Ameena u just said it all .....most of these organisers actually do encourage these security folks to manhandle the somalis and ofcouse as usual we still have to take their crap at the same pay for being manhandled too.... I used to really get so pissed off I sometimes thought these so called security guards with their henchmen (mali wimps) who really dishonoured their folks when they themselves would face the same kinda atittude if they went to another one elsewhere. Basically one of the reasons I started this episode was bse we as Somalis should gain respect from not only our own but also other people from different communities. Stand for your rights n never take shiiid from anyone and possibly do it via affirmative action ...

Money bags dont arent really athreat especially when u look at our form now n how we tend to chisel premiership sculps Ask Borough.... Oh this is one draw I have been looking forward to. I believe too that should we kick their behind, Ranieri will have no choice but to call it aday.

Click Here Plz

Dont stress, brood and talk about it ...rather just DO IT or seek help from friends who know.

Interesting Northener.... HEALTH AND THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Since junk food is destroying our health and killing us all, how is it possible that this information is being kept from most people in this country? I can give you the main reason in one word -- MONEY. Huge conglomerates will stand to lose huge amounts of money when the people of this country wake up and see what's happening to them and why. Because people WILL wake up. As PT Barnum said, "You can't fool all of the people all of the time." Sooner or later, the truth will out. Millions of people are not going to keep on dying from ailments whose cause is known. That's ridiculous. It’s not just ridiculous. It's outrageous. And, in fact, it's downright criminal! Right now, the gigantic conglomerates are riding high. Even with the Enron and Wall Street scandals, the prevailing philosophy controlling this country is that business is a sacred cow, and must not be criticized, let alone controlled. Since our government is bought and paid for by huge political contributions, no changes in this situation will originate from that quarter. The scientific community is also bought and paid for by huge business interests. The bulk of medical research is paid for by the pharmaceutical corporations, which are looking for new drugs, not for ways to help you and me to be healthier. No changes will come from that quarter any time soon. The reason is that health is not the business of the drug companies. Drugs that they can patent is their business. Face it. Your health is your business. Nobody else's. And if junk food is destroying your health, whose fault is that? You're the one who’s eating it! Would you expect some doctor or some other expert to hold your hand, sit down at the table with you and tell you what to eat and what not to eat? Now, it is true that in a well-regulated society, we would get lots of help from the experts. For example, we would have lots of scientific research done on the findings of Weston A. Price and Denis Burkitt. . Doctors would learn about their findings in medical school. The public health authorities would be trained to protect us from the disastrous effects of junk food, just as they are now trained to protect us from infectious diseases. In fact, in a well-regulated society, many kinds of junk food that are now permitted would be outlawed. Hydrogenated fat is one example. The stuff is dead like Vaseline. No living creature except us will eat it. That's why it won't spoil. It won't support life. And in our bodies, it clogs our arteries. Yet tons of it is used in our food. Refined sugar and refined starch are two other junk foods that should be banned altogether. But, as it stands now, when it comes to choosing what to eat, we're on our own. We have to educate ourselves. Those institutions in our society that would normally be responsible for protecting us are not protecting us from junk food. They can't. They don't have the money to do that. They don't have the legal authorization to do it. And, furthermore, since we, the general public, haven't been educated to know what we should and should not eat, we would not permit our public health authorities to dictate to us in these areas anyway. The attitude of most people would be, "I like my junk food, and nobody is going to tell me what I'm going to eat." So education must come first. Then when all of our people learn what improper food does to us, they will demand that harmful foods be taken off the market, just as we now demand that hamburger contaminated with E. coli and cheese contaminated with salmonella be confiscated. The nourishing food revolution (which will follow the infectious disease revolution) will take time, because it must start from the bottom up. This will be a grass-roots revolution, not a revolution led by the scientific community, which is dragging its heels on identifying the damages caused by junk food. So, for now, you have to protect yourself. You have to educate yourself. You have to learn what's good for you and what's not. And your taste buds won’t guide you in this. Animals are guided by their instincts to choose what's good for them. But, since the advent of junk food, we seem to have lost that instinctive ability. We eat harmful crap that a mouse or a rat will turn its nose up at if they have healthful food available. So, since we can't rely on our instincts, we have to rely on what lower animals don't have: our intelligence. We have to use that intelligence to learn what's good for us and what's not. Fortunately for us, dedicated people have compiled the information we need to make the food choices we have to make to stay healthy. All we need do to learn how to stay healthy is to check out “Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" by Weston Price and "Nourishing Traditions" by Sally Fallon and Mary Enig. Incidentally, this is a freebie site. I don’t get one dime from anybody to bring you this information. In fact, it costs ME money out of my own very limited retirement budget to put this page on the net. I do this because I can’t, in good conscious, stand silently by and watch millions die without speaking out. Won't you join me in spreading the good word?

Once again we see the inadequacies of Somalis being unable to understand each other even the mundane things like what turns you ladies on. I wouldnt know a mali woman would want unless she hints on it and that part parcel of good communication. I can tell you what Mali men love ... cuddly, curvy UNSI infested and sweet smelling firm bodies next to them. I also think that todays women are more open minded than our fore parents and are able to be themselves than just be submissive and not play her role. I would slightly disagree with Hibo when she says that a man can just feel his way through awomans emotions. I believe saying what you need from your man is as important too cause most men arent as intelligent as some can be. Besides even the smart ones wouldnt know if you are unhappy unless you act it. If you dont act this roles and dont talk, how would someone know what turns you on? Unless ofcouse he can read like abook and brail you with me fingers as I would kikikikik.... ithout communicating there would be no chance of a man or woman guessing what makes you jump unless ofcouse you get jumpy at some stage and that would be a signal of some sort. Explore the realms of turns on by talking to each other and perhaps gradual improvements on what your partners want.

Could these foods be giving us cancer? Acrylamide is a chemical used in the manufacture of plastics and the treatment of water. It is also carcinogenic. But what nobody knew until recently was that it occurs at dangerously high levels in baked and fried foods such as chips, crisps and breakfast cereals. So should we worry? Jenni Russell investigates a food scare that could revolutionise the way we eat Thursday August 15, 2002 The Guardian Frankly, I've had enough of alarmist stories about food. For the past 14 years I have dutifully imposed every successive food fad and contradictory piece of dietary advice on my household, and my energy for it is more or less exhausted. We were vegetarian, until assured that babies needed meat; red-meat-eaters, until BSE sent us back to chicken in a panic; redmeat-avoiders, until my pale and listless children were diagnosed as iron-deficient; fish enthusiasts, until the discovery of dioxins in fish, and the solemn warnings that no one should eat fatty fish more than twice a week. We drank less tea, because it was full of caffeine, before being told to drink more of it, because it was full of antioxidants. Surely it was healthy to eat fruit and vegetables? Yes, provided they didn't come from the store I had been going to for the past three years, where the delicious flavours were perhaps due to the fact that 80% of the products were contaminated with pesticides. So when I read newspaper reports this spring that Swedish scientists had discovered a probable carcinogen called acrylamide in baked and fried food, I turned the page hastily and hoped the story would disappear. Which it did - for a couple of months. There were no health warnings on crisp packets; the biscuit companies were still in business. Then the World Health Organisation announced that it was convening an unprecedented and urgent meeting of leading food scientists to discuss the Swedish findings. One of the British scientists who attended, Professor Peter Farmer of Leicester University, warned that this was not just another food scare. "The risk is unknown, but it could be on a par with tobacco." I started to pay attention. Acrylamide is a genotoxic carcinogen that causes damage to the nervous system, and is listed as "probably" carcinogenic to humans. A chemical used in the manufacture of plastics, it is also present in tobacco smoke, and is used in the treatment of drinking water. The US Environmental Protection Agency considers it potentially so dangerous that it has fixed the safe level for human consumption at almost zero. The maximum permissible level of acrylamide in American drinking water is 0.5 parts per billion, or 0.5 micrograms per litre. Now the Swedish scientists had discovered something that no one had ever suspected: that acrylamide was present in some baked and fried foods, and at levels that made nonsense of the limitations on water. A large portion of chips from one local fast-food company contained at least 300 times the amount of acrylamide permitted in a single glass, while one sample of McDonald's chips had double that amount. Crisps contained acrylamide in even higher concentrations. But it wasn't just fried food that was a problem. Some crispbreads, cereals and biscuits had much higher levels than some kinds of chip. And acrylamide was present, although at much lower levels, in all breads. The average figures for some of the products tested, in micrograms per kilogram, were: soft bread, 50; rye bread, 89; cornflakes, 53; Rice Krispies, 247; popcorn, 416; chips, 450; crackers, 547; crisps, 1,200, and Ryvita, 1,200 to 1,800. Cooked meat had far lower levels: fried chicken contained 39, and meatballs 64. But raw and boiled foods had no traces of the chemical. The discovery had come about by chance. Five years earlier, workers building a tunnel in the south of Sweden had suffered neurological damage from exposure, after an accident, to the acrylamide being used in the process. A Swedish university group that was studying the men in the aftermath of the accident was startled to find inexplicably high levels of acrylamide in the blood of its control group. Dr Margareta Tornqvist, who was leading the study, investigated dozens of possibilities before testing food. The results were totally unexpected and, when they were published, Sweden went into shock. The media were dominated by the news, and shares in one crisp manufacturer immediately fell almost 15%. The news had a powerful impact, because the tunnel-poisoning scandal meant that everyone in the country was already aware of acrylamide's harmful potential. The Food Standards Agency in Britain says that the revelation poses an entirely new and global problem. Most food scares are about contamination. There is no frame of reference for dealing with a cancer-causing chemical which is produced during the normal cooking process, and which appears in foods that most people eat every day. Dozens of foods haven't yet been tested, so no one can yet be sure which pose the greatest risks. Research is urgently needed into how and why acrylamide is formed. The WHO has recommended the creation of an international network to conduct research, and the EU commissioner in charge of food has been asked to start coordinating a European response. In the interim, it is the Swedes who are still leading the way. In the past few weeks, Tornqvist has found that grated, microwaved potatoes contain acrylamide levels that are higher than that of most chips. And vegetables - not part of the original tests - are producing acrylamide at high levels, too. Frying spinach produces 112 micrograms per kilogram, and fried beetroot produces one of the highest levels - 890. Leif Busk, the head of research at Sweden's National Food Administration, says it is clear that the crucial factors in the formation of acrylamide are heat and time. Boiled food is completely safe. But once food is heated at temperatures above 120C, acrylamide can start to form, and the longer the cooking process, the higher the acrylamide count. Well-cooked toast has twice the acrylamide of lightly toasted bread. When oven chips are briefly cooked, they contain 301 micrograms; overcooked, they contain an astonishing 1,104. Busk and his team are developing a hypothesis that may explain what is happening. From the start, the scientists were intrigued that the same kinds of foods were producing a wide range of results. Fourteen different types of crisp produced results ranging from 330-2,300 micrograms per kilogram. Some cereals scored less than 340; others more than 1,400. Busk thinks the answer may lie in sugars, and in what happens to them when they are cooked. All carbohydrates form sugars when they are broken down by heat, but different kinds of carbohydrate produce different types of sugar, and some may form acrylamide much more easily than others. The precise chemical composition of a potato, or any other vegetable or cereal, will be influenced by its variety, the soil in which it is grown, and how it is fertilised. The sugar theory would explain why beetroot, which is high in carbohydrate, forms far more acrylamide than spinach, which is relatively low. It also offers the hope that farmers and manufacturers might, in time, be able to identify and produce low-acrylamide food. That's crucial, because no one involved in food safety or nutritional research holds out much hope that consumers will change their eating habits if a crylamide is proved to be dangerous. Spokesmen at WHO and America's Centre for Science in the Public Interest point out wearily that although a third of all cancers are already assumed to be caused by diet, two decades of advice on healthy eating have produced only marginal improvements in our eating habits, while obesity and cancer rates are still rising. But should any concerned consumer care about acrylamide? Do all the figures on intake add up to real personal risk? Everyone agrees that there needs to be more understanding of precisely how acrylamide affects the human body, and until there is, the FSA refuse to offer any estimates. But while Swedish scientists await permission to conduct controlled trials on humans, they have made extrapolations based on that standard human substitute, the rat. They calculate that in Sweden the average intake of acrylamide from all sources is 70 micrograms per day, which translates as one microgram per kilo of body weight per day. At that level, they calculate that one person in 100 will be killed by acrylamide, or to put it another way, that 6,000 deaths a year in Britain could be ascribed to it. One in 100? I told Busk that, at those odds, it didn't seem worth telling my children that they had to give up a lifetime of delicious chips, not to mention fried beetroot. He had several serious responses to that. First, countries will have average intakes much higher than Sweden's, with correspondingly higher risks. In Sweden, most potatoes are boiled or baked, and it's rare to find someone who eats chips or crisps every day. In Ireland or Scotland, for example, that is commonplace. Second, dietary analysis shows children and teenagers to be the highest consumers of cereals, snacks and fried foods, and with that, acrylamide. Not only will their intake of the "probable" carcinogen be relatively higher than that of adults, but they are more likely to be damaged by it, because their cells are dividing more rapidly, and acrylamide is known to affect dividing cells. A single 40g packet of crisps per day could, for instance, take a child over the one microgram per kilo per day on which the average risk is calculated - and that is before they have eaten anything else. Third, Busk points out, their research indicates that acrylamide is 1,000 times more dangerous than the majority of carcinogens found in food. Every single time you consume it, your DNA is being damaged, and every increase in the dose is an increase in risk. If you don't care about limiting acrylamide intake over a lifetime, then it is perverse to worry about pesticides, or dioxins in fish. In the end, though, can the acrylamide issue be so urgent, when all that has happened is the exposure of a risk which has always been there? Plenty of people think that the issue is being overblown, and not all of them are representatives of the food industry. Dr Walter Willett, a food scientist at Harvard, thinks the Swedes have made their research public at far too early a stage. He wants to see more hard evidence, an abandon ment of extrapolations from animal studies, and a recognition that there's no need to be deeply concerned, because we have been eating this way for thousands of years. On this last point he, and many other critics, may be wrong. The techniques of grilling, baking and frying may have been around for ever, but in most societies they were never used as frequently as they are now. Forty years ago, the distinguished anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss observed that all traditional societies boiled their everyday food. Roasting and frying were reserved for celebrations, guests, and the upper classes. And when I think back to the limited experience of my own childhood, I can see how drastically cooking habits have changed. My mother fried all her rice, sauteed vegetables and baked lasagnes, but my English grandparents (born 1899) boiled practically everything they ate. They lived on porridge, mashed potatoes, boiled beef and boiled ham, and even Sunday roasts were effectively steamed in covered dishes. If they had a frying pan, I never saw it, and their acrylamide intake was probably limited to toast, and a cracker with the cheese. Where does that leave the rest of us? So many questions are still unanswered. More foods need to be tested, including the staples consumed in the rest of the world, while researchers point out that no one knows enough about cooking patterns at home. Britain's FSA has so far advised people not to change their diets. I'm not going to wait for them to change their minds; I have stopped buying my children crisps, or crispbreads, and will severely ration chips, but bread is too delicious and too nutritious to be abandoned. I'll still bake potatoes, because the water inside them apparently means that the interior is steamed at 100C, but I ought to discard the crisp, carcinogenic skin. Meanwhile, I predict that the first person to publish the Awfully Boring Acrylamide Cookbook, or How To Make Boiled Food Fashionable, Interesting and Delicious, will find themselves with a mini hit on their hands in 2003.

Briton jailed in Ethiopia for child sex abuse Audrey Gillan Friday August 8, 2003 The Guardian A British paedophile exposed by the Guardian for abusing orphans of the Ethiopian famine was yesterday jailed for nine years with hard labour by a court in Addis Ababa after an apparent attempt to open another centre for children in Zambia. David Christie, 62, was found guilty of abusing boys under 15 and of procuring boys for his friends. Originally from Bournemouth, Christie was the subject of a Guardian investigation in July 1999 which revealed that he had targeted a village set up to house orphans of the famine. Christie was sacked by the agency, Terre des Hommes Lausanne (Tdh), in 1997 after admitting an "improper sexual relationship" with one of the 300 children in his care. Other children in the village also made allegations of abuse. The first criminal bench of the high court in Addis Ababa said Christie had also arranged for five boys to be abused by two of his friends, one of them a Briton. The court declared that Christie had abused boys daily for several weeks at a time. It said he lured the boys by giving them sweets and promising them an education abroad. Christie had been living in the UK when he was arrested on an international warrant in Lusaka, the Zambian capital, and was in the process being flown to the UK when he was arrested by Ethiopian authorities who took him off a transit flight bound for London. Officers with Scotland Yard's paedophile unit had been monitoring his movements in London. After the Guardian allegations, Christie changed his name by deed poll to David Allen and obtained a passport. He could not be prosecuted because his offences predated the 1997 Sex Offenders Act enabling British courts to try UK nationals for such crimes. But an associate of Christie's tipped officers off that he was planning to flee to Zambia with the intention of working with children again. Christie had been the head or "father" of Jari Children's Village, an eight-hour drive from the capital. There he was responsible for the welfare of more than 300 children. His associates - some known paedophiles - would visit the village and a number of allegations were made against them. In 1999, a Guardian investigation discovered that it was not just in Jari that children were abused. Christie had ready access to young boys in Addis Ababa, where many children are forced to beg on the streets. At least a dozen boys were living at his house in the city. A number of these boys testified to the Guardian that they had been involved in inappropriate relationships with Christie and his friends. One said: "Other kids can learn from what happened to us. The children in Jari don't know good from bad, and they think people are good just because they are white. Any white man to come was seen as a good man." Det Supt Peter Spindler, head of Scotland Yard's child protection group, said: "This case is an example of how British police routinely work with international colleagues to arrest British paedophiles offending abroad. This sends a strong message to any British paedophile who chooses to go and offend in countries where they think they are out of our grasp. They are not." Colin Tucker, a spokesman for Tdh, said the organisation welcomed the verdict as it had been trying to prevent Christie's attempts to abuse other children. "The ongoing rehabilitation of the survivors of the abuse is of paramount importance to the foundation," he said. "This verdict serves as an important milestone for the children as they rebuild their lives. It will also act as a serious deterrent to those who wish to exploit vulnerable children through their money and power." Christie's trial began in October 2001 but was postponed several times because of his ill health. The three-judge tribunal "categorically rejected" Christie's request that he be allowed to serve his sentence in Britain. His lawyer said that Christie would likely be released from prison on good behaviour in 2007 and that he would appeal the conviction. Click Here: HREF="http://www.guardian.co.uk/child/story/0,7369,1014475,00.html";>Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Briton j… http://www.guardian.co.uk/child/story/0,7369,1014475,00.html Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003

The BBC has dramatically taken Robert Kilroy-Silk's daytime TV show off air while it investigates his anti-Arab diatribe in a Sunday newspaper column. Kilroy-Silk: speculation his could be axed altogether The Sunday Express has reacted furiously, accusing the BBC of "gagging free speech" and demanding the presenter be reinstated immediately, insisting there was nothing racist in Kilroy-Silk's column. And there has already been speculation on the BBC's Radio 5 Live that the show could be axed altogether if it is found to breach a recent tightening of its rules about presenters writing newspaper columns. The corporation has told Kilroy-Silk his show will be pulled while it conducts an internal investigation into his comments in last weekend's Sunday Express, which have already been branded "deplorable" and "racist" by MPs and Muslim groups. In it he said that Arab states "murdered more than 3,000 civilians on 11th September and then danced in the hot, dusty streets to celebrate". He added that "despotic, barbarous and corrupt Arab states" were populated by "suicide bombers", "limb amputators" and "women repressers". "They should go down on their knees and thank God for the munificence of the United States," he said, adding that "few of them make any contribution to the welfare of the rest of the world". Kilroy, the former-MP-turned-TV-presenter's daily discussion show, will disappear from the schedules from Monday and will be replaced by an extended half-hour of BBC Breakfast from 9am - 9.30am. The BBC said in a statement today that it "strongly disassociates itself from the views expressed in an article by Robert Kilroy-Silk in the Sunday Express of January 4 2004". "We stress that these comments do not reflect the views of the BBC," it said, adding that the corporation would "investigate this matter fully". But the Sunday Express has reacted furiously to the BBC's decision. It accused the BBC of "grossly over-reacting" and called on the corporation to reinstate the presenter immediately. "The article was not a racist article and it was a rewrite of a previous article that appeared in April without complaint. The Sunday Express rewrote it during the Christmas period, but there was not one complaint before," said a spokesman. "It was legalled by lawyers and there is absolutely no case to answer. The Sunday Express believes that the BBC is gagging free speech and is absolutely appalled." The spokesman added it believed Kilroy-Silk was the victim of a campaign by an Arab website that had urged its users to write in and complain to the "Express on Sunday". Earlier today backbench Labour MP Lynne Jones demanded the BBC consider sacking Kilroy-Silk and put down an early day motion calling on other MPs to support her in showing their contempt for his column. Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, has already branded the article "indisputably ****** " and said the CRE would be referring it to the police to see if there was a case for a prosecution on grounds of incitement to racial hatred. The Muslim Council of Britain described Kilroy-Silk's piece as a "gratuitous anti-Arab rant". Iqbal Sacranie, the general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, said action should be taken over the "bigoted and ill-informed ideas" in the piece, which was "ignorant, extremely derogatory and indisputably racist". He told Radio 5 Live this afternoon that he was delighted with the decision taken by the BBC, saying it "sent a very powerful message" to people in a position of responsibility that they could not express "racist, inflammatory views". He agreed in every community there were individual who commit criminal acts, but said it was wrong to generalise about "Arabs". Mr Sacranie was asked what he thought of Abu Hamza, the inflammatory Muslim cleric who operated out of a Finsbury Park mosque until it was closed down last year. "There are loonies around and of course if they make [racist] comments they should be condemned. But they [Hamza] are at the margins; Kilroy-Silk is part of the mainstream." The Sunday Express said today that the Council had been offered and had accepted a right to reply in this weekend's paper. Privately BBC bosses are furious that they have once again been caught in the firing line because of a newspaper article. Last month it was forced to introduce stricter freelance guidelines for journalists and presenters, preventing them from writing about current affairs or contentious issues in newspapers. This move followed the Hutton inquiry, sparked by Andrew Gilligan's controversial Today programme report on Iraq, a piece that was given "rocket boosters" by a subsequent Mail on Sunday column accusing Alastair Campbell of "sexing" up the intelligence dossier on Iraq to justify war. Kilroy-Silk's piece originally appeared during the war and it is believed he did not know it was going to be regurgitated last week. It first appeared on April 6 last year, with a different headline and slightly different editing. This is not the first time Kilroy-Silk has been accused of expressing racist views in his newspaper column. In 1992 he sparked fury with his comments about the Irish in the pages of the Daily Express. He described EC Commissioner Ray MacSharry as a "redundant second-rate politician from a country peopled by peasants, priests and pixies". After a complaint from the Irish Ambassador to the UK, he apologised. The then editor Sir Nicholas Lloyd also apologised.

Unfortunately we live in a world where the majority of people DO NOT WANT TO KNOW how their fast food comes about - just that it's easy to come by and very much available! I stopped all of that greasy nastiness a long time ago but there are some seriously intriguing publications regarding this issue. You first port of call should be 'Fast Food Nation' by Eric Schlosser. This book is a very interesting read and will change your whole outlook and perception of the fast food industry for as long as you live. Just to give you an idea of how the fast food industry works.....in any neighborhood where there are schools and colleges in most areas of the city have vending and have close proximity to Dixies, Kfc’s to name but a few. This generation is going to be more prone to diseases like diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease etc and remember that saying "YOU ARE WHAT YOU EAT". I for one wouldn’t want to be looking like the people on the series “FAT CITY!”

Just around the corner of my home, another fried chicken shop has recently opened in my local Neighbourhood making a grand total of ten within not even two miles of each other. There is seemingly a demand for this food, but why are we eating this mass produced Junk/rubbish. I read somewhere that KFC/DIXIES could not call themselves ‘kentucky Fried Chicken’ because in doing this they would be breaking a law because their chicken was not in fact chicken, but headless, featherless things that were being kept alive via the use of some kinda wires and stuff. Now whether this is true or not, you have to wonder how they can afford to sell their crap so cheap. As I passed this new chicken shop, A black female stepped out, she was with a young boy who appeared no older than five. The boy clutched his box of Fried chicken as if it were the best meal ever. I think we really need to think more about what we are eating and what our children are eating, this fast food diet that we have adopted could potentially lead to our downfall. I saw a BBC documentary, which told that in order to cull the black population in South Africa, drugs were put in biscuits and given to the female population under the pretence that they were offering sustinance to poor families. These biscuits were reputed to have made a large amount of females sterile. Do we really know what we are eating. Recently too there was another BBC documentary on ways they mixed the chicken with some sort of chemicals in Holland. Last year for the first time I saw ayoung mali kid with down syndrome and stuffed like turkey too. Now we better get back to our usual canjeero or else we r gonnas like many are.

Basically i was at my friends mums and the older ladies were saying a wife must cook for her husband as often as possible as the way to mans heart is throuh his stomach. but surely there is more to modern day man than cook food. so fellas what is your opinion on this and is it true for you. ladies do add your ideas to. also what other ways would you say is the way to your heart?

Last year my resolution was to cut my weight into half....Suddenly acouple of pounds got added as aresult of going to the gym and stopping after thinking I look ok. The problem was when you start off something that you cant finish you often end up worse off somehow like putting on weight when the initial idea was losing it. For me this year is going to be put down to experience and come next year it would have to be WILL POWER AND BRUTAL SCHEDULING. DID YOU GUYS ACHIEVE YOUR RESOLUTIONS FOR THIS YEAR AND WHAT ARE THE NEW ONES? WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO CHANGE?

To be honest once acriminal always acriminal....thats why we cant stabalise as anation. We need to Hung em high and an eye for an eye or atleast time would be something worth thinking about.

Hi Lucky ....Link not available ...

Jackson Web Site Unites, Divides Legal Profession Jackson Web Site Unites, Divides Legal Profession

ITS BEEN A MEMORABLE YEAR FOR ME AND HOPE TOO THE SAME FOR THE REST OF THE NOMADS. IM ALSO HONOURED TO HAVE MADE THE ACQUANTANCES OF SOME LOVELY PEOPLE AND THIS HAS BEEN A CHERISHABLE EXPERIENCE. MANY HAVE LEARNED HOW TO DEAL WITH EACH OTHER BOTH ON AND OFF NET AND MAY IT BE AN INSTRUMENT THAT STEERS US ALL TO ABETTER QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL SOMALIS ACROSS THE WORLD AND OFCOUSE FELLOW MUSLIMS. HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU ALL.

I thought Mad cow was synonymous with UK and France but now we see it suddenly rare its head in places like Canada and it looks like the the crazy cow was actually for the U.S. Mad Cows halt trade

Subxanalaah Iran has suffered from numerous Earthquakes....this one is the latest... Quake Kills 20,000

This is getting more interesting by the minute.....I find afew guys quite jumpy around here ....what is the matter people? Cant we just talk straight without cutting corners? Lol Smith...I didnt know that..... Not that I know agreat deal about Somali politics ...but somehow learned agreat deal from the many sources of dis-information.

I believe he is one of the best midlfielders of his time...typical unsung hero.....On his day he can win the match single handed.

Bee Now we need people like you who shouldnt take these peoples shiid anymore. We love our entertainers and love to listen to their songs both on stage and via audio/videos. However, when it gets to a stage where you pay alot more money than any other entertainment, get abused by being shoved all over the place, made to look cheap and ultimately not see what you went there for, then you know its time to totally blow these organisers and their so called lame ducks to hell. Most of the Somalis who go to these places are decent people and should be treated with uttermost respect for they dont go there to beg but pay to get some entertainment back. Yes we do have trouble makers and yes they should get rid of them but to spread it all over the rest of us and treat us like criminals I say nooooo. We as the "Riwayada goers" need be respected by these silly one dime Faraxs/Xalimos and their stooges. I tell you what if they boycotted these places, where in hell would they get the money? You pay you get the right service everywhere why not Somali entertainers. Believe me if Micheal Jackson was in town you wouldnt pay as much and even if you did, you wouldnt be treated like a "dog"

Well Rayana sis thanks for the advice but Im fine and I dont carry any baggages as you may think **Regrets**.....Just thought I would hightlight the problems faced by many a Somali. I believe its something that has to be addressed for entertainment shouldnt only be for the youth but also the moms and dads who would sometimes want to come sit down n just enjoy an evening out rather than get hustled all the time.

They Do NOt HAVE TOP NOTCH TRAINED ORGANIZERS Absolutely true Lakaad....We are learning but we have along way to go.

Baniyaal you forgot to mention Glitchy who would perhaps be better than even the versatile Cole. This kids are young but they all could easily slot into the likes of Roma, Barcelona and ofcouse midtable teams like Liverpool I find it hard to believe when Shujui cant believe what some of the best Players in the world say about Arsenal. Its true we havent yet won the European championship but one cannot doubt the makings of agreat team under agreat manager. Waryaa Baniyaal sorry to say this but everytime I see your teeth I kinda get scared ....kinda on per with jeeepers