loooool i was lucky enough to have watched that match...i just went ballistic when that goal went in. Oh well it looks like i will have to cut some of my expenses and divert all my savings to get Cable so that i can watch again the best league in the world

Yeah but the goal keeper then was dreaming of having his siesta lol Buffon was in goal not off his line and was still been twice from 35 yards, once with the left foot and once with the right lol. But i got to be honest the best goal i have seen this yeah (minus seria ) has to be Alan Shittera's lol Volley that was just sick lol

Yes thx for the reminder saxiib much appreciated

wE HAVE A WINNER 'Abid Abass' lol. That last game Real v Valencia sums it all up. For those of you who didnt watch it ask around if one of your mates has it lol Tha man is a Legend.

Abid Abass u are the man lol. Hey Batigol has scored so many gr8 goals i am still in the process of deciding which one is my Fav lol. Yeah i rember that totti goal now that was Mad. Hey anyone else rember C.Seedorfs two Bombs against Juventus last Year lol?? Seria for life man so many gr8 goals i dont know where to begin. Oh yeah i rembered one more H.Nakata's Goal fro roam away to Juv 30 yards Thunderous drive into the top left corner to make it 2-2 (why did we sell him shiid).

Sorry guys the pics didnt come out i will, try to fix it

Masjid ul Haram Makkah Minmbar of Masjid Nabvi Masjid ul Haram (inside View Medinah Msajid) Al Qiblatain Masjid Medinah (Divine order came to change the Qibla from Jerusalem form Makkah ) A beautiful Masjid The Islamic Center of Detroit Detroit, Michigan A beautiful Masjid Islamic Cultural Center of New York A Masjid in US A Masjid A Masjid in Kandhar, Afghanistan Janat ul Baqei grave yard in Medinah A beautiful Masjid in Dubai Bir `Ali or the Well of `Ali In Medinah

oooooh Lucy Pearl huh. Mines. I need a Girl By Usher P.diddy n Co.

''Arabs beware; the Trojan horse is in your midst'' Printed on Saturday, January 11, 2003 @ 23:14:14 EST ( ) By Raff Ellis YellowTimes.org Columnist (United States) (YellowTimes.org) – One would think that the Arabs, mindful of the last 100 years of history, would be a bit wary of Western intentions, as they become drawn into the "war on terrorism." In what appears to be an eerie reincarnation of the old British Empire, the U.S. is establishing a military presence in many foreign lands that heretofore had none. In Arab countries, since 1990, military bases have been established in Djibouti, Yemen, Oman, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. A remarkable feat when one considers the rampant anti-Americanism that is supposed to be present in the Arab world. Undoubtedly, promises have been made, for in today's geopolitical world, no one gives anything for free, certainly not bases for military action. The Arabs should be mindful that many of the white man's treaties and promises were not honored for Middle Easterners just as they weren't honored for Native Americans. Also, keeping its word has not been one of Washington's strong suits, (nor that of its ally, Great Britain), and no lengthy recitation is needed here to demonstrate that point. Back in 1916, the British, using the promise of independence for the tribes of Arabia, persuaded the Arabs to revolt against the Ottoman Turks. But, even before the fighting had begun, the English and French were meeting to carve up the area as spoils of war. After assisting the Great Powers in driving out and defeating the Ottomans, the Arabs received as their reward 30 years of colonial domination by France and England. The colonial master's vested interest determined borders and, more than hegemony, the imposed suzerainty, allowing them to install and remove puppet rulers on the basis of their unfaltering subservience or lack thereof, especially in the Gulf States. Arab nationalism would have to wait, as the democracy embraced and heralded by the conquerors was found not to be appropriate for their wartime allies. In the period between the war to end all wars and its successor, WWII, the British Empire began to decay. This was largely due to the simmering nationalist aspirations in the mandated countries, economic disparities and racial discrimination employed by the occupiers and the carpetbaggers who followed them. Ironically, Iraq was the first of the Middle Eastern nations under British mandate to gain independence, in 1932. I say "ironically" because, in the current scheme of things, it may also be the first to lose whatever sovereignty it gained back then. In the period following Iraqi independence, concessions were made in other countries culminating in the relinquishing of Palestine in 1948, which rang down the curtain on the final act of the long-running play, Rule Britannia. One of the interesting parallels between then and now is the current solicitation of the Arabs for assistance in a war that has Western interests at its heart. One must therefore wonder just what it is that America promised the Arabs this time around. Since neither party is talking, we have to take educated guesses as to just what those pledges might be. Looking at what it is that each of these countries might want, we can arrive at a fair presumption of objectives. In the case of Djibouti and Yemen, it's easy to speculate that economic aid would be an easy sell to those poor countries. Standing in line at the trough to lap up U.S. foreign aid has always been irresistible for impoverished countries. America can get impecunious nations to do pretty much whatever they want for a few greenbacks. For the others, namely the relatively prosperous Gulf States, there is only one abiding concern -- survival of the ruling class. Since 9-11, many Middle-Eastern regimes have been targeted for criticism in the American press, standing accused of sponsoring or "breeding" terrorists. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Egypt and Iraq have been in the crosshairs of the Israeli lobby with numerous negative articles in the media lamenting, among other things, the autocratic nature of their regimes, regimes that mainly owe their creation and survival to Western Powers. Although many pundits would like to see these repressive governments toppled, wiser heads worry about what may follow. So, as a matter of current expediency, it is almost certain that the U.S. has guaranteed support in thwarting any internal revolution in these countries, at least until near term objectives have been accomplished. They no doubt have told them that having our troops in their countries would help cement that guarantee. But will it? Saudi Arabia has stated that no matter how badly the Israelis treat the Palestinians, they will not issue a repeat of the 1973 oil boycott. I believe they have been told that such an action would have dire consequences. Could the right wing clamor for taking over the Saudi oil fields, bandied about in Washington for some time, be the straw that has broken the camel's back? Thus, the Arab countries have been totally neutralized and have capitulated to the West. The mighty Oz has spoken but what will happen when Iraq goes by the wayside sometime in March? It is clear that the war on terrorism must be sustained by keeping the drumbeat at wartime pitch. After Afghanistan comes Iraq. After Iraq, who's next? OPEC must be broken and once the Iraqi oil fields are in hand, Saudi Arabia and Iran are the last of the majors in the way. One can only imagine the clandestine meetings taking place between our Israeli-leaning government and their friends in Israel. Just like the infamous Sykes-Picot agreement that betrayed the Arabs in 1916, will there be a Bush-Sharon agreement that will betray them in 2003? I wouldn't bet against it. So, Arabs beware! Once the near term goal is accomplished of solidifying Israel's supremacy by toppling Iraq, the Trojan Horse will open its belly and disgorge an onslaught to overthrow the rest of its enemies. What good will any of these promises be then? Rule Americana here we come! [Raff Ellis lives in the United States and is a retired former strategic planner and computer industry executive. He has had an abiding and active interest in the Middle East since early adulthood and has traveled to the region many times over the last 30 years.] Raff Ellis encourages your comments: rellis@YellowTimes.org

The west, not Islam, is the real enemy of democracy The warmongers encourage secular autocrats to suppress the Muslim world Faisal Bodi Monday January 13, 2003 The Guardian How did it come to this?" asks Theoden, King of Rohan, as he gazes down on the massed ranks of evil beleaguering his fortress in Hollywood's adaptation of Lord of the Rings. The words may be fictional but, as we count down to Washington's second instalment in the real-life epic that is the the war on terror, an honest examination of what has brought the civilisations of Islam and the west to this critical pass is long overdue. For despite the seemingly unassailable sway of the clash of civilisations thesis - in some quarters more a desire than a forecast - there is hope and it lies in the fact that the differences are less intractable than the forces of darkness would have us believe. Five years ago, the Iranian president Mohammed Khatami called for a "dialogue of civilisations" before a meeting of the UN. The speech was an encomium to liberty, articulating what progressive Islamists have been advocating for years as the key to peace: emancipation from despotism. The major obstacle to peace, goes the theory, is not terrorism or religious obscurantism but the enslavement of hundreds of millions of Muslims, who continue to be denied the fundamental right of being free to choose their own leaders and systems of government. The warmongers have made sure the message has remained outside mainstream debate so they can forge ahead unimpeded. Using their agents and sympathisers in the mass media to blanket all Islamist politics as fundamentalist, and by excluding its fluid, nuanced discourse from the international conversation, they have rendered voiceless a full quarter of humanity. Because most Muslim politics is Islamist the political and media blackout has meant the grievances of subject Muslim populations have failed to reach their free counterparts in the west. How many on the Clapham omnibus know that France actively supported the Algerian government's annulment of elections that Islamists were poised to win in 1992, plunging the country into a savage civil war? Or that in Egypt, whose single-party regime qualifies in Washington as the second most-favoured tyranny after Israel, religious parties are banned, as they are in Turkey, and political dissidents tortured? Or that since the "accession" of the Palestinian National Authority, Palestinian newspapers critical of Arafat have been banned and their editors spirited away to jail in the middle of the night to be flogged back into line? Or that in Jordan political activity in mosques is outlawed? The governments of the west decree that liberty is not a fundamental right for Muslims; it is a privilege to be extended in proportion to the degree to which they conform to their prescriptions, especially that of secularisation. The war on terror is part of a campaign to wrench Muslim societies from their religious roots, a phenomenon that has best been explained by Rachid Ghannouchi, a Tunisian Islamist ideologue now exiled in Britain. For Ghannouchi the war against Islam began with Napoleon's invasion of Egypt in 1798 and continued through the era of colonialism when opposition was monopolised by a secularised elite that eventually supplanted the colonial regimes. However, instead of actualising the Koranic principle of shura (community consultation) to build democratic polities in which the will of the majority is recognised, they set about doing violence to the faith in the mistaken belief that progress and development could only be achieved by aping the west. But there was a crucial difference in the secularism enshrined in western polities and the aggressive totalitarian variant imposed in the Muslim world. While the former merely separated the religious from the mundane leaving some space for religion as in Britain, Arab pseudo-secularism sought to take control of the institutions and symbols of Islam. Resistance was met with state repression and violence. Ghannouchi lists how Tunisia's post-independence autocrat Habib Borguiba tried to sever ties with its Islamic past, abrogating sharia law, removing religion from the curriculum of Zaytuna University before closing it down altogether, and nationalising mosques and the awqaf (relig-ious endowments that gave religious institutions such as schools and charities indepen-dence). He also issued a fiat ordering state employees to break the Ramadan fast and restricted the number of pilgrims performing the Hajj. For Tunisia you could substitute almost every other Arab nation-state. Pseudo-secularism was necessary to remould the Muslim mind into accepting the western separation of church and state. There was no theoretical basis in Islam to render the political sphere unto Caesar. To the contrary - Muslims had to be forced by the state to adopt it. Anybody who believes the age of desacralisation has passed need only look at the demands being made by the US on Pakistan's General Musharraf and Indonesia's President Sukarnoputri to "reform" the Islamic schooling system, or madrasa, as a check against "extremism". That secularism has been placed ahead of liberty is, says Ghannouchi, the result of malevolence but also a mis-conception in the western mind that sees in all religion the European struggle against a church that in the Middle Ages opposed the ability of reason to explain the universe and to organise life. Since Islam has no inherent objection to reason - a facet demonstrated by the wealth of scientific knowledge it bequeathed to the Renaissance - it is inappropriate to view it through this lens. What we did have in the Muslim world was no end of autocracy. While the ulema (scholars who interpret the religion) shielded religious institutions from the state's will to power by anchoring them in civil society, they failed to develop a theory of governance rooted in the democratic practice of the early community in the city state centred on Medina. Like many Islamists, Ghannouchi insists on the compatibility of democracy with Islam. Controversially for some Islamists, he advocates British-style secular democracy as a step to a democracy rooted in the divine law, since any type of democracy is better than the despotism that is Muslims' lot today. "The conflict is not a religious one," he writes. "Nor is it even a conflict between religion and the western concept of secularism. It is a political conflict between the oppressor and the oppressed. It is about legitimacy and whom it belongs to. It is about the nature of government, the choice between autocracy and democracy." Last week Jack Straw took the war on Iraq to the world's most populous Muslim nation, Indonesia, claiming that Saddam posed as great a threat to Muslims as he did to the west. Nice try, mate. Autocratic Saddam poses the same threat to Muslims as the "autocratising" west. · Rachid Ghannouchi - A Democrat within Islamism by Azzam S Tamimi is published by Oxford University Press. I thought this was an excellent article nomads. I didnt find much that i disagreed with, i would just to ask the more knowledgable nomads amongst you, especially thoses who have already contributed to this topib for a more critical over-view thx. I Also read another article (which apears to be a Feature article) from .islamicity.com that was very relevenat to this and so i shall provide the Link to it if anyone wishes to view it. http://iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=IV0301-1829 Enjoy reading nomads

Hey check out what i found. I need not have to reSort to going out for sheesa on sunday's now. Eurosport fill C4 role Monday 13 January, 2003 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- British Eurosport have delighted UK based Italian football fans by announcing that they have struck a deal to show live Serie A action. The satellite and cable channel, who have signed an exclusive two-and-a-half year contract, will start their coverage on February 2 and will help fill the void left by Channel 4. The latter brought an end to their ten years of successful coverage after they failed to renegotiate their deal last summer. Eurosport will show a top match live every Sunday at 7pm, with extensive highlights planned for peak viewing on Monday nights. Pierre-Jean Sebert, Managing Director of British Eurosport, said: "We felt there was something missing for football fans, so we’re extremely excited to bring back Europe’s most refined, stylish and star-studded League to the UK." YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

Am in Bro

Thats it Abid Abass lol, Am glad to see i have an allie in this sea of Premiership Luvers. Forza Calciatori And i cant belive we (ROMA) are still using that donkey zebina???? and on top of that we bought another donkey Dacourt, when we could have bought Kleberson (the young brazilan who hit the cross bar in the world cup final and set up the second goal)Oh well. Anyway CUM ON SERIA A

lol C.C give the brother a chance. "It felt like she ripped my heart out, put it in a blender and pushed the 'puree' button" That bad huh Bro "I figured this is a dog-eat-dog world, and weak people have no chance to survive, I found out being honest, true and loving to your girl can only mess you up, so I decided not to love again, and more over I decided to play every chick I meet, to revenge for my broken heart." You right there. I would like to stay true to that romantic notion that says good guys win in the end but your right Bro. As you pour ur heart out to us you story sounds very familar to me. But you now playing chicks??? trust me just stay clear of them full stop, unless you want to get married that is. "one night and after 4 months of lovy dovy relation she called me and yelled at her and told her I want her any more and to humiliate her even more I said she is not my type of women then hung up on her…." DAAAAAAAAAAAAAM you got so cold bro........ "I want to apologize to her and make her feel better, but I think if I do, she will fall in love with me more, and I don’t want that to happen since I .." Please Tell me what should I do ? Well darman i do no what to say except that you where disrespected very badly by one girl....but that shouldnt have made you do what you did to that unsuspecting girl you should appolgies unreseverdly even if you fear that this may lead to further confussion. Infact if it does be man enough to tell her the truth that you simple "don’t love her at all" and ur not emotionally and mentally ready for marriage. peace out

"what are u doing in an alley way @ 4 o clock in the morning" looking for sex lol well @ least somethin made me laugh today. thx here enjoy this. A true story....not an epic but factual. A man was in New York's central park, when a dog went wild and attacked a >young boy. The man was able to grab the dog by the neck, pulling it off the >boy and choking it to death. A reporter for the NY times comes to >interview him, congratulating him on his act of heroism. He suggests the >headline: New Yorker saves the life of a young boy! But, the man told him, >I'm not from NY. Ok, then how about: American hero saves the day. But, the >man told him, I'm not American. Then, where are you from? asked the >reporter. I'm from Pakistan, the man answered. The next day the headlines >read: MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALIST STRANGLES DOG IN CENTRAL PARK. FBI >INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE LINKS TO AL QAEDA.

Salams Khayr I see what your saying Saxiib, and its not for me to disagree with a sheik...but lets consider why we have migrated to where ever we find ourselves. Civil wars, Abject Poverty, human rights abuses, Dictatorships etc etc. Walaahi it is a sad state of affairs that we cannot live in our own country (the somali's that is) however we cannot continue to blame the colnial past forever. For us independance came @ a cost of losing land to Ethopia and Kenya, and some segration between North and south ( although this is quite arifical). However since 1960 we have been the ones that had a say in our future...well somali's if not citzens. The reasons why we find ourselves where we are is that our countries are ruled by Dictators, Despots, Puppets and Muppets, AND THATS IF THEY ARE RULED AT ALL (somalia and afganistan as example). People are only human and want the best for the children and parents and family. Tell me would u still be in somalia now if u had the choice given the continued strife?? Lets just pray that we may be able to return back to our countries in the future, that we will be able to establish a home for ourselves, that we will be able to live in an islamic country inshallah ameen.

1. Call her everyday.Mind you Your synical u drop the brothers who do this 3. Tell her (TRUTHFULLY) that you can wait to see her. I do already 4. Offer her a back rub... without asking for one in return. WHAT?? Ya and get slapped in the face.... not to mentioned get a visit from her 8 brothers 5. Call her just to say you were thinking of her. Sure 7.Write her a poem. Or better yet plagerize one from here 13. Take her for a walk at sunset and stay to watch the stars. Not in cloudy old london lol, besides to risky dont wanna get mugged by 13yr olds carrying Adjusted Replica guns :eek: 14. Tell her something about you that no one else knows. Yeah "that really is my True B/day" macaanto 17. Watch a greety hard hitting documentary with her. Year sure why not 19. Stop trying to impress her. That could be an idea :cool: 20. Tell her you love her... don`t exspect her to know. Well if she doesnt no by know then good luck to her 21. Never forget how much she means to you. Yeah reliable company on a friday night when the rst of ur friends have deserted you and have hit the local marfish 22. Give her a great big hughs for no reason. Perhaps especially if its cold 23. Kiss her because she wants you to SOOO bad. Nope nope nope nope

dONT NO, I WOULD HAZARD THE ANSWER NO. But to be sure try and ask someone who does no. I would suggest yoy try this link here http://www.somaliaonline.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000227 I think someone from here can either give you the answer or direct to it. Salams

Lastly I advice to you nomads to stop using the word itself and convey the message to any friend/member of your family and carry on your campaign from there Indeed i will. I would like to stress though that i never use such a term though IT IS JUST PLAINLY WROOOONG

I agree that peace is first milestone we all should strive for. Indeed Baashi I would wait about ten yrs before implementing that so that State can recover from the anarchy. Walaahi that would be more than reasonable. We should down play the idea of confederacy and embrace, with caution, federal form of government in which union of regional provinces recognize the primacy and authority of central government while retaining certain powers of governmemnt. Indeed we should, in an indeal world that is. Sure why not to confederacy. However given the unique problem the somalia faces and the vunerability that such states would face from outside pressures i.e. ethopian interferance. I would down play confederacy idea aswell. Hey great contribution you made some very intersting points saxiib.

Thx hibo for the words of encouragmet. Am glad you found the articles interesting Hibo. It is a bigg topic that i was trying to Coe worse more nomads to join into but nevermind. I just though that they were excellent articles to read soi shared them with you guys. source www.islamicity.com It is a shame Hibo, and yes i agree that quite a large apportionment of blame in my opinon should go directly to so many leaders of the regimes in various muslim countries. They can be only described as being Incompetant and grossly negligent in the way the govern their countries affairs. But going back to the orginal assertion that i made. I think most ppl with common sense, whether in education or not, Muslim or non-muslim could say (if their being objective) that on the basis of evidence pprovided by the pro-war coalition the simple isnt a case for going to war with iraq. If anything teh case made would be to not go to war wioth Iraq and indeed start reviewing the foriedn policy aims. But thats taking a naive point of view for the sake of making the point. Clearly the know exactly what there doing. The various existing contradictions that are constantly echoed daily i.e. 'Iraq in is breach of un resloutin' bal bla bla whilst the convinantly ignore Israel's countless Breaches of Un resoultions just further adds more suspision to what their real aims and asspiriations are. In the end it does sadly come down to a somle number of very prominant powerful lobby groups that have specific agendas in the middle east and muslim countries, especially those that aspire to have islamic regimes and have some natural resources. Like i said in my last thread i think that their arrogance has taken them perhaps to far on this occasion, God only Knows what will happen. But i wouldnt be supprised to see them humbled in one way shape of form, infact am praying for it. And Finaly i would just end by saying that in their constant pursuit of war and use of Verilantly Inflamatory languages such as 'crusade' 'army of liberators' and indeed 'they are a threat to our civilazion' they probably will acheive the polarization that they desire ( and althouh this in my view a bad thing) this am sure will back fire on them and the will just exprience more acts of terror and they will see their blood lose increase. well any thx for ur response much Appreciated

You enjoyed it Ameenah.....crazy ppl lol. Well i got to be honest and say am glad that it seems to have disappeared as quickly as it came. Especially since its remnants (Hazardous ice) was making my journey to the bus stop more interesting then it had to be (i lost my footing on more than 1 occaision).

Not to sound Patornising but i suppose oen way anyone who thinks that there abit over weight and that are worrying that this my result in them being over looked is that perhaps you will have trhe advantage of not having all the shallow ppl on your case. what you think? a fair assement?

Your right in implying that perhaps the more lax, and undecided brothers who are not interested in pursuing a serious relationship would probably be weary of a sister whos covered up. Buts a good thing surely. I understand where ur frustrations my arise from, But dont worry about it. Just as there are brothers who wouldnt bat an eyelid where a beautiful sister walks past dressed well and covered from head to toe. There are some brothers i no, personally who cant help but drull over those girls who are well dressed and well covered i.e. hijab, lose clothing i.e dircaa (excuse the spelling fi incorrect)when the walk past lol. One in particular (i wont mention the name) whos on here aswell just looks @ these ladies commenting and i qoute " wow look @ that woman, thats who i want to know" lol i kid u not

Hi Nugaal. I would just like to just follow up what Jazeera touched on. Although admitedly the idea of a centralized Govt system returning to somalia in the near future would probably abit too much to hope for given the Hurt, Anger and suspision that still lingers with us, i dont necessarly view it as being obselite as a system of governing the country. I admit i dont no the history of our country in as much details, and the history of the conflict in as much details as most of you probably do. But i do think that we will have to change soon or later, we cannot remain in the state that we )(somalia, somaliland,puntland) that we are in today. It simple isnt a viable long term option for stability or security purperses Like Jazeera pointed out we have been discussing a similar topic in the islamic section for a while now and am sure u could probably get more veiws about a possible system of governance based on islam. well good luck with it