Awakener bro. A Late Eid Mubaarak You ask: You can continue with your last answer: Who is Muslim ? further questions you can explore: 1) What conditions you have to fullfil to be ( qualified as) a Muslim? 2) What nullifies to be muslim ? 3) Can a third person tell another person that he/she is NOT a muslim while the first person is claiming that he is muslim. Answer: InshaAllah, answers to these questions and more will follow soon Nur

Brother Bixi Welcome back to SOL You write: ICU is a product of USC and you agreed. Answer: If I follow your logic, then Omar Ibnul Khattaab and Abu Jahal are the same, because Omar used to be a Mushrik. Brother, forget the origins, let us talk where and what the ICU stands and compare it to where and what the TFG Warlords group stands for, who supprorts them and their position on the implementation of the Sharia as the law of the land. You write: While they kicked out some worlds out of Mogadishu and Kismaio, they rewarded remaining warlords with prominent positions in the ICU. Answer: The Prophet SAWS when he entered Makkah victoriously, not only did he forgive Abu Sufyaan, his enemy, but he gave him special status, The Prophet declared that " Anyone who enters the house of Abu Sufyaan, is safe" Abu Sufyan was given that previllage to win key figures for Islam. So, Likewise, what is wrong if they give sanctuary to a warlord who agrees to be loyal to the ICU and Sharia law and order? While, the warlords are being given sanctuary ny the Ethiopians, Somalia's historical enemy? You write: While Afgoi, Marka, and Kismaio were left untouched and under the same leader warlord leadership, Bay-Bakool, Puntland were attacked whatever the claim was. Answer: Brother, The ICU has never attacked any region that accepted Sharia and the Law of Islam, Puntland leadership is loyal to Ethiopia, while the majority of its people are loyal to Sharia and Islam, why do you think that the leadership declared the Sharia after the swift victories of the the ICU, the Puntland leadership, was worried for a popular uprising of tthe Somali people in Puntland by standing with their southern brothers. To say A = B, logically, you need to show that at least the two groups ae same in the following areas: 1. Warlords, for the past 16 years have committed crimes against humanity in both the south and the North/ Northeastern of Somalia. Can you say the same aboout the ICU? 2. The worlords are all under single leadership of an evil enemy of our country, Ethiopia. Can you say the same about the ICU 3. The warlords reject Sharia and Islam as the political governance system for Somalia, they support tribal clan system of 4.2 to divide Somalia along clan lines, while all serve United Ethiopia as their master. Can you say the same about the ICU. Now the ICU: 1. The ICU has created Peace and order for 6 months never seen in the south for 16 years. Can you say the same about the warlords. 2. The ICU has a leadership of devout Muslims, who are knowledgeable, respected and clean. Can you say the same about the Warlords. 3. The ICU stood for a principle, Islam, and refused to compromise, refused to sell Somalia to the Ethiopians. Can you say the same about the warlords? 4. The ICU has helped many poor families, ran charitable activities, restored courts that gave people their properties. Can you say the same about the Warlords? Nur

"Telling the TRUTH is a PUBLIC TRUST ( that belongs to the PEOPLE), telling a LIE is TREASON. (Committed against the PUBLIC)" ----First Caliph of Islamic State, Abu Bakar. I like to do my principal research in bars, where people are more likely to tell the truth or, at least, lie less convincingly than they do in briefings and books. ----O'Rourke, P.J. (1989), Holidays in hell. London (Picador), 212 "In 1983 the principal global media was owned by 50 corporations, most of them American. In 2002 this had fallen to just 9 corporations. Today it is probably about 5 (Media Corporations). Rupert Murdoch (a Jewish Billionaire) has predicted that there will be just Three global media giants, and his company will be one of them" ..... John Pilger 2007 "The crisis in modern democracy is a profound one. Free elections, a free press, and an independent judiciary mean little when the free market has reduced them to commodities available on sale to the highest bidder" Arundhati Roy. August 17 2004 "IN A TIME OF UNIVERSAL DECEIT, TELLING THE TRUTH IS A REVOLUTIONARY ACT." -- George Orwell “The teachings of Islam can fail under no circumstances. With all our systems of culture and civilization, we cannot go beyond Islam and, as a matter of fact, no human mind can go beyond the Koran.”--- Johann Goethe, cited in Sir Henry Elliot’s Letters of Johann Goethe, 1865.” -- “He was Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without Pope’s pretensions, Caesar without the legions of Caesar: without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue; if ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by the right divine, it was Mohammed, for he had all the power without its instruments and without its supports.” Bosworth Smith, MOHAMMAD AND MOHAMMADANISM, London, 1874, p. 92. "In his City of God, Saint Augustine tells a story about an encounter between Alexander the Great (the last ruler successfully to garrison Afghanistan) and a pirate captain he had caught on the high seas. Ordering the pirate to heave to, Alexander demands: "How dare you molest the seas as a pirate?" "How dare you molest the whole world?" retorts the plucky pirate. "I have a small boat, so I am called a thief and a pirate. You have a great navy, so you are called an emperor, and can call other men pirates." Substitute terrorist or rogue state for pirate and the episode neatly encapsulates the morality of the new world order. ." Seumas Milne; The Guardian, October 25, 2001 "Any individual who values truth more than lies, who keeps truth alive in his or her heart, despite all efforts to dislodge it from its ethical moorings, is more powerful than even the most advanced weapons systems. Truth emerges unscathed from the rubble of fallen empire as immutable as an inviolable law of nature. Nothing can bring it down because it is real." Charles Sullivan, "Truth Matters" ------- "He is a fool that makes his doctor his heir" Ben Franklin --------- " The Mosques are in the hands of the Islamists, the ( Islamists) control the education system and social welfare, they even control the health system, they also control trade and business, they control the Telecoms, they control money transfer business. We ( TFG Government) control nothing!. ( Parliament) must decide this morning what should be done about the Islamists,. Should the Islamists rule the country or should (the Transitional Federal Government ) rule country?. Have you all considered yet ways to contain the Islamists so we can take back all these institutions they control? , (All Members of Parliament in session responded with " YES" . "Are you reconfirming your commitment again?" asks Yusuf. " Yes" (they respond again). OK, As a man I will support you (to go after the Islamists control of the country) , These ( Islamists) are the enemy, do you hear me? , let us fight back against these men ( Islamists), These men ( Islamists) draw their power by controlling all the country's resources, be it Education, Religion, Mosques, Money Transfer, Economy, Telecoms, Business, or FATUUD! which is firmly in their hands, let us take it back from them if you want to see Somalia to be the Somalia (That we all envision)" ---Somali Warlord President Abdullahi Yusuf's Historic and Fateful speech to Warlord Parliament of the TFG (2008) in Baidoa. Nomads This page is dedicated for the free and non-inhibited exchange of views on Islamic issues from a Somali perspective for the purpose of enriching/sharing or learning. The intended audience are mainly the English speaking Somalis and their families, non-Muslims who have interest to know about Islam and the Media at large fishing for a good article. Since its launch back in 2001, many original and borrowed topics have been posted and read by Nomads, mainly by English speaking Somalis who reside away from home for apparent reasons. As such, the impromptu views of Nomads responding to posts on this site widely differ on any given topic, to reflect their perspectives and respective sources of knowledge, level of maturity, etiquette and taste. So, as moderators, we kindly advice innocent audience, while fishing for useful information, to always take these views with a bucket of fresh sea water from Somali coasts. This page also serves as a quick reference for all web browsers at large, non Muslims and Muslims alike, including news media professionals gauging popular views on burning issues of the hour, such as what is known as "Terrorism", Political Islam, family issues, gender relations and financial matters (which affects our lives the most, yet is least discussed). To make this page an enriching intellectual journey for all viewers, we kindly ask you to be considerate, tolerant and respectful of all views, regardless of their content and origin as long as they are likewise considerate of the etiquette and common taste of the target audience of this page as mentioned above. Islam, which is the name of this page, encourages Muslims to seek knowledge and wisdom, hence the free discussion of issues. Allah SWT says in Quraan " And debate with them with the most appropriate venues of a discussion" . This page, a family friendly page, is also meant to attract young Somalis, teens and even school age kids, as such, the content and the level of discussion should be appropriate for these viewers, (when seeking Islamic Edicts (Fatwas) on graphic description of private intimate relationships, it should only be discussed in private messaging which is provided by this site). This web page is a law abiding site, it adheres to the highest law-and-Order on earth, that of Allah, known as Sharia, which sanctifies and guarantees the sustenance of human lives, happiness, property, dignity and intellect,( And the Environment: It was reported that The Prophet SAWS said " Anyone who grows a plant that provides sustenance to birds, animals and humans shall be rewarded the reward of a charity for it" and " Faith in Islam is composed of some eighty parts, least of which is the removal of rubbish from common usage areas") thus, in no way does this web site or its moderators condone any filth, illegal activity against any human, animal or the environment anywhere on the planet. Moreover, SOL Islam page, a beacon of common sense and dialogue, does not condone aggressive violence, nor the commission of a crime against any individual nor against any law abiding institution. All ideas posted by the moderators are meant only for the intellectual enrichment and exchange of ideas by way of the universally accepted and recognized right to Freedom OF Speech, and right to Freedom AFTER Speech, and when ambiguous , all content appearing at this site should always be interpreted as such. Spreading of clan hatred is not allowed to be posted on this site, All Somalis are of a single wider family and their collective survival and happiness greatly depends on attaining peace through justice provided Only by their common faith, ISLAM. Because hate will never create security for any clan, and insecurity will never lead to prosperity for the whole of Somali People. Only Islam guarantees Universal Peace, which is the rock solid belief of Moderators of this page. May Allah Bless and guide us all to a path that is straight, amen. Nur Moderator 2007 SOL eNuri Unconventional Dawa Service We Illuminate Minds, To Eliminate Ignorance. كن كالنخيل عن الأحقاد مرتفعاً .... بالطُوب يرمى فيلقي أطيب الثمر

Democracy, not terror, is the engine of political Islam Neocon policies designed to promote liberal opinion in the Middle East have in fact played into the hands of the religious parties By William Dalrymple 09/21/07 "The Guardian" -- - -Six years after 9/11, throughout the Muslim world political Islam is on the march; the surprise is that its rise is happening democratically - not through the bomb, but the ballot box. Democracy is not the antidote to the Islamists the neocons once fondly believed it would be. Since the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, there has been a consistent response from voters wherever Muslims have had the right to vote. In Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey and Algeria they have voted en masse for religious parties in a way they have never done before. Where governments have been most closely linked to the US, political Islam's rise has been most marked. Much western journalism in the six years since 9/11 has concentrated on terrorist groups, jihadis and suicide bombers. But while the threat of violence remains very real, those commentators who have compared what they ignorantly call "Islamofascism" to the Nazis are guilty of hysteria: the differences in relative power and military capability are too great for the comparison to be valid, and the analogies that the neocons draw with the second world war are demonstrably false. As long as the west interferes in the Muslim world, bombs will go off; and as long as Britain lines up behind George Bush's illegal wars, British innocents will die in jihadi atrocities. But that does not mean we are about to be invaded, nor is Europe about to be demographically swamped, as North American commentators such as Mark Steyn claim: Muslims will make up no more than 10% of the European population by 2020. Yet in concentrating on the violent jihadi fringe, we may have missed the main story. For if the imminent Islamist takeover of western Europe is a myth, the same cannot be said for the Islamic world. Clumsy and brutal US policies in the Middle East have generated revolutionary changes, radicalising even the most moderate opinion, with the result that the status quo in place since the 1950s has been broken. Egypt is typical: at the last election in 2005 members of the nominally banned Muslim Brotherhood, standing as independents, saw their representation rise from 17 seats to 88 in the 444-seat people's assembly - a five-fold increase, despite reports of vote-rigging by President Mubarak's ruling National Democratic Alliance. The Brothers, who have long abjured violence, are now the main opposition. The figures in Pakistan are strikingly similar. Traditionally, the religious parties there have won only a fraction of the vote. That began to change after the US invasion of Afghanistan. In October 2002 a rightwing alliance of religious parties - the Muttahida Majlis Amal or MMA - won 11.6% of the vote, more than doubling its share, and sweeping the polls in the two provinces bordering Afghanistan - Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Province - where it formed ultra-conservative and pro-Islamist provincial governments. If the last election turned the MMA into a serious electoral force, there are now fears that it could yet be the principle beneficiary of the current standoff in Pakistan. The Bush administration proclaimed in 2004 that the promotion of democracy in the Middle East would be a major foreign policy theme in its second term. It has been widely perceived, not least in Washington, that this policy has failed. Yet in many ways US foreign policy has succeeded in turning Muslim opinion against the corrupt monarchies and decaying nationalist parties who have ruled the region for 50 years. The irony is that rather than turning to liberal secular parties, as the neocons assumed, Muslims have lined up behind parties most clearly seen to stand up against aggressive US intervention. Religious parties, in other words, have come to power for reasons largely unconnected to religion. As clear and unambiguous opponents of US policy in the Middle East - in a way that, say, Musharraf, Mubarak and Mahmoud Abbas are not - religious parties have benefited from legitimate Muslim anger: anger at the thousands of lives lost in Afghanistan and Iraq; at the blind eye the US turns to Israel's nuclear arsenal and colonisation of the West Bank; at the horrors of Abu Ghraib and the incarceration of thousands of Muslims without trial in the licensed network of torture centres that the US operates across the globe; and at the Islamophobic rhetoric that still flows from Bush and his circle in Washington. Moreover, the religious parties tend to be seen by the poor, rightly or wrongly, as representing justice, integrity and equitable distribution of resources. Hence the strong showing, for example, of Hamas against the blatantly corrupt Fatah in the 2006 elections in Palestine. Equally, the dramatic rise of Hizbullah in Lebanon has not been because of a sudden fondness for sharia law, but because of the status of Hassan Nasrallah, Hizbullah's leader, as the man who gave the Israelis a bloody nose, and who provides medical and social services for the people of South Lebanon, just as Hamas does in Gaza. The usual US response has been to retreat from its push for democracy when the "wrong" parties win. This was the case not just with the electoral victory of Hamas, but also in Egypt: since the Brothers' strong showing in the elections, the US has stopped pressing Mubarak to make democratic reforms, and many of the Brothers' leading activists and business backers, as well as Mubarak's opponent in the presidential election, are in prison, all without a word of censure from Washington. Yet on a recent visit to Egypt I found everywhere a strong feeling that political Islam was there to stay, and that this was something everyone was going to have to learn to live with; the US response had become almost irrelevant. Even the Copts were making overtures to the Brothers. As Youssef Sidhom, who edits the leading Coptic newspaper, put it: "They are not going away. We need to enter into dialogue, to clarify their policies, and end mutual mistrust." The reality is that, like the Copts, we are going to have to find some modus vivendi with political Islam. Pretending that the Islamists do not exist, and that we will not talk to them, is no answer. Only by opening dialogue are we likely to find those with whom we can work, and to begin to repair the damage that self-defeating Anglo-American policies have done to the region, and to western influence there, since 9/11. William Dalrymple is the author of The Last Mughal: The Fall of a Dynasty, Delhi 1857. - Please visit his website - www.williamdalrymple.com

Ahlan wa sahlan Yaa Xiin, what a surprise visit today? look who is here at our Aqal and tuulo? Well, who else from of the SOL Brothers and Sisters is joining us for this iftaar today? By the way, the next door Aqal-Somali is for the sisters, they can join us in the discussion from behind their cozy daah. Nur: (oo cuskanaya Barkinta), Xiin, why not try this new bur, its a cross between Belgian Waffles and Canjeero, kind a soft but not as thin as Canjeero, yet its not as crispy as Waffles, but with very similar taste and smell? Xiin: (munching) uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumh!, this is good Nur, mashAllah, and what is that? (poiting at special pastry ), Nur: Well that is our local version of a cinnamon cake, coated with golden colored hot goat buuter, dipped in accacia honey " , Xiin bro, try this Daangawis, made from fresh green Zanjabiil, its hot, but good for you! Xiin: MashaAllah, this stuff is good, so, this is home huh? Nur: Yeeah! Xiin: so what is like living in baadiyeh, I am just dropping by for you visit. Nur: Well, its kinda quiet, except for American Reconnaisance planes and Ethiopians raoming he country side romancing the stone. Xiin: What stone, precious stones? Nur: No, the blakstone, Oil, they even killed mos of my goats back in january. Xiin: arent you worried living here, its dangerous. Nur: well, its equally as dangerous running away, so we decided to stay in our huts, pray that Allah protect us from these greedy politicians. Xiin: (sipping his dangawis) well, whats that? Adaan? Nur: Yeah, its nearby Mawlac, lets go for Maghrib Prayers. To be continued..... Nur

Nomads, Its another Ramadan around, hope to revive this thread this year again, at least let us discuss Quraan, because its the month of Quraan. Nur

Nomads Allah blessed us all with another Ramadan once more (4th to since this thread began), lets make the best of it again, its too good and too rare an opportunity to waste. Nur

Ramadan Kareem Nomads I apologise for failing to post the topics in time for Ramadan, I was caught off guard by other concerns. InshAllah, the topics and their modertion will be be delayed until after Eid, due to scarcity of time in Ramadan. Ramadan is the month of Quraan, depending on your stamina, you can try one of the following: 1. Five Juzz a day, a Juzz after every prayer, or one go between Asr prayer and Iftaar for the first twenty days, and a one complete KHATAM a day for the last ten. 2. A Juzz a day for the month. Either way, let us focus more on Quraan and Ibaadah in this month and less on all other discussions. Nur

Brother Waleed Here is an answer to that question from another thread to Sister Warsan: Warsan sis Calaf is Somali analogue for Qadar in Arabic, it is one of the six pillars of iman, it comes in two flavors, Good and Bad. If you take an internet Class with Proffessor Nur on Somalionline Open University, and pose this question to the Prof. He will explain as follows: Miss Warsan, I have taught this class for five years, and explained many concepts to the best of my abilities, I have simplified complex concepts to make it a child play, but still a handful of my online students fail this class, not because i made them fail, but i can tell you who among my students is more likely to fail this course, and because its only five years, my prediction may not be that accurate, but its good enough for government work. Now let us stretch this logic a lil further, say, you come back to this site as a grandmother some thrity years, and Prof Nur is still on Somaliaonline Islam boards, with residual experience of 35 years on likelyhood of Nomads passing the grade at the SOL Open Uni. If you ask me again the same question, the Profs chances of accuracy increase. Now, Allah SWT creates his creatures with a constant mix of intellectual, physiscal, spiritual capabilities, and against these capabilities he expects them to perform and deliver duties that are within their sphere of influence. ( Laa yukallifu Allahu nafsan illa wuscahaa) ( Allah does not demand from any soul to deliver more than its capacity) Like the students analogy, Allah knows beforehand our choices and paths that we will take, and thus he records it in the Book of Qader, as the Book of Qadar is in a different domain of time-space than ours, the present, past and future in that book are contiuum with no breaks. ( The Quraan is a good example of a text treating the future as if happening now) So Qadar in other words is Allahs knowledge of our choices. Allah also interferes at times, we call them Miracles. Allah does not on one hand make you responsible for your actions, and on the force you to do something, it beats the purpose of creation which is to test people of their response level for Allahs unrivalled surrender. From Allah point of view, the past has already happened, its analogous to a movie that you have already seen, you pretty much know what is going to happen next, but that does mean that you have forced the events and actors. Nur

Dhuc Dhuc Quran in general and Surah Ruum in particular are better understood and appreciated when we pay close attention to the context within which the verses were revealed. The better we relate our present condition to the revelations background, the deeper our understanding of Allah's intention behind the verses we read or listen to. So, as we read Quraan this Ramadan, let us also keep the Seerah books, Science, medicine and history for reference, in order to connect events, phenomenas and stories to our present day situation and predicaments, this is called TADABBUR in Quraan, and its an important aspect of dealing with Quran. Nur

Salaamun Aleikum Nomads Ramadan is once more fast approaching, Allah's mercy is upon us all, many will be forgiven, wishes realised, happy moments shared, while others will waste this great opportuinty, and as a consequence pay a higher price for that option. Let us make the most out of this Ramadan, let us start with Quraan. Nur ------------------------------------------------- 2007 eNuri Quraan Services Burn Your Qareen, With Quraan

Kheir brother The answer has two dependencies: 1. Is Hiba a traveller 2. Is Hiba a Resident The first case, the requirement is that she keeps them on for a minimum of three days, and is previllaged to make Masx ( Wiping/dusting) if she does not take the jawaarib off. The second case, the requirement is that she keeps them on for a minimum of one day, and is previllaged to make Masx ( Wiping/dusting) if she does not take the jawaarib off. Of course, with conditions that Taharah is not broken, if taharah is broken and she is wearing them on, she continues the Masx al khuffein. On both counts above, Hibah as to make full wudoo. Wallahu Aclam. Nur

Um Zaak. looooooooooooool @ " Dont somalisize the issue " In Arabic the term for Anarchy is ( SAWMALAH) Somalization is a new word in the dictionary for Chaos and Anarchy, at least we are finally recognized for something other than thes the cuddly Somali Cat species. Besides, the idea is wonderful, make sure that the competition if only for the portion memorized, not old portions, so Kashafa does not take all the $$$$$$$ Nur

Xiin bro. This phenomena represents a real problem, the duplicity/hypocracy problem, which is costing the Dawa work a great deal. Here is an excerpt about this phenomena from eNuri Opticians few years back: ".......And although these wrongfully prescriped eye glasses make some of them look very scholarly and sophisticated from the outset, deep inside, these camel herders, are suffering from a spilt personality as a result of the double vision their current glasses offer, a love of this worldly glitter and a yearning to their faith and maker, conflicting requirements indeed." In another write up on SOL Islamic Board( Reminder for e-Preachers) I wrote: " Being a Muslim is one thing, taking the next step of Dacwah requires some essentials: 1. Knowledge. The fundemental principles of Islam : Tawheed. Unfortunately , today as I see the main problem facing Muslims worldwide is lack of a proper understanding of the overall meaning of the contract of Shahaadah. The Shahaadah in turn is composed of words such as ( ilaah) whose meaning is fuzzy at best in the minds of many muslims. If you ask most people who profess Islam the meaning of (Ibadah, Daghuut, ilaah, rabb) the answer you get explains the deplorable state of affairs facing the Muslims today. The Quraan and Hadeeth revolves around these key words, yet, the majority of muslims do not look deeper into these meanings in order to make the Quraan talk to us in a plain language that we all can understand. Unfortunately most issues that one hears in Muslim study circles addresses social ills and how Islam can solve these ills. However, these social ills which reflect the state of Muslim affairs today have emanated from their poor understanding of Tawheed which in turn has resulted in the actions ( or the lack there of )of the followers of Islam. (Eemaan is something that resides in the heart, reflected by actions) Hadeeth. So when we see the actions of a person, we are in reality peeking deep into his heart, if there is no action, there is no driver, and thus no motivation and belief. 2. Action: Our environment teaches us how to behave, thus our actions represent the residual experience of actions we saw other do in our lifetime. If we have a belief, our actions will represent it, and others will take a note of it, either agreeing or disagreeing with it, but it is in itself a form of dawa to others. The best way to make Dawa is through our actions, unfortunately, when Muslims came in contact with christians in the west, some have even adopted their method of Dacwah which is sermons and discussions. Although this form may serve in islolated cases, it by no means suffices for the practical Dacwah similar to that of the Companions of tye Prophet SAWS.(SAXAABAH) People observe the driver of our actions, if they feel that you really know where you are going, they will likely follow you, but if they sense through your actions that you are not truly representing what you are saying, then you have just seeded doubt in their heart. ( O Allah do not make us a Fitnah for the unbelievers) Our actions, are further divide into the following: a) Inter-Personal: Between you and the people you deal with. If your dealing is based with the Rabbani Akhlaaq that was inherited from our beloved Prophet Muhammad SAWS. Then definetely, this will draw the attention of the non Muslim and it may earn you the respect of the non Muslim, his trust and generate inquisitive discussion that may lead for the guidance of the non Muslim. People observe everything about you, and if you are not careful, of your personal behaviour, you may be doing negative Dawa. b) Work Ethics Your work ethics and how you deal with people in the material sense gives yourprospective converts a measure of your innate beliefs, if they observe diligence, promptness hardwork, honesty, frankness, then, it is likely that they listen to you after being satisfied with your other qualities. In Business, if you buy a product brand and become satisfied, you are likely to follow all their other products. c) Respect and Tolerance When people call you a name or two, do you get upset? do you respond with a respectful answer or call them names as they call you names? . A person once was insulted by another verbally, his response was the result of his self confidence and Eman. He responded by saying that he had other bad qualities that he is working on to change. This person is not blinded by a false pride of his reputation , rather he is interested to know his shotcomings even if it comes from an angry person. d) Ibadah Our relationship with Allah, is the basis of our success in Dacwah, Allah says ( And when you are done (with Dacwa), get up ( for Ibadah at night) and seek your lord)Allah says " (is it wise that) you preach others to do good while forgetting your own souls? "Dacwah begins with your self. First, look into your self, and try to justify your actions. Are they good or bad? If they are good, what is the motivation? the love of Allah, fear of his punishment? or is it a habit? If you find bad deeds, what is the price you are willing to pay for it? do you hide these bad deeds from friends and family? if yes , can you accept the fact that you have made Allah the least significant observer of your actions? Can you still count on false hopes that you will stop these bad deeds someday? Do you know when you are going to die? Now after answering these questions, the result may be that you have a clear view ahead of you. Thus you improve your life with good deeds and reduce your bad deeds in an affort to race with the remaining time left before you take the final stand before a judge and a jury not of your peers. So you get the Idea and importance of amassing as much hasanaat as possible and wiping as much bad deeds as possible thru Ibaadaat, istighfaar and repentence, in order for you succeed in your hobby of making Dacwah" end quote. In yet another eNuri (Somali language) titled ( Qalbi Fiican) , I wrote about an experience that I had with some wadaads that I shared a business, I was really shocked to find out how some people we count as enlightened wadaads, change colors to pre_Islamic mode once they see the mighty green back. The problem lies in our upbringing, we were all raised by parents who lived the age of bad aqeedaah and duplicity, so we have grown up with some level of hypocracy in our dealings, and it surfaces when our values are tested with the litmus test ( Green Back $$$). This topic is indeed a pivotal topic, it binds all of our beliefs and hence our actions. Baarakallah feek Xiin bro. Nur

Geel Jire bro. A great scholar and wise statements. The writing is very old, ( correcting aqeedah errors of the day), then translated in english. To many readers, its the analogue of Latin, it does not settle in, because, few can relate to it, hence the slow acceptance. Let us repackage these gems for the lay peaople, regular Faaraxs and Xalimos, by addressing their world and the problems that come with it. Nur

Khalaf bro. The issue of the Mad-habs is indeed a confusing one for the laymen. As a new convert or a reborn Muslim approaches his new faith, the question of how to worship arises frequently, unfortunately, in the community Masjid setting with a plethora of Muslims from around the globe each practicing in a different flavor does not help. The kis (keep it simple) approach is the best for the newbies, while for those thirtsy for further knowledge, a top down approach is the best, to start with the big picture first, then, carefully decend down in detail to see where the scholars have diverged on sensitive issues of fiqh. But before that, one must devote learning the Arabic language, because, there is no way an anglish translation of fiqh book can quench the thirst for fiqh, Imam Shafici was sent to the baadiye (countryside) to learn Arabic from the bedouins, which was his core competency that made him one of the four imaams. Nur

Nehanda That dua has the following meaning: O Allah, You are my Lord ( Sovereign ) There is no one higher than you (Sovereign) (because) you have created me, and I am your slave And I remain committed to my promise and oath (not to revere other than you) as much as I can I seek forgiveness for the ugly things I have committed I reconfirm my gratitude for the generosity you have bestowed upon me. While I am ashamed of my blatant disregard of your obedience as I sin. So forgive me, since no one but you is capabale to forgive sins. Translations courtesy of eNuri Transemantics Nur

Awakener Bro. Good to have you back, I have read your contributions and its roaring, maashAllah, our dialogue, one of the longest running on SOL just got a new life. Let us structure the dialogue this time around in a manner that will deliver a result. First Let us agree on the basics. 1. As Muslims, we both believe in Allah SWT. 2. We believe that he is the only God. 3. We believe that he created everything, thus the Master and sovereign over everything. 4. We believe that he has sent Mesengers and Prophets to mankind for guidance, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. 5. He Sent with these Prophets teachings. 6. The teachings were about purpose of creation, what we should know, what we should do, and results we should accomplish in our lifetime, to earn eternal happiness and peace. 7. That these teachings are GOOD for mankind. 8. The last set of teachings wee delivered by Prophet Muhammad SAWS. 9. That these teachings and the Holy Quraan were complete, as the Prophet Muhammad was the las prophet, thus his teachings were COMPLETE. 10. That the only sources to guarantee salvation is the quraan and Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad SAWS, the body of the knowledge transmitted by Allah to His Prophet Muhammad SAWS. Based on the above basics. Allah SWT said in Quraan: " In case you dispute on an issue, then refer back to Allah ( Quraan) and the Messenger ( Sunnah-Hadeeth) It was reported that the Prophet Muhammad SAWS said " I have Left for you two BOKs (Bodies of Knowledge), if you follow them, you will never get lost again: The Quran and my Sunnah" The purpose of Allah's creation of mankind was ONLY the WORSHIP of Allah. The worship of Allah SWT was detailed in Quraan and Sunnah. Nothing was left out! It therefore follows that no one can get closer to Allah by NOT FOLLOWING the two bodies of knowledge, or by introducing a new philosophy of worship not taught by Prophet Muhammad SAWS. 1. WORSHIP OF ALLAH begins with Belief in: A. Allah. B. Angels C. REVELATIONS ( HERE LIES OUR MAIN disagreement, I say revelation means heavenly transmitted books of which Quraan was last and Sunnah, you say, everyone can receive it from an enlightened teacher) D. MESSENGERS/PROPHETS E. RESURRECTION AND JUDGEMENT DAY F. QADAR, Good and Bad. 2. WORSHIP OF ALLAH has three forms: A. RITUALS TO PERFORM B. LAWS TO UPHOLD C. LOYALTIES TO SAFEGUARD A. RITUALS can only be performed the way Allah SWT taught His Messenger, any change of the way rituals are performed will diminsh the value of that worship to the point of null and voidness. B. LAWS of Allah in SHARIA, must be upheld, as these laws demarkate SOVEREGNTY of ALLAH. C. Allah is the waliyy ( Ally) of believers, and Satan is the Waliyy for the unbelievers, the highest form of worship is to align our efforts with the teachings, rituals and laws of Allah SWT as practically instructed by His Messenger Muhammad SAWS, without any addition or deletion. Allah SWT says in Quraan: " They ask you ( Muhammad) about the soul, tell them that the knowledge of the soul is a domain reserved for Allah alone" Now, Awakener bro. based on the above verse from Quraan, how much of the knowledge of the Ruux (soul) were left behind by Prophet Muhammad SAWS for us to follow? If he did, how much was it compared to the other Sharia knowledge (percentage wise)? How important was that knowledge for our salvation in the day of Judgement. Does the knowledge of the soul empower people to act like Allah, by knowing the ghaib (unseen)? Does it require special highly trained teachers to transmit this knowledge of the soul? If that is the case, what happens to the majority lay people who have no access to reach one these highly "enlightened" elite teachers? Nur

Buuxo and Suleikha sis Point well taken, Jazaakunna Allah kheiran. Zenobia sis That is correct, its the month we work on the deeper side of our soul and faith, the NAFS, we look inward deeply searching to reproach and reconnect with our maker, so InshaAllah I will take your advice. Brother, Bashi InshAllah I will delay the political topics so that we focus on the spiritual side of Islam in this month, although it can be argued that Ramadan has historically been the month of Jihad, both the Jihad to force our souls to submit to its maker, or to struggle for all the just causes of our people. Nur

Nomads Ramadan will be here soon inshAllah, and as usual, I will attempt to post some new posts, please guide me with your choice of a topic from topics on my personal jotter. 1. College Freshmen, Pillars to hang on against College Perils. 2. From The Anarchist Magazine: A. International Terrorist Convention. Events, Speakers and Trade Show, Nice surprises at the Registration booth! B. Condi Rice's Theory of Creative Chaos and Darwins Theory Of Evolution. Studpidity, Mother of all Blunders. C. Foot in Mouth Desease, Politicians and People! 3. Al Ayyamul Khaaliyah, Our Numbered Days On Earth. 4. High Fashion: Fire resisting Clothes For Somali Sisters. 5. Beitul Ankabut : Spiders Web Shelters, On Alliances and Protection Pacts. 6. Heavenly God, Earthly God. 2007 eNuri Ramadaaniyaat. Fasting Is More Than Craving For Sambusi! [ August 27, 2007, 05:48 AM: Message edited by: Nur ]

Ramadan is here once more, back to the Quraan Discussion. Nur

DEMOCRACY NOW! EXCLUSIVE An Inside Look at How U.S. Interrogators Destroyed the Mind of Jose Padilla In a Democracy Now! national broadcast exclusive, forensic psychiatrist Dr. Angela Hegarty speaks for the first time about her experience interviewing Jose Padilla for 22 hours to determine the state of his mental health. AMY GOODMAN: Did you conclude he had been tortured? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, “torture,” of course, is a legal term. However, as a clinician, I have worked with torture victims and, of course, abuse victims for a few decades now, actually. I think, from a clinical point of view, he was tortured TRANSCRIPT JUAN GONZALEZ: A jury began deliberations on Wednesday in Miami in the case of Jose Padilla, a Brooklyn-born man accused by the Bush administration of plotting to set off a dirty bomb inside the United States. The FBI initially arrested him secretly in Chicago in 2002, after he got off a plane from Europe. For a month he was held as a material witness. Then Attorney General John Ashcroft made a dramatic announcement: the US government had disrupted an al-Qaeda plot to set off nuclear dirty bombs inside the United States. At the center of the plot, Ashcroft alleged, was Padilla. AMY GOODMAN: President Bush then classified Jose Padilla as an enemy combatant, stripping him of all his rights. He was transferred to a Navy brig in South Carolina, where he was held in extreme isolation for forty-three months. The Christian Science Monitor reported: "Padilla's cell measured nine feet by seven feet. The windows were covered over... He had no pillow. No sheet. No clock. No calendar. No radio. No television. No telephone calls. No visitors. Even Padilla's lawyer was prevented from seeing him for nearly two years." JUAN GONZALEZ: According to his attorneys, Padilla was routinely tortured in ways designed to cause pain, anguish, depression and ultimately the loss of will to live. His lawyers have claimed that Padilla was forced to take LSD and PCP to act as sort of truth serums during his interrogations. Up until last year, the Bush administration maintained that it had the legal right to hold Padilla without charge forever, but when faced with a Supreme Court challenge, President Bush transferred Padilla out of military custody to face criminal charges. AMY GOODMAN: On January 3, 2006, the government charged him and two others with criminal conspiracy. The government claims Padilla, along with his mentor Adham Amin Hassoun and Hassoun’s colleague Kifah Wael Jayyousi, conspired to commit murder abroad and to provide material support toward that goal. Since May, the men have been on trial in Miami. According to the Miami Herald, the overall case against Padilla is riddled with circumstantial evidence. Much of the case is built around an alleged form Padilla filled out to attend an al-Qaeda training camp. Prosecutors have introduced no evidence of personal involvement by Padilla in planning or carrying out any violent acts. There is no mention of Padilla plotting to set off a dirty bomb. Despite this, prosecutors are seeking a life sentence for Padilla. JUAN GONZALEZ: Questions have also been raised about whether Padilla was mentally fit to stand trial. His lawyers and family say he’s become clearly mentally ill after being held in isolation for so long. Today, we’re joined by one of the few medical experts who has spent time with Padilla since his arrest five years ago. Forensic psychiatrist Dr. Angela Hegarty spent twenty-two hours interviewing Padilla last year to determine the state of his mental health. She concluded that he lacked the capacity to assist in his own defense. Dr. Angela Hegarty is assistant profession of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University. She joins us today in our firehouse studio. Welcome to Democracy Now! DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Thank you. AMY GOODMAN: And thank you for joining us for this first national interview, broadcast interview, that you are doing. How did you get involved in Jose Padilla's case? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, his attorneys called me up. For many years, I have worked -- I had an interest in working with religious fundamentalists of all stripes, actually. And over the years, I had worked with lawyers in Miami, as well as elsewhere in the country, and I guess they heard about me that way. And they called me up, because essentially he wasn't really talking to them, and it was clear to them that something was very wrong, but they didn't know quite what it was at this point. And the initial goal was for me to come down and see if I could help build a rapport with him, help him really begin to act, you know, with his lawyers to advocate for himself to help them defend his case. He wasn't doing that. And so, I came down to spend some time with him. AMY GOODMAN: And what did you find? Where did you first meet Jose Padilla? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, I first met Mr. Padilla in the Miami detention center, where he is held under special conditions in a conference room with a double mirror. And we spent twenty-two hours in that room together. JUAN GONZALEZ: And how did he react to you initially, because obviously after being in isolation and then with -- he has not had a good relationship with his lawyers, as I understand, for quite a while, but how did he react to you? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, he really didn't want to talk to a psychiatrist at all. He didn’t want to be evaluated at all. He was incredibly anxious. I remember the first day, after about the first hour, he smiled for a moment and said, you know, this really isn't as bad as he thought it would be. He obviously was very, very anxious. And in the course of the interview, he revealed to me that he essentially had been told that if he relayed any of what had happened to him, his experiences, people would quote/unquote “know he was crazy.” And he was very upset by this and very disturbed by it, and it’s just that his level of being so disturbed suggested to me that there was something more, but, you know, asking further questions, he wouldn't reveal it to me. He was resentful of his lawyers. He had left the brig thinking he was about to be released. He told me that he had been given regular clothing and was actually surprised to find himself incarcerated. He was very angry at his lawyers that they hadn’t gotten him out and that, in fact, his conditions in the Miami detention center under the special conditions in which he was held were actually somewhat more restrictive and more isolating than they had been in the later stages of his detention at the brig. So he was angry with them. He also felt that everything had been established, you know, that the government knew everything and that essentially they would -- there was no need for him to be revealing things to his lawyers. And he was very uncomfortable. AMY GOODMAN: What was the effect of over three-and-a-half years of isolation on Jose Padilla? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: I think there’s two things, really. Number one, his family, more than anything, and his friends, who had a chance to see him by the time I spoke with them, said he was changed. There was something wrong. There was something very “weird” -- was the word one of his siblings used -- something weird about him. There was something not right. He was a different man. And the second thing was his absolute state of terror, terror alternating with numbness, largely. It was as though the interrogators were in the room with us. He was like -- perhaps like a trauma victim who knew that they were going to be sent back to the person who hurt them and that he would, as I said earlier, he would subsequently pay a price if he revealed what happened. So I think those would be the two main things. Also he had developed, actually, a third thing. He had developed really a tremendous identification with the goals and interests of the government. I really considered a diagnosis of Stockholm syndrome. For example, at one point in the proceedings, his attorneys had, you know, done well at cross-examining an FBI agent, and instead of feeling happy about it like all the other defendants I’ve seen over the years, he was actually very angry with them. He was very angry that the civil proceedings were “unfair to the commander-in-chief,” quote/unquote. And in fact, one of the things that happened that disturbed me particularly was when he saw his mother. He wanted her to contact President Bush to help him, help him out of his dilemma. He expected that the government might help him, if he was “good,” quote/unquote. JUAN GONZALEZ: In the affidavit you submitted to the court summarizing your examination of him, you also talk about the things he did say that happened to him, the sleeping on a steel bed with no mattress for all that time that he was isolated? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Yes. In the darkness or in the light -- in the cells, the light would be all dark for a long time or all light for a long time. And for a very long part of his detention he had no mattress at all. And sometimes he would try to sleep on the pallet, if you will, the hard steel pallet, or other times he would be in essentially stress positions where he's got shackles and a belt and is in an awkward and uncomfortable position for long periods at a time. JUAN GONZALEZ: What other things did he say, tell you, were done to him? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, I think one of the things you have to realize is he was adamant that he would not reveal any quote/unquote “classified information.” He in fact refused to provide a narrative of his account. He essentially -- on the second day, after spending four hours on the Monday and we developed some rapport, on the second day I brought him in a list of materials and interrogation tactics that had been already -- you know, they were in the public record. And I asked him just merely to say yes or no to some of these things. And this included slapping, exposure to heat or cold for long periods of time, forcible showering. He was terrified, actually, about being taken to a thing called the “cage.” This was supposedly “recreation” -- I’d like to put that in quotes. He spoke about the lack of sleep, the relentless clicking and then banging of the doors of other cells that would wake him up. AMY GOODMAN: Explain that. Wasn't he alone in the Naval brig? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Yes, he was. In this very small cell, he was monitored twenty-four hours a day, and the doors were managed electronically. And between what Mr. Padilla told us and other sources, essentially it’s possible to open and close these doors electronically. And he would hear the click of the door opening, which is a loud click that sort of echoed, and then a very loud bang over and over and over again for hours at a time, possibly days. He had no way of knowing the time. The light was always artificial. The windows were blackened. He had no calendar or time, as you mentioned earlier. He really didn't see people, especially in the beginning. He only had contact with his interrogators. AMY GOODMAN: Did he recognize you when you returned the next day? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Oh, yes. Yes, he did. But he did have some memory problems, in that by about the fourth day, I asked him, “Can you just give me” -- he had been very clear that there was a particularly bad time, and then there was a somewhat better time, and then after he had access to counsel things improved somewhat. And he really was unable to give me any kind of -- beyond the most broadest brush strokes, he was unable to put anything in any kind of a chronological narrative at all. He was very, what we would call it in psychiatry, “concrete.” You would ask him, you know, how did you feel about something, or what have you, and he would generally resort to cliches. He seemed to have a great deal of difficulty recalling precise personal details about the interrogations or the experiences or particular incidents. He wouldn't know when they happened or how long they lasted, and so forth. AMY GOODMAN: Did you conclude he had been tortured? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, “torture,” of course, is a legal term. However, as a clinician, I have worked with torture victims and, of course, abuse victims for a few decades now, actually. I think, from a clinical point of view, he was tortured. AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to break, and then we’re going to come back. We’re talking to Dr. Angela Hegarty, a forensic psychiatrist, spent twenty-two hours interviewing Jose Padilla last year, assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University. This is the first time she is speaking out on a national broadcast about her assessment of Jose Padilla. His case is now before a jury in Florida. Stay with us. [break] AMY GOODMAN: Our guest is Dr. Angela Hegarty, forensic psychiatrist who spent more than twenty-two hours interviewing Jose Padilla last year. She’s an assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University. Jose Padilla's case is before a Florida jury right now. Juan? JUAN GONZALEZ: Yeah, I’d like to ask you about some of the assessments by folks other than you in his case. I understand there was a Bureau of Prisons medical person who interviewed him and also concluded that he had mental problems, but that they really were not severe. And I think the judge, as well, in the case at one point acknowledged that he had some mental problems, but said that they should not be considered, the causes of them, as part of the process of the trial. Your sense of some of these other assessments? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Certainly. Well, first of all, there’s a big distinction between the diagnosis of a psychiatric or mental illness, on the one hand, and finding of legal incapacity to proceed with trial. That’s a legal term, and there are legal standards based on case law. And, of course, the judge relied on the legal standards and concluded that the defense had not met its burden in proving that he lacked capacity. Now, of course, each interview that different people have is incredibly sensitive to a number of factors: the context, who the person is, their style, their interviewing techniques, their experience, and also, most importantly, who they are to the interviewee or the defendant, in this case. And, of course, from reading Dr. Buigas's report it’s clear that -- JUAN GONZALEZ: He’s from the Bureau of Prisons. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: That's right. It was clear that he saw perhaps a different side of the defendant. Perhaps the defendant, Mr. Padilla, reacted somewhat differently to him. He was a government doctor. Dr. Buigas actually interviewed him in his own office, whereas defense experts had to use this conference room with the double mirror. So the whole interview occurred in a very different context. And that’s why we have adversarial hearings, where one group of experts will go and put their case and then the other group of experts, and then the finder of fact or the judge, in this case, decides. But, yes, he agreed that he did have some psychiatric or psychological problems, but that they weren't as severe as those the defense had seen. Part of the problem, though, with that -- and I want to add this -- is that Mr. Padilla was really very reluctant to cooperate. In fact, he refused to finish the psychological testing that I was administering and also what Dr. Zapf administered, because -- so essentially he wasn't exactly the easiest person to elicit the kind of clinical information we need. AMY GOODMAN: What about the findings that he was, well, the equivalent, after his experience of three-and-a-half years in severe isolation and what happened to him during that period, of brain-damaged? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, during my time with him, some of his reasoning seemed somewhat impaired, some of his thinking seemed impaired, his memory certainly, his ability to pay attention seemed very impaired. I developed a differential diagnosis from this: severe anxiety. Post-traumatic stress disorder can do that. But also, we know from really basic neuroscience studies that extreme isolation for prolonged periods of time -- and I’m talking, you know, the studies are on maybe days or weeks, and he had extreme isolation for years -- really do, in fact, impair higher brain function. And I recommended that we get some neuropsychological testing. And, unfortunately, he wasn't able to fully cooperate with that. However, the testing we did do was consistent with brain damage, yes. AMY GOODMAN: Brain damage. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Yes. JUAN GONZALEZ: And have you dealt with someone who had been in isolation for such a long period of time before? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: No. This was the first time I ever met anybody who had been isolated for such an extraordinarily long period of time. I mean, the sensory deprivation studies, for example, tell us that without sleep, especially, people will develop psychotic symptoms, hallucinations, panic attacks, depression, suicidality within days. And here we had a man who had been in this situation, utterly dependent on his interrogators, who didn't treat him all that nicely, for years. And apart from -- the only people I ever met who had such a protracted experience were people who were in detention camps overseas, that would come close, but even then they weren't subjected to the sensory deprivation. So, yes, he was somewhat of a unique case in that regard. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’m thinking -- at one point in your affidavit, you talk about how he said that he felt at one point that a huge weight was crushing down on his chest. Did he -- DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Yes. JUAN GONZALEZ: Explain that a little bit. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, he thought he was having a heart attack, and he’s a young, healthy man. Now, one possibility is, yes, he was having a heart attack. Certainly with the kind of adrenaline that would be surging through his body, whether from what we call internal stimuli -- hallucinations, panic, paranoia, and so forth -- or as a result of what else was going on, it’s not unreasonable. However, more likely, he also felt his life was slipping away, he was going to die, and this actually is almost a textbook description of a major panic attack, which, if anybody has had one, the word “panic” doesn't quite capture how terrible it is. You really feel like you’re dying. And so, his perceptions of what was happening to him and himself, which is one of the most terrifying aspects, was really difficult to assess. For example, he reported very clearly that he had been given mind-altering drugs. And again, that is realistically, unfortunately, one serious hypothesis. However, another serious hypothesis -- AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean? Given by who? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: By the government. AMY GOODMAN: Drugged. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Drugged, yes. And clearly he had some terrible frightening experience to which he attributed these drugs. However, again, his -- given what sensory deprivation and isolation of this scale does, it’s also entirely possible that he wasn't given drugs, and it’s just the psychiatric effects of the isolation and the sensory deprivation, because the hallucinations can be incredibly vivid. People feel like they’re losing their minds, that they’re coming apart. It’s absolutely terrifying. AMY GOODMAN: We’re interviewing Dr. Angela Hegarty, who is a forensic psychiatrist who saw Jose Padilla for more than twenty-two hours. The new Army Field Manual bars the use of isolation to achieve psychological disorientation through sensory deprivation. The manual states, “Sensory deprivation may result in extreme anxiety, hallucinations, as well as bizarre thoughts, depression, anti-social behavior. Detainees will not be subject to sensory deprivation.” But you say he was. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Without question. AMY GOODMAN: How afraid was Jose Padilla? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: How to capture that in an apt metaphor? He was terrified. For him, the government was all-powerful. The government knew everything. The government knew everything that he was doing. His interrogators would find out every little detail that he revealed. And he would be punished for it. He was convinced that -- I mean, I think in words he endorsed -- even if he won his case, he lost, because he was going back to the brig if he managed to prevail at trial. And essentially, if hypothetically one were to offer him a really long prison sentence versus -- with a guarantee that he wouldn't go back to the brig -- versus risking going back to the brig, the chance that he might go back to the brig, he would take the prison sentence for a very long period of time. I think he would take almost anything rather than go back to that brig. AMY GOODMAN: What happened in the brig? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: What happened at the brig was essentially the destruction of a human being's mind. That’s what happened at the brig. His personality was deconstructed and reformed. And essentially, like many abuse victims, whether it’s torture survivors or battered women or even children who are abused by parents, as long as the parents or the abuser is in control in their minds, essentially they identify with the primary aims of the abuser. And all abusers, whoever they are, have one absolute requirement, and that is that you keep their secret. I mean, it’s common knowledge that people who abuse children or women will say, “Look at what you made me do,” putting the blame on the victim, trying to instill guilt. “People will judge you. People will think you’re crazy if you tell them about this. You will be an enemy. You will be seen as an enemy. You will be seen as a bad person if this comes out. There will be dire and terrible consequences, not only for you.” Jose was very, very concerned that if torture allegations were made on his behalf, that somehow it would it interfere with the government's ability to detain people at Guantanamo, and this was something he couldn't sign onto. He was very identified with the goals of the government. JUAN GONZALEZ: Did he talk at all with you about his family and his concerns about what might happen to his family? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Yes. Essentially, when Mr. Padilla would talk about emotionally meaningful events or feelings, it would always be almost by accident. And he worried that his mother would be -- her life would be somehow derailed by this. He told people that his family had been threatened. His family was terrified. So, again, always the tip of the iceberg with Mr. Padilla. He was very afraid for his family. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the Jacoby statement, declaration, and why the Bush administration did not want him to see attorneys? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, there was a quote in the Jacoby declaration that caught my attention as a forensic psychiatrist. And that -- essentially it says that the purpose of keeping Mr. Padilla isolated was to foster a sense of dependence on his interrogators and to essentially foreclose in his mind utterly any hope of rescue. And it makes reference to the fact that, given that people who have had contact with the criminal justice system will expect to see an attorney and be rescued by an attorney, they want to essentially disabuse him of the notion that he will ever be rescued. They want him to believe that he is in their power forever. And I believe, in a sense, they succeeded. JUAN GONZALEZ: What does all of this do to our notions or expectation of how the criminal justice system is supposed to operate in this country? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, essentially, based on the Jacoby memorandum, it’s -- you know, almost it’s a cultural cliche. You know, you have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you. You have the right to an attorney. Essentially, what happened to Mr. Padilla was designed to reassure him that this was not in fact the case. The things we take for granted as American citizens, that we will not get off a plane and be spirited away for years at the hands of harsh interrogators, that that can happen in America. And as a citizen myself, I find it very disturbing, especially in the light of the mistakes that have been made over the years. I recall a case of an attorney who was misidentified from the West Coast, and he had had a very tough experience as a result. And so, the possibility that an innocent -- that this could happen to an innocent person, a person perhaps who is merely known to somebody who themselves perhaps are being tortured -- you know, their name might come up in such a circumstance -- could actually be spirited away and entirely deprived of their human rights, their rights as human beings, their ordinary dignity, is disturbing. AMY GOODMAN: Dr. Angela Hegarty, we are headed to San Francisco today. Today, tomorrow, Saturday, Sunday, Monday is the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. You’re a psychiatrist. But that’s the group of 150,000 psychologists. And they are having a showdown right now. A vote will happen on Sunday, whether the APA will take a position against the involvement of its members, of psychologists, in coercive interrogations, in, what many psychologists are saying, torture. There is a massive protest taking place tomorrow at 4:00 outside the Moscone Center. There will be a track of debates inside the conference. Unfortunately, we wanted to record these debates, and the APA is now saying that there will be no video recording of discussions between the psychologists, public discussions, where military psychologists debate others around the issue of whether psychologists should be involved in these interrogations. What are your thoughts? And what position has your organization, the American Psychiatric Association, taken? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, the American Psychiatric Association principles of ethics essentially follow the AMA’s, which is -- AMY GOODMAN: American Medical Association. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: American Medical Association, yes -- is, no psychiatrist is involved in torture ever under any circumstances. Period. Torture -- there is no caveat that opens up the possibility by mentioning the Bush administration's qualifications on the definition of “torture.” That the psychologists are protesting and debating this is great news. Clinicians -- our entire professional identity is clinicians. And if psychologists -- psychologists certainly see themselves as clinicians, people who care for people. Our entire professional identity as people who help people is obviated by such involvement. And I entirely disagree with any caveat that would allow a clinician to be involved in torture at any time. AMY GOODMAN: What about the argument that those who don't want the moratorium are making, and especially high-level staff of the American Psychological Association, that for psychologists to be there is to bring ethics to the situation, to explain what is going too far? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Well, you know, I asked Mr. Padilla about that. He’d said that there were some decent people that he had come in contact with, you know, over the -- especially in the latter part of his stay at the brig. And I asked him, I said, “You know, if I were in a situation like this as a clinician and I abhor what’s being done to you, would you want me to stay, knowing that there’s somebody who cares about you, who’s ideally, hopefully, ethical? Or would you -- albeit powerless -- or would you want me to leave?” And he actually gave me one of the first and only immediate and straightforward and direct answers: he would want me to leave. He would not want me there, because for him my presence endorses what’s going on, even though, as I said, in my scenario I would be powerless to do anything to change it. JUAN GONZALEZ: And did he talk about having interactions with medical people, either doctors, psychiatrists or psychologists, while in custody? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: No, he just mentioned staff, in general. He had some interactions with some kind of clinical staff around medication and evaluations, but it’s unclear to me what their credentials were. AMY GOODMAN: So you don't know if psychiatrists or psychologists were involved. DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: Oh, I know that some mental health professionals were involved, but -- by the way this was designed -- the sensory deprivation, especially, the leaving and taking of stimuli from his environment. For example, there was a mirror that was there, and then that was taken away abruptly, or he’d have a pillow or a sheet or something that made him a little more comfortable, and that would be taken away. One of the things that came out in the course of my evaluation was, he was required to sign his name John Doe. This kind of thing and the whole notion of dependency and the cultivation of dependency, the impact of sleep deprivation, stress positions, all of that was so coordinated it’s impossible for me to imagine that at least at some phase there wasn't some mental health professionals involved. JUAN GONZALEZ: And what was the reason for wanting to have him sign his name John Doe? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: He’s no longer a person. He’s no longer an individual. There will be no record that he was ever there, that the interrogators -- this is from my knowledge of torture around the world -- that the interrogators essentially will be absolutely immune to any accountability. AMY GOODMAN: After having met with him for twenty-two hours, as we wrap up, Dr. Hegarty, your conclusions about his case, Jose Padilla’s case, as it stands now before a jury in a Florida court? DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: You know, I don't know if he’s guilty or not of the charges that they brought against him, but he has certainly paid -- already, before he was ever found guilty, he has already paid a tremendous price for his trip to the Middle East. AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank you for being with us, Dr. Angela Hegarty, forensic psychiatrist, assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University, one of the forensic psychiatrists who met Jose Padilla, one of the very few, speaking out now for the first time. Twenty-two hours she interviewed him.

Awakener bro. Are you back from the wilderness? Nur

Bush’s America By Paul Craig Roberts 08/15/07 "ICH" -- -- “ No American President can stand up to Israel .” These words came from feisty Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations (1967-1970) and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1970-1974). Moorer was, perhaps, the last independent-minded American military leader . Admiral Moorer knew what he was talking about. On June 8, 1967, Israel attacked the American intelligence ship, USS Liberty, killing 34 American sailors and wounding 173. The Israelis even strafed the life rafts, machine-gunning the American sailors leaving the stricken ship. Apparently, the USS Liberty had picked up Israeli communications that revealed Israel’s responsibility for the Seven Day War. Even today, history books and the majority of Americans blame the conflict on the Arabs. The United States Navy knew the truth, but the President of the United States took Israel’s side against the American military and ordered the United States Navy to shut its mouth. President Lyndon Johnson said it was all just a mistake. Later in life, Admiral Moorer formed a commission and presented the unvarnished truth to Americans. http://www.ussliberty.org/moorerfindings.htm [see also http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/evidence/usreport s/moorer.html ] and [http://www.counterpunch.org/weir06232007.html ] and [http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070608/ news_lz1e8boston.html ] The power of the Israel Lobby over American foreign policy is considerable. In March 2006, two distinguished American scholars, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, expressed concern in the London Review of Books [ http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html ] that the power of the Israel Lobby was bending US foreign policy in directions that serve neither US nor Israeli interests. The two experts were hoping to start a debate that might rescue the US and Israel from unsuccessful policies of coercion that are intensifying Muslim hatred of Israel and America. The Israel lobby was opposed to any such reassessment, and attempted to close it off with epithets: “Jew-baiter,” “anti-semitic,” and even “anti-American.” Today Israeli citizens who oppose Zionist plans for greater Israel are denounced as “anti-Semites.” Many Americans are unaware of the influence of the Israel lobby. Instead they think of the US as “the world’s sole superpower,” a macho new Roman Empire whose orders are obeyed without question or the insolent nonentity is “bombed back to the stone age.” [ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle _east/article647188.ece ] Many Americans are convinced that military coercion serves our interest. They cite Libya, Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and now they are ready to bring Iran and Pakistan to heel with bombs. This arrogance results in the murder of tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of men, women and children, a fate that many Americans seem to believe is appropriate for countries that do not accept US hegemony. Coercion is what American foreign policy has become. Macho superpatriots love it. Many of these superpatriots derive vicarious pleasure from their delusions that America is “kicking those sand niggers’ asses.” This is the America of the Bush Regime. If some of these superpatriots had their way every “unpatriotic, terrorist supporter” who dares to criticize the war against “the Islamofacists” would be sent to Gitmo, if not shot on the spot. These Bush supporters have morphed the Republican Party into the Brownshirt Party. They cannot wait to attack Iran, preferably with nuclear weapons. Impatient for Armageddon, some are so full of hubris and self-righteousness that they actually believe that their support for evil means they will be “wafted up to heaven.” [see http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18 165.htm ] It has come as a crippling blow to Democrats that “their” political party is comfortable with Bush’s America, and will do nothing to stop the Bush regime’s aggression against the Iraqi people or to prevent the Bush regime’s attack on Iran. The Democrats could easily impeach both Bush and Cheney in the House, as impeachment only requires a majority vote. They could not convict in the Senate without Republican support, as conviction requires ratification by two-thirds of Senators present. Nevertheless, a House vote for impeachment would take the wind out of the sails of war, save countless lives and perhaps even save humanity from nuclear holocaust. Various rationales or excuses have been constructed for the Democrats’ complicity in aggression that does not serve America. Perhaps the most popular rationale is that the Democrats are letting the Republicans have all the rope they want with which to produce such a high disapproval rating that the Democrats will sweep the 2008 election. It is doubtful that the Democrats would assume that men as cunning as Karl Rove and Dick Cheney do not understand the electoral consequences of a low public approval rating and are walking blindly into an electoral wipeout. Rove’s departure does not mean that no strategy is in place. So what does explain the complicity of the Democratic Party in a policy that the American public, and especially Democratic constituencies, reject? Perhaps a clue is offered from the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune news report (August 1, 2007) that Democratic Congressman Keith Ellison will spend a week in Israel on “a privately funded trip sponsored by the American Israel Education Federation. The AIEF--the charitable arm of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)--is sending 19 members of Congress to meet with Israeli leaders. The group, made up mostly of freshman Democrats, has plans to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and [puppet] Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The senior Democratic member on the trip is House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who has gone three times. . . . The trip to Israel is Ellison’s second as a congressman.” According to the Star-Tribune, a Republican group, which includes Rep. Michele Bachmann (R, Minn), led by Rep. Eric Cantor (R, Va) is already in Israel. According to news reports, another 40 are following these two groups during the August recess, and “by the time the year is out every single member of Congress will have made their rounds in Israel.” This claim is probably overstated, but it does show careful Israeli management of US policy in the Middle East. Elsewhere on earth and especially among Muslims, the suspicion is rife that the reason the war against Iraq cannot end, and the reason Iran and Syria must be attacked, is that the US must destroy all Muslim opposition to Israel’s theft of Palestine, turning an entire people into refugees driven from their homes and from the lands on which they have lived for many centuries. Americans might think that they are merely grabbing control over oil, keeping it out of the hands of terrorists, but that is not the way the rest of the world views the conflict. Jimmy Carter was the last American president who stood up to Israel and demanded that US diplomacy be, at least officially if not in practice, even-handed in its approach to Israel and Palestine. Since Carter’s presidency, even-handedness has slowly drained from US policy in the Middle East. The neoconservative Bush/Cheney regime has abandoned even the pretense of even-handedness. This is unfortunate, because military coercion has proven to be unsuccessful. Exhausted from the conflict, the US military, according to former Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, is “nearly broken.” Demoralized elite West Point graduates are leaving the army at the fastest clip in 30 years. [ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2147 052,00.html ] Desertions are rapidly rising. A friend, a US Marine officer who served in combat in Vietnam, recently wrote to me that his son’s Marine unit, currently training for its third deployment to Iraq in September, is short 12-16 men in every platoon and expects to be hit with more AWOLs prior to deployment. Instead of re-evaluating a failed policy, Bush’s “war tsar,” General Douglas Lute, has called for the reinstitution of the draft. Gen. Lute doesn’t see why Americans should not be returned to military servitude in order to save the Bush administration the embarrassment of having to correct a mistaken Middle East policy that commits the US to more aggression and to debilitating long-term military conflict in the Middle East. It is difficult to see how this policy serves any interest other than the very narrow one of the armaments industry. Apparently, nothing can be done to change this disastrous policy until the Israel Lobby comes to the realization that Israel’s interest is not being served by the current policy of military coercion. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

Zenobia sis You ask: " Nurow walaalo, help me. How does one stay focused?" Walaal, the word focus was bprrowed from the science of optics, its when a viewer pin points an image and reduces the center of observation to a sharp well defined image, while other images around it are fuzzy. Likewise, as humans we have many aspects in our lives that are of concern to us, thus, the first step toward focus is to PRIORITISE. 1. Make a list of what is important to you. 2. List them in the order of short term, medium term and long term, and beyond. 3. List what makes you happy. 4. List what makes you unhappy 5. List what you are afraid of. 6. List your wishes, in this life and next. 7. Now, list them from 1 to 9 8. Which one comes to number ONE? Nur