^people's testimonies are just as relevant. YOu can not rely solely on data gathering as that will narrow your view and your findings will be lost in the wave of the figures presented, even if it has relevant solutions to the causes.

Che, stop dodging the question and fadlan inta aa marmarsiyo ii galin, wiilka u jawaab. What are the religious leaders doing to tackle the burka phenomena in their communities? IF they dont educate the young then whose job is it? Ibti, stop answering question with a question and answer the man.

Ibti, when all else fails, put the professional hat on eh? I wonder why you are not as emotionally invested in the suffering of SOmalis more than you are on others sufferings, especially if they reside in the middle east.(I think we should explore the connection because I'm most certain there is something there) I'm not one to brag about my volunteer work but one thing I will tell you is that if you have put your efforts in the Dadaab refugee camps, you wouldn't have turned to statistical data to get to the root cause or the length of time people do odd jobs to survive because bottom line is these people dont have anywhere to turn, thats the simple truth. Whether they are in Kenya or Yemen, the story is the same. uprooted from their homes by violence, only thinking about the next move, where to go, how to feed the family and praying that tomorrow will be better. Hope and prayer is what motives these people and it keeps their spirits up and to face the struggles that tomorrow will bring. Now, I asked you questions before and you have ignored them but I will say, when I read stories such as the one on this thread, the first thing I think about is, should I be doing more, because the question isnt whether I am doing something but how much of it I'm doing that is making a difference. I question myself, I get angry and I really hate when good people turn their noise at the suffering of somalis or dismiss it as nothing more than a headline grabber. I'm a Somali first and the pain of these people pain is my pain. Their suffering should be my suffering and I'm always emotional about topics that highlight the sufferings of our women and children.

So this trade attracts certain age range who probably psychologically at least given up on having a normal life, which makes it an alternative rather than compulsion. Ibti, are you hearing yourself? YOu can't be serious, unless ofcourse you are looking to get a rise out of people. Aad iyo aad ayaa naagaha baahan ugu afgaftay and only someone whose belly is fool talks the way you are talking about these women. They did not choose the job, the job chose them because of their circumstances. What would you have a mother of 3 do in yemen, who doesnt have tol in diaspora to support her and her children? She cant get a job? The government cant provide for their people much less refugees...so, the only other think she can do is Beg? She is doing that already. She is begging men to sleep with her so that her child doesnt go hungry and have enough to buy milk and bread and put a roof over their heads. What more do you have them do? YOu want her to kill herself out of shame? I'm positive the thought has crossed her mind but she cant bring herself to do it because her children will be left alone to starve to death...so what would you have her do? Put her in a category and say if she is a certain age, she is whoring herself because she wants to because she has given hope, so let her whore herself, because Ibti feels that there is more these women can do...you dont think Naag somali eh, oo Muslim eh thought about the alternatives? You dont give our women much credit but you are the first to champion an arab's right to wear Burka... I say take your words back for Allah is witness to your cruelty...your idea of showing compassion is only limited to the suffering of the Muslims in the middle east... Take back your words or tan mar maalintaan aheyn baad illaah ugu jawaabeysaa....

^misled as in give the impression that the news was recent with your bold and daring title. Mida Kale, runta sheeg, after the defeat of the minarets, you were actively seeking a negative news from Switzerland, why else did you stumble on those blogs just so you can highlight the conversion of a traitor. BTW, why do you come off as sounding angry? Maybe runta is hurting you, lol, in any case, this thread is very disappointing and you should care because recycled news is beneath you. PS: About the other subject, I recall I was the last to respond to you, unless you wrote something in the last few days that I did not read about?

She would do anything else but....what exactly can she do? Are people reading about the suffering of these women, whose homes were raided by faithheads and drove them directly to prostitution, away from their family and friends and into the arms of a dirty arab? Do you think these poor women care whether they live or die, for as long as their children are provided for? It is clear, the situation in yemen is a one of many tragedies. Somali refugees are scattered between afgooye and Kenya and no one is speaking for them, no one Muslim is outraged on their behalf, instead, our energy is channelled on words on a screen, sufferings of palestinians, historical interpretations that cyber nomads write instead of being angry with ourselves for having things these poor souls can only pray to have for even a minute. Are these women not religious enough for you? Do they not deserve a voice to speak on their behalf? I'm disgusted with you all, really, I am.

Ibti, the title of this thread is very misleading and I'm very disappointed that your campaign of everything Muslims has come to this. (are there no burka wearers that you can champion for anymore instead of recycling news?) Cyber Nomad is the only one that has some sense left in this forum for he/she is only one that pointed to the obvious. The subject did not convert overnight nor did the news of his conversion occur in the year 2010. Today is wednesday, February 10th, 2010 and the subject's conversion took place sometime n 2007 but somehow, somewhere, this has become a recent news that we should know about? He is a nobody and his conversion does not change anything. I Would sooner hear about a youtube conversion of a Caucasian subject than this opportunistic man who was looking to score political points against his former party and commit indirect treason by selling out his country.

^lol Maverickyyyyyyy, it is not that people dont comprehend Sharia, it is that they refuse to comprehend it for as long as as Sharia professes to be the supreme authority, but often falsely favours one gender over the other with no room for compromise, thereby demanding that people should accept its ruling wholeheartedly without doubts in their heart of hearts, etc, etc. If I didn't know any better, I would say you are a Somali Sarah Palin, alot of talk, no substance. You can not even accept the simple historic precedent previous Islamic Empires have set for modern day events, which are reflective of these events that you accuse me of denying, the innocent blood that were shed in the name of religion after the prophet's death, 6th, 7th century.(rapid expansion) How do you think Iraq, Syria, Egypt came to adopt Islam? You think they woke up one day and decided to be Muslims? You think slavery was foreign to the early Islamic Empire? You think just because they called it conquered people and the divided booty that it didn't make them slaves? You think there existed no slave revolt? How do you think the early Islamic Empire richened and were able to carry massive raids on large and far territories?? You think Arab Muslims were squeaky clean and expanded without lifting the sword once or using slaves of non-arab descent to expand their empire? You tell me? Unless of-course you think the actions of the early Muslims empires were justified and the modern christian imperialists dating as far back as 15th century not so much? If you speak like a slave, think like a slave, you must be a slave. YOu are doing yourself disservice by harboring ill feelings about historical events that had nothing to do with you by looking back instead of looking forward, which is why aa fa-caa ka hartay. Speaking of faithheads and economic migrants, you talk as thought north america was actively seeking faithheads of brown and black color, instead of adopting a national policy to only recruit migrants of north and western european countries, which were preferred over eastern europeans and southern europeans in the late 19th and early 20th century. These migrants, mostly workers and families were sought because they were most likely to adopt the culture practices of the period(and easily assimilate), both in Canada and the United States, this is a fact, its not fiction by far stretch of the imagination. Blacks and browns were despised, heck, the Italians and the pols were preferred before they would accept a black or brown person. An argument could be made that recent patterns of closely examined group of refugees have shown difficulties with language,climate, difficulties with the surroundings but their children or the first generations that are born yearn to belong and mostly successfully assimilate, were as others in this group do confront stereotypes which forces them to draw back and seek refuge in familiar aspect of their lives, strengthen their faith due to the difficulties that arose in their journey to belong and some ultimately clinch to religion as way to make sense of this evolving society in fear of losing themselves and in part looking to belong.(small minority) and as a result become radicalized and what not because they feel empty inside. Now, you do not know me and I do not know you but one thing is for sure, I know who I am, you know who you are, therefore we can not pretend to know one another, especially when it comes to matters of faith, so why dont you do yourself a favour and stop pretending to know something when you clearly have no idea, especially the religion or the history of the religion you embrace? Learn the history, markaa lee aniga iyo adiga hadleynaa, until then, clinch to faith, see how far that gets you. Remember, in life, balance is needed, too much of one thing makes one's thoughts imbalanced.

^is it gross generalization that those who shout the loudest for Sharia Law are made up of mostly of asylum seekers? Is it gross generalization that those same group of asylum seekers are the first to jump at a chance to escape their impoverished lives for new beginnings and take oaths to obey and protect the secular constitution of their adopted country? Where is Sharia then? Sharia is nowhere to be found when they are crossing oceans if given the chance to escape the harsh realities that religion and theocratic rule has condemned them to, eh? C'mon, tell me, where is the gross generalization ya maverickyyyyyyyyyyyy? Ailamos, a long time ago, myself and others argued for a federal system, where the SOmali constitution would grand individual tuulos/provinces semi-autonomy based on regional relations, the right for these tuulos to self-govern, including but not limited to implementing strict sharia law for as long as the residence of those various tuulos vote on it. We argued for the tuulos to be custodians of their laws, criminal or civil matters, at the same time recognize the federal court as the final authority as the highest court will be the custodian of the somali constitution but that the day to day affairs of these tuulos would be on the hands of its officials, nominated and elected locally by the people. (whether they be elders or qualified candidates) We argued for the right of tuulos to take federal funds and build Islamic schools(madras) and such side by side with public schools and universities, for as long as the people had a say in the development of such institutions. We believed then, as we believe now this could work for as long as people are given the voice to argue for or against the mutual co-existence theory of secular(federal system) with the implementation of sharia based on the wants and needs of the umma for such faith led legal system. The question isn't about whether or not proponents of secular state will limit the freedom of the individual but whether or not faith-heads will grant the fundamental freedoms of the individual?(right to express one's religion , belief, expression, guarantee rights for women,democratic rights, for everyone one of legal age to vote, freedom of the press, freedom to grant political parties, etc, etc)

Sonono Khoza (abaayo, ma inkaaran tahay?) I feel for her for having to open herself up for a 67 yr old. Nacalaa kutaalo Zuma(ma nin oo da' yar ah mey weyde, marka ay 67 yr old as isku fureyso?) Is this the same Zuma who only makes headlines when he is caught with his pants down? A 67 yr old sex maniac, who is by far horniest man of this decade, behind Tiger Woods and worse of all believes the aid virus can be killed with fresh warm water by showering it off after having unprotected sex. On a lighter note, this isn't the first time Zuma knocked up one of his friends daughters. He is a perv. who needs to be hospitalized and cured from his sex addiction. What a dirtbag this man is.(atleast this one was smart enough not to fall for "have an abortion" line) PS: His other friends are on notice. If you have a girl of age, Zuma will go for the homerun. Keep her away from Zuma or else...

When asked which political party she would most likely vote for in the upcoming general elections, the lovely Malika said,"I always vote Lib Dem.,will continue doing so this year." Once, this strong, vibrant young lady showed so much promise, especially when she had shown her taxpaying side with the utter contempt she expressed to the benefit collector (who aired his dirty laundry on the tabloid)the one whose local municipality had rewarded him with flat and furniture that most benefit collectors only dream about. But she has done a total 180 on this issue if this young lady and others on the one hand disagree with the state of the deterioting social service system, at the same time vote for the party of yes for more funding for these social services that handicap the immigrant and make men econominally impotent, who is to say that these so called citizens are who they say they are? Liberal democratic party's idea of reforming the welfare system is to give more tax paying dollars so more people will be dependent on them. Their idea for NHS is to revamp it by giving more jobs to bureaucrats and call it reform. In other words, it is not good enough that already 60% of the NHS budget is given to health care professionals and bureaucrats but the liberal democratic party wants to reward the very people that are bankrupting the system by giving more jobs to local committees who will decide on the state of the hospitals and they are calling it, elected by the people for the people. Policies on immigration, terrorism and foreign policy in general, Liberal democratic party thinks that feeding the hungry, young Muslim terrorist is better than combating terror by doing covert operation and going underground in order to infiltrate the terror cells . According to their policy, they have come up with the simple solution of feed the terrorist, give him/her citizen rights with tax payer dollars, get them out of the gutter and pray that they dont turn against us. In other worlds, let us feed the pants out of them with food stamps, this way they wont attempt to blow up their bombs. This is their policy in a nutshell and if you dont believe me, do not look any further than their political manifesto. All in all, I'm just saddened that Somalis and immigrants still think that liberal democratic party is on their side but conservatives are out to get them.(no one political party is your friend but you take the one that closely shares your values of individual accountability, security and good governance) Look close at David Cameron, just because he was once a trust fund baby and lived a priviledge life does not make him your enemy nor should you hold his wealth hostage when you are in the voting booth. A vote for the conservatives this year is a vote for better improvement in the classrooms, especially to the mothers,teachers and anyone who has a small child. Small classrooms, more qualified teachers, improvement system that allows children and their parents to choose the best schools for them by giving them opportunities that otherwise will not be afforded. At the same time, Cameron and his party say that they are 'the NHS party', their idea of reforming the system by taking the government's hands off the nhs and hold health care professional accountable and give them a breathing room so they can do their job properly, less bureaucratic interference, so why wouldn't you vote for them? On terror, Cameron and his party are all about keeping the nation safe, the borders secure and airlines, terror free so they dont cross over to our continent. Its simple, a vote for conservative is a vote for security. He will not hesitate to take action by removing terrorists off the streets, which means, all of you will be more safe. A vote for a liberal democrat will more likely invite terrorists to your doorstep and at the same time bankrupt your economy and you want to discuss taxes then? Remember that farax on the tabloid? He will get more richer by not working a day in his life and you, the 'tax payer' will get poorer..imagine a world that is led by a liberal democrat? PS:I used Malika as an example but there are many more malikas out there who are just voting with their hearts and not their heads.

Our President spends more time with Amisom troops than he does with his own cabinet members. Our President frequents Addis Ababa more than Bakaraha. Our President spends more time raising funds for fictional war that he will never engage with the enemy than he does in planning a recruitment strategy to build a small, effective army force that can be a stepping stone for future administration. Our President is out of touch with the people he claims to represent but he is more in tune with what Melez and the gang discuss over tea and cake. People are fed up Mr President, please step down and step down now.

North, thank you for the good laughs. Wallaahi I cracked up as I read your confession. Of-course, I was not surprised by this simple admission, instead, I was relieved for you. I knew the truth would catch up to you one day because you wouldn't be able to bear the heavy burden that you were carrying on your shoulders all along. YOu are exhausted, now give it up and go on, give yourself time to heal. (Work hard on polishing up your debating skills) PS:I don't know anyone who has ever taken you serious, except Johnny, my abti is so forgiving that he has given you one chance after another and you have failed him every step of the way.

First thing is first, thank you for the kind words. Samir iyo aamiin allah naga siiyo. Inta dhimatay allah u naxariisto, inta noolna allah u gargaaro, aamiin. LOL@ Lets say I answered those questions you asked FOR myself and at the end of it I decided that as a free bird, who is educated (in Islam and world subjects) and independent (both financially and otherwise) would start wearing the Burka and the niqab full time here in London. Then WHAT? All of your questions have been answered, do I now have your support, would you defend my conscious decision that I made to wear it as a religions garment because I believe it brings me closer to my lord and I am doing a pleasing act with the right intentions. Furthermore would you respect my choice and defend it for what it is i.e. a person of sound mind making a different choice for religious reasons or even otherwise. Well would you? Ibti, no 'buts' or 'ifs' or 'lets just say'. First you must ask yourself the tough questions and ask your subjects these very same questions.(answering a question with a question will not work) Matter of fact, demand that they ask themselves the tough questions. (you have 30 strong women). Other than that, I don't do hypothetical, I deal with the 'now'.(we dont have much to discuss here if you do not want to challenge yourself or your subjects) You say 'you come from a research background', and I recognized it early on to be the simple truth, which is why I told you numerous times why I think you are the best person to tackle this issue with your 30 women but you must first challenge yourself before you challenge your subjects. Besides, you did not do your actual thesis on the burka and its impact on Muslim women, nor did you share any scholarly material thats upto date or provide statistical studies , instead, you shared your views, which you based on your interactions with the said women in your life as well as using the verses from the Qur'an to strengthen the argument that covering up could mean for some as more than a clothing(which was not a strong argument at all) and it could potentially mean for some that this simple act or the representation of it brings them closer to God, which is why they decided to follow this path in the first place.(not proven at all ) I told you that it wasn't as black and white as you make it ought to be and that there is potential here and that you needed to explore it. You just want to limit your understanding of the subject and accept any answer that agrees with "IBTI's position". You did not question the reasons nor do you question yourself as to why you accept a simple answer as, I do it as a sign of religious observance, etc. I have to be honest Ibti, not only do you come across as being irritant with the course this subject has taken but its almost as thought you want to just take people's words as truth and dismiss the opposition by using Allah as leverage. Remember, human beings are biased. You are biased, I'm biased, the said women are biased, thats why its our job to find out why people say what they say, how they say it and what role does outside influence play on their decision making but failure to grasp this simple fact will lead us and this subject a place where we can not turn back time. tick tock, tick tock, tick tock....

Good Evening Ibti, First thing is first, I don't believe that I intentionally ignored any of your questions. I believe I have answered all of your questions with the exception of "why do you object to women making choices for themselves". (I do recall giving you a reason why I did not want you to lose sight of the discussion by focusing on other distractions, i.e choices, which is why I did not give you an answer at the time) I had a very good reason why I did not want to address this particular side of the debate, which is why I accused you of bringing distractions to our debate by making this about personal choice, when in fact, the question has always been and is still is about whether Islam prescribes the Burka. But by you making the discussion about why I object to it, instead of proving the authenticity of the Burka, as the Burka was on trial, you fell right into Cara's trap. You allowed yourself to be overwhelmed by her distractions and to make this about women's choices, when in fact that was and is still is further from the truth. At the time, I made the choice to stay on course for as long as I possibly could by not falling for that line of questioning you were hammering me with but it seems to me that so far, you just can't let this go, so tonight I decided to entertain you for the sake of entertainment. Ready or not, here it comes: We established the religious argument and that there is none to be had at this time when it comes to the Burka, correct? So, in your view, what is left? Choice? By whom? Women? How are the said women characterized? Two definitions arise from the above questions. One is that, we first need to define what is it that we mean when we discuss a choice one makes. At the same time, we need to categorize the said women in order to understand the choices she makes and how it affects her and her community and whether the old cliche of subordinate role is the key to understanding her decisions, which more than likely allowed her to tune out reason, instead takes up the role of the dependent women, who relies on heresy masquerading as free, independent thinking, which leads to such choices as what the woman can or can not wear, how and when she can wear the garment and most important, how she ought to observe her God, etc , etc. First thing is first, what does it mean when we say one has to make a choice? It is a thought process, which the person decides about A or B , assuming that there is more than one choice to be had, thereby, choosing according to instinct/reason/ability to reach a decision after much deliberation, etc etc. (atleast thats how I define as someone making the choice between option A, B, or there could be C, D but it all comes down to making a choice) What are the choices that are presented to her? Who is presenting these choices and how does this said woman deliberate? Is she alone or with a male figure? Does she rely on popular opinion? All important questions to be had if we are to have an honest debate about the said choice, correct? Marka kale, who is this woman? A free bird, independent woman or is she the submissive, the old cliche of society who still clings to the same old, tired stereotypes of what a woman ought to represent in the eyes of her male master? We have to really be careful when we start discussing Burka and choice in the same sentence, sometimes, its best to be careful about what you wish for because you just might regret it later. Now, I don't mean to overwhelm you here with endless questions but these are all valid questions and they deserve an honest answer. After 6 pages of circling around the issue of Burka, I'm more than convinced that you do not have a shred of evidence that supports your position about choice or what such choices entail or better yet, who is making the decisions? Instead, you accuse me of allowing my personal views to cloud my judgment and that I should give more credit to these women for being brave souls and choosing to wear the Burka in the west of all places but what all of that tells me is that you just dont like my objection to the Burka because you believe that my argument against the darn thing is valid and therefore you dont want to admit that I'm right nor do you want to admit that you do not present a counter- argument but instead, you insist on bringing other factors into the discussion about woman's prerogative etc in order to avoid asking yourself the tough questions. You think playing dress up with an atheist/christian is research? You think 30+ of your close friends and family is real stats? (my personal views are much more convincing than the 30 or so women who you insist represent the majority of Muslim women) C'mon now, you know better, thats why I don't take these bits of personal moments you share serious because I know you are capable of much more. On some other issues, you can hold your own, even now, if it weren't for these distractions, I think you would have taken this argument to new heights but you can not allow Cara to trap you again. (forget it, she could care less if they wear a g-string. Cara will always believe that the choice should always be left to the woman because she thinks all women are alike) On page 3 of this thread, Ailamos said the following to you: This is basically what I have been trying to say, that it's always the woman's choice, not the male authority's, she has the sole responsibility to read and interpret and not succumb to someone else's interpretation. My question to you is, do you agree that all women are on equal footing when it comes to making decisions on their own? Do you think all women are capable of making decisions? I'm sure you agree that the free birds are more than capable of making decisions that concern their lives but what of the submissive ones? Are we to believe that these clingy women have developed and embraced modernity, even after the feminist waves? Do you think these prudes are in fact appreciative of the struggles that our women hero took on behalf of all women? Do you honestly believe that because someone resides in the west, that they are more likely to have independent thoughts, than say, someone in Jakarta? One thing is clear, which is that the hopeless souls, however many that exist hate to be labeled as such or boxed into a corner , instead, they take comfort in being dominated, because because, get this, wait for it, they find peace and security, oh and the shocker of it all, its a personal choice.(but wait for it, thats only after an alternative or lack of understanding of the choices is presented) In other words, these hopeless souls reject modernity in all its forms because of the fear of the unknown. Besides fearing the unknown, they resist change but it does not mean they oppose progress, especially if it has their best interest but this search, this process of self-discovery is the very same thing that they are told is problematic and if you dont believe me, says the male-master, just look no further, see what it did to the free-birds as 'feminists', 'men eaters', 'westernized', 'lack faith and have no respect for traditional values', is that what you want to discover? You want to be a free-bird? PS: sorry for the delay, tacsi baa i gashay

I'm still not convinced that banning the Burka encroaches upon civil liberties, or that it creates a slippery slope when it comes to government interference. No wonder you are not convinced. Thats because Ibti's views are shaped by 30 or so Burka wearers. If it were upto Ibti, she would convince the world that these women represent the silent majority and that we should take their word over the thousands of women whose lives were shattered because of the Burka in their home countries.(public record) Ibti draws the intimate experiences of the 30 or so women at the expense of the victims of Burka. These thousand or so women who say they have been coerced into wearing the material in the first place and that their lives were at risk at some point or another because of the Burka are not legitimate source, nor should their words be taken at face value because its a western agenda and perhaps these women are agents of the west, sent to spread lies about the good muslim by portraying the said garment in a negative light. On the other hand, the words of the said 30 or so amazing ladies that Ibti draws from her experiences are the sole authority of the Burka, thereby dismissing the thousand or so that have endured the lashes just because Ibti says its a personal choice and her ladies say its personal choice too, which means we should take their word and put the 'to wear or not to wear' subject to rest. Ibti's counter-argument is flawed, in that on the one hand, she insist that it is a personal choice and because Islam does not prescribe the garment, it doesn't mean that is outlaw by Islam, thereby insisting that the right for a woman to wear the Burka should be granted and no one should stand in the way of it. On the same token, Ibti argues that the material brings some women (the said 30 or so) closer to God by turning them away from worldy sins and vanity and into God, in other words, the motivation to wear Burka is an 'exaggerated penance', which only the Burka can fulfill. This could mean one of two things: Either the women battling inner demons and the Burka conceals the darkness from the world and away from prying eyes or they believe that Burka would single handily wash away their sins, thereby allowing them to be closer to God because they have embarked on the ultimate sacrifice, "covering their identity from the public" , so why wouldn't Allah grand them forgiveness? After all, the garment is made from harsh material and the dark screens that the figure represents a ghost like figure, thereby, subjecting themselves through penance in the Burka. And as for Ibti's high heel research? Ibti, Ibti, when did this discussion turn away from the Burka and into the world of stilettos? Let us keep our eyes on the prize because we don't want anything to distract you from your mission of putting this topic to rest but as soon as you bring distractions into the discussion, the Burka just doesn't go away. As for turning away from sin, Theresa of Avila once told of the moment she felt that God had admonished her for her youthful sins and from that point on, she did everything to feel God's love through spiritual healing. Denouncing worldly goods, giving her body and soul to serving God, which was anything she has yet experienced. Theresa once said "The memory of the favor God has granted does more to bring such a person back to God than all the infernal punishments imaginable." For her, loving God with all of her body and soul meant that she would not offend him. (the more she loved him and was closer to him, the harder it had gotten of offending God by being sinful) What we can take from the good lady? Her devotion to God in this world and the next. Collective works that brought her closer, it strengthened her iman. For Theresa, there was no other alternative, thereby defining her closeness to God through her collective good works was the way. Theresa continued to work hard, day and night, praying to God, indulging in mental prayer, denouncing her friends and the evil spirits but this surely was not enough. She knew she had to do more for she had tried to serve God by becoming nun and even that could not fulfill the sorrow she felt or fill her empty heart. All in all, nothing she did was ever enough, or atleast she felt that way, until she started dedicating her time to others. Her life as she knew it didnt end with being the best nun she could be, there had to be more, thats why she believed that good intentions were not enough, instead good actions is what counts with God, in which she said: "Good effects were better than pious sensations that only make the person praying feel good". By God was Theresa right and no amount of Burka would cleanse the soul of evil, even Burka, instead, good actions will go along way with God. (may her soul respect in peace) Example of good action: Feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, treating the sick. Devoting your life to others, that is what counts but I do not hear you saying any of that coupled with wearing the Burka, instead, Burka alone should be the good works of a Muslim woman. Being pious is all about the clothing when we both know that God can see through everyone and everything. At the end, I hope you take no offense when I say that I'm not convinced(just as cicero and others are not convinced), instead, I'm left with more questions than every before with every post. Ibti, can you honestly sit there and say that you have given your all in presenting a convincing argument for the burka? Instead, we are reading about one distraction after another....

^ what does fasting and prayer or fulfilling your religious duties have anything to do with a garment that we just concluded was never prescribed by Islam nor is Burka prerequisite to being a Muslimah? (let us not drag this discussion back and make it about religion ya Naden, unless you disagree with us(ibti and I) about the basics of the outer garment?) Ibti, I didn't read that last part you wrote earlier but I have to say, you are missing the point in a big way when you start to look for an excuse to change the course of this discussion and speaking of things I never once uttered.(i.e having more aqli than all the women put together or how much naive or even ****** some might be when infact it is not in their power to make a decision, which is why I said they are coerced or atleast appear to be co-erced in terms of pressure from the community to either belong to the click or face isolation. Ofcourse, I didn't discuss the women's intellect because thats a whole new topic... and yes IQ test is doable) But thats beside the point. You are saying women are not coerced, I'm saying they are and the evidence is there for anyone who is looking for it but you obviously want to believe what you want to believe, which is fine, but we are wasting time here, so, are we going to debate the merits here or point fingers and throw accusations of what I think of these women? So far the following is known of Ibti's position: Yes, yes and yes to Burka as a middle east phenomena Yes, yes and yes to Burka as a material that could be worn by women on their freewill but has not proven as just that. Burka and Islam are two separate issues, therefore should be discussed apart from one another. Since burka is not a requirement, religion and mention of religion should not be discussed when arguing for or against banishment of the said garment.(because we have established that religion does not require a woman to wear a burka) Therefore, Burka as a personal choice is left, which Ibti has yet to defend, except the example of the day she wore it herself and never to speak of it again and the few occasiosn she interacts with fellow Burka wearers who insist on telling her that it is a personal choice. Ofcourse thats what they will tell Ibti, they are not fools who are just itching to be lashed thousand times by their hubbies, instead they would tell Ibti what she wants to hear. Ofcourse, ibti comes back to report that Burka is indeed a choice that the woman alone makes, especially living in the west. And of Naden, we know the following: She equates fasting with Burka, therefore she disagrees with Ibti and I on the basics of the outer garment. She insist that choice be left to the woman and that it should not be up-to others to decide what a woman wears.(ifts about personal choice, why bring religion into it? I think abti johnny brought up the question) And of C&H, you need not look further than my signature, she agrees with me wholeheartly. And of Cara, she is itching to say yes but fears Johnny...(for reasons that are unknown to us all) So far so good ladies....but again, objecting to my position to have the darn thing banned is not an argument for Burka. Ofcourse without mentioning religion, that would be sufficient as we just established the position religion takes on matters that concern women's garments.

^We agree that Burka is not a religious requirement. Even more, you said burka is a choice for women to wear and at the same time its a vehicle for them to be closer to Allah. What is wrong with that picture? Not a requirement but its almost means of observing or fulfilling a religious requirement when we just concluded that it was not a requirement that a Muslim woman had to fulfill, so what is left? We can't make a proposal for what we deem as being harmful to women, whether they be men or women making the proposal? How can we stand by and not recommend means to banning this garment if all we witness is beatdowns and oppression, which this garment is associated with? Everytime we hear burka, we think dark thoughts, so how can we just stand by and not do anything? You show me the figure that backs up this claim that women wear Burka out of freewill and in fact it is not a tool to pressure them to wear it or sometimes forces through violence as carrying this awful garment on their body. Its the only thing left, as soon as you show me the proof of how many women wear on their own freewill, I will give you hundreds of scenarios why the darn thing is harmful and it goes against the interest of the majority, not the few you have seen or come across and in fact Burka is a threat to our way of living.

Ibti, good evening to you sister. "two side of the same coin" card is the only one you have left to play, which really doesn't surprise me sister but play I say. You do not object to my call for 'banning' of this said garment because it demeans women's worth but that the call to banishment is the very thing you object to. A woman is limited in her ability to juggle children and household chores at the same time while also hanging on to the Burka. Unable to drive her children to school because she can't drive with the said garment while behind the wheel. She may not compete in a the corporate latter for her dream job because of discrimination or even look for suitable employment in certain industries. Ordinarily, it is nearly impossible to walk the same way as she would if she didn't have the extra weight, never mind that she has a child on her hips and grocery bag on the other side and holding on to the burka in fear of falling. Nevermind that she can not protect herself from a would be attacker in the middle of the night beacuse she can't see who is attacking her from behind nor can she identify her assailant from a police line up because the said garment prevented her from recognizing the culprit, and so on and so on. Instead of calling for its banishment or even making an argument against banishment, you are stuck with "no one can tell me what to do", you would rather that women go on believing that it is a choice they personally made when infact thats further from the truth. Ibti, you believe that it is not a religious obligation for a woman to wear a Burka, as say someone who just limits herself to the head cover or one who doesn't wear anything to conceal her hair. Instead of addressing the grievances that arise from horrific scene of a woman juggling Burka on the one hand and her weight on the other among other things, you insist that its a choice and no one should have the right to look after her interest, much less a government authority. If thats the case, why should we applaud the government authority for coming with legislation of banning drinking (or smoking thats hazardous to the public) while driving if we won't listen to what they dictate to us citizens? Because, they know that someone who drives while under the influence of alcohol is danger to self and others and that person is not safe to drive in fear of crashing and causing an accident that would not only be harmful to him/herself but to others, thereby, outlawing drinking while driving but if we said, the heck with the government, we won't allow them to dictate what we should and shouldnt do, isn't it the same thing observing a garment and making it as a religious observance, when in fact it is neither an obligation nor a requirement for a Muslimah to wear it and instead, opt for personal choice? If every law that bans something is opposed, we wouldn't be civilized, would we now? Ladies, lets take emotion out of the equation, I know you are dying to agree with me, you just can't stand being told what to do and thats where all of your objections to this ban lies, ee admit it already and lets get a move on. I ask you again, why do women wear the burka? I dont want to hear that its a personal choice because it means you are not being honest with us or yourselves. If Islam doesnt require a woman to go through the trouble of wearing such an awful material, why does she do it? The obvious one here is that popular believe, but if silent majority agrees with me, who is to say the few that wear the burka do it from the goodness of their hearts instead of social conformity or requirement from the male figure in the family. Whichever way you look at it, she is forced to because if she doesnt, she remains an outcast and if she doesnt obey her the man of the house, she is beaten, worse, she dies from the wounds.

^not so fast Ibti. YOu have not refuted my claim that Burka should not be worn on the premise that Burka is not dictated by Islam nor does our culture require it. At the same time, Burka is harmful, nothing comfy about it.(as you have us believing) I knew religion did not dictate Burka as a condition for a woman to wear in order to fulfill her duties as a Muslim lady. On the other hand, you knew it all along, you just sided stepped it in hopes of wonderfully presented the Hijab and over covering as a viable option. So, in the spirit of understanding, I think its time for you to join hands with C&H(below, read my signature), because she agrees with me, its there for everyone to read. At the same time, she(C&H) insist on being stubborn about it, so she found an excuse(something about a woman's choice), same as Cara, she too agrees with me, now say it with me, LayZieG was right, I was wrong? All jokes aside, we understand that outer garment could mean literally anything that doesn't reveal the shape of the female, which is really what's being protected and a long garbasaar/shaal in your case, all those materials could fulfill the material, the same way a sizable men's overall could, so at the end of the day, if a man takes it to a extreme measure and defines what covering over her body constitutes, such as wearing Burka or whether the man forces her to, is wrong. Bottom line, its wrong, especially when people say that they do it for religious reasons because you and I just concluded that it is neither religious nor tradition, so what is it? A personnel choice to look like an Arabian robber? What comes of banning the material in the west? You just want to end the discussion because you can't find any more verses for me that supports your argument against banishment but maba kaa yeelaayo, unless of-course you say the magic words. wish people would just leave women to make their own decision about what to wear. What of the man who forces a woman to wear the darn thing on a hot, humid day? Atleast the ban would allow her to breath normal. Can the folks on the other side of the aisle say the same thing? Remember, men dont know any better. On the other hand, women recognize what is harmful to them and other women. You are an example of such a woman. ( if marx accusations of you weren't true and you were not in it for the profit.) (I kid) PS: Pious reasons and personal choice maba isa soo galaan. Mase one mase the other, not the two in the same sentence when you just so much as admitted that it was not a requirement. Pss: Running late, will be back later

Sura An-Nur, verses 30-31: English translation(Light) The above verses you shared were the same verses I brought to Sheikh Nur's attention, in order to get clarity on how he understood said verses, which we are still waiting for him to share and you have done the same, where you have said what you said of the same verses. When I brought it up last year, I did it to first get an understanding on how proponents of the Burka interpret verses that specifically deal with matters of dressing modestly, both for women and men. You are the first one who actually attempted to re-vive these very same verses, so, I grand your request of me, which is to bring forth verses that deal with women and women garments, which surprisingly is the same verses I once opened a thread on, but this time, I will share how I interpreted the said verses, along with Chapter 33, verse 59. For the following is said of a 'Woman and dressing Modesty'(after all we are dealing with Burka, so we should limit ourselves to verses that only concern our sex):- And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed. Simple enough, to the point and at the end, it instructs women to protect their goodies, i.e not to expose their nakedness to anyone that does not fall under the above category, especially against those that are more likely to engage or draw the woman to break her promise to Allah, thereby covering over 'bosoms' with the same cloth as that is is on her head. However, it does not instruct a woman to conceal her face but I can see why some commentary of the Qur'an would interpret as beauty being identified with the facial only. Beauty is not limited to just the facial and if we are speaking frankly, the saying of "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" is appropriate for this part of the discussion because it all boils down to individual liberty to see beauty as one sees fit. I'm sure we don't want to get into a discussion about what true "beauty" really constitutes...some men would say, well, as long as she has an attractive face, that will do for me. Others will say, face matters not and the body, especially her chest and her lower body is more attractive than just the face alone. The part about not exposing her beauty to anyone that does not fall under the above category is a direct violation of this verse, which makes sense but again, what is beauty to you? We are talking lustful actions here, sexual intercourse, body and soul, exposed for eternal pleasure but does it limit to face? Apparently taliban thinks so. You have to understand, women of the period weren't awliyo, they were buck wild. YOu could rarely tell who was a convert and who did not adhere to the new religion. all in all, not much distinct from the none converts and this particular verse was how would be able to tell apart from the non-muslims.. In pagan Arab culture, one woman was shared by atleat 4-5 men at a time, so the idea here is to refrain from such conduct and to only expose yourself to your husband and not to anyone else. (thats why marriage was important) This was a direct instruction against pagan practice. Islam had to establish itself as a religion and the light chapter is a reflection of such reform. You can say Islam was reforming the practices of the period, thereby making a direct statement. On the other verse(Chapter 33, verse 59), it says: O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. For us Somalia, this could be a Dirac and a Garbasaar that would conceal your figure or for the Arabs it could be their own garment or even a sizable men's overalls. Moderation, instructions to wear loose clothes that conceals the woman's figure. If the said garment is long enough to cover her body, including but not limited to the head, it does not object, matter of fact it welcomes it. The way I interpret this particular verse is that its a clause that is revealed for the sole protection of the female. Again, the question of the shape of the female which may entice some men to do more than look is spoken against. I just don't see how this verse speaks of Burka. Various interpretations of the above verse are available but this commentary should sum it all up: O Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks closely over themselves (again not exclusive to the face but the body as a whole, covering up, making sure the woman's figure is not exposed to the wondering eyes) PS: I think the Hijab crowd should perhaps take a second look at the mirror before they leave the house with their tight jeans and Hijab over their head, thinking iney asturan yihiin, which this verse speaks against it.

Ibti, Let us not turn out like Ulrich Zwingli and Martin Luther once did in debating about the ordinances...and whether Zwingli believed the spirit of christ or objected to real presence of spirit in the bread and wine, where as Luther believed that the words must be interpreted literally as a teaching of Jesus Christ. Otherwise, without this bit of interpretation, Luther and Zwingli would have gone far in their disputation but this minor disagreement handicapped the once in lifetime opportunity that both men had and the expectations of their followers and the impact it would have on the community etc. (let us not embark on their territory, instead, let us rise to the occasion ya Ibti)

^ I think it was the other thread where I wrote, yes, we do agree with the basics.(none of it derives the Burka as a source, as long as we agree on that, we can move on to step two)

^my dear,I think you are an amazing person but at the same time, I cant help but be saddened by these findings...why must you share a tafsir and not present it as a tafsir? My arabic is as bad as my Somali but I can work my way out of any verse you share, ee please do share.. The truth is, I did not object to what is Islamically expected of both women and men have to conduct themselves in a manner that is becoming of both genders, at the same time, the Muslim women have to dress modestly, which I was in agreement with but how burka fits to the overral meaning of the said verse is where I'm lost...thats why you and I are having this discussion. If you offended by my outsburst, its because I'm a compassionate person (which should not be mistaken for weakness or overly emotional on my part) and when I take someone at face value, I expect just that and an ounce of doubt makes me revaluate the individual with recourse but I still want us to continue as long as we understand each other. For you, it may not have been intentional, thats why I said, intentional or not but it doesnt take away the sadness I felt.

24:31 Surat An-Nūr And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed. Where in this qur'anic verse do you see the veil portion that you have shared with us ibti? We have to be honest with ourselves and with each other if we are to have an honest debate about the verses you have shared above, you will have to do a better job at presenting evidence. If we are picking and choosing Qur'anic commentary aka tafsir and presenting it as a fact, which is different from the authentic arabic poetry of our qur'an, then you should have put it in bracket or noted it as being an afterward tafsiir that commented on the above verse, etc. You did neither, which makes me question your motives and the length you will go through to fabricate a verse just so you can add a veil interpration from a commentary to drive your point home.(intentional or not) I'm saddened by these findings and I can no longer continue this debate (if I can not trust you to follow the rules) and if you continue to break our agreement, I too will have to break the rules, which means you will not like the portions of this surah that I will present as a fact from an unreliable online site that refute your claims) Please, take extra care when viewing sites that deem themselves an authority on everything Islam and instead present the said verses as written within the surah from the kitaab. PS:I can't help but wonder why you refuse to use your Kitaab as a primary source? Pss: Ibti, few months ago, I posted a thread entitled: The Veil: An E-Nur invitational and I presented Surah An-Nur for Sheih Nur to dissect. I brought up the very two verses you shared here. Read it here