What a colossal waste of time. He didn't admit wrongdoing, he is not paying anything. What was the point of this again?

"We believe in a Unified Somalia. Somalis can define it themselves. Like us, with 50 states." - Clinton

N.O.R.F;792875 wrote: Saxib, you're avoiding acknowledging what I'm saying. Somalia has problems. Whether its South Somalia, Puntland or AS controlled areas. The problems Somalia has are more than Somaliland's and have been protracted. Unless Somalia's problems are sorted (I have already mentioned what those problems are), Somalilanders will see no benefit in rejoining. Advocates for reunification should focus on solving the problems, maintaining peace and recovering Somalia's sovereignty before thinking about SL. Is that an irritaional perpective to have? I don't understand the urgency with which you want to derail my point. Acknowledge it first. ps more AU troops being sent to Somalia (just announced on Sky News). Those AU troops are the Kenyan ones just being rehatted under the AU mission.

LOL is this the surprise folks were telling us to watch out for. So you mean to tell me PM David Cameron sat down with diaspora groups and even a Universal TV interview, but didn't have time to meet the President?

Doesn't anyone realize the Parliament is empty? Post any other Parliament debate during the week for a comparison of what a typical debate looks like.

NGONGE;788300 wrote: Nonsense. The UK government, if anything, is carrying on with its old policy of assisting Somaliland but waiting for others to recognise it first. In fact, looking at the recent debate in the UK parliament and the exchanges that took place between the MPS (with mostly pro SL MPs having the lion share of the discussion) it seems that the UK is about to spring a surprise in this upcoming conference. - The British FM has confirmed that the newly appointed ambassador to Somalia has no business to do with SL and that things will still remain to be done through the embassy in Addis. - The British are happy to make a distinction between SL & Somalia when discussing both sides. - The British confirm that the only thing stopping them from recognising Somaliland are accusations of colonialist meddling and insist that African countries should be the first to do so. However, what's the betting that they'll take the opportunity to convince, pressure and persuade some of the 50 countries attending the conference to look sympathetically upon the SL case? - The British set up the Somaliland Development Corporation and (for maximum publicity and reach) will launch it a DAY before the conference commences. The coming days will show what the British government has up her sleeve. If the publicity for the conference (which is bound to be intensified as the date approaches) portrays SL as a progressive, peaceful and a promising democracy then we’ll know that the inevitable stitch up is on the Somali Republic. However, if it at all mentions the temporary meteor showers that are Khaatumo, Awadal & Maakhir then the stitch up may just be on the Somaliland Republic. As things stand though, I would bet on option one being the correct one. In addition, with the expected bickering between the many Somali factions attending this conference SL has a great opportunity to maintain its aloofness and subtly point to the collection of primitive partners the world is forcing them to work with. Furthermore (and with the possible assistance of the Brits and others), it can mingle amongst the many invited guests and build up a contact list that may help it in the near future (and the Turkey conference) if not in the immediate future. All in all, the signs are much more positive than many of the naysayers think. Don’t let the recent sparks mesmerize you just yet Nassir. SL is in a very good place, fellow citizen. This is surely exaggerated analysis. Do you really expect us to believe the entire premise of this conference is to portray SL in a positive light? Be serious for a second. Nothing indicates SL is central to the conference nor or behind its motives. The statements of British ministers themselves have hardly mentioned or treaded on anything SL related. In fact they've been more than happy to pass the buck on to the issue to Somalis themselves. A much more sober analysis would conclude they've forced SL to attend in order to argue that they staged a transcendent conference unlike any other on Somalia. This is about David Cameron and his own political perception and international sway.It takes an incredible leap oof faith to believe any Somali entity is a motivating factor behind this conference. The recent Parliament debate that you are referring to as if its a much indicator with respect to British policy, in fact showed how little Britian's parliament cares about this issue. There were 15 MP's maximum present for this debate and about 5 left during the course of it. Its just not that important and nothing that will transform the status quo will come out of this.

Che -Guevara;787425 wrote: Even if they weren't desperate, this is political suicide. This is what happens when people have no any political sense and I am most Somalis seem to fall in this category. Agreed but I think its been obvious for a while they have no sense of pragmatism whatsoever. The Taliban look like noted statesmen compared to this idiocy. The Talibs have long ago understood the rules of the game, while these guys are not operating on this planet.

^ That and absolutely desperate. I think this confirms they are on the verge of falling apart.

Abtigiis;786165 wrote: Ilaahay ha kaa abaalmariyo xaqa aad ku eedaantay. How true! Sad JB and few clan zealots don't see the bigger picture regarding this matter. I'm sorry but you've gotta save me the patronizing here. The man is my kin and I think you can make a case for him based on the obvious selectivity. But to argue he's a criminal who couldn't help but do so because of what clan he is, shows you continue to pay heed to the same concepts of superiority. I assure you the man in question doesn't view himself in such a deferential and helpless nature and neither do plenty of others. Break out of the mold that sees people of a specific background being victims with no agency over their lives. Even those in the worst of situations do not want pity or patronizing sympathy, but simple equal treatment.

Freedom;784313 wrote: ^^^ Who are the UK diplomats begging to show up, The TFG president said were sorry to Somaliland, please the righting is on the wall, people on the hate cool aid cant see that, i hope thats not you to Gold lol. I think this conference is more about Britain's own prestige than it does Somalia. That being said I have no idea how you think any Somali entity has leverage of the British. Explain to me how Somaliland, a major recipient of British aid and an entity that needs any international support for its political aims that it can get, has leverage of Britain? Do you really think SL can dictate terms to the Brits, one of the only major powers that has politicians somewhat receptive to your cause?

Freedom;784308 wrote: Duke, "marginalized the secessionists" lool come on old boy lets face it UK is begging Somaliland to show up to their meeting. Thats a fact dont drink the cool aid of hating somaliland to blind you on the facts :0 LOL this is the height of delusion goodness me. You think Somaliland holds political leverage over the UK?

This is political grandstanding IMO. Cameron wants to assert Britain's foreign policy and continue to appear relevant vis-a-vis their defense cuts. Not dissimilar to their decisions to take all the press for the Libyan intervention( along with Sarkozy). Seriously doubt they have any real strategic interests, security or economic here. Also the ambassador took the jet right back to Nairobi after the show was over and he will be based from there.

Oodweyne;780406 wrote: I really doubted that any of you know the real folks of this territories, the way we in Somaliland know them, even if some you are from this area in clannish wise. For, the diaspora and their endless wailing or lamentation is really not that important to us. Hence, it will not be what you imagined it to be, such as full-civil war. For, one think, the division of this community is so large; whereby, no amount of talk about Khaatumo or no khaatumo could paper it over. And, secondly, if we consider that civil-war was ever likely to be on the card, then, we would have seen to it to stop it long time ago. Hence, ours is “analogous” to that sense of “boiling the frog” gradually. Also, in no time, will matters get out of hand; for we control the temperature of the cooker. And, therefore, we are in a position to determine how long of the incursion each thrust must be, in-order to confirm our strategy. And, that strategy is: “encircle, suffocate, insertion, capture, built, normalised” . Which means, first "encircle" the city or the disputed area, then, “suffocate” , militarily, so that, you can control what goes in and goes out. And then, you “enter” (i.e., insertion ); and then, you “capture” , with hopefully little casualty. After that you then “built” , the apparatus of your state, such law and order and public offices, such as schools, and hospitals. And, then and only then, you “normalised” the situation by allowing the rest of the country to freely come and go as they wishes; as well as handing over the running of the city to new breed of officials from the town itself in every six months or so. Hence, this plan altogether will take six months to a year. This means, we are early stages of “encirclement” , where Buuhoodle is concern, indeed.. Quite the screenplay you have written here. The highest ranking Navy SEALS could not pull off an operation of this magnitude.

Abokor Omar;777554 wrote: Here is the deal. The SSC folks don't want to separate from Somalia, only a small minority is with Somaliland. We in Somaliland wish to separate from Somalia. Our destiny is unfortunately joined together. You will not leave Somaliland, forced will be used if need be, and when the grand meeting with Mogdisho begins, you will be part of the bargaining chips. Till than you are not allowed a state or any kind of progress. Harsh, I agree, but, who ever said life was ever easy. LOL who appointed you Minister of Defense?

Dr_Osman;776175 wrote: No region in Somalia that can compete on the oil front with Puntland. 5-6 companies inside investing, 1600km coast-line with concessions already gone with 60 billion barrells of oil best estimates. 20 billion barrels of oil onshore. TFG cries and screams when it hears puntland but doesnt do so with other region which tells you something LOL 60 billion!!!

Jacaylbaro;772967 wrote: He only comes out when he thinks there is a chance for him to get a position ,,,, so this is the perfect time for him after 20yrs. He loses, he will start bashing the whole thing ...... The man can't win. If he stays away, he is criticizing from an ivory tower and isn't on the ground level. If he comes down, he is trying to get a position. Which is it ?

Caraafat are you being facetious with your first point? If international recogiotion is dead in your opinion, what is the next possible step for SL?

Lool Im not from SL my friend, and my comment was aimed at this entire thread, not you in particular.

Stop politicizing an athlete.

Che -Guevara;766744 wrote: Reer Naajo were our neighbors in Xamar Go reer Bilaajo Carab-a great singer and great Somali. Really? I think you've might been neighbours with my mothers family lol

Thats a picture of her visiting a Somali Bantu community in San Diego.

Skeptic;766673 wrote: With the little freedom they get, they do stuff like this and we wonder why all the drought and the never-ending violence! ... What a joke and tasteless analogy.

LOL Carafaat is a radical, I think you should found a pseudo Unionist party. Not necessarily calling for outright union, but close to it.

How about autonomist?

Full disclosure, Im not from SL, but how is such a law justified? For proponents of the law. Do you think there are no grounds under which such a party can compete in the political process? For example do you think the likes of the Ikhwan etc should be banned in places were they succesfully have contested elections like Tunisia and Egypt? If the party is willing to contest elections, is not violent, what is the problem?