Illyria Posted June 7, 2013 In passing, I have been casually observing Samatar's activities while in the triangle, and I was left with one contradiction after another to the extent I could no longer reconcile how the events had been initially billed, how the reporting morphed into a quiet disbelief, and how he disappointed many banner waving secessionists who saw his arrival as the darkness before dawn. Interesting enough tho', when in Hargeysa, he seemed tense, uncomfortable, unease, pressured, and not at liberty even his demeanor seemed forced. that scene of him waving away a hat and the flag were most unfortunate. what a rude guest. why not indulge the hosts, and just let the young man place the hat, and then remove it at will. that would have been more gracious and would have shown humility on his part. Inversely, the mood took a different turn when he arrived in Borama where he seemed more comfy, smiley, generous with the compliments much more than when in Hargeysa employing flattery in his delivery. The answer might be found in Tol thing. who would have thought, eh? Or is this a case of minority inferiority complex of "Aayaa Huuno" taking its toll in the man and getting the better of the professor? Either way, a classic case of "Fuudka ma cabee, Hilibkaan cunaa". It is nonetheless bemusing to watch his unravelling through the prism of his adoring unionist fans. and the disappointment on the faces of the would-have-been secessionist flock. But I can not explain how he reached the conclusion that Tol is good and Qabiil is bad. I always thought tow were synonymous, and it is just a case of how deep you wish to peel the layers of the onion. was he fed from the well of bile ala confusionism, or is he up to something, a moment of genius ala Einstein where he might give birth to a surprise genus of brilliance. More interestingly, I can not wait his outburst when he returns to his comfy, air-conditioned five-star hotels packed with Diapora adulating hordes, and how he recounts his encounters in the triangle. Well, I suppose we will have to wait and see, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xaaji Xunjuf Posted June 7, 2013 The professor is a Somalilander, and he understand qabil is part of the society, you need to control it and manage it , Koonfurians have a problem with that so they have.4.5 system. But Somalilanders can tell the difference between toll , qabyalaad and all of that.Professor samatar is finally home and he is giving back to his country, he was for to long with ungrateful irresponsible tribalist Koonfurians.How is toll bad , toll is your clan sub clan and your people, who share a common ancestry with and culture , if you embrace it how will it hurt others.He said it is wrong to use your clan to hurt other clans. He made a clear distinction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Somalia Posted June 7, 2013 Secessionist habar clans only have their false identity to save them from their savagery, no doubt if they were to get independence from the great nation which indeed is united from Saylac to Raskamboni, they would be at each others throats and worse, they are habro so it would be scratchy scratchy bad for image. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xaaji Xunjuf Posted June 7, 2013 Says the pirate who is preoccupied with Kismayo instead of preparing elections:D Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Illyria Posted June 8, 2013 I will ignore the irrelevant bits, and focus on this part. Let us simplify it in a language you can relate to, so in your mind, is good, but is bad, and by extension is bad. did I get that right? Xaaji Xunjuf;960011 wrote: How is toll bad , toll is your clan sub clan and your people, who share a common ancestry with and culture , if you embrace it how will it hurt others.He said it is wrong to use your clan to hurt other clans. He made a clear distinction. Where does one begin, and where does the other end? Added on: And I would venture to say Samatar is very deceptive, lancing words, and can be classified as "munaafaq" and "faasidu al-ard" as described in Islam where learned people will try to confuse the people with innuendos and double talk while never speaking the truth. put it differently, they are a classic example of "sufahaa" roaming the country spreading confused messages of falsehoods and fallacies while poisoning the minds of the impressionable young minds with garbage and nonsense. On the issue of Qabiil, the Quran raises "و جعلناكم شعوبا وقبائلا " - in case you get confused - "Qabiil is sing. Qabaa'ilan" is pl. ". Now, why the double-talk and cause for confusion? And in the Somali context, when I say, "Tolaayeey", I am NOT only calling on my folks, I am actually going all the way to the end of the block. so what gives in his deceptive, small-minded, thieving ways? Or does he think we were born yesterday? And gone are the days when his mantra used to be Ummah = nation vis-a-vis Tol. how quick;y does the slope tilt to the bottom? the all knowing professor knows naught. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xaaji Xunjuf Posted June 8, 2013 You totally misunderstood the professor he said tol is good which means your clan , but qabyalaad is bad , but knowing your clan loving them cherishing them supporting them assisting them is not bad thats is tolnimo. But using your clan in a wrong way and try to hurt other is wrong. By the way you should edit that clan names are strictly forbidden to name on here,u can make ur point with out using clan names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Illyria Posted June 8, 2013 I do not think I misunderstood, and I do not think I will edit the names 'cos there is no harm is discussing names with relevance. there is no malice or meaning any harm or insult, but just a way to demonstrate a valid point in the conversation. And NO, he did not say Qabyaalad, he said Qabiil. Are we watching the same tape? are you bold enough as to question and insinuate Somali is my second language? I do not know what his intent was, but the wording of his utterance was clear enough for me to raise the question which I think are valid. but you seem to be making excuses for him without knowing his true intent which is troubling. I think both you and the professor will need to go back to the board and re-examine the wordings. Confusion I think is abound. Let us see what others make of it. here is the video. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carafaat Posted June 8, 2013 In contemporary sociological and anthropological literature, the definition of tribe varies widely and with conflicting identifications ranging from common language, common culture, same ancestral lineages, or common rulers. It implies a collection of individuals who are joined together by the factor of territory, blood, language, culture or history. However, the generic meaning of tribe in strictly genealogical perspective is an in-word identification of someone through an exclusive and male-based claim of assumed common ancestorship. What norms and rules accompany this way of being in the world is,primarily subject to the particular interests prescribed by the clan. In contrast, tol or tolnimo, in its literal meaning, conveys cohesion, construction, knitting, or joining things or individuals together etc. In its customary usage, tol implies rectitude, compassion, unity against injustice and against external aggression, and civic belonging beyond the immediate kin. Ibn Khaldun (1967) described this social cohesion assabiya (communal solidarity) as the fundamental bond of human society and the basic motive force of history. According to him `asabiyyah is neither necessarily nomadic nor based on blood relations. In the modern period, the term is generally analogous to solidarity. Tolnimo, in fact, could form the guiding ideal for the moral bonds of membership and leadership that are the basis for the principal of community (Selznick 1992; 2001). Thus, though tribe and tol have common primordial roots in traditional sense, they are very different in the conceptual imagination and, most significantly, in practical application. * In his keynote address during the pioneering Tol convocation held in Minneapolis in April, 2010, Professor Ahmed I. Samatar laid out the cardinal distinction between tribal mentality and that associated with kinship or more specifically tolnimo in its Somali roots. * He asserted this:* “The first (clansim), connotes what Somalis would call qabiil and, thus, is motivated by small-mindedness and the ‘Othering’ of those who don’t belong to the assumed male-centered genealogical tree; the latter is grounded on the concept of tol that, to be sure, acknowledges primordial ties but, more importantly, stresses the following:* optimum protection of individual and communal welfare, and meeting of obligations to other communities (from the intimate neighbor to the most geographically distant of the Somali people) in a larger context of peace,* social justice and generosity….In short,* qabiil *is always negative, if not degenerative, and lends itself to internal fissures and hate for the non-member. Tol, on the other hand, is elastic and, therefore, conducive to group solidarity yet always linked to deep empathy for strangers. We believe such a perspective transforms the way many contemporary Somalis relate to each other and, thus, bodes well for engagements that enrich constructive plurali http://tolleadershipcouncil.org/?p=414 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rudy-Diiriye Posted June 8, 2013 Guess...he finally raised the white flag!! Never give up homie.......thats my advice to all real somali (fake ones not included..of course), but i guess its 2 late for him. Hes hope is probably to become a minister of some sort!!....how about minister of Daqan celis Doleesye!! That will fit him perfectly!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Illyria Posted June 9, 2013 One more interesting observation, more of an invention to titillate the tasty buds of this captive audience. The only genuine political stakeholders in Somali politics are North and South. According to him, let us embrace colonial legacy - history begins and ends with it, ignore the "Halgankii Gobanimadoonka", never speak of the history before the European vagabonds came, conquered and partitioned the land of the Somalis, ignore the Dervish struggles and the ensuing mayhem, death and destruction both in human and stock, and most of all speak not of the subsequent principal events of the past 20 plus years, particularly the political reconfiguration of the country, the legacy of the civil war none of which hardly matters in the equation. Do not I love it when people selectively freeze time and only concentrate as to what makes sense in their warped calculation. Here today, where tomorrow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Illyria Posted June 10, 2013 And the honeymoon period is over so soon. Now he is told he overstayed his visit and it is time to pack up and leave. What was that old saying "Kabash kabashta hore, dhabana hays baa ka dambayn". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wadani Posted June 10, 2013 Illyria;960782 wrote: And the honeymoon period is over so soon. Now he is told he overstayed his visit and it is time to pack up and leave. What was that old saying "Kabash kabashta hore, dhabana hays baa ka dambayn". What have u heard? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Illyria Posted June 18, 2013 Samatar's most recent addition to the political discourse: colonial legacy is the only standard and acceptable measure for future political configuration of Somalia. Anything short of that is bad and unacceptable. History of the Somalis peoples prior to the European invasion is irrelevant, and so is the Dervish struggle and nationalist movement. The Act of union is is no longer binding, and the legacy of the civil war and what lead to the collapse of the nation state bear no relevance. let us see how long this self-induced illusions continue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Illyria Posted June 18, 2013 And so continues the demonisation of the clan, and the search for a social identity which nicely fits in with the desired, sought after political identity, as favoured, and bought into by the students of colonial history and its political legacy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites