I think you guys should read this first! http://www.allaahuakbar.net/jamaat-e-islaami/hizb/index.htm

American gothic The revelation that Strom Thurmond fathered a child with his 16-year-old black maid raises a host of thorny questions about race, sex, power -- and media silence. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Rebecca Traister Dec. 18, 2003 | In 1948, while running for president of the United States on the Dixiecrat ticket, Strom Thurmond proclaimed, "All the laws of Washington and all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, into our schools, our churches and our places of recreation and amusement." But in 1925 it apparently had taken neither legislation nor bayonet to force a 16-year-old black maid named Carrie Butler into the bed of Thurmond himself, then a 22-year-old graduate of Clemson University living with his parents in Edgefield, S.C. This week, it was officially revealed that the union between the former South Carolina judge, governor and senator, who died earlier this year at age 100, and his family's teenaged maid, produced a daughter: Essie Mae Washington-Williams, 78, a retired school teacher living in Los Angeles. In a press conference Wednesday, Washington-Williams announced that she was coming forward because she decided her children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren deserved to know "from whom, where, and what they have come" and explained that the relationship between her and her father had been warm, their communication regular. Earlier this week it was reported that Thurmond had put his daughter through college and supported her financially before she was married, and after her husband, Julius, died. L L

"The King of Pop is restyling himself Jacko X," LOOOOOOL

Perverted and Malicious In Response to Goth's Article I was stunned to read the misguided and corrupted article written by the person Bashir Goth "Against the Saudization of Somaliland" and posted on Somali Websites. This article was drafted by Mr. Goth with mischief and evil intentions in mind against Islam and its followers. There isn't any truth and logic in what he says and its crystal clear that this person is outside the fold of Al-Islam and here is the evidence of why it is so: 1. Authentic religion like Al-Islam and man made traditions are two different things 2. Wearing of 'Xijaab or Headscarf' by mulsim women is a mandatory command of Allah in order to safeguard them from evil minded people and keep them in good faith and chaste 3. Islam is a religion based on moderation, justice, purity and good manners 4. Sheikh Mohamed Abdi-wahab was a great scholar of Islam and never contradicted the four Imams of Islam or schools of thought 5. Islam liberated women, gave them dignity and never oppreses or exploites them for any purpose; be it financial or sexual as happens in many parts of the world 6. Somali girls are better off with taking Islam as a whole and you see the dignity and radiance on their faces 7. It is obligatory in Islam to kill someone who foresakes his religion Al-Islam unless he/she comes back into the fold of Islam on the spot and repents honestly Hence Mr. Goth's article is at war with Islam and its followers around the globe but Islam and its followers are here to stay and prosper and he wouldn't be able to do anything about it because Allah the all powerful promised to safeguard Islam and its followers till the day of judgement. Also Islamic Scholars, intellectuals, dutiful soldiers of Islam are ever ready and watchful to propagate and protect Al-Islam. Therefore, Mr. Bashir Goth, has bargained for a far cheaper price, whatever that price or material gain is !! Because he is campaigning for women nudity in Somalia and the destruction of Islam in essence. He is glorifying Westernism, pornography, materialism, social slavery and immorality. His article has no meaning and is bascially complete with lies, hatred against Islam and muslims and no one who is a muslim should believe his trash article for a second. His whole article seems to be drafted by 'Satan' and no doubt whatsoever that Mr. Goth is an evil person who has lost all hope and honour with regard to Islam and its followers. He is agent of an alien culture and must be expelled from Somali society. Finally, Islam and its philosophy will grow and prosper in Somalia and Somali women will not take lecture from somebody who is perverted and misguided. Mr. Goth is hopeless person who is attempting to take on mighty Islam and its followers but he is totally deluded and possessed by the charm of Satan's devilishness. In the eyes of muslims, Mr. Goth, you are a laughable cow !! K. Majiid ( Kaligii Jabhad ) E-mail: docol85@yahoo.co.uk

I think his guilty. What is he doing with other people's children ?? I think he is a childmolester!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

Originally posted by Nur: Salaams Nomads The following is a rendition I posted on another thread, as a light hearted answer to Mrt. Bashir Goethe. Bashir is not a bad guy, just religiously challenged who needs vision correction, so be kind nto him. As promised, This thread provides a treatment clinic for Nomads who have lived in the west for too long, to the point of believing that western and pagan lifestyles to be closer to Somali culture than Islam is. A case in point is an article posted here on these pages by Tony Montana and written by Bashir Goethe ( Somali German Poet?) You have misunderstood me brother. I do not agree with every thing in this article. I found this article on hiiraan.com and wanted to share it with my follow somalis on somalionline.com

Originally posted by Jawahiir: umm have to say when i dislocated my knee, this last summer and inshalla i wont experience anything worse! I understand I had the same injury!!

This is the worst physical pain I ever felt? 1.circumcision 2.Knee injury 3.Food poison and other "minor" injury's

My favorite books: Sayyid Qutb - Milestones (*****) Sheikh Safi-ur-Rahman al-Mubarkpuri - The Sealed Nectar(*****) Edward Said - Orientalism (****) Klein, Naomi - No logo (****) Schlosser, Eric - Fast Food Nation (*****)

Liberals to rein in 'anti-Islamic' MP 11 December 2003 AMSTERDAM — The Dutch Liberal VVD party has moved to stop its outspoken MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali from waging a solo campaign against Islamic schools in the Netherlands. The Somali-born politician had to hide out in the US temporarily in 2002 when her life was threatened due to her criticisms of Islam. Liberal-Christian daily newspaper Trouw reported on Thursday that VVD officials have been annoyed by what they say is Hirsi Ali's "solo runs" on the controversial issue of the beliefs and practices of Muslim immigrants living in the Netherlands. VVD leader and Finance Minister Gerrit Zalm has indicated that he wants to see a halt to the creation of additional Islamic schools in the Netherlands, but Hirsi Ali has been accused of pushing the issue publicly without clearance from the party. Hirsi Ali was brought up as a Muslim in Somalia, but has attacked Islam for repressing women. In an interview with Trouw in January this year, Hirsi Ali described Islam as "backward" and the Prophet Mohammed as a "perverse tyrant". "Mohammed is, judged by Western standards, a perverse man. A tyrant. If you don't do what he says, things won't go well for you. That makes me think of megalomaniac dictators in the Middle East, Osama Bin Laden, Ayatollah Khomeini and [former Iraqi dictator] Saddam Hussein." She also said by modern standards the Prophet Mohammed had been perverse to marry a 12-year-old girl. More recently, Hirsi Ali has added her voice to growing criticism of Islamic schools in the Netherlands. The schools have been accused of fostering intolerance and preaching anti-Western doctrines. But a report by the government's schools inspectorate found, in contrast, that Islamic schools often contribute to integration into Dutch society. The report also disagreed with claims that the standard of education provided by Muslim schools is far below that of other schools in the Netherlands. Banning Islamic schools is a particularly thorny in a country where the freedom of religion is enshrined in the constitution. The VVD's main partner in the centre-right government coalition is the Christian Democrat CDA party. The CDA is worried trying to block Islamic schools could lead to a restriction on all religious education, including Christian schools. In 2002, populist politician Pim Fortuyn made it politically acceptable to question the country's multicultural policies and he was the first to say publicly that Islam was backward. The VVD hoped to benefit from this growing unease about Muslim immigrants by recruiting Hirsi Ali shortly last year. She had resigned from her post as researcher with the Labour PvdA party after accusing Labour of being soft on Islam. But now Trouw reports that VVD officials are increasingly unhappy by Hirsi Ali's contribution to the debate about the integration of immigrants. She is accused of deliberately seeking confrontation by making very controversial remarks and by not sticking to the party line. Her recent comments about banning Islamic schools have led to senior VVD politicians contradict her in the media. She did however receive the backing — public at least — of most of her other colleagues. But VVD parliamentary party secretary Jan Rijpstra confirmed to the newspaper that the parliamentary grouping was unhappy with the way Hirsi Ali seemed to be making unsanctioned statements. Rijpstra is also the chairman of the party's immigration and integration commission, which was set up in response to earlier public statements by Hirsi Ali. She is to be told that in future her public comments must conform to the VVD's agreed policies and be sanctioned beforehand by the commission. Political commentators will be watching closely to see if Hirsi Ali will tailor her media performances to tow the party line or whether differences on the issue will come to a head in the New Year. [Copyright Expatica News 2003]

Shit not kazaalite. Well I have to burn it to a disc then. Thanks for the info

Shit not kazaalite. Well I have to burn it to a disc then. Thanks for the info

Against the Saudization of Somaliland By Bashir Goth, a journalist in the Middle East The following article is dedicated to the memory of Dr. Annalena Tonelli, 60, humanitarian worker and founder of hospital and school for the deaf in Borama, Richard Eyeington, 62, headmaster of the Sheikh Secondary School, and his wife Enid, 61, who were all slain in cold blood in Somaliland. Recently, I came across news reports on the activities of a group of clerics calling themselves “the Authority for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice” trying to impose draconian moral codes on Somaliland citizens in general and residents of the capital Hargeisa, in particular. The following article is therefore, a reaction to this issue. I can ignore, though grudgingly, when such clerics impose dress codes and other punctilious rituals on Somali men and women in the West because these are in the free world where they can express their opinion and seek legal protection against such abuse, but to import this demented thinking to my homeland and the heart of the capital city is quite unbearable to me. I cannot sit back and watch these people humiliate our women, destroy our beautiful culture, hijack our religion and denigrate the reputation of our country worldwide. I cannot find a better start than to relate an incident that occurred in my home village, Dilla, 60 miles west of Hargeisa, in the early 1990s. It was Friday and the residents of the little farming village of Dilla, western Somaliland, were looking forward to a normal weekend day. The only worry that the villagers had in mind on such days was the crowds of farmers and nomads that descended on the village to attend Friday prayers, thus swelling population to a breaking point. Fridays, however, were bustling days for business. Teashops and shopkeepers sold more than they could sell for the whole week and mothers had the luxury of abundant choice for milk and ghee from the hordes of countryside men and women coming to sell dairy products to buy weeklong provisions instead. Children also looked forward to special lunches with meat, rice or spaghetti instead of the bland, single menu local hadhuudh (millet). The whole village carried an aura of sweetness as the shopkeepers, teashops and mothers all burned frankincense to greet the Islamic weekend, perfumed themselves and adorned the best of their clothes for the Friday sermon. No one had the slightest expectation of how this particular Friday would be any different from the thousands of Fridays that they had lived through. But it was and the people were in the offing of a strange phenomenon that would put the wisdom and patience of villagers, particularly the Ulema (clerics), to unprecedented test. After Friday sermon, a man stood up in the mosque to address the worshippers. Everybody knew him. He was the headmaster of the school, a respected man, a dedicated teacher and a devoted Muslim. A man of no vices; he never smoked, never chewed Qat and led an ascetic life away from women and other worldly luxuries. The general guess was that he was going to lecture about the needs of the school or complain about children’s behavior. “You all know me,” he said “but what I am going to tell you today is something that you have never expected to hear from me. I am a new prophet”. The people were frozen. The teacher said that he was told by God to reform the Islamic religion and that anyone who believed that Mohammed (PUH) was the last prophet should read the Quran again. “It is here,” he emphasized, raising the Quran book that was in hand, “I am not fabricating a new thing. My name is mentioned here in the Quran and all you have to do is to read it carefully.” The worshippers left the mosque dumfounded, but the Ulema decided to have a word with the teacher. They had two things in mind, to assess his mental condition and to judge how adamant he was on his claim of prophethood. Founding that he was mentally sound after a few hours of discussions, the Ulema asked him to promise two things only if they had to leave him in peace. First he should not preach his new gospel in the village’s two mosques and second that he should not try to spoil the faith of school children. If he accepted to fulfill these two conditions he was free to do whatever he wanted with his “message”. He accepted the terms. Two years later, the teacher was spotted praying in the mosque and when the Ulema questioned him his answer was that he returned to his faith and had given up his infatuations. This is not an imaginary tale. It is a true story that all the people in the area know very well. My point in bringing it up, however, is to raise a question: Imagine this taking place in Saudi Arabia or any other place where Wahhabism or religious extremism prevailed! What the fate of this teacher would have been is anyone’s guess. He would have been hanged mercilessly. However, it is amazing to see how the Ulema of the little farming village of Dilla had dealt with the issue with the sagacity and tolerance that are the long lost faculties of Islam. By simply patronizing the teacher’s claim, they had proven that Islam was too strong and too entrenched in the hearts of people to be shaken by bogus prophets. They also set an excellent example for tolerance and compassion in giving the poor teacher the grace to come back without any fear of reprisal. The Ulema of Dilla represented a generation and a time when Islam and the Somali culture lived together in perfect harmony when Islam was natural and neatly interwoven into our people’s social fabric, when being Somali and a Muslim was an indivisible whole. Islam back then was like a crystal glass that takes on the color of any liquid that was poured into it. The crystal was so clear that one could see the inside liquid with unmistakable clarity. It was a time when the message of tolerance and peace prevailed, when Islam meant Islam in the true meaning of the word – submission to God and living in a state of mental and physical peace with others. Islam was a bond between the worshipper and the worshipped; an internal harmony whose radiance reflected on one’s face and was felt in one’s humility and generosity towards his fellow (fallible) human beings. Depending on your view of history, since Somalis embraced Islam at the time of the Prophet or shortly after his death, it never clashed with the local culture in terms of clothing, eating and going about their ordinary life. Once it settled in the heart, it made there its home and never bothered about how a person looked on the outside. The guiding principle in worshipping God was measured on one’s purity of heart as the Qur’an says “Qalbun Salim” (soundness of heart) or wa libaasu Ataqwa (“..the raiment of righeousness...”). Consequently a Somali woman would travel with a single man or even a group of men on long trips, spending nights and days in their company with neither the men nor the woman having any sinister thoughts about their togetherness. The heart was clean and nothing else had mattered much. These Somalis were unknowingly abiding with the prophet’s hadith, which says: “Verily in the body there is a piece of flesh. If it is sound, the body is all sound. If it is corrupt, the body is all corrupt. Verily, it is the heart.” Somali people continued to wear the qaydar, the dhuug, the Maro Somali, the dhacle and darayamuus, the guntino and Islam was always there where it should belong: to their heart, and not to their clothes. Somali girls had traditionally braided their hair with such style that made foreigners sing their proverbial beauty and Islam lived in perfect amenity with it. Somalis recognized unmarried girls by their uncovered hair “guudley” and married women by their hair cover “gambooley”. This was the time that our traditions and heritage were the identity of the Somali people as expressed so eloquently by one of our lyrics: “Reer guurayiyo Gabadh tima tidcani, Waa waxa dhulkeena u gaar ahee La inagu gartaa… “ One of the aspects to discover the cultural history of any people is to trace the change of fashion in clothing and jewelry in addition to folklore dances and other traditions. Adult Somalis may relish remembering the journey that the Somali attire went through. Islam found Somali men wearing the dhuug and later qaydaar. For the longest time the Somali man was well-known for his acacia-like hair style, his naked torso, and his gunti, covering the private parts of his body up to the knees, his stick tooth brush (cadday), his barkin, and his three piece weapon, bullaawe (dagger), waran (spear) iyo gaashaan (shield), in addition to his gudin iyo hangool. Then came the time when the Somali man adorned himself with laba-go’ (two sheets, one wrapped around the waist and the other thrown on shoulders) before he learned the macawis and garbagale (longie and shirt) and kabo carabi or kabo faranji (Arab and European shoes). It was the colonial powers that introduced the daba-xumeeye (shorts), the surwaal (trousers) and koodh (coat). Women’s clothes also went through similar or even more vivid metamorphosis. It went through the maro with the dacle and daraya-muus, the toob-shanan ah (short blouse) and googorad dheer (long skirt) and the daba-gaab (mini-skirt), remember “ninkaan daba-gaabi, daadihinayn, ama aan dibitaati daaya lahayn…” during the colonial time to the Diric and hagoog of modern times. The head cover and the hairstyles also went through similar changes along the lines of other costumes. I remember when Somali girls had fooshad (frontal hair collected together in a ball shape) and were called Fooshadley in late sixties and early seventies, and later when Somali women styled their hair like mountains on their heads. The general belief was that many of them used to place a glass cup on the head and built the hair around it to give them the mountain-like shape that was conspicuous in every major town in the seventies. This was, however, in the past when Islam lived in ideal co-habitation with the local culture, when fashion changed according to time and age. This was the time when one could pray occasionally, or never prayed at all, fasted in the month of Ramadan or never fasted at all, made pilgrimage to Mecca or never did at all; but would forever consider oneself a true follower of Islam, knowing that to be a Muslim is a bond between man and God and that one’s faith is not answerable to anyone else. Just mentioning the name of the prophet or singing a religious hymn would bring one to emotional ecstasy; no one ever doubted the truth of their faith, simply because Islam was synonymous with being a Somali. It was not something to show off but something entrenched deep in one’s heart. One didn’t need to advertise the color of one’s faith; one was simply a Muslim and never ceased to be one. (The Current Situation Nowadays, it is sad to see that perfect co-habitation; that ideal harmony between Islam and Somali culture swept aside by a new brand of Islam that is being pushed down the throat of our people. Wahhabism. Anywhere one looks; one finds that alien, perverted version of Islam that depends on punctilious manners more than it depends on deep-rooted faith. A strange uniformity, only known in the desert and uncreative cultures of Arabia, has crept into the social manners of our people. The unique fashion and identity of our people has changed forever. We have become a people without fashion, without culture and without identity. Our women, whose beauty has allured the eyes of every traveler, have been brainwashed by the prophets of Wahhabism into adorning the black cloak of ignorance. Instead of being native, Islam has become alien and instead of being a faith well guarded in the heart, it has become an outside façade that had to be advertised through strange attire and physical looks; black overflowing cloaks for women and white, ankle-length Arabian gowns and long unkempt beards for men. It happened that I was reading a report about the opening of an exhibition on African hairstyles over the centuries in Paris, called “Parures de Tjte (literally, head costumes). The report said that at the Musie Dapper headdresses, masks, statutes and hair accessories, some 100 pieces from tribal groups hailing from approximately 20 countries, show the primordial role of the hair in ancient African societies. It continued to say that given that black people have been perfecting the art of hair since long before Africa wore the political boundaries that it does today, it was probably a natural outcome that their tresses now have an impact on hairstylists the world over. I asked myself, yeah. How much contribution do my people have in this? May be some pictures from the good old days, before modern fanatics reduced Islam into a jealous guardian of Harem’s (women) hair, cheeks, arms, shins, feet, voice and smile. It is a pity and anachronistic of sorts to see that at a time when Saudi Arabia, the home of Wahhabism, is reassessing the damage that Wahhabism and extremism had done to their country’s name and to the reputation of Islam all over the world, at a time when “scales fell from the eyes of the Saudis” according to one American official, at a time when the events of Sept. 11 and terrorist explosions in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Morocco, East Africa and other parts of the world have made many Moslems revisit their history and re-read their doctrinal beliefs; that Wahhabism has to find a save-haven in our country. Anyone who followed recent press reports from Somaliland would have read that a group of Saudi-oriented clerics, calling themselves the “Authority for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice,” an offshoot of its Saudi counterpart, has been demanding the enforcement of a draconian rules on what the Somalilanders wear, say and do in their private lives. Before we proceed further it may be helpful to have a quick look at Wahhabism and how it is so alien to our culture. Wahhabism Wahhabism is an austere and closed school of thought promulgated by Mohammed Inb Abul Wahhab Najdi in the 18th century. Discarding Islam’s all four legal schools as corrupted versions, Ibn Abdul Wahhab demanded his followers a confession of faith a second time to Wahhabism. In his attempt to eradicate other schools of thought, Mohammed Ibn Abdul Wahhab conspired with the British for the destruction of the Ottoman Caliphate, which he saw pursuing a decadent and an unethical Sunni Islam as mentioned by one of the British spies in a book titled “Confessions of a British Spy.” While traditional Somali religious scholars read all four schools of thought (madahib) with equal respect and an open mind, Wahhabis view the cannons of Islamic jurisprudence and the colossal work of scholarship left by generations after generations of the Muslim Umma as an apocrypha. Hence, the schools of Shafi’i, Hanbali, Hanafi, and HhMaliliki should go with the wind, while the masterpieces of Sufism scholars such as Al Ghazali’s Ihya Ulum ad-Din (The Revival of the Religious science), the most referred book of Islam after the Quran and the Hadith, al-Munqid min ad-Dalal (“the savior from Error”), the Mishkat al-Anwar (“The Niche of Lights”) and Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi’s Alam al-Mithali (Ideal world) are counted by Wahhabism as nothing more than infatuations of demented men. “The Wahhabis consider, or previously considered, many of the practices of the generations which succeeded the Companions as bid’ah (“objectionable innovation”),” writes the Concise Encyclopaedia of Islam, Stacy International Cyril Glasse, Second Edition, 1991, not even giving the least thought to Shafi’i’s ingenious classification of Bid’ah into Bid’ah hasanah (“good innovation”) and bid’ah siya’ah (“bad innovation”). With tolerance being the norm for all other Madhabs, Wahhabism, is the only school that compels its followers strictly to observe Islamic rituals, such as the five prayers, under pain of flogging, and for the enforcement of public morals to a degree unprecedented in the history of Islam. Sufism, however, which was the Somali way of Islam and which Wahhabism condemns as a heresy, reaches out to the heart and good sense of all mankind without distinction. Instead of shunning all other faiths and branding them as bogus religions, Sufism sees all faiths as equally valid, following directly God’s words “wheresoever ye turn, there is the face of God.” Where Wahhabism sows hatred and rancor even among Moslems, Sufism preaches sulh-e kull (universal peace) and Mahabbat e-kull (universal love). The most conspicuous foot soldiers of Wahhabism are the moral police known as Mutawi’un, who roam in the streets like riot police and force people to perform rituals or adhere to Wahhabism’s code of decency in dressing and other mannerisms. Waking up to the monster that Wahhabism had become, the Saudi Authorities had started cracking down on the religious police. Too little too late, one may say. But at least they are acting at last. Thousands of Mutawi’un have been fired, while other thousands have been sent to re-orientation centers. The curriculum of schools has been revised and Saudi students have started the 2003/2004 academic years with new curriculum that takes the new world that emerged after Sept.11 into account. Saudi children are being re-educated to see human beings as human beings and not as infidels and Wahhabis. A Saudi Journalist Turki al-Hamed wrote in the Asharq al-Awsat “Saudi culture belongs to a past age. It is not appropriate for the age of globalization. People’s minds were stuffed with bad concepts.” A more blunt criticism came from former Bosnian Interior Minister Mohammed Basic who accused the Saudis of “poisoning our youth” with their teachings (read Wahhabism). Wahhabisim’s best example of humanism is “the harsh religious police that forced a group of school girls to their deaths by forcing them to go back to an inferno that had been their school. Their crime? Forgetting the head coverings in their haste to save themselves.” (Time Magazine, 15 Sept. 2003). This is the Wahhabism that the Saudi-oriented clerics want to impose on Somaliland. This is the sect that produced 15 of the 19 suicide bombers of Sept. 11. This is the mentality that the Saudis are today taking pains to change. It is a closed mind sect that turned Islam into a fragile creed that lives in constant fear of children’s toys and games such as Barbie dolls and Pokemon. It is a school of misinformation and ignorance that rebuked an Egyptian doctor for publishing an article on epilepsy because it challenged against the prophet’s statement that epilepsy was caused by Jinn (look at the September 15, 2003 edition of the Time Magazine). It is heart warming though to mention that as I was writing this article, 300 people including 51 women, have submitted a petition to the Saudi Royals, calling on them for a radical reform to tackle the growing extremist Islamic influence. Wahhabi encroachments into Somaliland This is the brand of distorted Islam that the neo-Muslim clerics want to enforce on our people. They want to tell us that over the LAST 14 CENTURIES, our people have been practicing the wrong religion; that since the dawn of Islam, Somali people had lived in vain, worshipped in vain and died in vain. God help them, they all will be burned in hell because they did not follow the correct path - Wahhabism. These people are out to eradicate our culture, our traditions, our songs, our poetry and our folklore dances. They brand our traditional children stories of Diin iyo Dacawo (dawaco), arrawelo and dheg-dheer as bawdy literature that has no place in the puritanical society that they aspire to build. Forget about Ina Xagaa Dheere’s satirical anecdotes, which the fanatics want to discard from our people’s memory. For these fanatics, the breast of the countryside mother who suckles her baby while selling milk in the streets of Hargeisa is a sin, not motherhood as many of our ordinary souls would see it. It is this obsession with sex, this concept of viewing women only as an object of sex, created for man’s libido relief, that turned women’s body into a thing of shame. The concept is that just like one cannot display sex organs in public, women as objects of sex, not human beings with intelligence and rights, should always remain under cover. Hence, we shall never have models and beauty queens to publicize the beauty of our women down the catwalks of Paris, New York and London. It may be worth to mention here that on the several occasions that the name Somali caught international media, other than civil wars and Black Hawk down, were associated with women. It was Iman, that Somali model, who made the name Somali synonymous with such exotic, unique and Cushitic beauty. Weris Deiria is now making headlines despite the daily curses and ridicule she receives from die-hard fundamentalists. It is also since that astute and clear-headed lady, Edna Adan Ismail, has become Somaliland’s Foreign Minister, that the international community is lending an ear to Somaliland’s case. If we let them have their way, these prophets of “purity” would soon be on a mission to destroy what has remained of our culture. The melodious voices of Zahra Ahmed, Khadra Dahir, Hibo Mohammed, Amina Abdillahi, Sada Ali, Magool, Maandeeq, Farhiya Ali, Zainab Egeh and many others of our women singers we will be history. The cassettes of their songs will be burned in the streets. Just remember Taliban. They want to edit, re-write and censor the treasures of Somali oral literature. Future generations will not be able to enjoy our beautiful folk dances, particularly women’s heelo yar-yar. Even traditional religious gatherings of our people such as siyaaradii Aw Barkhadle, Ramadan hymn chanting sessions in teashops and the dhikr/xadro circles of sufi tariqas, will be brandished as devil worshiping rituals of the infidels. It has been a strange déjà vu that while I was working on this article, I came across a news item that Saudi Arabia’s moral police had arrested expatriate workers practicing Sufism in their private house in the town of Sakaka, capital of the north Al Jouf region. Sufism in may parts of the Moslem world is a healthy spiritual communion with God, a combination of enchanting hymns and ritual dances that allows the individual to let out pent up stresses of life. These fanatics are on a mission to eliminate co-education schools, shroud young girls and deprive them of their healthy childhood social interaction with boys. They want to bury them alive and teach them from an early age that the female body is an eyesore to public decency. A girl should either be in the grave or under a man’s custody. I have to mention here that when I step out into the street in the morning I see groups of girls waiting for school buses; all of them Arabs except for two Somali girls. All the Arab girls of all nationalities look bubbly, tossing their beautiful uncovered hairs and showing off their latest hairstyles. Even those with head covers threw it lightly on the shoulders or barely on the back of the head. They even sometime waved hello for me or for my son. The two Somali girls, however, were fully shrouded with black from head to toe. One could barely see their eyes and they even wore black heavy socks on their feet. Their unique Somali features wrapped into a shapeless form, their shy and modest smiles buried and a kind of heavy footed, reptile shuffling replacing their elegant, Somali-only, rolling hip-walk. The black veil and the black skin also make a very sad and unwelcome combination, while the contrast between a black veil and a fair skin at least mitigates the gloomy impact for Arab women. I wonder: when did my people become more Arab than Arabs? When I met some of the Arab girls later in life, we often recognized each other and exchanged smiles, hellos, how-are-yous and pleasant good byes. What about the Somali girls? Well, would I even recognize them? Did they have a face? Even if they recognize me through their shrouds and dare to say hello to me, how would I know who they were. I could only pass them without glancing at them lest they accuse me of blasphemy, silently remembering Abdillahi Abdi Shube’s “Shaydaan aanad arkayn, oo shaambinaaya agtaada, waa naag shaadhir hagoogan.” May God give him peace in his abode, because had he lived until today, Abdi Shube would have probably been stoned to death. The question is how far can we allow these fanatics to use OUR religion for THEIR own political goals? How long can we tolerate our identity to be ripped into pieces in the name of alien ideas? How much of our culture, our heritage and the reputation of our country and our religion are we ready to sacrifice before we act? These people love to live in the dark. They thrive on the silence of the unwilling intellectuals and the gullibility of the ignorant majority. They hide under the cloak of religion and scare people with their indiscriminate use of terms such as blasphemous, infidels, apostates, sacrilegious, atheists, westernized minds and many others. They use the available democratic atmosphere to herd us towards the abyss. One pertinent question that begs for an answer all the time is why is it that it is always those who fail in school or in life who turn to such religious extremism? One may wonder if the problem is one of lost self-esteem, an internal urge for revenge and a desire for power and domination. No wonder that women bear the brunt of their onslaught for enslavement, for what better way to regain their lost self-esteem than suppressing women and denying them the success that they themselves had failed to achieve. In this way they could exercise power not only on their women but on the women of the whole community, thus bringing those successful guys who despised them for their failure under their mercy- hitting them at their Achilles heel, while hiding under the cloak of religious sainthood. It is time to tell these sick men that the bare breast of the woman suckling her child is not about pornography, but about motherhood. The girls and boys sitting next to each other in class are not indulging in a sex orgy, you demented paranoiacs, but enjoying a healthy educational environment. The girl walking in the street without a headcover and wearing a big smile is not about flirting; it is about beauty of life. The woman holding a lively conversation with a male friend in a coffee house or a shopping mall is not about illicit affairs; it is about a much-needed human relationship and a healthy exchange of intellectual ideas. The woman wearing the traditional diric and hagoog and regally strolling in the street is not about indecency but about culture. The nightingale voices of our female singers are not about eroticism, you philistines, but about art, music and enjoyment of one of God’s marvelous gifts. The Awra (private parts) and indecency are not about what you tell us, you sex maniacs, but about deep-rooted manners handed down through the centuries. Sufism is not about heresy but about breaking the monotony and adding passion and music to religion. Visiting graves is not about idolatry, but about remembering and giving due respect to the dead whose souls live among us. The foreign humanitarian workers in our country are not infidels whose killing guarantees one to go directly to heaven but angels of mercy and enlightenment without whom we would be doomed to hell and darkness. We know right from wrong and proper from improper. We don’t need or want you to teach us YOUR way of Islam. It is time we have to speak out. If we don’t do it today, we won’t be able to do it tomorrow. Because there will be no tomorrow as our country descends into 7th century Arabia

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Dead meat? Stories of asylum seekers stealing donkeys - and swans - to eat have turned out to be false. So why have the newspapers not apologised, asks Roy Greenslade Monday December 1, 2003 The Guardian Popular newspapers tell lies, ignore rules and refuse to apologise for their sins. They duck and weave to avoid self-regulatory censures. They abuse the concept of press freedom day after day. If this sounds unduly harsh and hyperbolic, consider the facts. For the past 13 years, journalists have been required to abide by an ethical code of practice which was drawn up by editors. Every editor claims to obey it and, in most papers, the code forms part of the employment contracts of every reporter and sub-editor. Here's a reminder of the first clause: newspapers and periodicals must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted material. So how do the Sun and the Daily Star explain how they came to publish two wholly inaccurate stories which suggest that not the least bit of care was exercised before they went to press? On July 4, the Sun devoted its front page to a story headlined "Swan Bake", which alleged that gangs of Eastern European asylum seekers were killing and eating swans from ponds and lakes in London. Unidentified people were cited as witnesses to this phenomenon. Next day the Sun ran a follow-up story headlined "Now they're after our fish", another unsubstantiated rumour without a shred of proof reported as fact. On August 21, a Daily Star headline stated: "Asylum seekers eat our donkeys." It told of the disappearance of nine donkeys from Greenwich royal park after thieves had cut through a wire fence. The story went on to claim that donkey meat is a speciality in some east African countries, including Somalia, and that there were "large numbers of Somalian asylum-seekers" in the area. On that slight evidence, a community was blamed for a crime despite the local police admitting that they had no idea about the identity of the perpetrators. Yet the paper went around garnering quotes from outraged citizens, one of whom was quoted as saying: "It makes my blood boil when I hear that asylum seekers have stolen them to eat." But who told that person that asylum seekers were responsible if it wasn't a journalist? Both of these stories have resulted in complaints to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) and my understanding is that neither paper has been able to defend them. Both break the spirit and letter of the code: they were inaccurate, misleading and distorted. (Most Somalis, for example, do not eat meat of any kind). Arguably, both stories also breach clause 13 of the code which states that papers must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to a person's race, colour or religion. Such reporting, a recent PCC statement warned, "may generate an atmosphere of fear and hostility that is not borne out by the facts". Neither case suggests that the papers have conformed to the injunction that they "must" take care over what they publish. Both papers have procrastinated since they received complaints, haggling over the wording of apologies because neither is prepared to do the decent thing by admitting that it has done wrong. So, despite the PCC's stated desire to offer speedy resolution of complaints under its catchy slogan "fast, free, fair", these papers are frustrating the commission's best efforts. It is now six months since the Sun story appeared, for example, and its so-called ombudsman, Bill Newman, continues to stonewall. This is the kind of issue raised in the report on privacy and media intrusion by the Commons select committee in June. It thought then that the PCC should consider a twin-track procedure offering either, or both, mediation and adjudication. I raised a similar point earlier this year when the Sunday Telegraph published a totally false story about six councils having banned schools from giving pupils hot cross buns at Easter. The paper escaped censure by printing an apology four weeks after its damaging tale had appeared. Whatever the donkey and swan complainants achieve through the PCC in terms of apologies or corrections, the journalists and editors responsible will suffer no stigma for their shoddy behaviour. These stories are patently false and, in one case, the police have a record of a reporter admitting as much. They break the code and, regardless of the PCC's remit, it just isn't good enough to mediate, especially when the papers have delayed the publication of apologies. Indeed, I understand that Sun executives still believe there is no need to apologise. In his evidence to the select committee, the PCC's chairman, Sir Christopher Meyer, rightly advocated the need for a more visible censure of editors along with what he called "a clear and common branding" for adjudications. But if there is no adjudication, then the paper can publish its mealy-mouthed apology wherever it fancies unless the commission is pushed by the complainant to negotiate its placing. In the case of the Sun's swans fantasy, the appropriate place would be the front page, of course, but don't hold your breath. The PCC's outgoing director, Guy Black, has certainly tried to help refugee groups that have complained about the press treatment of asylum seekers. He was a prime mover in drawing up guidelines issued in October which advised papers to avoid using misleading or distorted terminology when describing asylum seekers and refugees, offering succinct definitions of both. The move was designed to stop the prejudicial and inaccurate use of the phrase 'bogus' or 'illegal' asylum seekers and was welcomed by the UN Refugee agency (UNHCR) as "a valuable step in reminding editors of their responsibility to report these stories accurately". Well, there is a way to go because the phrase has become common parlance. Within a week of the guidelines being released the News of the World referred to bogus asylum seekers. The Guardian also did the same last Saturday, which was described by the readers' editor as "a regrettable lapse". It's a reminder of the depth of a problem which requires constant vigilance.

Thanks , I have been suspicious of this home site. We all need to be careful nowdays. :mad: :mad: :mad:

what tha hell did I see somalia and kenya???? :eek: :eek: :confused:

Report: Jackson accused of molestation - - - - - - - - - - - - By Robert Jablon Nov. 19, 2003 | LOS OLIVOS, Calif. (AP) -- A raid on Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch was linked to a child molestation allegation against the pop superstar, a Jackson family attorney said Wednesday. "We know that a search warrant was executed at Neverland Ranch early yesterday morning and that the warrant stated that it was in response to a complaint of a male child, 12 years old, who claims that there was sexual molestation that took place at Neverland Ranch," attorney Brian Oxman, who said he had represented the Jackson family for 14 years, told CBS' "The Early Show." Oxman is not representing Michael Jackson, though he said he had spoken with members of Jackson's family. "It is very upsetting to them," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America" Wednesday. "They are just really very shocked by this entire incident and they go, 'Here we go again. Michael is just a sitting target for people to take potshots at him.'" Today's Daypass sponsored by PBS's "Oklahoma" PBS presents Hugh Jackman in OKLAHOMA! As many as 70 law enforcement officials served a search warrant at Jackson's ranch Tuesday and searched for evidence through the night as part of an ongoing criminal investigation, Sgt. Chris Pappas said. He said no warrant had been issued for Jackson's arrest. The district attorney and sheriff planned to provide more details at a press conference Wednesday. The Santa Barbara News-Press reported in Wednesday's editions that a county source confirmed the search stemmed from a child molestation allegation. Jackson, who reportedly was in Las Vegas when the search warrant was served, denounced media coverage in a statement released to The Associated Press by spokesman Stuart Backerman. "I've seen lawyers who don't represent me and spokespeople who do not know me speaking for me. These characters always seem to surface with dreadful allegations just as another project, an album, a video is being released," the Jackson statement said, referring to Tuesday's release of a greatest hits album, "Number Ones." Backerman refused to comment on any allegations and said neither he nor Jackson knew the details of the investigation. The 45-year-old singing superstar faced a child molestation investigation in 1993 in a case that never resulted in criminal charges. Jackson reportedly paid a multimillion dollar settlement in that case but maintained his innocence. The $12.3 million Neverland Ranch in the Santa Ynez Valley has a mansion, its own zoo and amusement park, and has often been the site of children's parties. Steve Manning, a Jackson family spokesman, briefly talked to reporters outside a Las Vegas recording studio and said Jackson was "holding up" and had his family's support. In a television documentary broadcast on ABC earlier this year, Jackson said he had slept in a bed with many children. "When you say bed you're thinking sexual," the singer said during the interview. "It's not sexual, we're going to sleep. I tuck them in. ... It's very charming, it's very sweet." Jackson caused an international uproar last year when he displayed his baby, Prince Michael II, to fans by dangling him briefly from a fourth-floor balcony in Germany. Jackson called the incident a "terrible mistake," and Berlin authorities said the actions were not punishable. The singer had international hits with the albums "Thriller" (1982), "Bad" (1987) and "Dangerous" (1991) saw his career begin to collapse after the 1993 allegations. His last studio album, "Invincible," sold about 2 million copies in the United States - great for most artists, especially veteran stars, but only so-so for the man who bills himself as the King of Pop. :mad:

Nov. 18, 2003 | LOS OLIVOS, Calif. (AP) -- Investigators conducting a criminal probe swarmed Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch on Tuesday, a sheriff's spokesman said. The purpose of the search was not disclosed. Authorities from the Santa Barbara County sheriff's and district attorney's offices served a warrant about 8:30 a.m. as part of an "ongoing criminal investigation," Sgt. Chris Pappas said in a recorded statement on a media information line. The district attorney's office had no comment, said legal secretary Debbie Popp. It was not known whether Jackson or his children were at the Santa Ynez Valley property, which has its own zoo and amusement park with bumper cars, a merry-go-round and Ferris wheel. Nearly 10 years have passed since the 45-year-old singing superstar faced a child-molestation investigation in a case that never resulted in criminal charges. The singer who had international hits with the albums "Thriller" (1982), "Bad" (1987) and "Dangerous" (1991), saw his career begin to collapse in 1993 amid allegations he molested a boy. Jackson maintained his innocence, and charges were never filed. He reportedly paid a multimillion-dollar settlement. Jackson is also connected to Hollywood private eye Anthony Pellicano, who has begun serving federal prison time for possessing illegal explosives, and is being investigated about whether he secretly taped conversations of celebrities and their lawyers. Pellicano, 59, reportedly worked for Jackson while the singer was under investigation for child molestation in the early 1990s. As the raid was under way, Court TV reported that the warrant was tied to allegations brought by a 12-year-old boy. That could not immediately be confirmed by The Associated Press. Jackson's spokesman, Stuart Backerman, did not answer his cell phone and did not immediately return messages Tuesday. In a television documentary broadcast on ABC earlier this year, Jackson said he had slept in a bed with many children. "When you say bed you're thinking sexual," the singer said. "It's not sexual, we're going to sleep. I tuck them in. ... It's very charming, it's very sweet." The search came on the same day Epic Records released ``Number Ones,'' a greatest hits collection featuring Jackson's new single, ``One More Chance.'' On Nov. 26, CBS is scheduled to air a Jackson special consisting mainly of old concert footage. Jackson has three children, and caused an international uproar last year when he displayed his baby, Prince Michael II, to fans by dangling him briefly from a fourth-floor balcony in Germany, where he had gone to accept an award. Jackson called the incident a "terrible mistake," and Berlin authorities said the actions were not punishable. Not much is known about Prince Michael II, whose mother has not been identified. The singer's 6-year-old son, Prince Michael I, and 5-year-old daughter, Paris, were born during his marriage to Debbie Rowe, his plastic surgeon's nurse, which ended in 1999. He was also married to Lisa Marie Presley, Elvis's daughter, between 1994 and 1996. Jackson routinely keeps the children's heads covered with cloth while escorting them in public -- and he usually sports a surgical mask himself when out and about. He has said he wants to protect them from the public eye.

Claim: Designer Tommy Hilfiger shocked the world when he appeared on a television talk show and said, "If I knew that blacks and Asians were going to wear my clothes, I would have never designed them." Status: False. Origins: Rumors that Tommy Hilfiger made a racist remark exploded onto the Internet in the fall of 1996 after a news article purporting to be from a Philippines tabloid began making the online rounds. These self-same rumors had been in circulation at least nine months earlier, but the appearance of this article brought them to critical mass. According to Cristina Peczon (author of the article), the revealing remark happened on CNN Style with Elsa Klensch, during an interview with both Hilfiger and Ralph Lauren on the latest fashion trends: Hilfiger then supposedly butted in then with a comment, something like it is one thing for one's label to go popular worldwide, but there are some people who just don't look well in "their" designer clothes. Hilfiger then allegedly named several Asian races, apparently saying that he preferred if "these people" wouldn't wear their line — particularly Filipinos! Though many were up in arms about this article (there were calls for a boycott of Hilfiger products), no one was ever quite sure what the designer had said, who he'd said it to, or even which ethnic group he'd slammed. One version had him saying, "If I knew that blacks and Asians were going to wear my clothes, I would have never designed them." More colorful renditions had him making his shocking revelation on national TV and Oprah Winfrey then throwing him off her show. (Oddly enough, the same story has been told about Liz Claiborne since 1991, that Oprah threw her off the show after Liz claimed she didn't design for Black women as "their hips are too big." That didn't happen either. See our Liz Biz page for more about that rumor, and the one that she gives part of the company's profits to the Church of Satan.) A 1997 newspaper article debunking this tale noted: In one cybermyth, Hilfiger supposedly told style reporter Elsa Klensch of CNN that he didn't think Asians looked good in his clothes. Then, as the story morphed, he told Winfrey the same thing about Blacks, at which point she threw him off the set. Yet representatives of both shows deny Hilfiger ever appeared as a guest. A 1999 article also carried denials from officials of the shows on which the incident is rumored to have taken place: "Tommy Hilfiger has never appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show," said Audrey Pass, a spokeswoman for Winfrey. "Hilfiger's never appeared on CNN Style with Elsa Klensch," said Kathy Park of CNN. Oprah herself did what she could to quell this slander. On Monday, 11 January 1999, she opened her show by adamantly denouncing the rumor, emphatically stating the following: So I want to just set the record straight once and for all. The rumor claims that clothing designer Tommy Hilfiger came on this show and made racist remarks, and that I then kicked him out. I just want to say that is not true because it just never happened. Tommy Hilfiger has never appeared on this show. READ MY LIPS, TOMMY HILFIGER HAS NEVER APPEARED ON THIS SHOW. And all of [the] people who claim that they saw it, they heard it — it never happened. I've never even met Tommy Hilfiger. Both Hilfiger and his company have steadfastly denied all forms of the rumor, and it has taken many. Depending on who you hear the whisper from, he slammed Asians, Filipinos or Blacks, on Oprah or Ricki Lake or BET News or Larry King Live or CNN — as a rumor, it's a marvel of non-specificity. According to a company statement posted to the Internet in March 1997: Tommy Hilfiger did not make the alleged inappropriate racial comments. [. . .] Hilfiger wants his clothing to be enjoyed by people of all backgrounds and his collections are put together with the broadest cross-section of individuals in mind. To reinforce this, he features models of all ethnic backgrounds in his fashion shows and advertisements. The company has answered the charges leveled against Hilfiger in its corporate FAQ, which very clearly states that not only didn't he say what's been ascribed to him, he's also never been on The Oprah Winfrey Show, Larry King Live, or CNN's Style with Elsa Klensch. Cyberdenials or not, the rumor has legs. Earlier I mentioned it had been around at least nine months prior to its Internet explosion in late 1996. A March 1995 newspaper article noted: Then there's the infamous disparaging "statement" the Parsons brothers and several others said they had heard that Hilfiger made about Blacks, particularly poor Blacks, wearing his clothes. As with all rumors, there are several variations, and no one can say where or when Hilfiger made the comments. One woman said a friend heard him say it on BET News. A clerk at Burdines said he heard it was on the Ricki Lake show. Hilfiger's being cast as a racist villain is especially unfortunate because his history as a designer shows him to be anything but. Adding color and movement to everyday clothes, his designs shot into popularity fueled by enthusiastic support from the Black community which adopted his fashion statements as its own. When Snoop Doggy Dogg wore a red, white, and blue Hilfiger rugby shirt on Saturday Night Live in March 1994, the word went out: Tommygear was cool. That was the same year the National Conference of Christians and Jews bestowed its National Humanitarian Award on the young designer. In 1995 Hilfiger was named Menswear Designer of the Year by the Council of Fashion Designers of America, and from there he's gone nowhere but up. As immediately satisfying as it is to believe the old Liz Claiborne tale has updated itself by attaching to a newer, fresher designer, there's another likely explanation that must also be considered. As Hilfiger's clothing became more and more popular, it increasingly became a target for the Pacific Basin knock-off specialists. Hilfiger's statements that people should foreswear Asian or Filipino bootlegs of his clothes because cheap copies don't look good on anybody could easily have been misheard or misunderstood so that they were later remembered as statements to the effect that Asians or Filipinos themselves should not wear Hilfiger designs as they would make his clothes look bad.

Catholic bishops condemn same-sex unions - - - - - - - - - - - - By Rachel Zoll Nov. 12, 2003 | WASHINGTON (AP) -- America's Roman Catholic bishops overwhelmingly approved a statement Wednesday that urges states to withhold recognition for same-sex marriages. The bishops said they did not intend to offend homosexuals, and they called discrimination against gays unjust. But the church leaders said they had an obligation to "give witness to the whole moral truth" and reinforce Catholic teaching that gay sex is a sin. "Marriage is in crisis and will be further devalued and eroded unless we're strong in pointing out that same-sex unions are not the equivalent of marriage," said Bishop J. Kevin Boland of the Diocese of Savannah, Ga., who led a committee that drafted the statement. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in September gave its general support to amending the Constitution to define marriage as a union of a man and woman. Pope John Paul II also spoke out last summer against gay marriage. Today's Daypass sponsored by JFK: A Presidency Revealed Enter to win Cuervo Clásico Contest The prelates said they felt a need to make another public statement now -- as gay couples gain greater acceptance in society and seek the same benefits as heterosexual couples. Vermont allows civil unions between gays, and laws in California and Hawaii extend some economic benefits to same-sex couples. Two Canadian provinces recently legalized gay marriage. Last summer, gay rights groups scored a major victory when the Supreme Court struck down bans on gay sex. Last week, voters in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, approved a proposal allowing same-sex couples -- and also unmarried heterosexual couples -- to officially register as domestic partners. While courts will not have to recognize those couples, supporters hope the measure will make it easier for them to share some benefits. The bishops approved the statement by a vote of 234-3, with three abstentions. The prelates finished their work and decided to end their meeting Wednesday night, one day early. The interfaith gay advocacy group Soulforce said the statement was "confusing, harmful and spiritually violent." Said a group spokeswoman, Laura Montgomery Rutt: "When will the Catholic Church learn that this kind of spiritual violence leads to great pain, suffering and even death?" Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the bishops conference, acknowledged that some may question how Catholic leaders can make statements on sexual morality following nearly two years of scandal over priests who molested children. But he said the church must speak out "in season and out of season. "Yes, the church is human, but she must run by the passion and the prophetic office given her by Christ," Gregory said. The document, called "Between Man and Woman: Questions and Answers About Marriage and Same-Sex Unions," defines marriage as a "lifelong union of a man and a woman." It states that approving a union of a same-gender couple "contradicts the nature of marriage." "It is not based on the natural complementarity of male and female. It cannot cooperate with God to create new life," the statement says. The document says authorizing same-sex marriage "would grant official public approval to homosexual activity and would treat it as if it were morally neutral." The bishops said it would be wrong to redefine marriage to provide benefits for gay couples. Homosexual couples can obtain benefits, such as designating each other as beneficiaries of their wills, without granting them special status, the bishops said. In a separate matter, the bishops directed a committee to draft a document aimed at teaching Catholics about the church's ban on artificial contraception. Surveys have found Catholics use artificial contraception at the same rate as non-Catholics. A committee of bishops also presented a document to be used in dioceses for certifying that a priest from outside the United States is suitable for ministry. The authors said conducting background checks on foreign-born priests was difficult, and the document would help ensure that sexually abusive clergy are not transferred between U.S. dioceses. About 16 percent of the nation's 46,000 priests are from other countries, the bishops said. The prelates also revised instructions for Sunday services in parishes that have no priest. The changes include language emphasizing that holding the celebration without a clergyman should not be the norm. About 3,000 of the 19,000 U.S. parishes do not have a resident priest, according to Georgetown University researchers.

The Int'l Community of Submitters The Submitters are followers of the late Rashad Khalifa, a man who claimed to be a Messenger of Allah. Much of Rashad Khalifa's misguidance can be traced to his obsession with numerology, an obsession which has misguided many different people throughout history. Khalifa alleged that the Qur'an contained a mathematical code which revolved around the number 19. He went to the extent of removing two verses from the Qur'an because according to him "the word `God' ...is not a multiple of 19, unless we remove [it]", and the "sum of all verse numbers where the word `God' occurs is ... 19x6217 ... If the false verse 9:129 is included, this phenomenon disappears." By rejecting a single verse of the Qur'an, the Submitters bring themselves under the judgement of another verse, ... Do you believe in part of the Book and disbelieve in another part? And what is the reward of those who do so save ignominy in the life of the world, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be consigned to the most grievous doom ... (2:85) It is interesting to note that Khalifa was a numerologist who did his blighted profession justice: he predicted the end of the world. However, Allah says in the Qur'an: They ask you about the (last) hour, when will be its taking place? Say: The knowledge of it is only with my Lord; none but He shall manifest it at its time; it will be momentous in the heavens and the earth; it will not come on you but of a sudden. They ask you as if you were solicitous about it. Say: Its knowledge is only with Allah, but most people do not know. (7:187) The Submitters also reject the Sunnah of Prophet Mohammed (saws)- not part of it, but the whole of it. For the Submitters, the Sunnah is not a source of Islam. The problems this presents are overwhelming, for by doing so the Submitters have effectively destroyed their ability to perform: Salaat (obligatory prayers), the second pillar of Islam Zakat (obligatory tax), the third pillar of Islam Sawm (fasting), the fourth pillar of Islam Hajj (pilgrimage), the fifth pillar of Islam With four out of the five pillars of Islam removed, the Submitters have little to back their claim to being "Muslim". The true Messenger of Islam (saws) warned Muslims of falling into this trap, Narrated AbuRafi': The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Let me not find one of you reclining on his couch when he hears something regarding me which I have commanded or forbidden [i.e. from the Sunnah -ed.] and saying: 'We do not know. What we found in Allah's Book [i.e. the Qur'an] we have followed.'" Book 40, Number 4588 of Sunan Abu-Dawud For more information on the Submitters please visit the following websites: A refutation to the 'Submitters' Islam = Qur'an + Sunnah Answering Hadith Rejectors Zionist Conspiracies Against Islam: Rashad Khalifa's Cult Rashad Khalifa's Trick Submitters say: Satan is a temporary god on earth! A refutation to the 'Submitters' by Zahid Ghadialy "Nay, but we hurl the true against the false, and it hoth break its head and lo! it vanisheth. And yours will be woe for that which ye ascribe (unto him)." - Holy Quran 21:18. The Submitters, claim from the Quran that the messenger mentioned in the Holy Quran, 3:81, was their leader Rashid Khalifa and Muhammad . They have put several articles on the web to prove their claim. They have a well defined articles and literature of their own, and is widely circulated among muslims and non-muslims. The General Muslims, have no objections, if somebody wants to show some miracles from the Quran. But if somebody distorts the meaning of the Quran, or tries to propagate false teachings through that, then we object. "There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah. But it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and well) they know it!" Holy Quran 3/78 The Submitters, claim that their Leader, Rashid Khalifa, was a messenger of Allah, and they have written articles to support it. Here we will try to look at those articles and find out how true their claim is. Since the Submitters believe only in Quran and no hadith, we will examine everything in the proof of Quran only. And we hope that a sincere reader will appreciate our article. "There are those who purchase error at the price of guidance, so their commerece doth not prosper, neither are they guided. Their likeness is as the likeness of one who kindelth fire, and when it sheddeth light around him Allah taketh away their light and leaveth them in darkness, where they cannot see, Deaf, dumb and Blind; and they returneth not." - Holy Quran 2:16-18 Rashid Khalifa, Messenger or Not. "(O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and heart - of each of these (who follow) it will be asked (on the Day of Reckoning)". Holy Quran 17/36 The Claim of submitters, that Rashid Khalifa was a messnger, stems from the Holy Quran 3:81 Behold! Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets, saying: "I give you a Book and Wisdom; then comes to you A Messenger, confirming what is with you; do you believe him and render him help." Allah said: "Do ye agree, and take this my Covenant as binding on you?" They said: "We agree." He said: "Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses." - Holy Quran 3:81 [2] They claim that in the above verse Prophet Muhammad is also included, to be a part of all prophets. But this is not possible. My reasons for objections are: 1. This complete set of verses above and below 3:81 is the rebuttal for the claim of the people of book, that Muhammad is not a prophet. 2. To show that, the above point is valid, read the verses below that till 3:84, where allah states: Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the Prophets, from their Lord: we make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)." - Holy Quran 3:84 [2] If the messenger in verse 3:81 would have been Rashid Khalifa, then 3:84 would have included the name of Muhammad . 3. The Word Prophet and Messenger has been used interchangably, in the Translation of the Quran. There actually is no distinction between a Messenger and Prophet. All Prophets when they come they bring along with them the Message of Allah, and hence they are the messengers of Allah. 4. If we read 33:40 Allah says: Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things. - Holy Quran 33:40 [2] So, this verse clearly says that there Muhammad is the Last of the Prophet or Messengers, and there is not going to be any messenger after him. So now having been baseless, they try to show that the covenant in 3:81 is applicable to Prophet Muhammad also. For this they give reference to Holy Quran 33:7. So lets see what Allah says in 33:7 : And remember We took from the Prophets their Covenant: as (We did) from thee: from Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary: We took from them a solemn Covenant: - Holy Quran 33:7 [2] But what was this covenant mentioned in 33:7. For this we have to read the verse after that. That (Allah) may question the (Custodians) of Truth concerning the Truth they (were charged with): and He has prepared for the Unbelievers a grievous Penalty. - Holy Quran 33:8 [2] This clearly proves that the Covenant in Surah 33 is regarding the message of Allah. What Allah has given to his Prophets, regarding the belief in Allah, and there being no other Gods than Allah. This is Not at all related with the Covenant of Surah 3, mentioned above. Both of them together are out of context. The Context of these starting verses in the above surah, is regarding the believers: that they will be tried, as those that were before them. This could be seen clearly from 33:9 and the verses after that, where Allah clearly says, that the believers before were tried, so will be the believers at that time. But Allah, promises That he will reward the believers and punish the Hypocrites (33:24). The Theory of the Last Prophet To support their theory, that Prophets wont come on earth now, since Muhammad was the last prophet, but messengers can they take help of another verse. Lets see that verse, 40:34 : "And to you there came Joseph in times gone by, with Clear Signs, but ye ceased not to doubt of the (mission) for which he had come: at length, when he died, ye said: `No Messenger will Allah send after him.' Thus doth Allah leave to stray such as transgress and live in doubt" - Holy Quran 40:34 [2] In the Above verse Allah clearly says, that those PEOPLE WHO HAD DOUBT OF THE MESSAGE OF ALLAH THOUGHT THAT NO MORE PROPHETS WILL COME. But Allah never said so. The Submitters have clearly mis-interpreted this verse, and say that Allah said, Joseph was the Last Prophet but he send Prophets after that. Allah answers such people in the verse next to that: "(Such) as dispute about the Signs of Allah, without any authority that hath reached them. Grievous and odious (in such conduct) in the sight of Allah and of the Believers. Thus doth Allah seal up every heart of arrogant and obstinate transgressors." Are Muslim Idolators The Submitters claim that all Muslms are Idolators, since they join the name of Prophet Muhammad along with Allah in the Sahadah. But is this claim really true. The Muslim when he takes up his Sahadah clearly says, "There is no God except Allah and Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah". Clearly this is not the Joining of Prophet as a God, but they are misinterpreting it. The Prophet Muhammad was to be given due respect by all of the people of the world. In Quran Allah says in 2:104, that the prophet has to be given more respect than ordinary men. The natrul question is why only Prophet Muhammad , why not all other prophets which had come before. They also brought the same religion, they were also muslims. Here we have to remember, that all the Messengers which came before, came to particular region. Their message was Time bound and Space Bound. Muhammad was the universal messenger (Quran 34:28). In the Adhan the Muezzin calls, "Ashado Anna Muhammadur Rasolullah", which means, "I bear witness that Muuhammed is the Prophet of Allah". Clearly there is no sign of joining him as a partner of Allah. This was the same Adhan which was given when the Prophet was Alive, and has been recorded in All the historical books. All Muslims, follow the same Adhan till day. One of their claims also state, that Muslims have accepted Prophet Muhammad sinless, from birth till death, which is not true. Let us see, that is the prophet really a nice man. Is he good enough to be followed by Muslims. Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the praise of Allah. - Quran 33:21 [2] Allah clearly tells here, about the prophet's qualities. Do we need messengers The idea, which clicked Rashid Khalifa, about being messenger, since no Prophets are going to come stems probably from Bible. When God stopped sending Prophets to Israel, there were Judges, who warned the people to cokme to the right path and not to be led astray by Satan. Allah says, in the Holy Quran, 5:3, That he has perfected our Religion, the religion of Islam. After the Prophet Muhammad, no one was to come and do modification in it. Since Islam is already been perfected, we do not need any mesengers, to come and warn us or show us some miracles, and claim that he is a messenger or a prophet. We have the Book (Quran) with us, we need to analyze that and that only and find out what is true. Can Devil change verses in Quran ? The Submitters claim that after the Quran was written, the Devil caused misceif and added two verses in the Quran, which was not there. They have removed these two verses from their Quran. But here we have to look at the message of Allah: Nay, this is a Glorious Qur-an, (Inscribed) in a Tablet Preserved! - Holy Quran 85:21-22 Those who reject the Message when it comes to them (are not hidden from Us). And indeed it is a Book of exalted power. No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it: it is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all Praise. - Holy Quran 41:41-42 [2] These verse clearly tells us, that the Quran is Preserved by Allah, and no Falsehood will ever approach it. So this idea of two verses being wrong in it, is not valid. Allah says: "... Do you believe in part of the Book and disbelieve in another part? And what is the reward of those who do so save ignominy in the life of the world, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be consigned to the most grievous doom ..." Holy Quran 2:85 [3] So, this book quran has to be believed in whole. Removing two verses also removes you from the claim of believer. The trick Rashad is to corrupt people using his corrupt translation.. let's examine it ourself. YUSUF ALI -- 2:30] Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not." RASHAD -- 2:30] Recall that your Lord said to the angels, "I am placing a representative (a temporary god) on Earth." They said, "Will You place therein one who will spread evil therein and shed blood, while we sing Your praises, glorify You, and uphold Your absolute authority?" He said, "I know what you do not know." His claim From" Quran: The Final Testament" p.640 [The word "Rashad" occurs in 40:29 & 38. The word "Khalifa" occurs in 2:30 and 38:26. The first "Khalifa", namely, Satan, while the second occurence (Sura 38), refers to a human "Khalifa". If we add the numbers of suras and verses of "Rashad" (40:29,38) and Khalifa (38:26) we get 40+29+38+38+26=171=19x9] Interestingly, the translation by Rashad for Surah Al-Baqarah ayat 30 said that Allah wants to put a representative which is Satan and in parenthesis TEMPORARY GOD! Masha Allah!!! May Allah curse him!!! How could he called Satan a temporary God. God is ONE and ALWAYS ONE. SATAN IS ALWAYS HIS CREATION!!!! Secondly, is it Satan or us? Does satan shed blood? No, he wispers to the breast of the people, but not Satan himself killed people. Are we destined to be on earth? Are we the Khalifa on earth or Satan? If you look carefully, you will see that in order to find a multiple of 19, he changed the meaning of Quran, and therefore those who read his translation will doom to disbelief. I have a question, don't you think that this is the work of Satan. Satan really likes to seek people to disbelief. Satan really likes to seek people to worship him. Satan really likes us to think he is God. Don't you think it is what Rashad did in that verse? This is a warning to those who believe in Rashad. If you believe in Allah, then follow which one is the TRUTH. If Allah is willing, I will continue. May Allah spread peace. May Allah gives Light to the Truth and May Allah distinguish the Truth and the False. Since Rashad's philosophy is to destroy the belief in Sunnah and Hadith, so he sought to misinterpret the meaning of Hadith to those non-Arabic speaker or at least those who knows nothing in Arabic. let's examine. RASHAD 7:185] "...Does it ever occur to them that the end of their life may be near? Which HADITH, beside this, do they believe in?" YUSUF ALI 7:185]"...(Do they not see) that it may well be that their terms is nigh drawing to an end? In what MESSAGE after this will they then believe?" Arabic 7:185] Fabiayyee HADITHim ba'dahoo yu'minoon. You realize that the word Hadith is in fact in the verse but you must remember that Hadith means speech, or saying. let's examine a little bit more. RASHAD 68:44] "Therefore, let Me deal with those who reject this Hadith; we will lead them on whence they never perceive. YUSUF ALI 68:44] Then leave Me alone with such as reject this MESSAGE; by degrees shall We punish them from directions they perceive not. ARABIC 68:44]fazarnee waman yukathibubihaa thalHADITHi sanastadrijuhum..." and again, the WORD HADITH has been used in it. If you read it carefully, you will the discover the the MESSAGE Allah is talking about is the Quran, the Message of Allah. There are a lot more words of Hadith with he transliterate them to confuse others and with my amazement he didn't translate some of them because he knew if he did, they would be questioned... let's look at it. YUSUFALI 56:81] Is it such a MESSAGE that ye would hold in light esteem? RASHAD 56:81] Are you disregarding this NARRATION? ARABIC 56:81]Afabihaathal HADITHi antum mudhinoon. You could see here that Rashad didn't transliterate them to be Hadith, but NARRATION. Why is that, I wonder? do you see some inconsistency. Alhamdulillah, Allah has shown the one of the tricks of him. That is not the only verse in his translation that he hid the word Hadith to be narration where he could. there are numerous places. SO BEWARE. 'Khalifa' Satan, a temporary god on earth? In Rashad Khalifa's new revised translation of the Quran (1992), by a strange twist of irony the word 'Khalifa' has been interpreted as 'Satan, the representative, a temporary god on earth. In verse 2.30 of his latest translation under the heading: "Satan: A Temporary 'god'" it reads: 'Recall that your Lord said to the angels, 'I am placing a representative (a temporary) god on Earth' In the appendix which sets out to prove that by the sum of all sura and verse numbers where all 'Rashada' (root word of Rashad) and all 'Khalifa' words occur, without discrimination, add up to 1463 which a multiple of 19. Since the first 'Khalifa' word, which occurs in Sura 2.30, is stated by him to be non-human, it is not included in the calculations. Generally the word 'Khalifa' in Sura 2.30 is taken to mean that Man is the 'representative' which is being referred to in this verse. However, both are wrong. Let us explain the significance and importance of these particular deceptions: It is vicious to spread the false concept that God's sovereignty can be delegated. This concept took its origin among the Christians and gave birth to theocracy. The Christian kings modified the concept to give it the form of "Divine rights of the kings." The same idea came into vogue among the Muslims after caliphate changed into kingship and Muslim kings began to call themselves 'shadow of God on the earth'. From then onwards, Muslim kings became sovereign in the worldly affairs and Muslim priests in the religious affairs; and the 'Islam' became split up into 'church and state'. The concept of delegation of sovereignty of God to man is absolutely false from the Quranic point of view. Delegation of power from one person to another means that the latter gains absolute control of power for a certain period and that the exercise of this power by the former becomes suspended in the meantime. Secondly, the occasion for the delegation of power by a certain authority arises when that authority itself is not present at the place where the power is to be exercised. But God is Omnipresent. The question of His being not in control, at any time or anywhere, does not arise. God does not delegate his sovereignty to anyone, not even to His messengers, who themselves are subservient to His laws. Now let us see the argument produced in support of this false concept of delegation of Allah's sovereignty. They consider man as 'khalifatullah' and erroneously translate it as 'vicegerent of God' which means that he exercises delegated powers of God. As a matter of fact, there is not a single instance in the holy Quran where man is described as 'khalifatullah' successor of God. He is rather described a 'khalifat al-ard' When God addressed the angels and said: "l will create a Khalifa' on the earth" (2:30) It pointed towards the creation of a successor to the preceding prehuman generations that lived on the earth before mankind. Moreover, in order to clarify the point that man is not a representative, successor of God, we shall have to clarify the meaning of the word 'Khalifa'. There are three basic concepts in the meaning of the words with the root ' K', ' L', ' F'. (a) To succeed, (b) To follow © To undergo change. The holy Quran is self-explanatory. It says: "And it is He Who made the night and day to follow each other. " (25.62) Again it is said: "Day and night coming one after the other. " (2:164) 'B' can become the Khalifa of 'A' only in his absence. 'A' may be dead or alive but 'B' cannot take his place as Khalifa in his presence. The following verses of the Quran support it: Before Moses went up on the mount for communion with His Lord, he said to his brother Haroon: "You shall succeed me amongst my people (in my absence) " (7:142) At yet another place it is said: "Then We made you successors in the land after them, to see how you would behave. " (10:14) Hud said to his people: "(lf you turn away from the divine guidance), my Lord will make another people to succeed you. " (11:57) About the people of Aad it is said: "ln that He made you successors after the people of Noah. " (7.69) The holy Quran has, thus amply clarified that a Khalifa is a successor in the absence or on the death of his predecessor. Hence the question of somebody being a 'representative' does not arise. The concept of 'representative' is the invention of self-interested individuals who wanted to exploit people in the garb of 'God's vicegerency.' God is the lawmaker. The word 'khalifat fil-ard' simply means to hold reins of power with the purpose of putting into application the divine laws in human affairs. God's laws are immutable and cannot be changed. "No body can change the laws of Allah. " (6:34) Not even messenger of God: "(O Messenger of God!) You are not given the authority to change the laws of God. " (3.128) God is the only Sovereign. There is no sovereign except God. He is the only authority to whose laws subservience of man is due. The believers are an instrument to enforce the divine laws and its jurisdiction in law making and are confined within specific limits; it does not hold absolute rights of law making. The law making in Quranic society is a blend of Permanence and Change. The fundamental principles given by the Quran are Permanent and Immutable. Rashad's misinterpretation in Sura 2.30 to eliminate one 'Khalifa' to balance his figures is just another abuse of the mathematical 'miracle' of the number nineteen. He has called this 'Khalifa' Satan. Perhaps this has some significance. God Has His own sense of justice. Main text of this article from 'Conspiracies Against the Quran' by Sayed Abdul Wadud. Lahore, Pakistan.

Originally posted by BuZh FamiLy Ent: No, I won't ruin it for the peeps who have yet to watch the last installment of The Matrix, Revolutions. However, I did wanna hear people's takes on how the story ended. Were you surprised? Shocked? Neutral? All I can say is that I didn't expect that ending. Incredible acting, amazing special effects and a tight plot made this Matrix better than the second one, the Matrix Reloaded. One word Boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by LIQAYE: Nefertiti welcome back and i really like your signature. I am a hemaphrodite. :mad: :mad: who the hell is laughing. Me to

Originally posted by think_tank: fat and ****** ,