Originally posted by makalajabti: Dude I know all that but it doesn't give you the right to equal christianity with violence. Do you? I wonder about that because you ask questions that indicate otherwise and gullible SOLers like me always rush to inform a fellow nomad.

^ Quite easy (and condescending) to utter while sitting on a comfortable chair, in front of a nice (broadband-connected) laptop, in a house in the great Pacific Northwest. Be reasonable saaxib, the people you're wishing death upon for not having a nice home like yours, no matter how faithful they were, would still choose life over death. Naftu way macaantahay atheer. And you couldn't possibly understand what it feels like to die a horrible death from drowning or starvation. You could talk the talk, however.

^ Atheer the impression she's giving is one that Muslims alone have a monopoly on violence. I for one don't condone the violence of Muslims but let us compare apples and apples. If followers of one religion are constantly associated with violence, well it behooves us to understand why and to do so we must look at the numbers and recent history in context. Violence perpetrated by followers of Christianity and Judaism far exceeds that of any Muslim individual or state. And that includes Bin Laden himself. So the accusations on Muslims are unfair, inaccurate and overly exaggerated. But why are they exaggerated? There are many reasons including ignorance, biased media coverage, etc. Another reason may be that it's best to trump up accusations of violence in order to justify invading countries (for oil or other reasons). If you look at the 2003 invasion of Iraq (3 years ago this week), you'll notice that the fear and propaganda against Saddam and how he was capable of destroying Israel and Europe using his "weapons of mass destruction" was highly exaggerated. In fact, it was all based on lies. Now you have to agree that invading seemingly peaceful people (which Muslims are) flies directly into the face of those who want to invade. Think motives and follow the money trail atheer. Things will make a lot of sense then.

Originally posted by Rahima: Don’t worry though, feeling is mutual ina adeer- the favourite part that is, i still happen to be a gabar . :eek:

^ She's no Ayaan Xirsi but may be a Pat Robertson who speaks Arabic. Either way, she had some (very few) valid points amid an ocean of lies, stereotypes and regurgitated anti-Islamic rhetoric. Specifically, her denunciation of (some) Muslims who have resorted to violence versus the Jews and the Buddhists that don't. Well I don't know about Buddhism but Jewish (state or individual) violence has a very public and clearly violent recent past. So much more violence, in fact, than any Muslim state, group or individual has committed. Of course, she never did mention America (Christianity) and violence since they're really synonymous.

^ Give it up dude. It's over and done with. Move on.

^ There's a spot free over there in the bacaad. Wanna go? I bet I can kick your behind. Yes, this is childish behavior on the part of these SOLers but I can't say I never engaged in such. They'll tire of it soon enough and be that much closer to each other. They're developing strong bonds, you see.

Originally posted by Abu-Jamal: such as Riyaale, a former intelligent officer of late dictator Siyaad Barre. I'm sure you meant "intelligence" officer saaxib. Intelligent implies something different altogether. And I know of no one, whether pro or anti-Somaliland who is a fan of Riyaale. Just how bad can the guy be?

Zafir and Danyer are taking you to school atheer. Enjoy the ride.

Originally posted by hanuman: no im not a blondy i am a pure somali Same shidh different hair color.

Originally posted by Jaylaani: b/c I'm qaldaan from the north.. Who's giving all the other qaldaans a bad name.

Well turn off your CAPS LOCK key and then you will have a small chance of being taken seriously. Right now you have none.

Seriously.

Yes.

Originally posted by Kashanre: Yeah, and those "African Jews" are 5th class citizens in the streets of Israel. Saaxib, I'm sure some, if not all, of those whose bodies rest at the bottom of the Red Sea or the Middeterenian would rather be 9th class citizens (even in Israel) than dead.

^ Well with your new found fondness of polygamy, "pious" Rahima should not be such an illusive dream.

Originally posted by ThePoint: How can we expect such high standards from Arabs? Because (supposedly) they are our brothers and sisters in Islam who also (accidentally) happen to be filthy rich.

^ Yeah really, it's easy to criticize the Arabs when we chop our own legs at the knees, so to speak. Still, I think these "appeals" to Denmark and the west for understanding are hollow and meaningless. Who cares what the west thinks of Muslims when they themselves treat each other like shit?

^ Yeah but African Muslims (Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria, etc..) are just marginal Muslims. See when Muslims from Chad or Mauritania get caught on a sharp razor fence getting into Spain, they're Africans. When they drown off the coast of Yemen, Italy or Cyprus, they're African. So, really, African Muslims are on their own and this whole Islamic brotherhood thing is a racket. In comparison African Jews where airlifted out of Ethiopia to Israel. Compare and contrast, air-lift out of starvation and refusing a ship full of refugees to dock on the coast.

^ A morally bankrupt and racist ideology deserves nothing short of extinction.

^ You wish naden. Not gonna happen. Those bloody Africans deserve to drown.

Published on Monday, April 1, 2002 Israel's State Terrorism by Lev Grinberg What is the difference between State terrorism and individual terrorist acts? If we understand this difference we'll understand also the evilness of the US policies in the Middle East and the forthcoming disasters. When Yassir Arafat was put under siege in his offices and kept hostage by the Israeli occupation forces, he was constantly pressed into condemning terror and combatting terrorism. Israel's Stateterrorism is defined by US officials as "self-defense", while individual suicide bombers are called terrorists. The only 'small' difference is that Israeli aggression is the direct responsibility of Ariel Sharon, Benjamin Ben Eliezer, Shimon Peres and Shaul Mofaz, while the individual terrorist acts are done by individuals in despair, usually against Arafat's will. One hour after Arafat declared his support of a cease fire and wished the Jews a Happy Passover feast, a suicide bomber exploded himself in an hotel in Netanya, killing 22 innocent Jews celebrating Passover. Arafat was blamed as responsible for this act, and the present IDF offensive has been justified through this accusation. At the same time, Sharon's responsibility for Israeli war crimes is being completely ignored. Who should be arrested for the targeted killing of almost 100 Palestinians? Who will be sent to jail for the killing of more than 120 Palestinian paramedics? Who will be sentenced for the killing of more than 1,200 Palestinians and for the collective punishment of more than 3,000,000 civilians during the last 18 months? And who will face the International Tribunal for the illegal settlement of occupied Palestinian Lands, and the disobedience of UN decisions for more than 35 years? Suicide bombs killing innocent citizens must be unequivocally condemned; they are immoral acts, and their perpetrators should be sent to jail. But they cannot be compared to State terrorism carried out by the Israeli Government. The former are individual acts of despair of a people that sees no future, vastly ignored by an unfair and distorted international public opinion. The latter are cold and "rational" decisions of a State and a military apparatus of occupation, well equipped, financed and backed by the only superpower in the world. Yet in the public debate, State terrorism and individual suicide bombs are not even considered as comparable cases of terrorism. The State terror and war crimes perpetrated by the Israeli Government are legitimized as "self-defense", while Arafat, even under siege, is demanded to arrest "terrorists." I want to ask: Who will arrest Sharon, the person directly responsible for the orders to kill Palestinians? When is he going to be defined a terrorist too? How long will the world ignore the Palestinian cry that all they want is freedom and independence? When will it stop neglecting the fact that the goal of the Israeli Government is not security, but the continued occupation and subjugation of the Palestinian people? As Israelis in the opposition, we are fighting against our government, but the international support that Sharon receives is constantly jeopardizing our struggle. The whole international public opinion must be reverted, and the UN must deploy intervention forces in order to stop the bloodshed and the imminent deterioration. Israelis and Palestinians desperately need the awakening of the international community's public opinion and a reversal in the global attitude. These are needed both in order to save our lives (literally), and preserve our hope in a better future. Dr. Lev Grinberg is a political sociologist, and Director of the Humphrey Institute for Social Research at Ben Gurion University Source

^ How unfortunate. In that case, Yuusuf should be quite happy with the ciyaalasuuq title.

^ I think the good Suldaan should have put ciyaalasuuq in quotes. Though I would also think being called a warlord and war criminal carries more weight than being a ciyaalasuuq.

Originally posted by Rahima: ^For kicks Castro, that's why i've stopped entertaining Xiin. Took me a while, but i caught on eventually. Is that so? It took me even longer to realize that then. LOL.