami al-saghir (3.449), as follows:- Allah's hand is over the group (al-Azizi): Munawi says, "Meaning his protection and preservation of them, signifying that the collectivity of the people of Islam are in Allah's fold, so be also in Allah's shelter, in the midst of them, and do not separate yourselves from them." The rest of the Hadith, according to the one who first recorded it (Tirmidhi), is:- and whoever descents from them departs to hell. Meaning that whoever diverges from the overwhelming majority concerning what is lawful or unlawful and on which the Community does not differ has slipped off the path of guidance and this will lead him to hell." Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (Peace be upon him) as saying: "Follow the great mass (as-Sawad al-Azam) for he who kept himself away from it, in fact would be thrown in Hell Fire." (Ibn Majah; vide: Mishkat, 1/174, by A.H. Siddiqui). The translator of Mishkat-ul-Masabih (A.H. Siddiqui, pg. 113) said in the footnote to the last Hadith: "There is a good deal of difference of opinion as to what the term Sawad al-Azam implies. The overwhelming majority of the scholars are of the view that As-Sawad al-Azam means the largest group of the learned scholars and pious persons whose opinions are held in high esteem in Islam." Source Upon comparing the sharh's/explanations of the two hadiths , what is stressed on is-Unity on what is Halal and Haram by way of in the Jammah/the Muslim Community and by way of following the "largest group of the learned scholars and pious persons whose opinions are held in high esteem in Islam". Now its important to ask the question: how is what is Halal and Haram determined in Islam? Can a Masalah/question be raised without examining the Opinion of the Scholars and the Ulama and/or what the Islamic tradition has said on that matter(all 1400yrs worth of quran and sunnah analysis by Ulama/Muslim Scholars)? Who is the reference point for Quality in the Ummah? After all, the Most fearful of Allah/conscious of Allah are the Ulama(according to the Quran)? If the Ummah of today agreed that Men and Women are Equal (say the majority of them felt this way) or Jihaddd should be Abolished, would that hadith 'Verily my Ummah would not agree....' be False? Or would the definition of UMMAH have to be extended to cover 1400yrs of Islam and Muslims? I would go with the latter and say that in the context of that particular Hadith, Ummah is defined from the day that the Message of Islam came until the Day of Judgement. If that is the case, then that hadith is True and shows the OVERALL GOODNESS of the Ummah of Muhammed (sallahu caliyhe wasilm). We can't just measure the Ummah Qualitatively based on a single or two incidents, after all, the Ummah has been around thus far for 1400+ years. Thus, the use of that hadith to justify Democracy is not appropriate and infact becomes self-serving of a MODERN WORLDVIEW i.e. Democratic Idealism. Xiinfiin said: Though stability is very important it should not be used to preserve and justify the rule of monarchy. Islam does not endorse monarchy as it contradicts the concept of Shuura. I was trying to illustrate to Callypso that a Hereditary Monarchy is better then a Democracy and that it was a case of the 'Lesser of Two Evils'. Democracy is the worst enemy to Religion and all that maintains 'some aspects' of religion is better. I didn't say that a Hereditary Monarchy is what should be Supported at ALL TIMES, rather when left with only 2 choices: Democracy or Hereditary Monarchy; the latter is the better choice to preserve one's deen. Democracy feeds on people's Ego's and makes everyone think in the 'I', meaning always its 'Nafsi, ya Nafsi', 'I think it, therefor it must be right' or 'i have a right to say my piece' In the case of Iran, I think that Iranian parliamanet and elected President were concessions that the Imam Khoomenni had to give to the people. He was always the Imam and he fought long and hard to prove that Ulama should be the Leaders. In the case of Hamaas, they used an Election 'selectively' to get a job done, of which I think it might turn around an Bite them back and hurt them. Reason being is people have a False Dunya oriented plan when they Vote and participate in an Democractic Election and their measure of WHO IS A GOOD CANADIATE is usually in monetary values and carries with it a PROMISE of a GOOD and Easire Life. As it is stated in the Quran, what is Attractive is the Pleasures of this world 'Beautified for mankind is love of the joys (that come) from women and offspring; and stored-up heaps of gold and silver, and horses branded (with their mark), and cattle and land. That is comfort of the life of the world. Allah! With Him is a more excellent abode. ' (Sura Al Imran, v.14) and these are the things that people look to get out of their state, their nation, their country.

Castro said: I understand the emotional and sentimental reasons for wanting the language to survive but that's not what I'm thinking of. I'm thinking of the practical and tangible benefits of having a common language. A language is a means for communication. If that communication is encumbered by different languages, it impedes progress and hinders understanding of your neighbors. Salams, New Age Principle: The Criteria to Judge what is GOOD is Pragmatism? i.e. Tangible Benefit-$$$$ For if that wasn't the case, then why would parents encourage their kids to 'READ English' first - in most homes? Good command of English>>> English speaking University>>>Good Pay Job>>>Heaven on Earth! A language carries with it a WORLDVIEW that asserts itself over ALL ELSE. Much like a Religion, a Language says 'I' only in the way it becoems imbude in people's lifestyle and thought pattern. It is no coincidenance that those people from the Somali Community that speak Enlgish First (dream in English, Think in English etc), have a different WORLDVIEW then those that speak Somali FIRST (in their thoughts and dreams etc.) This kind of reminds me ot the Native and Indigenous people of North and South America and how their Languages have been lost and along with it their Cultures and People. Soo much so, that you can't recognize a Native/Indigenous person anymore unless you start to probe them about their background.

Originally posted by Castro: Koichiro Matsuura, Unesco director-general, said: "When a language dies, it is a vision of the world that disappears. "Language is much more than an instrument, considerably more than a tool." He added: "In structuring our thoughts, in coordinating our social relations and in building our relationship with reality, it constitutes a fundamental dimension of the human being." How many parents teach their kids the english Alphabets FIRST, compared to their own or for the Muslim parents-compared to the Alf, Ba'as'? "When a language dies, it is a vision of the world that disappears.

Salamun caliyka Originally posted by Rahima: Digaale and Khayr, To attack a Muslim who is actually doing good is unislamic. You both know and acknowledge that what Castro has said is correct, that he is doing good, something worthwhile and in accordance with Islam, so why the need to harp on about past grievances? This attitude developing on SOL where even the good of others is somehow belittled because of past events is getting ridiculous. It needs to stop, especially as it applied to our religion. It is our responsibility as Muslims to line up with our fellow brethren in good. I agree and I wasn't trying to knock the brother...infact, Alhamdulillah, he had some good 'pro-ulama' points. Anyways, you are right and inshallah, I will keep it in mind in the near futre. Fi Amanillah

Topic discussed on SOL A similiar topic on SOL-CM's responses and Mutakalims as well as J11 are interesting Freedom and Democracy-Another post on SOL Xinfiin, Its interesting that you use the 'My ummah does not Unite on what is wrong' hadith. Is the definition of UMMAH restricted to a Nation i.e. Majority of Palestenians voted for Hamas. Are the Palestenians the UMMAH or Part of the Ummah?, to a Community, trans-historical-meaning the Ummah is what makes muslims from the day the Risalah/Message came untill the Qiyamah. Cally said: How is a hereditary monarchy superior to democracy in deciding which law complies with Islam and which doesn't? A Hereditary monarchy establishes Hierarchy (the idea that ALL CITIZENS are EQUAL is abloshed, thus establishing DEFINED ROLES for the CITIZEN and decreasing ILLUSIONS in peoples mind), creates stability i.e. who will lead; sets LIMITS on the CITIZEN i.e. NO BE ALL that YOU CAN BE, rather BE WHAT YOU CAN BECOME. The former serves peoples self-delusions and feeds their egos, the later shows them realistic parameters to work with. A Democracy or the IDEA of a Democracy feeds on people's SELF-DELUSIONS that they can DO WHATEVER THEY WANT (as long as no physical harm is done to another or today's latest laws are not broken. Tomorrow that action might be legal, who knows-as long as people DEMAND for IT.) If ALL ELSE fails, hey why don't you let the PEOPLE DECIDE who should GOVERN them-thats the DEMOCRATIC/POPULAR SENTIMENT. In Islam, the preference is for Stability and that which is MOST in Congruence with Revelation. What feeds MAN'S XAWA/EGO and puts it as the APEX of INTELLIGENCE(I think, therefor I am) is to be rejected. You are BEING first and thinking is a result of Being. Its a case of the Lesser of the TWO evils. As I type this, I hear the ayats in sura Al-Maeda (Sura #5), about Muslims wanting the Hukm al Jahilyah. SubhaALLAH! Surah 5, v.49-50 And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you; but if they turn back, then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults; and most surely many of the people are transgressors. Is it then the judgment of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure? Caano geel said: Cally, the author of the article is currenlty in a jordanian jail and is rummered to be the spritual mentor to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the 'head' of the suni insurgency in iraq. So i think we can safely say that his view are about as constructive to the process as Dubya's. And the Author also reads Quran and Hadith and presents them, does that mean that we should Reject Quran and Hadith too? Or if the Author prays salat and his student prays salat too, does that mean that we should stop Praying salat too? :confused:

Originally posted by S.O.S: [The simple point: The injustices done by the disbelieving nations to Allah’s Prophet is nothing, compared to the injustices that WE Muslims have done to Allah’s Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), by which I mean, the massive abandonment of his teachings, the betrayal of his heritage with the (great price spent) legacy of his companions, and the spiritual rejection for the mission for which he stood. Believe it or not, but the corruption and neglecting of even a single aspect of his revealed message weights greater in his sight, than a mere abusive depiction of his persona, which, ultimately is the symptom of the former. End of simple point: !!!Are you :confused: ?!!!...try reading his (cs) quote again! P.S. For all those who’re shocked (if any), we can discuss perhaps more in detail next time, but for those who’re not shocked may explain as they please why knowledge of our religion and strict practice in the teachings of the Qur’aan and Sunnah are the only ways of aiding, supporting and protecting our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)? [/QB] Salamun caliyka walaal, I'm a little confused by your post as it shows a perplexed muslim brother that wants to share his thoughts with other muslims. What I am getting and correct me if I am wrong, is some frustration at the muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons. What the disbelievers did were indeed crimes far and beyond the imaginable horizons of true justice, and paradoxically, in whose name (justice it is) Allah’s enemies unite, and made insulting His Prophet de facto pillar of their desired world order. Therefore yes it’s something to be grieved about and we were all saddened, for our love of the prophet exceeds everything else in this world. But we shouldn’t become impulsive reactionaries and blame the disbelievers doing that which they’re known for doing, namely, to disbelieve (which is incidentally greater crime) and direct their mischievous plots to obstruct the light of Islam against Allah and His Prophet. Every Messenger sent by Allah was mocked as we can read these facts in the Qur’aan, and btw, putting aside our ignorance of history, it’s not the first time this has happened. Inshallah, I'll try to paint you a picture Composite of Personality Sensation -Physical -Emotional -Intellectual Imagination - process of producing mental images and ideas -Images that we encounter in our daily lives i.e. environment, co-workers,family,t.v., internet etc. -Some say that most of our senses are Visual (Thru the eyes) OPINION -Driven by what is in the Imagination THINKING DESIRE -Driven by what is in the Mind WILL -Driven by Desire. ACTION BECOMING BEING As a person SENSES , they shall IMAGINE and as they IMAGINE , they shall from OPINIONS and as they OPINIONATE , they shall THINK , and as they THINK , they shall DESIRE , and as they DESIRE , they shall DO and as they ACT/DO , they shall BECOME , and as they BECOME , so too will be the QUALITY of their LIFE in this world and the next. What were getting now are people who are SENSING things on different levels; some from an EMOTIONAL point of view towards loving the Rasul (sallahu caliyhe), some from a the Physical point of view, some from the Intellectual point of view who are pro-cartoons and con-cartoons. Where the divergences begin is here and are marked clearly in peoples Desire and Will. For if there is insufficient WILL to Change a Situation or become complacent about it, then it stems from having insufficent Desire to push forward an agenda. Hence, why some muslims are beginning to get TIRED of Muslim reactions to the Danish Cartoons. It is because they lack sufficient DESIRE to continue caring about it and this lack of DESIRE stems from and is driven and given direction by what is in their MIND, what is in their THOUGHTS and OPINIONS, which is fuelled by the IMAGES that the avg. MUSLIM is exposed to. NEGATIVE images of the MUSLIM UMMAH, day in and day out. Its funny how to the poor muslim who lives in Pakistan, or Afghanistan, this is a HUGE Issue but to the muslim that lives in the West or a fairly COMFORTABLE life, this CARTOON ISSUE is SENSED differently-INTELLECTUALLY sensed v. EMOTIONALLY sensing poor muslims. In one group, the Desire and WILL is there. In the other group, that DESIRE and WILL is not there and is often expressed in SCOLDING other muslims and blaming the UMMAH of Betrayl of the SUNNAH. I can tell you that this incident alhamdulillah,has drawn people closer to the SUNNAH of the Rasul (salallahu caliyhe) and has deepened their reverance and love for him.

Originally posted by STOIC: Ahura, I did not imply that groping is as a result of involuntary vasoconstriction of the male race. Mover over Mutakalim and Tolstoy, Professor Stoic is in daaa house!

Castro, Now defending the ULAMA? Ohhh, the Irony... :rolleyes: In anycase, ALL IS POSSIBLE with Allah and this is proof.

Mabruuk walaal! MasaAllah, the list of new mothers on SOL is growing...

Originally posted by BonefieD_CriTic: If that cartoon is meant to insult me then it is not doing it job - Are you the one that the man is holding by the hair? If so, then it is all about you!

Originally posted by Kashafa: ^^ I don't think anyone can object to the type of democratic governance you're arguing for, yaa Xiin. There's only one problem: it's imaginery The Democracy we're either speaking for or against is the one known, practiced, and invented in the West. It's the Democracy adopted disastrously by failed Islamic states: Turkey, Egypt, Algeria. That's the kind of democracy that's on trial, and which I say is incompatible with Islam. You mention political 'victories' in Iran and Palestine. Two anomalies that won't last. Same thing happened in Algeria in '92 when the Islamist party won, word came from above: crush'em. And the military, ever the obedient servant of it's masters, did just that. Forgot about the West, the secular forces in the Muslim world won't allow an Sharia-implementing goverment to come to power, democratic elections or not. Hamas is already back-pedaling, saying Sharia is not on it's political agenda. quote: Let the people vote and the majority of this Ummah will never go astray, IA. Theoretically speaking, in a true democracy in the Muslim world, the people and their elected representatives could vote to, say, allow 'civil unions'(California), or legalise prostitution(Nevada), or(and this is a stretch but completely plausible) vote to usher Islam into the 21st century by throwing out all the 'harsh' parts and give it a fatwa-based makeover. See where this slippery slope can lead us ? Like it or not, when you embrace democracy, you're also embracing the values and norms of the Western world for the past 200 years. Just ask any Turkish sister who can't attend university because somehow that fabric on her head is a threat to the finest system of governance mankind has known. What should we do ? Just the opposite. Instead of importing democracy wholesale, Extract the mechanisms that have made the West the powerhouse it is and configure it so that it's subservient and in line with the Kitaab and Sunnah.

Blogs are starting to become more enjoyable to read.... 10 TOP TEN PRO-REGRESSIVE MUSLIMS OF 2005-REAL funny!!!

Cartoon furor exposes double standards Feb. 23, 2006. 01:00 AM HAROON SIDDIQUI Gary Younge, the New York-based black British columnist, has written this about the Danish cartoon controversy in The Nation magazine: "Muslims have, in effect, been vilified twice: once through the original cartoons and then again for having the gall to protest them. Such logic recalls the words of the late South African black nationalist Steve Biko: `Not only are whites kicking us, they are telling us how to react to being kicked.'" Confusion continues to mark the Western response to the issue. Some of this is because we are in uncharted waters. But something else is at work — double standards and insidious attempts at delegitimizing the Muslim protests. Notorious British historian David Irving has just been sentenced in Vienna to three years for denying the Holocaust. Radical British Muslim cleric Abu Hamza al Masri has been jailed, among other things, for inciting hatred. About time. Yet there's silence from freedom of speech advocates who were on their pulpits just days ago. Denying the Holocaust is not the same as poking fun at a prophet, some might say. Muslims might respond that the cartoons contravened the historical fact that Muhammad was not a terrorist with a bomb in his turban. Masri's case offers a better parallel. Besides terrorism-related charges, he was convicted of fomenting hate against Britons. Muslims said the Danish cartoons did exactly that to them. How does a democracy decide which hate is worse? In France, the Catholic Church last year won a lawsuit against a fashion designer depicting The Last Supper with semi-nude women instead of the apostles. Where were the noisy advocates of freedom of speech then? Or, do they pop up only to claim the right to bash Muslims? The cartoon episode has little or nothing to do with blasphemy. Some Muslims invoke it but that's a tangent democracies need no longer take. The real issue is that freedom of speech has limits, by law and by social dictates (self-censorship). Newspapers do not publish cartoons that may be hurtful, hateful, xenophobic or racist. Do thinking people want to make the case for resurrecting the old caricatures of fat-lipped blacks, hook-nosed Jews or cross-eyed Chinese? "I don't find the cartoons offensive," some people say. That's not the point. Nor is it that some Muslims think so. That's like invoking a lapsed Catholic to tell most Catholics what to think. It's best in a democracy "to let each group decide what it finds most offensive, so long as the implied taboo is not too onerous," writes Robert Wright in a thoughtful opinion page article in The New York Times. He is the author of The Moral Animal. "Look, here's an old depiction of Muhammad," some others say, to discredit the assertion that Islam forbids depiction of the Prophet. There's no denying such depictions exist. Miniatures featured Muhammad in various scenes but only a few showed his face, while others blanked out the space. Some centuries ago, Muslims came to a consensus against such depictions. We risk breaking the democratic balance when we poke people in the eye about their beliefs. Doing so to Muslims in these tense times is especially reprehensible. The worldwide protests are being portrayed as the work of radicals or of such governments as Iran and Syria. Some no doubt are. But manipulating the public is not the exclusive preserve of Muslim radicals or Muslim governments. Suggesting that only the fanatics are upset is to minimize the offence caused by what the United Church has called an "incitement to racial and religious hatred." Those defending the Danish newspaper keep saying it did not mean to offend Muslims. Really? Here's Flemming Rose, the editor who commissioned the drawings, talking about Danish Muslims: "This is about the question of integration and how compatible is the religion of Islam with modern secular society — how much does an immigrant have to give up and how much does the receiving culture have to compromise." And: "People are no longer willing to pay taxes to help support someone called Ali who comes from a country with a different language and culture that's 5,000 miles away." Sympathy is also shown poor little liberal Denmark that can't quite believe its portrayal abroad. Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen is in a coalition with the People's party, which has called Danish Muslims "cancer cells" and "seeds of weeds." It is pondering a total ban on Muslim immigration. Just think: Keeping people out because Steve Biko: `Not only are whites kicking us, they are telling us how to react to being kicked.'" Source

Is this getting alot of coverage in the muslim world via media?

Ameen, But it really has me worried and saddened! For the avg. sunni or shia muslim brother/sister, this might feed to negative thoughts they might have had about their sunni and shia brothers and sisters. Its strange how just yesterday it was in the news, that Irran was willing to fund Haamass to run its governmental operations and trying to encourage other muslim nations to do so. It was a great, great thing for the Ummah b/c this was a cross sunni-shia alliance under the banner of ISLAM. 24hrs later and these bombs have now gone off to resurrect and deepen the secterianism.