BiLaaL

Nomads
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    713

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BiLaaL

  2. Posted

     

    General Debate of the 64th Session (2009)

    Somalia

    H.E. Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, President

     

    Statement summary

     

    SHEIKH SHARIF SHEIKH AHMED, President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia, thanked all those who had promoted peace and stability in his country, as well as those that had delivered aid to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity. He expressed condolences to those who had lost their lives in defence of those principles.

     

    Describing priorities of his Government, which came to power following the Djibouti Peace Process, he said it would be imperative to improve the security situation, promote reconciliation and deliver humanitarian assistance to displaced persons. Unfortunately, rebels were working to bring down his Government and were conducting a “violent insurrection” against Transitional Authorities, which only compounded the negative effects of 18 years of violence and unemployment.

     

    Foreign elements had joined the rebellion, he explained, some of whom had become leaders. Reminding the Assembly that his Government had overcome an attempted coup d’état, that success had been due, in part, to efforts of the Government and people, and assistance from the global community, especially the African Union. For its part, Somalia was working to create new naval forces, including a new Coast Guard, and to tackle piracy, which threatened shipping in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. However, there was still a long road to travel to that end.

     

    In that context, he said there was a new type of rebellion under way in Somalia, one conducted by foreign extremists and which was against Islam, peace and security. The extremists were “spoilers” who had taken advantage of the anarchy that had prevailed over the past 18 years. The situation should not be taken lightly and the global community must take “prompt and decisive steps” to ensure that Somalis were not held hostage by those working against their destiny. The consequences of inaction risked creating trouble in neighbouring countries. However, he stressed that terrorism was not confined to Somalia and should be tackled at the international level.

     

    Similarly, he said that if Somalia’s security situation remained unchanged, piracy would continue. While that scourge had slowed, thanks to international efforts, among others, more attention was needed. In addition, activities like illegal fishing and pillaging of national wealth not only violated Somali sovereignty but damaged the environment.

     

    Nonetheless, he was determined to continue political dialogue among all stakeholders, including the armed rebels, and “sit at the table to negotiate” an end to conflict. Indeed, he would spare no effort in finding a lasting solution to ensure the security of all Somali people and territory. Though the rebels did not believe in dialogue, he was ready to lay the basis for a transparent system, notably by establishing institutions that reflected the will and cultural values of Somalis.

     

    Such a system would be based on the protection of human rights and rule of law, and would seek to promote the genuine Islamic principles of individual freedom, respect for equity and equal rights, irrespective of gender or ethnicity.

     

    In addition, he said the Government would work to establish an economic system, based on market economics, which would encourage foreign direct investment and individual ownership. Institutions to combat corruption would also be created.

     

    “At this difficult moment in history, we need assistance and support,” he said, particularly in terms of security and humanitarian aid. It would be difficult to protect human rights without achieving security. Outlining Somalia’s needs, he said measures should be taken to promote police services, and judicial and administrative services. African Union troops should be increased. The refugee situation continued to deteriorate, and more than 3.8 million people needed humanitarian assistance.

     

    Regarding the resolution adopted by the Security Council on the arms embargo, he urged that body to reconsider that matter and help Somalia build its security forces, without which, efforts to reconstruct the country would be impossible. He also asked donors attending the Brussels Donor Conference to make further funding available.

     

    In closing, he expressed his firm belief that security advances would likely help counter the economic and social impacts of the “offensive” that had occurred for the last 18 years. In that context, he called for relaunching the enterprising spirit of Somalis. With remittances from those living abroad, tangible progress had been seen and he believed the economy could progress “reasonably” in coming years. As the economic crisis had placed an additional burden on Somalis, there was a need for joint and urgent action for Somalia. With international support, he was confident that Somalia could make genuine, concrete progress.

    Link to video, full speech in Arabic

  3. Posted

    ^ I'm not implying that Al-Shabab were weak prior to the return of Aweys. And yes they did (and still do) command strong outside support. Despite these strengths, they weren't travelling well - in the Somali context - in the months leading to Aweys' return from Asmara.

     

    Back then, many of Al-Shabab's Somali fighters were starting to question the usefulness of the movement, since Ethiopia had withdrawn. Likewise, the support Al-Shabab enjoyed from the public was also starting to deteriorate. Recall, these events coincided with the euphoria surrounding Sh. Sharif's election. Simply put, the tide of public opinion was increasingly veering away from the movement.

     

    All this changed with the return of Sh. Aweys. Suddenly, Al-Shabab gained a figure who could shield them against a strong public backlash. Aweys' intransigence gave them renewed confidence.

     

    This backdrop cannot be tossed aside. I still maintain that Al-Shabab are very much indebted to Sh. Aweys. I don't deny the valid points you raise. Instead, the points you raise fail to take proper stock of the wider context surrounding these events.

     

    Anyway, I wish they could both re-assess their strategies and do what is best for our country.

  4. Posted

    Originally posted by Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiy aar:
    Gaashaanle Aweys kistoo Soomaalinimo inay ku jirto waala ogyahay and I don't think they will see eye to eye waxa ka socdo Soomaaliya. Convenience's sake baa isku keentay with a declared common political enemy than being effective political ally.

    MMA, waa saas. Aweys waxba kama badali karo Al-Shabab. Aweys held romantic notions of uniting the resistance under the one umbrella when he came back from Asmara. He thought the likes of Rooboow and Godane would respect his impressive accolades and look to him as an elder of the resistance. Instead, they've treated him with contempt.

     

    Their memories are short. It was Aweys' return which galvanized their movement and gave it clout. Si xun beey odayga oola dhaqmeen.

  5. Posted

    I wonder what Sheikh Aweys will make of this development. Aweys has always been adamant that this Jihad is about liberating Somalia and safeguarding it from foreign domination. His statements regarding this issue were categorical and unambiguous.

     

    Al-Shabab have turned this notion on its head.

     

    Will Sheikh Aweys reproach Al-Shabab in this instance or simply go along with them, as he has done on other matters - at the cost of undermining his earlier pronouncements?

     

    Unlike other disagreements between Aweys and Al-Shabab - this one will be hard to ignore or justify. Al-Shabab have really put Aweys in a tight spot this time around. Aweys is likely to lament this development but do so quietly.

  7. Posted

    Not sure whether you bothered reading the article. It has some harsh words for your hero Yeey. It is amazing how someone can continue to admire an individual so condemned by all.

     

    Ahmed's chief of staff, Abdulkareem Jama, now estimates that the fledgling government would need $300 million in foreign aid per year and 50,000 more trained troops to turn the tide against the groups now fighting it. Given the fatal ineptitude and corruption of Ahmed's predecessors (
    the previous president, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, kept a money printing press in the presidential palace, according to the U.N.
    ), that sort of aid has hardly been forthcoming.

  8. Posted

    I get the gist of your argument. Your views may be controversial but they aren't devoid of reason. The plagues you describe are real - both for Somalis back home and in the West. Your reasoning as to why these plagues exist is where your confusion begins.

     

    For one, Somalis have a distinct culture. A culture which isn't subservient to any other.

     

    As for personal and economic development - the Somalis are well known, both in the East and West, for their entrepreneurial skills.

     

    It is not our culture which has let us down. It is our lack of practice of it which has reduced us to our current state.

     

    It is true that an increasing number of Somalis (both men and women) are tending to outwardly display certain Islamic practices. This isn't where the problem lies. Nor does practicing Islam equate to worship of Arab culture. Islam isn't culture. If one chooses to practice Islam - they aren't necessarily being Arab.

     

    Dare I say, Somali culture, in its purest form, is one of most sophisticated and civilized (for lack of a better term) cultures the world has ever known (far more sophisticated than Arab culture).

  10. Posted

    ^^ NYT's Gettleman with a rather glowing appraisal of Sheikh Sharif. The guy has been under tremendous pressure of late. A little something for his supporters to gloat over. Below is the accompanying interview.

     

    A Talk With Somalia’s President

     

    Following are edited excerpts from a transcript of Jeffrey Gettleman’s recent interview with Somalia’s president, Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed, at Villa Somalia, the presidential palace, in Mogadishu, the nation’s capital. The answers were translated from the Somali by a Somali interpreter

     

    Q. Let’s start with your enemy. You know these guys. You used to work with them. Like Hassan Dahir Aweys and Abu Monsoor [two well-known insurgent leaders]. Why can’t you make peace with them? Why is it so difficult to bring them on board?

     

    A. It’s true. It’s an important question. It would be my preference that since we worked together in the I.C.U. [islamic Courts Union] we would work together now. People go through stages and sometimes they take the wrong turn. When they didn’t join the peace process, that took them far out and now they can’t get out of that corner.

     

    Q. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said it was crucial to reach out and bring in these opposition groups. What are you doing about that?

     

    A. We have been busy with that. An important part of Hizbul Islam has already joined the government and some from the Shabab.

     

    Q. How do you try to persuade them?

     

    A. There are people in government that reach out to these people. And other Somalis. The government’s door is open and there is always an option to review their position.

     

    Q. When was the last time you spoke to Aweys?

     

    A. I don’t remember. It’s been a while.

     

    Q. Can you call him?

     

    A. I don’t have a problem with it in principle. But I don’t believe the time is right yet and that a telephone call would make a difference.

     

    Q. What’s your vision to bring peace? What are some specifics?

     

    A. The government wished to bring in as many groups as possible through the reconciliation. The government is working to earn the trust of the people. Helping us are the ways of Hizbul Islam and Shabab. Their path is a dark one.

     

    Q. What has the government done since you became president in February?

     

    A. This government faced obstacles that were unparalleled. We had to deal with international terrorist groups creating havoc elsewhere. Their plan was to topple the government soon after it arrived. The government proved it could last. The vision of the government is becoming clear to the Somali people and the international community. We are working on the security front a lot. We are doing reconstruction. We are doing humanitarian work. We have done things on good governance. You must remember that to accomplish a lot needs resources.

     

    Q. If you don’t get the help you need, what’s going to happen?

     

    A. We won’t be able to accomplish a lot. Not much will work. The government is dealing with a lot. We’re trying to set up administrations. We’re trying to reclaim parts of the country currently controlled by extremists. We are working on reconciliation. We have a lot of pressure from the fighting.

     

    Q. How urgent is it? Will this government not survive unless it gets more support?

     

    A. The problem with international aid is that it often comes late and is limited. There’s no doubt that an established government that doesn’t get the right resources will not stand. Why not Somalia?

     

    Q. Why has Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jama [a moderate Islamist group, led by Sufi Muslim clerics] been able to defeat the Shabab outside Mogadishu and you haven’t?

     

    A. There is a difference between the cities and the regions. Only the I.C.U. was able to control Mogadishu. Of course, we need to do more. But the opposition is busy attacking the government in Mogadishu, which makes it easier to liberate the regions.

     

    Q. You are not a military man, which many people say is a good thing. How much time do you spend on military matters?

     

    A. We spend a great deal of time on security-related issues.

     

    Q. What percentage of your time?

     

    A. About 75 percent.

     

    Q. Have you gotten better at military strategy?

     

    A. [laughing] I can’t say that.

     

    Q. Are you worried about Ahlu Sunnah getting too powerful?

     

    A. The Sufi sects don’t usually go to war. They don’t usually shed blood. The elders of the Sufis in the past used to manage them through spiritual connections. My fear is that if they continue on the path of fighting, they will shift from these tenets and principles.

     

    Q. How close are you to them? I went to Dusa Marreb [a town in central Somalia] and it didn’t seem like Ahlu Sunnah and the government were working together at all.

     

    A. Most Somalis subscribe to the Sufi sect. Ahlu Sunnah particularly suffered at the hand of Al Shabab. They have the right to defend themselves. Going beyond that defense would be questionable or illegal.

     

    Q. So what does that mean? They are going beyond self-defense. They are seizing new territory.

     

    A. We see that as part of self-defense.

     

    Q. Let’s talk about Shariah [islamic law]. The Parliament has agreed to use Shariah as a guiding principle. But what form?

     

    A. Shariah itself doesn’t change. What changes are the people who are interpreting it. The emphasis here has to be what is the best interest of the people, for this life and the life hereafter.

     

    Q. But can you please provide some specifics. Will girls go to school with boys and be educated equally?

     

    A. That’s one area where we don’t have a problem in Somalia. In Somali tradition, we had elderly women who were in charge of educating people.

     

    Q. What about the veil? Will a Somali woman be allowed to walk around in public without a veil?

     

    A. The interpretation of the veil is an item itself. In general, Islam ordains that a woman covers her body. The purpose of that is to prevent temptation and other problems.

     

    Q. But is this something you are prepared to make a law? In Turkey, they don’t make women wear veils. In Saudi Arabia, they do. Where will Somalia come in on the veil issue?

     

    A. The purpose is to get people to the point where they do this from conviction, say up to 80 percent of the people. The government would help the rest. The tradition of our prophet, peace be upon him, is not to give instructions or orders without first preparing the people.

     

    Q. But today in Somalia what does that mean? Will the law say that women have to wear a hijab [a head scarf] or not?

     

    A. If you look at the situation in Somalia today, this becomes a moot point. Hijab is the norm. And considering the difficulties we have in front of us, this does not become a major issue. We’re working on how to save people’s lives, which is much more of a priority than this subject.

     

    Q. What do you think about Al Qaeda and its influence here?

     

    A. We believe that there is a strong relationship between Al Qaeda and some people here, the people leading the fighting. The relationship with Al Qaeda is well known. Al Qaeda has said it. And the local fighters have said it. If you go to places the opposition controls, you will see foreign fighters. Their symbols and flags are also abundantly available.

     

    Q. When you were part of the I.C.U. in 2006, did you see this creeping in?

     

    A. There were many well-wishers in Somalia at the time of the Islamic Courts. There was no way to tell that this was the beginnings of Al Qaeda or anything like that, at the time.

     

    Q. But even back then, the U.S. government was asking your help to hand over Fazul Abdullah Mohamed and other suspected Al Qaeda terrorists. You didn’t and that was one reason the U.S. backed Ethiopia to invade. Do you look back and see anything you could have done to stop that?

     

    A. No, there was nothing we could have done to stop that.

     

    Q. Why?

     

    A. There was limited information about these people. We needed time.

     

    Q. What’s been your biggest mistake as president?

     

    A. We just started. We haven’t had any time to reflect.

     

    Q. Looking back at 2006, is there anything you would have done differently?

     

    A. I’m sure there was. But one would also have to consider the situation at the time and what was the right thing to do. Whether that could have been accomplished, that’s another question.

     

    Q. Some people think there should be more emphasis in Somalia on a bottom-up form of government that prioritizes local government. I’ve been to the regions recently and I haven’t seen any evidence of the central government. What do you think about this approach?

     

    A. Part of the government’s plan is to build administrations in the regions.

     

    Q. But what does that mean? Schools, hospitals, military help — where are you going to begin?

     

    A. To build a full administration.

     

    Q. Where are you going to start?

     

    A. We don’t want to expand.

     

    Q. What’s it like to go from being on the outside of power the last couple years to now being president? You don’t even have to open up your car door any more; someone else does it for you.

     

    A. I think whether I open the door or someone else does is of little consequence. What is important is that we took an oath to work for the nation.

     

    Q. What’s it like to be now working with the Americans, who helped the Ethiopians get rid of you?

     

    A. I would put the question differently. What we were fighting for was a peaceful Somalia that can deal with the rest of the world.

     

    Q. How old are you?

     

    A. I forgot my age since I was involved in all these wars.

     

    Q. Really?

     

    A. I was born in 1966.

     

    Q. How many children do you have?

     

    A. We have an expression in southern Somalia that when people ask you how many children you have, we say, “We’re good.” I hope that may be enough.

     

    Q. Are you 42 or 43 years old? What month were you born?

     

    A. What’s in this question? Why is it so important?

     

    Q. In the newspaper I work for, we don’t put “1966” as an age. We put the exact age, in years.

     

    A. O.K. I was born in January 1966.

    A Talk With Somalia’s President

  11. Posted

    MMA, I agree. Abnormal births are increasing. As with every other tragedy relating to Somali – no one has bothered to investigate it. Sadly, there may be thousands of other children who’ve inherited similar deformities but haven’t developed the outward signs of it just yet.

     

    These things will never get investigated by outside bodies.

     

    It will be up to concerned Somalis with relevant expertise to take on this mammoth task. When this will materialise – I don’t know. What is certain is that we do not have much time left.

     

    Expired, unfit medicine is yet another evil plaguing havoc in our country. Don’t start me on those profiting from it. Waxeey shaqeestaan ayagaa heli doono.

  12. Posted

    One can only assume that this sort of practice happens regularly along our coast :mad: We are so consumed by events on land that we have forgotten about the irreparable damage being inflicted on our sea.

     

    Mafia 'sank nuclear waste ship'

     

    By Duncan Kennedy

    BBC News, Italy

     

    A shipwreck that could contain nuclear waste is being investigated by authorities in Italy amid claims that it was deliberately sunk by the mafia.

     

    An informant told a judge the ship was one of a number he blew up as part of an illegal operation to bypass rules on the disposal of toxic waste.

     

    The sunken vessel has been found 30km (18 miles) off the south-west of Italy.

     

    Murky pictures taken by a robot camera show the vessel intact and alongside it are a number of yellow barrels.

     

    Labels on them say the contents are toxic.

     

    The informant said the mafia had muscled in on the lucrative business of nuclear waste disposal.

     

    But he said that instead of getting rid of the material safely, he blew up the vessel out at sea, off the Calabrian coast.

     

    He also says he was responsible for sinking two other ships containing toxic waste.

     

    Experts are now examining samples taken from the wreck.

     

    Other vessels

     

    An official said that if the samples proved to be radioactive then a search for up to 30 other sunken vessels believed scuttled by the mafia would begin immediately.

     

    For years there have been rumours that the mafia was sinking ships with nuclear and other waste on board, as part of a money-making racket.

     

    The environmental campaign group Greenpeace and others have compiled lists over the past few decades of ships that have disappeared off the coast of Italy and Greece.

     

    Processing waste is highly specialised and is supposed to be an industry where security is the top priority.

     

    If tests show that there is nuclear material on the seabed it will prove that the mafia has moved into its dirtiest business yet.

    source

  14. Posted

    MMA, you’re quite correct.

     

    What struck me about this brother is that his wishes do not relate to fleeting earthly matters. He is not concerned about his quality of life.

     

    He feels remorse for no longer being able to make sujuud to Allah or turn a page of the Qur’an like the rest of us can. He feels that these are two things he neglected while he still had good health.

     

    His feels remorse for missing his salat while he still had good health.

     

    Normally, disabled persons would wish for improvement in his/her health. The response from this brother is really profound. May Allah grant him Jannah.

  15. Posted

    Apologies for the late reply. It is clear that we aren't advancing much on atheism and its nuances. I have addressed much of what you've written in your latest reply in my previous posts. I won't spend any more time on it.

     

    I will, however, briefly address your oft-repeated highlighting of the word 'evidence'. If you're such a big fan of science, then know that you step outside of the sphere of science - the moment you start to draw metaphysical conclusions.

     

    Real science is limited to the observance and study of the natural world - the existence or non-existence of God fall outside the limits of science. If you wish to draw metaphysical conclusions about vague scientific theories, then you're not being scientific. Rather, your argument would resemble and be no different to that of creationism.

     

    You say that "no religion has ever provided proof of the existance of God". In your view - yes. Equally, be honest enough to admit that evolutionary science has also failed to prove the non-existence of God.

     

    Debunking the design argument and thereby claiming to have disproved Gods existence are two very different things.

     

    As for verses of the Quran concerning the big bang theory, refer to the following links.

     

    The Big Bang

     

    The Quran on the Expanding Universe and the Big Bang Theory

  17. Posted

    No Simple Narrative in Somalia Drama

     

    By Michael Weinstein

     

    As the coalition of Western donor powers, the United Nations, the African Union, and regional African states, such as Kenya, Djibouti, Uganda and Burundi, see it, the narrative of Somalia’s contemporary political history pits the country’s new and expanded Transitional Federal Government (TFG) against an armed “insurgency” composed of “spoilers,” “extremists,” or “terrorists” operating under the banner of “radical Islamism.”

     

    Just a cursory reading of that narrative shows that it has nothing to do with an objective political analysis of the most complex and complicated conflict in the world today, but is a piece of propaganda—a good guys vs. bad guys drama straight out of a Hollywood B movie—that would awaken contemptuous amusement were it not for the fact that the parties promoting it appear to believe it themselves and to formulate their policies and strategies in its terms.

     

    It is to be expected, of course, that the coalition’s rhetoric would be tendentious. Its members were the ones who contrived the new TFG or found it in their interests to support it, and, as a consequence, want to believe that it will be able eventually to succeed in governing Somalia, which has been effectively stateless since 1991, and to convince others to share that belief.

     

    Nonetheless, the narrative is a sheer expression of baseless hope that is meant to pass for a plausible projection.

     

    As opposed to the coalition’s simplistic narrative, the political situation in Somalia is so complex, convoluted and fragmented that it is impossible to draw any grounded conclusions about how it will mutate. The myriad interests constituting the country’s power configuration include the divided factions within the TFG, the factions of the armed Islamist opposition, Islamists outside the armed opposition with their own militias, clan families, sub-clans, regional power centers, micro-political interests at the local level, legitimate and criminal business interests, the semi-autonomous sub-state of Puntland, the self-declared independent Republic of Somaliland, Ethiopia pursuing its own agenda apart from the coalition, and Eritrea seeking to blunt Ethiopia and the coalition. On the ground, some of these factions and interests form alliances with each other and then fall out, interests overlap and cross-cut, and uncertainty and distrust proliferate. Both the weak TFG and the coalition of “stakeholders” are not driving the situation, but are enmeshed in it like all the others.

     

    Attempting to describe accurately the power vectors operative in Somalia, simply at the present moment, would involve writing a long book that would be outdated by events before it came into print. Such a study might discern some underlying patterns, but there is no one who will undertake the thankless task, so one is left with the option of criticizing ideological narratives.

     

    The back story of the new TFG begins with a policy shift in late 2007 by the Western donor powers, which bankroll the transitional institutions, to move from support of the TFG to pressuring it to accept a power-sharing agreement with the conciliatory faction of the opposition Alliance for the Re-Liberation of Somalia (ARS-D), which is dominated by Islamists and led by the new TFG’s president, Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmad. The shift was made because it had become apparent to the donor powers that an Ethiopian military occupation of Somalia, which was mounted in late 2006 in order to suppress an Islamic revolution in the country, had failed abysmally, as remnants of the Islamic courts regrouped, initiated an insurgency, and became powerful enough to take and hold substantial swathes of territory.

     

    With the primary interest of the donor powers being to block the emergence of Islamist control over south and central Somalia that might eventuate in safe havens for internationalist Islamic revolutionaries, their policy shift represented a concession to the realities on the ground. Whereas they had earlier stood fast against negotiations with the Islamist opposition, they now sought to “isolate” the “extremists” within it by co-opting the conciliatory faction and forcing it on the clan-based TFG.

     

    Through a series of negotiations in Djibouti in the second half of 2008, the donor powers—spearheaded by the U.N.’s special representative to Somalia, Ahmedou Ould Abdallah—engineered an agreement in which the transitional parliament was doubled in size to 550 members, allowing Sheikh Sharif to bring in 200 of his loyalists as a bloc, insuring that he would be elected to the presidency by the new parliament. As part of the deal, Sheikh Sharif was given an extension of the TFG’s term for two years from August 2009 and had to concede to choosing the members of his bloc according to the TFG’s clan representation system, and to naming a secularist prime minister, Omar Abdisrashid Sharmarke. Sheikh Sharif quickly made sure that Sharmarke named two ARS-D loyalists to run the Internal Security and Interior ministries, and a teacher without military experience to preside over the Defense ministry.

     

    By jamming a predominantly Islamist faction into a clan-based government, the donor-led coalition appears to believe that it has created a “national unity government,” where in fact it has concocted an improbable hybrid that is engineered to fail.

     

    There is no love lost between Sheikh Sharif and the donor powers; he represents their fall-back position and he knows that, so he will strive to continue his power play and try to take control of the TFG’s institutions and build a machine. Yet he has very little leeway—his Islamist base has organized and is pressuring him to alter the TFG’s constitution and institute Shari’a law throughout Somalia, and the coalition is exerting counter-pressure on him to govern “inclusively” and maintain the secular constitution. Meanwhile, the armed Islamist opposition groups, which control most of the southern regions of Somalia and are active in its central regions and its capital Mogadishu, have declared that they do not recognize the new TFG and will continue to oppose it militarily. In their counter-narrative to the coalition’s story, Sheikh Sharif has been bought off by a Washington-led conspiracy against Islam and has become its cat’s paw—another B-movie script with no more and no less plausibility.

     

    Add to the tensions within the TFG, the conflicting pressures on Sheikh Sharif from his base and his “partners,” and the armed opposition’s confrontational stance, Ethiopia’s support for and training of warlord militias from Somalia that are dedicated to taking back their regions from the Islamists and are not loyal to the new TFG, and one begins to understand the complexity of the present power configuration, which will not succumb to any simple narrative.

     

    The account above only scratches the surface, and Sheikh Sharif realizes that. In a revealing interview with IRIN, he said that the TFG is “broke and broken,” and that it was too early to tell whether the donor powers would give him sufficient support to achieve security and offer at least some hope for improvement in the lives of Somalis. The Wall Street Journal quoted an anonymous diplomatic source who said that although the donors would support the new TFG, “we are not going to suddenly open a spigot that wasn’t previously opened.”

     

    Somalia is not living in a cowboy movie in which the peace-loving people, led by their valiant sheriffs, face off against the “spoilers,” but encounters a looming and many-sided civil conflict that might descend into civil war. One could waste one’s breath hectoring the donor powers over their lack of resolve, their hypocrisy, and their obsessions with piracy and terrorism that afflict them with tunnel vision and spin them into political fantasy, but they are simply pursuing their own perceived interests at the expense of other actors.

     

    The point is that whether or not they know that, the other actors do and will devise their strategies accordingly.

     

    ____________________ ____________________ ____________________

    Michael Weinstein is a professor with Purdue University’s Department of Political Science.

    Source

  21. Posted

    Originally posted by *Ibtisam: I never agree with Billa, but on this I do. Beware of Somalia09 :eek: [/QB]

    Ibtisam, I think this is a case of mistaken identity. I don't remember disagreeing with you on anything (or even discussing). And who is 'Billa'? Clearly it doesn't match my SOL name. Help me out here :confused:

  23. Posted

    Originally posted by Somali09: You have presumed (from research & vast analytical powers) that I cannot be somali on the basis that I no longer choose to be muslim!

    You obviously haven't read my reply carefully. I based my assertion on the fact that you used an incorrect term (Somalian) to describe your nationality. I pointed out that a true Somali wouldn't have made such an obvious mistake. I didn't mention anything about being a Muslim. My initial reply is a couple of posts above - read it again.

     

    I am afraid to say that its actually YOUR understanding of atheism that is flawed. Atheism and Humanism go hand in hand better than Humanism with any religious system

    Atheism and Humanism do NOT go hand in hand. Being an atheist does not automatically make one a humanist - which is exactly what you implied in your earlier reply. What you're doing is concentrating on the broader generalization. There are subtle differences between the two. The fact that you're unable to grasp these subtle differences once again proves that your understanding of the concept is pretty weak - exactly what i set out to prove.

     

    Atheism is NOT a faith because it is an evidence based system which rejects any notion of god because of the LACK"evidence"

    .

     

    You say 'atheism is an evidence based system' yet it also rejects the need for evidentiary prove? Are you serious? What a confused statement! Your sweeping, thoughtless statements aren't doing you any favors.

     

    This is getting rather boring. This exchange isn't going to advance much. You're not prepared to delve deep into the topic at hand. You keep reverting to broad generalizations. Atheists out there would be ashamed of you, if indeed you're an atheist.

     

    Any views beyond this and you get the same responses: you lived in the west too long, immoral, lost your way, shaitan has deceived you, you are weak, pray for you...etc....etc. Please!

    Respondents to this thread have all been frank with you. It is you who is finding it hard to engage in any meaningful dialogue.

     

    PS - I stand by my initial findings in relation to your identity and purpose.

  24. Posted

    SOLers, i suspect something more sinister in this thread. In this day and age, we cannot afford to be naive - like it or not SOL has become a nesting place for all kinds of folks trying to gather information about our community. Sometimes for noble purposes but other times for ill.

     

    And NO, i'm not being delusional. Although I normally post in the Politics section, i'm a logical fellow. Norf can attest to this (you'll back me up won't you Norf smile.gif )

     

    Be patient with me for a moment and i'll explain why we need to be more sceptical about this fellow. I'll address some of the points in his/her latest reply.

     

    Somali09, your confused reply alludes to a number of points.

     

    1. That you're not Somali.

    2. That your understanding of what atheism actually stands for is flawed (since your understanding of the concept is flawed, would it be fair to assume that you're simply pretending to be one?).

    3. The above two points lead me to conclude that you have an ulterior motive - possibly related to gauging the number of members on this forum with 'fundamentalist' Islamic views. Your topic selection and the fact you paid particular attention to the only reply pertaining to hudud, goes some way in revealing what your initial intentions may have been.

     

    Originally posted by Somali09:

    YES i am
    somalian

    The correct term is 'Somali'. It is implausible that a true Somali would get this wrong.

     

    It is just a belief in the non-existance of any super natural force. To me, also humanism: ""Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives".

    Atheism and Humanism aren't comparable. They stand and argue for two distinct causes. Your borrowed definition of Humanism is correct. Where you err is in trying to link the two. Simply put, the humanist does not place much value on the existence or otherwise of God - it is simply irrelevant. Whereas non belief in God is central to Atheism.

     

    The assertion put forth in the second point which i raised above gains traction given your inability to properly explain the concept.

     

    I will reiterate, I have no problem with religion - you believe in what you want and I will do the same. Its a matter of FAITH.

    I believe in evidence and quite content with natural & scientific explanation. To me a belief in something in the face of invalidating evidence is an illusion.

    Again you're either being haphazard with your use of language or you simply do not know. Atheists themselves argue against the idea that atheism is a faith. Faith is to accept something as being true without having all the evidence (referred to as Ghaib, in Islam).

     

    I could go on but i'll stop here.

     

    To SOLers, I believe that this member is neither Somali nor Atheist. It is more plausible that he/she is an agent from one of the security agencies. Lookout for more 'controversial' topics (mainly centered around Islam) from this member. And with that in mind, I urge you all to be more sceptical and exercise more caution. Whatever you do, do not engage in a private conversation with such members.

     

    We are a community of brothers and sisters here. I think we ought to look out for one another.

     

    Somali09, if your aim is what I suspect it to be, it would pay to do some research.

  25. Posted

    Somali09, your ruh is most offended by the stance you've adopted. Denying the existence of your creator is the highest form of ingratitude. It is not something to be taken lightly. The matter is beyond that of simple opinion.

     

    There is no better time than Ramadan to ruminate on the 'illusions' you speak of. I would urge you to do just that.