FILE – In this Sept. 5, 2005 file photo, Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed gestures while talking to the media, in Beirut, Lebanon. The slaying of a British soldier in east London cast a spotlight on radical preachers that influenced Michael Adebolajo, the attacker seen in videos with bloody hands wielding a butcher knife. It also raised questions about the reach of the terrorist group al-Shabab, after a British government official said one of the two men tried to go to Somalia to train or fight with the group.(AP Photo/Hussein Malla, File)

FILE – In this Sept. 5, 2005 file photo, Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed gestures while talking to the media, in Beirut, Lebanon. The slaying of a British soldier in east London cast a spotlight on radical preachers that influenced Michael Adebolajo, the attacker seen in videos with bloody hands wielding a butcher knife. It also raised questions about the reach of the terrorist group al-Shabab, after a British government official said one of the two men tried to go to Somalia to train or fight with the group.(AP Photo/Hussein Malla, File)

FILE – Members of Somalia’s al- Shabab militant group patrol on foot on the outskirts of Mogadishu in this Monday, March, 5, 2012 file photo. The slaying of a British soldier in east London cast a spotlight on radical preachers that influenced Michael Adebolajo, the attacker seen in videos with bloody hands wielding a butcher knife. It also raised questions about the reach of the terrorist group al-Shabab, after a British government official said one of the two men tried to go to Somalia to train or fight with the group. (AP Photo, File)

LONDON (AP) ? The slaying of a British solider in east London cast a spotlight on radical preachers that influenced Michael Adebolajo, the attacker seen in videos with bloody hands holding a butcher knife. It also raised questions about the reach of the terrorist group al-Shabab, after a British government official said one of the two men tried to go to Somalia to train or fight with the group. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about the police investigation.

Here’s a look at the preachers and al-Shabab.

OMAR BAKRI MUHAMMED

Spiritual leader and founder of the group al-Muhajiroun. The group catapulted to notoriety after the Sept. 11 attacks by organizing an event to celebrate the airplane hijackers. Bakri, who now lives in Lebanon, had been one of the most aggressive voices of radical Islam in Britain. Members of the cell behind the July 7, 2005, London transit bombings also had links to the group.

The government banned al-Muhajiroun after the July 7 attacks in which four suicide bombers killed 52 commuters, but it has re-formed under new names ? such as the Saved Sect or al-Gurabaa, which have also been banned. He is barred from returning to Britain. Bakri says the man depicted in the startling video that emerged after the death of British serviceman Lee Rigby was named Michael Adebolajo, a Christian who converted to Islam. Bakri recalled Adebolajo was a shy person eager to learn about Islam.

ANJEM CHOUDARY

The former head of the radical group al-Muhajiroun, an Islamist group notorious for glorifying al-Qaida and tied to terror plots at home and abroad. Choudary has in the past described the 9/11 hijackers on the United States as the “Magnificent 19.” He also featured prominently in fiery protests against the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. He is the manager of the Sharia Court in Britain. Sharia is Muslim law as derived from the Quran. Choudary says Adebolajo took part in several demonstrations by the group in London.

AL-SHABAB

Al-Qaida linked terrorist group in Somalia. Al-Shabab boasts several hundred foreign fighters, including those from the Middle East with experience in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. It has also recruited fighters from Somali communities in the United States and Europe. Al-Shabab once controlled almost all of Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu, but African Union and Somali forces pushed the militants out of the city in 2011.

British officials have not said which of the two suspects attempted to link up with the group.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2013-05-24-Britain-%20Attack-Radical%20Links?/id-6d09f53e6c7d4cd6b0e1da72e18dc5ac

franklin graham jambalaya taylor swift and zac efron basketball wives manny ramirez easter 2012 jeremy lin espn

Millions of divorces take place all around the world every year.

Many of them happen because one of the partners has changed significantly.

Some of them happen because of the chronic cheating habits of either partner.

But most of them happen because they were not in the right marriage to begin with.

Those marriages took place because the partners didn?t (or couldn?t) give as much thought to their decision (of getting married) as they should have.

They didn?t ask the right questions.

They weren?t ready for the right evaluations (of themselves and their partners) and couldn?t anticipate the profound change that marriage would bring to their lives.

Are you thinking of getting married? In that case, have you made a careful assessment of your relationship to check if it is marriage-ready?

If not, here are the six crucial questions that you must ask yourselves before you pop the question.

While there are many more factors specific to your relationship which you can (and should) take into account, make sure you don?t miss out on these six.

1. Are our life and career goals similar?

Marriage is a decision to inextricably join your life with someone else?s. Aligning your life, career and other important goals is crucial.

Do you want to settle down in a quaint suburb and have lots of kids? Then don?t marry someone who wants to live and work in five continents.

Are you planning to pool all your resources, throw them (and yourself) head-on into your new start-up ? the dream of your life? Then don?t marry someone who wants a stable, cushy life and lots of ?quality time? together.

You get the point.

2. Do we fulfill each other’s needs?

We all have emotional, intellectual, physical, practical, social and various other needs from a relationship. If you?re in a relationship and are planning to get married, ask yourself ? have you made a rational, clear-headed evaluation of whether and how much of your needs your significant other fulfills?

Or are you glossing over your unfulfilled needs thinking ?every relationship requires compromise??

This is important because when we?re in the throes of that addictive drug called love, we tend to see only positives in the person we?re in love with.

Now nothing can be truer than the fact that every relationship takes some ceding of grounds, and kudos to you if you?re willingly doing your bit.

But if you ignore your basic needs, they will find a way to come back to you in the long run ? in the form of fights, emotional abuse, cheating and even divorce.

3. Do we know really know each other?

I was once with a guy who lied about his age on Facebook, and I never asked him about it. We were six months into the relationship when I discovered he was five years older than I thought.

Yes, you guessed it ? that was not the only lie on which the relationship was based. No wonder we didn?t stay together much more than a year.

Knowing your partner and allowing them to know you are vital aspects of a stable relationship. Trust takes an immense amount of work (and time) to build, but only seconds to lose.

Be honest and tell your partner everything you think they should know about you. This will make it easier for them to do the same.

Needless to say, if you can?t trust your partner enough to do that, it is probably not the time to think about marriage.

4. Do we know how to deal with each other?s “negative” sides?

You can?t live without your dogs. But your girlfriend would rather die than live with them.

You?re a devil incarnate when you?re angry.

You?re struggling with a bad spending habit.

We all have our negative aspects. If you?re thinking about making a lifelong commitment to someone it?s crucial to understand and develop strategies to deal with each other?s less-than-desirable traits.

Make a conscious decision to go (or not to go) pet-less for the rest of your life for a partner who?s allergic to your pets. Make your peace with the problematic spending habits of your significant other before you decide to take the plunge.

It takes time to understand and deal with things we don?t like about our partners. And until and unless you?ve spent that time, you?re not ready to make a decision on marriage.

5. Do we admire and respect each other?

Intelligence? Simplicity? A caring heart? A strong common interest? Is there something in him/her which genuinely complements you in ways more than one?

Falling in love with someone ?for no particular reason? is great for the heady period of infatuation but not nearly enough for the everyday reality of marriage.

Ask yourselves whether you admire each other for the special individuals that you are and the unique qualities that you both possess.

Marriage is a long ? sometimes boring, but stable ? commitment. It cannot be based on whether someone is exciting to you. It has to be about finding long-term fulfilment and happiness in the individuals that you are.

6. Am I ready to think of him/her as a parent of my children?

You love your partner like mad? Great. But do you also respect them? Are you proud of them?

Remember, your legacy to this world will be as much a part of you as of him/her.

Unless it fills your heart with joy to think of them as a parent of your children, you should probably think about that marriage thing again. In this regard it?s important to take not only your significant other, but also their family into account. Your child will carry as much of your genes as theirs. Is that something that makes you happy?

Marriage is a decision that will change your life, one way or the other.

Keeping a few basic principles in mind and asking the right questions will make sure you steer clear of pitfalls that often contribute to divorce.

Source: http://www.dumblittleman.com/2013/05/top-6-questions-to-ask-yourself-before.html

black panther party frank martin pink slime eagle cam trayvon martin case affordable care act the line

The Boy Scouts of America voted to lift a ban on gay scouts, but critics say a decision to maintain a ban on gay scout leaders sends a mixed message and leaves the issue unsettled.

By Daniel B. Wood,?Staff writer / May 23, 2013

Boy Scouts salute during New Jersey’s Boy Scouts Camporee in Sea Girt, N.J., in this file photo. The Boy Scouts of America’s National Council has voted to ease a long-standing ban and allow openly gay boys to be accepted as scouts.

Mel Evans/AP/File

Enlarge

The Boy Scouts of America voted Thursday to approve the admission of openly gay youth members but left in place a ban on homosexual adult scout leaders, raising the prospect of gay scouts having to leave the group when they become adults.?

Skip to next paragraph

‘ + google_ads[0].line2 + ‘
‘ + google_ads[0].line3 + ‘

‘; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ”; } } document.getElementById(“ad_unit”).innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = “pub-6743622525202572″; google_ad_output = ‘js’; google_max_num_ads = ’1′; google_feedback = “on”; google_ad_type = “text”; // google_adtest = “on”; google_image_size = ’230×105′; google_skip = ’0′; // –>

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of
The Christian Science Monitor
Weekly Digital Edition

The decision was backed by key religious groups, including the Southern Baptist Convention and the Anglican Church of North America. Nearly 70 percent of the Boy Scouts’ 116,000 local chapters are in churches or other faith-based organizations.

But critics worried that the decision was sending a mixed message and that the new policy, intended to bring some modicum of steadiness to an organization in transition, will fail to settle the issue.

?Today, following this review, the most comprehensive listening exercise in Scouting?s history, the … Boy Scouts of America?s National Council approved a resolution to remove the restriction denying membership to youth on the basis of sexual orientation alone,” the organization said in a statement. “The resolution also reinforces that Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether heterosexual or homosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting. A change to the current membership policy for adult leaders was not under consideration; thus, the policy for adults remains in place.”

The measure passed with the support of 68 percent of the 1,400 delegates at the BSA national conference in Grapevine, Texas. It will affect BSA?s 2.7 million scouts and 1 million volunteers beginning in January 2014.

The move changes the organization?s current policy, in which no one is asked about his sexual orientation but ?open or avowed homosexuals? cannot be members, leaders, volunteers, or employees. The policy ? instituted in 1978 and reaffirmed in 2002 ? was upheld by a 2000 US Supreme Court ruling (BSA v. Dale).

Thusday’s meeting, which featured an open mike for delegates, was extremely charged and 3 of every 4 speakers were for expanding the policy on gays, says Alan Snyder, chairman of the board for the Western Los Angeles County Boy Scout Council, who was at the event.

He says two testimonies, in particular, made big impressions.

In one, some very shy boys took the mike, trembling, and said, ?We are the youngest people in the room, and we want to remind you that the BSA is for kids,? Mr. Snyder recounts. In another, an older man said, according to Snyder, ?If I am Jewish, which I am, do I worry that a Catholic boy is going to try to convert my son to Catholicism? Of course not.?

Thursday?s vote was originally scheduled for February, but BSA leadership decided the organization needed more time to think about the issue.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/WrjGcc47qao/Boy-Scouts-allow-gay-scouts-but-leave-ban-on-gay-leaders-in-place

power ball livan hernandez soledad o brien mega ball lottery winner lottery numbers mega millions lottery

Ruto said the media group must issue an apology, admit liability for libel within seven days and retract the false story because of the harm it caused him after publication/FILE

NAIROBI, Kenya, May 22- Deputy President William Ruto has sent a demand letter to the Nation Media Group (NMG) over a story that ran on the May 19 issue of the Sunday Nation, alleging he spent Sh100 million of taxpayers? money to hire a luxury jet.

Ruto said the media group must issue an apology, admit liability for libel within seven days and retract the false story because of the harm it caused him after publication.

He argued that the newspaper ran with the story, which was accessible throughout the East African region and the Internet, under what he termed as an ?unnecessary, provocative and alarming headline?.

Ruto?s office was this week forced to control the damage done by releasing invoices and other documents relating to the rental of the jet, maintaining that the actual cost was Sh18.5 million.

?It was expressly meant to embarrass, discredit and malign his respected status and standing as a respected Kenyan and deputy president in the government of Kenya,? the demand note from Ruto?s advocate Kioko Kilukumi states.

The deputy president added that the jet he hired did not have any bedroom, meeting room, office, lounge or fully equipped kitchen as alleged in the article.

He explained that he opted for the cheapest option out of the three quotations that were obtained from charter aircraft service providers and cautioned the media house against running additional publications of a similar nature.

Ruto maintained that the jet in question was not hired on an annual basis but on a one-off basis adding that there would be no need to pay for it in instalments.

?The article was calculated to be understood that our client was leading a lavish lifestyle at the expense of the taxpayers. A prudent reader will conclude that our client has very little regard to tax payer?s monies,? argued Kilukumi in part.

It was not immediately clear what damages Ruto plans to get from the suit.

He also said that he will file a complaint with the Media Complaints Commission if NMG fails to comply with his demands within the stipulated time.

Ruto added that the journalist behind the headline did not seek his side of the story before publishing the article.

?The story as published lacks fairness, impartiality and accuracy. It is biased and heavily tilted to depict our client in the most unfavourable light,? stressed Kilukumi.

Source: http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/2013/05/paper-faces-legal-action-over-sh100m-ruto-jet-story/

pope joan pope joan strikeforce tate vs rousey strawberry festival the monkees ciaa love actually