Originally posted by SmithNwestern: Nationalist and OG, Mogadishu belongs to everyone no single clan or individual has a right more than ever. Smith you can't have your cake and share others'. NGONE, are you Juma's shadow, or was Samurai right? I think they're two people or he's certainly fooled me. BTW - Is it me or does anyone else think the hosts have yet again let in Jamaac Bootaan, in previous life aka WD through the back door?

^^^ That maybe the case but, this is a recent development. The man in question is supposed to be the alleged 'mastermind' behind the people who were arrested sometime earlier for the killings of foreigners. Ethiopia hands over suspect in Somaliland murders

Discussions about creating a secure environment for the transitional national government in Somalia must be focused on how to enable the new president to return to Mogadishu,i said Britain's Minister for Africa, Chris Mullin, during a press conference in Nairobi Friday. "He (Yusuf) will look more like a president when he goes to Mogadishu, rather than in a hotel in Nairobi," he added. THE PRESIDENT WITHOUT CAPITAL

^^The problem is the scholars are being selectively quoted by supporters of the gulf royal families who publish what they like and keep under wraps what does not suit their political decisions. Where are the Fatawas by scholars who rejected the presence of American troops in the gulf and why aren't they to be seen in full? Only when this happens will it possible for Muslims to decide the rights and wrongs of people who have have seen it fit for them to take up arms to remove them from their lands especially the holy lands. Originally posted by Rahima: Warding off evil by means of a greater evil is not permitted according to the scholarly consensus (ijmaa’) of the Muslims. If this group which wants to get rid of this ruler who is openly committing kufr is able to do so, and can bring in a good and righteous leader without that leading to greater trouble for the Muslims or a greater evil than the evil of this ruler, then that is OK. Good point indeed both this and the issues regarding conditions of Jihaad are addressed by IBN Taymiyyah's PUBLIC DUTIES IN ISLAM (Institutions of the Hisba, page 80, Conflict of Interest; Principal of Preference). I highly recommend this book from a scholar who was not scared to tell it as it is. What Salafi Online is trying to convince us is you can use the 'lesser/greater evil' rule to invite Kufar troops to the holy land but the same rule cannot used to remove the Kufr leaders. How comes this rules applies to every aspect of our faith except when it comes to removing the tyranical rulers?

Originally posted by JamaaL-11: quote:So I ask where was all this in your venom attack on S/land CID in regard to the 'alleged' story of the 15 year old. Or is it 'la jifiyana banan' in regards to other matters? What a naked hypocrisy by some SOL users.[/ Don't be silly, Jumatatu. What point do you have to compare living people to dead people? Is it really a "hypocrisy" to remind each other (as we should be doing as Muslims) to abstain from backbitting and, the bad-mouthing the dead amid the holy month of Ramadan? Don't you have a divide between politics and religion? I agree with Jumatatu 100% there seems to be partisan calls for forgiveness and understanding. The people who are now against talking about General Gani do not have such high moral standrards when it comes to General Aydeed. Some people who are who are lecturing forgiveness in this thread are busy reminding us about what happened to members of their clan in Xamar in another. What do you call that? Originally posted by JamaaL-11: Who are these 'people' you are talking about? What is on your mind? What pre-conceived perceptions are you harbouring? Why don't you address me as an individual? Jamaal if you live by those words you would not come up with: "War dadkan sow wax ma cafiyaan ambase ma hilmaamaan? Haday Ramadan tahayna, talow ma samraan miyaa, waa amakaage?" If Hornafrique can post an artcle showing his relative in positive light and expressing the feelings of the people in his neck of woods in regards the death General Gani, then Suldanka has the right to give the views from others, if he so wishes.

The bush-strangled once magnificent courts and mansions on the Pate Island in the Lamu archipelago inspired the sombre Al-Inkishafi (Catechism of a Soul) of Sayyid Abdulla bin Ali bin Nasir. The poem was written between 1810 and 1820; the translation from which these extracts have been taken from is by James de Vere Allen. How many wealthy men have we not see Who in their splendour shone like the sun itself, Strong in their hoards of ivory, Powerful in their stocks of silver and gold? To them the whole world bowed down in homage, For them Road of Life was broad and straight. They went in their way in arrogance, unafraid, Heads high in the air, their eyes screwed up in scorn. They swung their arms and tossed their haughty heads, Retainers went behind them and before. Wherever they went they took their seat of honour And many bodyguards surrounded them. Their lighted mansions glowed with lamps of brass And crystal, till night seem like day; And in their hall lay Beauty everywhere And Veneration stalked them all their days. Their homes were set with Chinese porcelain And every cup and goblet was engraved While, placed amidst the glittering ornaments, Great crystal pitchers gleamed luminous. The rails from which they hung the rich brocade Were made - I swear by God, Source of Wealth - Of teak and ebony, row upon row of them, Rank upon rank with fabrics hung displayed. The men's halls hummed with chatter, while within The women's quarter laughter echoed loud. The noise of talk and merriment of slaves Rang out, and cheerful shout of workmen rose. And when they went to rest, they had massage And fans of gay-robed women for their ease And music makers, playing and singing the songs Ceaselessly till they slept. And when they slept It was on exquisite beds of finest timber Carefully chosen, with soft mattresses With pillows of green cloth at head and foot. Embroidered with silver thread and fine-spun gold. Fabric was draped on canopies above To shelter them. Their limbs were sprinkled over With rosewater, and their bodies anointed With attar and sandalwood and incense-smoke. And yet, for all their wealth and proud grandeur They took, with Death's great Caravan, their leave And journeyed to the mansions of the grave And crumbled like blowing sand, and came to dust. So sleep they now, in a city of finger's span. No curtains there, no cushions nor silk couch. Their bodies are broken, mutilated all And crushed by merciless constrains of the tombs. Their cheek bones have caved in and decomposed, And pus and blood ooze through their parted lips; Maggots infest their nostrils and their throats They have become food for insect and for worms, Termites and ants devour and bore them though. Their bodies are eroded. Venom snakes And scorpions coil in their cavities. Their lighted mansions echo emptily; High in the painted rafters flutter bats. There are no murmurings, no happy shouts, And on curved bedsteads spiders spin their webs. Where once in wall-niches the porcelain stood Are now the ragged nests of wild birds. Owl hoot in the solitude of ruined halls And quail and gamebirds scuttle and cry below. On painted curtain-rails now vultures perch, And doves pout and coo between themselves Or start, and flap their wings , and whirr away. Swallows build their nests, and wood-pigeons. Cockroaches rustle in the empty courts. Where once men gathered, now the crickets shrill. The chatter in the ante-rooms has ceased And there remains only dirt and foul decay. The courtyards now are choked weeds and thorns, Bushes are canopied over with wild vines. Men fear today to pass these yawning doors. For inside Silence and Darkness reign supreme. If you believe me not, and say I lie, Then go yourself and peer about those halls. Callout. Your echo will come back, naught else, For human voices can be heard no more. My soul, all mortal men are thus, for all The Pen of God has signed equal Writ; And it is certain you will be as they Unless you have and hold your true faith. O soul, beware, be not firebrand, Abandon false pride, hold to truth and right. Your friends are saved - make sure to save yourself Or else fires of hell will eat you up. Know you, the day will come when over all The World there will be change: the Seven Heavens Will be moved from their place. The Sun and Moon Will tumble from from the sky. And for us men There will be fire and heat, both without cease. Where will you turn on that last day, when flames Rage within your spleen, and from your scalp The skin is singed - where will you flee for help? Tell me your refuge, for I would share it too. Never forget that Day, when multitudes Will assemble for every deed to be revealed; That Day when the oppressed will kneel before Their God and cry, "Decide between him and me! Judge us, O Lord God! See how I was wronged By this man - judge us in Thy rectitude!" And God, by Who all things shall be disposed, Shall judge, repaying each his wrong as due. Nor can the injured ever be paid back With golden nuggets, nor with coin of gold. Money, even were it offered as recompense Is not accepted. Compensation must Be rendered in good deeds performed in life. And he whose record shows neither good deeds Nor wrongs incurred from others - he, like a horse, Is bridled, with bit pressed to his mouth, And forced to bear the sins of those he wronged - Ordered to carry their burden and begone. Al-Inkishafi: Catechism of a Soul Sayyid Abdulla bin Ali bin Nasir ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' I'm sure i've contributed couple of my other favourites in another similar thread but, I thought the above poem is more suitable for this holy month. Ramadan Kariim to you all.

^^ The bigger irony is every country in the world is resisting the 'New World Order' and everyone is fighting tooth and nail not to loose the control of their affairs to foreigners while the Colnel is begging any Toure, Dick and Hassan to come and take over his capital city. That offer is too good to be true and I for one understand why some people are suspicious.

^^ If you think that was worth a chuckle or two, try to spot how Smith doctored the artcle above just to make to his Cambuulo Suxuur taste a lil bit better Some of the highlited bits were a bit odd and meaningless but the headline was just too dodgy Here's the un-doctored version: Britain wants Somalia government back home By Biketi Kikechi Britain yesterday called for speedy relocation of the new Somali Government from Nairobi to Mogadishu. The Secretary for African Affairs, Mr Chris Mullin, said the international community should help the new President, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, take control of his country. "The President should secure his territory. He should be in charge of his country," said Mullin. The new government, he said, would get more support when it starts operating from Somalia. The minister said he would tour Somaliland today, to help in the process of integrating the Somali government. Earlier in the week, Mullin met members of the Somali Parliament who are currently working from Nairobi. He is expected to meet Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi during his tour of the region. Sources said he would ask Ethiopia to support the new government. Somaliland, a province of the larger Somalia, was under British rule before independence while the larger Somalia was under the control of Italy. Analysts believe the self-declared independent Somaliland and Ethiopia hold the key to restoring and order in Somalia. Some Somali warlords have in the past accused landlocked Ethiopia of allegedly taking sides and fueling the war for its own interests. President Ahmed was elected early this month in the first post-war elections. He was sworn in at a colourful ceremony attended by 10 heads of state in Nairobi. ------------- Nice try Smithy

^^Even the Abuu Bakr quote brother Salafi wanted you to post goes like this: "O people The strong among you is weak in my sight, so that I shall excat from him what is due. And the weak among you is strong in my sight, so I shall excat to him what is due to him. Obey me as long as I obey God! But if I disobey God you no longer owe me obedience."

Originally posted by SmithNwestern: However who would disarm the factions, would Musa Sudi, Aydeed or JVA allow Abdiqasins faction or any other Somali faction, group or state to disarm them? lool @ Smith Bro charity begins at home especially in Ramadan! If the plan is disarm Xamar first and not your backyard, don't you think the Colnel should've at least discussed the finer details with the names you quoted above in the first place.

Smith My understanding was; the reasons given for the criminal warlords being given the stage and MP status was because they were in control of the Malitias. If thats the case why does it need foreigners to disarm these malitias if a peace agreement has been reached?

Originally posted by NGONGE: I always wondered about these “ethnic†descriptions that people use in this forum! Today, EURIKA, I finally worked it out. It’s a polite way to talk about tribes, right? The ingenuity is breathtaking. Reading some of the sublime messages posted on this section requires an experienced locksmith at times. Call a spade a spade, saaxib. If the rules don’t allow you to do so, call it a rake at least! Ethnic is not a farming tool. I think we should use celebrities as codenames. Can you figure which ethnic groups are respresented by the names Ms J Lo and Ms Zeta Jones.

Originally posted by Che-Guevara: Xarago-He is seeking troops from AU, not Ethoipia. The man is crazy but I don't think is ****** enough to ask for actual Ethoipian troops to be present in Somali Soil, and all of places in the Somali capital. This is not a new news. He stated his intentions of seeking foriegn troops eirlier. Excuse me for my ignorance, after two years of talks why does it need foreign troops - Ethiopian or not - to disarm the malitias? I thought the talks were a 'peace process' and were going to lead to voluntary dissarmament of these malitias.

Originally posted by IL CAPO: Are you a Pro Bush or Kerry? I am neither. Peace. Saxiib I can't stand Kerry but I can't stand Bush even more. The man is too lunatic to lead a religious cult let alone a country. I never used to care about which ***** runs the US but, I dread to see this beady-eyed former junky with dry lips shouting ''we're changing the worl''. Baastaadh foqal bastadh!

Originally posted by Salafi_Online: quote: I was just wondering, does a govt have to be declared "disbelievers" in order to depose them? What about IMMORALITY, SECULAR, GREED, UNHOLY ALLIANCES with the enemies of Islam, CORRUPTION, NEPOTISM, EXTRAVAGANCE etc? Are these criteria for deposing a govt and replace it with an Islamic one? Brother Viking you asked a great Question! to make a long story short ,†yes†they have to be disbelievers for one to depose them! Everything you mentioned would be classed as sins which do not lead to disbelieve (kufr)! I suppose you’d agree, Or else you would not have asked the question!.................................... As for dealing with the disbelieving (kaafir) ruler, then this differs depending upon the various situations. So if the Muslims have the power and capability to fight him, and to remove him from rule, and a Muslim ruler is present, then that is obligatory upon them, and this is from Jihaad in the Path of Allaah. As for when they are not capable of opposing him, then it is not permissible for them to instigate anything by oppression and disbelief, because this will result in harm and affliction upon the Muslims. Salafi in short what you're saying is don't remove your leaders even if they are tyrants or just, Muslim or Kaafirs if they're more powerful than you. I've heard of Salafi who tell Palestinians to stop the Jihaad and emigrate, are you one of them? Originally posted by Salafi_Online: quote: And lastly, do you consider the aiding of the kuffar against the Muslim to be an act of kufr? If in the affirmative, would you consider this to be a legitimate reason to depose them had there not being the fear of a greater fitnah (which is the exact reason why the scholars deem that they be kept there)? This is an act of kufr! But this does not necessarily mean the person who is doing this kufr is a kafir! Prior to ousting the one in authority, you must apply the conditions of takfir! And once they are labelled a kafir by the people of knowledge, deposing them would become permissible! (as long as the good outweighs the evil of course!)What you're calling 'act of kufr' was called 'a lesser evil' by some of the scholars who gave it the green light, the question is possible for an 'act of Kufr' be a 'lesser evil'? Originally posted by Salafi_Online: “The Prophet (peace be upon him) told us to combat evil. But there is a general rule to look at both advantages and disadvantages. And if fighting an evil leads to a greater one, then that fight is forbidden,†he said. But if removing an unjust rulers is a greater advantage, then it is allowed, is that correct?

By Andy Beckett October 17, 2004 The Guardian, October 15, 2004 Since September 11 Britain has been warned of the 'inevitability' of catastrophic terrorist attack. But has the danger been exaggerated? A major new TV documentary claims that the perceived threat is a politically driven fantasy - and al-Qaida a dark illusion. Andy Beckett reports Since the attacks on the United States in September 2001, there have been more than a thousand references in British national newspapers, working out at almost one every single day, to the phrase "dirty bomb". There have been articles about how such a device can use ordinary explosives to spread lethal radiation; about how London would be evacuated in the event of such a detonation; about the Home Secretary David Blunkett's statement on terrorism in November 2002 that specifically raised the possibility of a dirty bomb being planted in Britain; and about the arrests of several groups of people, the latest only last month, for allegedly plotting exactly that. Starting next Wednesday, BBC2 is to broadcast a three-part documentary series that will add further to what could be called the dirty bomb genre. But, as its title suggests, The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear takes a different view of the weapon's potential. "I don't think it would kill anybody," says Dr Theodore Rockwell, an authority on radiation, in an interview for the series. "You'll have trouble finding a serious report that would claim otherwise." The American department of energy, Rockwell continues, has simulated a dirty bomb explosion, "and they calculated that the most exposed individual would get a fairly high dose [of radiation], not life-threatening." And even this minor threat is open to question. The test assumed that no one fled the explosion for one year. During the three years in which the "war on terror" has been waged, high-profile challenges to its assumptions have been rare. The sheer number of incidents and warnings connected or attributed to the war has left little room, it seems, for heretical thoughts. In this context, the central theme of The Power of Nightmares is riskily counter-intuitive and provocative. Much of the currently perceived threat from international terrorism, the series argues, "is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services, and the international media." The series' explanation for this is even bolder: "In an age when all the grand ideas have lost credibility, fear of a phantom enemy is all the politicians have left to maintain their power." Adam Curtis, who wrote and produced the series, acknowledges the difficulty of saying such things now. "If a bomb goes off, the fear I have is that everyone will say, 'You're completely wrong,' even if the incident doesn't touch my argument. This shows the way we have all become trapped, the way even I have become trapped by a fear that is completely irrational." So controversial is the tone of his series, that trailers for it were not broadcast last weekend because of the killing of Kenneth Bigley. At the BBC, Curtis freely admits, there are "anxieties". But there is also enthusiasm for the programmes, in part thanks to his reputation. Over the past dozen years, via similarly ambitious documentary series such as Pandora's Box, The Mayfair Set and The Century of the Self, Curtis has established himself as perhaps the most acclaimed maker of serious television programmes in Britain. His trademarks are long research, the revelatory use of archive footage, telling interviews, and smooth, insistent voiceovers concerned with the unnoticed deeper currents of recent history, narrated by Curtis himself in tones that combine traditional BBC authority with something more modern and sceptical: "I want to try to make people look at things they think they know about in a new way." The Power of Nightmares seeks to overturn much of what is widely believed about Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. The latter, it argues, is not an organised international network. It does not have members or a leader. It does not have "sleeper cells". It does not have an overall strategy. In fact, it barely exists at all, except as an idea about cleansing a corrupt world through religious violence. Curtis' evidence for these assertions is not easily dismissed. He tells the story of Islamism, or the desire to establish Islam as an unbreakable political framework, as half a century of mostly failed, short-lived revolutions and spectacular but politically ineffective terrorism. Curtis points out that al-Qaida did not even have a name until early 2001, when the American government decided to prosecute Bin Laden in his absence and had to use anti-Mafia laws that required the existence of a named criminal organisation. Curtis also cites the Home Office's own statistics for arrests and convictions of suspected terrorists since September 11 2001. Of the 664 people detained up to the end of last month, only 17 have been found guilty. Of these, the majority were Irish Republicans, Sikh militants or members of other groups with no connection to Islamist terrorism. Nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of al-Qaida. In fact, Curtis is not alone in wondering about all this. Quietly but increasingly, other observers of the war on terror have been having similar doubts. "The grand concept of the war has not succeeded," says Jonathan Eyal, director of the British military thinktank the Royal United Services Institute. "In purely military terms, it has been an inconclusive war ... a rather haphazard operation. Al-Qaida managed the most spectacular attack, but clearly it is also being sustained by the way that we rather cavalierly stick the name al-Qaida on Iraq, Indonesia, the Philippines. There is a long tradition that if you divert all your resources to a threat, then you exaggerate it." Bill Durodie, director of the international centre for security analysis at King's College London, says: "The reality [of the al-Qaida threat to the west] has been essentially a one-off. There has been one incident in the developed world since 9/11 [the Madrid bombings]. There's no real evidence that all these groups are connected." Crispin Black, a senior government intelligence analyst until 2002, is more cautious but admits the terrorist threat presented by politicians and the media is "out of date and too one-dimensional. We think there is a bit of a gulf between the terrorists' ambition and their ability to pull it off." Terrorism, by definition, depends on an element of bluff. Yet ever since terrorists in the modern sense of the term (the word terrorism was actually coined to describe the strategy of a government, the authoritarian French revolutionary regime of the 1790s) began to assassinate politicians and then members of the public during the 19th century, states have habitually overreacted. Adam Roberts, professor of international relations at Oxford, says that governments often believe struggles with terrorists "to be of absolute cosmic significance", and that therefore "anything goes" when it comes to winning. The historian Linda Colley adds: "States and their rulers expect to monopolise violence, and that is why they react so virulently to terrorism." Britain may also be particularly sensitive to foreign infiltrators, fifth columnists and related menaces. In spite, or perhaps because of, the absence of an actual invasion for many centuries, British history is marked by frequent panics about the arrival of Spanish raiding parties, French revolutionary agitators, anarchists, bolsheviks and Irish terrorists. "These kind of panics rarely happen without some sort of cause," says Colley. "But politicians make the most of them." They are not the only ones who find opportunities. "Almost no one questions this myth about al-Qaida because so many people have got an interest in keeping it alive," says Curtis. He cites the suspiciously circular relationship between the security services and much of the media since September 2001: the way in which official briefings about terrorism, often unverified or unverifiable by journalists, have become dramatic press stories which - in a jittery media-driven democracy - have prompted further briefings and further stories. Few of these ominous announcements are retracted if they turn out to be baseless: "There is no fact-checking about al-Qaida." In one sense, of course, Curtis himself is part of the al-Qaida industry. The Power of Nightmares began as an investigation of something else, the rise of modern American conservatism. Curtis was interested in Leo Strauss, a political philosopher at the university of Chicago in the 50s who rejected the liberalism of postwar America as amoral and who thought that the country could be rescued by a revived belief in America's unique role to battle evil in the world. Strauss's certainty and his emphasis on the use of grand myths as a higher form of political propaganda created a group of influential disciples such as Paul Wolfowitz, now the US deputy defence secretary. They came to prominence by talking up the Russian threat during the cold war and have applied a similar strategy in the war on terror. As Curtis traced the rise of the "Straussians", he came to a conclusion that would form the basis for The Power of Nightmares. Straussian conservatism had a previously unsuspected amount in common with Islamism: from origins in the 50s, to a formative belief that liberalism was the enemy, to an actual period of Islamist-Straussian collaboration against the Soviet Union during the war in Afghanistan in the 80s (both movements have proved adept at finding new foes to keep them going). Although the Islamists and the Straussians have fallen out since then, as the attacks on America in 2001 graphically demonstrated, they are in another way, Curtis concludes, collaborating still: in sustaining the "fantasy" of the war on terror. Some may find all this difficult to swallow. But Curtis insists,"There is no way that I'm trying to be controversial just for the sake of it." Neither is he trying to be an anti-conservative polemicist like Michael Moore: "[Moore's] purpose is avowedly political. My hope is that you won't be able to tell what my politics are." For all the dizzying ideas and visual jolts and black jokes in his programmes, Curtis describes his intentions in sober, civic-minded terms. "If you go back into history and plod through it, the myth falls away. You see that these aren't terrifying new monsters. It's drawing the poison of the fear." But whatever the reception of the series, this fear could be around for a while. It took the British government decades to dismantle the draconian laws it passed against French revolutionary infiltrators; the cold war was sustained for almost half a century without Russia invading the west, or even conclusive evidence that it ever intended to. "The archives have been opened," says the cold war historian David Caute, "but they don't bring evidence to bear on this." And the danger from Islamist terrorists, whatever its scale, is concrete. A sceptical observer of the war on terror in the British security services says: "All they need is a big bomb every 18 months to keep this going." The war on terror already has a hold on western political culture. "After a 300-year debate between freedom of the individual and protection of society, the protection of society seems to be the only priority," says Eyal. Black agrees: "We are probably moving to a point in the UK where national security becomes the electoral question." Some critics of this situation see our striking susceptibility during the 90s to other anxieties - the millennium bug, MMR, genetically modified food - as a sort of dress rehearsal for the war on terror. The press became accustomed to publishing scare stories and not retracting them; politicians became accustomed to responding to supposed threats rather than questioning them; the public became accustomed to the idea that some sort of apocalypse might be just around the corner. "Insecurity is the key driving concept of our times," says Durodie. "Politicians have packaged themselves as risk managers. There is also a demand from below for protection." The real reason for this insecurity, he argues, is the decay of the 20th century's political belief systems and social structures: people have been left "disconnected" and "fearful". Yet the notion that "security politics" is the perfect instrument for every ambitious politician from Blunkett to Wolfowitz also has its weaknesses. The fears of the public, in Britain at least, are actually quite erratic: when the opinion pollsters Mori asked people what they felt was the most important political issue, the figure for "defence and foreign affairs" leapt from 2% to 60% after the attacks of September 2001, yet by January 2002 had fallen back almost to its earlier level. And then there are the twin risks that the terrors politicians warn of will either not materialise or will materialise all too brutally, and in both cases the politicians will be blamed. "This is a very rickety platform from which to build up a political career," says Eyal. He sees the war on terror as a hurried improvisation rather than some grand Straussian strategy: "In democracies, in order to galvanize the public for war, you have to make the enemy bigger, uglier and more menacing." Afterwards, I look at a website for a well-connected American foreign policy lobbying group called the Committee on the Present Danger. The committee features in The Power of Nightmares as a vehicle for alarmist Straussian propaganda during the cold war. After the Soviet collapse, as the website puts it, "The mission of the committee was considered complete." But then the website goes on: "Today radical Islamists threaten the safety of the American people. Like the cold war, securing our freedom is a long-term struggle. The road to victory begins ... " The THE POWERS OF NIGHTMARES starts on BBC2 at 9pm on Wednesday October 20.

HIS COUNTRY NEEDS YOU Oct 19 2004 By Bob Roberts, Deputy Political Editor OUTRAGED Army families accused the Government of betrayal yesterday after Geoff Hoon signalled that 650 British troops would cover for a US blitz in Iraq. The families claimed ministers were sending the men in to “pull the Yanks out of the fire†– and the move was a ploy to bolster the chances of President Bush’s re-election next month. One parent said: “It stinks to high heaven.†MPs warned that the soldiers, who would be under US control, would be risking their lives in a battle zone. BAILING OUT BUSH: Army families' and MPs say the move is a ploy to bolster the chances of President's re-election The Americans want the Brits to patrol south of Baghdad to free forces for an assault on the terror base of Fallujah. Defence Secretary Mr Hoon told a shocked Commons the UK would be “failing in our duty as an ally†if it refused the US request. Nor did he deny that the troops would be mostly Black Watch, currently the reserve force in Basra, southern Iraq. Some of the regiment, earmarked to be merged, believed they would be coming home before their six-month tour ends later this year. British troops from Cyprus, probably the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, may be sent to Iraq to plug the gap left by any switch. Yesterday, furious James Buchanan – whose sons Gary, 27, and Craig, 25, are corporals in the Watch – demanded his boys should come home. Widower Mr Buchanan, 56, of Arbroath, stormed: “They know they have to fight, but they hate being lied to. “It’s a bloody disgrace how the Government has treated them. It’s us going to pull the Yanks out of the fire once again – they need our boys to sort out their mess. “This is a political game to help George Bush win the election – and it stinks. “They promised my sons troops could come home this month. That was a lie. Mr Hoon says they won’t go to Fallujah. That’s another lie. They’ll be in the firing line.†full article

I find it odd how somali british citizens where trying to convince me this summer that America is the devil while Great-Britain can do no wrong. For some odd reason they associated me with everything american and I was hearing so much propaganda that I found myself in the unlikely position of actually defending the US. Thats what you have to put up with when you live at house number 668 Bro the Libdems are a long shot considering their performances in previous elections, i'm sure they'll do well next time but, in the mean time lets focus our negative energies on Bush, shall we? Remember, even the leader of the Libdems' speech at last year's anti-war rally included ''i'm here as an individual''. The result of the 97/01 Elections Labour............413..418 Tories.............166..165 Lib Dem...........52...46 Others..............28...29

^^I think you can get a more accurate picture of things when you check the blogs like the ones below. Ahmed In Burco inside somaliland Cock And Bull Stories

Originally posted by LANDER: You also have to admit that its very hypocritical for the Brits to convince americans not to vote for Bush when they can't even get rid of Bush's little handkerchief Blair. Saaxib I think if the Brits had a real alternative they wouldn't hesitate for a sec. Blair's opposition major opposition over here are the notorious Conservatives who were more vocal in support of the war than the ruling Labour party. Unlike in the US elections, people over here vote for the local MP's only and the winning party's leader becomes the PM. Blair is supposed to be good for domestic issues and no PM will ever say NO to Uncle Sam anyway and the Brits might as well try to get an 'uncle' who is good for them. Americans are not all as dumb as one might think. It's almost impossible to misunderestimate their dumbness

Salafi online: Brother I wish you would follow the salaf and shun your opinions! Allah order this ummah to follow the Salaf, The messenger ordered this ummah to follows and adher to the methodology of the salaf! Brother I did not say I reject everything you say, I just disagree with some or your way of presenting it. Even if I say I am one, i'm sure there will be things we disagree upon. I do respect and read books by Salafi scholars as well scholars who do/did not consider themselves Salafis and that's where we part. BTW- I've deleted the bottom Hadith and thanks for the correction.

Very interesting. Originally posted by dawoco: quote:no-one at all wanted to live in Nigeria - Africa's most populous country. lol, isn't that ironic? Yes it is. I'm sure there are decent Nigerians out there.

Salafi Whatever you say does not change the fact that most of these so-called leaders came to power by force or their forefathers did, and are not in moral position to declare “Sunnah Immunityâ€. Why are you so quick to point out the BID’A in everyone except the ‘royal families', and when will the Salafis start publishing and preaching Hadiths like the ones below? Maybe things will get better if you guys told a few home truths to the monarchs. Muhammad (saw) said: "There will be unjust rulers who cause hardship to their people. Whoever went along with their lies and helped them with their injustice, he is not from me nor am I from him, and he will not drink from Al-Hawd (the pond)" (Ahmad, An-Nisaa'i, At-Tirmidhi, and Al-Bazzar). “The best Jihad is the word of truth against the unjust ruler.†“Nay, by Allah, you have to enjoin the Maroof and forbid the Munkar, and deal with the unjust ruler severely, and force him to the truth, otherwise Allah will strike your hearts against each other.†-Ibn Masud Last but not least what gives the Saud royals and their cronies the right to declare or support others to overthow other leaders? Xoogsade I hear you loud and clear. OG Girl Feel free to speak on my behalf anytime( the real McCoy not the fake one that is)

Originally posted by Jumatatu: For Kibaki to give a Benz he must have made a 'big ugali' along the way. Genorousity is not in the vocabularly of a 'atarere' president. "The new Mercedes for President Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed has GK number plates." Originally posted by JustCause: Do I see a lot of envy here or is it just my eyes deceiving me????? Envy Shmevy! I could murder tens of thousands for a Merc like that, wouldn't you

"And Mr Ahmed will arrive at his swearing-in today in style... in a Sh12 million Mercedes Benz provided for him by the Kenya Government as part of his trappings as a new Head of State. They also provided him with three other Mercedes for his escort, from President Kibaki's car pool, and a high security mansion in Kileleshwa, Nairobi, to use as his new State House. To ensure Mr Ahmed has the status of a president, just one day before he was elected, the Kenya Government went shopping - and bought him his new specially modified Mercedes from local dealers DT Dobie. The gift of the Mercedes - a top of the range model S320 - and the provision of all the other trappings of power were the final part of Kenya's 14-year crusade to help find a lasting peace for her North-Eastern neighbour. The new Mercedes for President Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed has GK number plates. The president will be sworn in by his country's parliamentary speaker, Mr Shariff Aden, who also on his swearing-in a few weeks ago was provided with an official GK Mercedes and an escort car." PRODUCT PLACEMENT AFRICAN STYLE!