http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Mussolini http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/Prelude05.html

Very nice style, is there anythng he's publlished available?

Haniif Why don't these damn loser africans solve their own problems and stop begging other people. Waryaa soo adigana qaxooti maaden aheyn?

I agree with you, both Org. mizz_S.lander the plan is they tell us that indenpendent organisations will take the money/aid over to countries that have a UN record of being the most corrupt in terms of aid work But i see two problems: First, and the as you clearly state the problem is the government, but there are no incentives for the government to release the leashes on the idependent organisations. i.e. there was a case recently where Oxfam had to pay $1m (US) for duty on its aid vehicles in to the Srilankan government. Another example is the Angolan govenrment refusing to sign up to transaparant accounting practices for its oil dealing with major companies. Simply the backdoor is still open Second, do you not think that aid distorts the local economy. FOr example food aid quickly makes its way to the free market severly undercutting local produce creating more poverty. Fiscal aid i imagine devalues the local currency by flooding it with a stronger foreing currency ... again creating inflation Third, aid is driven by policy .. agreee or disagree with its a fact of life. i.e. on the condition you'll spend it buying stuff from us. I remeber seeing an interiew with a big-wig American bush advisor a few weeks ago saying that their aid has always been given to encourage and reward their friends, and they dont have the colonial guilt of the europeans. Therefore, for me at least it is difficult to imagine altuarism as a big enough incentive. Dont get me wrong i think it works in small scale i.e. u see people dying on tv screens and you reach deep into your pocket, but that only allevoites the current situation and does not tackle the underlying causes And last, whats the objective of aid, who are we rewarding. Clearly its appealing for any goverment to get free cash. But its typically the worst off governments that need the aid, so i think you could argue that its a pervest incentive i.e. you obvioulsy dont care much for your population, abuse them some more and get rewarded for it. But all of this depnds on a BIG problem for me, simply Who defines aid worthy#?! esecially when we're talking about non-relief aid. Org. Lidia The issue is not Aid, but rather debt relief and fair trade, for if Africa had both, they would not need handouts from DCs Agreed, but how? when the system is effectively zero gain. i.e. some one has got to loose something for africa to gain. If you see it the market context, its in no ones interest. A few $million here and there is far far far less than the pain unemployment and lower standards in developed countries. One thing comes to minds here: there is no reason to shift profitable markets, only those with a low marginal gain i.e. argiculture. You can see this in the current tradewars between china a the eu for example, which is simply pissed off that the chine are trying to sell them the T-Shirts they used to sell. Or IT the sector moving to india, check out any big american geek site and you'll find a comment about an indian steeling a highly educated profesionals livelihood at a third the price. This is a very bitter pill to swallow for any developed country and its in its interests to cull competition p.s. Nova Scotia .... holy bannannas, i hadnt realsed we'd dispersed that far, how many of us skinies there? Org. somalican Africans should take care of their countries or they should let others run the country for them.This is a dog eat dog world, and unless Africans understand that, nobody can help them. 'fraid the problem is that africans do understand and try very very very hard, but lack the resources. ap-o-l-o-gies for the rant

by the Mafioso And by the "proximety" rule, you get a lot of it, I see where i've been going wrong all this time, then i say we stick close to you

indeed, many happy returns. Now get the cillaan out boy and dye those grey hairs orange, surely its time

Get it out of the way as soon as possible, surely you want enough time at the end for a second go at it, where you'll know the mistakes and pitfalls

Ok, since there is the G8 summit comming up and there's lets all lift Africa out of poverty pressure groups running, i'd like to pose three questions: 1. Why should dept be cancelled. If as we know most of the money will go to fatten the pockets of very fat people. And there is little in the way of transparant accounability in how the money gets used. 2. Is the effect of NGO's and foreing aid the result we see today. i.e. corrupt governments propped up by foreing money rather than effective tax and economic infrastructure. In fact i think you can probably argue that its this support that maintains these ragimes. Look at Mugabi politicising food aid. 3. How do you guys and gals propose the problem be tackled Your thoughts, please:

DO you think you correlate the results with the number of wives, say if 1 wife=3% maybe 2 = 6% ... or maybe it could be an exponential tailing off nicely, so that there is a optimal number of wives!?

lest we forget "We've got nothing against men but we're working on a cure ...." right

What you think of an MBA degree? Do it in the right places and you'll earn a shit load of money. Though i have to be honest i never quite understood what buzzinez people do anyway. Probably why i wont earn a shit load of money !

Alright men and women, enough with the intelectual bull. I'm signing my self up right here, righ now! I want a gf and i need her on the double. I've had it with the singledom requirements: 1. Hold a converstation that doent evolve around her 2. Pay her own way .. i'm still a student damn it! in return i'll do the same and give her half of my private island paradise when i can afford it. Any offers?

Kaleidoscopic UD is the winner of the prestigious and quite honourable (among his ilk) titles of Mr. Chauvinist (2003) and Mr. Misogynist (2004) Thats so unfair, man nobody told me there was a competition. Had i known, I would of at least tried! I demand a re-match following a well organised time table.

Suldaaanka I've seen and heard your analogy numerous times recently brother and it bothers me quite a bit. NOw i'm not against a young lady doing her thang, infact it aught to be commended, after all equality, respect, human rights, self empowerment and blah di blah and what we should strive for. But you gotto admit it's totally misleading and infact i think it is damaging. First you talk of the old man (somalia) as a collective entity that bears and realises the true collective consciousness of it's citizens now as ask your self is that true? You gotto see what i'm gettin at, and you know it aint so. BY that reasoning we should have 'Bantu land' in the south, since the somals have collectively abused as the name suggests the 'adoon'. 'Banadirland', cos their slightly lighter in colour, and were discriminated against for not having the 'true' nomad blood. 'lower Shabelle-land' 'cos their farmers who's land got ef'd by war, miss-management, draught and war. and so on. In fact if i dont like what my supposed government (regardless of its legitimacy) has done i aught take up arms and get my stick out and draw my borders as far as my arm reaches! Next your giving legitimacy to an illegal occupation and division of somalia. Now here i will accept that there is no such thing as somalia just somali people, since we've never had any clear lines before colonisation. Without going too much into border disputes, the up-until 1977 - 'The French Territory of the Afars and the Issas' is now a true model of a nation. SO if we're really gonna do this i would have more respect for the legislative NOT the administrative sovereignty of somali land if it were to be called 'The British Territory of the Isaaaq and Dhulbahte' - and i aint being all qabiil here (infact i know next to nothing about qabiil ) its just the people that live in the region. NOw i'm roots kinda guy, and that sorta thing disturbs me, because it creates needless division, kids grow up thinking 'cos some ol' man' and in the context of our conversation the young women has thrown her veil of abuse and drawn a sovereign border around the edges of its seams where it lands. This is obviously the justified, right and true state of 'tings! U see there are a huge number of compelling and valid reasons to declare sovereignty, given the state a bunch of megalomaniac cock-eye 'bstrds have got somalia into, ie. we want a peace and financial aid, till the shit gets it self together. but sovereignty 'cos the British 'effed us, the Italians 'effed you and the French are 'effing them, you gotto be kidding you gotto question in who's interst your doing this, what you expect to come out of it and what you legitimise.

is who a missionary, Shaheera is a radion dj Yevete is a releif worked i like this pic, http://www.flickr.com/images/spaceball.gif more eye candy http://www.flickr.com/photos/68984054@N00/sets/144541/

sorry, hello, how goes?

> Who the hell are you umm, no one > and where have you been all my life? no where

^^ 'fraid to say it, but i'd have to agree

aamiin

The beeb's Africa on your streets program visits hargeisa, story and photo's

surely u mean more butchery in Baidoa

what do need help with?1

p.s. what are you comments on this, mahadsanid

hello guys and gals I'm ashamed to admit that for a Somali I'm woefully ill informed on politics, but would like to raise a question on the sovereignty of Somali state. Essentially from a philosophical point of view - To what extent do you think Somalia can be regarded as a sovereign state? I put forwars that because of the power vacuum we cannot call Somalia a state but only refer to the Somali's as an ethnic group - a STATE by definition is something along the lines of: In international law and international relations, a state is a geographic political entity possessing political sovereignty, i.e. not being subject to any higher political authority (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/State) Now this definition does not say anything about ethnicity and suggests that a state is independent of ethnicity. As such the action of the AU in wanting to place peace keepers in Somalia can be seen as nation building in the old fashioned sense of invade and civilise -- therefore when Museveni-(without going too in much detail of his own problems ) says: "We have to deploy whether they (warlords) agree or not. They are holding nine million people hostage, how many years have we lost in Somalia? It is either 14 0r 15 and this must stop," the AU is the imperialist wanting to tame the savages (possibly without the undertones of exploitation and may even be ultiristically) Because of this reason, do the AU need any authority from the the leaders of Somali factions to place troops in Somalia. Further, without the consensus of popular majority can any group stand up and say we represent Somalia (as a state). Thus the possibly altruistic 'free for all' resulting from the actions of the AU creates intersting questions as to the division of responsability, authority and accountability between a micro and macro state. Essentially to whom do we delegate authority and under what circumstances can they then be held accountable?

^^ lol@juma, man your twisted