^^^, I was talking to ngonge, young blood.

Blessed, what is the point of this thread? YOu posted an article about a wanted mass murder but failed to follow up with your analysis of the case against him, neither did you make a case for this man. In addition to that, you did not explain whether you are for or against Obama's decision to pursue the target at all costs?

^lol, now test him and see if he can pick Christopher Hitchens from a line up? PS: Khayr, you are silly, old boy.

kix kix kixk@Ibti, ditto. PS: as for the reading list, one assignment at a time. Let me first put the Burka issue to rest. You wont believe it but I made friends with one woman who rocks the burka and I cant wait to share my findings with you, ofcourse, all in due time.

Her name was Abigail(short for Anisa AbtiDoon) and she was 26 years of age, full of life and laughter. On April 26, 2007, her life was turned upside down when she found out that the man who swore to love, honour and cherish her for the rest of her living life was in fact a 'Muslim' extremist who sent her to martyrdom, announced Abigail. Before her marriage to her heartthrob husband, later came to be known as "Militant Mullah", Abigail had a promising career at a publishing housing firm, she was promoted to be a Junior editor to recruit young talents in the community. In a word, she had eye for talent and the senior editor, who was Abigail's mentor for close to two years knew Abigail was not like the others, she was made from a special cloth Abigail lived a charming life. The third daughter of Sadiq and Axado Abtidoon, her parents were proud of young Abigail, especially with her recent promotion, they believed that one day soon, their daughter will find her soulmate, her Mr. Right and have a family of her own. Already, her two older sisters were married with children, happy and content. As a young teenager, Abigail dated here and there but nothing came of it in terms of producing a lasting relationship. Her last boyfriend, a young Somali, Engineer Student wanted to test out the water for other fishes in the sea (so to speak) because he felt that his girlfriend was a brute when it came to holding out on him, recalls Abigail.(holding out sex, as Abigail was a proud virgin, who was not embarrassed to share it with anyone who asked her) Abigail had a zest for life. The Abigail I interviewed was not weak, she was in control, she even confided in me when she said; It is important to be assertive, at work and at home. But dont let her strong sense of self fool you, she despised liars. For 'Militant Mullah", he was anything but when Abigail first laid eyes on him on the preceding days, months. He was considerate, says Abigail. Quickly, Abigail takes a step back and pushes the chair to stand up, only to come back to the chair, she put her hand on the table that we were sitting as we sipped tea while she poured her heart out and said, " you know, he was unusually charming". I asked Abigail, unusual in what way? Abigail slowly exhaled before she started to speak again. For now, let me quickly point out to you why the man that haunts Abigail is called "Militant Mullah" instead of being called his real name. Her husband, yes, she is still married to him, is sitting in jail, waiting for trial to defend himself against various charges, for one, act to commit terrorism, attempted murder and a whole load of other charges. His case is pending trial and for this reason, we have to keep his identity anonymous, for one, to protect the victim(Abigail), and the other reason is not aid the defensive attorneys to hinder the trial proceedings with this expose. Turning back to the Kitchen, where Abigail finally gets the courage to speak about the unspeakable, her beloved husband, she finally breaths slowly to say something. The man who courted her, showered her with love and attention was not the same man who returned from the Dominican with a different attitude. Promised to love and protect her, he quickly changed his demeanor. The man who Abigail never thought had militant tendencies and was not religious or so he said to her, Militant Mullah, the would be husband, the devil in disguise was as normal as the average joe or so he appeared. He held a steady job at the local garage as a part-time mechanic. He was not ambitious but he had a drive to succeed in the little he knew. He started working for the local garage as an apprentice and finally landed a part-time position as a mechanic, fixing cars, changing oil etc. He was content and that was one of his supposed 'good qualities, says Abigail. From the first sight, he lived for her, did everything possible to cater to her needs. One day she told him, "babe, you are not like the other guys, you want nothing from me but at the same time, you want everything for me." His reply was simple, "Abigail, when I look at you, I see a beautiful, intelligent woman in front of me, the mother of my future children, my bestfriend, without you, I don't know what I will do." Abigail sobbed and sobbed with these words, she later recalled and she couldnt imagine being with any other man. He did not pressure her, he did not make sexual advances in the first few weeks of their courtship, contact was minimal.(usual hugs,holding hand in public) Abigail said, "he followed my lead." Later, when they had their first kiss, the moment was right, says Abigail. It was four months into their relationship, hundreds of phone calls, few dozen outings and they still could not get enough of each other and one night, after he brought her home, she leaned over and he took it from there and fireworks erupted. She remembers their first discussion about s.e.x, they had an open and honest relationship, nothing was off limits, especially when it came to down to discussing past sexual partners. She was honest and open about her abstinence from sex until she was married and it was a promise she would keep. Growing up, Abigail was like any other teenager, she was social, had many girlfriends, boys in her school and her neighbourhood wanted her when they weren't making advances or pretending to want to be friends with her so they can show off to her boys, etc. She admits, "my friends experimented with sex, we discussed it and after all the girls have done it, I was the only one in the click who did not, they were disappointed", she adds, "they would tease me constantly", until after Militant Mullah proposed. She said they discussed a wide range of topics, family, commitment, marriage, role of wife and husband, politics and even shared their each other's favourite things, books, places to go for honeymoon. She was quite surprised that Militant Mullah was an avid reader, he read biographies, said Abigail. I was quite fascinated with his list of readings, I guess I prematurely judged him, with his profession and all, admits Abigail. Two months before their wedding day, Abigail introduced him to her family, her sisters and young brother, Dayax. Abigail confided in her parents, she was very close to both her dad and mom. She recalls the time they discussed his family and there was not much he said, except that his dad was dead and his mom was married to another man and they were living in Ethiopia with her husband. He was an only child, his father was his role model, says Abigail. He spoke a great deal about his father. She distinctly remembers the time Militant Mullah told her about how his father read to him at an early age, quoting speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King and discussing Mahatma Gandhi and how he should always use peaceful means to solve problems. The principle of non-violence was instilled in him at an early age and he was so proud, he read part of King's speech to her without even looking up a book or at a computer screen, Abigail later recalled, I just couldn't believe that this man, the man who quoted King's speech would later turn out to be someone else. The wedding day was finally here, the married to be coupled agreed to live in the same apartment that Abigail was renting in the city, about 150km away from the quite and at times isolated Suburbs where she grew up and where her family still lived. After the wedding, the couple went to Honeymoon in the Dominican republic, all expense paid trip, as a wedding gift from Abigail's family. She later admitted to me that Militant Mullah was financially strained and he did not contribute much, which was one of the reasons they couldn't afford a house and opted to stay in her apartment after the honeymoon. The apartment was on the top floor, away from noise in a high riser. After they returned from the Dominican Republic, recalls Abigail, Militant Mullah quickly changed and soon, the horrors of the coming days will follow. Few days after the honeymoon, while Militant Mullah was out running errands, Abigail got a knock, a tall, Voluptuous middle aged woman stood with an ugly grin, says Abigail. Without so much as exchanging pleasantries, the lady walked in, asking for Militant Mullah and when Abigail politely answered back and informed her that her husband wasn't around, the lady got nasty and instead of taking a leave, made herself comfortable in Abigail's leather sofa. Abigail did not know what to make of the older lady, except to sit next to her to politely ask who she was and what she was doing in her home, asking for her husband. Just as she was getting the courage to talk to this angrily looking woman, she heard the sound of keys and the unlocking the lock, she got up and hurriedly met his husband in the door to open so she can warn him about the visiter. Abigail saw the look of her husband as he entered and gave a quick glance to the sofa area and he instantly knew who awaited him. In a moment, Abigail announced the lady but went on to say that she did not know the woman's name and instead asked him who she was. The lady heard and murmured something in Arabic, which Abigail could not make out and turned to Abigail to say, "didn't anyone teach you not to ask questions, especially when your husband hasn't taken his shoes off" and then turned to him and and told him , "boy, you forgot to tame your wife, dont say I didn't warn you now". All this time Abigail remained silent, unable to make anything of what was happening in her own living room. Shocked and unable to move, she asked her husband to go with her in the bedroom, as the apartment was small, only a one bedroom apartment, a living room, kitchen, bathroom and 2 closets. She later recalls that everything was going in slow motions but as the couple retreated to their bedroom, Militant Mullah was quick to point out that the older lady was in fact their guess and she would be staying with her for few weeks until things settle. Settle?, repeated Abigail. What are you settling? Who is this woman in my home? She can not be your mother because she looks like a foreigner and not a SOmali, so who is she? What is she to you and why is she in my home? He said, enough, I dont want to say more, just so you know, she is staying with us and you must not ask me anymore questions, all will be explained later. Later? Why later, why not now? Why are you acting this way? Why are you shouting at me angrily? What has gotten into to you, babe? She got no answers, just silent treatment as he left the room immediately. Next, she finds out that her telephone jacks were ripped, her laptop taken from her and new locks put in by her husband within the hour. Soon, she attempts to leave and the older lady stands between her and the door, unable to move her away because of the weight so she can go outside and clear her head so she can make sense of it all. Abigail's world turns upside down, confused, she sat in her sofa, wondering what to do, how to talk to her husband and most of all, find out who this woman is to him? Minutes turn to hours, hours turn to days, and finally, her husband comes into her room and says to her, you are free to go outside to get fresh air but you must remember not to talk to anyone, not even your family, not one phone call and proceeds to take the battery off her cellphone, takes her purse and instead gives her a new one with some of her content inside. She asked him, why are you giving me this purse and his response was simple, "I bought you this purse last week as a wedding present as he walks away", according to affidavit taken from Abigail after she escaped from the tall woman. Both women went out, Abigail's keys were taken from her by her husband and given to the older lady to drive her to the grocery store to stock up on food. Before they departed, the lady turns to Abigail and opens her bag to reveal a small pistol and says to Abigail to not make any moves while they are in public or she will shoot her in the back, while Militant Mullah will pay a visit to Abigail's family and kill them, one by one. Abigail, terrified of what she was hearing nodded in agreement and put her seat-belt on. When they arrived at the big grocery centre, Militant Mullah was distracted by a shopper who asked her question and just as quickly, not sure how Abigail knew whispered to the grocery bagger who was washing the vegetables in the corner to call the police and to approach the older lady quietly as she has a gun and she told him she was being held against her will. Abigail, curious about her bag and looking for a piece of paper to write on noticed an unusual weight and wondered what it was, little did she know that as she opened, explosives with a timer were inside, ticking and recalls quickly closing the back. She was sent for martyrdom, her husband put explosives on her back to kill her and the hundred of grocery shopper. Within minutes, police surrounded the building, slowly entered and approached the older lady, asked her to hand her handbag slowly and to put her hands up in the air. The older lady did as told and soon she was being taken on the side for questioning and the officer approached Abigail as the grocery bagger pointed her out and she was whisked to safety. ...to be continued Part Two: The trial and details of the target Filed by: LayZieG

Mus'ab Hassan Yousef, son of Sheikh Hassan Yousef Sr., raised in a small village near Ramallah, remembers throwing stones at Israeli soldiers but does not remember why he did it. He was a child of not more than 6 then when he learn to hate his Jewish neighbours and because he was the elder son of Sheikh hassan Yousef, one of the founders of Hamas, he knew no better except the few special occasions when he witnessed his father's growing resistance to Israeli occupation and the process of his religious indoctrination. He took oath to protect his land and people from the enemy occupiers. For this reason, he, Mus'ab Yousef Jr had first hand experience in the methods of recruitment of young muslim boys into the organization through his father, for the Sr. Yousef preached God's work to young recruits, pleading with them to join him 'for the sake of Allah and Islam" in the fight against the zionists, says young Yousef. Young Yousef did not know then what he knew now, which is that violence is not the only means to solving ones problem, especially when it concerns their Jewish Neighbours who have superior weapons and could wipe his people in minutes with a simple nuke drop. In his senior year in high school, young Yousef remembers being part of the Hamas propaganda for which he was arrested for by the Israeli police. Young yousef, at barely 17 yrs old oversaw a youth Militia(the Islamic bloc) who were involved in the long rivalry that existed between Hamas and their nemesis, Fatah, says Yousef Jr. Young Yousef's recollection remains part of him, which is why he discusses his youthful indiscretions with little or no remorse. He prayed regularly, attended Masjid, fasted but his faith was shaken during one of his arrests in his late teens by the Israeli security forces, in which he was tortured and later thrown in prison, full of Hamas foot-soldiers. He remembers the day that defined the rest of his life, which is when he experienced torture of Hamas prisoners by the prison ring leaders who were hamas members, fellow palestinians torturing their fellow brothers who they believed to be Israeli collaborators, says Yousef Jr. Some of the images were so disturbing that young Yousef could not tell if they were the enemy or if the Israeli's were, who he was long taught to be the enemy of his people and his own. He was confused because he didn't know why these ring leaders, who took oath to protect the palestinians and who sacrificed their lives were torturing fellow muslims, their brothers in arms against the struggle of Jewish occupation. Some of the tortures included but not limited to 'beatings, floggings, needles under the fingernails, melting plastic on the body of fellow Muslims" says Yousef Jr. So, his journey for self-discovery began and he knew then that not all Muslims were like his father whom he idolized growing up, the father who he loved more than anything in this world, the father who led his son down and robbed him of a future. The same father who long ago hid the truth from his son, embrassed for himself to tell his son that he was one of the founding fathers of the most notorious terrorist organization in the world, a terrorist organization who target jewish civilians in an unprovoked attack weekly against their neighbours and in turn use their civilians as human shields against Israeli aggression. Just recently, I watched an interview on the Amanpour show by Christiane Amanpour. She had a one-on one interview with Mus'ab Hassan Yousef Jr, a controversial character, son of the Hamas leader who recently dominated headlines with the release of his new book, "SON OF HAMAS".(CNN.COM/AMANPOUR) Some of the questions Amanpour asked the young Yousef were about his role as a 'double agent', working for the 'Shin Bet' and infiltrating the Hamas organization, his relationship with his father and later reading an excerpt of a note his father wrote denouncing the young Yousef. In the interview, Yousef claims to love the palestinian people and all the Muslims in the world but he has a grievance against the creator. He refers to the creator as "their GoD", who he blames for radicalizing his people(muslims), especially his family. He does not, and I repeat, he does not blame the terrorists themselves. He speaks unfavourably against the Qur'an, enough to warrant a fatwa from some groups for his head in the coming days, weeks.(chuckles) Other than that, the Interview was rather remarkable. I was more surprised with the young man's fearless personality and his daring interview, which more than likely would put his life at risk than his views about Muslims. I was taken by his calm demeanor and I was left wondering more about this person, whose had a life that was different from mine, who saw things a child should never have to witness but at the same time, sat on a chair across from Amanpour and poured his heart out to the audience as thought he was telling us about his past happy life, full of laughter and joy. I wish him luck for his new lease on life. May God guide him and the rest of us. About the interview, it was half hour long and as always, Amanpour had a great panel who analyzed Yousef's interview afterwards. From Tel Aviv, London to Demascus, Amanpour's panel included Yossi Melman, Hamas Spokesperson, Osama Hamdan and the sensationalist Fawaz Gerges in London. It was interesting because the zionist, who is an authority on the subject of intelligence and military affairs for the newspaper haaretz had this to say when asked whether some of the narrative in the book "son of Hamas" could be true, in which he said "Yes, Israel Intelligence tries to penetrate into palestinian organizations". He added by saying " The book is an embarrassment for the Israeli security services", suggesting that if some of the accounts were exaggerated, the government would make a public statement but that their silence suggests otherwise. It was interesting listening to the perspective of this expert because he claims, like it or not, that Israel does employ many agents, some who occupy low positions who are in fact palestinians, therefore suggesting that getting a high ranking spy, such as Yousef Jr does not come around often and if it does, they, the Israeli security services will do just about anything to accommodate him. If what Yossi Melman says is true, it is fair then to conclude that Yousef Jr's tell all book about daddy's terrorist organization might be credible, if not completely true. Yousef says that he took upon himself to spy in order to save his people, so atleast or to limit the assassinations of high targets from the organization, therefore brainwashing does not applied to him. If this man, who was a boy then felt compelled to carry the burden of his people on his shoulder and sacrifice himself for them, he was in fact in a position to negotiate targets, who to take out and who not to take out because simply put, for who his father was. Yousef Jr believes that the palestinians should be thankful for saving their lives instead of denouncing him, especially his father because he says that he is alive today because of him. He credits the Israeli forces for having high morals and following the rule of law when it comes to treatment of prisoners in war, which is what the captured hamas foot-soldiers are, prisoners in a war with their neighbours, the jewish and the state of Israel. As for the ever sensationalist Fawaz Gerges, he pleads with Amanpour and the audience wide to use caution when taking the word of this traitor as gospel, by accusing Yousef Jr and saying , "he exaggerates and his credibility is in question and we should be skeptical" because according to Gerges, the Hamas Militant organization is highly secretive and its nearly impossible if not totally impossible to penetrate and infiltrate their organization. On the other hand, the Hamas Spokesperson, the obese man who threatened to remove his mic in the middle of the interview told Amanpour that she broke her promise in having him in the same interview with a Jew, suggesting that he is allergic to Jews, instead opting to stay on the satellite feed long enough for Christiane to ask him questions, knowing that Yossi Melman was still visible in the other satellite feed and Amanour did not once stop the interview for calooley Osama Hamdan. Furthermore, Hamdan's sense of reality was clouded by his foolish suggestion that the Israelis conspired to co- author the book "son of Hamas" because he said, "the Israelis issues this book for their propaganda" and adds, "most of the narrative is a lie", suggesting that there is perhaps some truth to what young Yousef writes on his much talked about book, "son of hamas". All in all, Yousef wants his family, especially his father to embrace his new religion, 'the real peaceful religion', Christianity and to not hate" thy enemy", instead, he wants to see the day his family will denounce violence in all its forms and convert to Christianity. Filed by: LayZieG

Bilaal, its called survival. Put yourself in his shoes and ask yourself, if it came down to a life of terror or brief stink as a spy that could lead to a world of opportunities, which would you pick? Its simple, he made a personal choice, none of which had to do with who he was turning against. You are afforded many choices and opportunities everyday of your life. YOu have roof over your head, a family of your own, a peace of mind, safety net, job opportunities, education and your family is afforded the same but this man and others like him have limited choices where as yours is in abundance, so, tell me again what you were saying? yes, strap an explosive jacket or spy.... DUKEY, he was recruited, regardless of the location and he did it to survive and thats all you should concern yourself with.

^'shameless' is right. The political pot shots started already... this man could not resist connecting the tories, election and anti-muslim sentiments....shame on him for using the Muslim community to attack the tories.... His antics are getting worse by the day and he is losing the little credibility he has left by criticing his government, foreign policy, the police force and now the judiciary system. A criminal is a criminal. It is highly unlikely that the judge who handed the sentence was looking at the defendent and telling himself/herself, "gotcha, another Muslim infront of my bench, let me punish him/her and show the rest of the country how its done". Just as Britain tackles the rise in youth violence with harsher penalties, violent demonstrators should be dealt the same card. YOu break a law, you pay for it. Not setting the tone for the country by harshly dealing with violent demonstrators who trash embassies and business should be top priority and their crimes should not go unpunished, the tone has to be set from the top down. (but if you are Seumus, Israeli embassies are fair game or any violent demonstration against Israel and calls for hands off approach to terrorism to add to the order of the day) Other than that, typical of this socialist to cry foul everytime he feels his party politics is in jeopardy.

The son of a Muslim born leader converted to christianity. He was recruited by the enemy to spy on his people. Why is that so hard to believe when the choices are limited for palestinians? Or is it because you didn't want anyone living the life of exile unless they are not Somalis? Either have a respectable profession and maintain some dignity while securing your safety(starting fresh somewhere in the world and have opportunity to live and have a life and start a family), i.e spying for a fee or strap an explosive jacket on your chest with the instruction of detonating at the target location, which results in the person losing a life and the lives of bystanders(many bystanders, whose life is worth living). 'he was brainwashed" or we heard eedo say he was coerced or worse, raped into crossing over to the enemy border is waxa suuqa xoolaha laga sheekeysto. Deal with the truth and the truth is a hamas leader's son worked for the Israeli intelligence unit and worse, he is not Muslim. When a Muslim converts to another religion (i.e christianity) its because he was coerced via 'brainwashing', 'torture' but when a christian or someone of another religion converts to Islam, he/she is showered with praises and is said to be full of wisdow and some go as far as calling this new convert a brave soul who beat the odds among non-believers in order to find the right religion. Inconsistency, irrational reasoning and subversive behaviour is not going to get you anywhere, matter of fact it is doing more harm than good and the self-described policemen of my religion ought to be ashamed of themselves and instead focus on on the home front.

lol@the picture

^Ibti, first thing is first. The ranting bit, I already called you out on it on the other thread and for that reason, I will not repeat it here. About Muslims dying on the hands of other Muslims, that is a fact and no need to go back as early as the 90s to justify the killing and bloodshed of innocent umma, the last few year is good enough of a record to draw from, so don't even try that classic angle of looking at a longer record just so you can sleep better at night by by denying that thousands of muslims lives were lost in the hands of not 'infidels' but fellow muslims. Lets draw our examples from this century , which is that you dont believe more Muslims have died in the hands of suicide bombers, claiming to be Muslims 'which means they went through the shahada' and we can call them Muslims in all intents and purposes, so dont even try sista, unless you firmly believe they were not muslims(the suicide bombers) (i'm shocked more about you denying the deaths of many Muslims tonight, the same Muslims who lost their lives violently in the hands of fellow Muslims, more than I am of the killers taking innocent muslim lives to justify their misguided causes) Right now, I can not tell if I'm replying to Geelka or Ibti......(again, listen to my plea with you on the other thread about bringing back the old 'Ibti', you need her to safe you from yourself) Ibti, the Bush/Blair fiasco is not news to me or anyone for that matter. There is nothing that will be revealed on that inquiry that will be news to you or me, so don't put too much on the Blair inquiry as nothing new will come out of it. The truth is that for a long time, Muslims, in the protection of the west were allowed to criticize their host countries, call the destruction of oother religions and poison the minds of our youth. For a long time, the west agents were acting passive in their dealings with the fundamentalists. (governments feared political fall back, political correctness played a part and Muslim sensitivity) All this time, all worse things were happening than hate speech by some mps, these fundamentalists were pushing the envelope, more and more, forcing the officials hands to take up extreme steps and even the recent efforts in the last few years in my view is not enough. Every time these fundamentalists convince a youth to go the long way of boarding a plane to blow up his crotch or feet or face and fail in their attempt, we the passengers pay for it. Did you fly recently? Do you know how tense a person can get at airports but it seems we have to give more and more of our freedom while the governments walk on eggshells around certain figures who are known to preach hate speech because they dont want to offend the communities. Look at the incident at the MN masjids, the community sides with the masjid officials who allowed the recruits to roam around their facilities and corrupt young minds. The community turned against the families of the boys, whose where abouts were unknown for a longtime. These officials at the mn masjid turned a community against these families who just wanted answers as to why something like that will happen on their backyard. I said it before, I will say it again, if you silence the voice of an individual, you are ultimately silencing the voices of many. President Obama is compared with Hitler and associated with Nazism, what does he do? Jail his critics? no, he laughs at the absurdity and here we have someone jailed for making a movie and going on long, nasty tirades. You arrest him, what then? You hope things die down or go away altogether? Not going to happen. How many more G. Wilders will you imprison? How many more from the other groups? You probably heard the saying: What doesn't break you , makes you stronger. Well, G. Wilders did not break Islam, he will never tear the Qur'an apart. If anything, his hate speech strengthens the iman of the umma and reaffirms their positions and makes them just that much committed to defeating the nay-sayers but not in suppression or violence but through reconciliation and re-education.

Raamsade, this issue is not as black and white as you make it out to be. For a Muslim to align him/herself with the so called 'progressive forces' is just another ammunition for the fundamentalists to use to lure more people their way and corrupt the minds of the young even more than they have in years, while planting more hate against fellow Muslims on their hearts. (progressive forces, I presume to mean non-muslims actors and I can not see the benefit of going outside for help when we can clean house ourselves, right here, right now. Ofcourse here=not literally SOL or any cyber platform) My belief has been and will be for sometime to come, you want to change minds, you speak directly to the silent majority, and no, not the sideshow squad made up mostly of men but the silent, Muslim women majority. Fundamentalists and non-fundamentalists alike are all competing for the voices of these women and its all about who can get to them first because I still believe there is hope that we can start with few but asking the tough questions is just as effective. In this case, the possibilities are endless raamsade. As for the Burka argument, it is not as clear to some as it is to others, which is why I'm looking to push this issue for as long as it takes. ...and Ibti dear, first it was 'bashing', now its 'ranting', make up your mind, will ya? I recall you coming up quickly and in your opening statements, you advised the sideshow squad to not get excited because, get this, you said, "leave JOHNNY AND LAZY to do their bashing", perhaps, a weak attempt on your part to suggests that LayZie was bashing Islam of all things? fundamentalists, hell yes, Burka, yes, sideshow freaks, hell yes, but Islam? Instead of calling you out on your error, I gave it a pass because truly I thought you were above it all but you have turned your rhetoric up another notch today with the 'ranting this and ranting that'. Which is, ranting or bashing or addressing one grievance at a time? Make up your mind will ya Long ago, I took on the mission to state my positions on most of the issues highlighted above as clearly as reciting the english alphabet. For heaven's sake, you can pull a homeless man off the street and allow him to hear me once and turn to him a moment later and ask him, where does lazy stand on the burka issue? Are her views against fundamentalist justified taking into a factor that increased sentiment among Muslim men is growing ? and finally, do you believe Lazy advocates for the right for people to voice their opinion? and he will recite my positions with a smile, all in less than a minute. Now, I don't know what to make of this new you, maybe you are overworked and in need of vacation but you have retreated back and instead calling it quits, you have taken up the defense mode. You no longer formulate an argument. You have mastered at the art of attacking others positions without effectively defending your reason for opposing certain views and when you are challenged, you retreat back. This is not like you at all, so for your sake, I hope we can have the old Ibti back soon after a much deserved vacation but besides, in all seriousness, don't be defensive. I only went off on you lastnight because you have purposely dismissed the Imam at the first opportunity you had, when you called attention to his possibility of being 'just another western agent', suggesting that he may be masquerading as an Imam. Now, how do you reconcile your admission of not knowing much about the Imam but directly calling his credibility to question? Not like you at all Ibti. Bring back the old Ibti and imagine, I was willing to let go of your earlier errors, not one but two, but you just couldn't let it go. Best offense is not always a good defense. Give up this defensive play and start putting points on the scoreboard. PS: Bint Hamid, care to elaborate? What did you not find useful inside? Yes, he is an Imam, yes, his life is threatened by fellow Muslims but no, the details doesn't interest you because.....? It does not make you question why some groups always resort to violence in the name of......? You are not the least bit troubled by this news? You have some soul searching to do ya bint

^my dear, what do you make of the documentaries of channel one and such programs going undercover on local masjids and outting visiting 'imams' who preach hate and incite violence? They are allowed to roam around the streets freely. Until recently, these Imams were doing what they wanted and when they wanted and at the same time, saying anything and everything. Until recently, these imams were afforded the liberty to cross from one corner of the globe to the other, preaching to different congregation about how the 'white man' is the devil and he should not be tolerated and as soon as they were called on their double standard, they embraced the same 'infidel constitution' and called for its protection under the privacy violations that the west committed against them. Ibti, you have to realize, when a country is at war, all best are off and frankly, reading about the post-world war I&II policy in north america, it does not even compare to how muslims are dealt because they are rolling high and are given executive pass in the name of (political correctness because I guess as a society, we have come to acknowledge the other races, so we afford them courtesy not to offend, even at war times). When it came down to handling the anti-war, anti imperialists groups, the government took every step, introduced polices that looked to directly violate the rights of individuals for the benefit of the majority.(they violated their own constitution in order to suppress their own citizens) They imprisoned or threatened their critics and anyone who stood in the way of their interest and the order of the day. I think these fundamentalists were riding easy and continue to ride easy in some places and if it weren't for the policies of blair and Bush, they would have went on business as usual, as thought they didnt commit mass murder. All in all, I do not fear someone who preaches hate speech and tells his constituents that he will abort the mass immigration policy of colored people as much as I fear someone who is planting hate in the hearts of young Muslims to take up jihad and take out innocent lives, muslims and non-muslims alike in the name of their leader. For the former, I know his policies can be reversed and even defeated, if and when he is in office but for the latter, how are we ever to rationalize the loss of life? PS: Mr Jerk, the reason why he said what he said and why like minded people say what they say about Islam is because you failed to educate them. You failed to correct the wrongs of few who claim to embrace 'Islam' and kill fellow muslims and non-muslims alike in the name of the religion, where as you and the rest sit by idle, waiting for things to die down, waiting for people to just sit by and do nothing. When you read reports of casualty from Pakistan or afghanistan, you hear the loss of muslim life by a fellow muslim or so he claims as he straps the belt on himself and takes out not 20, 30 but 200 innocent muslims. HAve you ever asked yourself why that is? Why more muslims die in the hands of so called muslims than gaalo and you want to imprison a gal who doesnt know himself from his a*s? You should come to his defense so he can feel as thought he is protecting himself instead of allowing him to rotten in jail, not because he broke laws but because his arrest, his trial is a political statement, nothing more, nothing less. (bogus charges to score political points because no dutch government cares what another dutch says about other religion groups as long as it does not stand in their way and he stood in their way because of his rising popularity)

Ibti, your whole view is centered on borrowing the few personal experiences you had with a handful of women and calling it 'personal choice for a woman to do as she pleases'. Granted that these women do in fact decide on their own terms what to wear and where to wear them, neither proves that this garment has no place in our religion or our society as a whole, therefore, your argument that Burqa is a personal choice, is isolationist at best(few) and pure speculative at worse. I respect the fact that you had come out and said; 'listen, we both know Islam does not prescribe this garment but atleast we have to respect the sisters that do wear it and give them the benefit of doubt because for them, the garment could mean much more than outer wear, for them, they can interpret as a sign of religious observance etc'. My response to you is now as it was then (benefit of doubt does not fly with me, because I'm forever suspicious where a man's interest clashes with certain issues that concern women), for which that 'cheerleader in general' denied, which is that yes, Burqa/niqab is not prescribed by Islam, it never was prescribed by Islam and it will never be prescribed by Islam for as long as I'm a practicing Muslim, therefore, taking religion out of the equation, your argument is isolated to just mere personal choice, which you have yet to prove whether in fact large number of women do in fact make decisions about religion matters and wear burqa as a sign of religious observance is not proven, the burden of proof lies with you my sister, I said it then, I will say it now and I will repeat it tomorrow.(let us explore this new reasoning, let us define choices and personal ones at that and who is making what choice and when and under whose influence, none of which you have answered) We know what Islam prescribed in terms of dressing modestly for both men and women and anything more than that is hyperbolic, one in which would never have occured if some men's insecurity did not force them to reinvent how a Muslim women ought to dress and under whose company, all of which is evidence that personal choice has little to do with this subject. (some men, specially the mouthpiece recognize that this polarized garment marks the beginning of an end to hold this religion and its women hostage under the pretense of "dont u dare question what Islam prescribes for as long as we are barking orders as to what is deemed appropriate for women to wear") This thread highlights the length fundamentalists and their crooks would go to suppress the voices of fellow muslims, an Imam at that. How did we go from discussing the burqa and expressing our views on the issues to declaring fake fatwa's and calling for the beheading of prominent muslim leaders? Is this how we want the rest of the world to view Islam, an Islam whose followers can not bring themselves to articulate their point of view without wishing their opponents death(public or private)? The more we allow few minority (radical fundamentalists who are deadly and threat to our way of living and most importantly, threat to Islam, the more we endanger our way of life) and other groups, mostly made up of son's of peasants, who have learned to read and write, just enough to be lethal and whose interpretation has to answer for previous wrong doings committed against their inferior class and who are now holding Islam hostage in order to address not only the wrongs committed against their lower class but now are looking to avenge against anything who they deem stand between what they believe they are 'owed' and what they think is theirs after their emancipated souls have been freed from serfdom of 'ignorance' etc, even if it means fellow Muslims have to perish. We are nearing a moment when we have to decide, as women, do we take our future in our hands or do we continue to allow the few who wage Jihad on 'our behalfs" to continue their work? Why is that women are never consulted about waging war against so called 'infidels'? Is it because these men know that no woman in her right mind would favour unjustified killing, especially in the name of religion that as far as I know does not favourably support one gender over the other nor does God favour one gender over the other, so who are these people to call the death of Imam and etc and decide that he is a heretic? The reality my somali people is that the more we expose these culprits for who they are and what they are after, the more we are able to shame them and it starts here, in this thread against those that are calling 'for the death of an IMAM', an imam for Allah's sake.(a man of God, who puts the lives of others before him) SHAME ON YOU CHEERLEADERS, SHAME ON YOU. PS: JB, do not fault Ibti for she is the only one with some sense around here. She knows what she wants and when she wants it and in time, she will cross the aisle.(patience is all thats required) I truly believe that if today Somali was peaceful, Ibti would be the one I would recommend to represent S-land at the negotiation table because in her S-LAND lives on for another day and S-land gets a voice, one that would not be afforded to anyone else. S-landers recognize that they will get good negotiator in Ibti, who knows how to negotiate with her Somali brethrens when the time calls her to step up and speak for her people, wherever they may reside.

Naden, are you denying the efforts and improvements made on behalf of women under the Barre Regime? (fact, no one despised political dissenters more than Siyad Barre but why is that news, especially when we know that he was a notorious dictator who ruled with his iron fist?) You talk as thought women in the Barre Regime were getting daily lashes for not wearing proper 'fanatic' attire, instead, they were locked in their homes, the rest of the umma were censored and punished for watching football matches inside their private homes and we did not have formal education institutions from primary to secondary education under the Barre regime? Between you and I, it is you who is working hard to not recognize the successful institutions that were thriving under the Barre regime. Some would argue and say that under the Barre regime, somali intellectuals, especially those in Academia (women included) faired better than russian intellectuals, free thinkers, romantics under Tsar Nicholas I of Russia. Again, I urge you to point to me what part of the Barre records that we are attempting to 're-write' with new polished pages thats full of praises.

Ngonge, besides reading silly fiction books, what have you done for your community? C'mon eedo,split the beans. (aniga iyo ibti wax aan ku sabsabto mana dhexyaalan, only that one day she will see it my way when it comes to certain subject but I'm sure thats not news to you, ee stop the marmarsiyo ee answer why is it that you bully ibti) From time to time, I see you picking on ibti for being an activist for causes that are close to her heart and you do nothing but highlight that bit, so what added value can you add that will justify your bullying?? Is it because you are proud of her and can not bring yourself to admit what a wonderful person she is?? How about I help you out here, say it with me, "I, Ngonge, love IBti and I, Ngonge will never bully her again for as long as I read fiction'.

^ we have bigots everywhere and Wilders is not the first nor will he be the last and at the same time, we have 'dangerous monsters' among us but thats beside the point. So what makes him more special than say some mullah in inghilterra who preaches hate at his local masjid but he cant be touched for fear of backlash from the Muslim community? Is it because Wilders made a film about a group of isolated criminals, who neither represent the Muslim umma nor can be independently verified that they are indeed 'muslims', thereby highlighting the lessons of destructions they give to their pupils, is that what makes wilders special? How can we use the so called 'gaalo constitution' to protect the hate speech of some groups and not others? For me, there is nothing Mr Wilders can say that would get on my skin, much less anyone else. Atleast he is not calling for all 'Muslims' to be eradicated unlike some other groups who supposedly embrace Islam but at the same time call for the death of other religions and death on millions of people that are not Muslims, so why should he deserve imprisonment while some dangerous fanatics, more dangerous than some weird looking dutch politician who spews hate to lift the spirits of his constituents in order to gain parliamentary seats roam around freely, doing and saying whatever comes to their twisted mind about what Islam should be? Who gave these people right to spew hate on other religions on behalf of all Muslims and are allowed to be free men, while the whites, the moment a politician opens his mouth about Islam is either forced to resign or faces years in penitentiary ? I think the system is flawed for if you imprison one for hate speech, no matter where it happened in the globe, you should imprison all for the same practice, regardless of their religious background.

Ngonge, aduunyada waxaa ku dhameyse, 'pick your battles' as thought tomorrow is promised? We won't have the luxury to pick and choose which battles we should tackle, we should all speak at the same time, about the same issues that concern our communities, and affect our people and at the same time, we should be just as angry as Ibti if not more angry. As always, I'm on the side of Ibti(with the exception of the Burka, which is very decisive subject in general) and I'm sick and tired of people picking choosing what and when they should demonstrate when more of our people are suffering every single day of the week. (hold a moment of silence for them and those in similar situation, campaign for them, get angry on their behalf etc) Ofcourse, the lives of the british couple are relevant but they should not get this much publicity. If we are in inghleterra or Canada, the passion to take up a cause that is greater than ourselves should be our mission and I'm saddened by the fact that we dont have enough Ibti's to go around, seriously, I am. Instead, she is told, pick your battles by Ngonge, a man who refuses to lift his pinky finger to take up any cause, much less this one but on a lighter note, Ayoub the secessioner, indeed, let us have a moment of silence for riyaale (pray that he holds s-land hostage for another 10yrs)

^men and women are not equal. Women are morally and religiously superior to men. (let us not get started on gender wars here but you get the point now, yah?) Naden, how do you know Siyad Barre was illiterate or are you confusing him with general caydiid and the current warlords aka the so called 'islamists'? Did you ever meet aabe Barre? Aaabe Barre read more than George W. Bush and the other stuff you are accusing him was not his doing alone, the Somalis themselves played a big role.

Last month, Geert Wilders is reported to asked for 'Muslim fanatics" to speak on his behalf, so where are they? Geert Wilders, the Dutch far-Right MP, has demanded that his race hate trial should hear evidence from the fanatic who used the Koran to justify killing the director of an anti-Islamic film. It marked an incendiary opening to the landmark case that has divided the Netherlands over the limits of freedom. Mr Wilders, 46, who is accused of incitement and discrimination, asked for 18 witnesses to be called in his defence, including Mohammed Bouyeri, the man who stabbed and shot Theo Van Gogh in an Amsterdam street in 2004. The Van Gogh murder left a deep scar on the national conscience. It helped to change the mood of tolerance of Islam, and boosted Mr Wilders’s popularity. Mr Wilders, whose Party for Freedom came second in the European elections last summer, faces a 70-page charge sheet covering five counts of breaking Dutch law in more than 100 public statements — for example, by likening the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and calling for an end to the “Islamic invasion”. He could be fined or jailed if convicted. At the opening day of the trial the prosecution objected to the request to hear from Bouyeri, and the panel of four judges adjourned until February 3 to consider which witnesses to call. “This case is about more than Mr Wilders,” Bram Moszkowicz, his lawyer, told the court. “It touches us all. It is such an important and principled question that could have far-reaching consequences.” Mr Moszkowicz argued that the witnesses Mr Wilders wanted to call would prove that what he said was not simply inoffensive but true. He suggested that Bouyeri, a dual Moroccan-Dutch national, would be key to the case because he was a fervent Muslim who carried a Koran during his trial and defended his crime by claiming that Islam permitted violence against unbelievers. The prosecution countered that, unlike the other witnesses — mostly academics and theologians — Bouyeri was not an authority and should not be called. About 200 supporters of Mr Wilders travelled to Amsterdam District Court from as far as Germany to hold up placards declaring that free speech was under attack by Islam and political correctness. Eighty packed into the public gallery, applauding Mr Wilders and his lawyer. Ulrich Rosendahl, 46, an engineer who took the day off work to travel from Cologne to support Mr Wilders, held up a banner outside the court which read: “Wilders does as Chaplin did. He attacks fascism — Islamo.” Mr Rosendahl said: “I support what he says and I know he has lived under police protection for many years and I think that he pays a high price to fight for freedom of speech.” Mr Moszkowicz said that Mr Wilders had a mandate as an MP to speak out against what he saw as the Islamisation of the Netherlands. Birgit van Roessel, for the prosecution, said that “expressing his opinion in the media or through other channels is not part of an MP’s duties.” She said that MPs had immunity for only what they said inside parliament. Source: Geert Wilders: "I want Muslim fanatic to speak in my defence"

Last month, a trial for a dutch MP started in the netherlands. Some argue that this trial is more than just a trial about suppressing the voice of Wilders and others like him who bash "Islam" as there is no constitutional amendment that protects their free speech, 'hate' or otherwise. But as we have come to find out, this trial is just a public soap opera and it has less to do with 'hate speech' and more to do with the sitting government's fear of the rising popularity of Wilders party, the freedom party PVV, who have been gaining momentum for the last few years and are reported to be taking up more parliamentary seats than any dutch party in the next election. The question is, should Muslims be mixed with this debacle of a trial in the name of 'ISLAM" or should muslims be advocating for this man's release and calling out for mistrial since most of his witnesses were denied to testify in-front of the judge, only 3 witnesses were granted on his behalf. As Muslims, we are not without blood here, we preach hate speech everyday of the week, its nothing new and we have not seen citizens being jailed for preaching hate speech, instead, some "fanatics" among us hide behind the same 'infidel' constitution that they abhor, some bash jews as much as they drink a glass of water a day, its normal but again, I just dont see Muslims going to jail for preaching hate against other religions, especially their adopted host, so shouldnt the somali community in the netherlands be speaking for this man in order to protect their right to free speech? Or is the sitting dutch government too power to speak against? stay tuned...... filed by LayZieG

Ibti, do you deny that this thread is informative? Why is is that Muslims, when confronted with the truth, turn the other cheek? Typical of you people not to confront what is happening in communities all over europe and not just France. A small town Imam lends his support to a garment that we all know is out of this world and the reaction is to fire him from his post and and at the same time 'kill him' for selling out the crooks. Why wish someone who voiced his opinion, a spiritual man death? Why? What did he do that was so bad that he deserved nothing less than slaying, stoning etc? His community could have engaged him in an open dialog and discussed the subject thats of much controversy because not only would they have learned something from their Imam, Ibti you too would have benefited his sermons, thats the reality here. This Imam has much to offer, whether he has a book coming or he wants a republic based religion, thats beside the point. My hope is that more Imams come out and speak against this menace to society and the more people speak out in public, the more distance we will put between burqa/niqab and Islam. (JB had a point, it should start with the Muslim leaders who will have to change the attitudes of the umma if we are to hope this garment will be banned from streets near you) PS:Geelka, I will not read anything that is written by you, unless you are willing to engage in debate about this topic or any other, until then, dont waste your time addressing me.

Sherban Shabeel, you call it 'being aggressive', I, on the other hand, 'call it as I see it'. Owly, when did I say naagtaan waan aqaanaa? Why does it matter if I know her or how I know her? She is a Somali celebrity and who is recognized by her fellow Somali comrades by the mention of her first name, ayan, ayan hirsi? and her narratives are out there in publication and informal settings, only few clicks away. Her life is a public record, not much hidden about her qualifications. We know she has some sort of education, especially at the graduate level but no mention of attending law school much less taking the Bar exam. (why is that a surprise to you?) As far as I'm concerned, the closest brush she had with the court would be her brief stint as an interpretor for the refugee maryooley. Again, whether I know her or I don't know her is irrelevant because I'm not her enemy. I don't wish her harm but the same can't be said about 80% of the general forum regulars. They are ready to line up so they can get a clear shot at her in order to aim the rocks right through her skull.

For 38 yr old Imam HASSEN CHALGHOUMI, the choice to lend a voice to the Burqa Ban or to remain silent and allow his community to remain ignorant of the Islamic teaching and risk death threat is clear one: Lend your voice, do the right thing and be in Allah's mercy and seek his guidance and protection for he will reward you in the hereafter. Chalghoumi is not a headline grabber, he is just a simple Imam looking to stand firm for his beliefs and protect his community from the criminals who lure the young ones to take up causes that are sometimes fabricated and outright lies about western antagonism and 'the need to globally rid of infidels', etc. For this young Imam, weighting the risks, he had no other alternative but to denounce the awful garment they call Burqa, calling it 'ignorant' and 'backward' and adding that 'it had no place in our Koran' to the NYT columinist and for that, I applaud this hero of all heros, young, Imam Hassen Chalghoumi for his bravery. His Muslim community as well as some members of his close knit congregatation are calling for him to step down as an Imam at the local Masjid in Drancy and threatening to harm him for speaking his mind and speaking with such strong convinction. They are not threatenening to Kill the young Imam because he spoke ill of the quranic teachings or called the prophet names but simply telling the truth that 'NIQAB HAS NO PLACE IN THIS WORLD OR THE NEXT'.(nada)= death by stonning Please read the article on the NYTIMES to get to know more about this hero and his young, precious family. 'Death to Muslim Imam' for supporting the Burqa Ban in France

^adiga, do you have a problem with ayan the person, her so called 'intellect' or what she does behind close doors? Did you once imagine to be the man that she will spend her days with? Or is it because ninka waa cadaan and that bit is unsettling? Either way, why does it matter who ay la seexato, not like adiga in lagu weydiiyo qofta aa la seexato? I guess what I'm confused about is why you even bothered to comment?? As for me, I have a problem with this part of the praising of ayan's background Dutch-educated lawyer and former MP She attended law school? Passed the bar and was a practicing lawyer? Hallelujah Nevermind, maybe its not a big deal to SOmali people not to set the record straight, especially when sweetheart Faroole has a DR. title before his name. Maybe I should give Hirsi a bit of breathing room because a bit of resume booster never hurts even thought she has never been an officer of the court, unless, the writer of the story came across court transcripts of Hirsi translating for her clients infront of the judge and took it to mean that she was a lawyer? After all, she did have a brief gig as a translator, who could blame her if she didn't set the record straight now?