WD, Clean your room boy !

No, not new, but do you have a problem with that? I do, you got a problem that I have problem with that?

Welcomed? In whose eyes? It may be now the situation that the folks of Afmadow have been dragged into this because of the recent incidences in Dhoobley, but do not make the grave mistake of assuming that they do because of their support of Morgan. Morgan is the man after all, they had been fighting against for so long. Reaction for them is a defense mechanism, not that I support any taking up of arms, not allegiance to Morgan. On attacking me, dear Mr Yey occupies no one, no minorities land, his forces dont live of the backs of farmers, his admisntration does not sell drugs as some do, so please do not compare Puntland to the deep south. We occupy our land, we rule our land we control our land, we dont sell drugs we burn them and we dont enslave muslim Somali people. I don’t believe we were speaking about occupation, rather men in short skirts with pomp pomps (i.e. cheerleaders) . And who was talking about PL? Or are Morgan and CY PL? I hold the understanding that PL is more than these warlords . Whilst you’re at it, please brother cut the propaganda on the south. You guys sure do love to make it so bad, makes you look good doesn’t it ? Why can't you accept that Barre Hiiraale , your cousin, defeated you ? :rolleyes:

'To educate a man is to educate an individual and to educate a woman is to educate a nation.' Maalik Al-Shabaaz (Malcolm X)

QQ, Chat room I agree with completely, but why forums? It is only a waste of time if you make it such. Brambaro, It was sarcasm sister Unless of course you're being sarcastic and i'm missing. Yaa Allah

It’s not that amusing actually. At least you both have one thing in common; neither of you two could care any less about Somalia. And please brother save me the tirade on peace, we all know that this is nothing more than baloney :rolleyes: . Cheerleaders for warlords and war are guilty as guilty can be. You support one set of warlords and he another. What’s the difference I ask? For any person who really cares about our people, the fact of the matter is dear, absolutely nothing!! So go ahead, become bum chums and plan the destruction of our homeland together :rolleyes: . As they say two heads are better than one

This war is honestly useless. This region needs peace. The helpless town folks will be the only ones to suffer if this war doesn't stop. How true, and here are all the nomads sitting in the comfort of their own homes behind their up to date PCs cheerleading for their uncle/cousin who is killing innocent people. Indeed this is a sad moment in history. Sadder still is that these same very people (i.e. users) are the supposedly the intelligent folks our country needs. Seems like Somalia could do without them. It's beginning to seem that they will burn it to the crisp.

Is arguing for the sake of argument the new trend? JZK Sophist.

and wich boys do you mean, I'm one of a kind! Far from it WD. Most of you here are only fighting for the cause of their uncles, or in the case of others such as Smith, probably their cousins. I can make a whole list, but I won’t. Just now, that you are definitely one of them . Also, i do believe that you and otali would make very good friends. Dear you would smell and see what ever you wish to smell and see. No, rather it is that which is apparent to any sane thinking individual who is not blinded by agendas (namely the ones which flood this forum). I didn’t expect you to agree, how can you. It negates your agenda, does it not? Such a one liner only signifies what I though originally.

i wonder why people instead of creating bad news , For they have all been infected with the sickness of tribalism. Everyman is backing his tribesman. Caaqil, mashallah! Agree wholeheartedly.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the Iranians enriching uranuim. Listening to the BBC today, apparently it has everything to do with it. After all, the Zionist state considers Iran to be a strategic threat to their forsaken survival.

And I can see how a woman will be the most ostersized (sic) because she is the only one that can carry one-half of the evidence (in her womb)...so then will they publicly stone/whip/behead her before they try to find who fathered her "illegitimate" child? etc etc etc Sadly true. I too worry about this. The laws of the Almighty need to be adhered to tightly.

Otali, you never heard of Qoorsheel! Qoorsheel qoorta gooya! indeed a political novice. Whilst I probably agree with you, we should be fair. Otali is definitely not the only one. I can name a few just on this thread. still you got the audacity to claim your reer Sool? It's obvious who you are, unlike you I don't hide who I am. And I certainly don't lie about it. don't insult reer Sool please! Very intelligent boys! Give yourselves a round of applause .Bravo! So now, one has to be of particular tribes to hail from PL. Interesting , and fine. However, how is that the lot of you attack SL on the notion that you guys claim of PL here? Is PL made up of particular tribes or is indeed a state for all Somalis? If it is the latter, then I do believe all have the right to claim it. I smell hypocrisy boys, and its stench can even be smelt all the way down under . Just making a point boys- I actually think you’re all very alike.

What ever you guys might say for we know Otali is an Aydeed youth and a USC front man and Horn is a Gedo boy Huuraale cheer leader no 1, you cannot explain away the anger felt by the whole clan that lives in Dhoobley by their elders. And you? Morgan and CY ring a bell As for these poor people, they’re been treated as nothing more than pawns in a game. This is how a good friend of mine from Afmadow described it. He states that the average Somali of this area could not care any less about either group, all they want is peace. Having Morgan and his crew rule Kismaayo is no different than the current rulers.

how this is relevant to the discussion? Sarcasm is well noted akhi. What did you mean by or “Maybe your referring to Salma & Safar and there likes?!?â€. I do believe that there is an element of belittlement of these shuyuukh here, like their opinion (assuming that it was theirs that I was noting) is not worthy enough to be considered. if you have adiila from the salaf about quoting and promoting the names and books of the Ahlul Bid'ah, because they simply contained ayats or hadith, then by all means please show me so that i can be guided aright and follow the way of the salaf in that which i am ignorant of! I don’t believe I was promoting. Do you know what promoting is akhi? I can quote Einstein when he states that no intelligent mind can deny the existence of God, but does this also mean that i am promoting the fact that he did not recognise Islam as the chosen religion of Allah? Of course not brother. When i quote an individual it does not mean that i agree with them on all things and surely i am not promoting them in any way, all it means is that i agree with that particular statement. In response to your dalil by ibn Taymiyah, i would like a reference for it, i have many quotes by ibn taymiyah contradicting that statement, please read the following book by him! Al-Fataawa, 11/280-290. http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=47431&dgn=4 So, let’s get back to our point here, since complete disunity is against the teaching of Islam and you claim to be a student of Islam, how can you justify the secession of Somaliland?

Question : When is it prescribed to boycott innovators (followers of bid’ah)? When is it prescribed to hate for the sake of Allaah? Is it prescribed to boycott them in this day and age? Answer : Praise be to Allaah. The believer should analyze the situation in the light of faith and sharee’ah, and ignore his whims and desires. If his shunning and keeping away from the innovator will not result in a greater evil, then it is prescribed, and at the very least it is Sunnah. Similarly, shunning those who openly commit sin is at the very least Sunnah. But if not shunning them will be more effective because one thinks that calling these innovators, guiding them to the Sunnah and teaching them what Allaah has enjoined upon them will be more effective in guiding them, then he should not hasten to shun them, but he should hate them for the sake of Allaah just as he hates the kaafirs and sinners. But his hatred for the kuffaar should be greater, whilst also calling them to Allaah and striving to guide them, acting in accordance with all the shar’i evidence. So he should hate the innovator in accordance with the degree of his innovation, so long as it does not imply kufr, and he should hate the sinner in accordance with the degree of his sin, but he should also love him for the sake of Allaah in accordance with the degree of his Islam and faith. From this we know that shunning depends on the situation. Note that it states shunning for positive purposes, not to completely disunite from the fellow Muslim. Conclusion: the most correct approach is to look at the shar’i interests involved, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) shunned some people and not others, depending on the objectives of Islam. He shunned Ka’b ibn Maalik and his two companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) when they stayed behind from the campaign of Tabook with no excuse. He shunned them for fifty days, until they repented and Allaah accepted their repentance. But he did not shun ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ubayy ibn Salool and a group of those who were accused of hypocrisy, for shar’i reasons. The believer looks at what is in the best interests (of Islam). This does not contradict the idea of hating the kaafirs, innovators and sinners for the sake of Allaah and loving the Muslims for the sake of Allaah. Attention must be paid to what is in the general interest; if shunning is better then they should be shunned, but if the objectives of Islam dictate that ongoing da’wah efforts should be made rather than shunning, then that is what should be done, following the teaching of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). And Allaah is the Source of strength. Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutanawwi’ah li Samaahat al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), 9/423. (www.islam-qa.com) Note that it states shunning for positive purposes, not to completely disunite from the fellow Muslim. Question : can we call people who do shirk and bid'ah muslims? Answer : This question involves two issues, bid’ah (innovation) and shirk (polytheism, association of others with Allaah). A. Bid’ah. This issue may be divided into three topics: 1. Definition of bid’ah 2. Categories of bid’ah 3. Rulings on one who commits bid’ah – does that make him a kaafir or not? 2. Categories of bid’ah Bid’ah may be divided into two categories: (i) bid’ah which constitutes kufr (ii)bid’ah which does not constitute kufr If you ask, what is the definition of bid’ah which constitutes kufr and that which does not constitute kufr? The answer is: Shaykh Haafiz al-Hukami (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “The kind of bid’ah which constitutes kufr is when one denies a matter on which there is scholarly consensus, which widely-known, and which no Muslim can have any excuse for not knowing, such as denying something that is obligatory, making something obligatory that is not obligatory, or making something haraam halaal, or making something halaal haraam; or believing some notion about Allaah, His Messenger and His Book when they are far above that, whether in terms of denial of affirmation – because that means disbelieving in the Qur’aan and in the message with which Allaah sent His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Examples include the bid’ah of the Jahamiyyah, who denied the attributes of Allaah; or the notion that the Qur’aan was created; or the notion that some of the attributes of Allaah were created; or the bid’ah of the Qadariyyah who denied the knowledge and actions of Allaah; or the bid’ah of the Mujassimah who likened Allaah to His creation… etc. The second category, bid’ah which does not constitute kufr, is defined as that which does not imply rejection of the Qur’aan or of anything with which Allaah sent His Messengers. Examples include the Marwaani bid’ahs (which were denounced by the greatest Sahaabah who did not approve of them, although they did not denounce them as kaafirs or refuse to give them bay’ah because of that), such as delaying some of the prayers until the end of the due times, doing the Eid khutbah before the Eid prayer, delivering the khutbah whilst sitting down on Fridays, etc. (Ma’aarij al-Qubool, 2/503-504) 3- The ruling on one who commits bid’ah – is he regarded as a kaafir or not? The answer is that it depends. If the bid’ah constitutes kufr, then the person is one of the following two types: (i)Either it is known that his intention is to destroy the foundations of Islam and make the Muslims doubt it. Such a person is definitely a kaafir; indeed, he is a stranger to Islam and is one of the enemies of the faith. (ii) Or he is deceived and confused; he cannot be denounced as a kaafir until proof is established against him, fair and square. If the bid’ah does not constitute kufr, then he should not be denounced as a kaafir. Rather, he remains a Muslim, but he has done a gravely evil action. If you ask, how should we deal with those who commit bid’ah? The answer is: Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “In both cases, we have to call these people – who claim to be Muslim but who commit acts of bid’ah which may constitute kufr or may be less than that – to the truth, by explaining the truth without being hostile or condemning what they are doing. But once we know that they are too arrogant to accept the truth – for Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning), ‘And insult not those whom they (disbelievers) worship besides Allaah, lest they insult Allaah wrongfully without knowledge.’ [al-An’aam 6:108] – if we find out that they are stubborn and arrogant, then we should point out their falsehood, because then pointing out their falsehood becomes an obligation upon us. With regard to boycotting them, that depends upon the bid’ah. If it is a bid’ah which constitutes kufr, then it is obligatory to boycott the person who does it. If it is of a lesser degree than that, then it is essential to examine the situation further. If something may be achieved by boycotting the person, then we do it; if no purpose will be served by it, or if it will only make him more disobedient and arrogant, then we should avoid doing that, because whatever serves no purpose, it is better not to do it. And also in principle it is haraam to boycott a believer, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘It is not permissible for a man to forsake [not speak to] his brother for more than three [days].’†(Adapted from Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, vol. 2, p. 293)

The categories of al-walaa’ wal-baraa’ (allegiance and association, enmity and dissociation): 1.The people we should love purely with no intention of been an enemy to them: These are the believers: the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses, and the righteous. Also included are the mothers of the believers, the saxaaba, following two generations and the salaf-us-saalix. 2.The people we should hate and take as enemies with no love and support and respect for them: These are the kuffaar, the pagans, the hypocrites and apostates. 3.The people who we should love for their particular (good) deeds and hate for their other (evil) deeds. This category of people we love and hate at the same time. These are Muslims who make sins and do not practice Islaam well. We love them for the Imaan they have but hate them for the sins which are less than disbelief, kufr and shirk. Because we love them, we should find a way to advise and warn them against the evil which they do. We can punish them for the evil that they do that affects the society, so that the people of the society are protected from this evil. Also, we punish them in order to give them a chance for repentance. But we should not purely hate them or reject them like the khawaarij, who consider people pagans if they commit an act of disobedience to Allah, major or minor. Nor should we completely love them and treat them as sincere believers as the Murji’ah do. Rather we should take a position towards this category of people in between these two (i.e. khawaarij and murji’ah). This is the way of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaaca. http://www.calgaryislam.com/imembers/Sections+index-req-printpage-artid-105.html Pages 27-32 Therefore, the three categories of al-walaa’ wal-baraa’ are: -Those we have complete unity/allegiance with and love for. -Those who we hate completely and have no unity/dissociation with. -Those who we love for some aspects, hate for others, however because they are still Muslims we do not reject them and hence still have unity with. So my brother, I ask you, under which category do Muslims who commit an act of innovation fall under? I’m pretty sure we would both agree that it is the last of the three. You seem to be misunderstanding that there is a difference between disunity (complete, as I stated) and shunning a Muslim. As stated, boycotting is for the purpose of the greater good and can take forms such as not speaking to their person; however they still pray with the Muslims and still remain with the jamaaca (and hence are united with the Muslims). Even the saxaaba used this; an example which comes to mind is the incident between Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Al-khattab and his son Bilaal. Bilaal had forbid the female relatives of his from going to the masjid. Abdullah his father commanded him to not prohibit them from entering the house of Allah and let them go for he heard the messenger of Allah s.c.w instruct the believing men to not forbid the female believers from attending the masjid. Bilaal, then replied that he would still forbid them and from that day onwards his father never spoke to him again. Does this mean that the Muslims completely disunited with Bilaal, no of course not! That’s just ridiculous. Anyway, I do believe that this point also explains that it is correct for me to quote from Hassan al-Banna for it is a point which he was very correct on. Simply because I quote that, it does not mean that I agree with every point he makes. When the point is complicated, then it is for the scholars to distinguish, however what was so complicated about that quote. I do believe that many Muslims would be able to comprehend the truth behind such a statement. It isn’t brain surgery akhi. This is the same for anyone else aside from the messenger of Allah s.c.w.

Khayr, in a bid to be macho brother, you are trampling on the teachings of Islam. There is no harm in a man helping his wife with the house duties (it takes a real man to do so), for two reasons: 1.Rasulallah used to help his wives with the household duties, and 2.It is not compulsory for a Muslim wife to do household choirs. Hadiths: "The best of you are they who behave best to their wives." "The best among you is the best in his treatment of his household, and I am the best of you in my treatment of my household."

these suckers tried to set up a Taliban government in my beloved Puntland Which would mean that all your hopes, dreams and aspirations for a superior tribe in Somalia would be shattered right? We can't have that, now can we? FYI, al-itixaad has many ‘puntlanders’ amongst their ranks. So read and weep my brother, read and weep:p

I don't read gendonet shit, it makes people dumber! And i suppose allpuntland makes people smarter right? May ALL Somalis settle peacefully in Kismayo and the greater Jubba Valley And all across the Horn, aamiin.

SmithNwestern, Whilst most of what you say is true, that indeed everyone will not see eye to eye on all issues, my problem with most who support CY is the hypocrisy. So long as they don’t play the “somalinimo†card, then I’m fine with it . I just wish that they would come out and admit (not that it isn’t already obvious) that for them when they speak of the best interest of their people, they are referring to their clansmen and not all Somalis. For example, let us analyze Mr. WDs posts shall we . On the one hand, he claims that Al-itixaad are terrorists (which is fine by me, each to their own, gaalo rhetoric will not get you very far though), yet with the other hand he puts on his nationalistic mask to serve his interest (when he attacks the Somaliland government with respect to the article on the young girl). All of a sudden his ‘holier than thou’ attitude emerges :rolleyes: , and no second guessing why. Yep you guessed it, she is a puntlander and this is a great shot to take on his “enemiesâ€. He’d probably do the same thing if the girl was from elsewhere (with less force of course) just to take the cheap shot. Does he even realize that Islamically speaking, what type of man CY is? Does he actually think that CY if given the choice would approve of Somali women adorning the proper Islamic dress? This is the man (CY) after all who cried out to the Americans about his own brothers been terrorists. So you see the double standards. Mr. WD is easy to pick on really, he isn’t very diplomatic, but many here are older than he is and hence wiser, therefore they can mask their true feelings. But believe you me, any intelligent person can see past the façade. All in all, my point is, I agree, all have a right to their opinions, but many here are nothing more than hypocrites (not in religion, so no one jump down my throat). But to you Mr. Smith I ask, how can it be that you support CY and have Rantisi (Rahimuallah) as your avatar. Contradictory is it not? I wonder what Rantisi would of have said regarding the likes of our very own CY. are they all from Cabdulahi's subclan? Probably not, but I’d say the majority. Just look at the threads where the discussions have taken place. That is a testimony. Almost every self-declared puntlander (with the exception of Bari_nomad) is in support of CY. So how many self-declared puntlanders are there? Puntland has so many God-fearing Muslims, I can’t understand why on this earth you would all be behind the one who is one of the worst :confused: . I have no beef with any Somalis (generally) brother, but like I said to Smith why can’t you just admit to what you truly believe instead of trying so hard to be diplomatic. C'mon now, yell it on the roof tops, free yourself! Caato, Caddow and Caydiid are my maternal uncles too but still I rather see them dead than alive. Except for Caddow. Listen brother, CY is no better than Caydiid and Caato, and hands down Caddow is way above him. Maternal uncles ay? Then why the animosity to the tribe which is in the majority in Xamar ? Don’t make me dig up your remarks of late , just answer the question.

It seems like Al-itixaad are the only good thing so far. I’m not saying that they have no faults, but as compared to all others, there almost angelic like. Even better is, they are not based on tribal loyalties- which is why they probably make WDs skin crawl . And oh yeah, they make the warlords, Ethiopia & the US cry! I like them Smith

Good to see. Now in future, try to be fair and please do us all a favour and stop this CY ranting. You know that this guy is not good for the country, yet you support him. I can't fathom any other reason than tribal loyalty. So please dont jump the gun kid I promise i won't anymore abti

Generally, any God-fearing Muslim. Specifically to Somali politics, all who work towards the betterment of our people and homeland (endangered species).

Adow just as close as A/Yusuf so unlike you I will be happy as long as that Blue flag is flying and Somalia is back Yeah right :rolleyes: . Who are you kidding brother, do you realise how transparent your opinions are ? If Caddow or anyone not of CY clan wins, your heart will probably cease to beat. You claiming to be happy is actually laughable . You claim to be close to Caddow (lineage wise) yet you clearly do not like people of his tribe. This is one thing I’ve never understood about Somalis (not just you) :confused: . I can never ever imagine disrespecting any qabiil, even more so when my own relatives are of that tribe. If you don't care for other Somalis, at least have respect for your family members.