A starnge thing happened in my town i was told. A "Wadad" came from Ohio and and said he will do "muhadara" only for the Somali females (mostly wives ). After the "muhadara" he started collecting thier Gold/silver belongings , becouse of a mysterious charity he told them he runs in all corners of Somalia/Somaliland. in short , he left behind a families in ruins .... many families are breaking up becouse of that. as husbands protest wildly against buying new Gold/Silver chains, earings etc and the wives argue that they did "sadaka" Now ,i don´t know where the money he collected goes , but what i´m more concerned about is his responsibility towards those families? Is there a limit to what to accept as "sadaka" ? Is this common in your town/city?

I believe that man will not merely endure; he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among the creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of kindness and compassion. William Falconer

First of all i´ve to admit that am not a student , but as an old Student of computer science the lack of a corner for computer science students on sol haunted me for sometime, so hereby i lay the foundations of what is gonna be the brightest minds of the skinnies wrestling ground. Ask questions, invent new technology , come up with outstanding algorithms, share the knowledge. Ever heard of the Towers of HANOI? well, beeing Skinny is not always a drawback, remember the " ri, caws and shabel" thing of our nomadic quiz. it help me understand the Hanoi towers. (ccc) = see , see, see

Originally posted by Bakar: JB For instance, my argument would be: alternative explanations (creationism) are needed because science rests heavily on the principle of cause and effect. Hence it is contradictory to say all life evolve from simple cell structure. Therefore, there must be an intelligent being who designed the universe. JB, this is an easier way to either reject or support an argument rather than throwing those abstract terms at us. Originally posted by xiinfaniin: I totally find myself in agreement with the gist of intelligent design theory; the universe is irreducibly complex system. There must be supreme designer behind this elegant world. It just could not be pure coincident (a self-driven process that seems to produce wonders of great magnitude). That much I agree........... I could be many things but I ain’t apes! As if science or knowledge and facts obtained through it were there to entertain you . As it stands today , the chimp in San Antonio zoo is your closest relative when it comes to Darwins theory ,and it is a scientific FACT. ooooh mama , somebody stop me however unentertaining it might be,yet it won´t n can´t deny you the right to choose and have a faith a diffrent theory , be it descending from the benevolent celestial being that acts as an intermediary between heaven and earth namely angels or Adam´s rib, which may or may not be true and valid as far as science is concerned . And that is what you´ve exactly done guyz. First, Bakar by taking the easiet way , second Xiin by favoring Angels to Apes. Now , BOTH your posts share one single decisive argument and the nerve centre of your reasoning seems to be "There must be an intelligent designer or the whole thing is meaningless", a classic line . The two dimensional world of creationisim and it´s tendency to cut short to reach a quick result in an otherwise complex universal issue is a drawback, but ironically natural and well-known shortcomming in the human way of thinking in the three dimensional world of science and nature. In short, Our pursuit to wisdom by intellectual means is the source of our assumptions whereby the need to pursue knowledge through science is the outstanding one in a complex universe becouse of it´s ability to demosnterate and validate facts and realities as they appear in the eye and mind of the beholder. here i came to think of NGONGE and why creationism can´t be taught at school Socod_badne, please since brother kheyr insists shooting it from the angle of a muslim (as if we lack Muslims here ) refrain from answering his questions dealing specefically with Islam, just for the sake of a healthy debate, Scientists have a tendency of stepping on ppl´s toes

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: Dadku waa bahallo ilbaxay baad lasoo shirtag-teen. Not to mention that you are foolishly banging your head with the divine word (my be its divinity is in questions in your circles?) Waa inoo berri! Oooh mama.. Xiin is here .. everybody DUCK p/s .ever since Mutakalim called me "feylasuf" i haven´t been the same, it went into my head , so you know who to blame , looking forward to your 'evolving' dadaistic inputs Originally posted by Caano Geel: And on this note, baashi, when u say: "I believe evolution in the sense of organism evolving to best adopt their environment in order to survive" you are inadvert. agreeing with johny. and the hypothesis of evolution. The scientific theory that explains creation is yet to be formulated Caano Geel, There´re countless theories yet to be formulated including QUANTUM GRAVITY and till then they remain UNKNOWN and won´t support creationisim in any way. p/s Easy on my (Garad) , maybe he´ll abandon evolution becouse of me "BOI, am i as studly as the statue of Adam or what ?"-> by JB Mutakalim , welcome to the confused thread Awoowe a tiny advice though .. be everythiong but an interlocutor in this thread . cause , even the side you may take will probably convert in order to avoid more casuality. P/S.. The basic issue is phrased by Bashi, you may want to slightly rephrase it for the sake of robustness . but then , now that he wrapped the whole thing as a layman's consumption sort of cake ,i don´t know if there is a point . I knew it , i could tell it from the tinsels in his hair that he´d fallen for confetti at that Christian-right party. .

Originally posted by Bakar: I see no constructive argument resulting from refutation of creationism. If you don’t mind my ignorance , do you care to shade light on the other doctrines (if there are) that the world can neither be understood in scientific nor creationism terms? Because it seems that you rejected both realms’ and their doctrine of world/universe. Bakar , i don´t know if i can shed a light or cause more confusion... but i can try First , it is not like either one has to adopt scientific or creationistic doctorine to understand the world as you so willignly phrase it ,that would simplify the issue way too much. Creationsits too has to apply and adopt scientific approach to understand the world, just as the scientists and every other living human,animals, trees etc etc... that is equiped with some sort of intelligence. As there can NEVER be other ways and means for human beeings and the rest of all beeings to understand. don´t get confused .. science is nothing but observation, ,identification and description. But to apply science and call a phenomena scientific one has to carry out experimental investigation, and bring forward theoretical explanation of the given phenomena. ( just like Darwin ) Now ..to get you onboard on my boat of ignorance the third "doctorine" you´re looking for is called theUNKNOWN , called so becouse it´s not scientifically discribeable | understandable YET. Weird enough time and again creationists (usually blind beleivers)claim conformity to fact or truth (or victory if u like ) over naturalisim just becouse a phenomena is scientifically indescribable.meaning it is UNKNOWN yet. I hope i shed some light

Bashi ( Garaad ) .. Me n my incoherece , Ngonge n his fruits, Fidel n his remote smile , Socod_badane and his hike , we´re all rolling cause we thought you´d a real issue with Darwin´s theory rather than falling for the confetti at the christian right´s classic wedding with the Creationisim ,we put few question forward ,but then you faded on us Anyhoo.. Originally posted by Bashi: At issue is whether Darwinism can explain how man transitioned from chemical elements to bacteria-like organism to fish to mamamls then to its current form. And that is exactly one of the Questions i coverd with my incoherent post where i went. Darwin was aware of those difficulties that is why as pure natuaralist he presented that chapter and hoped for a brigher mind in future generations to shed ligh on it. Blaming him that no one has YET shed the light on these difficulties is pure dogmatisim at it´s extreme. The creationsits (these authors)seem to ignore the fact that science and scientists acknowledges human ignorance and treat it as a relative and natural phenomena. The problem with the creationists is ( as it always been) instead of comming clean scientifically and proving their beleif beyond any reasonable doubt , they meterialize on the shortcommings of the other knowledges ,theories. Originally posted by Bashi: At issue also is whether Darwinism can furnish its emperical eveidence to support the assertion that biological creation (from start to finish) is done by mutation and selection forces alone and Super Being or God has nothing to do with this whole enterprise known as life. This is the essence of Darwin's theory.[/QOUTE] We were exactly there when you joined us , we were talking about this VERY (start and finish ) Before you assume that there is a Start and finish , is the Question (IS there a start to it )a legitimate one? And there is where i disagree with Socod_badane , becouse Determinisim just as Creationisim (but contrary)assumes that there can´t be a start and finish as every event, action |reaction generates new ones. And there we are again, the possibility of Intelligent design that gives it start and the probability of Deterministic nature without start. Bashi (My Garad).. Again i Ask ,since you´re a beleiver , mind sharing with us how eventual failure in Darwin´s theory might prove and favor your case as a creationist.without you coming clean scientifically by putting forward the TRUE BLUE base of your beleif? it might help some !!

Originally posted by Caano Geel: Khayrn, friend i think u might be getting the wrong end of the argument. I second that !! Now, lemme put Socod_badane´s comment into the original context Deterministic universe is one that runs in conformity with invariant natural laws. These laws predetermine the outcome of every event. There are exception, as I already said, like radioactive decaying and quantum mechanics. Creationists DON'T believe in deterministic world. Afterall, creation theory is inconsistant with natural laws of our world. Now, in deterministic world, with every effect having a cause, the idea of startless action or effect is impossible. However, it is not an insult to sound judgement to say an effect can have no start. We already observe this fact in our world. There are self-sustaining systems that have neither a cause nor a start! where earlier i said . determinisim....-> every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs. And there comes the needle-eye opening of the creationisim. Since an endless inevitable reaction yields a meaningless startless action, the thought of it having no START "somewhere" is an insult to the everage sound judgment which is not based on specialized knowledge("common sense" if u like) Now that you the opening is there and you pointed at it , can you make sure that it won´t get so huge and take over cosmos? I Understan him , but i don´t agree totally with him. not becouse he misinterprated Determinisim, but in my view Determinisim opens the gate for Creationisim in the sense that the sound judgement of the common sense tells that for something to start it has to be NOT started first, and vice versa , and that includes state of events and actions ( reactions ). and it is that START where the creationisim sneaks in.

mIRC or as the protocol is really KNOWN (IRC ---> internet relay chat) oppened our eyes , even paltalk is based on that protocol the'm' in the mIRC comes from Mardem´s client. Through IRC netwroks undernet,Dalnet,ircnet.Fnet etc etc ,FNET beeing the popular by then till Dalnet introduced the chanserv / nickserv service has changed my online life for good. I remember that guy HAXPERT. It must be an honor having him as a member in SOL I´d the oportunity to talk to him on the phone once , and he told me that 7 of 9 was the youngest of the ONLY two Somali girls on the net . . as Jumatatu was the youngest among the guyz The funniest thing he remembers was the day he´d to ban every domain name with *.q8.com for accessive flooding , as that meant banning WARFAA who happens to be OG_GIRL´s grand pa My heart goes for all you who´d went through the hell of the civil war, i´d the previlege of flying with mom , dad an rest of family from Mogadishu Airport as a kid well before it went off. To be Frank , it really is an honor to meet you mIRC gurus here. P/S .. i was in college when i registered that channel "Somalia with chanserv on Dalnet, so the time one starts using the NET and the actual age of that person are not proportionl to tell the real age of that person. If that was the case .. 7 of 9 had be older than me I

Originally posted by Socod_badne: quote:Originally posted by Johnny B: nor do i beleive in Naturalisim just becouse it is based on the propability of life beeing a self-driven mechanism (coincidental actions and reactions if u like). The entire universe functions on deterministic course with exception of quantum mechanics field. Invariant natural laws of the universe make this possible. Nature is driven by invariant natural laws, no room for 'chance'. determinisim....-> every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs. And there comes the needle-eye opening of the creationisim. Since an endless inevitable reaction yields a meaningless startless action, the thought of it having no START "somewhere" is an insult to the everage sound judgment which is not based on specialized knowledge("common sense" if u like) Now that you the opening is there and you pointed at it , can you make sure that it won´t get so huge and take over cosmos? Originally posted by Elysian: even children would be able to state scientific facts, like “apple is greenâ€. That was a lil bit below the belt , even the sarcasm is appreciateable Now that you´re eting apples , lemme raise your eyeborow by pointing at the worm that is part and parcel of your apple which the Gravity theory takes into account but your child fails to mention On a serious note .. it´s the cause and machanisim behind the fall of the apple that brings science into the theatre .

Thnaks Fidel ! ama b careful not to cause riots i hope the readers will give the lil effort it takes to see my point. Where is Bashi? his silence is to blame Bashi(my Grad) share with us , what is so presuessive about the Neo-conservative creationisim?

Get your acts together !! Originally posted by The Flipmode..: We are not criticizing anyone's Faith, What we are saying is that We have a 'BIG' propaganda to fight and that is the aim of this thread.. Originally posted by The Flipmode..: Brother, I have the honnour to have started this thread and I have no intention of Fighting Christianity or the WEST as you claim ..(This is the twist I was talking about).. '''Misconception against ISLAM....''' I hearby rest my case !!

The Authors of those books are building their case against evolution in Darwin´s "Difficulties On Theory" a chapter in his book The Origin of Species. Darwin was aware of those difficulties that is why as pure natuaralist he presented that chapter and hoped for a brigher mind in future generations to shed ligh on it. Blaming him that no one has YET shed the light on these difficulties is pure dogmatisim at it´s extreme. The creationsits (these authors)seem to ignore the fact that science and scientists acknowledges human ignorance and treat it as a relative and natural phenomena. The problem with the creationists is ( as it always been) instead of comming clean scientifically and proving their beleif beyond any reasonable doubt , they meterialize on the shortcommings of the other knowledges ,theories. If a naturalist, Atheist etc etc , fails to DISPROVE the idea(theory) of creationisim scientifically , He or she doesen´t necessarily proved the contrary.and that is PURE science. I neither beleive in creationisim becouse it is based on the possibility of a supereme Intelligent Designer having designed it JUST so, nor do i beleive in Naturalisim just becouse it is based on the propability of life beeing a self-driven mechanism (coincidental actions and reactions if u like). Now that JB has shown his dedication,devotion to science , let me add that i beleive in ignorance as beeing the 3rd pool between the camps "KNOWs" and "don´t KNOWs". The thin line of the truth is our Ignorance dosen´t yield Creationisim and vice versa.

Originally posted by The Flipmode..: We are not criticizing anyone's Faith, What we are saying is that We have a 'BIG' propaganda to fight and that is the aim of this thread.............. we took one case of Treatment of Women in their Bible...and compared to the HOLY QURAAN..it is incomparable... There you tiptoed back into your Dungeon The aim of the thread is to FIGHT (fight back), yet you claim that you´re not criticizing anyone´s faith, but making a tiny innocent comparation. Just like many Somalis you seem to be a bit confused about how to fight a threatening cloud from the WEST. All those "to be" Enemy sources u mentioned "the Fashion industry",The feminists, the Liberalis etc etc are of Secular westren values. Brother(sister) Socod_badane tried to help you define your "to be " enemy by stating that West´s secular culture and Christianity are not of the same camp, but you seem to be targetting christianity to defend ISLAM against those threats. just keep in mind .... The West is not a religion , Islam is.

Originally posted by sweet_gal: Johnny are u Christian??????????????? Don't be embaressed to say so if you are? Because it'd be nice to meet a somali-christian. Sweet thing .. It´s soo tempting to claim to be Somali-christian just to make it to your "get to meet" list, but am not Christian. Though i find your diminutive attempt to discredit Christianity becouse of the New testament very droll, i Understand the logic behind it . Just for your enlightment The New testament (NT)hasen´t seen the light due to a NEED for renewal or insufficiency of the old Testament(OT)contents. The Old Testament gives the sacrificial system that God gave the Israelites to temporarily "take care of" their sins. The New Testament clarifies that this system was an allusion to the sacrifice of Christ through whom alone salvation is found. The diffrence between the OL and NT is clearly discussed here. The diffrence between OTand NT Now would it STILL be nice to meet me ? just kidding

If "Ummah" means a Universe,or galaxy population which is a unique concept witnessed in the Human civilisation through only religious means , then the answer is simple. All living human in this universe are one "Ummah", but if ONLY the muslilms among them build a unity then they can ONLY be Mohamed´s "Ummah".I don´t know what you might call the rest Since Islam just like other religions is subject to human interpretation there can NEVER be One "Ummah". Personally i beleive Muslims will never unite behind a single size of the "Niqab"´s eye openning in diameters

Step back everybody JB is here Sometimes a notion completely devoid of wisdom can trigger wise and outstanding reaction. this Question falls into that category. Before one answers this Question one has to extract the term Love out of the religious and deity touch in it,just As 7of9 did and WT agreed. but that per se falls short to further sieve the term and simplify it to Johhny level( everage ***** level). 1: Love is NOTa byproduct of Marriage. reason: Marriage = official (declaration of coupling )of two human beeing . 2: Marriage is a byproduct of a mutual liking(love) between two human beeing. reason:You can´t Marry or declare official coupling based on hatred.[[[here i´m discarding the arranged marriage types]]] Now let us put that into context , If Y(love) is the byproduct of X(cute Halimo) times J(steaming Farah) then Marriage(a declaration of official coupling) equals Y(Love). What am i doing here? well , YES it is TRUE love is (or should be)equal to Marriage. In onother words , you can Marry out of Love just as well as you can Love out of marriage. Now comes the decisive thing in the Question. namely the priority, which of them comes first ?and the answer can only be LOVE. This might sounds contradicting ,since Love equeled to Marraiage in our previous equation. but the tricky answer is , falling in love after marraige is not excluded . If A divided by B = C is TRUE then C times B equals A too is TRUE so is C times A equals B.

Originally posted by Baashi: Haddad, if the question is do I believe evolution in the sense of organism evolving to best adopt their environment in order to survive, Yes I do. What I don't believe is that this is self-driven mechanism. And here is where Science disappears! I am a believer. I believe there is a Divine hand guiding this process. I also believe there is a Divine Designer that pre-coded the inclanation that compels organism to adopt to their environment into the DNA. So far Darwin's theory has not convince (scientifically) me to discard this deep held believe by presenting evidence contrary to what I just outlined there. All it does is to emphasise the diversity of living things and explain why and how organism struggle for survival. Bashi, Darwin NEVER said there is no GOD or a Divine designer that pre-coded the whole natural sellection machanisim. what he presented is a theory and he proved it scientifically. Science neither disappears, nor will it deny you to be a beleiver. Science deleivers knowledge through the normal senses, knowledge implies a beleif, not the other way around. the presumption that Darwin and his theory are against creationinim(religions) is commonly held ,but according to the "Darwinists" it is upto the creationists to come clean scientifically as there seem to be no other way for mankind to KNOW. Share with us , Why you beleive that it is NOT a self-driven mechanism? Share with us , Why this divine pre-coder has coded it JUST so?

Dear Elysian !! I don´t think you misunderstood a thing , you just withheld the truth and reality behind the bible2000. "In Sweden every now and then a new version of the bible is released, some text are removed, reformulated or added in order “to simplify and keep the text updated†your statement is misleading , the bible2000 project was a simple (one time)translation of the bible into plain Swedish instead of the old biblical Swedish. it is not a new version of the holy bible, nor it is an every now n then work. That is why i reacted the way i did. Originally posted by Flipmode: who exactly said the Bibel2000 was against ISLAM...What we are saying is, the bible itself contains 50,000 errors in it and still claims it is pure..Why did we find 50,000 errors in the Holy Quraan after 1400yrs? You found ONLY 50,000 errors in the bible? i thought the whole book was nothing but an outdated old moral book on a serious note ... your list of errors is purely YOURS , am sure there are ppl who think there are more errors than you claim, as well as there are many who think your list is way too exagirated. As a good muslim you shoulden´t question it´s purity ,but i´m not here to judge you, so carry on the good work. You found 50K errors in the Quran after 1400 years? now here i must disagree with you ,either you counted wrong or missed a tiny negation

Originally posted by Elysian: Walaal, no need to get so offensive, you could just have asked me where I got the information. Let me enlighten you, the new version of the Bible , called Bibel 2000 was released a couple of years ago in Sweden. It was a huge thing, don't know how you could have missed it... This is what the people (members of the swedish bibel society) that actually updated it wrote on the hompage bibeln.se. "När bibeln har översatts har diskussionerna i arbetsgruppen stundvis varit intensiva. Än fler reaktioner blir det naturligtvis när läsarna tar del av den nya texten. Frågorna blir många, gamla kära texter låter plötsligt helt annorlunda, vissa texter är borta. Dear brother Johnny B, please tell me, have I missunderstood anything? Dear Elysian ,To start with you´ve deliberately or not failed to explain to the SOL readers what this bible 2000 is about, and what is the meaning behind the effort . 2nd , you´ve slightly mis-interprated the abouve Swedish, so before i convert it into english let me ENLIGHT the sol readers about the bible 2000 and why it was translated. 1: due to difficulties for the everage Swedish reader ( specially the youth) to understand and grasp the bible, this effort to translate the bible into PLAIN Swedish was born. 2:This Translation(interpration) is not meant to change the meaning and consistence fo the bible , but to make it understandable to the everage Swede( or Swedish speking people), so it is everything but a new version of the bible. 3: The Swedish bible society has NOTHING to do with this Translation(interpration). people with deeper knowledge of the Swedish language,christianity and theology have been assaigned to produce this "Translation" of the bible ( not a new version of the bible) 4: This translation was known to be a controversy among church leaders and among the the writers themselves. 5: There is no single paragraph that propogates against Islam in this "TRANSLATION". 5: The Swedish Bible society group was(is) critical to this work, and among their arguments is that is not properly regiven. As far as the Swedish text you qouted goes .. it exactly confirms what i´ve typed. it say : "The discussions among the (work-group)writers were sometimes intensive in the course of "TRANSLATING" the bible, Ofcourse more reactions are expected when the public(readers) get their copies, there´ll be many Questions , known dear phrases will suddenly sound diffrent and some will be gone." This very comment was made by the Swedish Bible society whose stance regarding this work is KNOWN. Dear Elysian, It is not for me to Judge you, I just wanted you to give the whole real picture regarding the bible2000.

Originally posted by Elysian: In Sweden every now and then a new version of the bible is released, some text are removed, reformulated or added in order “to simplify and keep the text updatedâ€!! Can such a book be titled holy?? hmmmmmm , which Sweden are you reffering to? cause in my "SVERIGE" where churchs are almost empty on sundays, where most of the ppl prefer to keep the monarchy but to divorce the church , where Academics are open source for knowledge, where open mindedness is the rule of the game.where religion is a personal thing. there is no such a thing like bible updating , or text removals or text refinings . these cheap shots on christianity which many Somali "wadads" practice, has to give way to the ever lasting true blue fact that.... There are ONLY two versions of the bible the old testament and the new testament. There are surely other ways and means to challenge the church´s view on Women and their veils, but painting christianity as a baseless evolving beleif is pure idiocy if not insane. Unless you wanna turn this into a propoganda against Christianity which would totally go against the topic ,Do stay to the facts and make it a good challenge. I may sound that am defending christianity here but that is not the case , i just want it to be proven so wrong ,but soley on facts, not emotions:D. Originally posted by Flipmode: [QB]our actions matter so much in non -ISLAMIC countries .[QB] Ofcourse our action smatter !! If she [A Halimo]walks into the bank covered with "Hijab" and all sorts of modern veils the ropery alarm will go ON but if she walks wearing her Jeans n sunglasses maybe just maybe Men´s "hot chick" alarm will go on

No matter how some try to make life impossible just becouse their version of ISLAM glorifies narrow mindedness, facts and realities SPEAK their own language. Those of you living in 14th century who could think of marrying anything female with TWO legs please give us a break. Even Animals pick their own partners after they´ve seen him/her, got somehow fond of him/her. why not me? Since you forbid all sort of contact with the "to be spouse", what is it you suggest? Just marry a chick cause she happens to be female and claims to be Muslim? eh..why not register with one of these "Muslim match" sites for a quick n lottery marriage me marrying a chick i never met is like me going out n bringing home a TRANS. now how funny is that

Originally posted by nin_brown: As for Johnny B If a women hasnt got the know how to obey her creator..what good can she do in this world...wouldnt let her clean my shoes...sxb dont let the school u go to do pollute your head..it aint gonna last....but the akhira is ever lasting..so if i was u i would watch out for what i utter I don´t think your shoes are an option for any human beeing girl , be it "Hijab" wearing ot Bikini wearing. And as far as beeing me is concerned .. you can´t be ME,so keep beeing yourself. Last thing you need is to threaten me .... convincing me through reasoning will do the trick Pucca ! You´re not alone in reading and following this thread?, but you seem to be alone in judging me and my post as ANTI-ISLAM , worse ! you haven´t shown us where you find it wrong? I´d be more than happy to remove it myself , given that YOU show us WHERE i& my post became ANTI-ISLAM and you became a faith guard of ISLAM. Goonle !! a non hijaab wearing Feminist that believes shes equal to men. It must be great beeing you watching that Independent , great looking, degree holding,Jeans wearing ,success stroy Somali girl run the show. Originally posted by Foxy: and who says that exactly, male chauvinist Pig like your self.....of please DITTO !! I´ve alot of respect for all Somali girls , "Hijab" wearing or Afro wearing.

Originally posted by Femme Fatale: Johhny, You can say whatever you want... FF .. Since you seem to have made ya mind,and whatever i may say will fall into everywhere but ya cute ears, lemme just WINK Foxy , thanks sis ... Always saving my butt

Ngonge , I hate to see you waving that white flag , becouse it MAY mislead the targetted group and make them beleive that you´ve really lost. Lost are those who intentionally shut their eyes and failed to SEE those sinple, humble arguments you presented. Somalis have very difficulties accepting having the weaker idea of any given issue, a shallow egos if u like, so instead of agreeing with you and cherishing your unquestionable arguments, they take an extreme position JUST to flag for indirect capitulation. Understanding that is vital KEY issue in Somali debates. NGONE bro, you delivered !! Always KEEP in mind , Somalis twist history JUST to make to the Arabs , Specially to the " kuresh" Arab family. Them not speaking even semi-arabic language doesen´t raise their eyebrows. Memorizing the "Kuran" in early ages and beeing fake descendants of "Kuresh" Arab family is part and parcel of every Somali´s mentality . WEST is not a religion , Islam is If Islam is a way of life then WEST is not . explaining that plain diffrence costed you alot , but you delivered it sxb and in time !! WELL done NGONGE !!