Somalis are not oral society The first scholar to study the Somali language was Sheikh Yusuf al kownayn, Known as Aw Barkhadle in northern Somalia (or modern republic of Somaliland), and his tomp is visited by many Somalis to this modern day and he was relative to the ruling family of Adal kingdom. Starting from the time Islam has arrived Horn of Africa, Somalis and other Muslims in the region have contributed to the production and preservation of Muslim and local literature, it is not surprising then to learn that the major reference book (which has numerous volumes) of the Hanafi school of law (Muslim school of law, dominant in the Asian subcontinent), is written by Imam Zaili’e, his proper name was Jamal Muhammad Yusuf Mohammed Ayub born and grew up in Northern Somalia, particularly in the legendary city as well as the imperial seat of the celebrated Adal Sultanate, the magnitude of the works produced by the Somalis is another subject, which I will cover in subsequent paper, however, it might be enough to note that there are entire sections in the modern Egyptian house of books and medieval Mosque of Umayyad Dynasty in Damascus dedicated to the works published by the local Muslim scholars as well rooms that housed students from this region (horn of Africa). The subjects covered in this works extend from jurisprudence ( fiqi), mystics, poetry, law and history to the prevailing social and political conditions. Some of these works could also be found in private libraries in Somalia as well as public libraries around the world, particularly in Europe and Middle East. Large portion of these works were published in Arabic although some of these works were also written in Somali with Arabic alphabet. It is interesting to note that Europe which is land of civilization with considerable intellectual history was employing Latin as medium of _expression for science and philosophical discourses as late as two hundred years ago. In fact, the great German philosopher Emanuel kant wrote his dissertation paper in Latin about two hundred years ago. Therefore, the use of vernacular languages, or put it differently, the linguistic nationalism or the pride one takes in his own language and its use as medium of literary works is recent phenomena, although there are exceptions to this assertion. Therefore, it is not surprising to contend that the Somalis were producing their scholarly works in Arabic prior 19th century; however, this has changed due to the socioeconomic and political changes as well as the growth of the population and the compelling desire of the scholars to communicate with masses so as to diffuse knowledge and create greater sense of community. Sheik Uways Muhammad Barawi who lived between 1847-1909, was born in Brava, he went to Iraq and studied in Baghdad between (1870-188), and visited numerous places in the Islamic world, upon his return to Somalia he visited Mogadishu and met with prominent Muslim scholars and then he left to the south particularly areas between the two rivers, where he was recognized as leader of the Qadiriya order( tariiqa). He founded the farming communities called Jama’at literally means communities that have celebrated Muslim cultural heritage through the production of poetry (mainly in the form of Sufi poetry that were designed to celebrate the personalities of Prophet Mohammed may Lord grant him peace and other prominent Muslim saints both locally and internationally) thus creating the sprit of brotherhood among Somali communities. It is worth while to mention that he was among the first people to produce major literary works in Somali based Arabic alphabet, a major portion of his work are currently in my possession and can also be found in both private Somali libraries and some libraries around the world. Significant figure related to the Somali writing history was Osman Keenidid, being religious man with high degree of political consciousness, he produced the first Somali alphabet known initially as Osmania and later it was named far Soomaali, (or called in Somali , taken form recently published article in the Somalinet ) or Somali writing. This script had been used to record literature and numerous books were written in this script, it was also used in school as late as 1972, as matter of fact Syl, the Somali nationalist political movement of 1940s had used it as official language until it was dominated by Pro Arab groups led by Haji Mohammed Hussein who was the president of the S.y.l from 1948-1952 and 1957-58. He advocated Somalia not to participate in the European Economic Community, he also campaigned for the use of the Arabic alphabet in order to narrow the gab between the Somalis and Muslim world. Cotemporary to Osman kenideed was Abdurrahman Sheikh Nur, Judge Qadi of Boreme, who also devised Boreme script in 1933, which was later used by the merchants as well as local people. He used the script to record his own works. Prior the invention of Boreme script he used Arabic alphabet to transcribe important things, however, this script never achieved national recognition in the same way as the ‘Somali writing’ did†The Somali alphabet was used until the military took over the country and introduced the Latin alphabet, there are also numerous people who devised scripts late 1940s, and 50s including Dr Hussein sheik Ahmed Kadere, the great Philosopher and many others. Therefore, it is baseless and biased judgment of history to say that Somali was oral language before 1972, it is also disrespect and lack of appreciation to the great works of the Somali scholars who dedicated their life to the advancement of Somali language. As matter of fact we can find to day( 2002) many books written in the indigenous scripts both in private libraries and public libraries around the world, by the way some of them are currently in my possessions. It is interesting to note that the pro Somali scripts are not entirely dead, in fact, one of the great champions of the ‘Somali alphabet’ Dr Hirsi Magan, the former student of anthropology is currently (2002) visiting Europe, to accelerate the production of software that can be used to write the Somali alphabet. Nevertheless the pro Arab movements are also very powerful to day, in fact there are two groups, the first group who was represented by the Dr. Ibrahim Hashi, who actively participated the glorious struggle to liberate the western Somalia. He has produced books in Somali based on Arabic alphabet, he used to say let us use the language of the Quran glorifying the use of the Arabic alphabet; however, with high degree of confidence we can say that this movements is dead. The second movements in the pro Arab comp campaigned the use of Arabic language as the official language and school language, this movement is currently powerful and in fact they have benefited from the lawlessness by creating schools that not only use Arabic as the medium of instruction but also borrow entire curriculum from Arab states. This is particularly true in southern and northeastern Somalia. Pro Somali groups believed the use of the Somali language regardless the alphabet used, this group was dominant until 1972-1991, however, it seems their influence is decreasing due to their focus and preoccupation of socioeconomic and political problems of the country, so they are not bothered by the kind of education that their children are getting, believing that these schools are better than none. There is psychological dimension to this reality, from 1980s the institutions of the state was deteriorating and education was not an exception particularly the public schools, and note that the schools both in primary and secondary schools used Somali as medium of instruction, there were also some schools which used Arabic as the medium of instruction, for both pragmatic and exaggerated reasons the Somali public had perceived that the quality of the Arabic schools were much better than the Somali schools, as matter of fact the joke of the day was ( ma Alaahida ayaad dhigataa, waad fiicantihiin idinku) you study in Arabic you are good than others. This psychological climate have given the pro Arab groups an advantage than the Somali groups. There is also an economic advantage, most of the Arab/Muslim organizations have greater tendency to support the schools that use the Arabic as medium of instruction than the once that use Somali as medium of instruction. These factors combined allow the rapid growth of schools that use Arabic language as well as the rapid decline of the schools that use the Somali as medium of instruction. Profound analysis to this social phenomena and elaboration of my understanding to this social development should be expressed in another treatise. Let us now move to the question that we asked at the beginning, which was what can we do to end the conflict.

My Sophist, in your article, you seem to have sacrificed two important elements in any academic or decent writing; namely, coherence and logical connections between affirmed propositions. Moreover, you seem to be making structural mistake, for a long time, I have been observing a flow in you reasoning, however, I have never attempted to point out to you, for I thought, doing so would require significant work, and the chances that you may recognize would be probably be limited. However, today it is stated plainly. In your writings, you have tendency to appeal to the emotional aspect of human beings, this does a good job in soliciting the attention of the readers temporarily, but fails to address the matter in question in an objective manner. The result of such emotional discourse is quite obvious: the problem persists and the suffering continues. Moreover, you have tendency to view others are more powerful, are more apt, like Samatar and Kaliff, in doing so, you forget, the real power that can change and bring about the desired change, that is you! Since, you think these so called intellectuals, are better suited to engage with our problems, you temporarily, relieve your self the responsibility to deal with problems, doing so however, does do no better, because you seem to be worried about the ongoing suffering in Somalia and since you are worried about it, and you believe others not you can do better, you suffer! Precisely because the locus of change is not, as you believe, within you, but within others. Finally, these older people, lack something you have, that is youth idealism( I suppose this with some grounds), they are conservative in nature, they are not willing to sacrifice much, the reason is obvious, they have a lot to lose: they are well paid, live in better standard of living and so on. As you might be aware (based on your previous good writing) true changes require commitments and worldview that puts the capacity to change the world within you and not outside of you. NB I have written this paper with sprit of honesty and brotherhood, and not in the intention to harm or otherwise self-gratify my ego at the expanse of others. Long life to those who suffer because of others. And long life to self-confident revolutionaries.

Apologitic individuals seem to dominate this forum. The gist of their argument is that the end justifies the means, more specifically, removal of Americans from Iraq justifies whatever that is executed to attain the desired end. Thus, the insurgent who decided to fight against imperialism, domination of one man against another, substitutes his enemy in the process of attaining his end. Consequently, he does what his enemy does and more : kill and murderer innocent people( such as those who are passing by) or those who have different views( those who choose to work with occupiers and find ways to resolve the accupation in more peacefull ways). In this scenerio the insurgent becomes a ruthless dictator : either my way or death. Ironic indeed. But that is not the irony in this forum. Blind symbathy inherited from decades of Radical Islamasiztion in Somalia have produced individuals who are so blind to reason and unfolding realities, that they are willing to endorse brutal dictators or killers to meet the end, i,e, defeat the infidal. In this context, one is reminded, revolutioneries in Russia early in this century. The moto of these revolutioneries was kill as much to make many as happy. Killing large numbers of people is justified, so long as one could justify their liquadation on the basis of the revolutionery objectives. Weather it is Islamic redicalism or Marixist one, the pattern is fundementally the same, as matter of fact, any Idiological commitment with passion blinds its bearer, in her struggle to be faithfull to her idiology( in our case Islamic redicalism) she becomes so blind as to endore the murder of fellow ordinary Muslim. The justification is fundementally the same : the victim, it is argued paralyzed our just cause. His luquadation, therefere, is just and proper in light of prevailing desire to defeat imperialism and domination of one human being( non Muslim) over another( Muslim).

Any analysis that does not rest on emperical grounds is likely to be lost, I say this because many of you have not based on your analysis on local realities. FAO, has estimated that 45% of land in Somalia is suitable for grazing and posture, whereas only 13% of the land is suitable for farming, of this 13% only 2% is currenlty used for farming. 50% of camel population in Africa is found in Somalia, Somali governemt has estimated the total animal population 32 million, however, German study has found 21 million, all this suggest a conlcusion. Somalia has potential of livestock production more than crop production, the baises against nomadims and livestock production is unfounded, the view that nomadism cannot sustain itself and it outmoded form of production has been catogorically refuted by nemerous research and studies,thus we perhabs should think ways to make livestock sector better rather than think ways of inhibiting its capacity to flourish.My fellow nomads pay attention to the local circumstances,moreover, livestock in modern defintion used by IMF, World Bank and UN includes livestock, thus nomadism and agriculture are not mutually exclusive, harnessed livestock sector would enable us to feed Middle eastern population, in so doing we can secure stream of hard currency that would allow nomads to lead a decent life charecterised by modern convieneince of education, health and social services. May the nomads, farmers, hunters, fishers and urbanites prosper in Somalia and elsewehre. Amen

I red, while I was doing research on sex, beauty, love and race, that spanish blonde women, during Muslim( Berber, Arab and other Nort African races) accupation of Spain( then known as andulisia, or in Arabic Andolis) did indeed favoured the black hair and black color, I even collected, pictures of ideal women in spain at the time, the motto of the beauty was the darker hair, the better. Moreover, I made similar, preliminary inquiry, I realised that redness of hair is predominant in Irish communities, I hypothesised, If Irish race were dominant as other Aryan races, then red hair as opposed to the blonde hair would have been idealised. Moreover, the comclusion, that I drew from this introductory research was quite obvious, beauty and love are related to power, whoever is economically, politically and milliterily is stronger is beautifull, there is no inherent beauty, however, sad that may be.

Hijab is not obligatory. read the Ayah or verse again(“O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.” (Quran 33:59,)it says it is better, so that women will not be bothered, in other words if a women's breasts are observable, males may show tendency to persue her, however, if women hides she avoids the attraction of the male, READ THE AYAH again. In 1970s young radical groups who were predomianntly Suadi unoverersity grautates designed "Hijab" that the Somalis wear, in fact they did not agree on how the HIjab would look like, some wanted total cover, others partial cover, others Hijab that is sensitive to the Somali way of dressing, others Hijab that is replica of Saudi dress, as hisotry turned out the Saudi young radicals win the day, if you want to varify, my argument, listen the Muxaadarooyinkii 80s, that is lectures of late Boqolsoon, and the Imam of shibis Mosque by the name of Mohamed Nuur Qawi, he is an Ereterian or Oromo origin, still in Mogadisho, Again many people interpreted the Hijab, Islamic world differ, Saudis are different from say Turkey or Palestine, Egypt is different say from ALgeria, moreover, if you look closely to the verse you will see that quran suggests the Hijab to reduce the burden of women may incur as result of unwanted attension from the sick males, as the next verse specifies, it seems the sick males refer to men who run after women just for the sake of adultery not marriage or genuine affection, however, we should be very clear, that Hijab is just a suggestion and not an obligation, obligation refers to somethign that you must do. so why Hijab is pervasive in Somali soceity, why modern Islamic groups succeeded, there is compex factors that helped them, the factors are not different than the once that supported the clan movements and clan tendencies.

I have written this paper for phinominology class, it deals with basic ontological question with regard to human institutions, I did not have any other ontological papers, see perhabs if you enjoy this one, good lack, I have written while I had Somali state failure in mind Account on human institutions Cooperative behavior is significant for the survival of human species. Surely, we observe that there are living organisms that cooperate to carry out particular work such a forging together on daily basis to secure living. It is very reasonable thing then, to say variety of living organisms cooperate to sustain life. Early ‘primitive’ human societies in this regard used to cooperate to meet the demands of life. I suspect that this fundamental need to secure the essentials of life necessitates the tendencies of cooperative behavior. It also appears to me that human species have more capacities than cooperating collectively to sustain life. Searle offers a definition of intentionality that seems convincing to me because this way of thinking about intentionality is liberal one, because it covers variety of possible states that I experience and think other people experience too, and here is what he has to say about intentionality( in P 85, Mind, Language and Society) Whenever I use the word ‘intentionality’ in this paper I am referring to the sense specified above. “My subjective states relate me to the rest of the world and the general name of that relationship is intentionality” he proceeds further to give a general outline to what the word intentionality covers and says (P85) “Intentionality to repeat is the general term for all the various forms by which the mind can be directed at, or be about, or of, objects and states of affairs in the world” My aim of this paper is essentially to give general account with regard to human institutions. So, if you think that other people experience and imagine sort of things you imagine and suffer the problems that you suffer from. It is not surprising to believe that you may coordinate your efforts to insure the problems are dealt with. It is reasonable to assume that this world that we live in is full of problems that cannot be eliminated on individual basis, cooperation then is pragmatic way to insure the welfare of communities or groups that engage in cooperative behavior. Searle thinks that by virtue of making ontological claim with regard to the existence of things and introducing three explanatory tools he can account for variety of human institutions and social activities. Here is his account of social universe. There are things that exist but their existence is independent of our (humans) existence. That is to say the mode of existence of things varies. For instance, the mode of existence of oceans is different than the mode of existence of say state as political organization. The latter’ existence is not independent of human existence in the manner that the former is independent of human existence. State has both objective and subjective existence. Surely, state has epistemic objectivity, that is, state is sort of things that you can verify by your self whether it is true that there is state or not. There is nothing mysterious about it. On the other hand, state has subjective existence in the sense that state cannot exist without there being people who represent the state, regardless whether the agents of the state are elected. Of course, there would be house or symbol that stands for the state, but there is nothing as state in the natural world that has independent existence of its own. Those sorts of things that depend their existence on our belief or attitudes towards them are sorts of things that Searle calls observer dependent. Whereas, the sorts of things that exist independent of our intentionality are sort of things that he calls observer independent. I think the distinction made in the preceding statement is useful one, because it provides clear and convincing ontological basis for social and institutional reality. It is not difficult to believe that there are things that exist whether we exist or not exist. In other words it is not difficult to imagine that Mount Himalaya (In Southeast Asia) exists independent of the cultures and people that flourish or vanish in its surroundings. Now, the question I have is how could we account for and explain social entities and process that are epistemically objective and yet contain some elements that are ontologically subjective entities or process. It might be worthwhile to mention that when Searle uses the word ‘epistemic’ he refers to some statement or propositions that can be verified independent of prejudices and beliefs, whereas ontology is used to refer to mode of existence(p44). So, generally, what does it mean to give an account or to give reason as to why something is the way it is? One obvious benefit of giving an account of something is that such an account gives us an understanding of the phenomenon. Thus, we could use the understanding of the phenomenon for variety of reasons depending on the situation that we find our selves. However, Searle has some other reason in addition to helping us understand these complex phenomena; he is aiming at giving comprehensive view of the mind, language and society. Thus, by giving an account of social and institutional reality (reality in this paper I mean whatever that is either ontologically or epistimacally subjective or objective) he is completing his wider aim of offering an account that fits together. Collective intentionality is one of the tools according to Searle that would allow us to account for social and institutional reality. Searle thinks that (P120) there is collective intentionality whenever there is cooperative activity. Similarly, whenever there is shared thought or feeling or any other thing of that nature, then there is collective intentionality. So in this scenario living organisms that cooperate for particular activity such as searching for food, are considered to have collective intentionality. All agents that have collective intentionality are called social facts( P120). But we observe that human individuals and societies do execute variety of activities and thus create institutions such as armies; states and these are what Searle calls institutional facts ( P120). But how do they create institutional facts, what is it that allows them to have these institutions. One thing that allows human agents to have complex institutions is their capacity to assign functions to objects. That is people assign things to particular functions. For instance, you may use a branch of a tree to defend your self from predator or use an oxen for a cultivation of agriculture. There is noting that would prevent one from using the same objects for variety of other purposes or not using them at all. Finally, the last apparatus that will allow us to explain institutional and social realities is constitutive rule. There are two kinds of rules. First one is regulative rule these are the sort of rules that regulate behavior that exists prior to the introduction of rules. There is also other sort of rules, these are the sort of rules that create the behavior that they regulate and these are called constitutive rules. It is very interesting to note that Searle says that constitutive rules have logical form that has the following format ‘X counts as Y in the context of C’. I have some concerns with regard to constitutive rules. Before I express my concern let me make another point that Searle makes with regard to the statues functions. It is seems to me reasonable to assume that people have the capacity individually and collectively to assign functions to certain things. That is the capacity to change and impose form on natural objects, such as taking a wood and making a bed out of it. Suppose, we have manufactured big knife to slaughter animals as sacrifice for gods, but suppose we have not used the knife for years and for that reason the knife is no longer capable of executing its assigned functions, that is the knife is no longer capable of slaughtering animals. However, we still believe that the knife can do the thing that it was assigned for. It is worthwhile to note that our collective belief does not match with the physical capability of the knife. That is the knife cannot slaughter animals, although we believe it can. As you can see there is mismatch between what we believe is the case and what is the case in the physical world. So, the assigned functions have now become what Searle calls statues functions. That is the function that exists as result of our collective intentionality. In other words people believe or think that the knife can do its job while the knife cannot do what it was assigned for. Searle thinks that this is very important concept because it allows us to believe or have an idea that has no physical basis. Searle uses this idea to partly explain the evolution of money in Western Europe. Now you could say the knife at this moment cannot slaughter animals (let us say this stands for X), however, it counts as knife that can slaughter animals (Y) within the context of these people who collectively believe that the knife is capable of doing what it was assigned for (this is the context C). Now, is it the case that whatever conforms to this logical form of constitutive rule is sort of things that constitutive rule creates as an institutional reality. Searle is not very clear about this. But if you assume that this logical form is kind of mechanism that allows one to account for the creation of institutional reality, then it make sense to say that the constitutive rule is sort of rules that create the realties that they regulate. For instance the treasury department produces dollar bills that count as money or something that counts as medium of exchange of services and commodities within the context of United States. Thus, the treasury department creates reality and at the same time it regulates (says this is one bill and that is ten bills) the same reality it produces. You could naturally ask what the word rule is meant here, Although Searle is not clear about what he means by rules, but it seems to me rule is sort of things that specify something and this understanding is in harmony with logical form of the constitutive rules we have previously specified. My concern with constitutive rules is that they are not clear when compared to the regulative rules. Searle says that constitutive rules create realities whereas the regulative rules do not. But regulative rules too establish realities. When you say to a pedestrian walking on the road that is new rule ‘walk on the right side’, haven’t you created this new phenomenon of people walking on the right side? Thus, the distinction between the two rules appear to me to be are ambiguous to the least. I agree with Searle that collective acceptant with regard to the institutional reality is the base that sustains institutional reality. I contend that it is very hard to sustain any social institutions (such as government, marriage, university) without having collective acceptance or collective belief or any other form of collective intentionality that is pertinent to the institutions in question. This simple mechanism ‘X counts as Y in the context C’ seem to have the capacity to account for variety of institutional realities. What follows is an attempt to explain the University of Minnesota based on the tools that we have discussed. Let us see if we can explain or account for the University of Minnesota using the tools and the ontology that we have specified. It easy to imagine that ideas of institutions of high learning come from an individual who have some how recognized the benefit of having high educational institutions in the state of Minnesota. However, it is unlikely that he himself alone can create a functioning university without there being some form of collective intentionally. Even if he has all the necessary resources to invest this high institution of learning, however, he still needs students, instructors and employers that believe that this is ‘an institution of high learning’. More importantly, people who run the university must collectively accept that this is a university. You could also say all people who cooperate to insure this university is functions have collective intentionally of some form. After all people who clean the building make the place suitable for learning, whereas the administrators facilitate smooth functioning of the University. Similarly, administrators and secretaries keep records of the student performance and administer also other relevant services such as salary payments and collection of payments. All these people cooperate to insure the university function so as to produce graduates and generate knowledge through research and teaching. Since there is cooperation there is also collective intentionally. We could also think that the university was started with one or few departments and the rest of the departments ware later introduced. How could we account for this? The logical form of the constitutive rules can help us account for this. We can think that the first person or people who decided the creation of University must have said this ‘building’ counts as institution of higher learning in this situation. Thus, you could use the same logical form to generate variety of departments and schools. A constitutive rule in this scenario then, not only creates new institutions but also regulates the new institutions created. There is also assignment of functions; the building has been assigned for particular purpose that is, building is an institution of higher learning. Thus, this building is not a parliament it is a house where learning is facilitated. It is true that I f the new institutions are going be created or the existing ones are to function there must be group of people who run the institution. Of course, you can think that they had been assigned to this function, that is the function of administrating the institution. On the other hand, it is reasonable to assume that workers, students and faculties also accept the legitimacy of this administrating body. Thus, there is collective intentionality with regard to the administration. so, this administrating body is the body that generates new departments and the regulations of these departments. This (creation of new institutions and their regulations) could be explained by the logical form of constitutive rules. Finally, in order for some one to create institutions one needs cooperation of others to assign functions to certain things and to insure that things do the work that they are assigned for. It may be the case that one can attain the essentials of life by her self-alone, but to really maximize the chances of survival one must cooperate with others to insure the basic needs of life are satisfied. Similarly, if one wants to create institutions of greater complexity like university, one needs the cooperation of others, thus, whenever people cooperate there is collective intentionality. Cooperation is minimum requirement for collective intentionality. Cooperation alone is not enough (because there are species in the animal kingdom who did not developed complex institutions like university partly because of their inability to use things for particular purposes that may not necessarily be inherent to the things) to facilitate development (creation and maintenance of complex institutions such as university) unless there is capacity of assigning functions to the things so as to facilitate realization of particular end. It appears to me that the assignment of functions and constitutive rules are saying the same thing. Both of them essentially say this ‘thing’ counts or this ‘thing’ is used as this ‘thing’. In this regard assignment of function and constitutive rules are saying the same thing. Although, Constitutive rules do more than this, that is they regulate in addition to saying ‘this’ counts as that. Thus, the capacity to assign functions to things as the circumstances demands and creation of rules to facilitate cooperation (which is the basis for collective intentionality) could essentially account for almost all institutional realties. In the case of creating a University people have to assign functions to buildings (While building itself is product of assigned functions (stones and other construction materials are assigned for particular tasks in order to build) and cooperation of the people) and cooperate (collective intentionality) to insure the departments of the University do there work. Finally, there has to be rules to make the cooperation among involved people more effective and thus make the University a functioning institution.

Ashraaf, discusses about some genuine issues, such as the issues of occupation and cultural imperialism, however, he fails to appreicate the hisrotical background behind the Islamic state or khalifa, precisely, for this reason his arguments turns out to be rehash from early clerical arguments against the west, although, what I call clerical argument( accusing the west for all our failures) has some elements of truth, neverthles it fails again to comprehend the relevent phinominon in more historically comprehensive way, and here are my reasons: Guniune Islamic state that is open to every Muslim existed only less than 30 years( this period was period of civil and politcal unrest, recurring civil wars and tormiol) all the rulers of this state were assasinated except on of them, Abubakar, consequently, this period which was right after the death of the prophet witnessed some degree of genuine Islamic rule( although, the later part of this 30 years even ended in bloody war, between those who have been elected, Ali Ibn Abi Dalib and those who opposed the nomination, Mucawiyyiah and his supporters, still it was a period which heriditory kingdom was unknown), where Muslim citizans could elect their officials and participate the political life of the state, however, this period is merginal in the Islamic history for the following reason: soon ethnic groups started to dominate the Islamic state, starting pre-Islamic aristocracy that resurfaced again under the name of Ummayads, it it worthwhule to remember, that Mucawiyyah Ibn Abu Sufyan Al-Umawi was descedent of Aristocratic family, his farther ( Abu Sufyaan) was respected elder, who never become Muslim untill Meca was beseiched by the Muslim army, Mucawiyyiha, who later become the governer of Syria( he was nominated to this post by Usman Ibn Affan, the second Khalifa, whom they belonged to the same clan: Banu Ummayah, part of the reason why Osman was murdered was his allocation of significant govrnemnt seats to his clansmen, the accusation was not entirely baseless, historically speaking, moreover, Mucawiyya's bloody war with Ali Ibn Abu Dalib, the fourth Khalifa was linked to the arguments surounding who will rule the Islamic Ummaha, Mucawiyyah as History shows was imperialist and royalist, for he built the first islamic kingdom, he did what the prophet rejected to do, that is establishment of heriditory kingdom where the child inherits the throne from his farther, the matter continues to this day and I beleive it is our problem, it is not a problem invented by the west, it is homegrown problem) established the first tribe or ethnic dominated Islamic state. He(Mucawiyyah) named his son( Yazid, the young man committed serious crimes such as cutting off the head of the grandsons of the prophet, Hassan and Hussein and palcing them on his office for display, how cruel), who was 18 years as the Amir of the Islamic empire after his death, since then the Islamic state became an state dominated by aristocras of various groups whether it was Abbasayds, fatimads, or later Turkish dynasties, it is too simplistic to equate this with Islamic state, for they were noting other than modern day ethnic groups who are each trying to expand their area fo dominion. Consequently, Ashraaf, as Many modern and ancient young Muslims becomes prey to the ideology of the ruling classes who use Islam as tool to sustain their hold on power, I -and no doubt-many others who are sensitive to the emperical realities of history do not yearn for Islamic Khalifa, because Khalifa or theocratic state that covers the whole Islamic world is hisorical impossibility, it never existed and its chances of existing is vary slim, however, federations and cooperations are possible among the Islamic nations, but we shoud be very carefull in idealising the Islamic past speicifically as it regards to the state, moreover, the west, is not our primary enemy, our enemy is domininat ruling classes and their cleint Islamic scholars who were and continue to be the agents of oppression and blanket exploitation

The following paper was written for a class( Epistimology) two years ago, it discusses about the nature of knowledge, please enjoy reading it. The paper was written non other than Zaylici. In this paper I will discuss the accounts that internalists and externalists provide for knowledge, then I will discuss their differences and similarities and finally I will side with one of the accounts and state my reasons for doing so. I Internalist account of knowledge Internalists, as the name suggests stress some aspect that is internal to the person or the entity that has the knowledge, they seem to be saying, as I understand, something like the following, if someone has knowledge, then that person must have justified true belief, the justification is understood partly as having access to the reasons that ground the belief in question. As you can infer from here, accessibility to the internalist is necessary condition for knowledge. Consequently, one distinction according to the internalist between true belief and knowledge is accessibility, having knowledge means, partly, according to the internalist, having access to the reasons that ground your belief (see Pojman, 136). To convert true belief to knowledge, therefore, one must have reason that he can use to support his belief, and such reason or evidence must be accessible to him. Having accessible ground to support your beliefs is necessary condition for knowledge, so, how did you access the basis of your beliefs, you could do so by examining your internal thoughts, and by reflecting on one of the following to access the basis of your belief: perceptions, memory reports, emotion, testimony, or inference from set of other beliefs. (See Pojman, 137). Now,what does it mean to have an access to the reasons that justify the relevant beliefs. Accessibility can be understood in two ways, either in the strong or the weaker sense, in the former, the knower can retrieve upon reflection the relevant reasons and use them to substantiate her beliefs, whereas in the latter the knower cannot by her self retrieve the relevant evidence, consequently, she needs the assistance of the other to access the grounds of her beliefs. (Regarding the two senses of the accessibility, I benefited from the lecture notes of Epistemology 4105 at the University_of_Minnesota.) In addition to the accessibility requirement, internalists require people to form their beliefs through truth seeking process (see Pojman138). This is what is referred to as epistemic responsibility (Pojman 137). Though truth may or may not be attained, nevertheless, truth must be the goal. Thus, an individual who believes something because it useful to her, does not have epistemic justification, because she does not aim at the attainment of the truth, but rather aims at something other than truth. Internalist, therefore, are committed to the truth. They see reason to be subjective or fallible enterprise, nevertheless reason remains the vehicle that gets us a closer to the objective truth, ( Bonjour, Pojman 138). Now, the reason for a belief might be perception, memory reports, emotions, testimony or inferences from set of other beliefs (Pojman, 137). Internalist demand the reason provided for a given belief to be the best available in given subject, what determines the best available evidence seems to be dependent on the specific area of inquiry. Two points are quite clear from the internalist position, that is, accessibility and epistemic responsibility. These two conditions distinguish knowledge from true beliefs. Internalists also offer solutions to the Getteir counter examples; one of them is non defeasibility. Defeasibility , as I understand, is an intuitive notion, and it goes like the following: you are allowed to hold your justified true beliefs so long as there is no evidence available to you that would defeat your belief, Tripartite analysis and the notion of Non defeasibility combined seem to be plausible response to the Gettier counterexamples. (I owe again my understanding to this notion to my lecture notes of the Epistemology) II Externalist account of knowledge Externalism emphasizes the processes that produce and sustain true beliefs; they seem to be saying something like the following: what is needed to convert true beliefs into knowledge is reliable process, or some low like relationship that connects beliefs with truth (see pages 320, of Lehrer, Critique of Externalism). Now what do externalists mean reliable process, to the externalist ( at least as far as the reliabilists are concerned) is whatever process that produces high percentage of true beliefs in a particular subject, reliable processes, therefore, convert true beliefs into knowledge( see the article of the Goldman,395 Strong and weak justification.) In order the belief forming mechanisms and processes to be reliable, the belief forming process such as human vision must function properly( I.e. not impaired) in suitable context (I.e. Appropriate conditions, for instance, certain planes are reliable means of transportation in specific weather conditions, extreme weather conditions flights are often suspended because planes are no longer reliable means of transportation in such extreme weather conditions). So, both the external circumstances, such as poor vision, and the mechanisms of forming beliefs such as vision or thermometer must be reliable and for that to be the case, certain conditions (to be specified by relevant truth trackers) must exist. Externalists do not only require reliable processes functioning in a suitable environment, but they also appeal to the notion of non defeasibility. Which we have discussed earlier. Thus, whenever someone believes something and does not have defeater in so far as she is concerned, the subject in question, Goldman, says, is weakly justified( weak justification, according to the Goldman is more complicated because it has many conditions but this I think is sufficient for surveying the general position of the externalists). Weak justification as opposed to the strong justification is employed when the subject uses unreliable process such as astrology to form beliefs, whereas strong justification happens, when the subject uses a reliable process such as thermometer to inform us or predict the temperature of given place. Weak and strong justification may fail to tell us the truth, nevertheless, thermometer is more reliable than astrology, and the preceding assertion (with regard to the thermometer and astrology) rests on many facts including possible statistical analysis of both methods. III Similarities and differences between the two accounts Both externalists and internalists agree that the processes that allow one to form beliefs must be committed to the truth, in other words, believe forming processes must not be processes that aim at, say what is useful to the subject, but processes that aim at the acquisition of truths. However, they disagree with regard to their emphasis on the processes that lead to the formation of the beliefs, internalists emphasize accessibility of the grounds one has for his beliefs, whereas externalists emphasize reliable process in general including good reasons (see Pojman, 143). Externalists do not require people to have access to the reasons that support their beliefs, internalists do. Thus, it seems that internalist privilege individual’s perspective or what is some times called first person perspective. Intuitively, people seem to have more direct access than others to their own feelings, thoughts and other cognitive processes, thus by not requiring cognitive accessibility, externalists seem to be downplaying the significance of the first person perspective and thus biasing toward what is often called third person perspective. Moreover, externalists attribute knowledge to the subjects in question based on the reliability of their belief forming process. Thus, their concentration on the process as opposed to the people’s cognitive access to the reason that justify their beliefs makes them biased to the non first person perspective ( again this preceding ideas are from the lecture notes of the epistemology class). Needless to say, they both require people to believe the proposition that are candidates to the knowledge and be committed to the attainment of the truths. IV My views and preferences with regard to the aforementioned accounts I seem to favor the externalists more than the internalists for the following reasons. First, externalists allow people to hold beliefs without necessarily having access to the reasons or evidences for that belief, by dropping the accessibility requirement, externalism seems to be consistent with the modern age, I say this because of the following: for the last three hundred years or so, something that had never happened before in the recorded human history have taken place, that is the enormous expansion of knowledge resulting from combined or interacting historical forces. The consequence of this expansion was the availability of large amount of ideas and information. Consequently, it was no longer possible for an individual (like it was possible in the ancient times for an individual to master almost all branches of knowledge like Aristotle did) to master all branches of knowledge. This historical development created conditions where one might be able to believe some conclusion, from given discipline, without necessarily having reasons for that conclusion other than what some reliable truth trackers have asserted in their books. In modern day mathematics, for instance, one might teach integral and differential branches of calculus, however, she might not be able to provide reasons or proofs for her beliefs with respect to a given principles, she might relay on others, say theoretical mathematicians, who if needed, could demonstrate to the inquirer the grounds for believing given basic principles of integral and differential calculus. Shall we not attribute knowledge to the one who believes certain mathematical conclusions, so long as the belief in question is produced through reliable process?, I think we do, that is what the externalist as I understand hold. We might benefit, therefore, from variety of disciplines and use their conclusion for our advantage without necessarily having reasons for that conclusion or even having the necessary capacity to grasp the reasons for that belief due to the complexity of the subject and our preoccupation with some other pertinent matters. For this reason, I prefer the externalist because they seem to attribute knowledge to whatever is produced by a given reliable process such as truth trackers or experts. Having preferred externalism, I think I need to defend it, that is precisely what I shall be doing in following paragraphs. It has been said, the so called reliable processes or belief forming mechanism are vague (see Pojman 147). Externalist themselves (at least Goldman, see 395, Strong and weak justification) gave an answer to this question, they say, any process that produces high percentage of truths is reliable. To substantiate the vagueness of this process Pojman asks something like the following: what is the percentage needed to make a given process a reliable one (see, Pojman P147). I think this question is legitimate one. In answering this question, I can relay on my general background. In science, statistics and surely in Engineering there are percentage of error that are allowed, and there are certain percentage of error that are not allowed because they make the processes in question unreliable. For instance, the polls or the statistical analysis usually tolerate certain percentage of error, say 5%, they are roughly willing to make errors in their predictions 5 percent of the time, so as to be correct, say 95% percent of the time. Thus, the percentages that make a given process reliable are determined by pertinent subjects such as Statistics and Engineering, and it is outside the province of philosophy to specify what makes a given process a reliable one. It has been suggested that externalism abandons, rationality and accessibility. The latter had been discussed before. However, I do not think that externalism drops rationality, bur rather regards it as part of the reliable processes that enable one to form beliefs, nevertheless, externalism does not regard reason alone to be the process that enables one to convert true beliefs into knowledge, some other reliable processes, externalism recognizes, could convert true beliefs into knowledge, for instance, ordinary watches functioning in normal circumstance are reliable belief forming mechanisms (see Pojman 143). Externalists do require people to have some basis or grounds for their process, as Goldman clearly stresses, reliable processes do not appear from nowhere or out of the blue, in fact externalist require people to form their beliefs in a suitable fashion to be determined by their specific topics( see Goldman, 395).Thus, externalists do not drop rationality or reason, but relax the accessibility requirement, that is, they do not require people to have access to the reasons or the grounds that support their beliefs, so long as the belief in question is formed by reliable process.

Thr auther is very confused, for he relies anti marxist to portray marxism, moreover, he rejects cultural borrowing, in so doing, he forgets that Muslim civilisation flourished because of its inheritance from Greek Civilisation, Muslims acheived greatness in variety of areas after they have transilated Greek sceinces and philosophy, dara AL- hikmah( or the house of the wisdom) is witness to this, he is simply an ethnocentrist, a man who blinds himself because of religious fanatisim, how could he be proud to the emperial envasion and seige of Viana, and yet accuse the west of emperialism, you cannot be proud that you have enslaved someone, while you yourslef refuse to be inslaved, such reasoning, is wrong, unless we tolerate his generalisations on religious grounds, that unless we think he is right, simply because he is muslim, however, Quran is against such judgment, for the Quran says, walaa yajrimanakum shanaanut qawmin calaa alaa tacdiluu( which transilates roughly, do not let your self the animosity that you have for some group deviate you from what is just, ) I am not Marxisit, not leberal, however, some of their ideas and what they did to their societies are remarkably human acheivement, the auther himself has benifited from the west, and many of us are int the west benifiting from them, we better be partial not Zealous religious fanatics who because of their hate of AMeriacan invasion in Iraq and dominaton of the midddle east unleash all of forms of prejudices to ther west and the thinking pattern in the west.

Young women whom we have had a Platonic relationship( a relationship deviod of intimacy and physical contact) saw me while practicing my Guiter course, the young women was angry and she stopped talking to me, she thinks playing music is Haram, moreover it is not approperiate behavior for a good Muslim, I told her that the major musical theorists in the medivial ages were Muslims like Al-farabi and Ibn Hazm, moreover, the prophet attended a traditional performance, played by Abyssinians in His Mosque and also in another accosion He( the propher PBOH,) was present when young Arab singer( a women) was signing, however, he left the scene, when the women said the following roughly, ' among us is prophet who knows what is in tommorrow[ that is what will happen tommorrow]" all this never satisfied her, in your experience honestly answer the following questions 1- do you listen to music 2- do you think music is prohibited in Islam if so what grounds do you have, support your thesis or understanding.

Jeele Qaxooti has point, but he needs some freindly amendiment, clan in Somali contexr is product of two forces, geneology whic is finite only 30 generation back( no body knows beyonds that even somali tradition, and contract or xeer, the latter as Lewis,, asserted in his book the call of kinship. Somali clansmen are not genetic kinsmen per se, but rather a product of historical contracts and blood relations, thus one cannot with confidnce that Somali clans are blood groubs, similarly, one cannot say somali clans are product of convienient alliences and contracts conditoned by their material conditions. Modern psychology provides ample evidence which suggest tha a groups like the Somali clans are a product of nature( genetics) and nurture( contracts and politico-millitery conviniences. This thesis is well supported by the fact that many Somali clans are in fact related not along the farther side but also along the mother side, many somali clans, no offense, gratify their matrilinial ralations as attested by the word HABAR which signifies motherly ralations, ironically this downplays the gratification of furthers as the progenators of Somali clans. What then makes the Somali clans powerfull in Somali context, this is the tough question that needs the help of the sceince and social sceince.

Sophist, you do seem to be an enlightened individual, however, you always incline towards religious dogma( I am Muslim too but a rational one(caqlani), that is a Muslim who is after the truth and nothing else, with this in mind there are certian interpretations of Islam and Muslim history that are nothing but poorly substantiated thesis, this includes the passionate attacks of philosophy in the name of defending Islam, it is noble work to defend Islam, but to defend your intrepretaion is not defending Islam, this is what Al-ghazali did, he defended his version of Islam, ironically you do not seem to differentiate the difference between Islam and and certian understanding of Islam, the two are different, one is thesis and hypothesis( Al-ghazali attacks on philosophy0 and the other ( Islam) is divine work).Again Islam is divine religion, however, our intrepretaion is not, so my good freind opennes amd learning from others regarldess their religious beleif( they might be whether Greeks Atheist, pagan Persians or Indian Budhists)was the mark of Islamic civilisation untill traditionalists and dogmatists like Ibn Taymiyyah dominated the Muslim thought, whereas political thinkers like Al-farabi dispeared from the the Muslim thought, dogmatist do seem to dominate the Muslim world today, unfortunately, and you seem to incline towards them, although O might be wrong on this one.One the other hand, I do not refrain from subjecting every thing to critical scrutiny, put it differently, I am free thinker, I am after whatevere I think is reasonble, regardless what others say, for I beleive the cultivated human mind is the altimate arbiter of all disputes. Peace

The following is written for the benifit of Yasmine and people like her, it is a discourse that aims to share experiences, bewilderment and above all usefull ideas and information, it is also a further eloboration of some of the themes coverd in the Republic and the works of Muslim philosopher Abu nasar Al-farabi, I wish, you would enjoy this work for I enjoyed during the process of my writting. Since my simple exposition of the Republic, or jamhuriyyah Afladoon, as iit was known in the Islamic medivial world, has attracted an attension of someone, I may as well provide the rational behind the divsion of labor. Division of labour If a women or a man is a good at sheomaking and produces good shoes, that is confortable and everlasting shoes, Plato would say the shoenaker should specialise and DEDICATE to the production of sheoes for the rest of her life, since Plato was a philospher obssesed with reasons, his reasons for a division of labor are the following 1- by specialising in sheoemaking and doing it alone, the sheomaker practices his art and thus becomes more perfect, consequently, it will take him less time and less work to produce confortable and everlasting sheoes. 2- since she practices her work all the time, the work becomes part of her life, consequently it becomes easy for her to produce good shoes, since it easy for ther to produce a good shoes she easily produces more shoes and with good quality, unlike the shoesmaker who speacialise many professions, she( the specialised shoesmaker) attains from her specialisation two benifits, i) by specilalsing and doing only one work, the work becomes easy to do, good for the individual for he does an easy job, ii) if the work becomes easy she produces more with good quality, this is good for the city or the state because they are more goods are available. Thus as Plato envisioned in 2000 years ago and Marx in 19th century eloborated, the divsion of labor not only benifits the professional in question, but also allows the community to have access to more good quality products, in other words the city that encourages its citizans to do and especialise what they most naturally suited for benifits both the citizans and the soceity for, such was the reasoning behind the division of labor. I as student of philosophy student and medivial history, was once an advanced student( second year undergratuate) of physics, after expereicning difficulties regarding what I would specialise red this work, and some of commontatary of tenth centruy eminiant Muslim philosophr by the name Ubu Nasar Alfarabi, both authers proposed the following proposition 1- excellecnce that is Sacaadah( liibaan in Somali) is attained by doing what you think you are naturally suited for regardless what others say including your family, culture and leading members of the society, in this scenerio this idea at their time was revolutionery idea, it is not wonder therefore, they have both been leading critic of existing socioeconomic and political order, Alfarabi in his celebrated treaties, Ara ahl al- madinah Al- fadilah, or the vertuus city, evnvisions, like Plato different political order than the one that he was living under,( I can discuss this in another article). Afarabi, the Turkish Philosopher, insprired me more than any other philosopher for the following reason i) he learned the philosophy from Christian monophosite, in other words he was a student of Christian Monk, at his times philosophy was not studied feild in the Islamic world, imagine therefore, the difficulties that he ecountered during that time, moreever, he was a stranger in Baghdad for he was Turkish non Arab Muslim, the leading conservatives did not approve his studies, however, he wrote more than 150 treaties on the follwoing subjects, Philosophy( political regimes, vertues city and many more) Music( strangely I am fanatic of Music, like Alfarabi and Ibn Hazm, for I am taking courses in Guiter and world Music) , Physics, and various Islamic feilds, after him Philosophy and sceince have flourished in the Islamic world( it culminated to the establishment of high instutite of transilation, learning and research in Baghdad, the institute was named Dara al Hikmah, or the House of Wisdom) untill declining when the extreme conservatives like the Kurish cleric Ibnu Tammiyyah( which by the way modern Islamisist in Somalia and the Arabs in the Gulf celeberate and study his work, Alfatawa Alkubra, is one of his celebrated work that he has produced, I think it is over 30 volumes)and his followers contributed to the eventual destruction of the study of sceinces and philosophy leading, perhabs, the the entire Islamic world into civilisational decey and primitiveness which to this day we are unable to free our selves from, this also explains why modern Islamasis, like Altittahad, and Al-islah abhore the study of Philosophy and do not encourage excellence( they do encourage people to study but not be to be excellent like Einistein or Newton, they fear, I suspect that they may be encouraging Atheisim, suspecision that had been conmfirmed on many times unfortunately) in sceinces and other productive feilds. I went too far, however, the central point of my argument was directed towards Yasmine and people like her, and the massage is clear do and study what you are most naturlly suited for,that what have desire and recurring tendency and learn from even Christian Monks, this massage is in direct contrast, I think, to the philosophy of the dominant Modern islamisis in Somalia, who strangely become a force in the Somali soceity for the last 10 years, do not take me wrong, these poeple called wadaadaa were miniority in Somalia before the civil war,sufis wer the dominant Islamic movements in the Northeast Africa, however, after the civil war their call had guined currency, many people have joined conciously or unconciously, the reasons were many, but cheif among them was, as I think, their version of Islam was simple and popular, morever, it provided a simple explanation to the inhuman realities that we as nation were facing, the simple explanation, perhabs obscurred more complex dynamics behind the war, God knows the best, this is my idea you can have different one, but show tolerence, after we are all Muslims, So Yasmine learn what you admire, and ENSLAVE your self, as Alfarabi said your slef to the objectives conciously decided, and learn it from whoever teaches regardless their backgroud, as it was narrated from Prophet Mohammed PBOH, said persue knowledge even it means to go to china, surely Chine at the time and even today was not an Islamic state, this perhabs is the theological basis of my recomdentations. I did all this with sprit of good will an honest, no hard feeling to those of you of have Islamasist inclinations, so much for a discussion of division of labour

I red this year the following books, The Republic by Plato, The Politcs By Aristotle, Commonwealth by Cecero, the Roman thinker, Metaphiscs of moral by kant, Human nature By David Hume, Ethnic groups in conflict by Horrowitz, and many more The Republic In this book Plato responds to a prevailing dogma that asserted "injustices are good and pragmatic and justice to be miserable and unfit for state or an empire. In other words the Athenian civilisation and culture viewed justicce and other high moral grounds to be unfit for empire, to maintain empire, they thought, one does not need to be just or right to others, he can take the properties of others as he sees fit and subject them to his wishes as his emperial circumstances demands, such was the policies of Athenian state, though Athens has enjoyed a great empire, however, it altimately lost the war to Sparta, the historical event set the stage for Plato who in his magnificient work, The Republic explores democracy, empire and varity of other political organisations in his quest to find a stable human political organisation capable of providing secuirty and basic human needs to the Athenian citizans. The argument of the Republic People have different natural apptitudes, some are good for shoemaking others are good for a metal work, others are good for soldeiring and millitray affairs, still others are good for philosophy and learning, let every one do what he or she is naturally suited for, that is do whatever you can do the best, with this in mind we can understand his diviion of labour; the labor of the state was divded in the following fasion, philosophers should rule, hence his famous saying no peace without philospher kings, soldiers should protect the city-states and manual workers should produce for th city.

I red in literature course a long time ago, a book by the name the Bluest eye by Tonny Morrison, she wonderfull artisit, although I did not enjoy the book, however, the book was a realistic depiction of the life of the Black American life, I currently, live in neighbourhood wher black people dominate, Morrison was helpfull in making me understand some of the realites that these folks face. you could say Yasmine this is a random thought and you are right, I developed this habit, after school, to just say whatever comes to mind without editing, so mach for a rondom thought

Proudsister, as an incurable optimist, I beleive your search would benefit from contribution, so sit back and read carefully what I am about to say, for it is a product of long meditation, research, thought and empirical observation. Look at the map African horn where Somali people dominate, one of the things that captures your eye is the relationship between land and clans, moreover, the clans do not inhibit the land randomly( exception can be made in parts of the south which was subject to migrations from northern clans), rather they live and occupy a given land based on how they are related from genealogical standpoint, thus clan prior modern age provided the individual with economic assistance such as help during hardship by offering the individual a means( such as livestock, land or money) to relieve the burden of the unfortunate poverty and enable him to survive in the harsh environment of the African horn. Moreover, the clan provided the individual with physical security, if a man is killed or injured or some how aggressed in any shape or form his clan were always there for him, revenging from those who aggress or violate the basic rights of the individual in question. The clan did had a role in love and marriages ( which is relevant to your question regarding the role of the clan in love and marriages) the reason being fewer clans were self-sufficient, in other words fewer nomadic clans did indeed had territory that meets their needs during all seasons or during hard times and droughts, for instances a given nomadic clan may need to use the water and grazing resources that are outside of their domain, to do so the clan would benefit from any relationship that they have to those who control control access to the much needed resources, one way to make connections was through marriages, thus clans were usually connected through marriages and thus become Xidid. marriages therefoer were the beginings of formal contracts and friendships, thus clan played role in the love affair and marriage of the individuals in question, marriage was indeed a means of politico-economic freinship and cooperation. Thus, using genealogy( abtirsiinyo) and Xeer ( contracts) and reinforcing them with marriage and war time alliances enabled Somalis to survive in an environment where the prevailing political order was might is right, whoever is stronger( numerical superiority) is always right, whoever has connections( married to the clans who control wells and grazing lands) always gets what he wants , whoever has more alliances his livestock survives and gets postures and water. It is clear from what we have said that survival necessitates the clan phenomenon, marriages and alliances. Without being a member of a given clan genealogically( or decent) or through client( sheegad) you can hardly survive in Somali society, moreover, similar logic applies to the people of the south who persue agriculture as opposed to the livestock breading. It does not seem to me, therefore, that the economic conditions of the Somali society have changed, consequently, there is no reason to expect that clan does not influence love and marriages in the same as it used to be, I believe that clan permeates every aspect of the Somali society, this is to be expected so long as the social and economic conditions that necessitated the clan phenomenon exist, if these economic conditions that necessitated the clan change, clan as living forces would cease to exist in the same way as ethnicity has eased to be social force in the west especially in America. To be Irish or English does not matter when it comes job and marriage in America, however, to secure a job and marry in the African horn, your clan or ethnicity matters. You asked why clans compete, they compete for resources, in the same way as they used to compete in the jungle, the reason is for survival, is there any other way to survive other than compete for small resources and kill one and another, yes but that requires work that has not been done in Somali territories; that is a revolutionary change( through writing, thinking, acting and engaging relevent conditions) in every aspect of the society, whether that be social, economic, cultural, religion and political. Finally, as urbanization and independence from the clan resources increases the role of the clan in love and marriages would decrease, thus it is not surprising if clan is not a big issue among the younger generation in the west, however, it seems to me that they cannot escape from the socialization of the immediate families who may propagate potentially hostile narrations of the past and local Somali stereotypes. I recommend you to proceed with your research and for it is good approach to our unfortunate fate in the twenty first century. However, we the young in the Diaspora have choices, the choices that we have include fighting back, but to do so we need the power of knowledge and tendency to struggle as those before us did who had struggled against the odds that we are struggling against. Long answer to your question I suppose, end of the discussion Proud sister.

Originally posted by Baashi: [qb] "Justice, courage and truthfulness have always found praise, and history does not record any period worth the name in which falsehood, injustice, dishonesty and breach of trust have been praised" My good freind both life( human experinces) and books such as the Plato the republic, commonwealth: Cecero and many ancient books, record that jutice( understood as doing and saying what is right or givin what belongs to others or not taking what belongs to others) is not good for life, morever, unjust man profits more in this world than the just and truthfull person. The unjust man, the argument goes, gains so long as he is capable of hiding his unjust actions and intentions, for instances, for the unjust man graps power and yet pretends to be a pious or goodman in the public, while in private he murders people and accumaltes wealth, morever, he is in position to assist the poor, the men of God, in this scenerio then, he makes people happy and in the eyes of the poeple he is thought to have made the God happy too, for he does what God wants which is worship and sucrifices, whether the unjust man is in the Muslim world or in the Christian world is the same, he always acts the same and follows the same principle: hide the unjust actions and intentions, portay good actions and good intention, however, the just man never gains power and wealth because he does not want to commit attrociteies, kill people, and conquar neighbours, take the property of others, enrich himslef at the expanse of others, these are precisely, what the unjust man does at the expanse of others, thus the justman loses in this world and possible the after life as people think for he does not have resources and power to show his goodness and justice. Similarly, the truth teller never gains beautifull women, for he does not want to lie and rob wealth from others, thus the beautifull women adimres the unjust man, for he has wealth, power, and above all the capacity to tell lies and commit attrocities as the circumstances demands, the unjust man therefore, is considered to be pragmatic man, unlike the justman, he is capable of maintaining power, and expanding empire, empires grow and expand at the expanse of the weaker nations, tribes and clans, justman cannot do that, he cannot subject others because of his interest, consequently, he cannot maintain empire, since empire exists at the expanse of others, justman cannot sustain empire. This explains why even in the Islamic world, unjust man ruled more time than the just people, Muslims have been under elected rule in less than 30 yearsout of 1500 years of Muslim history( during the time of Abubakar, Omer, Osman, and Ali, although even in this 30 years there was a conflitc and civil wars between Ali and Mu'awiya) that is is less than 1% of the total time Islam existed, in other words majority of the time Muslims were under either family/dynasty rule such as Abyssids, Umuyyads, Ottomas. These families ruled Islamic world with iron fist, they made muslims subjects to their empires and they acted as they saw fit to their emppires, the good people rarely managed to chellenge these families restore a regime that is elected among the leading good people of the Muslim world, this shows, as I contend, that good people and just people are always in subordinate position and consequently seem to be inferiour in the eyes of the people, morever, they seem to be less pragmatic, less suited to the world we are living in, our world needs liers, power grappers, land grappers, unjust people, such and such people seem to survive in this sensible world, Thus my good freind Bashi, you have mistaken to think that these high moral grounds are unquesionble, there are as shown by my argument and the argument of the ancient philosophers questionble and in some case not good to be just

nothing makes me more happy than reading a book that helps me understand why the collapse of the Somali state and how can we contribute to the re-institution of such entity, I am profoundly preocupied with these twin questions, that is why the state failure and how can we rejuvinate this noble political organizaion. Naturally, I have attempted to read any thing that aids me to grasp the forces that had shaped the history of African horn, to this end I have red many books, the one that left great impression on my mind and continue to do so is the following, The Shaping of Somali society,Reconstructing the History of a Pastoral People, 1600-1900, L V. Cassanelli The auther regards Somali soceity, as I understand, the product of interactions between the following, urban dweller, nomad, farmer and literate religious men, NB I have to go now, I will finish the writting later NB Sophist you owe me an answer to a question that you asked a while ago regarding high culture and civilizations, I will send it to you soon. till then may we secure the happy life that we are all striving for. By

Philosphers, whom I admire so much and being one of them, as I have degree in Philosophy, have long been interested in big words, the reason for this is not to belittle others, far from it, but rather big words have philosophical and sceintific function, how could you discuss the theort of relativity without necesserily using the following words, frame of reference, relative acceleration, vilocity, initial and final mass, natural light, spead of light, light phinominon, electromagnetic radiation, waves, parallel and perpendicular propagation of waves, twin paradox, in Politics, how could you discuss about politics without using, political community, constitution, quasi-natural transformation of constitutions and soceity, democracy, timocracy, aristocracy, econimic diversification, political modernisation, social mobilisation, clan identity, So, my dear first lady, big words enable us to discuss things that ordinary langugage fails to facilitate. for those of us who are inclined to use such a complex language or the big words, may not aim to dehumanise others, on the contrary, people like sophists, are extremely concerned about the condition of the somali community, they do not intend, I suppose, First lady, to enhence their self esteam at the expanse of others, however, they may do so, without realising it. Morever, you are not advocating, young women, people to be the same in the manners of expression,are you?, you are not also denying that peole are different are you?, morever, I personally, as student of philosophy, prefer people to express themselves as they see fit, whether they speak in acedemic language or not, in other words, let the peole free, that is let them address their concerns as they think would work, however, I understand your concern and I agree with you that people should be reasonable in their mode of communication and should aim to help their readers understand. I hope first lady, I did not offend you, for I do not like to make others unhappy, on the contrary, I conciously, strive to not to harm other people's feeling and self-worth, and that is one of things, that makes me happy and continue to lead vertuous life, or shall we say a philosphic life. so much for discussion.

The former article edited Sophists, the problems with Somali youths, in particular and Somali soceity in general is profound one, that is the foolishness of the Somali people that manifests itself in variety of circumstances is nothing but a manifestation of deeper fundemental crisis, The Somali as I see, needs a high culture, a culture that molds harmonises her fragmented social personality, the low charecter that people compete to examplify in every given opportunity, be it in public or private, is nothing but poor human quality, that is a charecter that lacks excellence and vertue, I trace this problem to our modes of economic production, that is nomadic life, nomadism is premitive way of human subsistance, no civilisation, no art, and no industry or written science and literature in Nomadic soceity, the necessary consequence of this is fragmented soceity, that is a soceity that rejects modernity on one hand, and on the other hand admires the same thing that it hates, a soceity that likes education but does not cultivate profound scholarship, to put it clearly, we are a soceity, at this historical moment, that is not good or excellent in any conceivable manner, fragmentation is word that cuptures our historical reality, to speak in Hegilian terms. what is needed in such historical condition is Platonic revulution( that is fundemental transformation of the society through science and human thought, reconfugeration of the societal structure) and foundation of high culture that stresses the necessity of labor division and glorifies excellence in every thing that one does. I see majority of the Somalis as people who are deeply and profoundly fragmented, their blood is pouring in to the sand, where their sons and doughters literaly and metaphorically are suffering from lack of blood transfusion, they show symptoms of deap sociopolitcal malaise, the resolution of this problem, in my view is foundation of new civilisation, no less could save this suffering masses. Islam and Somali culture can provide raw material for this to be theorised civilisation. Far from being anti Somali or antinomadims, I beleive foolishness is nothing but to be a Somali, it works also the other way around, that is to be Somali is to foolish, poor fragmented human charecter, foolishness is simplicity, not a complex refinement, the latter is charecteristic of the soceity with high culutes, foolishness and simplicity as opposed to the compex refinement is a charecteristic that follows from socioeconomic condition, and not biological phinominon so Much for discussion

Illmatic, I will do so, after I finish my examanisation at the University, that is soon.

The preceding article was written to a freind of mine who is in Somalia, the freind wished to know somethig about the following cities, Punt, Axum, Banadir, Zayla, Bosaso, Berbera and Marka. SO this was the first one,

Samatalis Xussen Xayle Kan kor ku xusan waa Arday Jaamcadda Minnisota cilmi ka raacda, Sanadkii lixaad, baranayna Culuumta Falsafadda, Cilmu nafsiga,Culuumta Siyaasadda iyo Umuuraha Soomaaliga Minniabolis, Minnisota. Talaado, January 27, 2003 Qormadan soo socota waxaan u hibeeyay gabadh lo oran jiray Deeqo Cusmaan oo daganaan jirtay xaafadii Dabka ee dagmadii Waaberi, Gobolka Banaadir, Jimhuuriyaddii Dimuqraadiga Soomaaliya. Akhristow iga gudoon, sheekadaan tixana ahaandoonta, Eebe idinkiis.kala xiriiri qoraaga fariimahan Emailka soo socda hail0029@umn.edu Soomaaliga iyo Waayihii hore Gacanka cadmeed( ama gacanka Berbera, magacan dambe ayaa loogu yeeri jiray gacan biyoodkan u dhexeeya Yemen iyo woqooyiga dhulka Soomaalida) ee badda cas iyo badwaynta Hindiya dhanka soo xiga Geeska Afrika, waxay ahaayeen goobo safarku uu ku badan yahay. Badda cas waxay isku xiri jirtay Masar iyo wadamada kulaala badda meditereeniyaanka( sida Giriiga, Ruum, iyo woqooyiga Afrika), Hindiya, gacanka carabta( ama Jasiiratu al-carab), faaris( Iiraan), iyo bariga shishe( sida shiinaha) iyo dabcan Bariga Afrika. sidaa awgeed Geeska Afrika qayb ayuu ka ahaa dunidii hore. Bulshaawinimada Aadanaha iyo Taariikhda Adamigu waxaa uu ka mid yahay noolayaasha bulshaawiga ah( social animals), taas oo aan ula jeedo In Aadamigu yahay noole ka hela wehesha Aadamiga kale. Labo sababood ayayna iila muuqataa in ay arintan ugu wacan tahay: 1- Aadimaga musiibooyin ayaa ku dhaca( uusan awoodi karin inta badan in uu ka hortago), sida cudurada, abaaraha iwm, sidaa darteed, waxaa uu u baahanyahay cid uu kaalmaysto si uusan u dhiman xiliga rafaadka. 2- Madaama Aadamigu uu ka taag daran yahay xayaawanada kale badankood( sida shabeelka, libaaxa iyo masaska iwm), waxaa uu bartay waayo aragnimo dheer bacdigeed in uu gaashaanbuurayto( xaalufaysto) kuwa asaga la midka ah si ay isku difaacaan. Labadan arimood( difaaca nafta xiliga halista iyo iskaalmaysiga xilliga rafaadka) ayaa ka dhigaysa aadamiga noole u baahan wehesha iyo wadashaqaynta Aadamiga kale. Haddaba, Markii dadku uu helo waxyaalaha lama huraanka u ah nolosha, sida raashinka, iyo nabadgalyada, waxaad moodaa in ay dabiici tahay in la raadiyo waxyaalaha dheeraadka ku ah nolosha. Sida walxaha lagu raaxaysto oo ay ka midyihiin dharka quruxda badan, dahabka,iyo waxyaalaha la isku carfiyo ama wax lagu carafsado. Ma daama qolo walba ay ku nooshahay meel cayiman juqraafi ahaan, qolo kaligeed ma soo saari karto wax walba oo ay u baahantahay ama ay jeceshahay in ay hesho. Si haddaba walxaha loo baahanyahay ama la jecelyahay loo helo iskaalmaysiga iyo wadashaqayntu waa lama huraan.Sidaa darteed, Ganacsigu waxaa uu ogolaadaa in qolo walba waxa ka maqan ay hesho. Tusaale, u fiirso xiriirk u dhexeeya reer guuraaga iyo dadka degan tuulooyinka amba magaalooyinka, reer guuraagu waxay keenaan magaalooyinka xoolo nool waxayna ku badashaan sokor, shaah, bur, tumbaako iyo walxo kale oo ay markaas u baahanyihiin oo magaalooyinka laga helo. Reer magaalka waxay u baahanyihiin caanaha iyo hilibka, reer guuraagu waxay u baahan yihiin sokor iyo shaah iwm. Labada baahi waxaa astura iswaydaarsiga amaba ganacsiga. Waa su’aale maxay tahay xiriirka ay leeyihiin taariikhda geeska Afrika iyo wadashaqayntu ama iskaalmaysiga iyo bulwaashinimada Aadamiga aan ka soo sheekaynay?. Wadashaqayntu iyo iskaalmaysiga waxay ka mid yihiin xooggaga qaybta balaaran ka qaata dhalashada ilbaxnimoooyinka, maxaa yeelay, shakhsiyaadka wadashaqeeya oo iskaalmaysta waxay u badan tahay in ay ka badbaadaan musiibooyinka wareega( sida abaaraha, iyo cudurada waxdabargooya), ayna ku guulaystaan in ay aska difaacaan cadowgooda. Labadan arimood waxay fududaysaa in ay tarmaan( bataan), bacdina ay hantiyaan( tiradooda awgeed) dhul balaaran. Tiro badnida, ka amaan noqoshada cadowga, iyo iskaalmaysiga xiliga musiibooynka waxay u qaaraamaan soo bixitaanka tuulooyin iyo magaalooyin, kuwaa soo saldhig u ah xadaaradaha Aadamiga. Xadaarad waa eray Afcarabi ah, macnihiisuna yahay kulmid ama isku imaansho, tusaale ahaan afcarbeedka waxaa la yiraahdaa Xadara, oo macneheedu yahay waa yimid, iyo Xaadir wuu joogaa, sidaa darteed, marka ay dadka isku yimaadaan oo ay meel wadadagaan ayaa waxaa la yiraahdaa halkaa xadaara ayaa ka jirta, laakiin dadka reer guraaga ah meel cayiman ma dagaan, maxaa yeelay mar walba waxay ku jiraan hayaan ay ku doonayaan in ay ku helaan biyo iyo daaq farabdan si baahida xoolahooda loo asturo. Sidaa darteed, dadka reer guraaga ah inta badan aduunka ma aysan samayn xadaarooyiin waawayn ayagoo wali ah reer guraa,maxaa yeelay nolosha reer guraagu saldhig uma noqonkarto xadaarad ama ilbaxnimo salbalaaran. laakiin waa macquul in ay dhagaxdhigaan ilbaxnimooyin hanaqaada, bacdi markii ay ka haraan eryashada nolosha reer guraaganimada, tusaale waxaa u ah arintan qabaa’ilkii Saljuuka oo tarixi jiray bartamaha Eeshiya, qabaa’ilkan waxay ku guulaysteen in ay cagta mariyaan boqortooyadii Baysantiine( waxay ahayd boqortooyo ka faliirmatay boqortooyadii Room) oo xuruntoodu ahayd magaalada Itanbuul( oo barigaa la oran jiray Konstantanoobal) oo xarun u ah maanta dalka cusub ee loogu yeero Turkiga. Saljuukiyiinta oo ahaa qabaa’il badawiyiin ah oo xoolaha dabagala ayaa noqday mudo ka badan 500 oo sano madaxdii dunida Muslimka iyo xitaa qaybo badan oo ka tirsan Yurub iyo Eeshiya. Akhristwo, waxay ila tahay in aad fahmi kartid hadda sababha u qaaraama dhalashada magaalooyinka, bacdamaa aan soo sheegnay in jecaylka aadamigu uu jecelyahay naftiisa iyo nolosha raaxada leh ay ku kalifayaan in uu raadiyo duruufo ka gadisan duruufaha dabiiciga ah( sida reer miyinimada oo kale). Raadintan uu raadinayo nolol wanaagsana ayaa aakhirka ku kalifaysa in uu dago magaalo, bilaabana in uu la ganacsado dadka kale si uu u helo walxaha aan laga helin deegaankiisa, bacdina waxaa uu suurta galaysa in uu noolaado nolol wanaagsan oo raaxo leh. Noloshan reer magaalka ayaana saldhig u ah ilbaxnimooyinka aadamiga, sida aan soo sheegnayba.Haddaba, Geeska Afrika waxaa ka jiray dal la oran jiray Bunti, oo lahaa magaalooyin islamarkaana laganacsan jiray dunidii hore. Haddaba taariikhda qoran waxay markhaati ka tahay ilbaxnimadii ugu horeeysay ee wax laga qoro( ee Geeska Afrika) in ay ahayd tii dhulka Bunti( arintan waxaa taageeraaya qormo ku xardhan dhagax ay ka tageen Masaaridii hore oo la yiraahdo Boleermo, dhagaxan gadaal ayaan ka faahfaahin doonaa). Hadaba, cutubkaan soo socda waxaan si qotodheer ugu falanqaynayna qoraalo dadkii hore ay ka tageen oo ku saabsan dhulkii faca waynaa ee Bunti( Bunti waa magac la soomaaliyeeyay, waxaana ka bartay in la isticmaalo erayga Bunti Gen Ibraahim Liiqliiqato, oo asaga qoray buug uu u magac daray, Bunti dalkii faca waynaa, erayga afingirisiiga ah ee u dhigma Bunti waxaa la dhahaa Punt, laakiin waxaan doorbiday kaas la soomaaliyeeyay in aan isticmaalo). Ilbaxnimadii Bunti Ganacsi ayaa ka dhexeeyay umadihii hore, sida uu ku bilowday ganacsigan waa mid u baahaan cilmi baaris qoto dheer, laakiin qormadan kuma falanqaynayno taariikhdii dhaqaalaha, laakiin waxaan gudagalaynaa ka sheekaynta xiriirkii Soomaalida iyo Masaaridii hore. Faaris( Iiraan) Baabilooniya ( Ciraaq) Ciilaam (Sayloon/Sirilaanka) iyo Masartii faraaciinta waxay ahaayeen dad horayumarsan marka loo fiiriyo dadyowgii hore ay isku waaga ahaayeen. Nolosha dadyowgan aan soo xusnay waxaa saldhig u ahaa isweydaarsiga badeecadaha,qodashda dhulka iyo dhaqashada xoolaha. Dalkii Buntina ayaga ayuu la mid ahaa. Goobtii Bunti Bunti( asalkii erayga, waa eray afmasri ah, ka soo Masaaridii hore ay u isticmaali jireen dalalka koonfurta ka ah Nubiya( Sudan) amaba dalalka babaryaala badda cas) waxaa mararka qaarkood loogu yeeri jiray dhulkii Ilaahyada, mid ka mid ah sababaha dhaliyay in magacan loogu yeero Bunti waxay ahayd fooxa oo ahaa walxaha lagu sharfo Ilaahyadii dadkii hore, sidaa darteed, Masaaridii hore waxay aaminsanaayeen in fooxa iyo ilaahyada ay xiriir leeyihiin, , oo inta badan aysan kala fogayn, lagana yaabo in ay ilaahyada qaarkood dagaanayeen arligii Bunti( waa sida Masaaridii hore qabeene, tusaale, ilaahyada masaarida waxaa ka mid ahaa Heedar( Heathor, oo ahayd ilaahadii Miyuusika, jecaylka iyo quruxda), oo mararka qaarkood loogu yeeri jiray gabadhii Bunti( fiiri qormada Heathor, ilaahadii Musika, jecaylka iyo quruxda ee Caroline Seawright, 2003, bogga kowaad), sababahan aan soo sheegnay ayaana masuul ka ahaa in Bunti mararka qaarkood loogu yeero dalkii Ilaahyada( ama god’s land). Fooxa oo ahaa guud ahaan walxaha ugu faraha badan ee laga dhoofin jiray dalkii Bunti, waxaa loo isticmaali jiray, sharfidda Asnaamtii Masaarida,carfintii maydka, daawaynta dadka xanuunsan, iyo carfinta iyo qurxinta jirka Aadamiga guud ahaan, sidaa darteed, fooxu waxaa uu lahaa kaalin muhiim ah marka la fiiriyo dhaqankii, diintii, iyo nolol maalmaadkii Masaaridii hore, la yaab malaha marka, in xiriirkii u dhexeeyay Masartii hore iyo Bunti in uu ahaa mid aad u qotodheer. Maqaamkii uu ku lahaa dalka Bunti ilbaxnimadii Masar waxaa daliil u ah dhumucda qormo oo ay ka tageen faraaciintii hore oo ku saabsan dalkii Bunti, kuwaaso qaarkood aan qormooyinkan soo socda aan ku soo bandhigi doono, hadii Eebe yiraahdo. Xagge bay ahayd Bunti?, su’aashan khad badan ayaa ku daadatay, waxaa la sheegaa dalalkan soo socda in ay ka mid ahaayeen dalkii Bunti lo oran jiray ;Soomaaliya( erayga Soomaaliya waxaan qormadan u isticmaali doonaa dhulka ay dagaan dadka Soomaalida ah, Soomaali waxaan ula jeedaa qof walba oo aaminsan in uu yahay Soomaali ama ku hadla Afsoomaaliga lahjadihiisa kala duwan,Soomaaliya, haddaba, waxaan ula jeedaa dhulka Soomaalidu taraxdo ee Geeska Afrika, ee ulama jeedo Jamhuuriyadii Soomaaliya oo kaliya), Yemen, Ereteriya, iyo Sudan.Waxaa jira qormooyin taariikheed oo ay masaaridii hore ka tageen oo taageeraya in dalalka Soomaaliya,Ereteriya, Sudan iyo Yemen ay ka tirsanaayeen dalwaynihii Bunti. Tusaale ahaan waxaa jirta qorma sheegaysa in markii roob lixaad leh uu ka da’o Bunti in wabiga Niil uu buuxsami jiray, waxaa cad xiligan aan joogno in wabiga Niil uu ka soo burqado dhulka buuralayda ah Xabashida, gaar ahaan waqooyiga dalkan cusub ee la yiraahdo Itoobiya, sidaa darteedna, dad badan ayaa adeegsada arintan si ay hoosta uga xariiqaan in dhulka Xabashidu uu ka tirsanaa dalkii Bunti(fiir bogga, 2, ee qaybta uu tafatiray Mustafaa Xaaji nuur, ee buugga History of Somalis and Somalia, gaar ahaana qormada uu ciwaankeeda afingiriisigu yahay Somaliland the “Land of Punt” and its ties with ancient Egypt,). Ereteriya waxay ku andocootaa in ay dalkii Bunti ka tirisanaayeen, maxaa yeelay, waxay soo saari jireen walxii ugu muhiimsanaa ee dalkii Butni u dhoofin jiray Masar oo ahaa Fooxa iyo walxaha kale ee wax lagu carfiyo. Waxay kaleeto oo ay arintan ku daraan in Masar markii loo fiiriyo Soomaaliya iyo Ereteriya, in dalkan dambe uu u dhowyahay Masar fogaan ahaan, sidaa darteedna, aysan jirin wax loo aado Soomaaliya bacdamaa Ereteriya laga heli karo walxaha loo aadi lahaa Soomaaliya. Waxaa kaleeto jirta oo aad moodaysaa in ay taageerayso sheegashadaan Ereteriya arintan soo socota, waayihii hore ganacsiga Masar iyo Bunit waxaa uu mari jiray dhulka. Laakiin, waa dambe ayaa la sameeyay kanaal isku xira badda cas iyo wabiga niil, markaas ayayna bilaabatay in laga kaaftoomo safarkii dhulka, Haddaba maxay tahay sababaha nugu kalifaya taariikh ahaan in aan sheegano in Soomaaliya ay ka mid ahayd dalkii Bunti, amaba in Somaaliya ay hayd xaruntii dalkii hore ee Bunti. Aqoonlayda iyo qormooyinka taariikheed ee aan soo sheegi doono ayaad moodaa in ay nagu kalifiyaan in aan u eexano oraahdan; Soomaaliya waxay xubin muhiim ah ka ahayd dalkii Bunti, waxaana laga yaabaa in ay ahayd xuruntii dalwaynahaas la oran jiray Bunti. Aqoonyahan ka mid ah dadka dhulka qoda oo taariikhii hore daba gala (oo Arkiyoolajiiste ah) laguna magacaabo Neville Chittick, ayaa waxaa uu ku sheegay waraysi uu bixiyay intii uusan dhiman ka hor, in labo arimood ay halbowle u tahay in Soomaaliya ay ka tirsanayd dalkii Bunti.( ( fiir bogga, 2, ee qaybta uu tafatiray Mustafaa Xaaji nuur, ee buugga History of Somalis and Somalia, gaar ahaana qormada uu ciwaankeeda afingiriisigu yahay Somaliland the “Land of Punt” and its ties with ancient Egypt,). Kow, Bunti waxay caan ku ahayd dhoofinta walxaha wax lagu carfiyo sida fooxa, labo, Bunti waxay lahayd Buuro u dhow xeebta iyo togag ama baliyo badda u muuqda, sida ku cad sawir gacameedyada ku xardhan mowlaca Xitshabuut,( fiiri isla marjicii hore) (safarkii Xitshabuut oo faahfaahsan gadaal ayaan ka soo sheegi doonaa, laakiin hadda waxaa nagu filan in aan ogaano in Xitshabuut ay ahayd boqarad reer Masar ah, oo safaro u soo dirtay dalkii Bunti, islamarkaana diiwaan galisay waxyaabihii lagala soo kulmay safarkaas, qormada safarkan waxay ku xardhantahay mowlaceeda oo ku yaala bartamaha dalkan cusub ee Masar). Sidaa darteed waxaa dhici karta dalal ay ka mid yihiin Ereteriya in ay soo saari jireen foox, inkastoo fooxoodu uu k liitay kii Soomaalida iyo Carabta tayo ahaan, laakiin wali Ereteriyiintu way ku andacoon karaan in ay ka tirsanayeen dalkii Bunti, bacdamaa ay foox soo saari jireen, laakiin Ertertiya ma laha dhul buuralay ah oo ku gadaaman badda iyo baliyo biyood barbaryaala badda nawaaxigeeda, sababahan ayaana dhalisay in aqoonyahaynkan uu aamino in Bunti ay ku tiilay Soomaaliya( ama in Soomaaliya ay ka tirsanayd dalkii Bunti), bacdamaa Soomaaliya ay leedahay astaamihii lagu xardhay darbiga mawlaca xitshabuut( gaar ahaana woqooyiga Soomaaliya). Fikradan ayaana ah tan ay qabaan taariikhyahanada ku takhasusa taariikhda Masaaridii hore. Cadaymahan meesha kama saarayaan in Ereteriya, Itoobiya iyo yemen ay ka tirsinaayeen dalkii Bunti, laakiin waa cadaymo hoosta ka xariiqaya in Soomaaliya ay ka tirsanayd dalkii Bunti.( Fiiri isla marjicii hore) Neville iyo rag badan oo culumo xagga Akadeemiyada( jaamiciyiin) ah waxaa kale oo ay qabeen in xariirkii u dhaxeeya Soomaalidii hore iyo Masaarida in uu ahaa mid ka qoto dheer xiriir bicshaaro oo kaliya, oo uu jiray mid af, dhaqan, iyo mid dineed intaba. Culumo badan oo Soomaali ah oo ay ka mid yihiin Maxamed Jamac Xabashi, Cabdulaahi sheekh Xusseen, Cabdirahman sheekh Xassan, iyo Dr Cali Cabdiraxman Xirsi ayaa qabay in xiriirka iyo isasaamayntii Masarida iyo Soomaalidii hore in uu ahaa mid aad u dhumuc wayn. Dr Cali Cabdrihaman Xirsi oo mudo dheer daraasaynayay taariikhda Soomaalida, islamrkaana qoray buug aad qiimo badan oo loogu magac daray sidan: Arab factor in the Somali History; The orgins and the deveolopment of Arab enterprise and cultural influence in the Somalia Peninsula,” Phd dessertation, Universty of Clifornia, Los Angeles, 1977.[ Isirka carbeed ee Taariikhda Soomaalida; asalkii iyo horayumarkii shirkadda carabta iyo saamayn dhaqan[kii] gudaha gacanka Soomaalida] Dr Cali oo ka hadlayana xiriirkii Soomaalidii hore is Masaaridana waxaa uu yiri: Sida ka muuqata qabriga laksar ee uu leeyahay sarkaal ka tirsan dowladii masaarida, si wayn ayay iskugu ekaayeen qaabdhismeedka doomaha Bunti yo kuwii Masaarida, shiraacooda xataa waxaa la soo wariyay in ay isku ekaayeen. Maanta reer guuraaga Soomaaliga ah waxaa mar walba uu wataa barkin alwaax ah si uu tintiisa uga ilaashado[ wasakhda] tan waxay la mid tahay tii masaaridii hore[ ay isticmaali jireen]. Taa waxaa u dheer, barkintan Soomaalida waxay u taqaanaa Barkin ama Barshin,[ masaaridana waxay u taqiinay Barsi, labada erayna aad ayay iskugu dhowyihiin]( fiiri qormadii uu tafaray Mustafaa Xaaji nuur, ee aan horay u soo xusanay) Waxaa sababo loo hayaa in uu jiray xiriir dimeed, maxaa yeelay masaaridii hore qofka markii uu dhinto waxay la aasi jireen alaabtiisa qayb ka mid ah, sidaas oo kale dhulka Soomaalida waxaa laga helaa qubuuro loo yaqaano taamuli, qubuurahan dadka waxaa lala aasi jiray alaabahooda, waxaa kaleetoo laga yaabaa in ay jirtay kala amaahasho xagga dhaqanka ah, tusaale, waxaa jira shibmir masaaridii hore ay u haysteen in uu ahaa mid ka mid ah Ilaahyadooda, Soomaalidana shimbirkaas waxay u yaqaaneen shimbir fircown. Intaa waxaa dheer, in dhulka Soomaalida looga feesteeyo sanadka cusb sida Masartii hore, dabaal dabaga sanadka cusub oo dhulka Soomaalida qaarkiis looga yaqaano dabshid, dab ayaa la shidaa, bacdina afarta koone ayaa loo firdhiyaa, si la iskaga xijaabo xooggaga shaydaanka iyo waxyaabaha xunxun, bacdina feestadaan ka dib waxaa la sameeyaa alabari lagu baryaayo in beeraha ay si fiican u soo baxaan sanadkan bilaabanaya. Arimahan oo dhan waxay ku tusayaan xiriirkii qotada dheeraa u dhexeeyay Soomaalidii hore iyo Masaarida.( faahfaahin arintan ku saabsan ka fiiri qormadii uu tafatiray Mustafaa Xaaji nuur iyo buugga Dr Xirsi aan soo sheegnay ciwaankiisa). La soco qaybaha kale Qoraaga waxaa kala xiriiri kartaa Emailka hail0029@umn.edu

Thannk you all I asked you the above question so as to benifit from your thoughts and ideas, it seems, based on the qualites of the answers hotherto submitted, the end that I aimed at has yet to be achieved, for that reason I will let nature take its course.