Heh. Temper, temper. Without praising myself too much, I believe my point was made very clearly and eloquently (if you don’t mind me saying so).

What is “FASAD FILL AL-ARATH†or crimes against humanity as you explained it? Do you even know what qualifies as “crime against humanity� "Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of executions in the world in both absolute numbers and per capita. The death penalty applies to a wide range of non-violent activities such as apostasy and "witchcraft", "sexual offences", acts deemed to amount to "corruption on earth", and crimes such as drug dealing." We don’t have the exact details of this case, though I suspect the charge of “corruption on earth†has been applied because of the recent unrest in Saudi Arabia. With bombings, gun fights with police and abductions increasing in the last couple of years, the government of Saudi Arabia seems to have put its foot down and decided to deal with any groups that threaten the peace harshly. The idea being, that these people are spreading fear and corruption in the country by their actions. Since corruption on earth is a crime punishable by death, these guys were convicted of the crime (my guess is that he kidnapping is what swung it that way). I needn’t comment on the fairness or unfairness (not yet) of the execution of the 36 people this year (two more than last year and 16 less than the year before), however, I thought I’d explain the logic behind the extra harsh sentences as I perceive them. I can’t blame OG or Classique for jumping to the defence of Saudi Arabia (though you can’t really call it defence. Both are talking about points of law and are choosing not to comment on the suspect application of that law). This is a matter of opinion after all. The irony of ironies of course is the sudden and overwhelming condemnation of a regime that applied the death penalty since 1977; I refuse to believe that people on this site did not know of this obvious fact. The unfairness point too is slightly puzzling. Again, I’m aghast that people did not know that despot regimes like Saudi Arabia’s and most other African, Asian and Middle East countries do not adhere to due process and fair trials. This leaves us with the fact that those executed this time were Somali and this is the reason for all this commotion! Is this it? We are willing to question Sharia Law, insult fellow Nomads and cause a complete din just because, this time, Somalis were executed! Most Westerners that face the death penalty in Saudi Arabia are backed by powerful governments that fight their corner and secure their release. These same governments are the ones helping and abetting the Saudi regime in keeping power. The rest of the people of the world (including Saudis, of which many have faced a similar end) don’t have anyone to speak for them and rescue them from the executioner’s sword. Who said life was fair? A few months ago, some Saudi’s demonstrated in the streets of Jeddah and were demanding that the government adopt democracy and freedom of speech! They were all sentenced to 100 lashes (men and women). Doesn’t that sicken you, people? Or will you wait until I supply you with the number of demonstrating Somalis in that crowd too?

And now, to the real story behind it all. Saudi executes three terrorists for killing officials, murderer for stabbing compatriot 08:34 AM EDT Apr 05 RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) - Saudi authorities executed three Saudi militants who assassinated several officials two years ago, Saudi authorities said as this Gulf state continued its campaign to stamp out terrorism. Hisham bin Awwad, Mohammed bin Awadh and Amjad bin Abdul Aziz were beheaded in public Friday in the northern Saudi city of al-Jawf where they carried out their crimes, the Interior Ministry said. After the executions, authorities displayed the executed militants in a public square outside a mosque, tying their bodies to poles on top of which were placed their heads. Militants have carried out multiple suicide bombings and kidnappings and fought gun battles with security forces since May 2003. The attacks have been blamed on al-Qaida, the terrorist group headed by Saudi-born terrorist Osama bin Laden, and allied militants. The three militants were convicted in the 2003 al-Jawf killings of deputy governor Hamad al-Wardi, religious court judge Abdulrahman al-Suhaybani and police Lt. Col. Hmoud bin Ali, in charge of a provincial police station. The Interior Ministry said the militants first met in Afghanistan and returned to al-Jawf to form a "criminal gang that carried out kidnappings, looting and assassinations." "They have exchanged criminal roles, and secured weapons and tools to carry out their desire of rampaging and killing the innocent under the guise of religion," the statement added. Their execution marks the first time Saudi authorities have announced penalties against terrorists apprehended here in almost ten years. The Saudi monarch had announced an amnesty last year promising that repenting militants will not be handed the death penalty. In May 1996, Saudi authorities beheaded four Saudis who confessed to bombing a U.S.-run military training facility a year earlier, killing five Americans and two Indians. A Saudi accomplice to the terrorists beheaded Friday, Sultan bin Abdul Rahman, was sentenced to five years in prison for helping hide the men and sympathizing with their ideas. Separately, a fourth Saudi was also beheaded Friday in the northern Saudi city of Tabuk for stabbing a compatriot to death. Friday's executions bring the number of people beheaded in Saudi Arabia this year to 33. Saudi authorities executed 35 people in 2004, down from 52 people the year before. Most were convicted of drug smuggling. Saudi Arabia follows a strict interpretation of Islam under which people convicted of drug trafficking, murder, rape and armed robbery can be executed. Beheadings are carried out with a sword in a public square. I put this source here because all the rest were from Amnesty Int.(you know how to find that one)

One more: The death penalty Two people will probably be executed in Saudi Arabia the week you read this document, if the rate of recorded executions in 1999 continues. Most of those who are executed are beheaded in public. Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of executions in the world in both absolute numbers and per capita. The death penalty applies to a wide range of non-violent activities such as apostasy and "witchcraft", "sexual offences", acts deemed to amount to "corruption on earth", and crimes such as drug dealing. More than 1,100 people have been executed in the past 20 years, according to reports received by Amnesty International, although the true total is probably far higher. It is almost certain that all were sentenced to death after secret and summary hearings and with no meaningful appeal. Often, the first warning prisoners have of their imminent execution is when they are taken out of their cell in handcuffs on a Friday, the day executions are normally carried out. They are taken to a public square, blindfolded and forced to kneel. The executioner raises a sword, then brings the blade down across the prisoner's neck. Sometimes more than one stroke is needed to sever the head. A doctor certifies that the prisoner is dead, then the body and head are removed and buried. Amnesty International does not know whether condemned prisoners are given tranquillizers. It does not know whether they are allowed to see a representative of their religious faith, or whether an appropriate religious ceremony is conducted before, during or after death. What it does know is that foreign nationals are rarely if ever allowed to see their loved ones before they are executed and are never given advance warning of their execution. For those awaiting execution, the psychological torment is extreme. Sa'ad al-Din 'Izz al-Din Muhammad, a Sudanese national, was executed in 1996 for a murder he denied having committed. A cellmate described his anguish: "He is in a frenzy every Thursday afternoon, Friday morning in anticipation of execution... All his family have been told that he is already executed. But he is still inside." A woman currently awaiting execution wrote to a former cellmate: "I cannot stop asking you to help me because here they do not give us the date of execution. Early in the morning they come and take you to a big square and cut your head off. Afterwards they inform your family and your embassy. This is why I am scared." Bucking world trends Contrary to UN calls for progressive reduction in the number of capital crimes, Saudi Arabia has continued to expand the scope of the death penalty. International human rights standards encourage abolition of the death penalty and set stringent criteria for its imposition and use, restricting the offences punishable by death to the most serious crimes. In Saudi Arabia, people are being executed for "crimes" such as "black magic", possession of "soft" drugs and "sexual offences" after blatantly unfair trials. [quotations] 'Madam... I ask you in the name of God and humanity... to help me because I have no one who could help me here in Saudi Arabia. My poor family has done everything they could but I believe they have lost hope... In this prison...we cannot have contact with the outside world, we cannot defend ourselves...' A letter sent in 1999 to a former cellmate from a woman currently held on murder charges and possibly under a sentence of death. 'I use a sword to kill male criminals... and firearms, specifically pistols, to kill female criminals. I think firearms are used to spare the woman, as to be executed by sword would mean uncovering her head and exposing her neck and some of her back.' Sa'id bin Abdullah bin Mabrouk al-Bishi, a Saudi Arabian executioner [end quotations]

Saudi Arabia: Further Update on fear of Execution/Possible Prisoners of Conscience PUBLIC AI Index: MDE 23/012/2002 4 December 2002 Further information on EXTRA 06/02 (MDE 23/001/2002, 17 January 2002) Fear of execution/Possible prisoners of conscience SAUDI ARABIA Duhayman Muhammad al-Hatila (m), aged 34 Mish’il al-Hussain Barman bel-Harith (m), aged 22 and at least 15 others (names unknown) Amnesty International welcomes the decision by King Fahd, announced by the Minister of the Interior on 4 December, to commute the death sentences against 17 men from the Ismaili community in Saudi Arabia to ten years' imprisonment. The men, who are held in al-Hair prison in Riyadh, may be prisoners of conscience, held solely for the non-violent expression of their conscientiously held beliefs. The Minister did not refer to any of the prisoners by name, but Amnesty International believes that they include Duhayman Muhammad al-Hatila and Mish’ il al-Hussain Barman bel-Harith. The Minister announced that 70 others arrested with the 17 men are also serving prison sentences. Amnesty International is concerned that they too may be prisoners of conscience. All the prisoners were arrested in April 2000 following protests by members of the Ismaili religious community in Najran, south-west Saudi Arabia. The protests took place following the closure of their mosque by Saudi Arabian security forces and the arrest of Hussein Ismail al-Makrami on suspicion of practising "sorcery". BACKGROUND INFORMATION Saudi Arabia applies the death penalty for a wide range of offences which, in addition to violent crimes, includes others such as sorcery, certain sexual offences, drug-related offences and apostasy (converting from Islam to another religion). Trials invariably fall short of internationally agreed standards for fairness, as they are held in secret and defendants do not have the right to formal representation by a lawyer. In many cases defendants and their families are not informed of the progress of legal proceedings against them. Defendants may also be convicted solely on the basis of confessions obtained under duress, torture or deception. Many thanks to all who sent appeals. Amnesty International will continue to monitor this case, and will use longer-term campaigning methods on behalf of the prisoners. If possible, please send a final round of appeals, to arrive as quickly as possible, in English or your own language: - welcoming King Fahd’s decision to commute the death sentences of the 17 men but seeking clarification of the charges against them, together with details of their trial proceedings; - seeking assurances that the men are being treated humanely and have access to relatives and medical care as necessary; - urging that anyone held solely for the non-violent expression of their conscientiously held beliefs is released immediately and unconditionally. APPEALS TO: King and Prime Minister, The Custodian of the Two Holy Shrines His Majesty King Fahd bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Al-Saud Office of H.M. The King, Royal Court, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Telegrams: King Fahd, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Salutation: Your Majesty. Crown Prince, Deputy Prime Minister and Commander of the National Guard His Royal Highness Prince Abdullah bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Al-Saud Royal Court, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Telegrams: H.R.H Prince Abdullah, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Salutation: Your Royal Highness Minister of the Interior His Royal Highness Prince Naif bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Minister of the Interior, Ministry of the Interior P.O. Box 2933, Airport Road, Riyadh 11134, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Fax: + 966 1 403 1185 Telegram: Minister of Interior, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Salutation: Your Royal Highness Minister of Justice His Excellency Dr. ‘Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Ibrahim Al-Sheikh Minister of Justice, Ministry of Justice, University Street, Riyadh 11137, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Fax: + 966 1 401 1741 Telegram: Minister of Justice, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Salutation: Your Excellency COPIES TO: diplomatic representatives of Saudi Arabia accredited to your country. PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY. You've got the addresses now. Stop wailing and send an e-mail.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Public Statement AI Index: MDE 23/019/2004 (Public) News Service No: 329 23 December 2004 Saudi Arabia: Disturbing increase in executions Amnesty International (AI) is gravely concerned at the recent increase in executions in Saudi Arabia. Eight people have reportedly been executed in less than one week bringing the total number of executions documented by AI to at least 31 this year. The eight include four Pakistanis, three Iraqis and one Saudi Arabian. The executions of last week account for almost one quarter of all the executions recorded by AI this year. AI is concerned that others could be executed in the coming days or weeks. While AI does not know how many people face the death penalty or who are sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia, the organization fears that there are many people currently detained who may be at risk of imminent execution. This includes three women, Majda Mostafa Mahir, Sit Zainab Binti Duhri Rupa and Sarah Jane Dematera, sentenced to death in connection with murder, after grossly unfair trials in which their basic rights were denied. Our organization has continuously appealed to King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to commute their sentences, including most recently last month. Trials in Saudi Arabia are often grossly in violation of international standards for fair trials. They often take place behind closed doors. Most defendants are not given the right to a lawyer and the right to an effective appeal. They may also have been convicted solely on the basis of confessions obtained under duress, torture or deception. Foreign workers are particularly vulnerable as many do not speak Arabic and may be forced to sign a confession in a language they cannot understand. They also do not have access to their family and in many instances, consular assistance. AI recognizes the right and responsibility of all governments to bring to justice those guilty of recognizably criminal offences. However, our organization fundamentally opposes the death penalty as the ultimate violation of the right to life. Trials for that purpose must meet internationally recognised standards of fair trials. The organization is committed to defending all people against the violations of these fundamental and internationally recognized rights. AI urges King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to commute all outstanding death sentences and to bring trial proceedings of people facing such punishments in line with international standards. Background Almost half of those executed so far this year have been foreign nationals. They are seven Pakistanis, one Sudanese, one Yemeni, four Iraqis, 17 Saudi Arabians and one Sri Lankan woman.

This writing of yours seems to assume that some people on this forum suspend reason to strengthen and reinforce their faith. The crowd you wouldn’t desire to reason with as they tend to idle their faculty of thinking! Only if you know seldom that is the case! The issue, prudent Ngonge, is the relationship between the revealed knowledge and the philosophical reasoning, particularly the one which our fellow nomad tirelessly advocates. How do you reconcile when the reason and faith eventually clash? Would you assert that the two will never clash? Or would you accept the limitations and inability of human mind to find, understand, and decipher the divine secretes of the Higher One? If you would, would you there fore not agree that questions alone would not do the trick? Xiinfaniin, how did you reach the conclusion that this topic was about “the relationship between the revealed knowledge and the philosophical reasoningâ€? Never mind my above question, for I have another, hold on to your seat, I have a hunch that you will not like this question though I hope you will attempt to answer it. When you say “revealed knowledgeâ€, how do you know that this revealed knowledge is true? Do you believe it to be true because of your Islamic upbringing, your parent’s beliefs or is there something deep within you that tells you this revealed knowledge (specifically the Islamic one) is true. Is it some sort of little voices in your head, saaxib? Somehow, I don’t believe this to be the case. Your zeal is strong and conviction immovable. This can’t simply be the result of following other people’s ways without having put a lot of thought and effort into it in the first place. I appreciate that this is a perilous topic (one that does not relate to the original thread in anyway). I could even understand your wise choice to be cautious about it all. However, are we not being slightly more guarded than need be? Are we not making huge assumptions here? What say you, good Xiinfaniin, to a child that might have questions regarding faith, the creator and the universe? Would it be along the lines of “ours is not to reason whyâ€? Or, would you reason with him/her and in so doing, explain the faith to him in a way that is logical, reasonable and acceptable? Likewise, how would you convince a non-Muslim that’s interested in Islam that your belief is the correct one to follow? In such cases, thoughtful Xiinfaniin, faith would really be a poor substitute for reason. Life, my friend, is all about questions. Many answers can be found if one condescends to think and contemplate. I agree that some questions would invariably verge on the brink of being heretical, but the fact that the question is asked would also deem it necessary for one to have an answer. The reply need not be contradictory to one’s faith. However, it has to be a reasonable and sufficient reply. There have been many clashes between Islamic philosophers and conservative scholars in the past. There are many such clashes even now. I wouldn’t want to comment on the validity of either argument. I’m merely attracting your attention to the fact that such intellectual clashes did and do take place. In fairness to both sides (and this relates to our discussion here) they all deeply pondered the questions being asked and tackled them with reason, logic and examples from many sources, mainly the Quran and Sunna. I mention the last two to tie them in with your assertion that reasoning should not contradict the “revealed truthâ€. For when a scholar tackles such reasoning, he, I would imagine, would use reason to explain (in depth, unlike your quick dismissal) why he believes reason should not contradict the revealed truth. Aside from the circular picture I’ve painted for you here, the blunt point I’m making is that reason will still be applied whether the argument contradicts revealed truth or not. If the reason being used is weak, it can be easily refuted and if it were sound, he who’s being asked the question would return to his source (in your case, revealed knowledge) and seek the answers. Surely one’s faith should be strong enough to withstand any onslaught, and reply in kind. If not, (and here we return to those words of mine that you’ve quoted) one will have to go back, ponder, contemplate, consider and mull over the chinks that reason had made in his faithful armour. If one’s intentions are really aimed at finding the truth, one is likely to find it (brace yourself, for I’m about to shock you again) in the revealed knowledge. Still, without ruminating, one is unlikely to fortify his faith. Blind faith with no contemplation is an absolute shame, saaxib. Ps I hope that your use of the word “bog†was meant in its usual meaning of swamp or quagmire and not the popular and vulgar one meaning toilet (see the misuse of words?).

There seems to be many strands to this topic now. There is the "logic is a belief" schoold of, erm, dare I say "thought"! There is also the "they were not martyrs‘" front, and we even had someone mistaking the thread for a bog! Without wishing to get into a long discussion over semantics, I only want to attract Ms Word's attention to the easy and natural interchange between the words “faith†and “beliefâ€. Again, this is a case of playing with words (or even misusing them). When one argues that he/she believes in Allah, and that their opponent (for lack of a better word) believes in logic and reason, it could only mean they’re equating reason to religion! Logic, reason and philosophy are not faiths. For one to follow a particular faith, one will either inherit the idea from their parents and treat it as a tradition (as do many Muslims, Christians and Jews). One might be born into a religion yet still ponder, reflect and employ all his reasoning skills to ensure that he’s on the right path. Once one submits, they submit with conviction, not blind faith. I’ve said it in the past and I say it again, I tend to err on the side of caution. So, while I agree with and encourage the principles of using one’s reason and logic in everything, I fear there is a chance that many green and unprepared minds might easily deviate from the right, reasonable, natural, and logical path. Sometimes, dogmatism is a worthy shelter. In one of his great movies, Burce Lee once said: When finger points at moon, don't look at finger or you'll miss the moon. This saying is probably an old Chinese proverb. It seems to fit in perfectly with the way I understood this topic. The case for martysim might have not been that strong, however, there was just enough information to justify the use of the word. Having said that, this was merely the shallow end of the piece. Wading into the deep end, I understood the message as being one that champions the freedom to think and make use of our cognitive faculties, rather than one that aims to sell the very crude and, simply, unnecessary idea of dead people. Where I feel a misunderstanding has occurred is in the implied assertions and the way people perceived them! This might also have something to do with the previous record of the author of this piece. Though I agree with him that people should attack the argument not the person, things are never that easy or straightforward. People form an opinion of a person judging by his previous performances, they need to have a reference point in order to work out what hidden messages or morals his stories have! Here, the consensus seems to be one of apprehension. Some of the questions this Nomad poses are/were very close to the knuckles. They consistently have been about philosophy and religion. The people feel that the author’s loyalties tilt sharply in favour of philosophy rather than religion, and as such, they reject any pieces he writes on those bases. Some go further than that and openly accuse him of having weak faith! I strongly doubt this to be the case and believe that when the issue is one religion versus philosophy, care should be taken when accusing or suspecting someone of deviating in such a way. In fact, such a thought should not be publicised unless one has indisputable proof that this is indeed the case. Of course I might be talking utter nonsense and none of this is real.

^^^^ Is there no hidden agenda with the opposition of foreign troops? Is it truly a case of not wanting frontline states sending troops to Somalia? Why does it matter so much? I personally was under the impression that all sides have used Ethiopia (for Ethiopia seems to be the bogeyman here) for years. All the supporters of all sides were aware of such “cooperation†(in the case of some, they even supported it). Why the need to make a big deal out of a few soldiers now? The men in Somalia (or Nairobi to be exact) are playing a political game. They’re using all the weapons at their disposal to triumph. What is your game? The supporters of the “government†on this forum are using badly veiled excuses to stand up for their kinsmen. They know that most readers can see right through such excuses (well, most of them know – I saw signs of intelligence there). However, I suspect that it’s so they can state a point; they are Somali after all (you simply have to boast). Where does that leave you and the many detractors of this “government� The two blocks in here seem to be of equal strength, so why don’t you all come out and clarify your positions. This business of opposing foreign troops out of simple patriotism is either dishonest or shockingly naïve (likewise the business of vigorously championing them).

^^^ Not much reason for the hatred right now. They're more or less in agreement! Though, and at the risk of annoying “my†fellow Somalilanders, the nauseating and constant rhetoric about it being “Africa’s best kept secret†tends to grate a little. In that area at least, Somaliland is not really that much different to Somalia. All allow their optimism to overtake the reality. Somaliland has the potential of being that (as does Malawi or Burkina Faso), yet every old lady I speak to repeats the same old tired bit of spin. Enough *****ing anyway, as long as there are no people dying, I’m content.

^^^ I agree. Ultimately, it’s the men’s problem and they need to find a solution to it. Now if enough men were strong enough, able enough and allowed to use a whip, karbaash or even practise shadow boxing on their wives, there would not be a high rate of divorce as there is now. Disclaimer: This is a generalization for it does not apply to each individual case; hence the example of how tough some women are and how they would fight back, is not needed. But, on a serious note, this is a natural consequence of a nation living in poverty and war. As the prince of poets once said: انما الامم الاخلاق ما بقيت The case of those in the West is even more complicated. They live in societies where marriage is sidelined and divorce is not much of an issue (other than when it comes to access to children and custody of pets). Can’t really suggest anything to you but to preach on. Someone might listen. PS: Just in case someone needs to know the meaning of the Arabic poem (as usually happens in here): The poet was talking about the importance of morals to societies. “A nation is but a set of moralsâ€, he says. “Should those morals perish, the nation too wouldâ€.

They have the same nonsense in Somaliland, Horn. Of course, it’s on a smaller scale and for some unexplainable reason they always manage to get round all the teething problems that they have. This fact never ceases to amaze me. How do the bunch of corrupt and power hungry individuals in the Somaliland government (and the opposition) manage to keep that ticking bomb from exploding is a real mystery to me. One never knows; they might even contrive a way of defusing it altogether! Still, Somaliland news these days is very dull. Nothing to really talk about there! There was a bit of a ding-dong with the issue of elections but they managed to find a way round all the problems. The election is on again (though, for the foreseeable future at least, it can not be viewed as nothing but window-dressing). The real news is coming from Somalia itself. Now that part is immensely enjoyable to follow. Many people have put their eggs in one basket or another. Many stand to be disappointed (maybe all). These changes and “political†squabbles have done wonders to the creativity of Somali news writer. All are trying to outdo each other with the latest piece of propaganda, rewriting of history and emotional appeals. It’s a real shame that you and many of the regulars of this forum have deprived us of your own take on these issues! The cut and paste brigade are working overtime, the “art thou not brainy†crew dive in with a few partial and barren words every now and then, and only few of those that really follow the events (daily) have been brave enough to give a full and objective analysis of the situation. Same old, same old.

And there was I thinking the title was in jest! We're doomed, doomed I tell you.

Heh. Bob, my wedding was a women only affair. It was one of those where the groom turns up right at the end, to have his pictures taken and take his wife home. It was a great wedding (I’m told). I didn’t go, and even now, five years later, I’m yet to see the video.

This, sadly, is another case of words changing the course of a whole discussion. It seems that the use of the word “Martyr†did not sit well with many readers. I’ll even wager that some did not participate in this topic purely because of their objection to such a word! How could such infidel philosophers be referred to with such a noble word? Though the word is synonymous with the Arabic word “Shaheedâ€, it really does not have the same connotations. A Shaheed, in most instances, is someone who dies in the name of his faith (mostly Islam). A martyr on the other hand can equally apply to religion (mainly Christianity) or any person(s) that sacrifice their life for a principle, point of view or belief. There should be no real objection to the use of the word martyr when referring to those philosophers. In the case of logic, reason and philosophy many people close their minds to the idea and assume that ALL those interested in such a subject must be some sort of religious deviants! If they’re really being generous and nice, they assume that they’re merely poor and misled sheep! We’re all philosophers in our very own unique way. Granted, we’re not as adept at the “art†as the heavyweights mentioned above, however we all (whether we like it or not) use logic and reason to arrive at conclusions to the most basic of thoughts. I shall not attempt to give any examples for I believe our resident archbishop of the church of reason has provided ample illustrations of basic logic. Examples even the silliest amongst us can not refute! We seem to have reached the usual crossroad, which way will we choose? Does one use reason to find, strengthen and compliment their faith, or, do we follow the words of the famous old English poet and say “ ours is not to reason whyâ€? PS Logic is not a faith.

Someone on another thread wanted to know about this subject. Didn't want to hijack her thread. Here goes: Picture a large hall; it could be based in a grand old hotel or a local community centre. There is red carpet all over the floors, the tables are nicely clothed and have small vases with plastic flowers in all of them. There are helium balloons hanging in every corner of the hall (they have the names of the bride and groom written on them). On a prominent corner of this hall, there are large speakers and massive lengths of cable. A solitary keyboard is lying on the floor! On the far centre of the hall, there are two stylish chairs (the type usually found in the sitting rooms of posh old style villas in 40’s Hollywood movies). A group of young girls with rolled up hair; manicured hands, half done makeup and casual clothes are running all over the hall. They stop to talk to each other while trying to hold two other conversations on the two mobile phones they’re carrying. There is panic in their eyes! The wedding cake has not arrived, the food is late and the bride has phoned them for the umpteenth time to check if everything is under control! The bride’s brother and a couple of his friends arrive carrying huge pots full of food from the morning’s lunch! They claim that the older ladies back home had thought it a good idea to make use of this food. The girls panic! This was supposed to be a classy wedding; the rice and meat will only lower the tone! The brother and his friend’s attempt to fish in murky waters by flirting with these panicky girls! He receives a phone call. His mother wants him to visit a distant relative on the other side of town to fetch a golden belt; the belt would look really nice on her daughter’s white dress, she thinks. The brother claims not to know the address and persuades his mother to ask one of the girls (the one he likes) to accompany him on this task. The delighted girl fakes shyness and moans about all the preparations she still has to do, but, reluctantly agrees to join the brother on this pointless trip. The groom arrives with a couple of his friends, his stressed wife to be, had phoned him crying and told him that all her wedding plans were falling apart. He came to assess the damage and see what he could salvage. He speaks to the girls, finds out what the problems are then phones his own mother for advice! The girls faint, his friends heroically try to comfort them. The bride’s mother arrives on the scene. One of the girls had phoned her and told her about the little conversation the groom had had with his mother! This old lady is not going to be upstaged; it’s traditionally known that the bride’s family are in charge of such events, what does that old woman think she’s playing at by sticking her oar in where it’s not wanted? The groom receives a call from his elder and very religious brother. He’s ordered to present himself at this brother’s house immediately! The groaning groom wonders if it’s going to be another lecture about the sinfulness and waywardness of mixed weddings! The poor unsuspecting man is unaware of what’s about to hit him. His brother, in addition to the usual lecture about mixed weddings, is planning to lecture him on the birds and the bees tonight. Our happy groom is going to be instructed to, erm, deflower his wife as soon as possible; it’s Sunna! Meanwhile, the bride is at home being fussed over by a crowd of women. Her best friends are not there to comfort her; they’re all in the hall trying to recreate her vision of a great wedding (one that they spoke about all their lives). She’s got her hair done already; she’s got her henna on. An old lady that’s been staring at her for the past five minutes walks over and declares, in a loud voice, that the bride is looking pale (or rather dark). Everyone panics! Some suggest she puts on the usual skin whitening chemicals (apply it one more time, they say. It’s your wedding day, dear). Others suggest she uses the traditional Somali skin products (which she already used, but one more time will not hurt). She refuses and tells them that this will ruin her hair and she herself will have to reapply her makeup (she knows she can’t do as good a job as the woman in the saloon did earlier). Faced with such rejection, the old lady decides to utilise an old traditional trick, she starts pinching the bride’s cheeks to make them look redder and livelier! The makeup is ruined! Back in the wedding hall, the guests are starting to arrive. Young girls with dollops of what looks like Vaseline in their hair, teasingly saunter in; young boys with varying styles of dress, raucously stroll in; old ladies with obscenely colourful dresses, casually amble in! A group of men, dressed in identical and ill-fitting suits arrive carrying more cables, a guitar and a tiny speaker. They place themselves in the corner and start testing the musical equipment. This wedding is in full swing. Among the chatter of the people, the laughs of the girls and the posturing of the boys, a man is heard shouting into the microphone the words “testing, testing, 123â€. A sudden panic sets in amongst our original group of girls. They’re now fully dressed and looking a million dollars. They’ve just been informed that the groom’s family has arrived! One rushes over to welcome them and guide them to their table, they ignore her and sit on another table instead. The groom’s two sisters disdainfully look around and make biting comments about the hall, the tables, the position of the band and everything to do with the setup of this wedding. The groom’s mother shares their sentiment but regally refuses to sully her royal tongue with such base utterances! The band starts playing, a balding man with a tight suit and retro glasses glides into the dance floor. A couple of girls join him (out of pity perhaps) and start to lazily dance. The band ups the tempo and plays a popular song, whereby all the girls race to the dance floor to join the lazy dance, the shiny bald head of the man can be seen from the distance bobbing away amongst all these fair maidens. A pang of envy goes through all the boys! The groom, having pacified his brother and promised to consummate his marriage forthwith, and the bride, having reapplied her makeup, fixed her hair and disentangled herself from the clutches of all those women, arrive, sweaty and holding hands. A line forms at the entrance of the hall to usher the couple in. Envious girls look at the bride’s beauty in awe and absolute wonder; desperate boys hopelessly try to attract her following bridesmaids attention with much winking and rising of eyebrows! The band plays the customary song and the crowd start clapping and singing. The happy couple slowly walk through the parallel lines of cheering guests. A baby in a tuxedo runs across their path, falls and starts crying! A quick-footed girl with a long neck darts in, picks him up and disappears into the crowd. The bride and groom reach their seats; they’re attacked by our group of girls who start fixing the creases on the man’s suit, the twists on the woman’s dress and the angles of the chairs. A middle-aged man’s voice is heard above all the hubbub. He loudly declares this wedding party, a party that has been running for the past three hours, underway! He invites one of the members of the band to bless this wedding by reading a few verses from the holy book. The band member reads the shortest verse he could think of. A few guests on one side of the hall start clapping, while from the other side of the hall the sound “shush†is loudly heard! The band start singing a dull song, this is the signal for the bride and groom to begin dancing. They both look uncomfortable and depressed as they tentatively hold hands and start slowly swinging them around while not moving their feet! Each bridesmaid quickly grabs an uncle, cousin, brother or a distant relative and ushers them in into the dance floor. They start whispering encouraging words into the bride and groom’s ears. The bald man glides back into the dance floor with a suitable female partner this time. He grabs hold of the bride and starts energetically dancing with her. Both sets of families wonder who the hell is this man! An hour later, and while the band is playing a really popular song, someone orders them to stop because the heavyweights are ready to strut their stuff. Everybody groans at the sudden interruption of that great song. A group of old ladies march to the band and one grabs the microphone. Without any instructions, signals or orders the crowd form a circle. The core of that circle is all made of old women and a few daring young girls. It’s ringed by another circle of many young women and a few old ones. That is also surrounded by yet another circle of young women, a couple of old ones and many many leering men. The woman on the microphone loudly (almost savagely) calls out someone’s name. The bride cringes but manages to keep a straight face. Suddenly, a drum is heard! Boom, boom, boom – boom! The old ladies in the inner circle start bouncing around, sometimes with both feet off the ground! They display an amazing and superhuman level of energy! These ladies, after all, are all registered disabled! They’re the proof, if proof is needed, that joy is a great healer. The baby in the tuxedo is seen jumping amongst the old ladies. The fun ends and the band starts playing another dull song for the benefit of the bride and groom. Both reluctantly amble back into the dance floor and nonchalantly pretend to dance. The bald man is dancing with a different partner this time. They’re oblivious to the shocked stares as they hold each other closely and slow dance next to the happy couple. The bride and groom are ushered back into their seats and the band starts playing a fast paced song. All the women stampede into the dance floor, many tying scarves round their waists and shaking their backsides faster than a food blender! The men try but fail to avert their gaze. The baby in the tuxedo stares at all the shaking backsides and heaving bosoms in utter fascination and absolute amazement. A non-Somali man enters the hall, he sticks out like a sore thumb and one of the bridesmaids is seen in deep conversation with him. He’s the hall manager and he’s there to tell anyone that’ll listen that the party should be over in the next five minutes! An hour later, the band start playing the final song and the bride and groom quickly cut the cake on their way out. As soon as they leave, the streets outside are fully of chattering Somalis and a traffic jam materialises out of thin air. Everyone agrees that it was a good wedding then go on to list all its faults. The boys start circling the crowd and searching for sweet looking single girls in need of a lift home, they get caught by irate old ladies and end up driving them home instead. Groups of nicely dressed young men and women arrive, late, but coolly slip into the crowds and pretend they’ve been there all along. Two hours later, the streets are empty and the bride’s brother is seen loading empty pots, balloons and various other materials into the boot of his car, the pretty girl is sitting in the passenger seat (could there be another wedding on the horizon?).

^^^ I assumed this was going to be a political analysis of the Somali situation, saaxib. Like I said, since this is supposed to be one of four articles, maybe the other three are going to reveal the professor’s aim. If I were to judge him on this article alone, I’d say there is a lot of bitterness and disappointment (not to mention the frustration evident in his line “my then beloved Somaliaâ€). The rest of the story he’s weaving is very sketchy and, at times, pointless. The way he narrates the story of Shadoor's election - a story that might be true; He’s a history professor after all – leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth and comes across as one of those oldwife tales! Surely someone of his undoubted talent need not resort to such shabby stories in order to make a long trodden and obvious point about the enduring decay of Somali society! I find myself agreeing with J11’s contentions, though believe them to be a tad strong if they were made on the strength of this shabby and, frankly, pointless article alone.

I await reading the rest of the articles to make a judgment on the professor’s point. Reading this article alone does not give one much of an idea of the professor’s aim. The historical tales and anecdotes were interesting but, again, there were no great revelations there!

^^^ Don't forget the Egyptian actor, saaxib.

They look like these guys Or do you really like these? Repro ID: H5264 Description: Somali crewmen on the quaterdeck of HMS 'Venus' in Singapore in 1916. Creator: Unknown Date: June 1916 Credit line: National Maritime Museum, London Source

Classique, as I already said, it was not a story. It was merely a thought. I could have kept it short and said: ان النÙس لاماره بالسوء الا !ما رحم ربي... I didn’t feel like lecturing anyone (other than myself) on this occasion. Maybe I was mistaken in attempting to paint the issue of temptation and the deviancy of the soul in a personal light! PS There was no lie to be had by the way (as I said, this was a “plan†to engage in forbidden acts. The plan was the temptation. As far as I recall, I don’t think if I confirmed or otherwise the results of that “planâ€! PPS J11, I know

^^^Good theory that has an element of truth. However, in the case of the UK, as I understand, the changing of the hours was done to help the farmers of Scotland. It’s irrelevant now. Every year, at this time, the British broadsheets are usually full of arguments why this practice should be abandoned. A hundred years ago though, it was important and helpful to those farmers on the far side of her majesty’s land. An extra hour a day was after all very important during the short winter nights.

As I came across this thread,my exasperation with you hadn't grown out of your affair but out of the fact that you overlooked the moral obligations and values that guide a genuine husband. Pardon me if I sound too harsh, but you should at least,some how try to make sense of what I'm saying, perhaps in a softer way. The essence of my response wasn't to grant you a one-way ticket to hell (subxaanalaah), but to awaken you to the ugly concepts that stand beautified in your mind. Why would you feel "good" about an affair? Take my advice and read the original thread again and again, saaxib. I can’t reply to you until I know you understood the piece above.

^^^ Welcome back