While having a thick skin is appropriate given the so called war on terrorism and the issues re Islam and the West - there should be a limit on the sort of commentary that one tolerates. When you have this: Among them: “Is Sharia law better than democracy in your view?” “How do you feel about the role of women in society?” “What are your views on Israel?” “Can you point to any single statement in the Koran that you would consider to be incorrect?” There should be straightforward, blunt answers. ie we are not here to debate Islam's or the Quran's theological minutiae or social and political viewpoints of Muslim peoples. We are here to try to work with you in making this mosque a reality and a positive force in the community. It's ridiculous to have to put up with comments like this. And if you let yourself get abused like this without proper pushback you do yourself no favours.

Federalism is embraced by a nation where there are groups (nationalities) different in ethnicity, language, culture or religion. Federal nations include the United States which has fifty states with a population representative of almost every race, creed and culture on the planet. Nigeria, India and Ethiopia are also federal states where there are multi-ethnic groups different in language, culture, religion etc. Switzerland too is a federal state where there are three nationalities: French, Italian and German. Federalism stems from the need for clear demographic separation along ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious lines. Even though, federalism is, as touched on earlier, embraced to quell things in a nation with different groups (nationalities), there are nations which did not go down the federal route. For instance, Kenya which has multi-nationalities did not wish federalism. Turkey which has a large Kurdish population did not see the need to go federal. If Turkey was to embrace federalism, it would have allowed the Kurds who feel marginalized the autonomy to practise their own culture and language. This is just stup*d. The US equals India? Really? It is obvious that federalism is not right for Somalia. The question is: What could be the most suitable system for Somalia? Firstly, any nation which went through war such as the one Somalia had to suffer requires a period of nation and state building. Nevertheless, the most suitable system for Somalia could be: Self-administering Regions within a Democratic Union. How is it obvious when no case was made that federalism is not right for Somalia. Federalism is the only solution to Somalia's problems. This pedantic article completely fails at making any sort of case - it's full of bluster. It's only a bit better than this .

I think if you're raising money as an organization and want all Somalis to contribute - then it shouldn't be about a particular region or the region that is aided rotates or is changed on a regular basis. This mentality of 'our own' is common to many folks. If you're raising money on an adhoc basis and want all Somalis to participate - then the pre-requisite is that you as an organizer have a record of helping out at others' adhoc fundraising. Then you should get the support you need.

^I'm not sure what sort of intellectual debate you were looking for. I think the essence of it is that no one knows who will burn in hell - that is upto God - I think raising that with regard to this issue is pointless. But the path to God is Islam - and according to His wisdom a non-Muslim man married to a Muslim woman would result (presumably) in the children deviating from the correct path. It's not about hating or looking down on non-Muslims. But to think that harmony and equality necessitate that a non-Muslim man get religious sanction to marry a Muslim woman is not logical. There are many parents who happily give their Muslim daughters to non-Muslim men - shouldn't that suffice? PS - Those who say they will leave generally always stick around

Hope they relayed info to residents. ---- At 1500 UTC (11 a.m. EDT) on May 19, Tropical Storm 02A had maximum sustained winds near 39 mph, with higher gusts. It was located in the Arabian Sea (part of the Northern Indian Ocean) about 135 miles east-southeast of Cape Guardafui, Somalia. That's near 11.3 North and 53.5 East. It was moving west-northwest near 6 mph (5 knots). NASA's Aqua satellite captured an image of Tropical Storm 2A at 09:41 UTC (5:41 a.m. EDT) just as the storm was strengthening to tropical storm status. The visible image clearly shows higher thunderstorms around the center, and the western side of the storm over land. Tropical Storm 02A is currently bringing gusty winds and rain to Bari, Somalia. Bari is an administrative region in northern Somalia where the major cities there are Bosaso, the capital and Qardho. Tropical Storm 02A is expected to track west-northwest and move into the Gulf of Aden, which lies just north of Somalia. Once there it is forecast to track in a westerly direction and bring rains and wind to Yemen, which lies to the north of the Gulf of Aden. Forecasters at the Joint Typhoon Warning Center note that increased wind shear will not allow the system to strengthen as it moves into the Gulf of Aden. It is expected to dissipate in several days.

^I heard the same about OG - gas only. Which isn't quite as valuable as oil deposits. If any resources in significant quantities are found - the colonization and occupation will increase significantly. And the money will be siphoned off to the corrupt elites in the capital cities. Somalia is still the jewel in the crown - hopefully nothing happens till we get a semblance of decent and competent people in power. According to local lore, Portuguese travelers as far back as the late 19th century suspected that oil might lie beneath parts of East Africa after noticing a thick, greasy sediment wash up on the shores of Mozambique. More interested in finding cheap labor, though, the explorers had little use for oil. A century later, it turns out that the Portuguese were right. Seismic tests over the past 50 years have shown that countries up the coast of East Africa have natural gas in abundance. Early data compiled by industry consultants also suggest the presence of massive offshore oil deposits. Those finds have spurred oil explorers to start dropping more wells in East Africa, a region they say is an oil and gas bonanza just waiting to be tapped, one of the last great frontiers in the hunt for hydrocarbons. "I and a lot of other people in oil companies working in East Africa have long been convinced that it's the last real high-potential area in the world that hasn't been fully explored," says Richard Schmitt, chief executive of Black Marlin Energy, a Dubai-based East Africa oil prospector. "It seems, for a variety of geopolitical reasons, that more than anything else, it's been neglected over the last several decades. Most of those barriers are currently being lowered or [have] disappeared altogether." (See pictures of oil in Africa.) Few have wanted to pay the cost of searching for oil or gas in the region, or risk drilling wells in volatile countries such as Uganda, Mozambique or Somalia. But better technology, lower risk in some of the countries and higher oil prices in recent years have changed the equation. Wildcatters and majors such as Italy's Eni, Petronas of Malaysia and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) have all moved on East Africa in the past few years. They're hoping to mimic London-based Tullow Oil, which discovered some 2 billion bbl. of oil in landlocked Uganda over the past four years. Last month, Texas-based oil company Anadarko Petroleum Corp. announced that it had tapped a giant reservoir of natural gas off the coast of Mozambique. "Anadarko's find went off like a bomb here in Houston," says Robert Bertagne, a Texas-based oil wildcatter. "It was, 'Wow, we are finding large quantities of gas, and that means we have hydrocarbons in the area.' Once you have a discovery, more people are going to go in there." (See pictures of oil fires.) Much of East Africa's hopes are focused on a fault line running from Somalia to Madagascar known as the Davie Fracture Zone. It's there that Bertagne's analysis — using Cold War–era sea-floor mapping originally intended for use by Soviet submarines — has prompted speculation about oil deposits rivaling those of the North Sea or Middle East. There's still a lot that's unknown: North Africa has seen 20,000 wells sunk over the past few decades, while drillers have sunk 14,000 wells in and off West Africa. In East Africa, the total is about 500 wells. That's changing. Kenya issued six exploration licenses between 2000 and 2002 and two more to CNOOC in the next four years. In 2008 and 2009, it issued 18 new licenses. "Despite a long history of unsuccessful exploration, the oil companies are investing in Kenya," says Mwendia Nyaga, managing director of the National Oil Corporation of Kenya. "The question is not if any hydrocarbon deposits exist, but where they are." (See "Borders of Sudan's Oil-Rich Region Shrink.") It doesn't help that the region is so geologically complex — with lots of fractures and offshore oil deposits likely deep underground. Or that many of the countries likely to have deposits have seen wars and unrest. Somalia remains a no-go zone, and Ethiopia's eastern ****** region is beset by a violent rebel insurgency. And while Mozambique's civil war may have ended in 1992, it has taken years for the country to fully recover Explorers salivate in particular at the prospect of peace in Somalia. Oil reserves in the blocks licensed to two small oil companies, Africa Oil and Range Resources, could contain as much as 10 billion bbl. Nobody is talking about producing oil in Somalia anytime soon, but analysts say oil companies are less likely to be intimidated by political risk than they were in the past. They point to oil production in south Sudan, where a 20-year civil war that ended in 2005 threatens to reignite. "Definitely, there is a sense that there are discoveries to be had," says Aly-Khan Satchu, a financial adviser who runs Rich Management in Nairobi. "The reality and the perception of risk are narrowing." http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1970726,00.html

Originally posted by Nur: El Punto You write: "Somalis are some of the biggest hypocrites." Though I agree with this statement in general, can you spare few Somalis from this rule, because we have very few who are no hypocrites? Nur I was referring specifically to the habit of having a major superiority complex with regard to black people and then aping their culture when Somalis come to the west.

^Understood.

Is the lounging at Starbucks really different from the endless cups of tea at a makhayad in Somalia? The only thing different is that in the west - the cultural/moral environment doesn't give parents, especially dads, the luxury of letting the extended family or society bring up their kids. You have to be present and act as a role model and be vigilant if you want your kids not to be swayed by thug/ghetto culture. PS - Somalis are some of the biggest hypocrites. The guy in Easleigh that was calling other black people 'adoon' or 'jareer' is the same one who when brought to America takes on the culture, morals and dress of the so called dhagaxs.

"If you follow your religion you will be fine?" On an agregate basis - yes. Why do you think Botswana has a much higher rate of HIV than Yemen which is a much poorer country according the World Bank? Are Yemenis more educated, have better health care etc? No. Why does Somalia have a lower HIV rate than Kenya? Kenya is more developed, richer, stable etc etc. Does this mean Muslim countries should not worry or take precautions? No of course not. But the ABC program is designed for countries with generalized epidemics - defined as an HIV rate of 1% or more to contain the increase in the HIV rate and then stablize and hopefully decrease it. I don't see the need for this sort of program in Somalia. I don't oppose the availablity of condoms but I think that is just not a realistic thing for vulnerable people. Do you believe that the young ladies selling themselves in hotels are really going to benefit from a condom prgram - when the power relationship is so skewed toward the john? Can they afford to insist on the use of a condom? No. It doesn't help these folks. I'd rather see folks try to address the root causes in this case rather than simply handing out condoms. Edit - I think where there isn't adherence - to simply hand out condoms is not the proper Islamic way. One also needs to appeal to people's better natures.

Good move for Fayed. Investing billions in a country with rising taxes, massive debts and political uncertainty - not too bright. But I guess it's deja vu - these gulf countries usually buy at the top of the market.

Originally posted by SeeKer: ^Lol........you beat me to the punch. Amazing the narrow focus people have to HIV/AIDS its no wonder the numbers will keep increasing quote: Originally posted by Karl_Polanyi: . NGOS will probably see this as an oudated way of combating hiv................. Excuse me for saying this but thats a load of crock! NGOs preach ABC whereby the first letter A stands for abstinence , but since we live in the real world where people think with their anatomical parts instead of brains (most of the time) perhaps giving a safe alternative doesn't necessarily mean go out and s!rew everything that walks by. The reason poor countries with little education and health infrastructure like Egypt and Yemen are able to have very low HIV rates is mostly because the number of sexual partners per person is not as high as many parts of sub-saharan Africa. And the reason for that is Islam. While I'm not opposed to having condoms available - there would be little need in Muslim countries for the whole ABC program - if most people adhered to the tenets of their religion. The stats for Somalia are wrong. The way these NGOs measure HIV rates is they go to prenatal clinics and take blood samples from the ladies about to give birth. And since Somalis are 60% nomadic not to mention that prenatal clinics are few and far between - the stats are all but meaningless. But you have to pretend to know what you're talking about to continue to receive funding. From the Washington Post: JOHANNESBURG, Nov. 19 -- The United Nations' top AIDS scientists plan to acknowledge this week that they have long overestimated both the size and the course of the epidemic, which they now believe has been slowing for nearly a decade, according to U.N. documents prepared for the announcement. The latest estimates, due to be released publicly Tuesday, put the number of annual new HIV infections at 2.5 million, a cut of more than 40 percent from last year's estimate, documents show. The worldwide total of people infected with HIV -- estimated a year ago at nearly 40 million and rising -- now will be reported as 33 million. There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda," said Helen Epstein, author of "The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS." "I hope these new numbers will help refocus the response in a more pragmatic way." Among the reasons for the overestimate is methodology; U.N. officials traditionally based their national HIV estimates on infection rates among pregnant women receiving prenatal care. As a group, such women were younger, more urban, wealthier and likely to be more sexually active than populations as a whole, according to recent studies. Link

Ilaahay ha u naxariisto. He was a good man.

What is your criticism based on? Did you look into the actual dispute? The man went into a school, saw a young girl wearing a niqab and asked why she was wearing it. From there, he decided to ban the niqab in girls' schools. For you to agree/disagree with him is ok. For you to air that disagreement really isn't. For a start you're not giving him the benefit of the doubt and are faffing about political reasons and what not. Secondly, you do not even know (despite Karl's posts) if the man was right or wrong (you are layman, saaxib). Yes your criticism is invalid and yes you must be a scholar. My criticism is based on this: before his fatwa niqabs were ok in all female schools - that is to say - it was theologically permissable to wear them. Then it became theologically impermissable and I don't see how. I haven't seen a theological explanation as to the change of the heart. What you are saying is he was right before the fatwa and he was right after the fatwa? And I have no ability to ask questions or post criticisms even though I'm not a scholar. I think we will have to disagree on this issue. Are you really saying that you, Ngonge, would never speak against a scholar on any position no matter how it deviates from the religion? That would indeed be something. I think part of our disagreement is that you think that something is irking people who air their disgreements with scholars/insittutions, that there must be an ulterior and nefarious motive etc. Just as you asked me to give the scholars the benefit of the doubt - you must give the benefit of the doubt to those dissenters. I think we'll agree to disagree at this point.

Ngonge, As a layman my criticims may not be constructive - but as long as they are not bashing or derogatory - why put the kibosh on me? And frequently it's not a matter of layman or not. It's a matter of prerogative. Before Tantawi's latest fatwa, ladies in all ladies schools could wear the niqab - but then something all of a sudden changed. I disagreed with his change of heart and thought that it may have been politically motivated. Is my criticism invalid? Must I be a scholar to criticize? I was talking about the independance of the institution as a whole. If it was more independant - it would have greater weight than it does now. And it would reduce the perception of stoogism. And thus serve its stakeholder better. As to trust or not - I look to the consensus of the scholars not to any particular person. There is a difference between everyone giving their opinion and taking an opinion seriously. Who people take seriously are scholars and respected institutions. That's why it is important their objectivity is unquestioned(or rarely questioned). And when that objectivity appears to be or is indeed clouded - there is a duty to speak up. It's not a bother for many. I ask you - if it's not a bother - why the need to keep these folks quiet? I just don't get that. If your position is - I don't give a fig for those opinions then that's perfectly reasonable. But the whole why bother - why speak up - I don't get that position. The easy answer is - if I care - why not?

^People are products of their environment. The environment we come from is one where corruption, war, poverty and lack of opporutunities have forced us to emigrate. It's also one where you constantly hear of relatives fleeing, barely surviving, asking for cash. Our environment is one of Islam where morality and ethics are integral parts of one's character. Given all of that - it's not unfair of me to have higher expectations of Somalis than some white kid whose 5th ancestor settled in Canada, lives comfortably on the hard work of his parents and can afford to try a blunt. While Peacenow has major issues with regard to his own person and Somalis and Arabs - this thread was focused on Somali criminals and their victims in Alberta. If people comment on that and say these folks are garbage or animals - that is not a slur on all Somalis. And folks do NOT need to be defensive and say we have x number of good people etc. Everyone knows that already - unless you are completely retarded.

^This whole Defender of the Somali Male (DSM) complex you got going - saaxiib drop it. It's tiring. One - to draw conclusions about statistics you need numerous studies producing consistent results with a sufficiently wide sample size. I don't believe any such studies exist for the Somali community. In light of that - anecdotal evidence can be valid. Two - there is no need to bombard me with success stories of Somalis - we all know they exist. The comment I was making was narrowly focused on the gap between Somali males and Somali ladies. Which brings me to this - if you really believe that Somali males don't significantly lag behind the ladies on a host of factors including education, crime, joblessness - then there is no need to prolong this further. It would be like debating George Bush on the merits of 'liberating' Iraq.

Ngonge, There is nothing in it for me(directly) and it's not a bother. But I disagree that it's not for me or you to say. I as a Muslim am a stakeholder in all Islamic institutions particularly when they have the importance that Al-Azhar does. As long as it is constructive criticism and not gratituitous bashing - I see no reason to circumscribe the ability of a layman or scholar to point out disagreements. They and you then have the ability to counter the arguments made or simply ignore them. No judiciary is truly independant of the state or the cultural millieu but I would like to see the leadership of Azhar elected independantly of the state and for dissent at that institution to be tolerated. That would be a big improvement on the current status.

POP, Clearly you're on a tirade. Perhaps that is why there is little logical or relevant in your post. Empires of the past targeting male demographics indeed??? 1- There are many immigrant groups in North America - the place I am most familiar with. The rates of criminality for Somali men are much higher than for Chinese, Indian, Arab, etc immigrant group even if adjusted for the fact that more men than women commit crimes. In light of these stark facts - I'm not sure how one demonizes or degrades Somali men when making a comparison to Somali women or even to other immigrant groups. 2. In North America, Somali women are more likely to graduate high school, go to college or university, hold down a job and have no criminal records at disporportionate rates to Somali men. 3. When you make a comparison of the relative position of the 2 sexes - I am sympathetic when a Somali women says I can't find a decent Somali man since the numbers are not in their favour. That is not to say that they aren't many good Somali men out there. But there is a large disconnect. I've made no generalization or demonization of Somali men. I pointed out how far they lag behind the ladies. This is not revolutionary stuff.

Actually in this instance Peacenow is mostly right. Most of these 'kids' have been born in Canada brought up by parent(s) who have fled to find safety and opportunity for them. Yet they kill one another in the streets of Canadian major cities while others are dying in the Gulf of Aden or the Sahara for a taste of the opportunities they have been afforded.

Originally posted by NGONGE: ^^ It all boils down to an "Islamic identity and personality"? War adigu iska hayso your identity and personality. I am a Muslim, it's a fact, and it's not an identity, personality or reer hebel thing. I do not treat my faith like a football team that I support when they score and condemn when they miss or appoint a rubbish manager. Al-Azhar indeed caries a lot of weight and it is not for me to judge them or decide on their fatwas. If I like/agree with it, I take it. If I disagree or feel uncomfortable with it (because other scholars dismissed it) I let it go. I do not try to tell people who are more knowledgeable than me how to do their jobs, saaxib. AND I do not badmouth them just because qabqablayaasha said it's the done thing. P.S. The child is my responsibility, Islam is NOT. I don't think there is anything remiss about saying that Al-Azhar should be an independant institution free(or rather freer) from political meddling by a repressive dictatorship. Given it's weight in the Muslim world - there is nothing wrong, in my opinion, with saying that this ruling or that ruling was not an objective one but is one that came as a result of political interference. If that is judging - then so be it. Given all the problems in the Muslim world - Al-Azhar needs to step upto the challenges faced as the pre-eminent Islamic institution. Where it fails - criticism, complaints and even lamentations are not necessarily out of order.

P.O.P et al, When you can find large numbers of Somali women in jail, trafficking in drugs, murdering each other, joining gangs, being deliquents and absentee parents - then you can really speak of 'degrading Somali men' and 'demonisation of Somali men'. Otherwise - this is all cloud cuckoo land talk.

Originally posted by ailamos: quote:Originally posted by ElPunto: quote: Originally posted by ailamos: I hope people don't get defensive and start to "guard" their faith by climbing up the palm tree, so please try to not feel attacked, I'm just trying to raise an issue and open the floor for discussion. Quite frankly - this discussion has veered completely off topic when you bring up why certain punishments are allowed in Islam or why some Malayasians are getting worked up over the word Allah. My bad my mexican friend... but I put the punishments and the Malaysians up simply as examples of why I am against our country being governed by religious law. The punishments and the Malaysians are not enough to allow you to discard an entire system of governance and thought. I suggest you ask questions and learn more before jumping to conclusions.

Curly, I'm sure you misspoke when you compared a book about making a man happy and a book insulting Islam with the claim they may be similar. If you really believed that you have a choice and they have a choice you wouldn't be making the following remarks: "I abhor this woman who's potentially setting us back" "I'm ashamed that it was a Somali woman that wrote this book and in this centry" "I for one will not be humouring this sort of twaddle on SOL" If you really believed her choice was as equally valid as yours - you wouldn't be heaping these derogatory remarks at her. Ergo, you are being hypocritical. I don't know why you think it's funny that a man might have an opinion on what he thinks may be right or wrong for a woman. Equally - I wouldn't be bothered if you had an opinion on what is right or wrong for men. In your mind - a sacred threshold has been crossed if a man ventures to give his opinion on women and women's issues. I think it's I who has wasted my time. With someone who is defensive, unreasoned and unwilling to hear let alone listen. Adios.

Originally posted by ailamos: I hope people don't get defensive and start to "guard" their faith by climbing up the palm tree, so please try to not feel attacked, I'm just trying to raise an issue and open the floor for discussion. Quite frankly - this discussion has veered completely off topic when you bring up why certain punishments are allowed in Islam or why some Malayasians are getting worked up over the word Allah.