Originally posted by Seekknowledge: which properties? The ones who had relationship with their own? So people from Northern Somalia who returned from the diaspora to get their houses back from the I.C.U belong their "own"?

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: ^^Don’t be guilty-ridden adeer! Admit that you don’t care whether Xamar is destroyed or not! saxiib, he believes reer Muqdisho should be sent to the countryside for "dhaqan celis".....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7106826.stm

It's not suitable for Ulema to make little photo shots at turbulent times like these. They have to make a stand on the issues in Somalia;they have greater resposibility then the rest of society. quote:Qosal garir iga dheh. Sxb, and what is wrong with those who intent to return to the 9th century (the time of the rightous companions?) because nobody has ever returned to a another time period.

quote:What is their excuse... refusing to negotiate Simply because the Ethiopians and T.F.G have given them one option: put down your weapons or we'll disarm you. They have declared them as terrorists and have vowed to crush them. They(resistance) have negotiated with the Ethiopians before and they told to lay down their arms, recognise the presence of Ethiopians troops and declare certain groups as terrorists. Secondly, all of the military leaders of the I.C.U are not in Eritrea as you would have us think.Negotiation is an easy word to roll of the tongue and criticise people from the safety of your home. But understand some Somalis have been given no other choice than to take arms against the Ethiopians, in other words Ethiopians are giving them no choice. Waa submit ama we will arrest or kill you. Note that I am not saying the opposition should not negotiate with the Ethiopians and T.F.G, but if you are saying thousands of Somalis will be detained, tortured and uprooted from their homes and nobody lifts a finger, then my friend this is not negotiation it is called "do as you please". Yes, the prophet saw negotiated with the Quraish and took deals which appeared disheartening to his companions, but remember that when the companions thought that they(Quraish) has killed the companion who sent to negotiate, what did they do? Did they say let us negotiate with the Quraish they might have killed our companion? No saxiib, they pledged to defend the honour of their companion and revenge him if the Quraish killed him. Had the Quraish killed the companion the treaty of hudabiyah would have been called and the Muslims would have gone to war with the Quraish. There is Hudaybiyah and there is also Uhud, Badr and Tabouk.

faduul badana Soomalidu

Originally posted by Castro: ^^^^^ It's not the drop of a pen but the drop of the pants, he speaks. He just forgot the step that comes after that: the bending over. Let the old man be. He's overdue for a vacation. I think Baashi realises that Ethiopia is not gonna be chased of out Somalia and quit Somalia just like that.But he realises that Ethiopias can't stay in Somalia without suffering too. I agree with him on both of thouse accounts, ie Somalis have the capacity to resist Ethiopia and inflict heavy casualties on them, but they don't have the ability to force them to run from Somalia. Ethiopia can afford(in the short term) to loose a few thousand peasant soldiers. Somalis can't afford to continue to go the way we are going with all the humanatarian disasters. But I disagree with his somewhat optimistic attitude to armed African Dictators, Mullahs and warlords simply settling their differences especially in light of the current global climate.

Originally posted by Seekknowledge: Nothing is wrong with them. I just don't like the Tent uniform for somali ladies and nice abayas for their own women. Man why arab women never wear those tents? cause our somali salafi sheikh trainees have no sense of fashion. So according to you no Arab women never wear tents(jalabeeb) and only Salafees sheikhs encourage women to wear jalabeeb? I guess Niqaab is also because of Salafee Sheikhs and wahabism?

Originally posted by Naxar Nugaaleed: she should have just wore the slacks, this is not the Riyadh airport u mean she is dowladiid nooh?

He mans a Qabil got cleansed in the early 90s and the same is happening today. Sadly, that is what some peoples imgagination conjures up at the sight of starving, dying and malnourished innoncent Somalis,ie he belongs to reer Hebel and reer Hebel killed this clan in 1940 codh-codh.......

Originally posted by NGONGE: quote:Originally posted by -: ^^^Seriously, whose side you are on? Now, if this should happen and if Ethiopia is OUT, the Resistance (excluding the Shabaab) may have to eat their own words and come to the table of discussion. After all, their deafening opposition in the past was all to do with Ethiopia, was it not? Abdullah Yusuf will call their bluff by extending them the generous hand of reconciliation and asking them to come aboard and help in resurrecting their fallen country (or words to that effect). What will they do then? They wil be probably have to swallow their pride and sit down and swallow their pride and sit down at a qurac tree with the oldman himself. Of coursr some groups will probably declare them infidels for sitting down with the devil himself.But the question that remains is whether Ethiopia will simply pull out if African troops arrive in Somalia.I mean, imagine if thousands of African troops arrive but Hassan Turki and his associated militias are still active in Somalia will the Ethiopians simply slip back to their border?

Commonwealth.....Alow ha na ceebeyn....

Originally posted by NGONGE: ^^ Don't be silly now. Explain yourself. How could they feel the heat (meaning they want out?) and at the same time have long-term plans for Somalia? Their long term plan for Somalia is simply to have a Somali ruled by their buddies without any so called Islamists or any other armed anti Ethiopian movements. Of course they want out, but they can't leave when there are Anti Ethiopian forces in Somalia.

Originally posted by Seekknowledge: Not every thing is like Bush said "You are either with us or against us". That is exactly the problem Bush told his pals to hunt every "terrorist" in Somalia and those "terrorists" have vowed to fight to last man.

Peacekeepers(so they call them) wont have a mandate to fight "terrorists" in Somalia. The Americans see Somalia as the new front against the war with Alqaeda. Therefore, on the one hand they want international troops to help prop up the T.F.G, but on the other hand they are urging the Ethiopians to stay and destroy the Alshabab network. As the Americans don't have the ability to send troops to combat Alshabab and other militias, the Ethiopians are the only ones capable of doing this job. Also the Ethiopians see the Alshabab militia and their associates as a serious threat to their national interests. The Alshabab and Hassan Turki militias have stepped up their attacks and are reported to be gaining a little more ground, thus the Somali conflict is not even at stage one. Ethiopians will send more troops to Somalia(as they already doing) and the international so called community will encourage the Ethiopians to take such actions, whilst on the other hand hypocritically calling for "foreign troops" to withdraw from Somalia. Remember that the intial U.S backed resolution called for no "neighbouring countries" to send troops to Somalia, however it was an open secret that the Ethiopians had sent thousands of troops to Somalia. Even the African Union let slip that they supported Ethiopia's intervention in Somalia even though it was against their resolutions. The Arab league, also another supporter of the Ethiopian invasion, is again hypocritically calling for their removal whilst they are secretly supporting their efforts to "combat terrorism".As we have mentioned, the Americans would prefer them to stay and combat the so called "terrorists". This all means that any amount of "peacekeeping troops" will not destabilize the situation, because the Ethiopians are not leaving Somalia anytime soon whether or not there are peacekeepers. They will stay in Somalia so long as their is the existence of armed Somali groups in opposition to them, in particular Islamist militias. Ban Ki Moon should know full well the reasons for failure of of so called "coalition of the willing" forces and the U.N in Afghanistan and Iraq. The so called Nato and international troops as simply seen by those in armed opposition as taking sides in the conflict, thus they are either forced to take part in armed combat or just sit by and watch idly as the Ugandans are doing in Somalia. The only way international peacekeepers are useful is when they actually have a "peace to keep" in those countries. This means a ceasefire will have to be negotiated first before any troops are deployed.We saw this in the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel. In this case it was succesful because both sides agreed to end violence and the peacekeepers are keeping them apart at the border.But sending troops to Somalia when there is full scale combat without agreeing a coordinated ceasfre, is pretty much a useless excerise! Infact I am expecting any employment of such troops to lead to an escalation in violence!Marka, get used to Xabashi troops on Somali troops........

try Peek vids the film is on there but it isn't working for me... ps. wasn't it Lions for Lambs?

Originally posted by Baashi: With the stroke of the pen, Ethiopian aggression can be terminated. You save thousands of civilians, end the conflict, thwart Melez's "wag the dog" strategy, and inaugurate a new dawn. Baashi, with all due respect you have been saying this for a long time, but you are yet to provide us any with any real ways this can be done.Adeer things are easier said to done, you should know this especially from Somali politics. Note that I am not against your ideals, rather how easy and logical you make seem, ie to thwart Meles Zenawi and Somalia gains peace just like that "with a drop of a pen".

That might well be the case in Norway, but I still fail to see how development is neccesarily linked to being patriotic. Perhaps being nationalistic and patriotic are two different things? Palestinians probably come across as probaly some of the most patriotic people in the world. Even with Somalis stick the Somali flag and wave it around and their will be a tremendous buzz. The Somali flag could well one of the most liked flags by it's people in the world. You also said: quote:They are because they are prideful os what the country has become Who has more pride than Somalis? We look down on some other Africans, Habashis, Arabs and whites because we consider ourselves "Somalis", a unique and beautiful group of people. This is also the case with Amhara and Tigray who consider themselves to occupy a unique place within the African and Semetic society. They are prideful because they claim to be the descendants of Solomon and Sheba. Thus just these two groups plus Palestinians shows that you be at the lowest in terms socio-economic status but still have a certain amount Nationalism,Pride and patriotism so to speak.

You already broke rule number five you gorilla

Originally posted by -*Xidigo*-: What is *******? It's a new Somali recipe served with meat and spices. Just go to any restaurant and ask them for it [ November 18, 2007, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar ]

Originally posted by Juje: The subject matter is not something that needs to be discussed mildly let alone be accepted as some of you are suggesting. It is sick, immoral and utterly contradicts the teaching and practice of Islam, that is if you still believe in it. I wouldnt freaking care about it if it was in a Socialist tabloid and advocating for the rights of this God forsaken people - but in a Somali forum it is exceptionally disgusting. Now some of you as I read in your posts are hoping they have a peaceful life - it shows that you are more tempted to be marked as a Somali liberal and more modern. It is suprising how people drop their dignity and morals at the sound of 'modern'. Well i will tell you straight forward if you are afraid of it - homosexuality - is and cannot be accepted and anyone practicing should be burned to dead if I was asked. Damn you are accepting queers now, what will you be accepting in ten years time - peados. Bloody liberals I would say. Saxiib, we dislike what they do as much as you and this is a totally unacceptable act in Islam. If they are claiming this acceptable in Islam, the it is our duty to refute them. However, you must realise that you(or we) live in the West and we have no ability to stop them without being imprisoned or violating the law of the land. We must refute them ideologically, but we don't have the right to take pshyical action or burn any people.

Originally posted by Juje: The subject matter is not something that needs to be discussed mildly let alone be accepted as some of you are suggesting. It is sick, immoral and utterly contradicts the teaching and practice of Islam, that is if you still believe in it. I wouldnt freaking care about it if it was in a Socialist tabloid and advocating for the rights of this God forsaken people - but in a Somali forum it is exceptionally disgusting. Now some of you as I read in your posts are hoping they have a peaceful life - it shows that you are more tempted to be marked as a Somali liberal and more modern. It is suprising how people drop their dignity and morals at the sound of 'modern'. Well i will tell you straight forward if you are afraid of it - homosexuality - is and cannot be accepted and anyone practicing should be burned to dead if I was asked. Damn you are accepting queers now, what will you be accepting in ten years time - peados. Bloody liberals I would say. Saxiib, we dislike what they do as much as you and this is a totally unacceptable act in Islam. If they are claiming this acceptable in Islam, the it is our duty to refute them. However, you must realise that you(or we) live in the West and we have no ability to stop them without being imprisoned or violating the law of the land. We must refute them ideologically, but we don't have the right to take pshyical action or burn any people.

Alshabaab want to link themselves to an imagined or perhaps none existing global Islamic struggle( to recreate the righteous Khilafah). The Emir of this global struggle is rumoured to be a certain middle aged man in Afghanistan. Of course what they forget is that these local populations, be they in Iraq, Somalia or Afghanistan don't neccesarily see themselves as part of this global struggle. They understand these wars in their forms of Islam,local culture and tribes. Mr Ceyrow's last speech was aimed as much at the group in Asmara more-so than the "occupiers". He said that it was not enough " to host meetings" and make noises in the international media, rather Jihad is the only way and solution. He also made it clear that the war in Somalia was not one between Ethiopia,Somalis or ethnic groups(Somali tribes) but between Crusaders and Muslims, this might have been a reference to the clan insurgents in Muqdisho. Thus Mr Ceyrow tried to distance himself from both the clan insurgents and the group in Asmara. His opening statement " I give greetings to the Mujahideen in Chechnya, Iraq, and Afghanistan; and his call for non Somali Muslims to fight in Somalia was again a way of trying to distance himself from Somali Nationalism and tribal insurgencies. The most troubling remark in his speech was his reference to slaughtering Ethiopians in Adiss Ababa just like "they slughtered ours in Muqdisho". This could be the first sign that Mr Ceyrow's group perhaps might be willing to adopt Alqaeda style tactics and take the fight to neighbouring capitals. To these men the world is black and white; there are infidels and there are Muslims. There is Darul Islam and there is Darul Harb as understood in the middle ages.But they forget a city like Adiss Ababa today is home to all religions including Muslims, Jews and Christians. Globlization combined with the modern mulitcultural state has made these distinctions between infidel land and muslim land even more blurred. It is also highly questionable whether the group in Asmara can still be officially allied to this group after they have taken such a divergent path. Asmara group have made clear they don't support Alqaeda, don't support foriegn fighters and they support secular Somalis to play a great role. Alshabab has gone as far as labeling the Asmara secularists as Infidels. There will also remain great questions as to whether the clan fighters can keep up their relationship with the Alshabab group. This is a delicate relationship which can change at anytime. We saw the Alqaeda in Iraq unravel as their alliance with local sunni tribesman and other so called insurgents broke down. The break down of this relationshiop was caused by several factors, namely: the brutal violence of Alqaeda in Iraq, in some cases women who were simply collecting rubbish were shot for being being "apostates" and "traitors". They also supported mass attacks and suicide bombings against Shia civilians whom they branded as " rafidah(rejectors). The Alqaeda in Iraq also tried to push the hardcore Salafi(some call it Wahabisim) model to Sunnis in Iraq,whom had been relatively unwilling to take on this type of Islam. Therefore, the Alqaeda in Iraq didn't understand or respect the local tribal culture of the Sunnis in Iraq. Infact they tried to import to them a relatively foreign brand of Islam and they even gave allegiances to those outside of Iraq such as Osama Bin Laden as the Emirs of the struggle rather than those leaders of the local Iraqi resistance. Is Alshabab taking the same root? ie being self righteous,brutal and unwilling to understand the struggle of their local populaces? Can they maintian the delicate relationship between them and Somali subclans? Time will tell! But if they are to take a page from history they should know that the most succesful Islamist groups are those that solely and only focuse on their local struggles. These include Hezbollah and Hamas, groups who never seek to make judgements on other global conflicts or appear to side themselves with the global Alqaeda network. Rathey they attempt to clean their own houses( however you interpret that). Those who have aligned themselves with and fought with other global purist groups have failed in Bosnia, Chechnya and know Iraq. For the simple reason that they don't understood or appreciate the dynamics, history and local struggles of the very people they are trying to "liberate". Of course there is suppose to be an Ummah, but there is also Lebanese, Palestinians and Somalis. I'll leave you with some thought provoking words from a Mr Oliver Roy in his book : Globalised Islam: The search for a new Ummah quote:The jihadists, on the contrary, are confronted with real world. They choose to fight. But even Jihadists geography relates to some sort of imagined world. Jihadists always ignore the concrete socio-cultural context of the people they want to help; they disregard their culture, national interest and politics. They fight at the periphery of the Muslim world, from Bosnia, to Kashmir, through Chechnya and Afghanistan , in the very confines were the muslim warriors of the first century AH had to stop their victorious march. But these confines are also the remanants of fallen empires and the fault line between North and South( or rich and poor countries): they are related to modern wars and politics.

quote:Generally, a people are more patriotic, the more wealthy a country is. When you reach a certain level of development, the flag comes out. This is not the case with some scandanavian countries.

Originally posted by SheekhaJacaylka: I wanna see their faces ,,, really the wuld probably turn their backs :rolleyes: