Carafaat - It depends on your perspective. Somaliland official policy and many in that entity wish to secede in any way possible without talking to any other Somali entity. That door has been closed. The reality is that many Somalilanders don't see themselves as part of Somalia. They go to pains to disassociate themselves internally and externally. It's not surprising then that a development which attempts to strengthen and reconstitute the rest of Somalia may be seen as negative in the quest for international recognition for Somaliland based on the chaos in the south.

For an alien - you sure start a lot of topics. I'm sure there must be some topics started by others that you can contribute to.

^I don't think any one group or entity has a monopoly on pedantry, misinformation and puffed-up sense of self.

Semantics. Before he insisted that he was innocent. Now he's ready to accept some blame. Clearly he is a scapegoat and this decision was caused by monetary problems but I refuse to accept that a high official of a country that engaged in wide spread human rights violations doesn't deserve to be held accountable.

^It's not about being easily convinced. They support their entity as you support yours notwithstanding the Buhoodle killings. Why allow for yourself something you don't allow them.

Did the visa run at Ras al Khaimah back a couple of years. Thought the officialdom was a bit much compared to UAE or maybe a bad day for them.

I think overall this conference was a net positive for Somalia ex Somaliland. The world is committed to helping reconstitute the Somali Republic and will provide assistance in a variety of ways. There was no mention of the trusteeship/guardianship notion that were being pushed by some of our Northern comrades. I think this conference was a small net negative for Somaliland despite the talk of special status and being seated apart which is, in reality, a dimunation of previous talking points. Somaliland had never attended a high level Somalia conference before and had always insisted on unilateral recognition on account of peace and decent governance in contrast to the chaotic south. This method of going about recognition has been firmly put to bed at this conference. What is clear is that the world believes Somaliland is part of Somalia even though it is not seen in exactly the same light. That Somaliland sees itself as distinct and different is not the issue here but that the world sees Somaliland in the same orbit as Somalia. And as, hopefully, the rest of Somalia gets its act together - the underlying basis for international recognition will diminish as the effort for unilateral recognition has diminished. Finally - I think unionists or whaever you call them - have devoted too much ink to Somaliland and its role at this conference. It was not primarily about that. And this preocupation feeds into a negative cycle of narcism and self importance on the part of Somalilanders. I also think the focus(and commentary) should be on helping the south acheive security and some semblance of official governance and not on secession or international recognition.

I can't seriously believe you've posted video of ppl's lives ending here. This is too crazy.

Allah and Muhammad: Choir Quitter Gets it Wrong By Kary James PostsWebsiteBy Kary James | Yahoo! Contributor Network – 23 hrs ago COMMENTARY | Maybe Colorado high school student James Harper should have paid more attention in his world religions class. Harper is making headlines for quitting the school choir to protest an Islamic hymn. Harper, in an interview with KREX Channel 5, states that he is a Christian, and he feels that the song's message about Allah is inappropriate for a public school choir. "This is worshiping another God, and even worshiping another prophet ..." said Harper. Here's what Harper doesn't understand. Allah -- a God by any other name Allah isn't a name, it's a word. Specifically, it's the Arabic word for God. Arabic-speaking Christians pray to Allah. Allah is the God of Abraham and the God of the Old Testament, which means that Allah is just another word for the God worshipped by Jews and Christians. There is an Islamic saying that Jews, Christians and Muslims are all "People of The Book." The book in question is the Old Testament, also known as The Bible. So if Harper is a Christian, as he says in his interview, he would be singing to the same God he ostensibly worships himself. Muslims don't worship Muhammad Harper's second error has to do with the nature of prophets. The Old Testament is full of prophets such as Elijah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel. Neither Jews nor Christians worship these prophets, though they often revere them as divinely inspired. Similarly, Muslims do not worship Muhammad; they revere him for being the bearer God's word. For the record, Jesus is also considered a prophet in Islam. Religious objections: fine for personal choice, not fine as musical censorship If singing an Islamic song violates Harper's personal, religious convictions, quitting the choir is a fine decision. It's not unlike athletes who elect not to attend practices on their Sabbath days or would-be cheerleaders who don't try out over objections to revealing uniforms. The school choir is an after-school extracurricular activity, not a required class, so quitting won't affect Harper's grades or credits. His religious convictions, however, should not dictate what other students may sing. Harper's characterization of Islam is incorrect at best, and shows a complete ignorance of that faith at worst. So while Harper might say he doesn't wish to look like a racist or a bigot, he does appear to be playing one on TV. http://news.yahoo.com/allah-muhammad-choir-quitter-gets-wrong-234300871.html

LOL@ controlled detachment does wonders for people.

I do not think that lack of funds are the real problem in Djibouti since the public budget alone is nearing the $ 600 millions with minimal taxation (it would be great should the overall Somali budgets reach that target even within 10 years of better stability for example). But funnily enough, if oil is exploited, most Djiboutians are automatically entitled to it as they largely hail from Awdal and other northern constituencies part of the TFG 4.5 groups (pres H. Guled was from Garissa...some djibs and one djib MP are even from Puntland clan); it's not even dual citizenship as the Somali constitution start by defining nationals as all Somalis, not to mention that Djibouti itself is one of the claimed territories (though Somalis only reside traditionally in around 20% of Djibouti for the few really indigenous). More seriously, I think having pooled resources or cooperation is imperative: the Djiboutian date palms project with the Saudis could be ideally extended to the Bossaso hinterland for instance. Ports and Telecommunications are sectors where the Djiboutians are at the forefront in Africa too. Sharing expertise or even pooling resources in the Water and Clinical training areas could make a difference too. It may even makes sense for Somalia health ministry generic drugs procurement and other regulations be subcontracted to the Djiboutians at least initially etc (sharing experience is as valuable as wealth)... 600 million dollar budget and nothing much to show for it?! Resource money isn't distributed on the basis of clans or being Somali - it would be based on being part and parcel of the Somali Republic or its constituent regions. I can see resource money being given to O*gadenia because they are Somalis under occupation who would join Somalia if they could. I don't see why Djibouti would be getting any money. Unless it's bilateral aid of some sort but that is not an entitlement. Djibouti chooses to be sovereign and independant - so how could you share your wealth with those - the only answer here is Djibouti - either jioin up or isku filnow. Clearly this all premature since nothing has happened. By all means we should share expertise, freedom of movement and all other aspects of friendly nations but there are limits given the status the govt of DJ has chosen.

Taleexi;790659 wrote: ElPunto : See trees from the forest. Atom is the smallest particle of matter and itself consist of Electron, protoron and nuetron where each is doing its distinct function in order the atom doesn't collapse within. Therefore, let every tuulo with you thousand people has its maamul and after it obtains peace within it can initiate dialogue with its neighbors. This grassroots evolution will for sure have an exponential growth. I aint lying it is a cumbersome methodology but it remains to be one of the few solutions that are not yet tested. Ok - but you haven't addressed the concern. In your atom example there is a limit to the organizing structure ie electron, proton etc But the Somali case is one where there isn't. So using your example - the proton would be separated out into North Proton, South Proton etc and within that you could get Northeast Proton etc. etc. Once you agree on where the limits are can you obtain peace and iniatiate dialogue. And as Somalis we haven't.

^Adiga ma fiyodahay? Peacful Somalia had less violent crime than peaceful SA. Granted. Consider this - your ppl are now coming to violent crime/sexcual deviant SA in droves and much more would come if they could. As such - yaree insults and the derogatory comments.

Seriously! Soliciting and offering generalizations about groups of ppl based on the few you have seenin your city? Dee naga daya dee as Ngonge would say.

^Where exactly is the bottom? Sub to power of 15 clans exist - at what point is a 'bottom-up' defined? At the rate we're going - vilages of a few thousand will have 10 different self-dclared mamuls. Ultimately accountability is what matters. You can have it in various forms. The problem is that instead of pushing for accountability - everyone who has a grievance wants to set up their own mamul. Ultimately this extreme fad will collapse on itself.

I think appeal to reason alone can serve as a fair common metric ground in determining what's rational and what isn't. Disagreeing with this will require explanation of the inadequacy of reason as basis as well as the providence of a method that triumphs it. I don't think the laws against Holocaust denial are well-justified. I don't really understand why you think what he said warrants a warning. Also, could you explain bit more about favouring to keep the internet a free zone regarding blasphemy rules? (It makes perfect sense reading it, but I wasn't expecting it so I guess I want you to repeat it). @ PS - I'm not convinced what he did warrants being tried at all. How/why reason is adequate is the argument that you need to make. I'll tell you my position though. The moral and ethical boundaries are made by God and we should stick to those. He has created us and knows what is best for us - ergo the laws that stem from that would, ideally and in best practice, be the optimum vehicle for human happiness. What he said is disrespectful. In an Islamic society - we don't mandate respect for the Prophet but a the same time - we don't appreciate blatant disrespect. I don't think Muslims should be spneding much time searching for blasphemy - as long as ppl and society as a whole are in general respectful there is no need to hunt for culprits ie ie the internet Why are you unconvinced what he said doesn't warrant a trial? Are you familiar with the ins and outs of Islamic blasphemy laws as practiced in Saudi Arabia? I know I'm not.

^One time you agree with me? Clearly all the other times you were mistaken

Ileen bararaf-layasha waa wada langaab. Explains the vehemence.

Garnaqsi;790577 wrote: You are not, if it's ridiculous. There should be rational limits as to the rules you can create and one is never justified in persecuting someone over ridiculous rules. Putting philosophy aside, do you personally think they're morally/legally justified in persecuting him? Who determines what is ridiculous or what is rationale? Is it your metric that the world should adopt? Are the anti-Holocaust denial laws ridiculous or irrational? It's odd that many don't get worked up over those and other similar rules. Clearly the authorities are legally justified - it is their laws after all. Are they morally justified - it depends on what base your morality is built on - if you are a secular humanist etc - clearly not. As a Muslim - I think this man should be given a warning since he has apologized and seems remorseful. And I don't find what he said to be of the extreme gratuitous insults which blasphemy laws would police. I also do favour keeping the internet a free zone regarding blasphemy rules. PS - your continous reference to persecution is simply a denial of facts. After all - there is a legal basis here.

^What does justified mean from your perspective? If one has a law - however you may disagree with it or even ridiculous - if one breaks it - are you not justified in prosecuting him or her??

Did you read what you posted?? A/Y, Cadde, Faroole all contributed to SSC predicament and no Xaabsade and the others. If you want to get back at Faroole - do so by mentioning only him but if you want to indulge in fantasies - articles of this type are the ticket.

If he knew the law and deliberately broke it - he should be ready to deal with the consequences.

When you're in a predicament and you look at everyone else to lay blame on - you are by definition ridiculous. But do carry on.

^Simply a ridiculous article. Now's not the time for Khatuumo leadership to be talking about Faroole - there are bigger fish to fry.

If you read his work - he was simply an excellent reporter - and gave westerners insights into the Arab/Muslim world that weren't covered by their reporters generally.