Sheekadu markay dheeraato ayaan naca, Habalaha waxa la leeyahay in short, look out and find a gleaming Farah before its a too late, otherwise blow the dust off any dusty farah, am sure he will work like a stubborn mule. Boodhka/boorkaga ka tumo aad yar intaan wakhtigu ka tegin. Meeksha khayaal ayaan laskugu sheekayn. Nin baa layidhi in the wild west - maxaad Bangiga u dhacday, wuxu yidhi cos that is where the money is. runtaan idiin sheegayaa habalaha isxariifinayaa or enlightened xalimos, dont waste your time adeer.

^^Iwonder those pretend somalilanders now and leaders at that are all hanbadii Siayd barre, from riyaale, to ciro, ismail-yare, to Jaycalk-Sheekha. bloody parasites, they con us.

The Somalia he came to in 69 was totally different than the Somalia he left 91 as a runaway fugitive, he left when even the trust between people is gone, his narrow minded policies push the country behind the cliff. It was free fall afterwards. But com'on what is the difference between the somali street metality at that time and SOL's politcal section rightnow - both are burdened by the same baggage. humanity seeped out of everone.

^^HAHAA kulaha, waad isu camirtay, we call people like that isu camira - Xariifad cadilan

^^I think C.Trevor is warning girls against the same fate of Condeleez Rice, at 55 yrs of age and still playing with Bush's dog. ha noqon Guun is the plain somali but to get a life isn't that bad. So do it. Don't live your life in regret. Honestly honey all you can do is find a Faraax and get married you wont regret it when you hold the kids on your left and have your earned degree and high salary on your right. Hooyo waa malcaamad how daymol'aan. dadkaaga wax bar.

Camir said that :"Ethiopia’s intervention and its political factor can have several reasons. It might be for tit for tat or ending our protracted conflict that is destabilizing the region. I am optimistic and I had chosen the latter." Ya iibasay oo kale? anyon else .... Quite ironic, someone belives that,this isn't the end of the dark tunnel but its the mid point of Somali's self-destruction remotely controlled by that short guy in addis ababa, the guy got the best of them.

When was the date Omar Almukhatar was hanged by the italians?, was it 1940s or ealier? or ealier, i watched his lifetory film and he was a teacher turned to Mujaahid and found the shahadah in the hands of the italians.

Iwrote my day off slip yesterday, in fact Sheekh jacalka supported me to fill the little form when i asked SOL, when is Eid?, he prompted it's friday, and filled it so - therefore la jiifiyaana banaan la joogiyaana banaan. Secondly as far as taraawix is finished last night - you' all expect an Ciid, and its time to rejoice.

The devastating cost of Africa's wars: £150bn and millions of lives • Loss is equivalent to total foreign aid since 1990 • Economies, health and human rights all suffer Chris McGreal, Africa correspondent Thursday October 11, 2007 The Guardian Conflicts in Africa since the end of the cold war have cost the continent £150bn, equivalent to all the foreign aid it has received over the same period, according to a report released by Oxfam today. The study, Africa's Missing Billions, says that almost half of the countries on the continent have been involved in some form of conflict since 1990 at a substantial cost to lives and development. The report compares African countries afflicted by conflict with those at peace and says nations at war have, on average, 50% more infant deaths, 15% more undernourished people and life expectancy reduced by five years. Indirect deaths are 14 times higher than deaths in combat. The report has been released ahead of a UN conference on a proposed arms trade treaty as part of a campaign by Oxfam and other NGOs for a ban on weapons sales and transfers where they are likely to be used to commit serious human rights violations. About 95% of Kalashnikov rifles in Africa - the most common weapon there - come from outside the continent. The research by Oxfam, Saferworld and the International Action Network on Small Arms, a London-based international network of NGOs working to curb weapons proliferation, estimates that conflict shrinks economies by 15% on average. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, for instance, has suffered more than a decade of foreign invasion and civil war that, besides causing the deaths of about 4 million people, has cost it £9bn, or 29% of its gross domestic product, according to the report. Eritrea, Burundi and Rwanda are among the other worst hit countries. "This is a massive waste of resources - roughly equivalent to total international aid to Africa from major donors during the same period," the report says. "It is also roughly equivalent to the additional funds estimated to be necessary to address the problems of HIV and Aids in Africa, or to address Africa's needs in education, clean water and sanitation, and help prevent the spread of TB and malaria." The report says that besides the impact of increased military expenditure and destruction of infrastructure, war creates inflation, debt and high unemployment. "The indirect costs from lost opportunities are even higher. Economic activity falters or grinds to a halt. Income from valuable natural resources ends up lining individual pockets rather than benefiting the country. The country suffers from inflation, debt and reduced investment, while people suffer from unemployment, lack of public services and trauma. More people, especially women and children, die from the fallout of conflict than die in conflict itself," the report says. "For conflicts, the greater part of the human cost results not from deaths and injuries due to combat but indirectly from the loss of health and livelihoods caused by the disruption of economy and society. Across nine African conflicts, indirect deaths were 14 times greater than deaths occurring in combat." The report says that the medical impact of combat injuries is dwarfed by the broader consequences, including higher rates of disease and infection caused by large movements of people, poorer nutrition, difficulties in finding clean water and higher rates of sexually transmitted diseases. "Studies show that although women are often not targeted in combat as directly as men, women experience as much or more mortality in the long run. Women suffer seriously and exclusively from lack of maternal health services, as well as facing extremely high levels of rape and HIV infection. During the conflict in Sierra Leone more than half of women experienced some type of sexual violence." Ethnic conflict in particular erodes the ties of family and community, entrenching hatreds and distrust. The impact on children can be particularly severe, forcing many out of school and some into fighting. The report says its figures are almost certainly an underestimate of the true cost of conflict because they do not take into account the economic impact on neighbouring countries, which are frequently affected by political insecurity or an influx of refugees. One spillover from conflict is the vast numbers of small arms washing around the continent, which has contributed to violent crime. Armed robberies, murders, cattle rustling and gang violence have risen in several regions. The report says that combating poverty would be a big contribution to ending conflict but that other measures, including curbing the small arms trade, particularly the supply of ammunition, would also have a significant impact. "Economic growth and the lives and livelihoods of people in Africa are being held back by armed violence. In failing to control the arms trade the international community has let Africa down," it says.

^^heheh like maxa kaga shan iyo toban ah, what's fifteen for you. Lol.

She is one of the venoms the Islamic Ummah produced this aakhir zaman, she is a backstabber who plundered and went her way to insult the prophet-of-mercy, to be honest she is an ugly cow, may she burn in hell, have a sad life in this world and the worst to come for her(iA). Afterall she can still repent, Allah is merciful

When is Eid - on friday or sat?

Ciid Mubaarik everyone

Ciid Mubaariik Dhamaantiin, it was Eid of 2006 Where is Sh.Nur and Xiin?, that was the year that was!

Inaa Lilaah Wa Inaa Ilayhi Raajicuun. My thoughts and prayers to you and family, samir iyo iimaan & naxariitii janno Ilaah has siiyo Sataraka wa ridaaka khairun mina dunayaa wa ma fiiha

Ian Sample explains the genome wars The Human Genome Project came into being in an atmosphere of deep unease. Many scientists saw it as an extravaganza that would suck up vast sums of money. They feared other research would wither and die. But while senior researchers openly attacked the idea, one threw enough weight behind it to convince the US congress. That person was James Watson, joint discoverer of the structure of DNA, and he was appointed director of the Human Genome Project at the US National Institutes of Health in 1988. At the time, only short strands of DNA had been read, and then at great expense. To unravel the entire human genetic code (or genome), with its 46 chromosomes each made up millions of "base pairs" of nucleotides - denoted by the letters G, T, A and C - was close to unthinkable. Once every letter had been read, scientists would scan the chromosome for genes - self-contained segments of DNA which contain the basic instructions for making an organism. Watson set out to establish an international consortium to take on the challenge. Britain was an obvious partner; scientists at the Sanger Centre in Cambridge had already begun learning the black art of sequencing. Soon, France, Germany, Japan and China were on board. The attempt was officially launched in 1990, and according to Watson would take 15 years to complete. The timescale reflected the laborious approach. Each chromosome was broken into short fragments which were copied (to produce large quantities) and tagged with fluorescent dyes. These were then squirted on to a gel and sorted by length using an electrical field before each letter of each fragment was read. "A more important set of instruction books will never be found by human beings," Watson wrote. But the project was to descend into what ultimately became the most acrimonious race in modern science. The consortium used DNA sequencers supplied by Applied Biosystems, a company that had started work on a new generation of machines. With those, the company's president, Michael Hunkapiller, realised, it would be possible for a single institution to beat the consortium to the finishing line. Aware, too, that competition would increase demand for his sequencers, Hunkapiller oversaw the creation of a rival team. At its head, he appointed Craig Venter, a former government scientist already controversial for applying for patents on 337 human genes. Venter was also backed by Tony White, then president of the scientific instrument company, PerkinElmer. The Venter team's approach was dirtier and faster. Instead of painstakingly reading each chromosome in turn, they would use a "shotgun" method that first shattered the entire human genome with ultrasound, then read the fragments. Complex software was then used to work out how to stitch the letters of the code back together again. Venter's company, Celera, declared it was joining the race to sequence the human genome in 1998, adding that it would have the job done in just three years. Venter made no secret of his wish to profit from the human genome. He envisaged a huge DNA database that companies would pay to search through. Sir John Sulston, who headed the British arm of the Human Genome Project, was furious at what he saw as a bid for private ownership of our genetic inheritance. Though many scientists were dismayed at Venter's plans, the rivalry gave a much needed kick to the human genome project, which for 10 years had progressed at a crawl. The consortium rapidly refocused its efforts and claimed it would complete the genome two years faster than planned. Likewise, the public effort kept Celera from monopolising the data, from which it could have generated a huge income. Around the world, labs working for the public consortium churned out genetic data as fast as they could, immediately uploading it to public databases, a bid designed to prevent Venter from patenting them. Venter, who did not disclose any of his own sequence data, made no secret of using the consortium's results to boost his own. Ironically, as Venter records in his book, pharmaceutical companies began trawling the public database in search of future moneyspinners. In 2000, several meetings to bring the two sides together broke down in acrimony, but eventually, the two rivals agreed to an uneasy and temporary suspension of hostilities, each realising that a coordinated draw was in both their interests. In June, both declared the genome effectively complete. From the White House, Bill Clinton said: "Today, we are learning the language in which God created life." From Downing Street, Tony Blair said: "Let us be in no doubt about what we are witnessing today." What they were witnessing, in fact, was a deeply manufactured truce, with the genome only 85% complete. Two years later, Craig Venter was forced out of Celera by Tony White, who was intent on turning the company into a drugs giant. Four months after leaving, Venter admitted that Celera's human genome, supposedly a mix of DNA from five anonymous individuals, was predominantly made up of his DNA. In 2003, the public consortium announced once more that it had completed the human genome. This time, the claim was closer to the truth, though chunks of the code remain unread even now. Even so, it was the most extensive and highly accurate sequence of the 3.1bn nucleotides that are responsible for turning a one cell egg into an adult of 10 trillion cells. The final price tag was approximately $3bn (£1.47bn).

Cracking the code to life The Guardian 06/10/2007 When Craig Venter announced that he was going to unravel the human genome, it sparked one of the most bitterly contested races in the history of science. Here, in an extract from his new memoir, he describes the acrimonious sprint to the finish Craig Venter The Guardian Monday October 8 2007 The first tangible evidence that I had offended the genome scientific establishment came soon after I announced that I was going to sequence the human genome, our entire genetic sequence, with unprecedented speed. Once the publicly funded scientists had decided that they wanted nothing more to do with me or my teams, my research institute's application for government funding was turned down. In hindsight, it was inevitable that my attempt to simultaneously jump-start the human genome project and join hands with the establishment was doomed to fail. What was different in my case was that I was able to find alternative sources of backing. I would head a new independent company funded by PerkinElmer, the parent company of Applied Biosystems (ABI), which dominated the market for DNA sequencers (machines that read DNA) and now proposed to build a new, automated machine to sequence the human genome. PerkinElmer would invest $300m (£147m) and the human genome sequence we produced would be published and placed in the public domain on completion. My critics had dwelled on how I was only in research for the money. They got it backward: I was interested in the money only to have the freedom to do my research. After some discussion we came up with a logo for the new company, a little dancing figure whose limbs formed a double helix. And we had a name: Celera, chosen because it was derived from the Latin for swiftness. My working assumption was that my data would be essentially the only real data from the human genome for several years to come: the government-led competition was advancing at a crawl. But by September 1999, the pressure was on us. The public programme had announced that it had already sequenced about a quarter of the genome. In another change of direction, my rivals announced they would produce just a crude version of the genome and finish this "first draft" by the following spring, no doubt accompanied by a media event. The key differences in what we were doing at Celera and the altered publicly funded approach came down to standards and strategies: the whole-genome shotgun technique versus the clone-by-clone traditional approach [see Venter versus the establishment below]. I knew that we had the winning strategy with the shotgun technique, and that even with the same or even greater sequencing capacity, the government-funded labs could not compete unless they abandoned their standards and changed their plan to match ours. In place of their original plan of publishing high-quality data over the course of a decade, my self-proclaimed rivals - the five surviving genome centres, which had nicknamed themselves the G5 - were now making an effort to dump as much raw sequence into the public databases as quickly as possible. They had convinced themselves that, by doing so, they were blocking me from both patenting the genome and getting credit for finishing first. I was baffled by the silliness and immaturity of their thinking. While my many critics were obsessed with the release of the Celera data, the public-funded labs were heedlessly dumping sequences into the public databases that the pharmaceutical companies were gleefully downloading nightly so they could file patents on them. This naive policy by all those opposed to patenting of the human genome therefore had precisely the opposite effect: gene patents were filed sooner and faster, and almost all were based on the government data, not Celera's. The downgrading of the government objectives was met with little comment or analysis, thanks to a masterful job in public relations. No one seemed to appreciate that by changing its objectives the public effort had also, in effect, exchanged the aim of a highly accurate and complete chromosome-by-chromosome effort to sequence the human genome to a quick and dirty "rough draft" that made what we were undertaking at Celera appear thorough and comprehensive. Thanks to the change in the strategy of the G5, my bosses at ABI stood to make much more money. ABI loved feeding the public programme, which now wanted to buy millions of dollars' worth of DNA sequencers from them (as well as the associated chemicals necessary for the job), and were like arms merchants who had started a war so that they could sell weapons to both sides. It was frustrating having to work so hard to build team spirit among the Celera sequencing group as they watched our business "partner" equip our rivals at a faster pace. Using the same instruments for reading the genetic code meant that - aside from the not inconsiderable matter of the government-funded programme's having more than tenfold greater resources of money and manpower - the key difference between the Celera and public programmes lay in our respective scientific strategies. To most, the word "sequence" implies that the base pairs of the genetic code are actually assembled in their proper order; no one would think he had assembled a jigsaw puzzle simply by throwing the pieces on a table. However, because the government-funded labs were doing thousands of mini-genome projects, they had thousands of mini-jigsaw puzzles to solve, order and orient, whereas we had only one big one to do. I was betting on the integrity of our science to prevail and on our programmers, our algorithms and our massive computer to outcompete the much bigger public effort. By now the race to read the genome had captured the imagination of many, and the public perception of who was winning became an important issue for both sides. The government-backed labs wanted to impress on the politicians that they still deserved funding. As for Celera, we were a public company, which relied on the support of its investors. Every government-funded lab had one or more press officers. The media, however, returned again and again to one theme: Craig Venter as underdog, a sole crusader and outsider who was pitted against the collective might of the establishment. Under his leadership, Celera was taking on the official Human Genome Project, a $3bn to $5bn, government-backed international effort with major centres in Britain, France, Germany, Japan and the United States. While my team liked this David and Goliath spin, Francis Collins and his colleagues at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland would grumble about how they were overwhelmed by my "huge public relations advantage". Collins griped about the unseemly articles depicting the race to the genome, where I was standing on the helm of my yacht as he crouched on his motorcycle. John Sulston moaned: "Trying to get reporters to print the admittedly more complex analyses that we felt were being ignored was going to be an uphill struggle." The whining of the public project about my massed ranks of spin merchants was a constant source of amusement at Celera, for my "PR army" was in fact a young woman named Heather Kowalski, now my fiancee. Heather knew there was only one way to cultivate the media: by being honest. Most important of all, she did not shrink from telling me when she thought I was saying or doing something ****** or misguided (a not infrequent occurrence). Work did continue despite the increasing public scrutiny. We were now producing between 50m and 100m base pairs of DNA every 24 hours, and the sequence was of extremely high quality. If we wanted to, we could also draw on the data released by the government effort every day into the public database, GenBank. Like other taxpayers, we had helped to fund this effort, after all. Pharmaceutical companies downloaded the data nightly, and Incyte was very open about its use of GenBank to create a database that they used to compete with us. Francis Collins did not complain about these outright commercial uses and, indeed, used them as a further justification of the value of federal effort. Yet after I indicated that we would do a de facto collaboration with the taxpayer-funded effort by including its data in our assembly, there were anguished howls of protest. The G5 had discussed whether they could withhold their data from Celera even though their mantra had always been that they were providing the sequence free to all. There were even suggestions of scientific fraud, such as when Sulston told the BBC that the Celera effort was a "con job". As the grandstanding continued, the press battles became more and more wearing. I worried that Collins would manoeuvre to use the White House to give the impression that the government and Wellcome Trust were the only parties involved in sequencing the human genome, whether they finished or not. A triumphal broadcast from the Rose Garden was going to carry more weight than anything my one-woman PR army could put together. We set ourselves a simple goal: to make a joint announcement with President Clinton when at the White House when Celera finished its first assembly of the human genome. At that time, the government effort would give a progress report on its own efforts, and we would announce that we would work together toward a joint publication in Science. As the date drew closer, the tension increased, but by then the momentum was unstoppable. Once I had agreed to a draw [see Venter versus the establishment below] we wanted to announce it at the White House as quickly as possible before hostilities could flare up again. When I turned my attention to my White House speech, the pressure increased after we were informed that this would be the first time in history that a key scientific advance would be announced from the White House, and I found myself struggling over the decision of what to say and how to say it. I did not sleep the night before not one but two world leaders - Tony Blair and President Clinton - were to unveil the results of the greatest concerted undertaking in biology. The coming celebration would be hailed by some as the most notable intellectual moment in history itself. Happily, on June 26 2000 all the rivalries were swept aside by everyone's feeling of being part of an historic achievement. At the White House, there was an electric atmosphere and a mood of high anticipation. The press conference was unlike any I have been to before or since. Held in the ballroom, it included close to 600 people and an unbelievable collection of television cameras and photographers. Flash after flash strobed across our faces. To everyone's surprise the tone remained positive, cooperative and cordial. We were all one big happy genome family. · This is an edited extract from A Life Decoded: My Genome, My Life, by J Craig Venter, to be published by Allen Lane on October 25, priced £25. To order a copy for £23, with free UK p&p, go to guardian.co.uk/bookshop or call 0870 8360875. Craig Venter will be giving public lectures in London and Oxford, October 23-25. Further information from: penguin.co.uk/events Venter versus the establishment

^^and you're not a brit yet! What a shame

The prophet(SCW), emphasised about Islaax data bayn - or making peace between peoples, lack of it he called it - Alxaaliqah or the razor,literary a mighty blade - it deosn't shave the hair as he said, but it shaves the deen, means erdicates, and all this is happening and in Ramadan. How long the somalis were muslims? 600 years, 1000 years, or in between and we failed to understand the difference between hypocrisy and reality.

Ina Lilahi wa inaa ilayhi raajicuuun Ghanima, Samir iyo Iiman iyana naxariistii janno Allah ha siiyo.

Originally posted by -Nomadique-: Think Cowrie shells. Cowrie shells. Think of Geel adeer, camels are coming back!

^^Amiin, naxariistii janno Allah ha siiyo

Originally posted by SheekhaJacaylka: Today, I am glad that i'm just glad that i'm glad Waad so walanaysaa baan u malaynayaa

^^Anything with seafood waan ka dhagaysanaya and most welcome, waan dhameeyey hilib, bariis, laxoox,those are all my cup of tea.

^^You become the resident chef in SOL, Haye maxaa cusub ee karinaysa Ciida? not moofo i hope!.lol