I wonder why the silent fart is stinkier than the loud fart.

Professor Noam Chomsky, the American intellectual, is back again. With a vengeance, I may add. Beyond the ballot BY NOAM CHOMSKY 6 January 2006 THE US President Bush called last month’s Iraqi elections a "major milestone in the march to democracy." They are indeed a milestone — just not the kind that Washington would welcome. Disregarding the standard declarations of benign intent on the part of leaders, let’s review the history. When Bush and Britain’s Prime Minister, Tony Blair, invaded Iraq, the pretext, insistently repeated, was a "single question": Will Iraq eliminate its weapons of mass destruction? Within a few months this "single question" was answered the wrong way. Then, very quickly, the real reason for the invasion became Bush’s "messianic mission" to bring democracy to Iraq and the Middle East. Even apart from the timing, the democratisation bandwagon runs up against the fact that the United States has tried, in every possible way, to prevent elections in Iraq. Last January’s elections came about because of mass nonviolent resistance, for which the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani became a symbol. (The violent insurgency is another creature altogether from this popular movement.) Few competent observers would disagree with the editors of the Financial Times, who wrote last March that "the reason (the elections) took place was the insistence of the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who vetoed three schemes by the US-led occupation authorities to shelve or dilute them." Elections, if taken seriously, mean you pay some attention to the will of the population. The crucial question for an invading army is: "Do they want us to be here?" There is no lack of information about the answer. One important source is a poll for the British Ministry of Defence this past August, carried out by Iraqi university researchers and leaked to the British Press. It found that 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops and less than 1 per cent believe they are responsible for any improvement in security. Analysts of the Brookings Institution in Washington report that in November, 80 per cent of Iraqis favoured "near-term US troop withdrawal." Other sources generally concur. So the coalition forces should withdraw, as the population wants them to, instead of trying desperately to set up a client regime with military forces that they can control. But Bush and Blair still refuse to set a timetable for withdrawal, limiting themselves to token withdrawals as their goals are achieved. There’s a good reason why the United States cannot tolerate a sovereign, more or less democratic Iraq. The issue can scarcely be raised because it conflicts with firmly established doctrine: We’re supposed to believe that the United States would have invaded Iraq if it was an island in the Indian Ocean and its main export was pickles, not petroleum. As is obvious to anyone not committed to the party line, taking control of Iraq will enormously strengthen US power over global energy resources, a crucial lever of world control. Suppose that Iraq were to become sovereign and democratic. Imagine the policies it would be likely to pursue. The Shia population in the South, where much of Iraq’s oil is, would have a predominant influence. They would prefer friendly relations with Shia Iran. The relations are already close. The Badr brigade, the militia that mostly controls the south, was trained in Iran. The highly influential clerics also have long-standing relations with Iran, including Sistani, who grew up there. And the Shia-dominant interim government has already begun to establish economic and possibly military relations with Iran. Furthermore, right across the border in Saudi Arabia is a substantial, bitter Shia population. Any move toward independence in Iraq is likely to increase efforts to gain a degree of autonomy and justice there, too. This also happens to be the region where most of Saudi Arabia’s oil is. The outcome could be a loose Shia alliance comprising Iraq, Iran and the major oil regions of Saudi Arabia, independent of Washington and controlling large portions of the world’s oil reserves. It’s not unlikely that an independent bloc of this kind might follow Iran’s lead in developing major energy projects jointly with China and India. Iran may give up on Western Europe, assuming that it will be unwilling to act independently of the United States. China, however, can’t be intimidated. That’s why the United States is so frightened by China. China is already establishing relations with Iran — and even with Saudi Arabia, both military and economic. There is an Asian energy security grid, based on China and Russia, but probably bringing in India, Korea and others. If Iran moves in that direction, it can become the lynchpin of that power grid. Such developments, including a sovereign Iraq and possibly even major Saudi energy resources, would be the ultimate nightmare for Washington. Also, a labour movement is forming in Iraq, a very important one. Washington insists on keeping Saddam Hussein’s bitter anti-labour laws, but the labour movement continues its organising work despite them. Their activists are being killed. Nobody knows by whom, maybe by insurgents, maybe by former Baathists, maybe by somebody else. But they’re persisting. They constitute one of the major democratising forces that have deep roots in Iraqi history, and that might revitalise, also much to the horror of the occupying forces. One critical question is how Westerners will react. Will we be on the side of the occupying forces trying to prevent democracy and sovereignty? Or will we be on the side of the Iraqi people? Noam Chomsky, eminent intellectual and the author, most recently, of Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World, is a professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.

About time! But these leaders need to provide those isbaaro boys better alternatives, such as access to education and jobs, lest the Jubba Valley experience the return-of-the-isbaaro episode which shook Xamar recently. Removing the isbaaro is Part 1 of the Resolution - Part 2 decides whether or not those isbaaro return with a vengeance. Let's hope those leaders succeed in Part 2. Nonetheless, a positive step.

Abwaan Maxamuud Ciise Cabdullahi Sangub oo isagu ah Abwaan Soomaaliyeed oo aad Qaali u ah ayay Waxmagarato Maangaab ahi u Dhigeen Shirqool ay kula dagaalamayaan balse ku guuldaraystay, iyaga oo dhinaca kalena ku Guulaystay in ay Cuqdada iyo xumaanta ku jirta banaanka soo dhigaan. Idamaale News Idamaale.com - always defending the undefendable: warlord-turned-presidents, corrupt officials, and now, child-rape suspects. Everyone who goes against their narrow socio-political self-interests is deemed as waxmagarato, as if Sangub's arrest pertains to the political situation at home. But if the same girl were to accuse Cabdi Qeybdiid of rape, I got $100 saying Idamaale.com would be one of the first (if not the first) websites to declare him guilty! They make me sick! :mad:

KHEYR: Your comparisons don't make much sense. How can you compare illegitimate pregnancy to murder (i.e. "honor killing")? Keeping things like pregnancy under tabs to protect a family's honor is at least understandable, but hiding a MURDER is wrong in every sense of the word. What "honor" are you protecting by hiding a murderer? He mercilessly killed his children today, and if you hide him, he might kill you and your family tomorrow. So why hide him? Find me the Hadith whereby the Messenger of Allah Muhammad (scw) hid murderers from public scrutiny and exposure. Then, you might have a sustainable debate. Originally posted by Khayr: No sense of IDENTITY AS A MUHAMMEDAN UMMAH Come again...? I'm proudly a member of the Muslim Ummah, but what in the world is a "Muhammedan Ummah"? "Muhammedan" is a derogatory term historically used by the staunchest anti-Islam people to deride the Holy Religion of its global, all-humanity nature by attributing its adherents' name to that of a single individual. The Messenger of Allah (scw) never referred to the believers of Islam as "Muhammedans" so where do you get the term from?

LOL This is some funny sh!t though. Robertson must be getting senile as he gets older. According to The Associated Press, Robertson spokeswoman Angell Watts said of people who criticized the comments: "What they're basically saying is, 'How dare Pat Robertson quote the Bible?'" So the Bible says any Isreali leader who "gives in" to the Palestinians should die? That's the reason Rabin died and now Sharon must die. That's all in the Bible, huh. Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the United States, compared Robertson's remarks to the overheated rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. So where's the "joke" thread about Roberson's comments, since one was made about Ahmadinejad? :confused: Robertson needs to move his TV show to Comedy Central, cause he's getting hilarious lately.

^^ You folks still watch soccer, huh. Alls I know is the Texas Longhorns made the comeback of the decade and beat the over-rated USC Trojans. The Seattle Times' Sports frontpage had: Vince, Valor, Victory inscribed in big, bold letters. Vince as in Vince Young, Texas quaterback and Rose Bowl MVP. But what do you soccer fans know 'bout football? What's in store for Somalia in 2006? Like someone else mentioned, only Allah SWT knows. So what we say is based on conjecture and estimates. 1. Somalia will still maintain its international standing as a "failed state" and continue its existence as a very poor country. 2. The children of warlords, corrupt "officials" etc. will get security and education in the Diaspora (the West, mainly) while the children of common Somalis will be face death, little access to education and jobs, poverty will remain rampant, and a general lack of basic necessities in every aspect of life. 3. Ethiopia will continue to weild unprecedented influence in Somaliland, Puntland, Jowhar, Bakool etc. and rule Somalia through proxy leaders. 4. George and his global supporters will continue to maintain that Somalia is a potential hub for "terrorists." So what changes? Nothing, another year of suffering for people back home, another year of warlord' prominence (now they're "presidents" and "ministers"), another year of scattered conflicts based on clan or land disputes, etc. The problem was clan. In their brilliant minds, they sought to fix the clan problem with a clan solution. And so the clan problem takes on greater dimensions, assumes greater responsibility. May Allah SWT save Somalia from the corrupt individuals who continue to ruin it. Aamin!

Originally posted by Khayr: However, what good does this do for the IMAGE of Muslims worldwide in exposing the ROTTEN APPLES of the Ummah to the WORLD at large. It just feeds the negative sterotyping and type casting of muslims. What good does this story do for the "image" of the Muslim Ummah? Let me answer that by asking you a question: Are you more concerned for the "image" of the Ummah than their un-Islamic "actions"? Exposing the truth was, is and will never be the wrong thing to do. People, Muslim or not, must know about atrocities such as this "honor killing" crap so that they can be better educated and better suited to defend against such illegal actions. But being quiet about this "honor killing" is akin to justifying it, for whatever purpose (protecting Muslims' "image" or not). And the "image" of the Ummah has been stereotyped for decades, if not centuries. Maxay inoo dhinte? We still standing, ain't we?

I'm always amazed by how many different phrases all mean the same thing: murder. Things like "manslaughter" and "honor killing" - they all lead to death. Whether he killed his daughters to protect his family's "honor" or not, the id!ot committed murder, fair and square. Nothing Islamic about it, though, as you mentioned.

Your price is too high! No Bai Nut Ding!

If Togane was right in his hateful poem that didn't recognize the many aspects of life, I wonder what's his take on this inspiring story by Hiiraan Online? And since Togane himself probably can't answer this question, its open to the supporters of his spiteful poem to answer.

Originally posted by Scientist: When I say them, it means them, it means anyone who advocates FOWDO ..."Muqdisho is the land of lawless, missery,and anarchy" so if you have a problem with that, then you are as sick as the warlords". Really...? You're intention was to criticize people who cause "FOWDO" (havoc) in Somalia? Strange that you mention only Muqdisho. Wixii Muqdisho ka dhaca aniga lama yaabo ileen waa meel aan maamul midaysan ka jirin. Laakinse waxaa layaab igu noqotay meelo la sheegey inuu maamul ka jiro (sida Puntland) oo waxyaalaha ka dhaca kuu cadeenayaan inuusan wax maamul ah jirin. View these two examples with me: Garowe Online: "Yaa ka danbeeyay is-rasaaseyntii ka dhacday Garoowe?" AllPuntland.com: Taliyaha ciidanka daraawiishta Puntland iyo maamulka gobolka Nugaal oo kawada hadlay ammaanka xabsiga Garoowe kadib markii ay maxaabiis ka baxsatay. Beneath the ears and the noses of the Puntland "administration", thugs are exchaning money extracted from illegal activities (sea piracy, in this case) and a group of prisoners escaped from Garowe Central Prison (the same prison, need I remind you, within whose walls two inmates sentenced to death were executed by angry clansmen). So my question to you is: Meeshaa (i.e. Garoowe) miyaysan FOWDO ka jirin? Mise sheekadu waa wixii xunba Xaawa (i.e. Xamar) leh?

Originally posted by Jacaylbaro: I admire her coz she is comitted ,,, she knows what she is doing ,,,,,,,,, of course she is against Allah ,,,, in this view she is BAD ,,, and she should be killed ,,,,,,, So which one is more important: To be admired because she's "committed" (as you say) or to be despised because she's against the teachings and tenets of Islam? This lady's crusade against Islam doesn't harm the religion in any way, shape or form. Islam is the way of life Allah SWT, in all His infinite wisdom and knowledge, sent down to mankind (to his slaves) as a guide to earthly purity and a heavenly Hereafter. Therefore, Islam needs no protection from mankind - because Allah SWT protects His message.

Originally posted by Jimca Lee: Bullsh!t...is a lie cleverly dressed up to resemble truth. Agreed! Bullsh!t is the bull that literally took a sh!t on human dignity and morals.

All of that simply because a stranger (dude) asked you what time it was? I say you're a bit paranoid (which automatically "fine-tunes" the inner alert system). The question you posed is two sides of the same coin. P.S. Next time someone asks, instead of freezing, pull the ol' school Korean act: Shake your head and say "No English!"

As far as the location of the "Land of Punt" was, historians have yet to agree to any definitive theory. There are many possibilities, however. Yet, Punt remains a mystery to us even today, for we do not precisely know its actual location. It has been suggested that Punt, because of its exotic "overseas" character, might be as far away as Somalia, Yemen or even the Horn of Africa . However, many modern Egyptologists place Punt much nearer to Egypt. We known that some of Punt's treasures were carried over land by way of Nmay and Irem (through the modern Sudan). We also here of the children of the chiefs of Punt that were raised at the Egyptian court alongside the children of Kush (Nubia) and Irem. Therefore, it has been assumed that Punt was not so far away, and most modern scholars place it perhaps on Africa's East Coast perhaps only just south of Egypt. Furthermore, modern attempts to classify flora and fauna suggests that Punt may have been located in the southern Sudan or the Eritrean region of Ethiopia. Yet this would place Punt to the east of Nubia and there is no evidence of military conflict between Punt and Egypt, as there was between Egypt and Nubia. One even wonders whether Punt was indeed an actual political entity through all the years between Egypt's Old and New Kingdoms, or was rather more of a generalized, perhaps encompassing a rather large area of Eastern Africa. History is a puzzle which never seems to have all the pieces intact at once. No person alive can say with absolute certainty exactly where the "Land of Punt" was located. "Puntland" of present-day Somalia is an ambitious attempt to coalesce the myths of the "Land of Punt" and claim it as factual.

Originally posted by Scientist: They thrive on anarchy, they love lawlesness, they hate law and order, they can't rule themselves and don't want to be ruled. I must say you're taking the concept of us-and-them to new heights. Are you better than them (whoever "them" may be)?

First, I established the fact that ALL the above-mentioned websites are either edited or owned by people from Puntland . Secondly, I also found out that ALL these websites are pro-Abdullahi Yusuf government. Cajiib. Wixii xunba Xaawa leh horaa loo yiri. I suppose these following websites which have published articles critical to BBC Somali Section editor Yusuf Garaad are all owned or edited by "people from Puntland" and are, in fact, "pro-Abdullahi Yusuf" government websites. Let us see the truth in such a statement: Same article appears on following websites (but only one website is picked on by the Dutchman): Midnimo Information Center AllPuntland.com WardheerNews.com AllGedo.com Other articles: SomalilandNet.com Somaliland Times Websites defending BBC Yusuf Garad: Goobjoog.net HobyoNet.com Geeska Afrika Mudulood Page Thank Allah that we have online access to: Radio Banadir, HornAfrik, SBC Radio, Radio Daljir, Radio Horyaal, amongst others.

the theory of limbo consigned children outside of heaven on account of original sin alone. As a concept, limbo has long been out of favour, as theologically questionable and unnecessarily harsh. It is hard to imagine depriving innocents of heaven. Then, why imagine? :confused: The church is growing most in poor places like Africa and Asia where infant mortality remains high. But in "rich places" like Europe and North America where suicide rates are high, the Church isn't growing as much. Why is that? Before these "rich places" became rich, the citizens thereof adhered to the Church and to its bylaws, for everything from social relations to political doctrines. As soon as these "rich places" gained power and wealth on a global scale, things such as faith in the Church (and in God) and morality took backseat prominence, and were overpowered by the newest religion, Capitalism. The concept of limbo should be the least of the Church's concerns because there's a larger debate over homosexuality in the priesthood, as alludd to in the article, which will eventually lead to a fundamental split within Christendom.

Assalamu Calaykum, Originally posted by S.U.N.S.E.T: Unable to refute due to lack of knowledge or whatever the case may be; you'r now compelled to take the brochure and go home with doubts and defeat . If the argument of a non-believer can make one go home with "doubts" about his/her faith, then its best to remember the inspiring story of Bilal ibn Rabah, companion of the Messenger of Allah Muhammad (SCW), who withstood torture and torment but never relented in his faith and devotion to Allah SWT. Originally posted by Fathia: How do you make someone belief, As someone above mentioned, you can't make someone believe in Islam. If anyone could make someone believe, then the Messenger of Allah Muhammad (SCW) would've made his beloved uncle, Abu Talib, convert to Islam before his death. Excerpts from the Noble Qur'an: 2:256: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. 18:17: ...He whom Allah guides is rightly guided; but he whom Allah leaves to stray - for him wilt thou find no protector to lead him to the Right Way. 40:28: ...Truly Allah guides not one who transgresses and lies! 28:50: ...for Allah guides not people given to wrong-doing. 24:46: ...and Allah guides whom He wills to a way that is straight. 9:24: ...then wait until Allah brings about His decision: and Allah guides not the rebellious. 3:86: How shall Allah Guide those who reject Faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them? but Allah guides not a people unjust.

^^ LOL That I don't understand either. If you bald, live with it. Some people are born poor, blind, deaf or disabled, yet others, who have been blessed with their lixdooda-lixaad, are not content with their image or lifestyle. That is the issue at heart here. But I never said women had a "monopoly," as you put it, over such behavior.

The "way forward" for Somali women's education is to train them to become tailors and cooks for eternity? Like someone mentioned before, some Somali women have mastered both the aforementioned crafts in the comfort of their homes. If they genuinely wanted to establish an all-girls school and educate the female masses, they should've offered a variety of subjects, not just these common crafts. P.S. So many bearded men in the pictures of an all-girls school. Why? :confused: Originally posted by Tolstoy: for it's true that once upon time, as I can recalled from this distance, I too, was one those Students/Marchers , who had marched dutifully for the benefits of that bygone dictator of the then Somali Republic - namely the late Gen. Siad Barre So, just like ina Riyaale, you too was once a proud Guulwade for the "bygone dictator"? I think I'm beginning to finally understand the source of your callous bitterness.

I know some girls who were darker than me in 2003 but can be classified as "ligh-skinned" today. What did it change? I know they didn't use skin enhancement creams for health reasons. But it does speak loudly of their low self-esteem. P.S. I never quite understood why some women try so hard to remain young and pretty, while they know the inevitability of aging, and that some day they'll all be haggy and ugly.

I am saddened that someone actually had the audacity to claim that a hijab ban is worse than civil and military conflict in Muslim countries. Tell that to the millions of innocent dead, millions more who continue to live under oppression. Originally posted by Callypso: For Turkey to ban the Hijab is a deplorable limitation on the fundamental human right to self-expression, but surely the level of vitriol aimed at Turkey is a bit hypocritical . I know Somali Muslims who placed their hand on the Qur'an and vowed to be truthful but told ridiculous lies so they could live in America or Canada. You're comparing State-sanctioned law that goes against Islamic doctrine (affecting the lives of all Turkish citizens) to the behavior of certain individuals you know? :confused:

^^ Muslims the globe over have done worse things to each other than a hijab ban can ever do. Should we also question whether or not they're Muslims as well? The hijab controversy is an ideological battle compared to military and civil conflicts in Muslims nations amongst Muslims (in this context, Somalia should provide ample example). Turkey remains a [secular] Muslim nation.