^^lol. terrible analogy mate.

I tried to avoid taking pictures in public these days. better safe than paddington.

most of the voiceovers for somali commercials on the universal are done by one individual. i wonder how much he makes?

aswrb. the islamic government of bladland and moorishland fully condemns the World Farce Programmes refusal to buy the products of Somali farmers whilst doing the exact same thing in Ghana.

ASWRB.The Islamic government of Bladland and Moorishland praises and acknowledges the ShirkBusting intiatives occuring in our country of origin.

Judging from how barca played against manutd last year, i think they have more than enough to cope with and beat arsenal. barca may not have the greatest defenders in the world, but what they do well is harras the opposition, win the ball back and deny the other teams the ball. Also, Arsenal's defence is probably more suspect and prone to errors.Arsenal's best chance will be on the wings. Walcott is the most potent weapon they can use on the counter .Arshavin needs to have a good game too. it'll will be close though.

Ghana: WFP Promotes Local Rice Production Chris Twum 26 March 2010 In its bid to promote local rice production in the country, the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) has taken the bold initiative to purchase locally produced rice to benefit local farmers in the country. The WFP has since purchased 1,433 metric tonnes of Ghanaian rice, worth US$780,000. The rice will be distributed through the School Feeding Programme in the three northern regions, where the WFP, Ghana School Feeding Programme, and Ghana Education Service work together to provide school meals to over 100,000 children in 304 schools. On the part of the WFP Representative in Ghana, Mr. Ismail Omer, he said: "The new WFP Strategic Plan encourages local purchases from countries where wework." Mr. Omer observed that when prices are competitiveand funding is available, the WFP purchases food within the country for distribution to the vulnerable food-insecure people whom we assist, so it becomes a win-win situation for both the farmers and our beneficiaries. It noted that out of the 1,433 metric tonnes of rice purchased, the Northern Region branch of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, supplied 55 metric tonnes, AMSIG Resources878 and EDEM Farms won the third bid to supply500metrictonnes. The AMSIG Resources isaMillennium Development Authoritytechnical training service provider, which works with farmers in variousparts of thecountry, including Savelugu-Nanton, Tolon-Kumbungu, Tamale,West Mamprusi and Karaga. The rice, which AMSIG supplied to the WFP, was producedbygroups of women farmers who live in these communities, in the Northern Region. The WFPfoodpurchases in Ghana have increased significantly in recent years. In2008 and 2009, the WFP bought US$10 million worth of food, consisting mainly of maize, maize meal, corn soy blend, iodized salt, and vegetable salt. Rice has recently been added to the food items specified for distribution in Ghana, and is now being sourced locally. Building on its successful local procurement programme, the WFP would soon begin anewinitiative in Ghana called P4P or "Purchase for Progress." The P4P is a five-yearpilotprogramme,which promotes the development of agricultural marketsin such a way that smallholder farmers will produce food surpluses, and sellthem at fair prices to various markets, including the operations of the WFP.

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: Keligi-Muslims are back on SOL I consider your labelling me as part of the "keligis Muslim" crowd as a source of pride. Jzk.

Ngonge; It is clear we are like fire and water on this issue. I think we will just end up going around in circles. So let us agree to disagree. I will also take your advice and the brother Cawale on board and I will leave the scrutinisation of Tantawi's actions here. May Allah forgive Sheikh tantawi and guide all of us, Ameen.

Originally posted by Naden: ^ Karl, you think that an admonishment against the niqab is ' a great crime against Muslim women ' when there are millions of Muslim women struggling with inheritance, divorce, custody, violence, discrimination, and dispossession issues? Yes, walal, I fully believe that the attacks on the Niqab and the Hijab are all great crimes against the Islamic religion and the Muslim women. To bless, to support, and to openly side with, those who have banned Muslim women from wearing the Hijab and the Niqab, is, indeed, a great crime against the Shariah and the Islamic religion. All of the other issues you mentioned are also important, but, the issue of Hijab and Niqab is equally important too. In the world of logic and rationale, many issues can be of equal or similar importance and, therefore, need tackling at the same time or at different stages. Today,The issue of the Hijab and the Niqab just happen to be two of the most contentious issues. Check the news, walal. I consider it a crime that Muslim women are being barred from wearing the Hijab/Niqab in the public institutions of France, Tunisia, Turkey and now in instutions in Egypt. I consider it a crime that Muslim women are being attacked, ridiculed and some phsyically abused for wearing the Niqab. This is an issue of al awala and bara, of iman and hypocrisy, and of xaq vs badil. It is an issue of people who want to perserve the sunnah vs people who want to entirely deny the Sunnah or mock it and call it various demeaning names. Secondly, why is it that some of you guys seem more focused on the personna of the cyber user Karl Polanyi than the validity of my points? You asked for one proof of the Niqab in islam and a I gave links containing a plethora of evidences, yet you and Castro have not responded to them. Rather, you seem to be more interested in discussing the personal priorities and the intelligence( as in the case of Castroller) of Karl Polanyi. I find this a strange phenomenon. Walal, we are patiently waiting for you to kindly enligthen us on why there are hardly any proofs for Niqab in the Shariah and why those I posted in the links cannot be regarded as evidence. I hope you will not dissappoint us. Originally posted by Naden: ^ A true sign of the moral and ethical bankruptcy of this wretched ummah, discussing a silly garment that wouldn't have seen the light of day had the white man not dug up some oil in an otherwise barren land. Hope your tableeq mentors are instructing you in something more worthwhile. Maybe my history is not great,but as far I remember; the discovery of oil occured in the last century, whereas the discussions and the mentioning of Niqab go back as early as the first century/ies of Islam. I can't remember Ibn Abbas or Bukhari signing lucrative oil deals with Texas Oil Companies. So what is the relation between the two issues? Similarly, I am not that good with numbers, but I think that would make it a difference of over 1 thousands years. In a nutshell, the Niqab has been mentioned by the best of our generations, it was reported to be worn by the wives of the prophet(saw) and all of our scholars, despite their differences on the status of it, are agreed that Niqab is, has and always will be a part of Islam. So I hope you fully understand the implication of calling it a "silly garment". Ibn Al Qayyim said, “So what Din, and what good is there to be found in the one that sees the prohibitions of Allah being committed, His prescribed punishments being laid to waste and abandon, His Din left, and the Sunnah of RasulAllah (saw) being thrown away while he is of cold heart with a silent tongue, a dumb-mute Shaytan just as the one who speaks falsehood is a speaking Shaytan?!

It appears that some people are still using the smokescreen of the proposed Niqab Ban only affecting all female institutions as an excuse for the late Tantawi and his ilk. This is merely a weak and feeble defence of someone who committed a great crime against Muslim women. It is a clear case of defending the indefensible. I have one question for you people: when did the Sheikh suddenly become a woman? One should have their facts ready before they lunge into any debate. For your information, the young girl in question does not even wear the Niqab when she is with other Muslim females. She only adorned herself with the Niqab because Sheikh Tantawi and his entourage, who just happen to be members of the male race- btw, entered the building. The eyewitnesses reported that her teachers explained this issue to the Sheikh. However, he was not satisfied with having her remov her Niqab. It was reported by the eyewitnesses that he went as far as insulting her appearance with these disgraceful words, "So if you were even a little beautiful, what would you have done then?”. The eyewitnesses also reported that he said, "“I have already told you that the Niqab has absolutely nothing to do with the religion, and it is something that is from custom!”. Finally, he finished his abuse with more equally disgraceful insults, “and I know the religion better than you, and those who gave birth to you (i.e., your parents).” Now, even if some of you may dispute the authenticity of those words, can we not at least agree that ordering her to remove her Niqab was a wrong act in the first place? Simple question: was the Sheikh right or wrong to order her to remove her face veil? If the Pope did a similar thing to a nun, would the Catholic faith followers not have the right to be outraged about his conduct? Indeed, the Sheikh transgressed his Islamic, Human and all civilised obligations in forcing a non-mahram female to remover her Niqab. We can give a scholar the benefit of the doubt when he slips up once. What excuse can there be for a scholar who is constantly being reported to have transgressed on the rights that non Mahram Muslim women have over him? What excuse is there for a scholar who continuously tries to force his liberal opinions on others and makes what Allah and his prophet have made forbidden halal? It was only a few years ago when our sister Yvonne Ridley was part of a delegation who went to meet the said Sheikh. Yvonne refused to shake his extended hand. In his typical manner, Sheikh Al Azhar was upset at the fact that some Muslim Women had chosen to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad and disobey his Hosni Mobarak version of Islam. So she claimed that he insulted her with the following words, ""Who is teaching her? She can shake my hand, why she is like my daughter. This is the problem with Muslims in Europe today, they listen to extreme voices." As for those who said every Muslim should be concerned with his affair and leave Allah to judge others, these are indeed words of Xaq (truth) and, believe me, I am not enjoying bringing the many errors of a great Alim to the public. Having said that, unfortunately, our brother Ngonge is using this concept in the wrong context and thus they became devoid of truth. Of course, I am responsible for my actions. My sins are large and wide as the oceans. I fear to stand before Allah. I fear of being a hypocrite. But this does mean that every man should lock himself up in a box, stand by idly when the religion is being mocked, when Muslims are being attacked on the streets, when a scholar is blessing this crusade, and when the Hijab and Niqab are being banned left, right and centre. We are only criticising these scholars because they are bringing their errors to public and then attempting to make it a new religion I sin, yet I do not encourage others to openly sin. I may make an abundance of errors, but I do not make my errors, fears and personal prejudices into actions, which are part of the Shariah. I make errors, but I will never support the anti Islamic Governments legislations, which forbids Muslim women to practice their religion. Therefore, when a scholar takes such actions, we reserve the right to criticise him, as he has betrayed the Ummah and sideded with the enemies of Islam. It is not befitting of a true Muslim to stay silent on such issue and every person has an obligation to forbid the evil and enjoin the good, each according to his own ability Today, the issue of Niqab and Hijab is not an issue that you can choose to take a neutral stance on. It is something that affects every single Muslim with Iman in the West, and whether you like it or not, it is an issue of right versus wrong. If you want to pretend it does not, then, fine, go and tend to your affairs. However, do not try to inject the needles of carelessness in those of us who have spoken on this matter. I cannot for one moment buy this feeble argument of yours, which says the layman cannot criticise scholars when they take sides against the interests of the Muslims in our every day issues. Are you saying the poor, defenceless Muslim women- who were prevented from entering the university campuses and from studying in one Egyptian university, purely because they were wearing Niqab cannot criticise the position of Tantawi who was a major catalyst for the ban? Are you saying Sister Yvonne Ridley cannot criticise Tantawi and his likes, even though he tried to make her shake his hand and accused her of being an "extremist"? You want to silence her because she is a laywoman, no? Are you saying a Muslim woman in France cannot criticise Tantawi for supporting the Hijab ban in France. Singapore? Yet, on the other hand, when a "zealot", a “ radical", a "xawayan" and a "extremist" Sheikh says something unpopular to the Western world or something that goes to your against your tastes, every single person on this forum reserves the right to ridicule him and call him all kinds of names? Where is the justice? Love them or Loath them, The Fatwa’s of Alazhar are monitored across the world and they the impact the lives of many Muslims (male or female). It was only one day after Tantawi's actions that the Italian party proposed to ban the Niqab: "MP Barbara Saltamartini, of the People of Freedom, said:’ banning the burqa can not be considered anti-Muslim because wearing it is not obligatory in Islam. 'The Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest authority in Sunni Islam, has just stated unequivocally that Muslim women have the right to their own identity and that the burqa is not part of Muslim tradition". Therefore, as you can see- the likes of Tantawi and Ahmed Al tayeb are the ammunition and the Sheikhs that give blessing to the actions of Singapore, Egypt to a lesser extent, France and Italy when they want to prevent Muslim women from exercising their Islamic rights. When My Muslim sister, my cousin, my auntie, is prohibited from wearing the Niqab/Hijab, in whatever country is next and the likes of Tantawi and Tayeb are used as justification, I hope you people will not tell me to keep silent.

Bush wa rageedi, bruv.

Originally posted by Abtigiis & Tusbax: Laakiin Ilko-dhaadheer baan meesha soo dhigayaa without running after the other player who snatches ball and then when the ball comes back with the sweat of others, I will do dummies and theatrics, ma soconayso.

Originally posted by ElPunto: 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. People are products of their Environment. A Somali teenager will think of himself as similar to the people he lives amongst, his school mates and the pop culture on TV. They are not going to think, " ohhhhhhhhh gosh, people are drowning in Aden, i musn't try this blunt ". So peacenow is wrong as asual and he singles out SOmalis for communal and societal problems. Poor immigrants and their second generation kids are likely to be have their fare share of drugs and crime. Somalis are no different, although we think we live on a different planet. The article even mentioned this: "In Alberta, the drug business is worth over $5 billion annually and is controlled by well-established gangs such as Hells Angels, native gangs and Asian triads. According to criminal experts, the ‘newbies’ — what the Somali-Canadians are called — are running headlong into other groups, rubbing people the wrong way and triggering turf wars in which they are coming out the losers" lol @Tujiye. How many farax pilots you guys got, warya?

It is hard to compare Fabregas to Rooney since they play in different positions. Secondly, I can't remember Fabregas excelling against the big teams. Rooney has also scored the winner in the Carling Cup. When Drogba lost it against Milan, Rooney was gunning AC Milan. Rooney is the more consistent out of the three. Age matters too. Rooney has the potential to achieve way more than Drogba. Rooney is also English, which helps, of course, lol.

Originally posted by Castro: quote:Originally posted by Karl_Polanyi: In any case, that post wasn't for you. Naden challenged me to bring one proof regarding the Niqab And you still haven't provided any. Sometimes, not even Google can save you. The Link I provided by Yasir Qhadi details the evidences of Niqab.

Here you go my Somali brother. I think you will look good in this: A lil Turban A lil Miswak. Now you ready roll like and Sheikh that turban. ps. Stop Ganging up on the lad. He is actually a frustrated Somali Patriot.

Originally posted by rudy-Diiriye: just show respect to all mankind and planet earth. then u will receive the good that u give. simple aye And women too, yo rudy.

Sheikh Xiinfanin said that they are not takfiris but "keligis Muslims".

@Ngonge, sxb, you would have to translate the Arabic video for us. In any case, that post wasn't for you. Naden challenged me to bring one proof regarding the Niqab in Islam and there are folks on this forum people who have claimed(in the past) that Niqab is completely alien to them. I was just laying down the proof for them and clarifying . Secondly, my criticism of Tantawi, as you will see, is not only related to the Niqab issue. Sug Sxb. ps.Some Somali people here are slow . When you criticise a man for ordering a young woman to remove her Niqab, one of them will ask you if you are female and give you a rant about womans rights. Talk about the irony.Another one will start philosophising about rationality and "not having enough Hatred for the non Muslims". Seriously, if you can't contrubute ideas, it is better to be silent rather than taking a cheap shots at sheikh Karl Polanyi just because the rest of the SOL clique squad are doing the same thing.

Muridi, you need to buy a ticket to Kismayo and some 50 karabash for fasad fil forum.

Edit: there is a great deal of confusion regarding my criticism of the late Tantawi's actions against the Niqab. It also appears there are Parallel debates going on here as some people are demanding the evidence for Niqab and some are even talking about "humans rights vs religious obligation". Before I agree, scrutinize and disagree with Ngonges sermon, let me just clarify the status of Niqab in Islam and those who have claimed that Niqab is an entirely alien concept of Islam. Then I shall move on to the issue of banning Niqab in all girls schools, the actions of Tantawi and why it does concern us(European muslims).( Sorry for keeping you waiting, Ngonge, but your post warrants more thought and attention). There are many evidences and references to the Niqab from the books Sunnah and the early exegeses of the holy Quran by the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the following generations. For those demanding the evidence right here and Now, I have already placed a link containing the status of Niqab in Islam. You can read it in your own time and then perhaps explain to us, which parts do not suffice as evidence. At the time of the incident, Sheikh Yasir Qhadi did a detailed analysis of the proofs regarding the Niqab in the light of the Sunnah. Here is an excerpt of what he said, “What perturbs the lesser-educated minds of the Ummah is that this pernicious custom of obscuring the face seems to have crept into this nation rather early. Regarding the interpretation of Surah Ahzab, verse 33, which commands women to ‘…not display your beauty like the women of Jahiliyya did,’ al-Tabari’s Tafsir tells us that even the Companions differed amongst themselves regarding whether the face was a part of that beauty which should be covered or not. It appears that the Shaykh al-Azhar was able to detect something which even the Companions missed: that the face covering had nothing to do with Islam! The pervasive insidiousness of this imported fabric was not limited to the Companions, however. We find each and every classical work of legal jurisprudence – from al-Nawawi’s Majmu to Ibn Qudamah’s Mughni to Ibn Abideen’s Radd al-Muhtar to Ibn Abd al-Barr’s al-Tamhid – have sections dedicated to this issue. Peculiarly, we find all four classical Sunni schools of law discussing the legal status of the niqab, in numerous major work of fiqh, written throughout the centuries of Islam. In fact, we even find schools of law outside of the four, such as Ibn Hazm’s al-Muhalla, that discuss this issue. It is indeed great Providence that we have been blessed with the pedantic wisdom of the Shaykh of the Azhar for being able to cut through and expose such a large conspiracy, which spanned the entire geographic regions of the Ummah, and reached back to the earliest of our times. Without his insight, it would be quite easy for someone to believe that the niqab has been a part of the Islamic tradition from its very inception”. Many past and present scholars alike held the Niqab to be something obligatory upon a Muslim woman. Based upon their understanding of the Quran and Sunnah, these scholars held the face of a Muslim woman to be part of her Awrah, hence why it should also be covered. On the other hand, some scholars took the position that the face is not part of the Awarah and thus believed the Niqab to be something optional; but they also considered it an established Sunnah act and something virtuous. Some Hanafi scholars took the latter position, however, they added the clause that is better for a woman to wear it in times of fitna( testing and tribulation). Islam allows these differences of opinions, so long as they stem from the Quran and Sunnah and the scholar does not come to this reasoning from his personal desires or societal/political pressures. If a scholar does itjihad and he is correct, according to the Islamic Shariah, there is still a reward for him. Likewise, if a scholar did his utmost to do itjihad but came to an erroneous position, then for him there is also a reward. There will always be another scholar to correct the error of another, so the saying goes. I respect the opinion of the scholar who holds the Niqab to be optional the same way I deeply respect the opinion of the scholar who holds the opposing opinion. Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi said: “But never do I hold that this opinion — that covering the woman's whole body except the face and hands is the obligatory attire for the Muslim woman — be imposed on the woman who believes in the other opinion, according to which veiling the face is obligatory and uncovering it is forbidden. I will only blame the advocates of the latter opinion if they attempt to impose their attitude on the proponents of the former one and accuse them of being sinful and wrongdoers for adopting it. It is agreed upon that, with regard to the controversial issues on which scholars have given different personal legal opinions, there is no blame to be placed on a person for following a certain personal legal opinion to the exclusion of others”. Therefore, this issue of the Niqab is not about insulting the scholars nor is it a matter of arrogant young men insulting their knowledge. We are only criticising those people of knowledge and the so-called “modernists”, who have decided to ignore all of the Shariah evidences and come up with a completely new innovation: “Niqab is alien to Islam”. Many of the Ulema have also labelled these people, be they scholars or nonprofessionals, as people who are completely ignorant of the Shariah. For example, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi said: “No Muslim scholar, whether among the predecessors or contemporary scholars, has ever been reported to have regarded wearing niqab as forbidden except in the case of ihram for women. The scholarly difference regarding the issue of niqab is only over whether it is obligatory, recommendable, or merely permissible. Thus it is untenable that a Muslim jurist would regard niqab as prohibited or even merely undesirable in Islam. Hence, I was really shocked to learn that the writer Baha' published an opinion attributed to some Al-Azhar scholars to the effect that they believe that veiling the woman's face falls under prohibiting what Almighty Allah has originally permitted. In fact, the advocates of this view cannot be said to be of firm knowledge about the Qur'an or the Sunnah or fiqh. Suppose even that wearing niqab is merely permissible — as I do myself believe — not obligatory or desirable. Even in such a case, any Muslim woman may wear it, and no one has the right to prevent her from doing so. It is her personal right, and in practicing it she neither falls short of her duties nor causes others harm. Even man-made laws and the conventions of human rights advocate the personal rights of people” What is apparent from these quotes of Sheikh Yusuf is that he holds the Niqab to be something optional, yet he is harsh in his criticism ( re: “ they lie about the Law of God ”) of those who have claimed Niqab is alien to Islam. This also the same position Mufti Ibrahim Desai of South Africa has taken: “The issue cannot be about whether there is a Shar'i basis of niqab or not. The above references and authorities clearly prove beyond doubt the Shar'i basis of niqab. No scholar can dispute this. Contextually, the issue is that if a woman wishes to voluntarily wear the niqab, especially in a Muslim country, can she be restricted to do so? The simple answer is no, she cannot be restricted. That is curtailing her right of freely practising her Deen and what she correctly understands of her Deen. This right of a Muslim woman is even respected in non-Muslim countries. It is indeed a shame if a Muslim country deprives a Muslim woman from this right. Such a restriction leads one to question the motive behind depriving one of such a right. Is it motivated by political persuasion etc? It is at this juncture the istiqaamat of an 'Alim –e-haq is challenged. Do they really speak for Allah”? Some of the Ulema have even taken the position that mocking the Niqab and insulting women who wear Niqab is, in fact, and act of enmity towards the revelation of Allah(swt) and the Sunnah of prophet(SAW), which can lead to the major disbelief: Q: What is the ruling concerning one who ridicules those who wear the proper hijab and cover their faces and hands? Answer : Praise be to Allaah. Whoever ridicules a Muslim woman or man for sticking to and applying the teachings of Islam is a disbeliever. This is regardless of whether it is concerning woman's hijab or any other matter of the Shariah. This is based on the following narration from ibn Umar: At a gathering during the Battle of Tabuk, one man said, "I have not seen anyone like our Quranic readers who is more desirous of food, more lying in speech and more cowardly when meeting the enemy." A man said, "You have lied and you are a liar. I shall definitely tell the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about that." That news was conveyed to the Messenger of Allah and the Quran was revealed. Abdullah ibn Umar added, "I saw the man holding on to the bag of the camel of the Messenger of Allah and the dust was striking him while he was saying, 'O Messenger of Allah, we were just joking and playing. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was simply saying the verse of the Quran], "Was it Allah, and His Signs and His Messenger you were mocking? Make no excuse, you have disbelieved after you had believed. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others among you because they were sinners" (al-Tauba 65-66). So ridiculing believers has been equated with ridiculing Allah, His Signs and His Messenger. The Standing Committee ( www.islam-qa.com )

I was going to say somethin about Bashir Goth, but then I remembered how Ngonge might say, " don't speak ill of the liberal Somaliland Ulema". I joke. See yall around another time.

edit: bear with me guys. I am on a tabliqi retreat somewhere.

Xaji Xunduf stop the pretence. We all know your tribalist and more explicit views on other forums.