Classic misuse of the hadith! You are suppose to give with both Do as you please :rolleyes:

^^Well then give him £3 or something you stingy farah. P.s. if you do, don't play games with him, have his money/ food ready each and everyday you use that station, he will start counting on it so don't mess him about.

^^I know, but I thought she might not know about your erm dark side, so I was hinting

^^Either way, yaan kuu caawriyiin, give him what you can, it is not like it will take anything away from you. Give him your left over breakfast or lunch. You don't need to add to his madness by laughin at him and mocking him

^^^You are so evil! Please give him your left over change this evening, or if you don't want to give him money, do what I do, buy food and give it to them. How can you refuse someone who ASKED you for food. Acudubililah. He thought ask the Muslim you will have better luck, I guess he was wrong!

^^^LOOOOL HAHA, I don't mind looking you know how curious I am, I'll have to take a list of those places.

^^^She is scared of her shadow Blessed, she'll insist we hire few farahs as body guards Aah her convo is an adventure, she is qarax, reer Burco style, don't know why she claims Hargisa highlands.

The UK and the US have "actively undermined" international law in the way they fight terrorism, a report by judges and lawyers has said. The independent International Commission of Jurists carried out a three-year global study. It concluded that many measures introduced to fight terrorism were illegal and counter-productive. It called for justice systems to be strengthened and warned that temporary measures should not become permanent. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is a non-governmental organisation which promotes the observance of the rule of law and the legal protection of human rights. After a painstaking study carried out over three years in several countries, the panel of eminent lawyers and judges concluded that the framework of international law that existed before the 9/11 attacks on the US was robust and effective. But now, it said, it was being actively undermined by many states and liberal democracies like the US and the UK. The report remarks upon the extent to which undemocratic regimes with poor human rights records have referred to counter-terror practices of countries like the US to justify their own abusive policies. Many governments... have allowed themselves to be rushed into hasty responses to terrorism that have undermined cherished values and violated human rights The report will make uncomfortable reading for many in governments on both sides of the Atlantic, says BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner. The panel said the legal systems put in place after World War II were "well-equipped to handle current terror threats". It said countries should use civilian legal systems to try suspects and "not resort to ad-hoc tribunals or military courts to try terror suspects". The report's authors expressed concern at the lack of adequate safeguards in the use of control orders, the weakness of diplomatic assurances in relation to deportations and "excessive detention without charge". Britain's pre-trial detention time limit of 28 days is one of the longest in the world. The British Home Office said the UK faced a severe threat from terrorism. "We recognise clearly our obligations to protect the public from terrorist atrocities whilst upholding our firm commitment to human rights and civil liberties," it said in a statement. "Our policies strike that balance, with new legislation facing rigorous scrutiny through external consultation and in Parliament as well as being subject to the Human Rights Act, which the UK government enacted." The ICJ report recommended an urgent review of counter-terrorism laws and policies to prevent serious and permanent damage to fundamental human rights principles. The panel reviewed counter-terrorism measures in over 40 countries, and heard from government officials, victims of terror attacks, and from people detained on suspicion of terrorism. It found that many states have used the fear of terrorism to introduce measures which are illegal such as torture, detention without trial, and enforced disappearance. Some of the world's top international law experts served on the ICJ panel, including Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland and former United Nations human rights commissioner, and Arthur Chaskelson, former president of the constitutional court of south Africa. Mr Chaskelson, chairman of the panel, said: "In the course of this inquiry, we have been shocked by the extent of the damage done over the past seven years by excessive or abusive counter-terrorism measures in a wide range of countries around the world. "Many governments, ignoring the lessons of history, have allowed themselves to be rushed into hasty responses to terrorism that have undermined cherished values and violated human rights. "The result is a serious threat to the integrity of the international human rights legal framework." The report also called on the US administration of President Barack Obama to repeal any policies that were instigated under the "'war on terror' paradigm" that were inconsistent with international human rights law. "In particular, it should renounce the use of torture and other proscribed interrogation techniques, extraordinary renditions, and secret and prolonged detention without charge or trial," the report recommended. It added that the US detention centre at Guantanamo Bay should be closed in a "human rights compliant manner", with inmates either released or charged. President Obama ordered the closure of Guantanamo Bay within hours of becoming president last month, as well as ordering a review of military trials for terror suspects and a ban on harsh interrogation methods. BBC

OH she posted same time. Yeah thanks Sheh, for the HELP! NOT :mad: I had to go back and read everything slowly to finally get it on my own, only to realise you came out with it 1min before me!! lol Inside joke that has been killed now! LOL slow death at that. Blessed what ever happened to Burco iyo Feb?? I'm not coming either, going to India instead.

^^^^I don't approve, I'm scared sheh might become lazy or even worse start partying like a rock star with you two and bli kiss!! :eek:

Oh shid now I get it :eek: You are talking about the damn book!!! Oh oh i get it. that is what you are on about right? P.s. You know I have fish memory, I don't remember the threads before that, so cannot interlink the responses, had to read the last few pages again to get it! LOOL II maaxaad laa dooleh caadinasa

^^^You'll be fine, if all else fails, africa here I come dhee or adoption by your parents. Inshallah you'll be fine.

Loool @ debate the permissibility of his lust for you. I checked that out already, its all good to go said the shikes Walahi I must be having a slow few days, I still don't get this damn thing. You said I thought you might benefit from the mechanics via a manual. You can familiarise yourself with it until your brother marries. I expect no feedback after What is mechanics through the manual, and why must I learn this mechanics via the manual (horta what is it?) before he marries

^^^REally? How you feeling?? Have you found a new place yet?

^^^In Islam, I THINK has no value Some people will have to find something else to keep them going in life, for it is deemed harmful. I know she was trying to help me, and in a way she did, It forced me to do some research on the yellow lines for hala expression Pluz I was pulling her leg a bit about that comment, that's what people keep telling me

^^^Eeew Head. out. of. gutter. :eek: :eek: Even with the background, I still don't get it, I'm suppose to quiz him or his wife or something :confused: LOOL @ they'd much rather the women let rip. P.s. what are you LoL[ing] at, overexposure and requiring more and more sordid fantasies for satisfaction is very common. I assume it is like watching a film, even if it is a classic film, you cannot watch it three times in two/one months.

Until 2006, the Israeli-Palestinian political landscape was dominated almost exclusively by three major players: the Labor and Likud parties in Israel, and the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s (PLO) largest faction, Fatah. That year brought a dramatic change, however, with the success of Israel’s newly formed Kadima party in the elections for the 17th Knesset and of Hamas in the Palestinian legislative elections. Since Hamas won a plurality of seats in January 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council elections, Israel has refused to negotiate with the democratically elected Palestinian government, deeming Hamas a terrorist organization which includes in its founding charter a statement calling for the elimination of Israel. Throughout most of its existence, however, Hamas has also provided humanitarian programs, including extensive welfare and social services in the Palestinian occupied territories, and in April 2008, Hamas political leader Khaled Meshal offered implicit recognition of Israel if it withdraws from the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. “We have offered a truce if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, a truce of 10 years as a proof of recognition,” said Meshal—the target of a botched 1997 Israeli assassination attempt in Amman. Hamas has also said it would abide by any peace deal with Israel, as long as the agreement is approved by the Palestinian people in a referendum. One would assume that those criticizing Hamas for not accepting the right of Israel to exist would not only support the right of Palestinians to live in the West Bank and Gaza, but would also support an independent Palestinian state. Ironically, this is not the case. The charter of the Likud party, which is in a two-way race with Kadima to win the Feb. 10 parliamentary elections, clearly rejects a two-state solution and unequivocally calls for annexing, settling and developing all of “Greater Israel,” which according to fundamentalist Jews incorporates both the West Bank and Gaza. Thus, in calling for the elimination of Arab Palestine, the Likud party’s vision of historic Palestine is in effect a mirror image of Hamas’ from an Israeli perspective. Indeed, since 1977 Likud-led governments have attempted to transfer this ideology into on-the-ground reality in the occupied Palestinian territories and have facilitated the greatest increases in Israeli settlement growth in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. During periods of Likud leadership (1977-84, 1986-92, 1996-99 and 2001-05), more than 90 new settlements were constructed to further the Greater Israel ideology and Judaize the West Bank. From the creation of the state in 1948 until 1977, Israel’s Labor party, including its predecessors the Mapai and Alignment parties, was the single major player in Israeli politics. Historically, it has been a champion of Social Zionism and was one of the earliest proponents of the settler initiative. In contrast to Likud’s religious justification, Labor’s drive for Jewish colonization of the Palestinian territories arises from a secular, security-based agenda. Both parties, however, advance their goal of an expanded Israeli state by creating facts on the ground in the form of settlement construction and settler immigration. Following the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel conquered and occupied the Palestinian territories, Labor governments have authorized the construction of nearly 50 settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. New settlement construction continued during the Oslo process in the 1990s under the Labor administrations of Yitzhak Rabin (1992-1995), Shimon Peres (1995-1996) and Ehud Barak (1999-2000). In all, the settler population grew by more than 163,000 between 1993, the beginning of the Oslo period, and 2004—a 63 percent increase. Historically, the Labor party platform contained a clause rejecting the possibility of an independent Palestinian state. The platform was altered in 1997, and that terminology was replaced with the words, “we do not rule out…the establishment of a Palestinian state with limited sovereignty.” It is important to recognize that not ruling out a Palestinian state is not synonymous with supporting a Palestinian state, as some have implied. Further, “limited sovereignty” by definition rules out the possibility of a completely autonomous Palestinian state. Further constraints on Palestinian sovereignty are clearly defined in the Labor party platform, including the declaration that “The Jordan River will be Israel’s eastern security border and there will be no other army stationed to the west of it.” The Palestinians unquestionably view the Jordan River as the eastern border of the West Bank and of a potential Palestinian state. Further, indefinite Israeli control of the Jordan River would result in a Palestinian state completely encompassed by a militarily dominant Israeli state. This is an unacceptable scenario for an independent nation, particularly one having endured more than four decades of occupation. Clearly, past and present Labor party doctrine, combined with its historical support of settlement construction and settler emigration into Palestine, indicates a lack of authentic support for a two-state solution and a desire to create an Israeli state incorporating the Palestinian territories. Since winning a plurality of seats in the 2006 Knesset elections, the Kadima party has headed Israel’s governing coalition. It was formed in 2005, when then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon left the Likud party to establish a party that would allow him to carry out his Unilateral Disengagement Plan. Although created under the guise of removing Israeli settlements from Gaza, Kadima also has fundamental ties to the Greater Israel concept. According to the party platform, “The Israeli nation has a national and historic right to the whole of Israel. However, in order to maintain a Jewish majority, part of the Land of Israel must be given up to maintain a Jewish and democratic state.” Statements by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Sharon’s successor as party leader, echo this dichotomy. In a cabinet meeting last fall Olmert declared, “‘Greater Israel’ is finished. There is no such thing as that anymore. Whoever talks in those terms is only deluding himself.” In 2006, however, he told the United States Congress, “I believed, and to this day still believe, in our people’s eternal and historic right to this entire land.” Kadima’s contradictory position on the Land of Israel parallels the often-criticized dichotomy of Hamas’ call for the elimination of Israel and their stated support of a long-term truce. Kadima supports a "demilitarized" Palestinian state in the short-term (as does Hamas towards an Israeli state) to preserve a Jewish majority, but in the long-term believes fundamentally, as stated in the Torah, that Jews have a right to all of the Land of Israel. Therefore, if demographic realities change in Israel's favor or the geo-political situation in the future allows for them to take control of the West Bank and Gaza, Israel will do so because it is their religious right to occupy all of the Land of Israel. Not only do these paradoxes bring into question the veracity of Kadima’s commitment to a long-term, sovereign Palestinian state, but the facts on the ground speak for themselves. According to the Israeli Interior Ministry, under Kadima the Jewish population in the West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem, grew by 14,000—from 268,000 at the end of 2006 to 282,000 at the end of 2007. This 5.2 percent increase is over five times the immigration rate of Jews into Israel during the same time period. Furthermore, immediately before the November 2007 Annapolis summit, the Israeli government announced the future construction of nearly 8,000 apartments and homes in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. By contrast, only 1,600 units were built from 2002-2006, indicating a six times greater growth since Annapolis than during the previous four years. This extensive settlement development is in stark contrast with Olmert’s declaration that Israel must withdraw from “nearly all” of the Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem, to achieve peace. The concept of Greater Israel evidently is alive and well in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. The election of Tzipi Livni (characterized by many as a dove) as head of Kadima was thought by many to be a positive step toward peace. However, the basis for this assumption is unclear, particularly given her unabashed support and participation in the War on Gaza. Additionally, as Israel’s minister of housing and construction in 2004, Livni personally reviewed and issued tenders for the construction of 1,001 new housing units in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Her direct role in settlement expansion and advancing the Greater Israel ideology in occupied Palestine should not be a surprise, given her recent statement during an interview with former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that “the peace process is not and should not be affected by any settlement activities.” Livni’s actions and language are hardly that of a “dove” and strongly bring into question her sincerity in supporting a genuine two-state solution. Palestinian voters elected Hamas nearly three years ago in large part because of their frustration with the corrupt and ineffective Fatah leadership. As has been seen, however, Hamas has indicated its willingness to support a two-state solution with Israel on its pre-’67 border, despite constant Israeli military incursions into Gaza (prior to the War on Gaza) and a dire humanitarian situation in the besieged Palestinian territory. By contrast, all of Israel’s major parties are committed to the ideology of a Greater Israel—an ideology they implement with illegal facts on the ground. The ultimate irony of the 2009 Knesset elections could be Israelis’ choice of Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud) as their next prime minister—the very man who occupied that position in 1997, and presumably ordered the assassination of Hamas political leader Khaled Meshal. Jason Hicks works for the Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs (PASSIA) in Jerusalem. Source: The Palestine Chronicle

On February 13 at 9 am, Jews Say No, wrapped up 24 hours protesting in front of the World Zionist Organization and Jewish Agency to say “Not in Our Name” to the Israeli government and to these US-based organizations that promote and defend its policies. Close to 900 people participated in the protest, some for one hour, some for 24 hours! In the wake of the election of a far right wing majority in Israel, these concerned Jews mobilized to build on the wave of increaingly public Jewish solidarity with the 1.5 million Palestinians who continue to live under siege in Gaza. The protest was held for 24 hours to highlight the reality endured by the people of Gaza who are forced to live under inhuman conditions without reprieve, 24 hours a day. The demonstrators wanted to show the devastating impact of the Israeli occupation, the ongoing violence, bombings, and home demolitions by the Israeli government, and the effects of Israel’s blockade, which denies the people of Gaza food, water, medical supplies, and other humanitarian aid. The day was marked by three periods–morning, afternoon, and night–in the life of a child in Gaza. Readings depicted what life should be like for children but what, instead, as a result of the Israeli government’s actions, their daily conditions are like. Protesters from many different Jewish backgrounds- long time civil rights and peace activists, Holocaust survivors, children of survivors, as well as first time participants- came together to speak out against the ongoing Israeli siege on Gaza. Testimonies from participants about why they were there and letters of solidarity from around the world with today’s action were read throughout the day. Dr. Ruchama Marton, President and Founder of Physicians for Human Rights, Israel, wrote “We, Israelis, Jews, and Palestinians, need your voice that says NO clearly and loudly as a tool for creating change in Israeli and American policy”. Nabila Espanioly, Director of the Al-Tufula Center for Women and Children, declared, “As a Palestinian citizen of Israel I join you in your demand: not in my name, not with my tax money. After the election in Israel, I believe today it is more important than ever to sound your voice.” slid show More pictures here

Saladin, the greatest of Muslim warriors, died of fever and old age on the morning of March 4, 1124. He was the iconic believer. Malcolm Lyons and D E P Jackson write in Saladin: The Politics of the Holy War, ''The imam Abu Jafar and al-Fadil were with him on the morning of March 4. The imam was reciting from the Quran. 'It is said that when he reached the words — There is no god but God and in Him I put my trust — Saladin smiled; his face cleared and he surrendered his soul to God'.'' On his last visit to Jerusalem, the holy city he had restored to Arab rule, in September 1123, he gave his fourth son, Abu Mansur al-Zahir, some immortal advice. As his son was about to leave, on October 6, Saladin kissed him, rubbed his hair fondly and said: be chary of shedding blood, ''for blood does not sleep''. He added, addressing his attendant emirs, ''I have only reached my present position by conciliation''. Nine centuries later, blood has still not slept in that land. It keeps awake as a nightmare. No region in modern times has refused conciliation and invested as heavily in a nightmare. Blood neither sleeps nor ceases; most cruelly, it does not discriminate between child and man. There is nothing new about war. But there is something new about the war raging on the sands of Israel and Palestine. Once, blood was lost on a battlefield, with honour. Blood is now spilt on the street. Civilians are no longer exempt from the havoc of war. Both sides target them, relentlessly. The difference is this: the Qassam rockets fired by Palestinians are crackers, pinpricks, compared to the overwhelming, bellicose firepower of Israel. Of all the images shivering into our consciousness from Gaza, none is more searing than the faces of children who have lost their laughter. Israel is building the foundations for war in 2025: children who are five today will be adults then. Blood will not sleep. Israel has every right to protect its citizens, but there are grave dangers in a disproportionate action that punishes a population for the actions of a government. It is only the insecure who over-react, but why would Israel, with its overwhelming military superiority, feel vulnerable? Perhaps, after throwing a chain around Gaza and delivering maximum punishment, time after time, it is unable to deal with the persistence of defiance. Defiance is courage, and courage is admirable, but courage is not victory. Victory too needs a definition, and it cannot be imposition. It must be justice, and equity demands that Palestine and Israel accept that neither will disappear. Both are nations. Facts demand peace, but fear engineers an essentially unequal war, its story told in cold statistics of dead, dying and destruction. There is more than one reason why Palestinians are still in refugee camps and Israel is a regional superpower. Gaza is imprisoned in two concentric circles. Only one is the blockade by Israel. The larger circle is a noose placed by cynical Arab ruling cliques who feed off Palestine's despair to perpetuate their own survival, using the alibi of conflict. When there is rage on the Arab street, as now, there is silence and wordplay in the Arab secretariat. Organisations like Hamas and Hezbollah have filled a vacuum created by military incompetence and pathetic governance. That is their appeal to Muslims beyond their borders. Poor governance has created a knowledge deficit; and knowledge is the key to strength. An Arab friend sent me some startling statistics; the email was captioned 'A time for introspection'. Here are just a few: there are only 500 odd universities in the Muslim world. The United States has 5,758 and India has nearly 8,500. Literacy in the developed world is 90% against 40% in the Muslim world. If you removed Turkey from the list, the comparison would look grimmer. High tech goods and services constitute only 0.9% of the exports from Pakistan, and 0.3% from Algeria. They add up to 68% of Singapore's exports. Men die for two diametrically opposed reasons: when they value what they seek to defend, and when there is nothing worth living for. Israel has created a state worth defending. The Palestinians must be given something to live for. Source: Muslims without borders

Johnny, while I can understand that once in a while you have to justify something to your mind, the fact that you keep banging on and on, year in year out, since the days of paltalk about something which you refuse to see any other way is puzzling to say the least. You are not looking for information or enlightenment, nor are you willing to move from your spot, it just seems a pointless exercise of you standing up once a year just to look around as far as your human eyes can see and then going "yep, that is the edge of the earth, as far as I can see" The simple fact is, we are not willing to debate the characteristics of God with someone who does not believe in God, hypothetical conversations are extremely boring and pointless because you are staring off with so many “IFs” and can head in so many directions. So unless you are saying that you now believe in the existence God and want to progress as to what kind of God he is, then so be it, but otherwise there is no point anyone engaging with you with out the core foundation.

^^^^LOOOL @meticulously researched findings on where bears do their business and what religion the Pope is.

^^As always I am on Allah's side Johnny boy :mad: Merry go around, why does it bother you so much.

^^WHY should I?? She took 45mins of her time, the least I could do is respond. Sister SS, first can I say err thanks for making me read this, I felt like I was reading one of the promotional material the sexual wellbeing nurse leaves lying around, with their cheesy title of “get in touch with your inner self” yad yad ya. I appreciate the time you took, but I have several issues with what you posted. Firstly, I do not understand how what you described in your post relates to the start of our discussion and reactions to watching films with male friends. Remember this is how we got into this whole tirade. I am still waiting for you to somehow interlink the two and highlight where responses cross wires to say it delicately. Moving on to what you advocate for; Firstly it requires a lot of time and shaqalaan to stand in front of a mirror scrutinizing your own body, not to mention that prolonged over exposure to your own body has the risk of developing body image problems or self obsessed behavior, before you know it either you are on your way to an eating disorder or you are locked in your room for hours admiring your curves- ails waad iis caawryi. I appreciate that someone should be content with their body image and at peace with their looks, I even advocate for this, but I have a problem with the extent of ogling at your own body. My personal opinion aside, as always we have to look to Islam first and foremost in every issue, with my Islamic binoculars I can see several problems. Writing, creating and fantasies (regardless of whether they are sexual natured or not) are severely disliked and discouraged in Islam. In fact we are asked to observe fast to avoid them, along with daydreaming. Furthermore in Islam, despite the fact that we are forgiven for our evil or haram thoughts, at the same time imagining oneself committing a sin (and these things you are advocating for are impermissible for us) has different implications all together. Most scholars agree that haraam fantasies that a person deliberately calls to mind (as you are suggesting) are not covered by forgiveness which covers our normal thought process. While expanding on this Al-Nawawi said that The reason why passing thoughts are forgiven is …., that they cannot be avoided. “But it is possible to avoid dwelling on them. Hence dwelling on them is haraam”. If you frequently imagine something and wishes for it, inevitably your fantasies will develop real characters. Your fantasies will have to increase both in complexity and presentation to sustain your pleasure, after all having the same ones over and over again will get boring, upgrading these fantasies will either lead you to other paths or roads such are progressing from still photos to pornography or acting out your own created fantasies. I won’t elaborate on the obvious issue of looking at haraam images, and seriousness of your eyes become accustomed to looking at haraam things, to fulfill these fantasies, but all I want to emphasis is once you let your desire dominate you, you are heading for trouble. Lastly just a side issue that some psychologists advocate that sexual fantasies can be classed as a psychological disorder, it runs the risk of dominating someone so much so that they cannot enjoy any pleasure except through these fantasies, leading to abnormal sexual fantasies. I think I'll stop here, I've been typing for a while now, I hope you get my drift inshallah and no hard feelings.

Blessed I was trying to figure that one out too, but something tells me sheh is speaking in codes or something. OKAY: SS Hmmm where shall I start.. let me think

^^^??? :confused: ?? Yaah W salam