Originally posted by Alle-ubaahne: Now, what is so amazing is that you happen to be the single most illiterate person in Islamic studies in SOL, and yet you know some arabic words that depict you more jaahil! Cajiib, saaxiib! All I will need to find is one person who is more illiterate than me and your claim is proven false. Shouldn't be difficult with you around. Calling yourself 'shiiq' does not make you one. What it does show is how dangerous little knowledge can become in the hands of your likes. You may fool others by talking the talk but I see right through you, dude. In my view, you represent all that is wrong with Muslims. Carry on with your mischief.

Fundamentalism is hampering global efforts to tackle climate change, according to Britain's top scientist. In his final speech as president of the Royal Society, Lord May of Oxford is to warn that core scientific values are "under serious threat from resurgent fundamentalism, West and East". Scientists must speak out against the climate change "denial lobby", he says. Lord May completes his five-year term as president of the UK's academy of science on Wednesday. "Ahead of us lie dangerous times," he will say in his fifth and final anniversary address. "There are serious problems that derive from the realities of the external world: climate change, loss of biological diversity, new and re-emerging diseases, and more. "Many of these threats are not yet immediate, yet their non-linear character is such that we need to be acting today. "And we have no evolutionary experience of acting on behalf of a distant future; we even lack basic understanding of important aspects of our own institutions and societies. "Sadly, for many, the response is to retreat from complexity and difficulty by embracing the darkness of fundamentalist unreason." 'Denial lobby' Lord May will say that fundamentalism applies not only to organised religions but to lobby groups on both sides of the climate change debate. The climate change "denial lobby" and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) opposed to nuclear power are not exempt from a denial or misrepresentation of scientific facts, he told reporters in London. Speaking in a week that saw the opening of climate talks in Montreal, and the re-opening of the nuclear power debate in the UK, he said there had to be open questioning and inquiry of such issues. The huge problems with nuclear power had to be weighed against the problem of putting more carbon into the atmosphere and the future potential of land and sea turbines, he said; "rather than ruled out of discussion on what you might call some fundamentalist belief system". 'No easy recipe' Another danger to the enlightenment of science came from the growing network of fundamentalist and lobby groups in the US that campaigned for creationism to be taught in science classes, he added. "By their own writings, this group has a much wider agenda which is to replace scientific materialism by something more based on faith," he said. He called on scientists to take a more active role in speaking out against so-called "intelligent design" and other threats to modern scientific values. "The only thing I can see scientists doing is being more energetic as citizens - getting out there and trying to convince people that that's not a very wise way to behave," he explained. "That's no easy recipe." Source

^ I agree with you Xiin. I believe the term that best fits this most certain and furcated outcome is bitter-sweet.

^ I did say I wanted to avoid trouble. Why must you drag me into this?

Does the mention of your clan's name in the first paragraph make you read the rest or stop reading at that point? Do we understand the psychology of clannism? The psychology that makes each and every one of us feel a twinge of shame when we explain to non-Somalis what the anarchy, chaos and death are all about? But we talk about it among ourselves as if it is real, concrete, tangible and can be proven by a blood test. For those of us who cannot see beyond the mention of the name of "their" clan, it is important to remember no one is recording the recent history of Somalia as Togane is. Have you read his latest poem? Have you read any of his poems? No? Why then speak of the man as if you know him or his work? It's a shame. A real shame. But a shame that is part of many shames to which we bear witness. P.S. The name of his latest poem is "THE DOGS BARK BUT THE CARAVAN STILL ROLLS ON". Read, ponder, learn then teach!

^ I think Ducaqabe is referring to the permanent military bases the US will 'leave' behind after the withdrawal to safeguard the free flow of oil. That may be a victory of sorts assuming the resistence (not insurgency) that is now confining 160,000 troops to the so called Green Zone will succumb to a few thousand left behind.

I was gonna say something that would get me in trouble. As you were.

^ Atheer fardo laysku hayo laysuguma faane, maxaad haysaa adigaagani?

Originally posted by Ducaqabe: The point remains that no Iraq pull out without any gains. Tell me, atheer, with a 15 year war that cost 58,000 American lives, millions of Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian lives, and upwards of half a trillion dollars, what were the gains (besides lining the pockets of war profiteers) after the shamed pullout. The 'Vietcong' prevailed in that war, if you remember your history.

Originally posted by Alle-ubaahne: So sad that the sister didn't notice the presence of the great Shiiq Alle-ubaahne This coming from the same dude who called Arabic, the language of the holy Quran, 'af qalaad'. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Ducaqabe: Public opinion matters only when a powerful group backs it. When it comes to matters of war, public opinion matters saaxib. Looking back at history, and this I learned from Chomsky, the degree of dissent of the US population is inversely proportional to the damage its government does. In other words, the more (average, non elite) people disagree with the war, the less likely it is it will continue. So, for the neocon's agenda to stay on track, 'Bin Laden' will have to attack the US with an even more devestating blow than 9/11. That is the only way this war will continue at $1 billion a week. The amazing thing is, and you're right about this, powerful interests (corporations, the wealthy) do back overwhelming public opinions. Ultimately, it's not in their best interest to have a population in the hundreds of millions in their own land against the war. This has been shown to be the case in the Vietnam war (sited in Chomsky's Understanding Power) The bottom line is, an expensive war with no tangible positive results is doomed. If the US economy shows even a hint of hiccup, the war is doomed. In all of the scenarios (except for the one I mentiond above) this war is doomed to failure. The sad thing is, however, that the fate of this war depends not on whether it was just or not. Simply on the awareness and disapproval of the US populace. That and lack of funds.

^ And that's one of the reasons saaxib why the eventual withdrawal of the US (with its tail between its legs nonetheless) will not be much of a celebration for me for it will begin decades of instability. My heart goes out to the Iraqis walaahi. The curse of the black gold has claimed yet another nation.

^ I am over it saaxib. But US public opinion matters. It matters more then the millions you speak of. If the anti-war percentage hits 70, congress will have to stop funding this war and heads will roll. Mark my words.

Celebration is hardly the mood I'd be in. I'd be vindicated, sure, but with all the loss of life, the loss of property, and the loss of innocence, I'd be sad but vindicated. My jubilation will come when the neocons are either in jail or dead. They lyrics of Bob Dylan's song hit the nail on the head for me. Specially the last two lines. The song was written in 1963 and it's about the Vietnam war. Chilling similarity to today's (and future) madness.

^ Your record on impartiality is blemished sir. Find another outlet for your clan propaganda. General, this is a monumental task. The logistics are very difficult. The obstacles (people mostly) are numerous. But the rewards will be great.

^ It's harvest time in America. I'm not an anarchist any longer. I don't really know what I am. I call it as I see it. US hegemony is fascinating. It's demise will be even more fascinating.

^ The most time consuming tasks will be researching, finding and authenticating these refernces. Once found, deciding on putting them out there is a matter of a few exchanged emails or an IM conference. So finder(s), authenticator(s), and auditor(s).

^ Ok. I'm serious this time. A committee is a great idea. Could I be an independent auditor of this committee? I'm not much for clan allegiancy. I will be impartial, I promise. I hate them all equally.

Here's a monkey wrench for you Duke: my clan is not represented or is under-represented in that committee of yours. How could they possibly know about my clan when I'm the son of hebel and heblaayo, the duke and dutchess of clannia? I should be on that committe. Better yet, I should chair that committee.

Even if I could vote, saaxib, I wouldn't bother. Voting in a plutocracy is similar to insisting the earth is flat, both an exercise in futility. But you're right about the collapse of the hegemony so quickly. Between Delay's indictment, the congressman of California convicted of bribery, an ex-aid to Colin Powell charging Cheney with authorizing torture, Iraq regressing to worse than the worst days of Saddam, Afghanistan practically lost to the Taleban, Venezuala flushing the free trade of the Americas down the toilet then turning around to buy arms from Spain and Russia, China building nuclear submarines that are undetectable by US destroyers, 60% of the US population wanting an immediate exit from Iraq, the trade gap at an all time high, US debt in the trillions, and on and on and on. It's not surprising to me that it's happening. That it is spiraling so quickly down the drain is the surprise. Buchanan may have strong morals but they hardly coincide with yours and mine. He's looking at this from the point of view of an American nationalist and 'patriot'. Strategic US interests he does not question. It's not the power of the US he has problems with, it's the misuse of power by the neocons, in his view, that is the problem. I find this all too interesting as I've heard this predicted from Noam Chomsky 3 years ago when he came to Houston. At the time, I could not fathom that what he was saying would happen in my lifetime, let alone in this decade. Ah well... P.S. Defeat is the only option for the US in Iraq.

^ And I bet it was real good.

^ You're both full of shidh. Yeah you, and the dude above you.

Buchanan must be going through an Arianna Huffington-like transformation. The man is certainly leaning to the left more and more. A failed and flawed policy, as the invasion of Iraq, cannot succeed no matter how long the US stays or how many troops they keep there. Nice article Xiin.

^ Because you're a law and order fan, I'll give you another chance.

And here I was starting to like you till you spewed that rubbish about not wanting to use a site because it's made by Jews. You can Google rubbish if you like.