Rahima, you and I would like to see someone put a fresh spin on Somali politics You aren't wrong there, but the problem is the people (namely the educated youth) who we hoped would someday in the near future do just that have unfortunately become infected with the disease which plagued and continues to plaque their elders- tribalism. but are you positive Somalis are willing to test the waters with the name "al-itihaad" if need be? Not only am I not positive i am sure that Somalis would not be willing to accept Al-itixaad (except for a handful of wadaado maybe). We as Somalis are a people who cannot agree upon anything including the colour of the ocean, to some it's blue; to otherwise its turquoise and a disagreement on this can result in a civil war. We are so backward that we cannot even see our downfalls. We are such a sad people walaahi! Somalis understand nothing but force- which is why I believe CY is more likely to succeed as president than Cabdiqaasim who tried diplomacy and reasoning with the warlords was. Ruthlessness and brutality is the only language they speak and until they shape up, it seems that it is with this they should be ruled by. In terms of testing the waters under the banner of al-itixaad, that is irrelevant now. We have a government who we should be in support of- we have no other choice. Personally though, I have issues with any person who campaigns for the leadership position. The best possible leaders who would be able to execute the fairest methods of governance are generally those who run away from such a position- sadly this is to our detriment for it means being left with the worst.

Rahima, you and I would like to see someone put a fresh spin on Somali politics You aren't wrong there, but the problem is the people (namely the educated youth) who we hoped would someday in the near future do just that have unfortunately become infected with the disease which plagued and continues to plaque their elders- tribalism. but are you positive Somalis are willing to test the waters with the name "al-itihaad" if need be? Not only am I not positive i am sure that Somalis would not be willing to accept Al-itixaad (except for a handful of wadaado maybe). We as Somalis are a people who cannot agree upon anything including the colour of the ocean, to some it's blue; to otherwise its turquoise and a disagreement on this can result in a civil war. We are so backward that we cannot even see our downfalls. We are such a sad people walaahi! Somalis understand nothing but force- which is why I believe CY is more likely to succeed as president than Cabdiqaasim who tried diplomacy and reasoning with the warlords was. Ruthlessness and brutality is the only language they speak and until they shape up, it seems that it is with this they should be ruled by. In terms of testing the waters under the banner of al-itixaad, that is irrelevant now. We have a government who we should be in support of- we have no other choice. Personally though, I have issues with any person who campaigns for the leadership position. The best possible leaders who would be able to execute the fairest methods of governance are generally those who run away from such a position- sadly this is to our detriment for it means being left with the worst.

Rahima, you and I would like to see someone put a fresh spin on Somali politics You aren't wrong there, but the problem is the people (namely the educated youth) who we hoped would someday in the near future do just that have unfortunately become infected with the disease which plagued and continues to plaque their elders- tribalism. but are you positive Somalis are willing to test the waters with the name "al-itihaad" if need be? Not only am I not positive i am sure that Somalis would not be willing to accept Al-itixaad (except for a handful of wadaado maybe). We as Somalis are a people who cannot agree upon anything including the colour of the ocean, to some it's blue; to otherwise its turquoise and a disagreement on this can result in a civil war. We are so backward that we cannot even see our downfalls. We are such a sad people walaahi! Somalis understand nothing but force- which is why I believe CY is more likely to succeed as president than Cabdiqaasim who tried diplomacy and reasoning with the warlords was. Ruthlessness and brutality is the only language they speak and until they shape up, it seems that it is with this they should be ruled by. In terms of testing the waters under the banner of al-itixaad, that is irrelevant now. We have a government who we should be in support of- we have no other choice. Personally though, I have issues with any person who campaigns for the leadership position. The best possible leaders who would be able to execute the fairest methods of governance are generally those who run away from such a position- sadly this is to our detriment for it means being left with the worst.

^ The way i see it is, there must be a reason why there is a unanimous agreement. If anyone was to accuse the scholars of bias as some will try, they hail from different regions of Somalia and are all of different tribes (which is after all what Somali politics operates on).

^ The way i see it is, there must be a reason why there is a unanimous agreement. If anyone was to accuse the scholars of bias as some will try, they hail from different regions of Somalia and are all of different tribes (which is after all what Somali politics operates on).

^ The way i see it is, there must be a reason why there is a unanimous agreement. If anyone was to accuse the scholars of bias as some will try, they hail from different regions of Somalia and are all of different tribes (which is after all what Somali politics operates on).

^ It all depends on who does the accusing and on what grounds . People have the habit of accusing anyone who opposes their views. I prefer to follow the opinions of the Somali scholars (e.g Maxamad Sh. Cusmaan, Umal, Mustafa Xaaji Ismaaciil, Shariif cabdi nuur, Cumar Faaruuq and Cukaash etc) – that on the Somali scene Al-itixaad (the true ones, not the claimants) are the best we have. I'm sure you are aware of my views on Al-itixaad. They are not infallible and I’m sure have made mistakes, but I’d take them over the warlords any day. As for trust, that is a big ask. I can’t say I trust any group wholeheartedly. Regarding piety, i don't believe any of us can be sure- that point was just not to generalise all businessmen and politicians for i am sure some of them are god-fearing. Anyway all we can do is have hope that everyone including the warlords come on board and this government succeeds.

^ It all depends on who does the accusing and on what grounds . People have the habit of accusing anyone who opposes their views. I prefer to follow the opinions of the Somali scholars (e.g Maxamad Sh. Cusmaan, Umal, Mustafa Xaaji Ismaaciil, Shariif cabdi nuur, Cumar Faaruuq and Cukaash etc) – that on the Somali scene Al-itixaad (the true ones, not the claimants) are the best we have. I'm sure you are aware of my views on Al-itixaad. They are not infallible and I’m sure have made mistakes, but I’d take them over the warlords any day. As for trust, that is a big ask. I can’t say I trust any group wholeheartedly. Regarding piety, i don't believe any of us can be sure- that point was just not to generalise all businessmen and politicians for i am sure some of them are god-fearing. Anyway all we can do is have hope that everyone including the warlords come on board and this government succeeds.

^ It all depends on who does the accusing and on what grounds . People have the habit of accusing anyone who opposes their views. I prefer to follow the opinions of the Somali scholars (e.g Maxamad Sh. Cusmaan, Umal, Mustafa Xaaji Ismaaciil, Shariif cabdi nuur, Cumar Faaruuq and Cukaash etc) – that on the Somali scene Al-itixaad (the true ones, not the claimants) are the best we have. I'm sure you are aware of my views on Al-itixaad. They are not infallible and I’m sure have made mistakes, but I’d take them over the warlords any day. As for trust, that is a big ask. I can’t say I trust any group wholeheartedly. Regarding piety, i don't believe any of us can be sure- that point was just not to generalise all businessmen and politicians for i am sure some of them are god-fearing. Anyway all we can do is have hope that everyone including the warlords come on board and this government succeeds.

JB, do you even care about the plight of our brothers or is this just a cheap shot at CY :rolleyes: ? You are blurring the line here.

^ Good on him? :confused: mujaahidiinta ah ee Daraawiishta Puntland I always laugh at this . Every qabiil believes that there misguided fighters are mujaahidiin. How they mess with the word :rolleyes: .

^ Good on him? :confused: mujaahidiinta ah ee Daraawiishta Puntland I always laugh at this . Every qabiil believes that there misguided fighters are mujaahidiin. How they mess with the word :rolleyes: .

This is just sad. I remember being told of an incident (back when Cabdiqaasim was elected) where young Somalis were arrested for adoring t-shirts with the Somali flag. I was flabbergasted to say the least, here in Australia i can walk around with such clothing with no hassles, but could expect problems on Somali soil. The world seems upside down. Just a disclaimer though, this I don’t believe reflects the views of our brothers in the North so let’s not turn this into a SL bashing session. I can imagine the same happening in PL or the south if a SL walked around with a SL flag. We are all the same; we have our sick and good citizens.

^^ If you never ever go, you'll never ever know (Darryl summers from hey hey it's Saturday ). Although a kiwi, let’s hope you get it Rokko, otherwise ask those who remember :cool: . Buur Hakaba, heard of it just recently, don't know anything about it but i do like the name.

Let’s hope he keeps to his word, I don’t expect much from warlords and warlords turned president. We can only have hope. he will deliver unlike Caato Not only is he a warlord (as if that wasn't bad enough), but also a businessman. Businessmen along with politicians usually have one thing in common, they’re accomplished liars and deceivers (unless they have taqwa).

Let’s hope he keeps to his word, I don’t expect much from warlords and warlords turned president. We can only have hope. he will deliver unlike Caato Not only is he a warlord (as if that wasn't bad enough), but also a businessman. Businessmen along with politicians usually have one thing in common, they’re accomplished liars and deceivers (unless they have taqwa).

Let’s hope he keeps to his word, I don’t expect much from warlords and warlords turned president. We can only have hope. he will deliver unlike Caato Not only is he a warlord (as if that wasn't bad enough), but also a businessman. Businessmen along with politicians usually have one thing in common, they’re accomplished liars and deceivers (unless they have taqwa).

Personally I would prefer that we as Somalis could work out our differences amongst ourselves without the intervention of foreigners. Realistically though, I realize that this is highly unlikely- if we could we would of have achieved peace by now. However I feel that for there to be a deployment of foreign troops into Somalia, a few conditions must be met. The soldiers/countries MUST be Muslims, no Amxaaro at any cost and for their to be justice. There should be no targeting of one qabiil or group of people (such as SL) whilst turning a blind eye to another. Let’s not have another American fiasco (where the religious and one qabiil were generally targeted) for that would only jeopardize the trust of our people in the new government. Often we read in these forums that the warlords of Mogadishu need to be disarmed, but I wonder, are the warlords only in Mogadishu? Disarmament needs to be of all warlords/fighters, including those in PL (I say this in only because it is where CY hails from and any favoritism would most likely be to them for this is only natural human discrimination- excluding the wadaado which he hates with a passion).

He who really cares about the affairs and well being of our people especially at a blessed time like the month of Ramadan, will not be consumed by who started what, who killed who but rather condemn the actions of both sides equally. If by posting such pictures, one is trying to present an informative image, then he/she should be fair in posting the suffering of both sides (or at the very least mention that the blame is to be dished out to both sides), to not do so only highlights an element of taking sides and hence not being much better than those at the war front. Likewise to come in and defend the actions of one group over another is just to take the other side of the same sickening coin. May Allah have mercy on these people and just as importantly may Allah guide them. I wonder, do Somalis not ever get tired? Do they not ever learn?

^ It's not like they are relevant brother- they speak of one thing and we are discussing another. The point was if we can EVER overthrow a leader (with the clause I’ve mentioned so many times and you seem to be missing everytime). The point of disagreement here is whether or not the Muslims can ever depose a leader (on the condition that a greater fitnah is not to be foreseen). You said never unless he is a kaafir, Islam says yes- hence your opinion becomes null and void. I don't believe anyone is disagreeing with the let's be patient and advice the leader part- we all know, we all acknowledge so need to keep regurgitating it- address the point above with the clause. Are the influential Muslims allowed to depose a leader if there is no fear of a greater fitnah? Must they put up with him always unless he is a clear kaafir? It isn't very hard to understand. I did not speak of my own whims, i paraphrased what sh.ibn baz said, which remains as such.

I don't remember any of this 21st October celebration, and the ciids are vague. But how angry i am when i am reminded of what we missed out on. We are basically the sore losers in this whole equation. We don't even have memories to cherish. What a shame. Inshallah our children will be able to live such sweet moments (ciid in a Muslim country is a wonder, ciid in your homeland is a dream fulfilled-dreamer i am).

True Maybe False Maybe False False True True True True 11-13 NO CLUE False Don't know False Probably False Dont know True- without a doubt.

The people who are now against talking about General Gani do not have such high moral standrards when it comes to General Aydeed. Some people who are who are lecturing forgiveness in this thread are busy reminding us about what happened to members of their clan in Xamar in another. Interesting point. But he who does not care for qabiil will apply the same rule of Allahs forgiveness for both men. Walaahi everytime one of these people dies, i am shocked everytime because i can only remember that which happpened. Only the truly sick individual will make such a duca for gaani and not caydiid, or for Egal and not gaani. As for the reminders, brother are we not Somalis? Hypocrisy runs in our blood (or so it seems). It’s always the other man who is evil, always the other qabiil which killed and plundered whilst my clan and adeero were innocent and did not partake in any wrongdoings. Maybe if we truly acknowledged the downfalls of our clans and clansmen and worked together on righteousness (not bound by lineage) we would get somewhere.

Salafi, They don’t rule by the shariica as it should-parts of it doesn’t mean complete application (btw SA is not alone in the partial application of the shariica, so lets not play the ‘oh how angelic are the royal family’ card). It is that simple. How can a government whose economic system is based on riba/usury claim to be completely following the shariica? This is done with brother. If you don’t like it, then live with it unless of course you believe that riba is xalaal. Also, my minimal amount of knowledge (including the detriment of dealing with riba) allows me to know that anyone who uses it is not exactly following that which was revealed by Allah. It’s funny that you speak of minimal knowledge akhi, just yesterday you were willing to throw around fataawas to allow for the secession of SL. Was that you or someone else? I must be mistaken. As for the rest of the users, the following article is excellent in simplifying what the above link explains. http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/politics/khalifa.html#disobedience It addresses the following points: Contents - Definition of Khilafa and Khalifa - The duties and responsibilities of the Khalifa - The prerequisites to becoming the Khalifa - How the Khalifa may be chosen - The Majlis-Ash-Shura - How the Majlis-ash-Shura selects the Khalifa - Using force to choose the Khalifa - Disobeying and removing the Khalifa - Who has the authority to remove a bad Khalifa - The removal of the Khalifa - The Khilafa of Abu Bakr

you sure? I think u need to go read my post again! I asked you to post it so that I can take a look at it! i was not positive of what he said, thats why my post was very vague! cheap shot though! Well it has been posted, what do you make of it then? Its interesting how you take from the scholars of Saudi or anyone for that matter as long as they agree with your view! If it is not in accordance with your view they are wrong as far as your concerned! if Bin Baaz defends Salman and Safar you jump on his his banwagen! if he praises His government, This is a no no he is clearily wrong! If Uthaymin praises Hasan Albana, you will quote him at will, because here it suits your needs, but God forbid if he praises his government! you wil never quote him for this! That’s rich coming from you. I posted a verdict by ibn jibreen, you dismissed it and tried to belittle it with questions surrounding his authority (when other times you acknowledged that he is one of the major scholars). I also referred to a statement made by abu bakr and although you we’re on the ball about its content, you had to reply with “I understand this as not ruling by the laws of islamâ€. This is Abu bakr- a simple i understand does not hold ground. The issue is not whether or not Safar and Salman are right or wrong (i personally don't agree with revolting against the regime at this point in time because i don't believe it will be of benefit to the Muslims), but rather the manner in which their refutation is done. Simply because of a difference in opinion concerning the Saudi government some have sought to attacking their whole Islam and speaking of them as if they are destined to hell. I’ve read the fataawa of the scholars and the commentary of certain groups- there is a major discrepancy in the manner adopted. You like your buddies at these places you quote from my brother, are very confused about the manners of disagreement. You seem so dead set on tarnishing anyone who disagrees with you on any matter that it’s almost sad. I wonder, how do you all handle disagreements amongst yourselves? Do you all give each other labels? I mean do you ever become Salafi_online al-....? As for ibn Baz (rahimuallah), I respect him, love him and hold him in high regard. All of this is not nullified by the fact that I may not agree with him totally about every issue. For example, on a different note, I do not believe that the niqaab is waajib and prefer the reasoning of Al-bani rahimuallah. Does this mean that I am degrading him, no of course not? That defies logic. I can say the same about Sh. Albani’s fatwa on women wearing gold, I may not agree, but nonetheless respect, love and hold him in high regard. do u know why the Saudi Bash the northern Alliance? Its not because they aided the kufar( I don’t think they care) if so prove it! First of all know that not all of the northern alliance were shiica. Secondly, aside from that, where were you when the invasion of Afghanistan happened? I'm sure that we all agree and acknowledge that to aid the kuffaar in fighting against your brother Muslim (as did the norther alliance) is major kufr, therefore, do not the northern alliance come under this banner of the scholars refutations? As for the points of the scholars, check out: http://www.fatwa-online.com/news/0011126.htm Note that Sh. Rabee’ states that to fight the northern alliance (&Americans) is jihad and this fatwa was at the time when Afghanistan was been invaded by the Americans (pay attention to the date, it was at the exact time when the occupation was taking place). If this is not a denunciation of the actions of the northern Alliance, then I do not know what is. As for this topic, I can only highlight that which has already been posted: You stated: to make a long story short ,†yes†they have to be disbelievers for one to depose them! Everything you mentioned would be classed as sins which do not lead to disbelieve (kufr)! I suppose you’d agree, Or else you would not have asked the question I posted the following fatwa (pay attention to the question, it is speaking of Muslim leaders who commit acts of kufr and sin- not who are kuffar) Question : There are people who think that because some of the rulers commit acts of kufr and sin , we are obliged to rebel against them and attempt to change things even if that results in harming the Muslims in that country, at a time when there are many problems in the Muslim world. What is your opinion? Answer : Praise be to Allaah. The basic comprehensive principle of sharee’ah is that it is not permitted to remove an evil by means of a greater evil; evil must be warded off by that which will remove it or reduce it. Warding off evil by means of a greater evil is not permitted according to the scholarly consensus (ijmaa’) of the Muslims. If this group which wants to get rid of this ruler who is openly committing kufr is able to do so, and can bring in a good and righteous leader without that leading to greater trouble for the Muslims or a greater evil than the evil of this ruler, then that is OK. But if rebellion would result in greater trouble and lead to chaos, oppression and the assassination of people who do not deserve to be assassinated, and other forms of major evil, then that is not permitted. Rather it is essential to be patient and to hear and obey in matters of good, and to offer sincere advice to the authorities, and to pray that they may be guided to good, and to strive to reduce evil and increase good. This is the correct way which should be followed, because that is in the general interests of the Muslims, and because it will reduce evil and increase good, and because this will keep the peace and protect the Muslims from a greater evil. Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutanawwi’ah li Samaahat al-Shaykh al-‘Allaamah ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), vol. 8, p. 202 ( www.islam-qa.com ) Then I paraphrased the fatwa with: Islam allows for the overthrow of a leader (the decision being made by the influential people of authority and power) so long as there is no greater fitnah that will come of it. Which you replied with: this is another rabbish with all due respect, based on the teaching of the prophet right! then why dont we see a hadith or even a quotation from salaf! Now you tell me, what on earth are you on about :confused: . This is as clear as day. The question of the fatwa is about a Muslim leader who commits acts of kufr and sin. Ibn baz replied that so long as a greater fitnah is not feared then he can be overthrown. Did you read what the salaf did during the reign of AlHajaja?!? ' here have a read! Yes and have you ever thought that the clause for this whole debate we are having is the condition that a greater fitnah will not come of overthrowing the leader. Lastly, I believe I’ve told you both in private and public, no need to resort to insults when you debate. Here you are lecturing to sahal about the etiquettes of debates, yet you do that which you accuse him of. Remember that a hypocrite resorts to insults when arguing. I'm sure this point is far more important than if we see eye to eye on this. N.B the fatwa of ibn baz I was speaking of can be found in his book Majmuucu Fataawaa’ Wa maqaamaalaat mutanawica (published 2000, p.380)