impressive or what? LOL. here's something i rustle together! let me know what you guys think! i'd rate my cooking skills at 7.5/10. still lots of areas to improve though. LOL

The dangers inherent in Lord Justice Leveson’s report do not end with the controversy over statutory underpinning for a new press regulator The publication of Lord Justice Leveson’s report into the ‘culture and ethics’ of the British media - and his proposals for the future regulation of the press - has, as predicted, sparked something of a phoney war. Critics of Leveson have rallied to support Tory prime minister David Cameron’s rejection of the proposal for statutory-backed regulation. Meanwhile Labour and the Liberal Democrats have demanded that Leveson’s report be implemented in full, backed by a reportedly 100,000-strong e-petition from the Hacked Off campaign and shrieks of horror from its celebrity voiceover artists. This debate has become so distorted that somebody like Shami Chakrabarti has been able to pose as a champion of press freedom simply by coming out against a law compelling newspapers to sign up to a regulator. Yet she was a key member of Leveson’s panel, who sat in judgement on the press during the inquiry, looking less like a freedom fighter than a member of the Crown’s censorious Star Chamber. Prominent figures on all sides of this phoney war, including Cameron and Chakrabarti, have declared that they accept the ‘Leveson principles’ of independent regulation ‘with teeth’ and tough measures to enforce the new rules on the press. Yet these principles amount to an order for effectively licensing, sanitising and restricting a press, and further impinging on the bedrock liberty of freedom of expression. Here are just some of the Leveson proposals that should be rejected along with statutory underpinning. The illusion of ‘independent self-regulation’ The Leveson report repeats over and over that the new regulatory board must be ‘independent’ of the press and politicians to achieve a system of ‘independent self-regulation’. You surely do not need a law degree to see that as a contradiction in terms. If a regulator is ‘independent’ of the press, it is an external policeman. That cannot be self-regulation by any normal standard. In any case, what will the new body really be independent of? Unless they are to be angels summoned from above, everybody sitting on it will have earthly interests and agendas of their own. The likelihood is that Leveson’s new regulatory board would be stocked with the same class of the Great and Good who sat as Leveson’s advisers – knights, media grandees, retired police chiefs and the like, none of them with much time for popular newspapers and dirt-digging journalism. These people would have the power to rewrite the journalists’ code, define what is in the ‘public interest’, investigate newspapers they deem to have broken the rules and fine them up to £1million. What is more, Lord Justice Leveson proposes that the new ‘independent’ regulator should be ‘recognised’ in law, with a ‘recognition body’ empowered to check that the regulators are doing their job. He says that role should be played by Ofcom – the regulator for the communications industry. Leveson also proposes that Ofcom could act as a ‘backstop regulator’ for the press if the new system falls short. Yet Ofcom is a quango stuffed with government appointees – its current chief executive, Ed Richards, is a former top adviser to the New Labour prime ministers, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. Broadcasting regulators have pursued mission creep over the years, expanding their remit from administering the technical distribution of bandwidths to policing the content of broadcasts. The last thing our raucous press needs is to be overseen by the quango whose aim appears to be to turn the BBC into the Bland Broadcasting Corporation. The licensing stick disguised as a carrot The Leveson report claims to offer incentives to publishers to sign up to the new regulatory body. In particular it offers the press a low-cost arbitration system that could save them big court costs, and says the regulator should introduce a ‘kitemark for use by members to establish a recognised brand of trusted journalism’. These have been described by Leveson’s cheerleaders as carrots, not sticks. If so, it is a carrot shaped like a baseball bat with a six-inch nail through the end of it. This is effectively a new form of official licensing of the press, last seen in Britain more than 300 years ago, albeit presented in the double-talking legalese of today. Those who decline the invitation ‘voluntarily’ to sign up to the new system would be threatened with having to pay ‘exemplary’ damages and ‘one-way costs’ if they were taken to court. That is, they would be made an example of by the authorities. That looks like an indirect form of taxation on dissident newspapers – exactly 300 years since the Crown first taxed the newly unlicensed press in 1712, to try to stop the masses reading about what their rulers were up to. What is more, publications outside the new regulator would be faced with being overseen by Leveson’s proposed ‘back-stop regulator’ – Ofcom. As for the notion of a kitemark for a ‘recognised brand of trusted journalism’, this attempt to depict the freedom of the press like the double-glazing market ought immediately to raise the questions: ‘recognised’ by who? ‘Trusted’ by who? Much of the evidence to the Leveson Inquiry dripped with fear and loathing of the popular press, and that prejudice is clear between the lines of the report. It is not hard to imagine what view the new regulators might take of ‘good’ journalism. Their kitemark would be a form of ‘ethical’ licensing, a badge of conformism. After all, what such marks usually tell us is ‘this product is safe and child-friendly’. We might note that none of the rule-breaking convention-busting heroes of the historic struggle for a free press in Britain, such as John Wilkes in the eighteenth century or WT Stead in the nineteenth, would have qualified for any such kitemark, and were all the better for it. A complainants’ charter One legitimate criticism of the press in the past has been a reluctance to publish corrections and apologies swiftly and prominently enough when mistakes are made. Leveson’s proposed ‘independent’ arbitration body would use that as an excuse to throw the press open to anybody with an axe to grind or a taste for self-publicity. The arbitrator would hear complaints, not only from individuals alleging mistreatment, but from ‘representative groups’ and third parties who don’t like something they have seen or read. Expect a weekly list of complaints from lobby groups, crusaders and the Society of Black Lawyers. What is more, the hearings would be heard in the ‘inquisitorial’ style of a French court, where the judge simply hears the evidence, rather than the English adversarial system with its rigorous cross-examination of witnesses. The inquisitorial system was used during the hearings of the Leveson Inquiry itself, where tabloid-bashing witnesses were rarely cross-examined. One consequence was that celebrities were able to make all sorts of unsubstantiated allegations about press harassment – from Hugh Grant’s suggestion that a tabloid might have burgled his flat to the myth that in 2001 the Sun started a ‘countdown clock’ to Charlotte Church’s sixteenth birthday – without being challenged. If the judge figure on the arbitration body sides with the complainant, the regulator will then have the power not only to order the publication of a correction or apology, but to determine how and where it should be printed in the paper. Are the front pages of our newspapers to be edited by judges rather than journalists in future? A more secret state? The Leveson report is big on ‘transparency’ as a way of countering what it sees as the questionable relationships between journalists and the police in the past. Yet its proposals are likely to leave the public even more in the dark about what the police are doing. For example, Leveson wants to end the practice of ‘off-the-record briefings’ – a key tool in helping both crime reporters and the police do their jobs. The alternative will not be more information coming out of the state, but far less. He says that police commanders should inform officers of ‘the dangers of consuming alcohol in a setting of casual hospitality’, though he does not specify what the drinking-and-briefing limit might be. He also proposes that police whistle-blowers should no longer contact the media with their stories, but should go to a senior officer or the IPCC in confidence – a form of anonymous ‘self-regulation’ he thinks unfit for the free press. And he wants a bar on news outlets naming people who have been arrested. The intention no doubt is to prevent a repeat of the mistreatment of Christopher Jeffries, the landlord of murdered Joanna Yeates who was monstered by newspapers when he was briefly arrested, later winning big damages and starring at the Leveson Inquiry. But there have been many other cases where the press identifying arrested suspects has been crucial both to informing the public, aiding the investigation, and keeping justice open. The end result of all this institutionalised mistrust could only be to make the state more secretive. --------continue here: http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13138/ --------------- an excellent read.

STOIC;896168 wrote: Almost told someone to shut the hell up in Fajr prayer...One of those new-muslim know-it all type with big beard and short pants was yelling at people for not making Adhan on time.He basically called everyone in there weak muslims...Dude sit down and let the administration handle the adhan time...He was so loud I felt embarrassed for him and his ways of thinking. Most of the congregants are Pakistanis and they own the Masjid.He was still loud when i left.... be patient with them for indeed they like a new child in a candy store!

do you think it was difficult as eating ugali? i'll lie for attention-seeking purposes? Apo, stop being childish! lets call it evens and stop the fighting brother? how about it?

In the Netherlands, everyone is quite aware of the Christmas character known as Black Pete. He's a little African slave who helps out Santa Claus. According to the Dutch tradition, Black Peter is responsible for carrying a book full of the names of naughty children, along with a rod and a sack to take the bad children away. He also scatters candy for children. Since the character's creation in the 1840s, the Dutch have defended it. They even dress up publicly in blackface, and claim that Black Pete is only dark from coming down the chimney -- but he doesn't wash clean. Yet recently, Black Peter is causing more anger and controversy among the Dutch for the stereotypes associated with the Christmas character. In fact, they became so mad that organizers of New Westminster's Dutch Sinterklaas celebrations in Canada have pulled Black Peter from their traditional parade after complaints that the black-faced helper carried racist undertones. Members of the African-Canadian community complained that the character was offensive and outdated. It was the first time since 1985 that Black Peter will not accompany Sinterklaas as he heads to New Westminster Quay aboard a paddle wheeler boat, according to the Vancouver Sun. Bernard Piprah, who was an organizer of the annual Black History Month symposium at Douglas College, argued to the Vancouver Sun that the Black Peter character comes loaded with offensive, racist stereotypes: "[The character] is degrading, and it's racist, and it's incredibly outdated," Piprah said told the Vancouver Sun. "You can't erase that. You can go to your local library and read that this Black Peter was a slave. He beat children. He was dumb, and he spoke buffoonish Dutch. There are just so many insulting aspects to that character, and I can't believe they're celebrating it in New Westminster." Although many Dutch just want the tradition to stop, some would like to address the issue. In Holland, critics say that avoiding the racism implied in continuing the Black Peter tradition is a way of avoiding the thorny issue of immigration. "It's kind of something they should address, no matter what the culture, when an aspect of it is clearly offensive to a particular group," Piprah told the Vancouver News. ----------------------------------------- http://www.thegrio.com/news/black-pe...ion-or-not.php ----------------------------------- interesting article.

Juxa;896148 wrote: Alpha it is time you burry the hatchet with Ibti LOL@juxa, there is nothing to burry with IBZ! ma fahantahay ya???

good day and personal greetings of the highest regards to all, i was involved in a serious car accident this morning. i emerged unscathed but may have internal bleeding and bruised ribs etc. lets hope the shaybardis at kaah private hospital this afternoon go well.

Jacaylbaro;896112 wrote: Alpha, don't try to extract fame in every situation ...... what? what are you talking about JB? did you have problems comprehending what i wrote?

thats shocking!

^so now IBZ issues the royal seals of approval? LOL!

^ good! his failure to help the child is tantamount to murder!

^oi ugali boy! how comes the kenyan santa claus has razor bumps?

LOL@adams zalya, come on man! dee chill. this is how me and you have been all these years....do you remember the day you called me a ''pompous poodle of the far right!'' i almost died laughing ruunti....don't be upset brother.... you're a cool guy with firm held convictions.

Chimera;895950 wrote: Somali culture has many degenerate aspects, which are sold to us as being "important traditions" and "values", which in truth have not advanced our living standards or contributed to a stable society. The current status of women in Somalia is a victory to the degenerate side of our culture, just like "clan" has defeated the republic, so have various outdated traditions managed to outlast their eradication campaigns sponsored by the republic and helmed by women. BTW, every Somali man was raised by a Somali mother, if he turns into a chauvinistic pig, maybe his mother should have broaden his persepective with regards to the other gender, instead of worrying about the latest gossip. Women have a lot to do with their own status in society. oh right!...... i guess the conversation is never, quiet over, until the man-feminist adams zayla says his moralising piece. this sermon, which was presumably delivered from utopia GMT+1890679848585 upon his favourite horse morales and wearing his valyrian steel armour - looking quite the part! for the rest of us mere mortals, on the ground, who grapple with the everyday realities of the 'degenerate' injustices of womanism, adams will forever be the torchbearer and his messages of biblical proportions will shine a light through which we shall see .........indeed kulaha - our traditions and values have enslaved our women and until these chains are unclenched and they're set free from involuntary servitude, we'll be a distance 197th in the world for female empowerment. you sicken me with your spiel Adams!

Well, well, well, well, hello baby For one day you here and then you're gone A long, long way, yeah, yeah, yeah I know la ra ra ra ra yeah Well, well, I know, I know, I know, yeah Mama put me out at only fourteen So I start sellin' crack cocaine and codeine Time to stack some paper I gotta do it quick Thinkin' I'm a juvenile but they don't know who they messin' wit, yeah My mama's only son But I live everyday like it's my mutha****in' last one Every nigga and they mama askin' why But I'm in the game live by the game and in the game I'ma die But if I die or should I say if I go Bury me in Hiram Clarke next to the come and go 'Cause tomorrow ain't promised to me The only thing promised to a playa is the penitentiary So I'ma take care of my business on the smooth tip Watch my back sellin' crack and pack two clips And when ya think about that you say, "It'll be on" It's a trip you're here today but the next day you're gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone This world we livin' in man it ain't nuthin' but drama Everyone wanna harm ya in New York niggas gettin' shot fo bombers Now they got yo life in the former they in like California Niggas wit dubs are hydroponic, marijuana Gangbangin' got the ghetto hotter than a sauna Down in Orange my nigga Pops died on the corner Behind a funky-*** dice game I saw him once before he died wished it was twice mayn I remember bein' eight deep off in Chucky crib Lettin' us act bad not givin' a **** what we did When we lost him I knew the world was comin' to the end And I had to quit lettin' that devil push me to a sin My brother been in the pen fo damn near ten But now it looks like when he come out man I'm goin' in So shit I walk around wit my mind blown in my own ****in' zone 'Cause one day you here but the next day you gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone I'm up early 'cuz ain't enough light in the daytime Smoke two sweets [incomprehensible] Peanut holder my boulders smolder on the PA pipes AK loader as I get swallowed under city lights Niggas be lookin' shife, so shife back Can't show no weakness wit these *****es life jacked Mayn it's a trip where I stay especially for me Them *****es tryin' to lock me up for the whole century They gave my nigga down in Florida Dante 19 I wish that we could smoke again and take a tight lean My world a trip you can ask Bun B ***** I ain't no liar My man BoBo jus' lost his baby in a house fire And when I got on my knees that night to pray I asked God why he let these killas live And take my homeboy's son away Man if you got kids show 'em you love 'em 'Cuz God jus might call 'em home 'Cuz one day you're here, the next day you're gone I know, you know, well, well, yeah La ra la ra, I know, yeah, yeah Yeah, you're gone One day you're here, come on And then you're gone I know, you know, I know Yeah, oh, la ra la ra, la ra la ra No, no, no, no, no, no Come on, come on baby, baby La ra ra ra ra One day you're here, baby And then you're gone Next day you're gone One day you're here, baby And then you're gone, gone Next day you're gone Come on, don't leave me, yeah Don't leave me baby

^ i seem to recall a similar ismail mire poem too.

just been skyping with my kenyan friend. his wife gave birth to a baby girl. he was so happy, you could feel it!

^ Abwaan i was referring to Cabdinaasir Macalin Caydiid.

its been a big year. next year will be less spectacular as Somali politics changes every 3.5 years, at least big changes.

AUN!

at the end of the day IBZ, when all is said and done, the truth of the matter remains: we are perfectly fine with our women being educated and given the chance to learn. after all, a learned woman is more useful to a family and the wider society. laakin, our Resistance to the current western mantras resolve around the 'civilising attitudes'' of spinsters, whose frozen eggs will never yield no dividends, in: giving us dictates telling us how we ought to behave what models we should implement our culture is backward and should be reformed other such fantasies. in our egalitarian society, it's not an expectation but rather an obligation, a civic responsibility if you like, and duty to assist in ensuring that equality is practiced, to enable all are given the opportunity to flourish, to establish a fair and just society. laakin, we will not accept prescribed and indeed foreign ideologies which seeks to deliberately undermine our sacred norms and values. we will not accept the imposing white super-structure, which has seemingly permeated every aspect of our society, into force-feeding us ludicrous ideas from afar. we will not accept laws and values which have no applicability to this land and its people. we will not tolerate the vicious Somali spies and agents of the devil whose aim it is to infiltrate and change from within by transplanting their western norms and values in our midst. we will never accept these and many other things..........indeed.

Wadani;895808 wrote: I''m all for strong Somali women, but I cringe whenever I read the deluded and self entitled rantings of a Somali feminist from the diaspora. Don't they realize that the sexual and feminist revolution of the 60's has systematically eroded the pillars upon which the western world was built? Is that what they want to import to Somaliland/Somalia? +1000 and to put some flesh on the bones of your premise, as it were wadani, IBZ is attempting to reconfigure our sacred values. if its not broke don't fix it!

D/P

JB, i understand this Teresa Krug used her coverage of 2010 SL presidential elections as a launch-pad before hitting the jackpot. she left SL apparently before i arrived but she seems like the folks from Abarso Tech - with their civilising paternalism, ''we know you better than yourselves'' white-apologist nonsense which her story seemingly conveys. was her friendship with the somali athlete more valuable than her other friendships? and would Samia consider Tesera a friend or just another prying pseudo-journalist in a post-conflict areas. why exploit the suffering, the personal tragedy and untimely death of someone to further elevate yourself . i don't like when white people exploit these complex situations for their own end. teresa is the same as the photojournalist who inhumanly stood by as the vulture stalked the child to further his career!

its quite obvious IBZ intended this thread for me. i'm a little-man, insecure, lifeless without the validation of women and other stuff. but i don't care.