SomaliNet Forums

gurey25 wrote:

Executive wrote:Gurey

All your points are invalid and bias, you have long been a champion of the seccssionst agression in the eastern regions. For one second acknowledge the reality on the ground. No one buys the false argument which tries to justify your aggression. We are not the ones claiming your regions and tuulos, you are. Sure you live in Sanaag and Sool, that doesn't justify sending your troops to dhubahante degaans and pointing your weapons towards the east. As long as you are the aggressor accept the grievances. No one buys the argument "We are against your rights cause we fear that you might attack us in revenge". If you want peace, dulmiga aad tageerysid iska dhaaf. You sound worse then the Isrealis to be honest, wax nin somali ku haadlo ma ahaan.

When a soliders from Hargeisa, Burco and Berbera dies fighting in Kalshaale, Megaagle, WidhWidh and Hagoogane we all know where the obstacle to peace lies. Somaliland claims Dhulbahante territory and that is the problem. Somaliland is the aggressor, and somaliland is the one sending troops to other regions. When that stops we will have peace in our regions.

You are right i am a champion for a more agressive stance by somaliland....

but you are all making things too complicated when it is very very simple.

Somaliland will be independant from moqadishu by any means necessary, using the borders of British somaliland is the most effective vehicle to get to that goal,as our legal case will be stronger than south sudan, and eritrea and even kosovo..

but what you do not understand is that the borders of British Somaliland are just a vehicle,
if you can provide us when an alternative vehicle that will keep us independant, i am sure we will agree..

the problem is that Somaliweyn proponents believe they can rule isaaq by force.

abdikarim86 wrote:I don't understand what is so controversial about what gurey said?

He is saying most reer waqooyi don't care for Sool and Eastern Sanaag
and if we can still get indepencance without Sool and Eastern sanaag no one
from amongst us will complain.

Is that such a bad idea?

samadoon-waaxid wrote:

Shift wrote:Finally waa la is afgartay,i say dont ever look back
Wheres garam-garam i didnt see him on there,one of the best somali speakers of all time

garam garam is on a af somali learning course in Kismayo niyahow but yeh the differences were ironed out by meeting half through,NSUM will get to have a positions in the hogaan temporary until a further all beesha congress is conducted bk home in few more months.where more consensus,mechanism for accountability,good governance will be reached and even possibly reshuffle the whole mamul.this is prolly the first all-inclusive,self reflection,heavy weight meeting the beesha have in about a decade.so it should be a good start inshallah.

Executive wrote:Guul SSC Alhamdullilah a productive and successful conference




Voltage this is an interesting point the secessionist extreme loves to ignore, it was put eloquently by Jamac Qalib

"Conclusion of Treaties of Protection that Britain had entered into with elders representing various Somali tribes or clans during 1884-86 were the basis of the north’s colonial history for the following seventy-six years. A lone, but important, non-signatory of those treaties of protection was the Dolbahante. The subsequent de facto association of this group and their homeland within the British Somaliland Protectorate administration was only by default and mutual expediency, but never a de jure. However, since the essence of the north’s independence in 1960 was only perceived as a transitory process to the reunification with the south, it was non-controversial. If otherwise, however, the then new State of Somaliland could not have inherited the Dolbahante homeland without the latter’s consent, and would not even now, had that issue not already been resolved by the reunification process. Because that independence would only be for the signatories of those treaties of protection, but the Dolbahabte that was not a party to those treat could only join it by own consent."

Faithfully,
Jama Mohamed Ghalib

Blue_609 wrote: sool sanag has no relation to SL since 1- ppl dont want to be part of it 2- SL did nothing for those regions they just claim it to maintain thei 1960 borders and perhaps have a solid case for their recognition.