^ Not quite. Mine had more thought put into it. :cool:

Saaxib Xiinow, the sad thing is, this topic is really not about guilt or innocence. It's a commentary on a social ill namely that of clannism. I read the police report and wondered if many people have actually read this. If so, what could posssibly make them think this is a libel case? And though I take you not as a foaming-at-the-mouth clannist, I'm afraid even if Sangub is found guilty that the cries of conspiracy, defamation and "questionable character" of the accuser will not go away from the mouths of many. The real question we need to ask is when does bad behavior not worth protection from the clan? As things stand now, there's no such limit. Any behavior is clan-protected.

^ You will forgive me if I take some time to fully read this. I've decided to reserve my quick replies to trolling.

Originally posted by Ducaqabe: Sangub remains innocent till proven guilty in a court of law. Funny you should say that good Ducaqabe as this reminds me of a Celebrity Trial Jury Selection skit where Dave Chappelle was a potential juror being questioned by the prosecution and the defence. Pay special attention to the part about R. Kelly (the rapper accused of urinating on a 15 year old on tape). Chappelle, making fun of the (in)justice system for blacks, shows how evidence, confessions and some such nonsense mean little when there are other forces at work. Chappelle Show (R. Kelly skit)

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: So an alleged recorded telephone conversation, and equally alleged admission to a police officer is all we need to condemn Sangub? An "alleged admission" to a cop is called a confession, good Xiin. And what is so "alleged" about it, may I ask? Do you not think this is an authentic document? You can get the same thing at the county district court. May be officer Bernard Martinson who wrote it was clannist and is out to get Sangub?

Originally posted by Socod_badne: How does one achieve such daunting task? By confronting and shaming those who practice it. It's quite simple really. You know them, I know them, we all know them. They're in every family. One good way of doing this is confronting the morons who will show up in support of Sangub on the 23rd. Who cares if we bring our laundry to the outside. It's already out there and it stinks. Confront these fools and show them they're in fact in the minority. Shame them and scorn them. Come out in support of the accuser. You will be accused of being clannist, sure, since that's the only thought their small minds are capable of formulating. Bring this police report and show it to them. If they can't read, read it to them. Let them explain exactly why they're supporting the accused if it's not for tribal affiliation or sympathy. Surely they're not out there weathering the Minneapolis cold because they value poetry and the arts.

^ Indeed, the clan cancer has metastasized. This terminally ill culture of ours must be euthanized.

^ Blessed, the final word is that of the clan. The girl and her accusations be damned. They mean nothing. She's an opportunist with a questionable character who is carrying a clan-based vendatta against our poet-icon. Che: from the looks of it, we really are going extinct for we are unable to evolve as the rest of humanity has.

^ Let's see if this topic is deleted. That will be an unambiguous statement by the administration of the site.

^ I believe that's what the letter is calling for. But even beyond this short term goal of supporting the victim, it is a call to introspection and self evaluation. Exactly what defines our moral system of values?. Clearly, with this support of Sangub, it is not Islam.

^ That image is a copy of the official police report and is publicly available to anyone. It's unconscionable what our people are engaging in. This is not a case of libel. And my anger and frustration is hardly at the crime committed for the law will take care of that, but the amazing sickness that's engulfing us. That's what's killing me.

Just how many thousands of dollars were raised for the legal defence fund of the accused? Could the same effort raise the funds for the millions starving in Somali today? Let me see if I understand this correctly, so a self-confessed child molester has the unequivocal support of the community and the people starving back home get a prayer and a shaking of the head?

^ I'm sorry atheer. I'm taking this elsewhere. My bad.

Originally posted by Abaadir: Castro, What is it that bothering you about Sangub’s case? The chances Sangub convicted are remote. Latest news has it, that the Judge is weighting to throw the case out. The victim does not have enough evidence to support her case. Her character is also in question. Take it easy bro. We will get the end of the road. Caku wax fudud oo aan fardo ahayn Her character is in question? Subxaanalah. Atheerkaa waa child molester. The sooner you get that through your clan-infested mind, the better we'll all be. Mise inuu adiga kugu qabto ayay ahayd so you would understand? Had that happened to you, would that make you a person of questionable character then? The only way he'd get away, despite his uncoerced confession, is due to lack of physical evidence. Of course, self confessed child molesters from my clan are excluded from shame. :rolleyes:

Saaxib NGONGE, in an effort to fully comprehend your argument, the one you accused us of rejecting, I came across the following statements of yours. On first glance, they seem contradictory but upon further study, I believe they show your anger and frustration at how the reaction to the cartoons has been bodged. You make us come across as anti free speech when you know full well, at least in my case, we're not. Shed some light on these statements, will you? First statement describing how the Jews would react to such defamation: Originally posted by NGONGE: But, where WE differ from them is that we protest for today and never plan for tomorrow. The Jews would have worked towards changing the laws that allow such a paper to insult them in such a way. Second statement describing what you believe Muslims would be doing if they attempt to use the same approach as the Jews: Originally posted by NGONGE: When I joined the topic yesterday, I was of the opinion that we should resort to the law courts and seek orders that limit the freedom of speech of such troublemakers. But, the longer I thought about it, the more ludicrous that idea seemed to me. Saaxib why is it ludicrous for us, and not for them, what seems to be the tried, tested and true method of dealing with these things? No matter, we're really not that far apart in our arguments and this is no personal attack on you. The only point of contention between you and I is your assertion that everyone has the right to say anything no matter who gets offended. That's not how the world works and it's not what free speech is all about. Understanding that last fact is not an endorsement of the insanity that's occuring in the Middle East or that maddness of a protest in London. The two are not one and the same thing.

^ You should see the fitna of those who came out in support of Sangub at his hearing. It's that blind support for a fictional entity that fully explains the state of affairs in Somalia (all of it).

^ This should be familiar territory for you: are you a bloody Jew? Are you paid by a Zionist organization to divide Muslims (starting with SOL)? Won't you answer that?

^ Atheer you're a decent man born into a people who have the best of both worlds: all that is wrong with muslims and all that is wrong with tribalism. Keep your sanity and stay away.

Originally posted by Laba_Xiniinyood: The prophet (P.B.U.H) mentioned in a Hadith that if anyone insults any prophet, kill Him; If he insults a Sahaba (companion) beat him. So are we to follow the Holy Prophet or not? For if we are, the Cartoonist shall be slayed just as Van Goth! Oh that's just great. I need a break from this place.

Originally posted by Zero: P.S. That's my last say on this topic. Any further attempts to explain a crystal clear point will not bear any fruits. You went from "I'll think a little bit more about what you wrote" to "accept something 'tentatively'" to the "crystal clear" statement above in a matter of two hours. You are indeed what the world needs. Go on to achieve great things and may the force be with you.

^ I'm afraid the clarity of vision and the ease with which you see the simplicity of this issue has eluded the legal and legislative branches of many a western nations. That you find Ngonge's argument enlightening is good, but to assume (incorrectly, of course) that it is the last word on this issue is mighty naive atheer. So, and I'll say this again in case you have comprehension issues, there is a line that freedom of speech cannot transgress against. That line is where other freedoms (freedom from harrasment and insults) begin to be infringed upon. You said you were going to think more about this, no? Go ahead.

^ No, the gist of the debate is where is the line between free speech and freedom from hatred. The relativity of offensiveness is the obvious part. And do humor me by looking at what I said and not what I am. I am proud of my laziness, among my other fine attributes.

Originally posted by Zero: Castro: How does it amount to muddying the waters? It involves introspection and the dreaded word of "reform" in Islam. Another issue discussed ad nauseam around here. One that goes beyond matters of free speech, hate speech and other issues the societies we live in deal with.

Originally posted by NGONGE: You chose to deal with the Danish issue being a form of hate speech but ignored my example of the hadeeth! The omission was no accident saaxib. Though the issues are not unrelated, I'm afraid considering it in this context amounts to muddying the waters. And what makes you think the west is not hard at work writing legislation that would ban such hadeeths? When, not if, they do ban them, and we hadn't created laws to protect our sensibilities from such rubbish as the cartoons, that will be the ultimate loss and probably time to leave the west.

Originally posted by NGONGE: If it merely causes offence, we should take it on the chin like the grown ups that we are and move on. Well articulated argument saaxib. I'm afraid, though, that I'm no more convinced than I was some days ago. You see, the balance between rights has been disturbed saaxib, and I know you'd like to carry this discussion to higher level than the particular issue of cartoons but I'm afraid you will fail. You will fail because in this environment where muslims are, literally, under seige saaxib, it matters not what medium the offences came in. That they are offensive is not even in dispute here. The real question is, have the existing laws in certain countries been shown to be outdated and inadequate to deal with the current state of the world. One where plurality and multiculturlism are the norm. This was hate speech and the laws need to catch up to that. Not everything can enjoy the protection of freedom of speech. That's an invitation to nihilism and its quite a dire state to be in. I'll leave it at that.