To Ducaqabe: Heh. Don’t you think reading the previous posts on this thread would have been a sensible thing to do before asking your question? My superiority (real or imagined) is only the result of your laziness, saaxib. Would you call a man that walks normally disabled? Would you call one that demonstrates an ability to see blind? Would you call one that CAN hear you deaf? I’d wager that you would do no such thing. Why then are you offended when I call you obtuse though you admit that you didn’t read the whole thread? I don’t pick on you personally, saaxib. I target your attitude and laziness. Do it again and I’ll do it again. If it upsets you, tough. You need to learn to read if you want to be in the same thread as me.

^^ It was a pointless question. If you had to ask it, you COULD NOT READ. As for arrogance, neither you nor Castro have told me anything new here, saaxib. If you had any sense (or comprehension) you would have taken it with a PINCH OF SALT. As for Net Etiquette, when one is faced with obtuse comments (and your question, was obtuse) one is never wrong when giving a proper reply. I was doing you a service, brother. If you try to not let any little barbs get to you, you would have seen that. Still, this is pointless really. Experience tells me that I’ll again be trying to explain the art of fishing to a bunch of Nomads. If there is anything I’d love you ALL to learn is to not be riled by anything I write. Once you manage that, you’ll be able to cope with almost anyone else. The irony of course is that though I’m annoying, arrogant and rude, I remain on the right side of offence.

Originally posted by Ducaqabe: Whom might the 'establishment' be? It is such responses and total lack of understanding of the tempo of someone’s reply that creates comments like Juma’s rape boasting. The establishment, my dear hard of reading brother, are those with the power to delete, ban and rebuke misbehaving Nomads (in general, they would be those in charge of things, but I’m sure that you already understand that). What then, pray tell, prompted you to ignore all my thousand odd words and choose to pick on this one word? Were you lost for words or did the use of the word ‘establishment’ irritate you? What other words irritate you and how long (or rather how many words) would it take before you start frothing at the mouth and swear bloody murder? I’ve said this to the admin in the past in private and I repeated it countless times in public. As long as the majority of the Nomads lack basic comprehension skills and are devoid of reason, the rational and sensible approach is pointless. The big discussion is fruitless and the desire for consensus becomes absolutely, utterly, completely and totally bonkers. Ban him and get it over with or let him back in and stop this circus. Castro, You’re of course correct as to the level of wrongness of Juma’s words. However, one could argue that the vagueness of the rules is what encouraged Juma to utter those words. I’m sure you realise by now that such words don’t move me or phase me at all (he could have been talking about my own mother there and it would not matter). They are, after all, the words on the screen I always refer to. They could have easily been deleted by the moderators and we could have moved on. Or even, as often happens, Juma could have been banned and that would have been that (with a couple of protest threads that are locked or deleted maybe). Online personas don’t, on the whole, rile me that much (nor should they you). The words in question here were clearly intended as an insult and something to shock and anger the ‘opposition’ (whomever he decided those were). They, like I just said, could have been deleted and we could easily have moved on. Simple words and insults DON’T MATTER and should not matter. Trends, the pushing of agendas and spread of certain ideas or ways of thinking is what should matter and always be argued against. Yet, sadly, that never happens in SOL (or Somali society in general). It’s easier to deal with one issue and move on, whilst ignoring everything else! I say remove and deal with the environment that compels someone like Juma to utter such horrible words and you will, surprisingly, see less of that nonsense appearing on the forum. I doubt if there is anything else I could add to this topic. I just hope that the establishment are not as obtuse as Ducaqabe (said with the utmost respect to my hasty brother). PS Khayer, of course I was looking at myself on the mirror as I dictated those words. Drives me secretary mad, that does.

Ah! Finally the political section is beginning to reflect reality! It’s about time that we’ve reached this crossroads. Of course, and as usual, it’s probably only in my head and I’ll have to slowly paint you all a picture (with eyes and ears and lots of colourful little things) to get you to view things from this elevated seat of mine. It looks like Juma, yet again, managed to upset the establishment! Would you call it a great surprise? A shock? An uncharacteristic blip from predictable old Juma? First of all, and for Ayuub’s benefit, let me reiterate again that I am not Juma. I know of Juma, I spoke and corresponded with Juma on many occasions and I (whilst realising that I’m going against the grain here) LIKE Juma. But, I am not, have never been and am (unless reincarnation is true) not likely to ever become Juma. One can’t be more explicit on this topic than that I hope. I would appreciate it if you don’t mistake me with Juma or any other person in future. Unless of course, and this, I suppose, would stand to reason: unless I say, you were on Juma’s side and wanted him to benefit from the reflected glory with the mention of my name. If that were the case, I’d say carry on, brother. For if I’m anything at all, I’m nothing but charity itself! At the mention of charity, I’ll have you know that big-hearted as I clearly am, I’m no bottomless pit. Other things like reason, a sense of fairness, a touch of bias and a hint of indignation often dim and blunt my charitable inclinations. This here brings me to the absurd situation we have on this thread. I tried to refresh my memory with this site’s golden rules but they’re nowhere to be seen! Now this new development presented me with two possible explanations. It’s either that the golden rules have been removed in order to be revised and reintroduced with all the loopholes plugged and dealt with, or, they’ve been cancelled altogether and this is a free for all! I tried to use my own initiative and remember these golden rules. I scoured the deepest parts of my memory. Words such as inconsistent, obtuse and impossible to enforce, came to the surface. However, knowing that I am a man that adores the sound of his own voice, I realised that these were my own opinions and not at all connected with our missing golden rules. There was also something about not questioning the administrators of the site in public or challenging their decisions. It took me a good two seconds to realise that this last one was not mine. As if I’d gag myself with such unnecessary self-censorship! I’m quite sure that this was one of the golden rules. In fact, I’m willing (not to be left behind by JB’s earlier gallantry) to bet my membership on that fact. Yet, here we are, all discussing the decision of the admin! For now, and because it’s a free for all as I skilfully proved above, I shall not pick on the admin. No, instead, I shall try to reason with the moderator. A moderator, who as the admin and many other Nomads admitted, has been doing a good job on this section. To do a good job requires one to have patience, common sense and a sense of humour without excess emotions. As far as I can see, all these are present here. However, and pardon my stepping on your foot there, there seems to be a tiny lapse on the common sense front. My charitable leanings make a brief return as I assume that this is indeed a mere momentary slip. However, it is this slip that I wish to address here. You see, I can’t understand how the name of the Nomad in question is suspended yet at the same time that Nomad is required to issue a public apology in order for his name to become active again! The word that was employed, of course, was ‘disallowed’. Is there some sort of mechanical block that’s put in place to disallow him from posting or is it a temporary ban? Or, and this would really be absurd, are you relying on his manliness and good sense to adhere to this ‘disallowance’? What if he decides to ignore your pleas and carries on posting on the forums without making the requested public apology? Will you ban him then? Now to return to the reason for this ruckus and Juma’s infamous comments! I’ll have to admit that I have not read them and cannot adequately comment on the style used or type of words. However, I’m a man of the world, a supposed Somali, and would confess to having a bit of experience in all things obscene, offensive and abhorrent. Therefore, and without having to resort to knowing the man’s exact words, I’m more than sure that none of what he wrote would have unduly shocked me. What really shocked me here is the reaction of the politics section regulars! Since when, pray tell, have you all become a bunch of shrinking violets? By now, Juma is probably angry with me and the rest of the readers irritated with (if not indifferent to) my opinions above. However, I’m a bit of a selfish creature (as you would be if you always had to look down for company) and am only concerned with what these events mean to me! It matters to me not if Juma is banned or pardoned (if he likes this place that much I’m sure he’ll find a way of reinventing himself and resuming his fights with all the usual nonentities). What matters to me are those golden rules, because, great as I am, those darned rules are bound to catch me out sooner or later! Now, if I could get caught out by these rules (and I pride myself on my great powers of comprehension and all round superiority), what will the infants of this site do and how are they expected to trawl their way through all these incomprehensible minefields? I hereby refuse, reject and question all arguments as to the clarity of the rules and request a clear explanation of every last one of them. I’m not being difficult, troublesome or quarrelsome (and those with an iota of comprehension abilities would sense the not so subtle ridicule running throughout this post). Still, I’d like to contest the golden rules. I want to dissect them all and make sure that I understand them (and as a result, the rest of the Nomads do too) very clearly. I’m not sure that there has been such a thread on SOL in the past and would think that out of the excrement that is this thread, a lovely rose would grow (luckily for us, roses thrive on crap). Juma’s crime is that he violated the golden rules, is what the admin claims. I, on the other hand, accuse Juma of NOT understanding the golden rules and can not, therefore, punish (much as I’d love to do it) a man for not understanding. Neither would I (in the tedious name of ‘keeping the peace’) expect a grown Somali man to apologise in public (even when wrong). We’re not that developed, as a species, to take such great a leap and it’s unfair to expect Juma (talented in the art of provocation as he is), to evolve this quickly and suddenly turn into a timid gentleman! It’s impossible I tell you. This brings me back to the issue of disallowing names as opposed to banning them! What exactly does it all mean? To me, it all smells like a right royal cop out. But, again, just as I was about to end this with a flourish, my charitable inclination takes over. The admin (and his moderator) are nice people. Because they’re nice people, they’re trying to also be nice to everyone. However, this is the politics section not the poetry section. Nice and politics don’t mix. One can only be nice after one has been ruthless. Even the recipients of the nicety would appreciate it. Niceness without ruthlessness would mean that one is a pushover! It’s a difficult balancing act but both the admin and his moderator are skilful enough to pull it of. I think it’s time the golden rules were explained properly and nicety spread all over this section (mostly to Juma) and once this has been done, those in charge needn’t be nice, keep the peace or try to please everyone anymore. However, as long as doubt and ambiguity remains about the golden rules, Juma and many others will innocently (and not so innocently) continue on breaking them and shouting VICTIMISATION every time their words got deleted or names, err, disallowed. Lets hope that some of you take heed of my words and try to sensibly address it all rather than the pointless appeal to the emotions that half of those replying to this thread have already put us through. Bonne Année PS If you decide to be stubborn and insist on the apology, I’d humbly remind you that a forced apology is no apology at all. Neither would the victims receive just satisfaction nor will the offender mean it. It will be yet another of those ‘keeping the peace’ gestures. Pointless, meaningless and since it does not fully burry the hatchet, the chances are, that the original problem will resurface. PPS Shouldn’t Juma participate on a thread all about him?

Any new people wanting to join should click on the first page of this thread for instructions. A new season is about to start.

Dedicated to the greatest comedian of all time. “You can do anything you want and you can say anything that comes to mind — just so long as it’s funny. If you ain’t funny then get the f*** off the stage, it’s that simple.†Obituaries The Times December 12, 2005 Richard Pryor December 1, 1940 - December 10, 2005 Stand-up and actor of comic genius who brought a brutal honesty to the art RICHARD PRYOR was an American comedian of antic genius. He was born Richard Franklin Lennox Thomas Pryor III — no mean appellation for a boy who grew up in a brothel run by his parents and owned by his grandmother in Peoria, Illinois. Young Richard learnt the facts of life by peering through keyholes. Yet for all that, he had a strict upbringing. He attended church and went to parochial school until the church authorities found out what his family did for a living, at which point he was abruptly transferred to the public education system. It was then that his trouble started. Pryor dropped gradually into a pattern of drugs, alcohol, violence and lawsuits that was to dog him through the next two and a half decades. Despite his chaotic personal life, or perhaps because of it, Pryor’s talent bloomed rapidly. He had appeared in amateur comedy shows while serving with the US Army in Germany, and became a professional comic at a club in his home town of Peoria after his discharge. But Peoria, the archetypal synonym for the more boring aspects of middle-America (despite the Pryor family’s thriving brothel) was hardly the entertainment capital of the world. Nor did it suit Pryor’s iconoclastic, raunchy style of comedy. In 1963, inspired by the success of the black comedian Bill Cosby, he took a chance and moved to New York. He started out in the same “colourless†mould, once saying: “I made a lot of money being Bill Cosby.†But with his wild eyes and arched eyebrows dominating a face forever in motion, Pryor was never that safe. Television appearances began in 1966, though the nature of his material usually confined him to late-night shows, and he was soon hired to appear in Las Vegas for $3,000 a week. But as his success mounted, so did Pryor’s resentment at the restraints placed on his style by the white show business establishment. They wanted him, he said, to become “the kind of coloured guy we’d like to have over to our houseâ€. It was not the style of an entertainer who once summed up his outlook on comedy by saying: “You can do anything you want and you can say anything that comes to mind — just so long as it’s funny. If you ain’t funny then get the f*** off the stage, it’s that simple.†As soon as his act no longer amused him, Pryor did just that. In 1969 he abandoned his Las Vegas routine halfway through, saying: “What the f*** am I doing here?†Pryor retreated to Hollywood. He appeared in a few minor roles while making some highly successful recordings of his comedy routines. His live performances, which had become darker, bluer and even more searingly honest since Las Vegas, were packing concert halls across the country. He delivered surreal monologues in the argot of the drug culture, calling himself a “crazy niggérâ€. Critics hailed him as a major step forward in the evolution of a true black humour in the US. He was now writing, too, gaining two Emmy awards for his work on Lily Tomlin television shows and collaborating with Mel Brooks on the 1974 film Blazing Saddles . For the latter he received the American Writers Guild Award and the American Academy of Humour Award. Although nervous studio bosses would not let him play the sheriff in the film, his collaboration on the screenplay with Gene Wilder laid the foundations for a lasting partnership. The on-screen double act was only postponed and Silver Streak (1976) was the first of four films in which they co-starred during the next 15 years. The money was rolling in, Pryor’s film roles were getting bigger, and behind the scenes his private life was falling apart. There was a conviction for possession of marijuana, another for assaulting a motel desk clerk, and a running battle with the income tax authorities. He had a self-confessed addiction to cocaine — “like I bought Peruâ€, he said later — and failed marriage followed failed marriage. In 1978 he was charged with shooting at his estranged third wife. Fortunately, being stoned at the time, he only succeeded in hitting her Mercedes. “I killed her car,†he would joke. On June 9, 1980, everything changed. Pryor accidentally set himself on fire, possibly while attempting to freebase cocaine, and was taken to hospital with severe burns over 50 per cent of his body. He lay on the critical list for several weeks, underwent several skin graft operations, and eventually emerged from hospital a reformed character. In his autobiography Pryor Convictions and Other Life Sentences (1995), he suggested that the freebasing story derived from an attempt by his managers to cover up what was really a suicide attempt. By his own later account, however, he had been taking cocaine for several days on end before drenching himself in brandy and setting it on fire — an unusual way in which to attempt suicide. It was often difficult to extract the facts of Pryor’s life from his stories, often blown out of proportion as comedy routines. His talent was undiminished, though it now lacked the wild, angry magic of his earlier days. The release of Stir Crazy (1980) presented Pryor and Wilder as two hopelessly ill-prepared jailbirds, like an updated Laurel and Hardy. It was a major hit, and by 1982 Pryor was rated as America’s fifth top box-office star, ahead of Paul Newman and Harrison Ford, and the $4 million fee he received for playing the computer genius wooed by Robert Vaughn’s villain in Superman III set a record for a black actor. He was reunited with Wilder on See No Evil, Hear No Evil (1989), in which Wilder was deaf and Pryor his blind buddy, and on Another You (1991), the weakest of their films, with Wilder as a former mental patient and Pryor a conman. Now solid gold at the box office, Pryor’s bad days seemed to be over, but fate still had one trick up its sleeve for Pryor: in 1986, visiting the Mayo Clinic to check on some slight disorientation, he was told that he had multiple sclerosis. As the disease progressed, Pryor became a virtual recluse in his Bel Air mansion. He stayed in his bedroom, a revolver always within reach. In 1990 he suffered a major heart attack but recovered, later moving to a smaller house in Beverly Hills. He had quadruple bypass surgery in 1991. It seemed that his career was long over, but in August 1992, on a rare visit to the Comedy Store on Hollywood’s Sunset Strip, Pryor astonished his friends by going on stage and performing. Six months later he was back on the road, giving six live shows in ten nights. He was wan, frail and sometimes confused, but still recognisably Richard Pryor, and still determined to be funny. In an interview given to The New York Times in February 1993, Pryor looked back on his past life: “I got friends who say, ‘Oh I don’t regret nothing’. But I can’t say that. I regret some of the things I’ve done. But one thing I’ve learned: when they’re done, they’re done.†In 2001 he married for the final time. His latest wife was Jennifer Lee, to whom he had been married briefly in the early 1980s. It was the second time he had remarried an ex-wife. He is also survived by seven children, one of whom is the actress and comedienne Rain Pryor. Richard Pryor, comedian, actor and scriptwriter, was born on December 1, 1940. He died of a heart attack on December 10, 2005, aged 65. Source PS It's not about me, it's about him. :cool:

^^^ Read his words again and again and again. The operative words there are MEN’s ATTITUDE TOWARDS..... If it’s as you perceived then yes, he violated the rules of SOL. But you need to work on your perceptions my friend. One of the most interesting ,or perhaps disturbing things about male attitudes towards women in Islam is the assumption that women must bear the responsibility for men's virtue as well as their own. Women must not only keep themselves pure, but they must not act to cause men to have impure thoughts - that's why women must remain so covered. This Questions the 'Hijab' and all other covers that MUST be used inorder NOT to make men "Impure". JB, Boring thread, saaxib.

Tukaale I was under the impression that the Sayid and his boys used spears (amongst other weapons). These photos if the source is genuine were made at least ten years before the Sayid’s time. You might be right and these photos might turn out to be fakes, however, when I looked beyond the nakedness, primitiveness and untidiness I can see Somali characteristics in the faces of the men and children in those photos. Look at the man in the middle of the middle picture, stare at his face, and try to mentally give him a shave and haircut. Does he not look like Castro to you? Does the one lying on the floor not look like Johnny B? Isn’t Juma the one on the left? Look at the children. The sweet seller looks like an everyday Somali child. The two on his left (right in your case) not only look Somali; they’re even standing in that camp geel jire way. I think these are genuine Somali photos. They’re supposed to be taken in Aden, which will probably explain the white child crawling on the floor.

"Somali Soldiers" Studio photograph, in Aden, between 1900-1910. "Somaly Soldiers" Studio photograph in Aden, between 1900-1910. "Somali Sweetsellers" Studio photograph of street children in Aden, circa 1906 . Disability and malnutrition are visible. Source

^^^^A controversial first post! Looks like you started at you mean to go on. Welcome to the site, saaxib. Somalis always bring a smile to my face with their antics and actions. When one plagiarist was exposed, I had a feeling dozens others would follow. It’s the Somali way. We copy each other in all areas, why not writing! Still, one can’t help but smile as one imagines countless numbers of Somalis in houses (and offices) all over the world reading the latest Somali news in their favourite Somali website and quickly cutting and pasting a sentence into Google to see if it’ll come up elsewhere. I strongly believe this image is not a figment of my imagination and that right about this minute some (supposed) Somali professor is poring over another professor’s words and trying to spot the plagiarised material therein. I was half tempted to create a Non-Somali news blog and write a long and pretentious analysis on some international issue or other using a fake author’s name (James T. Kirk for example). I would have then copied the entire article (making sure I changed the international references into Somali ones) and pasted it into an e-mail to be sent to one of the popular Somali news sites (also ensuring that I changed the author’s name to M.S. Barre). Once it's published, how many spotters would I excite, I wonder!

Originally posted by Callypso: I think Ngonge is saying that it is easier to trump the repressive rules about watching dirty movies than the ones about mingling with girls. It takes a certain kind of courage to walk up to a girl and ask her out. I wonder if that's covered in the movie, actually. It is. They’re not brave enough though. The film is sprinkled with girls walking about and scenes of the three men looking at them wistfully (see, the last line in the article, it’s after looking at a few that those outburst are uttered).

^^^I’ve been observing this young lady for a while now and I think there is method to her madness. From the way she speaks and the riddles she’s throwing about, it seems that there is a group of them that came from planet Mars (for those that find it hard to suspend disbelief, lets call it another Somali website instead). It also seems that our friend here lost her companions and is playing a virtual game of hide and seek. She thinks x-quizit is one of her fellow aliens (don’t think many people would argue with that sentiment really).

New Delhi, Dec 7. (UNI): The Government has taken up with the Saudi Arabian authorities the issue of clemency for an Indian national who faced gouging out of his eye as ordered by a local court there, the Rajya Sabha was assured today. Minister of State for External Afairs E Ahamed, responding to the concern expressed by members in this regard, said the Indian Embassy in Riyadh had petitioned Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz bin Saud to pardon Indian national Abdul Lateef Naushad whose eye had been ordered to be gouged out by the Dammam court. Giving details, the Minister said on April 1, 2003, Naushad was involved in a dispute with a Saudi national in which the latter's eye was hurt - subsequently, he lost his sight. The Dammam Court ordered the gouging out of Naushad's right eye in line with the principle of "an eye for an eye'", Mr Ahamed informed. The matter had engaged the attention of the Government which had also petiitioned the respective courts in Dammam and Riyadh, the Minister said. Earlier, several members, including Messrs NK Premachandran (RSP), SS Ahluwalia (BJP), and V Narayansamy, PJ Kurien and Vayalar Ravi (all Cong), raised the issue by way of a Special Mention. Source -----------------------------------------

Originally posted by sheherazade: And he wanted to know why I wouldn't let him buy me a drink. Heh. Classic move. If the chat up lines and charming talk don't work, get her drunk.

Many Somalilanders put their faith in international recognition as a remedy against all their ills. But that's a pipedream, says Ms Omar: "I think it's a complete fantasy and also a weapon the government is using to stifle debate. Everybody is told that you can't talk about this because you will embarrass Somaliland and we won't get recognised. I think Somalilanders must first recognise their responsibility as human beings, recognise their responsibility to uphold the laws that they have already voted and then we can worry about recognition." Imagine if that was the case with all democracies! Recently, there has been a trend amongst the newsmakers and politicians of Somaliland to brush the issue of recognition aside and talk about (supposedly) more important things! I can understand Ms Omer’s position and appreciate her priorities here. She’s a human right’s activist and to her, human rights, rule of law and the ending of corruption are more important than recognition. I’ve recently noticed that many people have started thinking in a similar way. They all argue that recognition is not important (for now) and that Somaliland should concentrate on building from the bottom up. But, how could you have a nation without recognition? Ms Omer (and those of similar mindsets) needs to watch old-fashioned fairy tales like Cinderella or Sleeping Beauty. Better still, why don’t we all follow the Yellow Brick Road? For even the Cowardly Lion knew that in order to be a proper and real lion, he had to have courage. The Tinman knew he had to have a heart and even the Scarecrow joined Dorothy and the rest to beg the Big Wizard for a brain! Could a lion be a lion without having courage? Could a country be a country without having recognition? Or have these people given up on the idea and are trying to let everyone down gently? For, surely, their argument is nonsensical and gaining recognition matters not a jot to improving living conditions, law and order or human rights. The way the agenda-setters of Somaliland keep shifting from one idea to another is quite confusing. One can never tell what their real aim is anymore. Maybe we should all be off to see the Wizard, the wonderful Wizard of Oz and ask for help with the whole thing. One thing where I agree with Ms Omer is in ignoring all the cries about embarrassing Somaliland, serious and real debate should be had regardless of how embarrassing it is. And on that note, let me depart from this thread with the great words of the Scarecrow as Dorothy and her companions entered the creepy forest, “Of course I don't know, but I think it'll get darker before it gets lighterâ€.

Originally posted by Curling Waterfall: quote:Originally posted by NGONGE: ^^^^ You mean like Somali women evolved from eating hambo in the past to clearing the stuff remaining in the pot now? Yes. And Also calling 911 on Faarax's sorry behind. Or better still, beating the crap out of him if he gets out of line. Best of all, having him clear the stuff and clean it... while you dine out with ur girlies . Do such things take place in the streets of Kismayo or was it Borama? On a serious note, and as others have already mentioned, though the plight of the Saudi women is heartbreaking and tear inducing, our poor sisters in that part of the world do suffer in luxury. Still, changes are being made. Maybe they’re not being made fast enough but they are being made. An example of such a change is this article in itself. Not long ago, no self respecting news editor would have published such a petulant article. In fact, even now, I bet it was still grudgingly printed. Many people would ascribe these coming changes to American pressures, Zionist conspiracies and some other similar nonsense. However, the real and very obvious reason for such changes is our beloved Internet and the communication revolution. Now, the girls of Saudi Arabia can literally see their counterparts in Dubai, Kuwait and Cairo moving about freely, dressing in whatever way they desire and driving their own cars. Now, Saudi girls observe the love affairs on the net, are exposed to an infinite number of Saudi atheists and get to access proxy websites with photo-shopped images of Nancy Ajram or Haifa Wahbi (both Lebanese singers, very glamorous singers might I add). They are demanding changes, CW. However, right now, it’s subtle murmur rather than a deafening din. Still, it is being heard loud and clear and the number of articles, cases and subtle changes taking place in the Kingdom is testament to that. Incidentally, and I have no idea if this actually exists in Saudi Arabia but, how do Saudi women get round this Moharam issue if they own mobile phones? Three way conference calls? PS Do YOU own a mobile phone (not you CW)?

^^^^I see what you’re saying and agree with it. But, it still does not fully deal with what irks me in this topic. Maybe if I compared the situation to something, you might see where I’m coming from. Picture a school class room (not necessarily a western one). Now, imagine that the teacher had nipped out for a few minutes but before he left he ordered everyone in the class to keep quiet and not talk to those sitting next to them. I’m sure you (and anyone reading this) have been in a similar situation. Can you remember it? Remember how much noise all the pupils made? But, do you also remember the good boys and girls that made no noise at all and followed the teacher’s orders? In addition, if you look back at those situations, does it not make you smile when you remember how even the noisiest ones stayed in their seats while chatting away and imperiously showed everyone else that they broke the rules, and spoke? I’m using that example to show that though many people break the rules, there are many others that don’t know, because of conditioning or whatever else, how to break the rules even if they wanted to. It’s CEEB to talk to girls and try to sleep with them. It’s also CEEB to watch dirty movies. But, whilst a girl that you try to chat up might reject you by uttering the scary words ‘CEEB, CEEB, CEEB’, the worst a dirty movie could do to is turn out to be faulty.

^^^^ You mean like Somali women evolved from eating hambo in the past to clearing the stuff remaining in the pot now? PS Katrina worries me.

^^^^ It is not intellectual indecency though. If it were to be labelled at all, I’d say it was intellectual bravery and a clever way of dealing with serious and current problems in Egypt. In fact, I’ll go as far as arguing that such problems don’t only exist in Egypt but in almost all Muslim lands. With Egypt though, the problem is more obvious (not sure if that’s to do with the size of the population or high level of unemployment). Nonetheless, the problem exists there and this film attempts to cleverly air it and deal with it. How are single men and women in Muslim lands, when faced with all these temptations and provocations supposed to behave? When governments, religious authorities and conservatives demand decency and recommend quick marriages, should they not (in the case of Egypt at any rate) create the appropriate environment for such ends? As the article above mentioned, the problem is in the system. On the one hand society demands decency and total adherence to traditions (Islamic). On the other hand, society does not help these young men and women with marriage costs, jobs and cheap accommodation. Surely, something has to give! Many of the Somalis in Arab countries suffer from the same problem (many in Western countries do too). Pardon my anecdotal evidence, but there is a joke often repeated amongst my Somali friends living in the UAE that the best type of Somali girl to marry is a Nurse (they get a housing allowance or some such benefit, you see). Do such problems exist where YOU live? How does society (local communities) combat it? Edit: You can buy the film here

Watched this film a few weeks ago. By Tarek Atia To watch a pornographic film in Egypt, you need four things: the videotape; a VCR; a television; and a place to watch it. Film Thaqafi (Cultural Film), which went on general release yesterday, is the story of three horny 20-somethings trying to pull these elements together to watch what is euphemistically called "thaqafi" (cultural) -- a codeword for porn meant to keep parents, friends and colleagues out of the loop (and those in the know in). Which is a roundabout way of confirming that despite the lack of open discussion of the subject, there is quite a "thakafi" culture in Egypt; mainly centred around teenagers and young adults whose skills in the dating and mating game are, well, underdeveloped. It is this malaise that ails the three main characters of the new comedy Film Thakafi, a first-time effort for scriptwriter and director Mohamed Amin. Until now, Amin has existed on the fringes of the entertainment industry, doing low-budget ads and travel videos since he graduated from the Cinema Institute 15 years ago. But the "torturous" wait to get onto the big screen has been worth it, as Amin's film is truly a gem. Finally, we have an Arabic film whose popular appeal isn't just the names on the billboards. Clever subject matter and the director's successful handling of plot and characterisation are the things good cinema is made of. Film Thakafi is not, as the name might suggest, a romp into the raunchy world of pornography. Instead, it's a sensitive look at the problems of sexual repression faced by a particular generation of Egyptian youth. The film takes as its premise that the under-20 generation is being brought up in a world far different from that which those already "over the hill" (read: over 20) grew up in. The 20-ish crowd seem to have been left behind in the brave new world of mixed gender schools, more lenient dress sense and a more relaxed attitude about relationships between men and women in general. It is this shift that Film Thaqafi brings to life. The struggle of Egyptian 20-somethings to find their place in a changing social landscape is encapsulated in three young men who don't know the first thing about approaching a girl, let alone ask her for a date. The film's main characters have been socialised by the mindset of the houses and schools they were brought up in, where any mixing between boys and girls was considered a no-no. And when it comes to satisfying their sexual cravings through marriage, the economy is not making it any easier. So what do they resort to? Porn, of course. And herein lies the story of Film Thaqafi, which follows the three men through a day-long "mission impossible" to find a VCR, a TV, a film and a place to watch it. As we follow these intrepid adventurers on their travels around town trying to compile all the necessary elements, it becomes clear that their desire will never be fulfilled. It is when the three come closest to their goal that the film is at its most devious -- and symbolic. At one point, everything is finally in place, but it turns out that the TV and video do not have matching "systems". Occasionally, they even get to start the film, only to inevitably be cut short just as things are starting to get steamy. The power cuts, or a sibling or parent walks in. Finally, they discover that the film has actually been taped over with a session from the People's Assembly. The film tackles its taboos deftly. I asked Sami El-Adl, the veteran actor and producer who risked making the film, how it got past the censors. "Why shouldn't it get by?" he boomed. "There are no bad words, no bare legs, no kissing. There's nothing overtly outrageous in there." Then he added, "And the censor has become more daring." Thankfully, so has the movie business. Film Thaqafi is a film where young people actually play young people's roles with complexity, not as caricatures. The film stars, Ahmed Rizk (who played a mentally-retarded boy in the mega-successful Ramadan series Al-Ragul Al-Akhar so convincingly that people thought he was actually mentally challenged), Ahmed Eid (the budding comedian from Short, Fanella wa Cap), and Fathi Abdel-Wahab (the anti-Israeli trouble-maker in the landmark Sa'idi fil Gam'a Al-Amrikiya). Rizk is the outgoing, talkative leader of the crew, who will stop at nothing to watch the "thakafi" film, including suggesting they try to watch it in a cultural centre attached to a mosque. When that doesn't work, he insists on asking their friend, who is in church mourning the death of his father, if they can borrow his apartment for a few hours. When I asked Rizk about doing the scenes in the mosque and the church, he quipped, "We're already doing a risky film, so we had to do risky scenes." Eid and Abdel-Wahab also manage to round out their characters, complementing each other and Rizk with genuine camaraderie. Rizk attributes the successful portrayal of friendship to the month ahead of filming in which the actors worked out their roles and the relationships between them. "We've all acted in a lot of things, but we'd never done that before, and that was the key," Rizk said, calling director Amin "a thermometer" for correcting the trio whenever he felt the characters were becoming "too similar to each other." When I met the three actors earlier this week in El-Adl's downtown office, they were jovial and enthusiastic, but a bit nervous as well. The pre-release hype is pointing toward a success, and El-Adl, for his part, says his whole history has involved supporting youth projects like this one. Many have failed, but he's convinced that this time he has a winner. He expressed concern that the film exceeded its budget of LE1.3 million by more than half a million pounds, but El-Adl has spent the money wisely, investing in good advertising and promotion. Small details, like the film's slick poster, point to a growing trend of sophistication in the marketing side of the film business. "I'm an actor," says El-Adl, who makes a cameo in the film as a police officer who catches the kids but then ends up discussing the "thakafi", which he has clearly seen before, with them. "But when a screenplay hits my desk that makes me mustafiz (agitated), I go for it." He raves that he wishes there were 15 Mohamed Amins and 35 stars like these, because then he'd produce them all. Actually, he and his brothers (Mohamed, Medhat and Gamal El-Adl) have been responsible for many of the films (Sa'idi, Hammam, Short) that have changed the business in the past three years. The film is not perfect. Once or twice it goes a bit overboard with its message, like when a nurse repetitively states that she needs to get married so she can release the desires within her. The ending, a cameo appearance by superstar Youssra (playing herself), is just plain weird. One of the most telling and sure-to-be controversial scenes takes place after the three fail to watch the film in the mosque's cultural centre, and instead find themselves being asked to join a communal prayer. While performing their ablutions, they discuss how contradictory it is that they are preparing to pray, and yet their real goal is to watch a porno. Amin says he meant the scene as a symbol of the confused interaction between the trappings of modern life and the religious sensibilities of the Islamic world. Commenting on the way women dress today, one of the characters says, "I wish they'd all wear niqab (full-body cover) and then we'd be better off." Another fumes, "Stop dressing this way; you're ruining a whole generation." Source

Today is the last game in the league. The season is almost over. There is one point between the top two teams. The final game means everything to them. I’m not the biggest fan of the Soldiers but, today, I can do them a great favour by beating the Lions. Anyway, like I said, the season is almost over and we can start a new season very soon. Nafta, there is no need to take over Castro’s team. You can have a team of your own in the new season. So can any others that want to join this league. I’m not sure how long to wait before I start the new league. Should it be immediate or should we wait for all the latecomers? How about January? Edit: Anyone know what the person below is talking about? :confused:

Well, they've got to pay for the dinner, the cinema tickets, the Taxi ride home and maybe even a gift or two. This might also have to be repeated a few times before any sex takes place. Poor women, you say? Poor men, I say. :mad:

^^^ Aha! But why beat them up then? In such a case Xiin's argument is the correct one, wouldn't you say? Gays need no hormone treatment. They need not be locked up either. They represent a reality of social tendency that’s clear deviation from the norm. The Islamic prescription for all social ills has been containment, and not one of denial. Their practice must be censored from the public through harsh implementation of Islamic penal code. Simple. You don’t have to hate them. You don’t have to seek them. When they are ****** enough to expose their wicked practice to the public eye, eliminate them. Simple.

^^^That was always the option being followed though. It’s not new, and evidently, it’s not effective. Nor, if you ask me, is it fair. You are talking rehabilitation. Xiin is talking DEATH. Yet, let us not lose sight of the topic here and the background. Would you really kill the people in the article above? Is dressing up as women reason enough for the killing? How do you determine who is and who is not a homosexual? When you say ‘contain’ and ‘discourage’ are you implying that we all have the potential of being gay?

Castro, Here are two poems by two of the most famous non-classical Egyptian poets. هوا انا صحيح ما رحتش مصر,بس باتكلم اللهجه المصريه بطلاقه. عمرك سمعت الناس بتقول Ùلان بيتكلم مصري زي البلبل؟ انا بقا, كنت باخد دروس خصوصيه من سيادة البلبل بزاته. المهم, قصر الكلام,, The first is بيرم التونسي quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- قال: إيه مراد ابن آدم؟ قلت له: طقه قال: إيه يكÙÙŠ منامه؟ قلت له: شقّه قال: إيه يعجّل بموته؟ قلت له: زقه قال: حـد Ùيها مخلّد؟ قلت له: لأه قال لي: ما دام ابن آدم بالصÙات دي نويت أحÙظ صÙات ابن آدم كل ما اترقى -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source The second is by Ahmed Fouad Najem. It's called The Lady's Dog. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- كلب الست ÙÙ‰ الزمالك من سنين و٠حما النيل القديم قصر من عصر اليمين ملك واحدة من الحريم صيتها اكتر Ù… الادان يسمعوه المسلمين والتتر والتركمان والهنود والمنبوذين ست Ùاقت ع الرجال ÙÙ‰ المقام والاحترام صيت وشهره وتل مال يعنى ÙÙ‰ غايه التمام قصره يعني هى كلمة ليها كلمه ÙÙ‰ الحكومه بس ربك لجل حكمه قام حرمها Ù… الامومه والامومه طبع ثابت جوه حوا من الزمان تعمل ايه الست جابت Ùوكس رومي وله ودان Ùوكس دا عبقال املتك عندة دستة خدامين يعنى مش موجود ÙÙ‰ عيلتك شخص زية يا اسماعين واسماعين دا يبقى واحد Ù… الجماعة التعبانين اللي داخوا ÙÙ‰ المعاهد والمدارس من سنين حب يعمل واد Ùكاكة يمشي حبة ÙÙ‰ الزمالك والقيامة والÙتاكة يرموا طبعا ع المهالك عم سمعة من قيامتة حب يعمل Ùيها Ùلة بعد ما الوظ بيجامتة اشترى حتة مجله قول مشي يقرا ÙÙ‰ حكاية من حكايات الغرام واندماجة ÙÙ‰ القرايه خلا مشيه مش تمام ع اليمين يحد٠بعيد خطوتين ويروح شمال لمحه Ùوكس من الحديد قال دا صيد سهل حلال هب نط ÙÙ‰ كرشه دوغري جاب بيجامته لحد ديلها اسماعين بدال ما يجري قال يا رجلي رجلى مالها ØŸ بص شا٠الدم سايح من عاليها ومن واطيها وياللى جاي وياللي رايح المجله مش لا قيها حبه واتلموا الظنايا اللى هما البوابين والحكايه والروايه قال لهم دا كلب مين كلب مين ما كلب مينشى سمعه لبخ حبتين قال واحد منهم امشى اللى جابك عنده مين؟ قال دا شارع يا مواشي والجميع بيمر منه اللى راكب اللى ماشى مستحيل نستغنى عنه كلمه من دا وكلمه من دا ظاطو واترسمت Ùضيحه قول نهايته القصد من دا اسماعين اكل الطريحه راحو قسم الشرطه طبعا والنيابه ÙƒÙيله بيهم واترموا ÙÙ‰ الحجز جمعا لما ييجي الدور عليهم حبة والشاويش امين قال : سعيد النقشيندي قام غريم عم اسماعين قال لة: محسوبك يا اÙندي قام سي سمعه يروح معاه الشاويش قال : غور بدمك راح تعوصنى ÙˆÙوق Ù‚Ùاه ك٠طرقع داهيه ٠امك تÙتكر ÙŠÙضل سي سمعه قد ايه ÙÙ‰ القسم نايم ØŸ استضاÙÙ‡ الحجز جمعه يا بلاش ادي العزايم شا٠بلاوي ما تتحكيش Ù… الديابه المسجونين قال يا عالم يا شاويش يا نيابه يامسئولين خلصوه بعد المناهده جثه من جحر الديابه هى يمكن ساعه واحده كان ÙÙ‰ مكتب النيابه قال له مالك يااسماعين قال لة زي البمب ... مالي ØŸ قال له عضك Ùوكس Ùين قال له سيبنى اروح لحالي انت شو٠سي Ùوكس يمكن خد تسمم غصب عني الوكيل قال برضة ممكن والشاويش قعد يغنى انت Ùين والكلب Ùين انت قدة يا اسماعين طب دا كلب الست يا ابني وانت تطلع ابن مين بشري لصحاب الديول واللى له اربع رجول بشرى لسيادنا البهايم من جمايس او عجول اللى صاحبه يا جماعه له غناوي ÙÙ‰ الاذاعه راح يدوس Ùوق الغلابه والنيابه .. بالبتاعه -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You can read many more here