AfricaOwn;935294 wrote: So all the "known to police" Somali victims (stay within the context of this thread) that I posted earlier were wrongfully booked by the police? If you'd like to stay within the context of this thread, then don't derail it with your logical fallacies. Let's revisit some of your posts in this thread: First, in a knee-jerk response to Chimera's suggestion of innocents being killed, you ask what it means that most victims were "known to police," to hint that Somali youth who are killed are engaged in criminal activities: AfricaOwn;935272 wrote: Here you incorrectly define "known to police" as a person involved in criminal activity: AfricaOwn;935280 wrote: visit your local police station to help you define the term "Known to police", they'll tell you it means that the person was involved with criminal activity in the past. After realizing you made that up and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, now you try to argue that someone "known to police" can still be a criminal despite the evidence that most people who are known to police are documented in non-criminal encounters, and when that is pointed out to you AGAIN, the strawman above appears. Where did I say "all 'known to police' Somali victims were wrongfully booked," and when was this EVER the discussion? My point here is 1) to call into question your use of "known to police" as evidence of the criminality of Somali victims; and 2) to point out that your definition of "known to police" - which you define as a person involved in criminal activity - is absolutely and unequivocally false. Some people who are "known to police" are criminals, yes, just like some people who are not "known to police" are too. So once again, thanks for playing.

AfricaOwn;935290 wrote: But..."Known to police" could also be a person involved with criminal activity in the past right? Of course it can, but the statistics show that the vast majority are not. You're still wrong. Thanks for playing.

Showqi;935286 wrote: AfricaOwn is absolutely right. If the individual has a criminal record that means he or she was already known by the Police becauce that person was charge or convicted for a crime. Once again -- "known to police" says NOTHING about criminality and is overwhelmingly the result of documenting minority youth in non-criminal encounters: Safferz;935283 wrote: Umm wrong, just as I suspected, which is why I asked you what *you* think it means. "Known to police" means you've been stopped by the police and asked for your identifying information, which is then documented and entered into the system. This is something that happens disproportionately to young black men, both in low-income, overpoliced, majority black neighbourhoods and when (perhaps even more so) they're seen by police officers in white neighbourhoods. White children in the suburbs, even when asked a question by a cop, are rarely *documented* for it. Here are a few excerpts from a Toronto Star investigation, "Known to police: Toronto police stop and document black and brown people far more than whites" : "A Star analysis of Toronto police stop data from 2008 to mid-2011 shows that the number of young black and brown males aged 15 to 24 documented in each of the city’s 72 patrol zones is greater than the actual number of young men of colour living in those areas. Young white males and those designated as “other” do attract police attention, but nothing as pronounced as black and brown youth." "On a patrol-zone level — there are 72 in Toronto — the Star looked at the ratio of individual young males, aged 15 to 24, who were documented to the actual population of young males in that age group. Obviously, not everybody who is documented in a patrol zone lives there. Police say nearly all of the people documented in the zone that includes the Entertainment District — a place where people from all over to work and play — do not live there. The ratios of young men documented in that area, known as zone 523, to the numbers who live there are huge, since relatively few people live in that zone to begin with. For young black males, for example, the ratio of individuals documented to the population there is 252:1. For brown young males, it is 65:1. For young white males, 23:1." "While blacks make up 8.3 per cent of Toronto’s population, they accounted for 25 per cent of the cards filled out between 2008 and mid-2011. In each of the city’s 72 patrol zones, blacks are more likely than whites to be stopped and carded. The likelihood increases in areas that are predominantly white."

AfricaOwn;935280 wrote: visit your local police station to help you define the term "Known to police", they'll tell you it means that the person was involved with criminal activity in the past. Umm wrong, just as I suspected, which is why I asked you what *you* think it means. "Known to police" means you've been stopped by the police and asked for your identifying information, which is then documented and entered into the system. This is something that happens disproportionately to young black men, both in low-income, overpoliced, majority black neighbourhoods and when (perhaps even more so) they're seen by police officers in white neighbourhoods. White children in the suburbs, even when asked a question by a cop, are rarely *documented* for it. Here are a few excerpts from a Toronto Star investigation, "Known to police: Toronto police stop and document black and brown people far more than whites": "A Star analysis of Toronto police stop data from 2008 to mid-2011 shows that the number of young black and brown males aged 15 to 24 documented in each of the city’s 72 patrol zones is greater than the actual number of young men of colour living in those areas. Young white males and those designated as “other” do attract police attention, but nothing as pronounced as black and brown youth." "On a patrol-zone level — there are 72 in Toronto — the Star looked at the ratio of individual young males, aged 15 to 24, who were documented to the actual population of young males in that age group. Obviously, not everybody who is documented in a patrol zone lives there. Police say nearly all of the people documented in the zone that includes the Entertainment District — a place where people from all over to work and play — do not live there. The ratios of young men documented in that area, known as zone 523, to the numbers who live there are huge, since relatively few people live in that zone to begin with. For young black males, for example, the ratio of individuals documented to the population there is 252:1. For brown young males, it is 65:1. For young white males, 23:1." "While blacks make up 8.3 per cent of Toronto’s population, they accounted for 25 per cent of the cards filled out between 2008 and mid-2011. In each of the city’s 72 patrol zones, blacks are more likely than whites to be stopped and carded. The likelihood increases in areas that are predominantly white."

AfricaOwn;935272 wrote: The stats say most of the victims are "known to police" , now what does that mean to you? And what do you think it means? Because you'd be surprised at how little qualifies as "known to police."

Cara.;935257 wrote: Here's my advice: join a gang. In every single case of a young Somali man killed during a violent altercation, the community swears up and down that it was a case of mistaken identity, "wrong place wrong time", or that the young man was an upstanding, promising member of the community with absolutely no ties to local hoodlums. One can only conclude that bona fide gangsters must therefore be completely immune to being killed in these troubling times, and that the safest place for our young men is in a gang. So we're victim-blaming now?

Who is Adams?

Chimera;935195 wrote: Ps; do you have long and thick curly hair with a pretty face? Not hitting on you, serious question. Haha, why do you ask? I impulsively cut my hair short about a year and a half ago, but just hitting shoulder length again now

Chimera;935186 wrote: Well this is demoralising, so many views yet no support. Brother is in the wrong profession, or catering to a non-existent audience. I'm not so sure, Afrofuturism isn't an obscure genre of science fiction and there's definitely a market. He seems to have a lot of talent, but he needs to work on his hustle. I did a google search and an image search and the only websites that come up with Hiddigo is the indiegogo page and SOL.

Coofle;935128 wrote: You only know written arabic,,,once you go to Arab country you will have difficult time understanding the language...Alas! that is why what I read and what people say don't match also...I should stick with books and little sujuis... Books have gotten a lot better though, many specifically go into colloquial speech and focus on communication, and for Arabic you can even find material to help you learn specific dialects. It's unfortunate that most African languages do not have as many good resources and books you can use, but Swahili is one of the more popular African languages so you should be fine. Depending on where you are, you may be able to find Swahili classes (or hire a tutor). Definitely try and find people to practice with, and once you've reached an advanced beginner/intermediate level and know the basics, it's a good time to travel and spend a few weeks/months somewhere you can immerse yourself completely in the language.

Coofle;934788 wrote: it on the list of things I gotta do before I hit 40!.. But right now, Swahili is top of the list..I got to speak good swahili at the end of this year...the problem is I have no sufficient source to study from ...Even when I learn few things and try to use them people say ...its all wrong where did you learn this? ... Wuxu ilayn waa af-jinni (no disrespect) You won't be able to learn from the internet alone -- you need to invest in a good English/Swahili dictionary, and one or two books (if you can find one that comes with an audio CD, even better) that will help you with learning grammar structure. Swahili does borrow heavily from Arabic in its vocabulary, but in its structure it's a Bantu language so it's important to find a book that will explain it well and teach you the patterns. Make sure you study daily and supplement it with listening/watching Swahili language television and radio, and also try your best to find native speakers to practice communicating with. You won't learn a language on your own, the most effective way has to be a combination of studying and putting what you've learned to work in conversation with native speakers. Let me know when you're learning Amharic

Coofle;934752 wrote: Although I am a hardcore Af-Soomaali nationalist and also a multilingual Somali ethnic. Recently I had developed an interest (motivated) in Kiswahili language...I have never been to east african countries, and frankly if it was in my hands I would prefer to learn speaking Amharic more than kiswahili but you gotta do what you gotta do...right now I need to grasp basics of language fast... So why not learn Amharic?

Alpha Blondy;934669 wrote: its based on anecdotal quantitative research methodology. I'm rolling right now lmao. Say what now?

Alpha Blondy;934588 wrote: research has shown that somali/revert marriages proportionally have higher incidences of domestic violence than a somali marriages. Sources please.

Wadani;934460 wrote: Since social and economic conditions vary widely through out the world we should adjust the analytic lens we use to fit local context when dissecting disparate peoples perceptions of safety/danger, rich/poor etc. Socio-economic appraisals of this kind are inherently relative and it's very difficult, if not impossible, to draw a line that would represent an objective assessment that the vast majority of the world population could agree on. Such a feat would assume identical points of references (thus identical histories and development trajectories) when societies conjure up unsafe and unstable conditions. So whatever line we attempt to draw will be nothing more than a Western, postmodern, postwar (at least on our shores) criterion that has no place in the developing, conflict prone and often times preindustrial world, unless our experiences are somehow more 'real' and thus more valid as measures. You removed the line about not being a relativist

Wadani;934306 wrote: I wouldnt say their sense of safety and normalcy is distorted, because its perfectly calibrated with the conditions they find themselves in. They just have a different standard against which they judge safety/normalcy. Is there not a line we can draw for acceptably safe and unsafe conditions, rather than see it as relative? I agree with you that their sense of safety and normalcy is calibrated with their conditions, that's what I was getting at -- new ideas of "normal" and "safe" emerge in conflict and post-conflict contexts, when the reality may be that human security is still precarious.

Alpha Blondy;934286 wrote: yeah..... basically, i was saying that people shouldn't be speculating and stuff, inaar. just because you spent a summer holiday there, you can't really be talking like an expert, ya dig? That's true, but you can also observe a lot in a few weeks or months in a different place. I'll also go as far as saying people who live back home can sometimes have a distorted sense of safety and normalcy (because certain conditions/realities have become a new normal, in a way), which is why I'm interested in the perspectives of visitors. I have relatives in more unstable areas who will tell you everything is fine and urge you to visit, when it really isn't.

^^ care to elaborate?

Wadani;934265 wrote: When u say there u mean moqadishu right? Yep. I've been to Hargeisa recently.

SomaliPhilosopher;934245 wrote: Safety in Mogadishu and Hargeisa is night and day. The latter, I was able to to lurk around town 3 am (walking), while in Xamar, I was scolded on the daily for returning past maghrib (driving) Hmm. I'm just trying to gauge the level of normalcy and safety there these days before I decide to go (I was thinking about visiting sometime in 2014). Sounds like it's still too soon for what I'm comfortable with, though.

Juxa;934199 wrote: Oday, xamar was rough the first few days. I chose to stay with relatives instead of wasting the money on hotels when there is so much need. I really enjoyed it. Waking up, seeing relatives etc. I tried to limit going out to places where the qurbawi gather and instead went to the suuq with the girls, attempted public transport, donned indho shareer etc. When I got to hargeysa I was spoilt rotten and just relaxed. I also tried to see the locals and have nothing but great experience on both cities. I will go again this year insha Allah, hopefully for longer Not to derail the thread, but how safe did you feel in Mogadishu vs. your experience of Hargeisa?

Haatu;934076 wrote: They're Boran=Oromo. So... Kenyan, not Habesha.

wyre;934064 wrote: The guy in the interview who says, "they shoot us you some of our coleages are dead" is Habashi He's Kenyan

Saw this earlier today... if Westerners are going to make an industry out of Somalia, I take no issue with people like Bashir making them look like fools and getting some of that paper in the process.

Aaliyyah;933698 wrote: I agree with Che. The Somali government needs as much assistant as they can possibly get. But UAE is a rich nation. Not to mention the canadians were the only one paying; quiet unfair. It was a diplomatic issue between the two countries, it had nothing to do with needing revenue. UAE was angry that Canada did not allow Emirates and Etihad more landing rights in Canadian airports, and as a result UAE closed a Canadian military base there and introduced the costly visa for Canadians entering UAE.