Good riddance. He should a get a real job. You know, a job that requires skills, training, or a modicum of knowledge. It's high time the Saudi government reduce it's welfare handouts to these leech-like mullahs. There was an article in Foreign Policy magazine a few years ago regarding the delicate relationship of the monarchy and the mullahs. There are more mullahs on the Saudi government payroll than there are teachers, firefighters, or health professionals combined. Unconscionable.

Arintu haday tahay "aan ooyee albaabka ii xidha", waxa sheekha ku haboonaan lahayd cataabkiisa iyo calaacalkiisa ee siyaasad xumidu ku dheehan tahay inuu naftiisa ku ekeeyo. Dadku salaadda umay iman inay nacab naaxay ka dhagaystaan fikradihiisa siyaasadeed, beer-laxawsi aragaxiseed, iyo guubaabo dagaaleed. Teeda kale, sheekhu ma oohin iyo baroor-diiq baa abiid u noqon? Muu miidaanka dagaalka aado oo mujaahidiinta maahsan thawaabka la qaybsado; mise wixiisu waa qawda maqashii waxna ha u qaban.

The Saudi leaders' decision to remove him was a prudent one. Pathetic political rants have no place in the hallowed grounds of the Haram. The contrived emotionalism of the mullah notwithstanding, it's telling that his sadistic supplication makes a throwback to a famous remark of one Al-Hajjaj bin Yusuf, a genocidal maniac of the medieval period. "Qad ayna'at ro'oos al mojremen", the sheikh says. It's one thing to feel umbrage at the foreign policy of muslim and nonmuslim countries. It's an entirely different thing to express discontent by ululating about nihilistic fantasies of widespread violence and destruction.

I doubt a Unionist Party message would gain much traction with the Somaliland electorate. What's more worrying is an islamist, gung-ho shariah message finding a receptive audience. As far as this nightmare scenario goes, I think the Turkish model of secularism is more prudent and ought to be adopted. It's one thing to have democracy. It's an entirely different thing to have liberty. Liberal autocracy is certainly preferable to, what Fareed Zakaria and others have called, "illiberal democracies".

Mawkish. Insipid. And then there's the all-too-familiar reference to Sartre and Nietzsche, some such reference is invariably the stock-in-trade of all philosophasters with pretensions to philosophical erudition. (Aside: Sartre has always been the butt of a joke in the world of analytical philosophy, scarcely the paragon of clear thinking. Bertrand Russell's sardonic remark about existentiaist writing is fitting.) Has the author read (si xoogle weliba) the metaphysical moonshine of Sartre, Being and Nothingness, or the hogwash of Heideggar, Being and Time. If such was the extent of my exposure to science or philosophy, I think I too would find much solace in the silly rituals and jarring incantations of Sufism. Neither interesting nor moving is the author's reminiscence about his childhood. However, one cannot help but feel a tad bit ruthful about the human condition; a condition fraught with morbid fears and hopes, wishes and anxieties, frailties and uncertainties. Those of us who are not tough-minded need the crutches of creed to hold us up. It matters very little what are the content of such creeds. The Director of the Human Genome Project, Francis Collins, is an illuminating instance of a scientist succumbing to the wretched human condition. Relating the story of his newly restored faith in the trinity, he writes Nobody gets argued all the way into becoming a believer on the sheer basis of logic and reason. That requires a leap of faith. And that leap of faith seemed very scary to me. After I had struggled with this for a couple of years, I was hiking in the Cascade Mountains on a beautiful fall afternoon. I turned the corner and saw in front of me this frozen waterfall, a couple of hundred feet high. Actually, a waterfall that had three parts to it -- also the symbolic three in one. At that moment, I felt my resistance leave me. And it was a great sense of relief. The next morning, in the dewy grass in the shadow of the Cascades, I fell on my knees and accepted this truth -- that God is God, that Christ is his son and that I am giving my life to that belief. Really? A water-fall with three parts is a divine sign of the trinity? Bashir Goth might not possess the rich scientific education of Francis Collins but he certainly shares the pyschology. In the Varieties of Religious Experience, the famed pyschologist of religion, William James, examined many disparate and eccentric religious experiences which left an indelible mark on the minds of those who had experienced it. The symbols proved to be almost insignificant. Vishnu had, he discovered, the same power to transform the lives of believers as Jesus, Allah, or Buddha. What else can explain the faith of Dr. Collins and Bashir Goth?

Muslims should understand that Allah, according to popular scripture and tradition, is omnipotent and omniscient. You see, a moment's reflection is sufficient. If He gave them the freedom of will to offend as they please (He could have stopped them in a million different ways if he wanted to), you should afford them the same prerogative. Afterall, Allah has more knowledge, more power, and more reason to be offended since it's His book, yet He does not resort to immediate violence and cosmic protestations whenever someone blasphemes. Wa billahi Towfeq.

SeeKer, the myth that coffee stunts growth refuses to die. This medical quackery is based on earlier studies which studied the relation between coffee consumption and osteoporosis. It was wrongly assumed that caffeine causes lower bone density because older people who drank a certain amount of coffee ended up getting osteoporosis. Caffeine limits calcium absorption. And then doctors discovered that it was merely a case of correlation not causation. The subjects in the study who drank coffee also had extremely low calcium intakes. The conclusions of this study somehow morphed into the assertion: if you give your kids too much coffee, you'll stunt their growth. Though caffiene effects the calcium absorption in the body, it is so tiny as to be negligible; adding a little milk to your coffee cancels it out. Disclaimer: Nomads with medical training are better equipped to proffer verdicts. Mine is a layman's view.

^ You used to question whether the wearing of hijab is compulsory in Islam. I'm not persuaded that your opinion (or doubt) about the hijab makes you "gaal ismood", or a thoughtless person under the thrall of the white man. No doubt some Nomads questioned your faith - publically or privately - when you expressed your uncertainty about their cherished cloth. In any event, instead of hurling invectives at persons who prefer their religion to be seperate from their government, you ought to tolerate their opinion the same way your views on hijab ought to be tolerated.

^ I was tempted to offer the inept editors of Hiiraan Online (and Garowe Online) my services. I would blue-pencil this poorly-articulated piece probono. Mind you, regardless of the shabby style and shoddy substance, the author's basic contention that secularism is preferable to theocracy is unassailable.

Belo. Alot of Puntlanders on SOL innaba caadi maaha, miyaanay aqoon waxaan dagaal iyo dood ahayn. Waxaad yara moodaa inay khabiir ku yihiin faan iyo fatoosh, daan-daansi iyo deel-qaaf. Qof samaan iyo suruur la raba bay xumaan iyo xaqiirnimo ka raadiyaan.

Does idealism always amount to irony and tragedy? Would that dreamers and reformers temper their fiery imagination with a bit of cold pragmatism. Edifying. Entertaining. Classic.

by Muuse Yuusuf Sunday, August 08, 2010 The saga of the 43-year-old Iranian woman, Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, who was facing punishment by stoning to death for adultery, continues. After sustained international pressure, the Iranian authorities have backed down and the woman will not be executed by stoning to death. However, she still faces death by hanging for allegedly killing her husband. She denies that and says another man has killed him. Nevertheless, the man, who was imprisoned, will not face execution because the deceased’s son has pardoned him. Mohammad Mostafaei, the woman’s lawyer who brought her case to the attention of the international community has fled Iran, seeking asylum in Norway after the Iranian authorities questioned him and his family arrested. Let me leave that sad story aside and return to the subject matter of my article. It is understandable when a man who lives in an Islamic or Christian fundamentalist state and has never experienced advantages or disadvantages of living in a secular country disapproves secularism. This is because one would excuse him for his ignorance and for believing that his way of life is the best. And so be it. However, It is entirely the opposite when Somalis in secular countries, such as Holland, the US or India, who having been reaping the many benefits of secularism, including protection of religious rights, to criticise secularism per se. Would not that sound hypocritical? For the sceptics, here are some indisputable empirical evidences that prove the relevance and the predominant position of secularism in today’s modern world. The vast majority of the 192 UN member states (probably over 90%) are secular minded states, adopting a range of practices and are in different stages of implementing secularism.[1] It is equally true that the 57 Muslim countries have accepted the concept, including Turkey, which has always been a bridge between the west and east and is now striving to join the European Union. The exception is a few countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran and now southern Somalia where “Islamists” are attempting to erect a fundamentalist Islamic state similar to that of Saudi Arabia. Like it or loath it, it is because of secularism that interfaith dialogue and peaceful co-exist among nations have been possible, anyway most of the time. Imagine what the situation of other faiths would be if say the ultra right wing of American Christians, Muslims or other religions were to descend on the throne of power in the White House? There would probably be religious tyranny and religious wars. If the above empirical evidences do not make you appreciate secularism and you remain sceptic, below are some thought provoking scenarios that you might like to ponder on. Nurturing young minds vs. oppressing them? In fundamentalist states, whether Christian, Islamic or Judaism, it is very likely that authorities would base their academic curriculum on the concept of creationism[2] (simply put it: God created the world). It is very unlikely that they would entertain other theories, such the big bang[3] or the evolution,[4] theories that provide alternative explanations of our universe’s origins. However, in a secular country, like Somalia before the civil war where the theory of big bang was taught in schools, it would be possible to teach all these theories in the classroom on equal basis, hence helping enquiring minds acquire a balanced and well-researched education. So in order to nurture young minds and to give them a balanced understanding of these big philosophical questions, which one would you recommend knowing that students are tomorrow’s leaders and scientists. The choice is yours. Interfaith tolerance and harmony vs. religious bigotry? You are in India, the biggest democracy in the world, and as you probably know, it is a country with a population of 1,178,900,000 and with many different ethnic and religious groups. Most faiths, including Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism and Christianity, are all practised in that multicultural country. Empirical evidences indicate that most adherents to these faiths staunchly believe that their religion is the truth and the only truth. They also believe that other creeds are fictitious belief systems, which should be wiped out of the face of the earth, or at least converted! Also, empirical evidences indicate that inter communal and religious violence have been an issue since independence, but it is probably a mixture of the state of secularism and democracy that has been helping these diverse communities, though not perfect, to co-exist and live in harmony and peace, and of course to practise their faith as much as they like. So apart from secularism, what other systems would or could you suggest in view of helping that country hold together as one independent nation? Marriage counsellor vs. stoning to death? After a stormy row with you wife, you ended up having extra marital affairs in one of Amsterdam’s red districts after a lapse of judgment. As a good and faithful Muslim and as your conscience had been troubling you for while, you admitted this to your wife who then reported your imprudent action to the local police station. The officer advised your wife to discuss it with between you partner, and to seek a marriage counselling or legal advice, if both of you agree on that. An amicable divorce had resolved the conflict. Now, let us assume a magic wand had flown your family over the oceans and you found yourself in a fundamentalist state, say Saudi Arabia, for the sake of argument. You committed fornication. As a good and faithful Muslim and as your conscience had been troubling you, would you have reported your action to your local police station knowing that adultery is punishable by stoning people to death? On the other hand, imagine if you were caught in the act red handed. The choice is yours. Spirituality vs. religious dogma/violence? Although one can be religious and practise their faith in midst of secular and a capitalist society, if your argument against secularism is because it is devoid of spirituality and you think religion can fill in the gap. Then your challenge is to stay in southern Somalia, where people are being made to hate their religion, because of the current implementation of the Wahabia doctrine with its distorted legalistic interpretation of the Islamic faith, which has rendered Islam devoid of spirituality and mysticism. Sadly, people in southern Somalia are being forced to abandon their way of seeking salvation, divine light, and spiritual guidance through the Sufism[5] traditions in which Sufis masters have been brilliant healing the sick, the deprived and the poor through their excellent mystical wisdoms and practices. Finally, do you know that under Articles 426 and 480 of the 1962 Somali Penal Code,[6] which Somaliland and Puntland have adopted, adultery and theft are punishable with imprisonment of up to two and three years respectively? These were part of our ancestors’ past legal practices, including customary laws and Islamic Sharia, which they used in order to resolve their human problems and they were all Muslims. Were they not? The Penal Code was passed by an elected sovereign Somali parliament. So as I have been arguing in previous articles, please let us keep Somalia a secular state forever. Indeed, S stands for Somalia and Secularism and the two are inseparable twins conjoined by their umbilical cords! Hiiraan Online

^ Complete non-sequitur. Al-Qaeda is not based on communism. It does not stem from the socioeconmic theories of Karl Marx. It is not inspired by some form of Buddhism. It has nothing to do with Confucianism. Their idealogy is informed by a perverse interpretation of Islam, a corruption of faith that most muslims rightly decry and deny. However, this doesn't change the ugly reality that these religious ninnies quote the Quran and Hadith to justify their hatred and violence. This doesn't mean that Islam is responsible. But it does mean that moderate, pacific muslims have a responsibility to vociferously denounce those who hijack their faith. And while muslims do not have to apologize for what every terrorist does, we should have the decency and sensitivity to consider the untold misery and agony that was visited upon others in the name of our religion. Common decency, really.

^ Not Islam, but what some commentators call: islamists. Admittedly, islamists are a minority in the muslim community. Most muslims don't agree with the Al-Qaeda and Al-Shabaab method of using Islam as a draconian and regressive political ideology. The death cult of islamism is comparable to other immoral, illiberal ideaologies of the past. It, too, shall have the same fugacious fate of intolerant, illiberal movements.

^^ The Amin Amir cartoon about Janna-Jihad reminded me of an old film starring Adel Emam - the egyptian comedian actor - about the scrouge of terrorism. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYQdFruQQF4

Heh. I wonder if you can sign up for the Bilderberg Group, the illuminati, and other influential, sinister cabals. There's a spirited debate over at Teen Forums on the nature of these secret organizations and the extent of their pelf and power in shaping the "New World Order". Ah, the mind of youth is ever a crucible of fantasies, anxieties, delusions, and aha-conspiracy explanations. It becomes tragic when these youths don't outgrow these childish intuitions. Imagine listening to an adult, bereft of an analytical or skeptical mind, spewing grandiose theories about collusions with pitable certitude. Sad, indeed.

As one columnist put it, it would be sacreligious and egregious if there were a Japanese cultural center next to Pearl Harbor, or a German cultural center looming over Treblinka, or a mosque at Ground Zero. Of course, there's nothing wrong with cultural centers or mosques, but context is everything. I'm told that it would be a good old sufi mosque, not some crazy salafi-wahabi center. Still, NY is a big city with beautiful real-estate. The folks who run the Cordoba Initiative should start improving "Muslim-West Relations" (sic) by choosing another site to build the mosque.

Pure piffle.

^ Ramadan Karim.

Withdrawn.

^^ Don't you subscribe to some conspiracy theories? Be honest now, adeer. You're a staunch supporter of Al-Shabaab and presumably Al-Qaeda. Were the 9/11 attacks and the Ugandan bombing the work of nefarious governments? Do you blame the economic and technologic backwardness of the ummah on vast kufar conspiracies? What about your own academic or financial frustrations?

I don't mind tolerating bipolar, terrorist-sympathizers online. But actual terrorists who lend material and logistical support to Al-Shabaab deserve to be behind bars. Nicely done, Homeland Security.

D/P

I applaud Siyad Barre's vision of secular government. But he'll always be remembered by most Somalis - and rightly so - as the most divisive, despotic, debauched politician to rule former Somalia. Adan Adde and Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke, their minor political problems notwithstanding, were saints compared to him.

Anigu ciyaal wallaahi-ga waan ku wareeray, wax allaale waxaan idhaahdo garan maayo. Ingriis saafi ah qori kari maayaan, af soomaaligina way ilaaween. Bal kaa yar ee xummaddu hayso wuxuu soo qoray inoo fasira.