abaayo, well i dont. I am very sorry.

Black Hawk Down.

Originally posted by Lucky: THANKS BUT NO THANKS!!! Now teLL what does my inteLLigence have to do with what i said-its the truth and you know it! Let me see. You, just like many others who replied to this thread have done so without really answering any of my questions. It asked what do you think of the Jabuutiyaans, not what you think of the thread. I dont think you should be telling me what to put up and what not to. Back to your question:What is irreLevant is the topic itseLf. Im not surprised that you wouLd post something Like this. The topic is irrelevant? And you somehow feel its your place to tell me that? I mean what are you trying to convey here? I asked what the noble nomads here think of the Jabuutiyans. As i have said before they are SOMALI so Leave it at that-unLess of you are trying to stir something up that is. Maybe if you haven't been listening, i myself have a Djiboutian blood in me, and have many Djiboutian uncles and aunts. So i beg to differ about trying to stir anything up.

Originally posted by Lucky: This is one useLess topic-very irreLevant as someone mentioned. Lets Leave peopLe aLone-they are somaLi...Lets Leave it at that.Big deaL the french took over their territory and they got a different name. To the^^^^^poster"the itaLians took ya'LL over, and you stiLL dont know how to cook pasta"is that suppose to be some sort of an insuLt? :rolleyes: WeLcome to the SOL famiLy and pLease refrain from using vuLgar Language-as it is not permitted in the premises. PeopLe Lets stop wasting time and generaLizing here-Lets behave Like RationaL and ReasonabLe human beings...aight! Lucky i think you are very intelligent person, but that wasn't smart. What did you see irrelevant about asking a question? Just asked what they thought Jabuutiyaans.

Ok.

Please do that Alien. Its very strange to have not heard of that when it happened. Its not something common that happens in our community, and i am very sure i would've heard of it - if infact it did happened.

Whats funny about this is Somalia, a country many times less powerful than britain has managed to kick the Amerikaans out of the beautiful motherland. God i feel proud of my Soomaalinimo.

We are now a client state Britain has lost its sovereignty to the United States David Leigh and Richard Norton-Taylor Thursday July 17, 2003 The Guardian Britain has by now lost its sovereignty to the United States and has become a client state. As Tony Blair flies in to Washington today to be patted on the head by the US Congress, this is the sad truth behind his visit. No surprise, therefore, that the planned award to him of a congressional medal of honour for backing the US invasion of Iraq has been postponed. To be openly patronised in that way, under the circumstances, would be just too embarrassing. Is it fair to accuse the US of destroying our national sovereignty? The issue is so little discussed that even to make the claim has parallels with the ravings of the europhobes that Brussels plans to make Britons eat square sausages. Yet consider the following seven facts, none of which depends directly on the way the US dragged Britain into Iraq, nor on the current MI6-CIA intelligence blame game about the war. Firstly, we cannot fire cruise missiles without US permission. The British nuclear-powered submarine fleet is being converted wholesale so that it is dependent on Tomahawks, the stubby-winged wonder-weapons of the 21st century. They transform warfare because of their awesome video-guided precision. But Britain can't make, maintain or target Tomahawks. The US agreed to sell us 95 cruise missiles before the Iraq war, the first "ally" to be thus favoured. They are kept in working order by Raytheon, the US manufacturer in Arizona. Tomahawks find targets via Tercom, the American terrain-mapping radar, and GPS, its ever-more sophisticated satellite positioning system. The Pentagon, meanwhile, is trying to block Galileo, a European rival to GPS, which the French think will rescue their country from becoming a "vassal state". Sir Rodric Braithwaite, former head of the joint intelligence committee and former ambassador to Moscow, published earlier this year a little-noticed but devastating analysis in a small highbrow magazine, Prospect, of the price we are now paying to the US in loss of sovereignty. Of the Tomahawks purchase, he wrote: "The systems which guide them and the intelligence on which their targeting depends are all American. We could sink the Belgrano on our own. But we cannot fire a cruise missile except as part of an American operation." The second in this list of sad facts is better known. Britain cannot use its nuclear weapons without US permission. The 58 Trident submarine missiles on which it depends were also sold us by the US. Just as Raytheon technicians control the Tomahawk, so Lockheed engineers control Trident from inside a Scottish mountain at Coulport, and from the US navy's Kings Bay servicing depot in Georgia, where the missiles must return periodically. "Cooperation with the Americans has robbed the British of much of their independence," Braithwaite observed. "Our ballistic missile submarines operate by kind permission of the Americans, and would rapidly become useless if we fell out with them. Since it is no longer clear why we need a nuclear deterrent, that probably does not matter. But it makes our admirals very nervous about irritating their US counterparts." The third awkward fact is that Britain cannot expel the US from its bases on British territory, or control what it does there. Some, such as RAF Fairford, are well known - surrounded by armed guards as the huge B52s roared off nightly to bomb Baghdad. Others are remote, particularly Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, where any British citizen who attempts a landing will rapidly find himself arrested. The bases are given bogus British names - such as RAF Fairford or RAF Croughton - because Britain is ashamed of all this. "The British have never questioned the purposes for which the Americans use these bases," Braithwaite wrote. "The agreements which govern them leave us little scope to do so. It is yet another derogation from British sovereignty." The fourth fact is about intelligence. The row over scraps of British material used for public propaganda purposes - alleged uranium from Niger, alleged 45-minute Iraqi missile firing times - shows, if nothing else, that MI6 does still run independent spying operations. But it obscures the big truth: the policy-determining, war-fighting intelligence on which Britain depends is all American. The US has the spy satellites and the gigantic computers at Fort Meade in Maryland which eavesdrop on the world's communications. Britain gets access to some of these because GCHQ in Cheltenham contributes to the pool and collects intercepts which the US wants for its own purposes. This is cripplingly expensive: Britain has just invested a wildly over-budget £1.25bn in rebuilding Cheltenham. Yet it brings us no independence. Braithwaite again: "The US could get on perfectly well without GCHQ's input. GCHQ, on the other hand, is heavily reliant on US input and would be of little value without it." Robin Cook, the former foreign secretary, recently - and somewhat drily - let it slip to the foreign affairs committee how the US wears the trousers in the intelligence marriage. America receives all the intelligence that Britain gathers, he said. "On our side, we have full transparency." Britain, on the other hand, merely "strives to secure" transparency from its supposed partners. These points lead inexorably to the fifth fact about our loss of sovereignty. Britain can no longer fight a war without US permission. Geoff Hoon, Britain's defence secretary, said humbly last month that "the US is likely to remain the pre-eminent political, economic and military power". Britain would concentrate, therefore, on being able to cooperate with it. "It is highly unlikely that the UK would be engaged in large-scale combat operations without the US," he said. As Rumsfeld brutally pointed out, however, the US could easily have fought the Iraq war without Britain. The sixth fact is that Britain cannot protect its citizens from US power. Blair faces an outcry as he flies into America because the US refuses to return two British prisoners for a fair trial; rather, they have to face a Kafkaesque court martial at Guantanamo Bay. And the seventh and final fact is that Britain is reduced to signing what the resentful Chinese used, in colonialist days, to call "unequal treaties". At the height of the Iraq fighting, David Blunkett went to Washington to be praised by John Ashcroft, the US attorney general, for what he termed Blunkett's "superb cooperation". Blunkett agreed that the UK would extradite Britons to the US in future, without any need to produce prima facie evidence that they are guilty of anything. But the US refused to do the same with their own citizens. The Home Office press release concealed this fact - out of shame, presumably. Why did the US refuse? According to the Home Office, the fourth amendment of the US constitution says citizens of US states cannot be arrested without "probable cause". The irony appears to have been lost on David Blunkett, as he gave away yet more of Britain's sovereignty. If we really were the 51st state, as anti-Americans imply, we would probably have more protection against Washington than we do today.

Hmmm. Thats really something big, and i am very suprised i havent' heard that story (have 5 families in Canada). Can you remember a link to a newspaper that has picked up the sentencing? Does any other nomad heard of this? How old was the guy?

This is why i think we are more than 20 million now. If you look at the 9 million figure, it says it was taken at 1977. Thats almost 30yr ago. So do you think we have stayed in 9 million for that long? Kenya's population has increased from 12-25 from that same period. And Ethiopia's population has doubled in that 25yrs. Large population always means a good thing for the country. Another reason why i think every able Soomali man should have more than the usual one wife thing. If we dont want to see a decline in our population. Having multiple wifes, and expecting women to have more 3 children is i think what made us 20 million now. We need to continue with that.

Brother Zakariye. Its good to see you again. Sxb, waa sidaa tiri, meeshan wixii xumaa ayaa soo wada baxay.

Originally posted by silent-sistah: nin yaaban ,,,,,walaahi that is sad...that a somali father would sexually assult his own sons..Subahan Allah....Allah ha u gargaaro,,, It wasn't a Soomali father, but an Amerikaan father. That was just to show, how these Amerikaans treat their children, and you people somehow think Soomali parents are evil compared to these GAALO. In the 30yrs i have lived, i have never heard of any Soomali father/mother that has done anything like that.

Originally posted by harmonyangel: Nin Yabaan, what the hell are you talking??? Getting girls tested for their virginity??? Have you even read the Quran properly? Tell me this, is the NO-SEX-BEFORE-MARRIAGE aspect of Islam, only for girls? Does this only apply to women??? I DONT THINK SO! If you think it does only apply to women, please show me the Hadith and I will apologise. But so far, it applies to BOTH men and women, so if the man is wanting to test the woman to see if she is still a virgin...hell, lets hook him up to a lie-detector and see if he's been humping round the place, LIKE THEY ALL SEEM TO BE DOING LATELY. Anf if he's lying, then So you think its unislamic to ask your future wife to be tested to see if she was still a virgin, but nothing wrong in asking the man to get tested. Please maskax isku yeel. If a man has to be tested, the women would have to be tested as well. Who said women were free of those same deseases? And besides, how can you possibly make him get tested? Its not like you can force him or anything.

Just recently in my city, a father was sentenced to 5yrs in prison, for molesting his two sons.

I heard there was some bililiqo in Ottawa. My mother who lives there, told me people were breaking into stores and looting it.

Miss Lexus weren't you banned from here? Today when i was driving home from work i saw a Lexus car with the plates *Lexus MS* walahi

I know there are alot of Soomalis who live in those areas where the power has went. How are you people dealing with it? It reminds me of Somaliya.

Maybe guys should also demand girls be inspected to see if they lost their virginity or not.

Mizz Unique is the only one making sense here today. Mizz Unique please continue to enlighten those who think our dhaqan, and our parents are backwards to the best of your abilities. And my god help you.

Originally posted by Lucky: The girL didnt say Lets Leave our dhaqaan behind and take the american one-re-read the post again. No i think its you who needs to reread what she has wrote and understand the real intentions behind it. Anyone who says, the SOOMALI way of living is backward is advocating the Amerikaan culture over the Soomali one.

Originally posted by Instinct-Poet: Kinda sad, I kinda knew Mohamed Salah From around the way.But yo regardless of Cab Drivers or not,I'me be there, this thing is getting really serious,Just Yesterday as I was Dinning At Safari Restuarant on Nicollet, Somali Cab driver Pulled in front Yelling to some of the somalis that happen to chit chattin in fron,saying"Help me get this guy out of my cab".There was big african american guy sitting in the back, refucing to pay. Well anyway, after he seen all the somalis sorrounding the cab, his consious kicked in he paid ofcource..But basicaly is a real hassle for the somali cab drivers, they're too easy going,this is a risky bussiness, well you either quit it or get well detailed with the damn job.Minnesota Gun laws is pretty good.Get a gun and carry it in your car nothing wrong with it.. Or else maybe you shouldn't put your self in risky situation like that.. Instinc thats very sad. But why do they even bother picking up Afrikaan-Amerikaans? I dont understand, if i knew i was in danger of being robbed by an Afrikaan-Amerikaan i wouldn't have picked them up at first place. Why give them the chance to rob you, or even kill you at first place? In Washington DC a similar thing had happened. Cabbies were either killed, or robbed by these ungratefull Afrikaans. They all refused to stop for any single black person, and after 3 months of this. A black community organiziation has started paying for a reinforced glass windshields and sometimes even equiping the cab with a small video cam. They should do the samething to those blaacks. And then mabye they would realize they are only hurting themselves. :mad: Adoon Adoon dhalay.

Ohh i forget, 80% of the Jamaican population is illiterate thats one in four knows how to read.

Originally posted by Opinionated: how about this, find another profession! Self-Edited. :cool:

Originally posted by Opinionated: I am so speechless....I can't even type the things that I wanted to say..but let me condense it for you all...I think 90% of you here (excluding MaLikaH, Harmonyangel and Somealien) are as backwards as your parents. What can i say Opp, we are all backward Soomalis, who can only beat up their children. I think we need to get on with the Amerikaan culture, and stop living like REER-BAADIYIIN. I like that. We also need to approve of sex before marriage, and our daughters can have all the b/friends they want in the world. They are also allowed to wear that thing they see on TV, because its so hip to do and its part of the new culture. What else am i missing? I am very sure there are more i haven't said. Oh, and parents who beat up their children, they all deserve to be in JAIL.

ST. PAUL (AP) - Somali cabdrivers said they will stage a one-day walkout in Minneapolis, but not at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, to honor two cabbies who were fatally shot in the past month and to draw attention to their security concerns. More than 80 cabdrivers met Sunday at William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul and agreed to park their cabs for 24 hours Aug. 18. They said they plan to ask non-Somali drivers to do the same. There are hundreds of cabdrivers in Minneapolis. The walkout will also not affect cab service in St. Paul, they said. They also announced a fundraiser planned for Aug. 16 to help the families of Ahmed Ahmed and Mohamed Salah. Ahmed, 38, was killed July 10. Salah, 28, was fatally shot Friday. Both were driving in Minneapolis. Meeting organizer Omar Jamal, executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, said details of the walkout will be announced at a cabdriver's rally Saturday in Minneapolis. During the two-hour meeting, cabbies also said they intended to drive their cabs in a procession to Gov. Tim Pawlenty's office at the State Capitol in hopes of meeting with him. Drivers at Sunday's meeting said neither their employers nor the city of Minneapolis have done enough to make their jobs safer. They are asking that bullet-proof partitions and security cameras be installed in their cabs. So far, cab companies have been unwilling to pay for such upgrades, and Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak made it clear Friday that public money wouldn't be provided for private businesses. Drivers said Sunday that a walkout was the only way to get their message out. "We want to force the city and the company to meet our demands," said Siad Gabeyre, who drives for ABC Taxi. "This is for safety. This is for life for the citizens of the city of Minneapolis. I hope to force the companies and city to come together." Rybak on Sunday called the recent shootings "tragic" and said that city leaders have been working to address the drivers' needs, even before the recent shootings. Cabdriver Mustafa Hussen said the walkout was worth losing a day's pay to show the solidarity among drivers. "The strike is to remember the two brothers we lost in the community of taxi drivers," Hussen said. "The strike will be an expression of concerns that have not been addressed."