As I said I cannot have an adult rational conversation with you 'cos you are not making much sense. You come across as a troubled person who has been listening to the same rubbish all his life and cannot think rationally. Think about your logic. How does someone from the triangle tells someone from Cayn not to talk about Sool? you would be wise to leave the federal government and its affairs to the people it concerns and who know about its inner workings. it is more complex than you think. And put HAG aside and let its sons speak on its behalf. Focus instead on the triangle's obsession with the federal states which is the topic if you can. But you won't knowing how your lot are wired. Xaaji Xunjuf;941301 wrote: ^^ And who are you to talk and speak for the people of awdal sool and sanaag .

I think you are exaggrating their importance, and giving them too much credit. I would not advocate for any policy that seeks alienation or forceful persuation of any group. if the triangles do not want to be part of the union, let them be provided they remain in their triangle. live and let live. the wishes of the people in Awdal, Sool & Sanaag must be protected, recognised and respected. "Pressure domestically and stagnation in the political front will see the seccesionist dream crumble" I agree the unionsts must stand against the secessionists for the sake of the union, but it has to be done in a manner benefiting all peoples of Somalia, secessionists or not. You and I must disagree on this front. The federal government lacks clear direction, vision, and time-tested leadership. "I am very enthusiastic about the somali government, the president is on the right track and federal state"

Does prof. Ghandi stand a chance in this race?

Very mature. Next time stick with the kids who laugh at your one-liner zingers and incessant use of iconography, stay away from adult discussions. obviously you cannot break bread with men of the hard knock club. When the going gets tough the triangles tuck tail. Put me at ease. are you out of your little mind? And why assume I would get angry with a loony behind a keyborad some thousand miles away? NGONGE;941230 wrote: ^^ The use of the word "saaxib" is to put your mind at ease and stop you from losing your temper. It obviously didn't work. Ok. I was trying to be a grown up about this and see how far your paranoia goes. Since you refuse to mention any other groups and your feelings about them. I may as well write this thread off as an invitation to have a cyber fight. So here goes: You are uuf and the secessionists are great. Bax warya. So, in your self-inflicted, spleen-bursing, wall-pounding, mouth-foaming session of rage, you missed the breakdown about the regional representaion? Typical secessionst. NGONGE;941230 wrote: Since you refuse to mention any other groups and your feelings about them.

Do me a favour and cut the saaxib rubbish. The trend being observed is the point or hypothesis. can you talk to that? can you disprove it if you disagree with it. and bear in mind the semantics of the message. otherwise, I will have to wait for a clear headed secessionist or a HAG fan with whom I can engage. you seem to be roaming in circles. NGONGE;941218 wrote: Err..do you follow your own words and their meanings, saaxib? I can't miss the point even if I wanted to (it's there in the title). But the question still applies, are these two the only ones you consider "propagandist" or "weak"?

You are missing the bloody point, which is about the triangles and are instead reaching for a quick zinger. I see the answer did not satisfy you. You are assuming the triangles are bad. I am not. I am only observing a trend, but you keep avoiding it. NGONGE;941208 wrote: It was a simple question, saaxib. You criticised SL and HAG. I asked you who was left? Are you saying everyone else is good?

So in your estimation the whole country is HAG and the triangles? Again, read one more time. of the 18 regions, the triangles are found in 3, and the HAGs are found in 4 including the capital. so what happened to remaining 11 regions? NGONGE;941195 wrote: ^^ I did. Answer the question please.

Could you go and play while I talk to the grown ups? Xaaji Xunjuf;941188 wrote: How can HAG be played when they have the Presidency and Capital on lock, they cant be played they have it all under control:D

Try it again and this time see if you could put that organ up your head to a good use. NGONGE;941187 wrote: ^^ So secessionists are bad and HAG are puppets? Ya hadhay marka?

There is trend I observe in this forum. it is entertaining to watch how loud the secessionists from the trio Habro's triangle (Hargeysa-Berbera-Burco) are against federalism and federal states in Somalia. A good example is their daily bombardment of the forum with negative progranda against Puntland, Jubaland, Southwest, Khaatumo, Awdal, Galmudug, Ximan & Xeeb or whatever state emerges. It makes perfect sense 'cos for their dream project to succeed, they have to create smoke and vilify federalism, and go against all efforts against the formation of federal states in Somalia. All negative propaganda is seen as positive contributing to their end goal. Even their fake unionists are on the campaign. They are always seeking, and sometimes fabricate negative news about one of the federal states or an emerging state or upcoming regions. It is also commical and sometimes laughable to read their commentary to realise how clueless they are, but for them, it is pure gold. For them history began yesterday, but horaa loo yiri Dhallaan Qayladi, Waa Qaboonada. What is however troubling is how HAG fans, who are supposedly unionists are on the same bandwagon without realising the game being played. I understand they are a bit slow when it comes to politics, but will it be too late by the time they wake up to realise the game? Genuine pro-unionists, whether in favour of federalism or not should be on the lookout, and beware of the trap being laid.

Good point.

A_Khadar, it is pointless trying to reason with the clan secessionist boys. Surprising though Mr Carafaat who claims to be a unionist, and opposes federalism, yet embraces clan secession. Only in SOL.

I know. I flew from it many times to the moon. that was my way of doing what the jack a*rses do.

And this is Hargeysa International Airport. how is it any different from Garowe?

I wonder where the the minister got the idea that in Somaliland the task-force team counted houses whereas in Puntland they counted families. Here is the methodologies used by the task-foce teams in both areas. Methodology The survey will use a typical census-questionnaire that covers gender, age, marital status and other basic socio-demographic and economic characteristics of the population: maternal mortality, births and deaths, migration, literacy, labor force participation/ occupation; access to water, energy, and housing characteristics. Separate questionnaires are also prepared for the nomadic population that seeks to capture the unique variables experienced by nomadic populations between rainy and dry seasons. And if the teams used Satellite and GIS expertice assisted by relevant technologies like Earth-Google imagery in rural areas, why did the minister invoke Google as a supporting evidence to dispute the results? Just asking. Satellite Imagery and GIS support For smaller towns, especially in Puntland and Somaliland, Earth-Google imagery was extensively used to prepare town section photographs that were highly useful to avoid the need for less precise and tedious sketch mapping.

Baashi, The trick is finding a polical solution, and a common ground which satisfies all stakeholders. It would not matter what configuration or shape it takes. Any thing short of that is 'dhicis'. I could see 5 federal member states: Somaliland - W. Galbeed, Togdheer (excluding Buuhoodle), and Sanaag (excluding Makhir) Puntland - Bari, Nugaal and Mudug (excluding south Mudug) Central State - Sh. Dhexe, Hiiraan, and the old South Mudug (Galgaduud and south Mudug) Jubaland - J. Hoose, Dhexe, and Gedo Southwest - Bay, Bakool, and Sh. Hoose. Let Khatumites, Awdalites, and Makhirites decide for themsleves without coercion. Xamar would serve as a federal territory. But neither Somaliland not HAG would be happy with that set up. Puntland or Jubaland would not be happy with South-North confederacy. So we are on hold.

Zack, I agree. either both Uganda and Kenya are here for the benefit of Somalia, or they are both against it. you cannot pick one as the saviour, and the other as the devil. silly thinking.

I was referring to required understanding of inter and intra dependencies of the provisions of Article 49, and not taking a single one as if stand-alone without considering its sub sections.

Baashi, You raised valid points, but unless the federal parliament gets its act together, creates the required federal commission, and unless the Federal member States House [upper house] has been created (which could not without the formation of federal member state which shall be members of that Upper house - prerequisite), it can hardly get involved in the process, and anything the federal MPs do, short of supporting the process, will lack legitimacy, and cause further confusion. Baashi;937102 wrote: If the Parlaiment takes up the motion regarding to Juba Federal State (JFS) then the approval will follow its normal parlaimentary procedure course. Simple majority will decide if creation of federal member state of JFS is in accordance with the constitution .

NORF, If so, you would have known that if provisions of an article are not implemented, the rest of the article becomes untenable, and therefore in a pending status. And yes to discussions, but by people who understand its inner workings, and can engage in intelligable dialogue. N.O.R.F;934890 wrote: One doesn't need a law degree to scrutinise the constitution and see where there may be areas of contention saxib. A discussion on the articles and their implications should be encouraged.

Thanks for the update. Good stuff.

Carafaat, I could not follow your reasoning, so I'll leave it there. It is only fair I re-insert this line here for the right context. NORF, If so, you would have known that if provisions of an article are not implemented, the rest of the article becomes untenable, and therefore in a pending status. And yes to discussions, but by people who understand its inner workings, and can engage in intelligable dialogue. N.O.R.F wrote: One doesn't need a law degree to scrutinise the constitution and see where there may be areas of contention saxib. A discussion on the articles and their implications should be encouraged.

Where are the Jubaland enthusiasts? any updates on the presidential election?