<cite> @Naxar Nugaaleed said:</cite> Fellow Buckeye Khadra Bashiir was the best Somali teacher I've met. Glad she was chosen for that position. Is she from Columbus? What does she teach?

Paris (AFP) - Controversial French comedian Dieudonne was arrested Wednesday and will stand trial over a Facebook comment suggesting he sympathised with one of the Paris attackers, as France cracks down on those who condone terrorism. Related Stories French comedian to be tried after Charlie Hebdo gag Reuters New issue of Charlie Hebdo sells out quickly Associated Press Charlie Hebdo -- More Than a Deadly Assault on Speech Huffington Post French comedian Dieudonne probed for Paris attack quip AFP France's First Free-Speech Challenge After Charlie Hebdo The Atlantic The arrest was one of 54 cases for "condoning terrorism" or "making threats to carry out terrorist acts" opened since Islamist gunmen last week killed 17 people in a three-day shooting spree that targeted the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, police and a Jewish supermarket. In the midst of a mounting debate on the limits of free speech, prosecutors started a case against the comedian Monday after he posted a message on Facebook saying: "Tonight, as far as I'm concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly". The message was a mix of the catch-cry "Je suis Charlie" used in global tributes to the slain magazine journalists and the name of one of the gunmen, Amedy Coulibaly, who shot dead four Jews at the supermarket on Friday and a policewoman the day before. Dieudonne was taken in for questioning on Wednesday morning and released later in the day. His lawyer Sanjau Mirabeau said he would appear in court on February 4. The comedian was "free and reassured" and would appear on stage as planned in the evening, Mirabeau added. "The freedom of expression applies to everyone, at least this evening, " the lawyer said. - 'Land of freedom of expression?' - View galleryDieudonne M'bala M'bala (L) and his lawyer … Dieudonne M'bala M'bala (L) and his lawyer Sanjay Mirabeau leave the police station where th … Another of the comedian's lawyers, David de Stefano, said the arrest was "shocking." "We are in the land of freedom of expression? This morning, the government provided the demonstration of that," he said sarcastically. Dieudonne is a controversial figure who has often made headlines, most notably with his trademark "quenelle" hand gesture that looks like an inverted Nazi salute, but which he insists is merely anti-establishment. Branded a "pedlar of hate" by the government, Dieudonne has also attracted anger over sketches widely viewed as anti-Semitic that have occasionally prompted local authorities to ban his shows. But the polemicist's arrest over his Facebook post has sparked debate over where freedom of expression starts and ends, particularly after millions took to the streets in support of free speech following last week's attacks. The magazine has also repeatedly provoked outrage in the past. One Charlie Hebdo front cover currently circulating on social networks, which dates from October 2012, is titled "Mohamed Merah, come back! They've gone mad." View gallerySanjay Mirabeau, lawyer of French comic Dieudonne M'bala … Sanjay Mirabeau, lawyer of French comic Dieudonne M'bala M'bala, speaks to the press in fron … Merah is the Al-Qaeda militant who went on a killing spree in southwestern France in March 2012, murdering seven people including Jewish children and soldiers. Charlie Hebdo at the time said it wanted to mock the proliferation of ultra-radical Islamist networks. "I can't stand Dieudonne and his nauseating clique, but it seems there are double standards for freedom of expression in France," one Twitter user said. - A fine line - Basile Ader, a lawyer specialising in media law, said there was a difference between mocking religion and condoning terrorism. "Charlie Hebdo mocks religions, which is not banned in France as the offence of blasphemy is no longer in our legislation," he said. "Dieudonne condones an act of terrorism that has just taken place and could bring others to say: 'If he tells us it's ok, we must do it'." Under a law adopted in France late last year to fight the threat of jihadism, actions condoning or inciting terrorism are subject to much harsher sanctions than before. On Monday, a 34-year-old man who hit a car while drunk, injured the driver, and subsequently praised the acts of last week's gunmen when police detained him, was sentenced to four years in prison. And a 22-year-old in the Paris suburb of Nanterre was sentenced to a year in jail for posting a video mocking one of the policemen shot dead last week. Ader said he was shocked by the length of that sentence, adding that the current emotion and "psychosis" in France were likely to have been a factor. Dieudonne has since removed the remark from his Facebook page, which Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve this week deemed "contemptible". But he has left his response on Facebook to the minister's comment, accusing the government of trying to "ruin my life" when "I am only trying to make people laugh". Ader said that where comedians are concerned, judges tread a fine line between respecting their right to humour and respecting the law. But he said he believed "there is no ambiguity" about Dieudonne who "clearly makes anti-Semitic comments and can no longer benefit from this impunity given to humorists, even if he makes people laugh."

New York Times David Brooks The journalists at Charlie Hebdo are now rightly being celebrated as martyrs on behalf of freedom of expression, but let’s face it: If they had tried to publish their satirical newspaper on any American university campus over the last two decades it wouldn’t have lasted 30 seconds. Student and faculty groups would have accused them of hate speech. The administration would have cut financing and shut them down. Public reaction to the attack in Paris has revealed that there are a lot of people who are quick to lionize those who offend the views of Islamist terrorists in France but who are a lot less tolerant toward those who offend their own views at home. Just look at all the people who have overreacted to campus micro-aggressions. The University of Illinois fired a professor who taught the Roman Catholic view on homosexuality. The University of Kansas suspended a professor for writing a harsh tweet against the N.R.A. Vanderbilt University derecognized a Christian group that insisted that it be led by Christians. Americans may laud Charlie Hebdo for being brave enough to publish cartoons ridiculing the Prophet Muhammad, but, if Ayaan Hirsi Ali is invited to campus, there are often calls to deny her a podium. So this might be a teachable moment. As we are mortified by the slaughter of those writers and editors in Paris, it’s a good time to come up with a less hypocritical approach to our own controversial figures, provocateurs and satirists. The first thing to say, I suppose, is that whatever you might have put on your Facebook page yesterday, it is inaccurate for most of us to claim, Je Suis Charlie Hebdo, or I Am Charlie Hebdo. Most of us don’t actually engage in the sort of deliberately offensive humor that that newspaper specializes in. We might have started out that way. When you are 13, it seems daring and provocative to “épater la bourgeoisie,” to stick a finger in the eye of authority, to ridicule other people’s religious beliefs. But after a while that seems puerile. Most of us move toward more complicated views of reality and more forgiving views of others. (Ridicule becomes less fun as you become more aware of your own frequent ridiculousness.) Most of us do try to show a modicum of respect for people of different creeds and faiths. We do try to open conversations with listening rather than insult. Yet, at the same time, most of us know that provocateurs and other outlandish figures serve useful public roles. Satirists and ridiculers expose our weakness and vanity when we are feeling proud. They puncture the self-puffery of the successful. They level social inequality by bringing the mighty low. When they are effective they help us address our foibles communally, since laughter is one of the ultimate bonding experiences. Moreover, provocateurs and ridiculers expose the stupidity of the fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are people who take everything literally. They are incapable of multiple viewpoints. They are incapable of seeing that while their religion may be worthy of the deepest reverence, it is also true that most religions are kind of weird. Satirists expose those who are incapable of laughing at themselves and teach the rest of us that we probably should. If you try to pull off this delicate balance with law, speech codes and banned speakers, you’ll end up with crude censorship and a strangled conversation. It’s almost always wrong to try to suppress speech, erect speech codes and disinvite speakers. Fortunately, social manners are more malleable and supple than laws and codes. Most societies have successfully maintained standards of civility and respect while keeping open avenues for those who are funny, uncivil and offensive. In most societies, there’s the adults’ table and there’s the kids’ table. The people who read Le Monde or the establishment organs are at the adults’ table. The jesters, the holy fools and people like Ann Coulter and Bill Maher are at the kids’ table. They’re not granted complete respectability, but they are heard because in their unguided missile manner, they sometimes say necessary things that no one else is saying. Healthy societies, in other words, don’t suppress speech, but they do grant different standing to different sorts of people. Wise and considerate scholars are heard with high respect. Satirists are heard with bemused semirespect. Racists and anti-Semites are heard through a filter of opprobrium and disrespect. People who want to be heard attentively have to earn it through their conduct. The massacre at Charlie Hebdo should be an occasion to end speech codes. And it should remind us to be legally tolerant toward offensive voices, even as we are socially discriminating. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/09/opinion/david-brooks-i-am-not-charlie-hebdo.html?_r=0

I wonder if the recent events in Awdal region and this news by Haji are connected.

Adan Adde Airport construction is almost done.

Great to see modern building styles coming up. This is an example of clean functional apartment space.

Mogadishu at night, street lights glowing, cars and people moving peacefully. Peace and Development for Somalia.

A new mosque is near completion.

As guns go slowly silent, life is gradually returning to normal in Mogadishu. Gas stations are popping up everywhere.

Going towards KM4 junction passing the renovated Saxafi Hotel, Mogadishu looks stunningly revived.

Near the Children's Hospital, roads are being resurfaced and street lights installed.

Inside a New Maternity Hospital in Mogadishu.

The long awaited resurfacing of the JIDKA SODDONKA has started. This road is very important to Mogadishu. The work is underway to completely rebuild this road.

Some pics from the U/C SYL hotel in Mogadishu. Interior design seems to be improving

Yardimeli childrens hospital being constructed in Mogadishu is coming along nicely and may become the largest children's Hospital in Eeast and Central Africa

Huge 6,000 Mixed unit housing project launched in Mogadishu

A brand new port in Mogadishu to be constructed by China

^^ lol@ monthly visit.

In Britain, David Oyelowo was feeling limited. A brilliant actor who can melt inside of a role and turn in a performance worthy of high praise from his contemporaries, Oyelowo — who first came of notice as doomed spy Danny Hunter on BBC’s Spooks (called MI-5 in the U.S.) — wasn’t finding much material that allowed him to push himself to the next level. He’d had minor success doing prestigious work with the Royal Shakespeare Company, but breaking into TV and films proved to be challenging. And he envisioned more for himself when he fancied a performance art career. So seven years ago, he and his wife Jessica made the decision to head to Los Angeles, with the hope being that he’d find the type of work fitting for his training at the esteemed London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art. He arrived in May of that year and by July — a mere two months after moving in the place where he’d hoped he would find the role of his dreams — the script for a film named Selma was dropped into his lap. It took another seven years, five directors, and a rewrite before the film would hit the big screen, but now Oyelowo is impressing critics with his arresting portrayal of Martin Luther King Jr. in Selma, the humanitarian who would help to change the lives of millions of Americans before being slain in 1968. Oyelowo’s story isn’t so uncommon. It’s familiar to that of many black British actors, and in some ways, his role — and his story — is part of a larger trend playing out in Hollywood right now. There’s a black British Actor Renaissance of sorts occurring, largely because black Brits aren’t finding the type of work in the United Kingdom that allows them to explore the depth they’re seeking from their roles. But stateside, these British expatriates are giving life to classic American stories, many gritty and all of them deeply layered and complex. Part of that may be luck or timing or opportunity. But it’s the odyssey of Oyelowo — who as King is playing one of the most recognizable and iconic Americans of all time — that feels as if it were being orchestrated from on high. “I played a soldier confronting President Lincoln in the film Lincoln, and I say to him, in the winter of 1865, ‘When are we going to get the vote?’ and then there I am, 100 years later, depicting Dr. King, alongside the very same actor, Colman Domingo — we confronted President Lincoln together — we are now in a jail cell, asking for the vote again, in 1965,” Oyelowo said in an interview with BuzzFeed News. “I’ve played a preacher in The Help, I played a fighter pilot in Red Tails, I played someone who was in a sit in, was a Freedom Rider, was a Black Panther, then goes on to be a senator in The Butler. They’re all characters that took me on this journey through what it has been to be a black person for the last 150 years.” Oyelowo stopped, paused, and corrected himself slightly here. In nearly every role he’s taken on since he arrived in the United States, he’s portrayed the sojourn for what it’s like to be a black American for the last 150 years. It’s an important distinction that’s not taken lightly by the 38-year-old actor. “I know more about American history than I do either Nigerian or British history at this point,” he said, before adding a quick chuckle. Read More

<cite> @galbeedi said:</cite> Barwaaqo, I just want to be a good neighbor minding his own business and deciding his future destiny. The sooner you all realize this the better for everyone. Tillamook and others, is this a death wish ?. wax qarxiya, wax dila and all this talk about killing is not the mission of the Awdal Army. unlike many of the Somali groups, we don't kill people for the sake of killing. This is going to be a moral and ethical liberation army. We will be save guarding and following what we call a just war measures. We value human life for our people and their opponents. As I said before, we wont be boasting, or chest pumping for the sake of hubris. We are in the early stages of training the army. this will not be stone throwing or rioting. It will be a liberation army. Xaajiyow iska yara sug. Waar nimanku deg deg badanaa. Great to see Galbeedi in good spirits.

<cite> @Safferz said:</cite> What I don't really get about the complaints against this thread is why you all seem to take it so personally. How does a mugshot of someone arrested for a crime reflect you in any way? Get upset with the individuals you see in this thread if you're so concerned about negative images of Somalis, not Nin-Yaaban for reporting news that's already public record. I could not agree with you more Safferz. The complaints here are misguided.

Awesome pics Mooge.

<cite> @thefuturenow said:</cite> The cabinet needs more SLers with ties to Kulmiye. That would be a shrewd political move. I read somewhere that Siilaanyo wanted a man from his Burco subclan to be named as the PM.

As indicated by Lazy G. this cabinet will be very similar to the last one. Many of the ministers from the last government will return.

22 Richest Schools In America By Richard Vedder and Christopher Denhart Forbes Magazine The 22 schools holding half of U.S. endowment wealth enroll just 5% of higher education students. If anything, that’s an understatement. The concentration of wealth of the 22 schools includes three large public university systems with multiple campuses. The eight Ivy League schools in the top 22, for example, alone have over 21% of the total American endowment assets, but well under 1% of the students. Assuming a conservative 4% payout rate out of endowments, the two richest schools, Harvard and Yale, are spending well over $2.1 billion a year for 35,000 students, or about $60,000 a student, about eight times the average appropriations state governments provide four-year public universities. Moreover, many highly endowed schools also receive huge federal subsidies to support research. For example, Harvard and Yale in the 2011-12 academic year together received over $1.262 billion in federal support. Adding that on to endowment spending (assuming a 4% payout), these schools are spending well over $96,000 per student –without considering revenues from tuition fees, foundation grants or alumni support. The typical state school spends less than $25,000 per student from all sources. Contrast the highly endowed schools with those holding the other one half of endowments. The second half serves nearly 10 times the number of students as the top 22 schools. One of us attended one of the top endowed schools (Northwestern) as an undergraduate and teaches at a typical state school (Ohio University) today. Both have similar enrollments, but Northwestern’s endowment is nearly 18 times that of Ohio University. Assuming the same 4% payout rate, Northwestern has about $16,800 per student in annual endowment income, compared with less than $800 at Ohio University. Additionally, Northwestern receives vastly more in federal grants and contracts than Ohio University to support large research programs. Do these disparities in funding impact reputation and performance? Yes. FORBES prides itself that its rankings are based on outcome based measures that interest students, such as whether they get good jobs, can avoid large student debt, or like their instructors. But money can buy good instructors or reduce debt. Wealthier schools can and do use their resources to improve their rankings. It is no accident that the top five research universities (as opposed to liberal arts colleges) on the FORBES 2014 Top Colleges list –Stanford, Princeton, M.I.T., Yale and Harvard –had five of the six largest endowments in the U.S. These universities at the top are extremely successful in raising funds and managing their wealth. We do not have a problem with large endowments, however, we do question whether the U.S. government should expend public resources to further this disparity. Favorable tax policies and exemptions, unequal research funding and donor tax write offs all play into reinforcing disparities between rich, elite private schools and poorer public institutions. The federal government’s mission is to further education and research for the good of the broader public. Yet its tax and subsidy policies are akin to give tax exemptions for donating money to the members of the top one percent. It amazes us that so-called “progressives” who deplore the wealth and power of the top one percent usually call for expansion of the current system of financing universities, rather than reforming it to remove the advantages accorded to the rich school. Maybe it is because so many of them personally were educated themselves at these citadels of privilege. Perhaps schools with large endowments should not remain tax exempt, and maybe they should even pay an endowment tax, or, at the very minimum, they should have to dedicate more endowment funds to lowering tuition costs for their students. Yet leading liberals like President Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren (all of whom taught or attended either Harvard or Yale) are silent on this issue –does their loyalty to their alma maters blind them to addressing the financial power of the academic one percent? Top 22 Richest Schools in America: Harvard University, $32,334,293,000 Yale University, $20,780,000,000 University of Texas System, $20,448,313,000 Stanford University, $18,688,868,000 Princeton University, $18,200,433,000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, $11,005,932,000 Texas A&M University System and Foundations, $8,732,010,000 University of Michigan, $8,382,311,000 Columbia University, $8,197,880,000 Northwestern University, $7,883,323,000 University of Pennsylvania, $7,741,396,000 University of Notre Dame, $6,856,301,000 University of Chicago, $6,668,974,000 University of California, $6,377,379,000 Duke University, $6,040,973,000 Emory University, $5,816,046,000 Washington University in St. Louis, $5,651,860,000 Cornell University, $5,272,228,000 University of Virginia, $5,166,660,000 Rice University, $4,836,728,000 University of Southern California, $3,868,355,000 Dartmouth College, $3,733,596,000 For list of endowment data on 800+ Schools visit the NACUBO report. This list of 22 schools account for 50% of the total endowment funds of American Colleges and Universities in this report.