Sign in to follow this  

Kacaan distortion of Somali history exposed: who were the Dervishes??

Recommended Posts

Che -Guevara;969560 wrote:
It seems Caps draws some pornographic pleasure from this Englishman's writing. Go marry a woman, maybe that will calm you down and your unbridled anger.

Is it me or is ALL his references by the British? War miyeeysan dad Somaliyeed jirijin waagii Engrisku dhulka yimid? lol The Somali men and women that were in their 20s, 30s and 40s during the Daraawiish era, were in their 70s, 80s, 90s and to certain extent in their 100s during the Kacaan era. With Gaaroodi's logic, those first-hand experienced Somalis are all liars, while the British Colonizers are all telling the truth. lol


Heck even the Somali men and women that were in their 50s during the Daraawish era were still alive in the 1950s and 1960s. They are much more reliable since they were the victims against British Colonial aggression that had one mission and that was to leave behind "their own version of history' for the ages to come.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Below was a response I made to a post by Nuune. I dare any of u to come up with a rebuttal and/or challenge any of Gaaroodi's facts.


You do realize that these British sources that you're complaining about were also used extensively by Aw Jaamax, Faarax Idaaja and the other practitioners of historical alchemy who miraculously turned fairy-tales into fact. So Gaaroodi isn't doing something new here by citing British sources, but he is doing something new by posting these online for all to see, free of the clan motivated selectiveness and distortions of the Kacaan/neo-D@@rood historians.


Your notion that the British were biased and not neutral in reporting the events on the ground is illogical. Firstly, the British have no vested interest in painting one clan as more heroic than another nor as being more devoted to the daraawiish cause. But for arguements sake let's say the British were reporting in a biased fashion because they favoured the SNM clan over the Khaatumo clan (which I assume u are alluding to in your comment about neutrality). Why would they portray their chosen clan as hostile to British interests?. In such a case would they not go out of their way to highlight the loyalty of the SNM clan (loyalty being a virtuous attribute in their warped colonial minds) and exaggerate the belligerence and rebelliousness of the Khaatumo clan? This would make what Gaaroodi is currently doing almost impossible, as he'd have nothing or very little to substantiate his claims. But as you can clearly see we find no such bias in their historical records, because it is filled with accounts of perpetually shifting alliances within the region involving all the clans. There was no black and white divide between British friendly clans and pro Daraawiish clans, as the situation could and did change within months or a few years.


Secondly, it was not in the interest of the British to report inaccurate accounts of what was happening in Somaliland, as much of these writings influenced the military and political policies pursued by the british in the said region. Inaccuracies in the form of additions, deletions and embellishments would cost them dearly in terms of human and economic resources.


As for your last point, well it just boggles the mind how you could invest in Somali historians the power to be neutral in their accounts, knowing the power clan bias has on perception and interpretation, while accusing the White European who belonged to no clan, and who was only in Somaliland to ship somali meat to Aden and viewed all of us as wild and savage nomads, of being biased in his rendition of the facts.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wadani;969564 wrote:
Firstly, the British have no vested interest in painting one clan as more heroic than another nor as being more devoted to the daraawiish cause. .

It's the mark of colonial powers to create division by favoring one group over the other in the lands they capture, Rwanda anyone?


Wadani. I do believe you are sincere in this discussion and the Kacaan certainly omitted parts of our history, but don't defend Garoodi and jump over the cliff . One needs a sound mind to have decent discussion, a vengeful person like Garoodi is hardly that mind.


Nin waalan tolkii baa u miyir qaba marka don't encourage him.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this