I Hope The Admin takes your longing to my dear Otali and unbans him. Longing? I haven't totally lost it, made an error, yes, but alxamdullilah my faculties are still intact.

they're the most persecuted race in the history of humanity! I probably wouldn't say the most. Often times, they brought it upon themselves.

What is he saying exactly? He’s implying that it’s ok but does he give his proofs (other than appealing to our logic and common sense?). Need I remind you that your Salafi Sheikhs disagree with him? Brother, whilst I love the scholars of Islam, they are not always correct on every situation. The Salafi scholars are divided on the issue of Usama- not all of them disagree with him on the main issue of his war on the west, often they disagree with him on technical matters such as the methods which he employs (and this all comes back to whether or not you recognize “suicide†bombings as a legitimate form of combat). But the author is correct, when it is a defensive jihad, you do not need the command of a khalif to defend yourself. He isn’t saying anything which objects to the teachings of Islam-any scholar would tell you just that. Also, some scholars (namely the pro-Saudi government scholars, not that I am degrading them wal ciyaadu bilaah, I love them) are against Usama for the reason that he speaks out against the royal family. As for the one obscure neo-mod remark, he once again is correct (in my opinion anyway). In an attempt to explain the status of Polygamy in Islam, often many Muslims take on a defensive mode to the point that some even claim that it is not applicable in today’s world. I believe that he was only making the point that we shouldn’t trample on Islam and become apologetic in an attempt to make Islam seem more appealing to the gaalo.

LOOOOL , I've been confusing JB and Gesi. Much apologies for my human error. I knew something didn't sound right. But still JB does sound like Otali.

What a tragedy! Exactly. At the end of the day, to hell with all of them. From this Hiraale guy, to Indha Cade and Morgan. We often forget that there are innocent people who suffer, so at this point it matters not much who is guilty or who is more guilty.

Yeah, hopefully they’ll grant me the opportunity. I don’t think such a thing is done at my university, but as they say you’ll never know till you try. I plan to visit home soon inshallah, I will be taking a good look around. Maybe even at the clinics mentioned in the article. I hope you'll succeed! Inshallah

^ Now judging from the above post of JB i can see why smith would doubt his puntlander status. See, simple. Just a question . I don't go around defending or go against people for the heck of it brother. I don't agree with JB just like i don't agree with Smith. JB, I really do hate making accusations, but you sure do write just like Otali. Dare I say you have found a way around the ban? I recomed you to stay at the Romance section or take OG_GIRL´s quick course on SOL politics, it sure pays off Maybe you should take her course yourself brother. Obviously you haven’t learnt much.

I bet she has a selective memory, Are you sure that it is not you who has selective memory brother? Not once have I defended the actions of any Somali group or Somali leader (the ones where there is a disagreement on). The only reason I make any comments about some leaders is because they have cheerleaders on SOL. I have not seen for example, anyone on these forums defending Caydiid (aside from the banned Otali, and yes I had expressed my opinion on that), nor have I seen anyone defending any of the other scumbags, but I have seen people defending Morgan and CY. Folks also defend Hiraale and Idha Cade (but since I do not know about their status, I can only keep my comments to myself). I don't comment to all PL on these forums, just some. Others i agree with most of the time because they don't go around defending any warlord. Shining Abdulahi Yusuf with the same daylight as Aidid and Siad Barre is outrageous. It depends on the light you use brother. If we speak about the number of people killed, then sure CY is not in the same league as these two (that is obvious), but for me there are also other issues of relevance-namely the using of our enemies (the xabash) to kill your own brother. CY is not alone in this, there are others also that I detest just as much if not more (Caydiid Jr. to be exact) for this reason. Me no like warlords, especially xabash lovers For instance, she commented how JB could not be reer Puntland if he doesn't support it. Haven't Rahima seen how degrading JB talks about Puntland and bringing the war to garowe and other crap in those lines. The first time I read any of JBs posts were when he replied to me on another thread claiming that which you are now. I asked smith that question because I wanted to know how he came to the conclusion that this guy could possibly not be a puntlander. Maybe he is a puntlander just like Smith is, with the exception he is not a big fan of CY. No need to make assumptions on baseless points brother. I was only asking Smith a question- no need to over analyse it . And since you are such an avid reader of the responses of SOL, have you read anywhere where I have made negative remarks about PL or its administration in general. I just don’t like CY, it is that simple, and as far as I’m aware PL is not defined by CY. If you paid close enough attention, you would of have seen in a few places where I have defended all regions, including PL.

It's in our blood Rudy. Just give it to her.

My 1st crush was at the age of 6 i remember My first crush was a girl named Sabaax who i went to Arabic school with, we were about 7 Is that even possible people? Is it a thing in Perth folks?

Interesting. I shall go and see the good work for myself inshallah. I'm hoping that if allowed (inshallah) i shall do my postgraduate year in Somalia. Question is though Smith, are the people of Somalia willing to eradicate FGM. Recently in my area there was a conference held for Somali women educating them about the dangers of FGM and aside from the few who new the Islamic stance, most were in support of the continuation of this barbaric act. How then can such an expedition be expected to succeed?

You know I support Puntland and its president, thats a fact. Whats that got to do with Dhoobley? Nothing directly, it was more about your line of reasoning and the opinions which you hold. You think about it. As for Yusuf Inda Cade, dear the people of Dhoobley and their leaders on the ground blame the man. The man already occupies Marka, Barava and yet you over look him and attack Yey, why? Is that not hypocracy, is it not being baised? My dearest brother , like I’ve said over and over if this is true, then yes he is guilty. So far all I’ve heard this from are certain people on these forums. Had this come from more people (namely those who I feel are not biased and are generally fair), I’d be inclined to take their word for it. Like I said, some try and tell me that Sayyid Maxamad (Rahimuallah) was an evil man-I know their reasons and motives, hence I dismiss the claim. No pun intended walaahi brother; it’s just that I only take my information from reliable sources considering that you can’t be so sure these days. Now can you say that about Yusuf Inda Cade, Xasan Dahir Aweyes, or even Abdiqasin see the people who occupy and pray in other peoples properties are well known except to you dear Rahima I supported Cabdiqaasim for he was the leader of our country (just like I will support CY if he wins). I do not support Indha cade (I don’t know much about him aside from what some claim) but I support Al-itixaad (Xasan Dahir Aweys is their leader, the last I remember, he may of have been replaced since the US have been after him for so many years). I don’t want to have to repeat myself, but Al-itixaad are not perfect but they are the best on the Somali arena. They make mistakes, but are not in support of the warlords. Al-itixaad is an organization whose members come from all across the country and who have bases all over the country, from Boosaaso, Xamar, Kismaayo to Hargeysa. Where i live brother, Al-itixaad is very popular brother and let's just say the majority of the Somalis in my area are from Afmadow and ********ia The only morons who cry complete foul about Al-itixaad are the likes of the Ethiopian lackeys (Caydiid Jr and CY) who begged the Americans to eradicate the “terrorists†from their country. What kind of information does it take for Mobb_Deep to convince our good sista Rahima that Hiiraale and Indhacade are indeed warlords? Reliable information (even Somalis have their fair share of CNNs). Information from sources other than that of people who make it a sport to vilify most people who do not share a tribe with them. You see, we all agree that Caydiid was a warlord and committed many atrocious acts against innocent people. Most also agree the same about CY (except maybe some of his sub-clan), when I see such a thing, then yes I will consider them to be as such. Thank ya in advance for yo patience with me na'mean. I don't mind you having a look at the bottom quote of yours for information purpose while ya attempt to answer my question na'eman. You are more than welcome my dearest brother *curtsey*. But allow me to be so deferential and ask, you have highlighted my question to our brother Smith for the reason that…? If I say that CY is a warlord that does not mean that I am saying that these men are not. All I’m saying is I know who are the clear warlords, some I am unsure about and till there is proof of such a thing (more proof than that which comes from those who clearly share a political ideaology, if it came from folks such as LSK and Baashi I’d pay close attention for I have faith that they are not swayed by certain motives) I shall wait. Is that so hard to accept my dearest dear old brother?

^ So which part of it did you disagree with brother? The brother has made as you stated very strong arguments and irrespective of which “side†he is on, they remain as such. I believe he explained the Muslim situation well- we have turned into a group of apologists who have made it a mission to please our enemies. It’s like 9/11; I never understood why Muslims felt the need to be the first group to cry out innocence when there was no proof of guilt or association.

So let me ask you then Smith, are you claiming that CY has not being involved in tribal wars and not being responsible for the killing of innocent people? I think that is obvious for us all. Don’t worry about my so-called laziness or what not, that is off topic. I don’t need to research over and over on that which is evident, do I need to research that the grass on my lawn is green or that tim tams have a chocolate component? I am not well versed in Somali politics, I can admit I know almost next to nothing about it all as compared to most of the big guns here, but there are issues which are clear to most, one been the identity of the major warlords-which yes adeer CY falls into. Brother you know, yet you overlook. That is what I disagree with you on. You have a right to your opinion (I don’t believe I contested that) but don’t try and sugar coat it for us (you do what Otali and WD did , only thing being you are a tad more cautious ). You can support CY, Caydiid or anyone for that matter, but don’t expect us to believe that any pf these people are decent innocent law-abiding people. A warlord is scum, we have no other choice therefore we deal with them. As for judging or exonerating, you seem so quick to others based on reports, so why not deal CY with the same hand? Can’t you even bring yourself to questioning his actions? Or is he that off bounds? Sacrilegious is it ?

What an ***** !

Mobb, let me put it in black-and-white format for you. I know that CY, Morgan, Caydiid Jr., Caato are warlords-this is an established no-buts-and ifs fact. Do I know this about these other two men, NO I don’t. Does this mean that they are innocent? No it does not. If in any way you are claiming that I am doubting the warlord status of these two men for the reasons of tribal allegiance, dare I say contemplate the lineages of the men that I have mentioned as no-buts and ifs warlords- technically speaking, they by Somali standards are closer to me than Hiraale or this Yusuf guy. So do us all a favour and give it a rest- your point is well understood my brother . We shall end the question for the bottom line is they may or may not be guilty, but I will not brand anyone guilty until there is clear proof of it. This is like the allegation that Galeyr stole the money of our people, I do not know for this to be the case; therefore all I can say is as far as I’m concerned I DO NOT KNOW. I don’t know how I can make this any clearer, I say black, you still say gray.

Alxamdullilah, indeed it is a mercy from the Almighty.

As for being more than Yey, of course Puntland is more than one man. But neverthe less he is an important man, he is the President and many people support him. Blind hatred is not something we can debate. Who are you kidding my brother? CY has your support for reasons more than being leader of Puntland. You see, the thing I am against is, claiming that CY is not in fact a warlord when you have knowledge of such things. You won't even put the question into light; it's almost blasphemous to you. It would be credible if you stated that CY is guilty of many a crimes but since he is the leader of Puntland I support him to that extent for that is better than creating conflict. If indeed CY is elected the president, this will be my stance. I shall support him to the extent that he is the president of Somalia (just like i supported Cabdiqaasim- it is not that i support the man but rather the idea of peace and prosperity in my homeland) but that does not mean that I will exonerate him of all the crimes he has committed. This my brother is the bottom line, but you can’t even admit that. It’s almost like you will defend this man irrespective of what crime he commits. I bet you, if it was your family members that he had massacred you would not be speaking like that. Often I see this trend with Somalis. JB is not from Puntland Why is that? How does one become a puntlander?To be from the area of puntland is it a must that you support it? Had this guy claimed that he is from Burco but he doesn’t believe nor support the idea of Somaliland and he believes Riyaale to be a warlord- I’m sure you would welcome that with open arms .

Who are the Muslim Moderates (Neo-Mods) ? Yamin Zakaria Article ID: 1169 | 593 Reads In 1925, shortly after the symbolic destruction of the Ottoman State, Ali Abd Ar-Raaziq, a graduate from the distinguished institution of al-Azhar University of Cairo, issued a controversial religious edict (Fatwa). He claimed that the institution of the Islamic State (Khilafah) is not an integral part of an Islamic society. Many of the readers might be forgiven for assuming that the current infamous Sheikh Tantawi of the same al-Azhar was inspired by the likes of Ali Abd Ar-Raaziq for approving the recent French governments decision to ban the Islamic scarf (Hijab). Prior to this no genuine Islamic scholar endorsed the abolition of the Islamic State or the ban on the Hijab. It would be superficial and hasty to consider such incidents as merely isolated events in history. The contentious Fatwa of Ali Abd Ar-Raaziq represented the apex of the reformist movements, which began campaigning for reformation since the early eighteenth century or earlier, in order to halt and revive the declining Ottoman State. In contrast, during the early period of the Islamic history, the various movements were primarily confined to debating the various interpretations of the Islamic texts. Not a single scholar or a movement of that period ever advocated the need to reform Islam. This contrast can be explained by the observation of the eminent Islamic Historian, Ibn Khaldun. He stated that, it is natural for the conquered subjects to look up to their conquerors for solutions to their problems. The defeated will naturally seek to identify the causes of their defeat and often attribute it to their way of life (ideology). Hence, the result is either reformation or abandonment of their ideology. Either route will lead to a level of emulation of the conquerors ideology. Thus, the reformist movements began to imitate the West by approving the imposed European model of nation states and eventually deserted the concept of an unified Islamic State. In line with historical trend, new reformers best described as the neo-moderates (neo-mods) have arisen, as the Islamic world faces renewed vigorous aggression from the Capitalist-Zionist-Christian axis (neo-colonialists). Palestine, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq are the most recent examples. The neo-mods (reformists) unlike their forerunner are primarily the product of US led initiatives rather than emanating from within the Islamic world with the aspiration to revive the Islamic society. Similarly, the neo-colonialists are also distinct from their predecessors. They are primarily focused in colonising the minds rather then just the rich resources. A nation mentally enslaved has very little willpower, and the capability to resist subjugation. The quest for colonising the minds of the masses has necessitated in pursuing an intellectual battle. The aim is not to eradicate Islam, which failed miserably in the past and proved impossible, but to secularise (marginalise) it in the minds of the Muslim masses. As a consequence eradicate Islam as an ideology for shaping and reunifying the Muslim societies. Simultaneously, the neo-colonialists are advocating “democracy and freedom†as a suitable alternative. Since “democracy and freedom†plays the predominant role in shaping society, which obliges any functioning religion to be secularised, as two people can not occupy the same seat at the same time. Therefore, “democracy and freedom†can easily coexist only with a secularised version of Islam. Secularised Islam is also conveniently termed as ‘moderate’ Islam. The US government has initiated a drive to manufacture ‘scholars’ and ‘experts’ to promote a ‘moderate’ version of Islam, simultaneously recruiting and promoting those existing ‘moderates’ (neo-mods) that are wittingly or unwittingly campaigning for the same. If the policy fails, the US has already issues threats to enforce “democracy and freedomâ€. It is certainly a mystery as to how the Western intelligentsia can talk about enforcing “democracy and freedomâ€, without noticing the inherent contradiction or hypocrisy of “enforcement†with the values of “democracy†and “freedomâ€. Apart from the carriers of ‘moderate’ Islam, everyone else simply falls into the radical camp. They are often scorned by labelling them as fundamentalists, fanatics, and extremists. Where as the neo-mods are given a positive image as ‘liberals’, ‘modern’, and ‘free thinking’, regardless of the strength of their argument. The different types of the neo-mods are briefly examined below: a) Radical Reformists These radical neo-mods vociferously argue that “democracy and freedom†as defined and practiced by the West are totally compatible with Islam. As stated above, this is only possible under a secularised version of Islam, where Islam would only have any relevance in the individual’s personal sphere of activity at his/her discretion. How is it that two ideologies emanating from different sources can have the same principles and values, unless it is a monumental historical coincidence! Furthermore, how can they remain distinct but yet have identical principles and values! Of course, that is not the case in reality and hence the Islamic laws are ‘reinterpreted’ when there is an overt conflict with the principles of “democracy and freedomâ€. The outcome is that the Islamic laws are replaced with secular laws, whilst keeping up the Islamic pretensions. Therefore, it is no surprise that these neo-mods always evaluate Islam by measuring it up to the yardstick of “freedom and democracyâ€. If the two ideologies are totally compatible, thus identical in their values and principles, then surely there is no need for divine revelation? Since the Greek Philosophers invented Democracy well before the advent of Islam. This process of ‘reinterpreting’ Islamic texts in areas that is well established leads to a level of absurdity. As an example, they view polygamy with disdain even though the Prophet (SAW) fully practiced it along with his companions. Who decided in the first place that polygamy is inherently wrong? These self appointed ‘intellectuals’ (neo-mods) do not for once recognise that those in the West attacking polygamy are the most polygamous people around, with their culture of “freedom†placing very few limitations to the sexual practices. Any form of sexual behaviour is acceptable as long as it is not a second wife! If you are accustomed to Jerry Springer, the pretexts is often, “it is because you are not homeâ€, and so I slept with your stepson or your dad! One obscure neo-mod alleges that the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was in reality a monogamous person and polygamy was primarily a mere convenience to acquire tribal allegiance, amongst other reasons. He elaborates on the point: - “If Muslims chose to ignore 25 years of Prophet’s monogamy and chose 12 years of his polygamy as a benchmark for Islamic principles and values, then this is a sad commentary on Muslims and not on the Prophet of Islam. If Muslims chose to forget the 25 years and remember only the last 12 years then yes Muhammad was a polygamist. After all Muhammad is what we remember of him.†What an astonishing analysis and reasoning! No other Islamic scholar in the last 1500 years had the ‘intellect’ to deduce such an amazing conclusion. Why must the Muslims choose the first 25 years of the Prophets (SAW) life over the last 12 years? If anything it is the latter part of a person’s life that has more importance, as he develops and matures through life. In the case of the Prophet (SAW) certain laws revealed changed with the elapse of time. Therefore, the subsequent revelations have greater importance, as it can abrogate the earlier revelations but never the reverse (Read Niskh and Mansukh). Furthermore of the first 25 years, 15 years was prior to him receiving revelation, therefore not acquired the Prophet status? So even by the neo-mod’s reasoning the Prophet (SAW) as a Prophet was monogamous for the first 10 years but polygamous for the next 12 years, hence polygamy should be preferred. In any case, why should anyone advocate such reasoning unless one is ashamed of the Prophets polygamous acts, as he states it is “sadâ€? So, there is already a preconception about Polygamy in the neo-mods ‘scholarly’ mind. I suppose if he were around at the time of the Prophet (SAW), he would have ‘guided’ the Prophet (SAW) and his companions exclusively to monogamy. It is only rational and consistent to examine all of the Prophets (SAW) life not to select only part of it to formulate an opinion. The Prophets (SAW) entire life coupled with the Quranic verses indicate that both monogamy and polygamy are permissible. No evidence to indicate that one is preferred over the other, unless you have already formed an opinion about it and interpret the evidence to justify the preconception! These are not scholarly arguments but an attempt by a defeated mindset to reconcile the irreconcilable. b) Apologists The apologists are either fervently pragmatists or isolationists. The former are politically active and operate with a defensive mindset. The latter are mostly non-political, their focus is primarily confined to individual activity in gaining knowledge, spiritual enlightenment and some confine to theological issues such as the nature of the Creator. The isolationist neo-mods by their own conduct are behaving like the medieval monks living in caves, oblivious to the reality, and by de facto promoting a secular version of Islam. However, a few of these isolationists unexpectedly transformed after 9/11, and suddenly they were advisors to the likes of George Bush, participating fully in the political arena. As the US began a new wave of brutal attacks post 9/11, instead of confronting, the language employed was one of reconciliation and apology. They even resorted to using their Islamic knowledge of the technical terms to justify their (neo-mods) conduct. As an example they claimed that, the Mujahideen led by Shaikh Usamah Bin Laden are not entitled to declare Jihad in the absence of the Islamic State (Khilafah). The subject of Khilafah has been conveniently avoided and now, it has suddenly becomes important! Since, when does anyone need permission to declare or fight a defensive war (Jihad)? When the slaughter of the defenceless Muslims is rampant, even common sense dictates that permission is not required, not even from the Khalif. No matter how much ‘scholarship’, or ‘knowledge’ or ‘wisdom’ one claims to posses, the truth cannot be hidden under such pretexts. The pragmatists on the other hand usually resort to provide a convenient interpretation of the legal texts in certain areas, so that it has an acceptable meaning to the non-Muslims and the Muslim secular elite around them. This has dual purpose in seeking to avoid conflict and attaining certain material benefits. As a consequence, this leads to the constant erosion of the Islamic values with the ongoing apology for Islam and being Muslims. In addition, their lack of perception and analysis of the implications of their actions has often resulted in scoring political own goals. The recent statement issued by the infamous Sheikh Tantawi of al-Azhar is an example of this defensive mindset and lacking the full political awareness of the subject. He used the underpinning ‘principle’ of “obeying the laws of the land†above the divine laws to approve the French governments decision to ban the Islamic scarf. Many of the followers of these neo-mod principles are too embarrassed to explain the statement of the Sheikh and hence the silence. Some in the name of seeking to influence, every year eagerly attend the Iftar parties at the embassies, where they dine with those who have just murdered so many innocent and defenceless Muslims and non-Muslims. To the contrary, these neo-mods have become useful showpieces in legitimising the actions of these imperialist governments, to the Muslims at home and abroad. Despite the Iftar parties and the picture shots, were they able to have any influence on the current US policies regarding the captives in Guantanamo Bay, or the war in Afghanistan or Iraq? Only people who are upright, altruistic and principled can engage in political discourse on behalf of their community. Consider the recent example from the poet Benjamin Zephaniah, who refused the knighthood on the basis of British governments current policy in Iraq and her colonial history. How many of these neo-mods would turn down such an opportunity on the basis of their self proclaimed leadership and principle? Conclusion The neo-mods do not have a consistent position and are trying to reconcile the irreconcilable by twisting evidences, along with their illogical ‘principles’. A position that has caused more confusion, and harmed the Muslims and the non-Muslims. Whilst some may have good intentions but others, and in particular the radical neo-mods clearly have malicious intent, evident by their overt cooperation with those seeking to undermine Islam. Some of these radical neo-mods are using pretexts that are so absurd that it is laughable, (see the polygamy section above) and then they parade themselves as Islamic ‘scholars’, with credentials from institutions that are operating to undermine Islam from its basis.

my comments in the other thread was nothing personal, I was just reading some of your posts the last few days, and you seemed to always be on smith and bari's case when they express support for morgan and cabdilaahi yuusuf, and on the other hand, you seemed to be easy on otali. Bari? I can’t remember the last time I made any remark against Bari. Whilst I may not agree with Bari all the time (this is the case with everyone), I don’t believe he holds the same views as SNW (i know that now)- as far as I’m aware he doesn’t support any warlord. SNW on the other hand does and on that I disagree with him. I wasn’t easy on Otali; it’s just that there was not much need for me to say anything to him. He openly supported Caydiid whilst acknowledging his crimes- that in my books says it all . I shouldn’t really say anything about him in his absence, but the views of that guy were nothing more than a joke- his tribalistic views were open for everyone to see and alxamdullilah many (HA, Baashi, WD, SNW, Bari_nomad) put him in his place. i read somewhere that you're from gaalkacayo, well am from laascaanood, barasho wanaagsan walaal! Likewise . My best friend since the age of 6 is from Laascaanood . We always talk about going home together. Some time soon inshallah- although I gotta be honest; we are excited at the prospect but somehow hesitant at the same time .

Brother, let me ease your pain. My list of clear known war lords (that are currently active) include: Caydiid Jr. Cusmaan Caato CY Morgan Yalaxow Etc There are plenty of others, but I have chosen this lot so as to highlight that I do not deem any person a warlord because of the tribe that Allah bore them into. This Yusuf guy may indeed be a warlord (I just heard of him a few weeks ago and guessed his tribe because of Otalis support- that was a sure bet), but it is not my place to say this and that person has committed this and that crime until it is proven. So far there are two different sides to the argument. Some say he was involved, others say he was not. I don’t know (I don’t really follow Somali politics outside of this forum), therefore all I can say is, if indeed he was involved, then yes he is guilty and yes he is a warlord. I don't have to limit myself as far as Morgan is concerned because we know for a fact that he is a warlord, just like Caydiid and Caato. If I was to brand guilty any person who Somalis claim to be guilty, I’d be saying everyone was guilty. Just like a few weeks ago, this Somali girl tried to tell me that Sayid Maxammad was a “terroristâ€, should I take her words for it? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter; this is especially the case with Somalis, therefore it is very hard to find reliable information. On these forums, there are people who i hold in high regard (LSK, Baashi, HA to name a few), others whose views i would always double check. However, there are those whose guilt is evident and clear (and most decent Somalis would agree), namely those whose names I have listed. How can I make it any clearer for you? This guy may or may not be guilty, but that is beside the point. His guilt would not make Morgan innocent, that is the bottom line. Everything aside though, Mobb are you arguing for the sake of an argument ? I do that at times, it keeps my mind thinking, as a student of science we are taught to regurgitate information instead of thinking for ourselves.

Literally speaking true, practically though not always, and mostly takes time. All politics around the world is full of corruption, yet not every country is in a state of chaos. Corruption is only eliminated in a true Islamic state.

^ :rolleyes: imaginary ey? Gesi, are you ok brother? One minute you accuse me of being anti-puntland and the next here you are making such comments. Are you confused? Yes i believe you are Puntland is an existant part of our beloved homeland Somalia, and inshallah is more than CY and his lackeys.

Rahima, do you consider "sheekh" INDHACADE a WARLORD? I have to be honest; the first time that i had ever heard of this guy was on these forums. Morgan is another story. If indeed their is truth to what people have been saying (that he was involved with this tragedy), then yes why wouldn't i consider this man a warlord? That would be hypocritical of me. I would say this had he even been my very own father. Mobb like i said to you before, on what grounds do you assume i support this man? Please do quote me. I await your response. Don’t ignore it like you did the last . Please expose me . If i say that George Bush Jr. is evil and a war criminal, does this necessarily mean that i support Saddam? There is station which is in between, I don’t play by the rules of you are either with us or against us. Gesi, So i suppose you've never read any of my comments to Otali? And anyway, Otali had his fair share of opponents (which I agreed with completely- i enjoyed playing the cheerleader in those debates), Baashi and HA just to name two. SNW described it best, i don't like monopolies. Had there been more Otalis on this forum, you'd be saying i was anti-Xamarlanders As for HA, I know that he does not support such things. He can make mistakes, just like you and i can, but at the end of the day, we all know what HA stands for and that cannot be tarnished by what anyone believes. Hypothetical: If i am on a board where the majority support Howard and i disagree with them, will i speak up against Blair (even though i despise him also)? No of course not, it's called common sense . Argue on merit brother .

For once shut up and atleast pray for those people! Allow me to second that.