Originally posted by Baashi: ^Stay tuned bro. In this paper we do indeed examine those who are at the center of Somali politiking. We will look into their public records. Preview of topics under considerations: 1. Biadowa - city of death turned city of hope. Xog Haye examines what made Baidowa suitable for the Parliament meeting. 2. Complicated city - Mogadishu's stakeholders - who are they? 3. Jowhar and its flip-flopper wobly prince. The man of the hour Dheere plus Inna Yussuf's triangulation gamble. 4. Falling from grace: Puntland - Public fleecing in sytle. How the untouchables got so invisible dor so long and why Cadde don't want to be under the long shadow of the strong man any more. 5. Islamic courts at crossroads. Al Xaaj Mussa Yalaxow and why he showed his true colors by tarnishing the courts' good name. Investigative report on the thin line between Courts and Warlordism. 7. Inna Yeey the makeshif president of 4.5 TFG formerly Jowhar faction but soon would-be Biadowa faction. Strong man's juggling act to stay at top. 8. Somali British Corner's bid for recognition. On Hargeisa frustration with Ethiopia and Britain's silence on the recognition issue. They don't say out loud what they tell them in private. Politiking gone low, the art of thriving on the misery of one's brother. 9. JVA - the coalition of convienence, the most sucessful alliance. How they last this long? 10. Sleeping with the enemy. Money talks: Qanyare and Co.'s heads turn when it does. Srange bed fellows - a biography. These topics are under consideration and if and when we decide which one to pick we will use our latest template with the three-angle anylsis sections to cover all the edges of the issue. Stay tuned Digaale. Waxa-la-Yiri content programming dept. Wax ma yaqaan War moogaa ka liita. Wax ma yaqaan War moogaa ka liita .Indeed. War Baashow bal labadaa qodob ka bilow.

Originally posted by Bishy: No it AINT. You Plagiarised the name from one very famous other Farax Name: Faarah Brown! Becoz it can be kulaha,You got the Name[and the idea] from non other than this Farax Brown. Originality xaa qaaday??...Couldave figured anyway,arent you the Danyeerow?? I was meaning to come to you and tell it to your thieving self,Danyeerow but unfortunatly i lost my damn password[ADMIN,I need help dee ]. Untill then you can use it,laakin markaan soo laabto,waa bila maxaan idhaa. I am currently using *Cute Bishy's* handle to voice my opinion,ileen nin cunaha la hayo baan ahayo!![Agah!].Agah! I Missed YOU ALL OF YOU! *Faarax Brown: Using a Borrowed Handle* You are indeed missed. I wondered what happened to Faarax [coon] , illeen waa nin xayiran. Adminow; war ninka soo daa haddaad ilaahay taqaan . give him his handle back or create one for him please.

^^A very interesting adventure, I say. I did canoeing once (a similar activity? I guess) and went very smooth. It was on a very stable river (yours sound a bit too wild), and reasonable distance---about ten miles.

^^Oh Bishaarooy---why Bishy?-- do you not know that i am short-handed at this juncture. Fair enough, yaa naden, and I stand corrected. But I hope your vacillation is not deliberately engineered to seek sedition. If that were the case, I hope you would agree, it would make our discussion an inept dialect that serves no purposeful function. To make sure that we are working under the same religious framework let’s agree on some fundamentals in Ijtihaad as it relates to our discussion:-- The Islamic science of hadith is a mature field that has well-established processes and standards to separate fabricated hadiths from authentic ones. Hadiths in the Muslim and Bukhari collection were thoroughly authenticated, and hence the validity of both its contents and chain of narration won consensus of the Muslim scholars. Consensus of the learned community of ummah is not to be taken lightly when considering issuing verdicts that’s contrary to a previously established interpretation. Before we go any further lets affirm that Ijtihaad is not tantamount to a reckless freelancing in which you reserve the right to comment on jurisprudential matters and yet disregard its main pillars (i.e. previous interpretations and standards of hadith). To call authenticated hadiths ‘dangerous’ is a hostile thought. But let me halt it there and wait to see where you stand on the above action items, yaa naden. JB, no contradictions there i insist. It is not surprising, however, that you spotted one and tried, with all your might, to ‘smash it for good’.

General Duke, addeer Sh. Xasan waa buu Barri ka diriray mooyee wax kale ma ku haysataa? Or guilty of association is the name of this scheme? Indhacadde has been and, remains to be, a simulated-mullah. At least that much is known about him. AQasim is a bewildered man; unable to emerge from Barre’s legacy. He had his lion share in the demise of Somali state. But what do you say about the good Sheikh? Or the fact that he made Bush’s infamous list is good enough for you to accuse him an occupier of the fertile south?

Castro, adeer waan ku salaamay. I see nothing new in facilitating the muslimaat to join the workforce of Islamic call. As you now dacwa has never been an elitist field. Needless to say dictator Muhamad of Moroco’s attempt to stay relevant will not come to fruition. Naden, for a minute I was tempted to lecture about the difference (whose value ironically eludes you) between equity and equality in general, and as it relates to gender relations, in particular. But that thought eclipsed as I realized that you take no issue with the religious verdict of reserving imaamah for the Muslim men. You, in turn, need to know that I see no obstacle to the muslima’s path in serving her community in different capacities as long she shuns from seeking the position of head of Islamic state. If I got it wrong, however, and you hold no such view you can correct me, and we shall discuss it further. If I got my deductions right, on the other hand, and you are not contending to that reserved imaamah, the contradictions you spoke of about the leadership hadith begin to fade away---grow less significant, and hence unworthy of further discussion. Perhaps your neural firings were vapors of your mind, and, naturally, they easily hide from the view when subjected to real analysis . Still I liked your delivery of those thoughts, I must admit, and how eloquently you put them across . As for the other hadith, as I said before, it neither exacts a binding law nor contradicts any Islamic principle. When put in context that is. As it was explained by many able scholars, it was an instructive sermon delivered to educate those gathered female companions about particular weakness of theirs. It was all about encouraging Muslim women to give more charities. Just like the hadith of cukaashah, (sabaqaka bihaa cukaasha didn’t mean he won’t be able enter the paradise; it just meant it (his entrance) won’t be in the same manner), the prophet employed concise and short phrases to answer directed questions at him. Likewise, deficiency in religion and intelligence does not literally mean women are really deficient in both. This is similar, in terms of relative shortage of religiosity, to the other hadith that encouraged less wealthy Muslims to resort more remembrance of Allah in order to compete with those blessed with more. Needlessly to say one wouldn’t, in a good heart, deduct that poorer Muslims have deficiency in religion as they can hardly compete with richer believers in the charity field. Deficiency, as you can see, looses its demeaning connotation when explained objectively and put in a proper perspective. This particular hadith (women have deficiency in intellect and religion) could be challenge of sort, I concur, especially in this day and age. But to aptly understand it demands more than firing random thoughts, I hold. It requires putting it in context and explaining it in the light of the larger Qur’anic theme. It is not unusual, however, to detect what seems to be an abviuos contradiction both in the Qur’an and in the Sunnah. The process of reconciling them lies not in expressing and reporting that dissonance--that’s just the beginning of it. A more effective approach, however, is to study in the methods used by the learned community in breaching that gap. To the uninitiated, though, that may seem a lengthy process and impossible task to assume. But ad hoc shortcuts present worse alternatives and they yield no convincing answers either. The door of Ijtihaad is not closed shut, and I could see how you may want to extract realistic answers by your own, but the work had already been done by men whose entire life was a dedication for this cause. They left valuable works behind. It is there and ours to take yaa naden . Before I leave the scene---I feel that I am a little bit ahead ---let me tend to my friend JB’s broken argument and say few words to him. JB, my dear lad, you seem to have missed the main point of this argument. That gender is not an issue in Islam is a correct statement saaxiib. What it means is that before Allah’s universal justice one is not judged on a gender bases, but by his/her deeds. Gender, my good friend, just does not factor in. But that does not mean it does not exist. It does. There is the woman, and there is the man--right there, my good man. Each is conditioned in specific manner that’s unique to him/her. Each has strengths and weaknesses. Based on these divinely attributed characteristics, the tasks each could excel are not equal. Their tendencies are distinctively different. By uncomplicated deduction their responsibilities, good JB, differ. That’s where equity as a realistic approach to realize fairness while recognizing differences comes in. it’s where the notion of gender equality meets its demise and gets exposed as an empty slogan that fails to transcend its rhetorical usage. So you see, good JB, you hastily attempted to crack an indestructible argument saaxiib. Despite all your load noises it remains unscathed. Give it another try.

Brother SOS; you need to use a larger scale when talking about Muslim scholars whose jurisprudential approach you happen to disagree. Without doubt scholars like this do indeed deserve my respect, and that, I assert, of all Muslims. I am unaware of any crimes he’s guilty of. If you found his fatwas somewhat shaky you are not alone. But verdicts reached through genuine ijtihaad are not considered crime even if they are deemed to be wrong. It is a judgment call, but I really don’t hold the view that a pattern of issuing liberally inclined religious verdicts is indicative of a lost soul. He should not loose our respect simply because he issued a questionable fatwa, walaal. Even more importantly, we should not question his integrity and genuineness as a Muslim scholar. To be generous in justice is an Islamic virtue, yaa SOS. If he got this one wrong, as you adamantly assert he did, how many significant and valid verdicts did he reach and get it right? Did he not pioneer the gradual return of Shariica in Sudan? Are we not to consider his other positive fatwas before we take him to the woodshed? As for your take on converts, though I would generally agree with the points you raised, I disagree with you on this particular case. Islam instructed the prophet to employ persuasive methods when preaching. He was also known to use incentives to soothe new converts hearts and alleviate any hardships they may encounter. His was a wise approach that effectively gathered their hearts, as it were, and hence preserved (pardon the liberal usage) their faith. Although a lot would depend on the individual cases, I could still see how Trubi’s reasoning could positively device an efficient resolution to such a case. I could be guilty of ignorant but not a crime. When I err that is.

It makes you wonder. Thanks for posting.

^^Stay cool bro S.O.S. He committed no crimes. Indeed he makes a lot of sense, in some parts of his talk. Obviously he seems to be using more logic than revelation. Still, he remains a respected Muslim scholar and Mujtahid in my books. I disagree with the most of what he said. Emotions aside though, good brother, what would the priority be in the incident he cited in NA? Would you preserve newly-convert’s faith, and allow her stay with her family, or would you give no consideration to the particulars of her case? I don’t know. But I know that Muslim women can’t choose to marry non-Muslim man. That I know for sure.

^^Tradition of mine has been to leave the scene while I am ahead . It works. It really does. On a more serious note, your thoughts sound very genuine to me. At worst they depict a Muslim soul in search for real and practical answers. One can only appreciate how difficulty it could be when the faith you hold so dear contradicts with what is considered to be universal values of our age, for whose validity one rarely dares to question. The intricacy even grows more complex when the core message of your creed, as your piece implies, is ambushed from within. Given that appreciation, I have not gnashed a single tooth in anger with your thread. If some fellow SOLers resorted to rend own cloth in protest, my garments, as it were, remain untorn. In fact, I have almost praised your courage to share your intellectual defiance against what you supposed to be an apparent prejudice against women folk. Yes I said almost. I know. Now, apart from my sympathy for your struggle to reconcile between particular teachings of your faith and that of your own understanding of its underlying message, my take on this issue is completely different than yours. But before I even begin to discuss let me share with you few observations of mine on your thoughts. First, considering it is the equity (and not an elusive equality as you seem to believe) that which Islam promotes, I suspect it is a neural misfiring of sort to assume that Islam advocates literal gender equality. Islam presents a complete social lifestyle, which, at times, diametrically opposes the prevailing view of this age. It assigns gender-based roles, imposes limitations, and regulates desires. From Islamic perspective, for instance, personal freedom means the ability to elect and do few things, and not all things (I wonder how my good friend JB reacts to this). Provided it comes from an authentic source, divine directives are to be obeyed. Don’t get me wrong as there is nothing bad about asking propping questions as you did. But what held me in reserve is your self-referential style. Religious matters, my good sister, are best understood when put in context. There is a little value, if any, to gain from explaining jurisprudential issues in isolation. Worse still, you can’t be serious in wanting to understand the rationale and the reason behind the legacy you cited, and yet scoff the works of some early and contemporary scholars, and indict their interpretation as a one tainted with self-serving biases! Granted that most Muslim scholars, if not all of them, are male, but it is an idle talk to speculate as to what their intent was in interpreting the way they did. Gender is not an issue in Islam. To inject sexism in the discussions of this nature is pointless. Second, your neural misfiring # 3 is wildly off the mark. To compensate anomalies in your assumptions about Islam and equality you resorted to employ an incomplete ad hoc. The suggestion to retire this authenticated hadith simply because it is inconvenience to your folk (curtailing some personal desires, in the case of the leadership hadith) is faulty snipe that missed its aim. I understand this was a random neural misfiring (with qualifications as well), but it still shows how bothered you are about the legal consequence of that hadith, and how much it irks you—to the extend you are willing to commit it to the flames. That disloyalty of yours to the consensus of learned community of this Ummah is not a good sign. I would advice you work within the parameters of Islamic fiqh. Questions are fine but discard not the source from which potentially your answers could come. Third, the two hadithis you cited are of a different genre. The hadith that regulates the degree to which a Muslim woman can rise to serve her community has a binding legal effect. It enjoys the consensus of Islamic jurisprudential schools (all four of them). It is a settled law, so to say, and any one who dares to challenge is destined to a doomed insurgency. The other hadith that addresses women’s deficiency in reason and religion (wonder who is not deficient in both) has no legal consequence. But if you chose to highlight both and present them as a glaring contradiction to your fundamental understanding of Islam and what it stands for, you are not to blame.Your understading of it is. Intaa ha na joogto. I will come back IA.

^^MMA, muraad waa raggeedii. Wallaahi waa iga qosliyey ! Innaba caadi ma aha . Qanyare & Yalaxow aa la baafinaa aa...

^^Bisinka. Waa maxay sharooko ? Ayyuuto weligay baan aqaanay. Hagbadna mar dhow baan bartay. they just mean the same thing.

MMA, waxaad illowday; buufis bug hilib-xalaal Caadi ay hadda nala noqdeen laakiin anigu qaxii ka hor ma aqoon.

^^Fools, as the saying goes, rush in where angels fear to tread. Abu NGONGE ku lahaa! Are we to take that as a case of a Freudian slip? Or your contempt toward the sources of haddiith has no boundary to observe? You see, ‘scholar JB’, no one is preventing you to participate and debate in any topic that you deem important. But the problem lies in your misconception that, in all threads, all roads lead to Rome. I am telling you that, in this particular thread, there is a minimum level of competence to meaningfully participate, and hence all roads do not lead to Rome. There is only one-way to go about challenging these ‘mullahs ’; have a proficiency in religion, saaxiib. Haddii kale iska aamu. Iga qor xikmaddaa, adeer .

Bro Nur, as much as I support those religious men in Mogadishu and like them succeed, the argument you presented is insurmountable, and therefore, for now, I am forced to agree with you on the basis of the lack of full sovereignty of these courts. It is apparent that these Islamic courts apply the shariicah law selectively. Though I will always support them politically, till I do more research on this issue, I will have to have reservations on the legal binding of this need-based-shariicah-implementation . As for my theory of strict adherence to the dictates of the divine law and my loyalty to the salafi approach of interpreting it, that I still hold and I did not depart it walaal. I always apposed armed dacwah in the house of Islam, but I thought the intractable political and security circumstances in Mogadishu warrant some exceptions. In the light of your analysis however I realize the wind behind your argument, and till I do more research on this issue I have to control my personal desires for a speedy reestablishment of shariicah in Mogadishu. Perfection should not be the goal, I still hold, but we shouldn’t lower the quality bar in favor of expediency, I concur. So we are not ready for it yet, I agree. But what shoud we do in the meantime, I ask? PS: To continue this discussion I will come back for the questions you posed.

Nurow, I envy your caution (a sign of a judicious man) and appreciate the distinction you made (need vs. conviction) as to the approach and the nature of Mogadishu Islamic courts. I also have no doubt that they are working on a hazardous ground; shaky foundations, inadequate religious training, and, above all, chronic tribalism. But I am still not convinced (though admittedly I am fleeting with more questions than answers) about the rigidity of those processes you cited. I always viewed the process of implementing Sharia to be in the form of a gradual contract between a certain consenting community and the leadership of the dacwah. If a certain community, say Hawlwadaag in Mogadishu, decide to have Islamic Shariica served on them, I fail to see a reason to have their wishes not honored. Clearly it is not an easy task to enforce a Shariica penal code on a society whose sole source of legitimacy is the clan. But trying it nevertheless is not only a noble cause, but practical as well. Perfection should never be the goal, yaa Nur. Genuine but inexact deed is acceptable, I thought. As for the confusion or the potential misrepresentation which imprecise implementation of the Shariica could cause, that’s a very legitimate point with which I would agree absent of my belief that reasonable people would assess these Islamic courts holistically. Every great empire had a humble beginning, I am sure you would agree, and as long the course is right, minor mistakes are both expected and negligible relative to the larger picture of the process. The chickens are not going to come home to roost, I insist, for a slight jurisprudential deviation or a questionable alliance those courts might undertake in the process of reintroducing Shariica to the masses. While the warlords are fighting it out, a slow but sure appearance of a new system is beginning to peek. Imperfect as it may be, it is an alternative to what has been the norm for a decade and half. Granted that it is now both in its infancy and in the hands of men who have a very limited background as to how to manage a complex institution like the one they are trying to erect. But don’t you think their effort is justified (hence, the usage of the brand) as the masses suffers for the lack of government? Should the masses live in this void till a central government emerges, and forgo the service of these courts? What is the maqsidu shariicah in this one yaa Nur? Does the harm (potential misrepresentation of Islamic brand) outweigh the benefit (providing alternative governance for the Mogadishu residents and honing judicial and administrative skills of wadaada) of the service these courts provide? Could partial (gradual) implementation of the Shariica ever be permissible? PS:- My views are based on Somalia’s failed state reality otherwise the question of sovereignty would have been relevant one to discuss.

Nur, ‘A spare part for a Ford may not’ literally ‘work on a GM’, but could we tweak it and somehow make it fit? Could we reconfigure it so we could use it till our sole GM gets to the next mechanic place? How long could we wait for a spare part whose factory has long ceased? And how big should the embracing community be, yaa Nur? What say you about the makeshifts courts in Mogadishu? Do they not have a legitimate purpose to serve? These are not rhetorical questions walaal. They are valid queries that need answers. But one thing I agree with you; the challenges of reestablishing Islamic government largely emanate from within, and not from without. External challenges are not that big a threat compared to the lack of leadership that this sahwah suffers. It’s the tradition of Allah to withhold tamkiin (enabling factor to successfully and justly administer the divine objectives of Allah’s message and manage its political and economic complexity) from those whose managerial capacity is inadequate to the task, and whose spiritual readiness is not at the desired level. Those who work toward its end may as well be eligible, and perhaps get, His support and help but the grant of tamkiin may be postponed. That much I can understand. But I could not swallow the suggestion, from your piece, to stay put and suffer until a comprehensive Islamic government with a global reach is borne. It must start from somewhere, maaha yaa Nur? Come back yaa sheekhii, and lecture more. This is very interesting thread. Thanks much, and as always may Allah credit to your xasanaat account!

Originally posted by Salafi da'wa: Xin, Yaa akhi .................... The topic as it states, is whether a Muslimah can be the head of an Islamic state, to suggest a woman can be the guardian of men conflicts with the message of Islam. They are not barred from the position due to their limit in intellect or deen , except that her position and responsibilities in Islam prevents her from fulfilling the obligations of wiliyahul amr. That's enough concession for me, yaa salafi. the rest does not warrant a response; it is a mixture of agreeable sophistry and irrelevant exposition.

This is good one, yaa Caamir.. When the power of reason is combined with that of positive thinking, the effect is imperishable walaahi. Xayaakallaahu yaa cabdallah, I say.

Sulayman, it is quite disappointing that you have not understood my objections to your ‘half-baked interpretations’ (yes it is a half-baked when one resolves to selectively quote the chosen prophet’s tradition without giving a proper regard to the objectives of his message) of the Sunnah. What most people objecting to is your assertion (and bro salafis) that women are less intelligent than men, and, hence that is the reason for barring them from holding the highest position of any Islamic state. Now I see you confusing yourself and spinning to all directions. No one is denying the intent of the lawgiver to have different roles for his servants. That’s not my contention walaal. So don’t waste your breath on some thing that most people agree on. Viking, yours is very competent and well-prepared write up, and I agree most of what you wrote. I think you and naden have very valid points. Scholars have differed in how high a muslimah can rise in her public service. It is no longer practical to say muslim women should shun from political participation. It would be a self-imposed injury if this ummah decides to limp on a one leg. The doors of legitimate worldly opportunities are wide open for her. As long she can manage to observe and comply with the divine orders of her maker, I see no religious obstacles getting in the way of her natural progression to better her affairs and that of her community as well. It is doable. One of those divine orders that Allah decreed on his female servants is to shun from seeking to hold the highest seat of leadership of this ummah. That is where good Xiin stops, as I am no equal to the wisdom of Allah and His intents. I simply comply and concede that power to Him. Any position other than is a fair game for all and can be open for discussion, I hold. As far Saudi Arabia and its debased monarchy, in my opinion, it represents what is wrong with this ummah. Not only because it denies women the right to drive but also, and more importantly, it operates on a system that challenges the innate rights of man; the right to choose who can represent them to serve Allah’s purpose in this life. The Saudi masses and its scholars are to blame for the decadence they suffer. Masses because, I have to yet see a meaningful objection from what is Saudi Arabia’s large population, and I think (could be naiveté) that they could effectively end this regime with the help of Allah had they demonstrated practical steps and showed spiritual power. Scholars because this corrupt monarchy enjoys considerable support from them. It is them who blessed them and sing its praises. It is them who for too long withheld that overdue fatwa which should’ve detailed all reasons and religious justifications to resist its methods and hold it accountable to the public treasures it robbed and the wrong policies it implemented. But because Saudi Arabia does a poor job of representing Muslim image (or Taliban as you mentioned) we should not minimize the significance and the practical benefits of our core values. The concept of mahram for our women, for instance, should not be retired simply because Saudi Arabia abused it. Like wise the concept of gender roles and its significance should not be lost on us because some corrupt regime pushed its envelope when enforcing it. Even when addressing workplace and other sectors of education and health, we should think Islamicly and must incorporate our values as well. As long those guidelines are considered, I think the argument for gender segregation would be reduced to a mere shout. PS. Sorry, I could not edit it.

Wrong T.

^^Very good. You’re still clinging to it. Who is not weak in deen and deficient in intelligence, yaa salafi? Are we not all devoid of knowledge? What are the characteristics of man (insaan)? How does the noble Qur’an approach this subject saaxiib? And if women are so intelligently weak, why the beloved prophet sought her advice in the time of crisis? Do you remember what happened in that famous hudaybiyah? Tell me, my good brother, who’s lost in this gloom of selective quotes and half-baked interpretations of the sunnatu al Mustafa? Ponder a bit on those questions, yaa saaxibii? Need you not camouflage with the jewels of our beloved prophet whose wisdom you seem to have missed!

Originally posted by Salafi da'wa: Good XIn saxib I dont understand your contention, do you have a problem with the hadith or with ahlul dikr's explanation? ^^I am contending the notion that women are less intelligent than men. Simple. I accept the hadith the way it is. If some scholars (Ibnu baaz included) explained it in that light, however, it does not mean it is so. Don’t get me wrong saaxiib for I applaud the ijtihaad of those scholars to reason as to what the rationale of barring women from the highest position of leadership is. But it just remains ijtihaad, and no more. Midda kale, you have to understand that I am beyond blind taqliid at this stage of my life, and although learned scholars are all dear to me, the truth, as Ibnu Qayyim once wrote, is dearer than them to me. Marka ha igu xuuxin ahlu thkri said this. But if you, or Sulayman for that matter, feel that women are not as intelligent as men why don’t you open another thread and bring something to show for it. And while you are at it remember the issue is not, good friends, whether there are distinctive, and some times not so distinctive, roles that’s suitable for each gender as we agree on that one. The issue you seem to have chosen, yaa salafi, is whether those roles are based on deficiency of intelligence of one particular gender. Aniga doodaydu waa simple adeer: xaddithkani waa saxiix. Xukunkiisuna waa dhab. Ilaahay iy rasuulkiisa saa ku taliyey. Haddaadse la shirtimaado xadiisku waa sax laakiin dumarka waxaa xukunka loogu diiday caqli yaraan baa haysa. Taasi ima marto. PS: i ma liking how this thread is progressing..

I also wish, good Sulayman, that you could address your fellow sisters as respectably as you could without resorting to cheap and phantom scientific research. You've already went off topic when you indulged us all in the lowest level of this discussion one could reside; gender x vs. y. How do you measure intelligence, good brother? As me calling you dude, though I don’t think dude is particularly offensive word, still apologies saaxiib. But the irony is really suffocating in that you are offended by dude, yet adamant about posting shallow and selective quotes of some learned scholars that assert women to be less intelligent than men. Now, all is not lost so lets restore the decency of this discussion or at least allow bro Nur to give its last rites.

^^waxaan dux lahayn baad ku noq-noqonaysaa. give it up, dude. Ama dood macno leh la imow ama iska daa waxaan aad ka lulato saaxiib. Dumarku waa ka caqli yaryihiin ragga waa sheeko aabaheed dhintay, don't be that father now . Hadba mid baa kusoo galayya...ibtilo!