SomaliNet Forums

There can't be a confusion between Makador and Magadle ( magadli in the text) The Arabs can easily write Makador all the letters of the later are in Arabic. A gedabursi extremist like Rooble fanatically seeking to inject his small clan into that history might see anything he wishes.

X.Playa wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:48 am There can't be a confusion between Makador and Magadle ( magadli in the text) The Arabs can easily write Makador all the letters of the later are in Arabic. A gedabursi extremist like Rooble fanatically seeking to inject his small clan into that history might see anything he wishes.

Even today people mention you as an Isaaq. For example when people are talking about Marehan or Majerteen it's always Marehan or Majerten. No one says Darod because Darod is too broad.

In 2017, people still do not differentiate you and lump you all under Isaaq. There is nothing extraordinary to mention you distinctly.

Now we have a historical issue where you weren't mentioned in any historical context as Isaaq relating to Ahmed Gurey and the unused misnomer Habar Magaadle was most possibly a mistranslation of the Gudabiirsi Habar Makadoor.

Like I said before it's 2017, sooner than later the original work of Shihab ad-Din will be transcribed online.

I wonder what you people will argue. Siad Barre wrote it from the grave like he did 1960's documents transcribed by the UN online?

Voltage wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:51 pm

X.Playa wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:48 am There can't be a confusion between Makador and Magadle ( magadli in the text) The Arabs can easily write Makador all the letters of the later are in Arabic. A gedabursi extremist like Rooble fanatically seeking to inject his small clan into that history might see anything he wishes.

Even today people mention you as an Isaaq. For example when people are talking about Marehan or Majerteen it's always Marehan or Majerten. No one says Darod because Darod is too broad.

In 2017, people still do not differentiate you and lump you all under Isaaq. There is nothing extraordinary to mention you distinctly.

Now we have a historical issue where you weren't mentioned in any historical context as Isaaq relating to Ahmed Gurey and the unused misnomer Habar Magaadle was most possibly a mistranslation of the Gudabiirsi Habar Makadoor.

Like I said before it's 2017, sooner than later the original work of Shihab ad-Din will be transcribed online.

I wonder what you people will argue. Siad Barre wrote it from the grave like he did 1960's documents transcribed by the UN online?

I think the too many slaps by Ben Dover made you delirious. Just have a cup of water and I will talk to him to make him take it easy on you.

As to your statement its meaningless. One refers to clans in context , in the south an isaaq is collectively isaaq but in their region each sub clan is separate.

The term Habar Magadle is obvious and self evident no one confuses Habar magaadle with the Makador and such. You are just passed off and use this weak argument as a rebuttal.

When it comes to your Tidoros and the isaaq chief Axmed Gurey who is famous is pretty obvious.

As far as your Shire jaamac inventing the wheel that was embarrassing your Daarood has a poignancy to embarrass themselves. I suggest you scuttle out of this no win situation you seem always to involve yourself out of sheer tribalism showcasing.

Another feeble attempt to pivot, the propagandist must be desperate

Xplaya, this is the same guy who earlier in the thread retorted:

In fact the word "Isaaq" is not found anywhere.

As if the word Darod (Tarod) appeared anywhere in the text

The fact that Ahmed Gurey bin Hussein Al Somali was a Habar Magaadle is not in dispute here. We have the Arabic text copy, the only copy that distinguishes between a certain Habar Maqdi (the bandits whom the Imam destroyed) and Habar Magaadle who fought valiantly with the Imam under the leadership of their leader Ahmed Gurey, and whom the Imam personally presented with gifts as a show of gratitude.

The Magaadle present in the Arabic copy is written exactly as it would be pronounced in Somali complete with the (gã) sound instead of the Arabic (jīm).

Whats more, Makador is never written in ANY Arabic copy we have. Not a single one. The only ever mention of Makador is by Pankhurst purely based on a guess (he uses 'probably' indicating he is just making a guess) transliteration of Maqdi (based on a random citation of I. M. Lewis's work).

Lewis, on whose work Pankhurst based his guess on, revered as the most distinguished Somali scholar clearly states it is Habar Magaadle.

Even reasonable Dir like Zumaale (whilst maintaining a lets-wait-and-see stance) has dismissed the clan mentioned is Habar Makador.

Now back to Xiraabu Gutia Theodoros

How do you explain three generations of pagan, non-Somali names in a supposedly Marehan man's abtirsi? Why would a Muslim Marehan man carry the name Gutia? Or Theodoros? Or even Xiraabuu?!!!

We will pretend your embarrassing attempt at explaining away the name did not happen. What else do you have? How can you explain it?

How do you explain the craven behaviour of your leader that you disingenuously attempted to present as warrior-like?

How do you explain his murder of a mere boy! And his subsequent shameful fleeing of his land for fear of the Imam's wrath and seeking refuge in Hawiye country!

How do you reconcile the description of your clan as "wavering" and "lagging behind"?

Do you agree that your attempt to xayasiis your clan ended up backfiring and caused your people avoidable embarrassment?

Ben Dover wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:10 pm Another feeble attempt to pivot, the propagandist must be desperate

Xplaya, this is the same guy who earlier in the thread retorted:

In fact the word "Isaaq" is not found anywhere.

As if the word Darod (Tarod) appeared anywhere in the text

The fact that Ahmed Gurey bin Hussein Al Somali was a Habar Magaadle is not in dispute here. We have the Arabic text copy, the only copy that distinguishes between a certain Habar Maqdi (the bandits whom the Imam destroyed) and Habar Magaadle who fought valiantly with the Imam under the leadership of their leader Ahmed Gurey, and whom the Imam personally presented with gifts as a show of gratitude.

The Magaadle present in the Arabic copy is written exactly as it would be pronounced in Somali complete with the (gã) sound instead of the Arabic (jīm).

Whats more, Makador is never written in ANY Arabic copy we have. Not a single one. The only ever mention of Makador is by Pankhurst purely based on a guess (he uses 'probably' indicating he is just making a guess) transliteration of Maqdi (based on a random citation of I. M. Lewis's work).

Lewis, on whose work Pankhurst based his guess on, revered as the most distinguished Somali scholar clearly states it is Habar Magaadle.

Even reasonable Dir like Zumaale (whilst maintaining a lets-wait-and-see stance) has dismissed the clan mentioned is Habar Makador.

Now back to Xiraabu Gutia Theodoros

How do you explain three generations of pagan, non-Somali names in a supposedly Marehan man's abtirsi? Why would a Muslim Marehan man carry the name Gutia? Or Theodoros? Or even Xiraabuu?!!!

We will pretend your embarrassing attempt at explaining away the name did not happen. What else do you have? How can you explain it?

How do you explain the craven behaviour of your leader that you disingenuously attempted to present as warrior-like?

How do you explain his murder of a mere boy! And his subsequent shameful fleeing of his land for fear of the Imam's wrath and seeking refuge in Hawiye country!

How do you reconcile the description of your clan as "wavering" and "lagging behind"?

Do you agree that your attempt to xayasiis your clan ended up backfiring and caused your people avoidable embarrassment?

I.M.Lewis in his paper " The Gallant in Northern Somaliland " on page 35 explained Habar Maqdi or Magadli as :

"The Habar Magadle are the only Isaq group mentioned in the Futuh al-Habasa. At least it seems that the " Habr Maqadi " desccribed in the Futuh are the Habar Magadle Isaq. The Isaq are not mentioned under the name Isaq, nor is there any reference to the easterly branch of
the Isaq, the Habar Habused"

Boom.

Make no mistake about it Xplaya, the propagandist knows. He was present when I discussed the issue with a Dir member who dismissed the notion that Habar Maqdi refers to Habar Makidoor (although he adopted a more anticipatory stance whilst I was in agreement with Lewis). Our resident propagandist was just caught falsifying history and this was his sorry attempt at avoiding discussing the name and history of his ancestor Xiraabu son of Gutia son of Tidorous.

X.Playa wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:22 pm
I.M.Lewis in his paper " The Gallant in Northern Somaliland " on page 35 explained Habar Maqdi or Magadli as :

"The Habar Magadle are the only Isaq group mentioned in the Futuh al-Habasa. At least it seems that the " Habr Maqadi " desccribed in the Futuh are the Habar Magadle Isaq. The Isaq are not mentioned under the name Isaq, nor is there any reference to the easterly branch of
the Isaq, the Habar Habused"

How sad.

So I want people to understand just exactly what the issue is.

At least, it seems

Basically it connotes an open festering historical question, something that has not been concluded.

Like I said before;

Now we have a historical issue where you weren't mentioned in any historical context as Isaaq relating to Ahmed Gurey and the unused misnomer Habar Magaadle was most possibly a mistranslation of the Gudabiirsi Habar Makadoor.

Like I said before it's 2017, sooner than later the original work of Shihab ad-Din will be transcribed online.

I wonder what you people will argue. Siad Barre wrote it from the grave like he did 1960's documents transcribed by the UN online?

Voltage wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 8:09 pm

X.Playa wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:22 pm
I.M.Lewis in his paper " The Gallant in Northern Somaliland " on page 35 explained Habar Maqdi or Magadli as :

"The Habar Magadle are the only Isaq group mentioned in the Futuh al-Habasa. At least it seems that the " Habr Maqadi " desccribed in the Futuh are the Habar Magadle Isaq. The Isaq are not mentioned under the name Isaq, nor is there any reference to the easterly branch of
the Isaq, the Habar Habused"

How sad.

So I want people to understand just exactly what the issue is.

At least, it seems

Basically it connotes an open festering historical question, something that has not been concluded.

Like I said before;

Now we have a historical issue where you weren't mentioned in any historical context as Isaaq relating to Ahmed Gurey and the unused misnomer Habar Magaadle was most possibly a mistranslation of the Gudabiirsi Habar Makadoor.

Like I said before it's 2017, sooner than later the original work of Shihab ad-Din will be transcribed online.

I wonder what you people will argue. Siad Barre wrote it from the grave like he did 1960's documents transcribed by the UN online?

Lol like I said , like I said , like I said.

Like what? You are not mentioned as Daarood either are you stupid or mentally challenged?

He's trying to save his Boon face.

Voltage got obliterated. All that is missing is official meher. Si fiican ba loo gursaday. When he failed to challenge Ben Dover's case, he ran to the BAN button to save himself.



What a weak hoe.

Barre propaganda is dead and his subscribers are weak hoes.

Beesha Hiraabu Ibnu Guita bac la'aan ayaa lagu aasay

Talk about a thread backfire

Explaining the name Xiraabu Gutia Tidorus

As you guys can see, the propagandist absolutely refuses to discuss the baffling existence of (at least) three generations of pagan, non-Somali names in his abtirsi. Beyond attempting to cover the issue up with that laughable post in which he attempted to argue that the pagan name Xiraabu Gutia Tidoros is actually an authentic Somali name ( ), he has been jumping through all sorts of distractions to kill any discussion of this important fact.

He knows the explanation of why the leader of his clan has such name would not reflect well on his people.

Have you ever wondered why Marehan are known as Boon (or Boon Marehan)?

Well, this is very interesting.

Marehan are very unique among Somalis in their make up. As a clan, Marehan is made up of a mixture of Somalis and a group of hunter-gatherers equivalent to what we know today as Midgans, this group is called Boon (or Bon) have been completely incorporated and absorbed into the structure and abtirsi of the Marehan clan. This is all well documented in academic texts by non-Somalis, I will share a few of them here.

The Marehan are divided into two main sections, the Rer Hassan and the Rer Isaak,
in addition to which are the Bon Marehan who correspond to the Midgan of Northern Somaliland and the Dorobo of East Africa, and include the Habr Awrarsama and Habr Yakob.

Once we go through some of the other sources, the driving force behind the unabashed unapologetic Marehan propaganda becomes clear. The sensitivity towards the issue of Xiraabu Gutia Tidorods (to the point of attempting to paint him as a hero, and fabricating a Somali name for him out of thin air) is really a symptom of the underlying problem, the origin of Marehan as a clan.

It is thought by some that a further tribe, called the Bani, exists still in Jubalnnd. The word Boni, however, appears to be the Gosha rendering of "Bon" which is merely a term of disrespect, and corresponds to the 'Midgan' of northern Somaliland. A Somali will not feed with a Bon, whom he regards as of low caste. Among others may be mentioned the Bon Marehan, so called because they eat dead meat. Bon Boran, the poor Boran, and Bon Garreh, mostly descendents of the Garreh who once occupied the area around the Deshek Wama and Afmadu but were driven out by the Bartiri under Doi Said.

"They eat dead meat"

neither the pastoralists nor the agriculturalists depended on hunting for their livelihood. Indeed some killed giraffe in order to obtain hides tough enough to fashion sandals and water buckets. Some even hunted larger game because of the demand for ivory and rhino horn. Generally, however, they usually reserved such activity for servile groups. For example, only one Somali group in the NFD, the Bon Marehan, was specifically geared to hunting; and these people originated in Jubaland, and were considered to be servile.” Some parties from the Italian side even undertook forays as far west as Isiolo in search of game."

Do you see why the propagandist has been working tirelessly over the course of years to change the image of servitude, ignoble origins, hunter-gatherer ancestry and the actual eating of dead meat, to instead paint a different picture of his clan as Somali, with Somali names, and some participation in Somali history?

Make no mistake about it, the propagandist is aware of the history of his clan, he knows they are Bon, and he has made it his goal to conceal that and xayasiis his people on internet forums.

Now you know why all of this is important to him. You know why he tried to claim that Xiraabu Gutia Tidorous is actually a Somali name. You know why he is opening threads about ignoble people no one knows nor cares about. Why he makes ridicolous claims like some minor Marehan scholar actually "invented" the Somali script, or how Afweyne "spoke better English" than other Somali politicians (lol!). All of this is very important and part of the narrative he is trying to propagate.

Its just his bad luck that now everyone knows about his clan's real history.

Voltage is the clear winner:

1. Losers resort to personal attack & Ad hominem. Voltage didn't.
2. Losers resort to gang attack. Voltage here is alone vs many.
3. Losers appeal to the audience ("As you guys can see", "Do you see", "Now you know why") to take a side, indication of weakness. Voltage presented his points & arguments without appealing to the audience to take a side.

paperino wrote: Wed Jul 12, 2017 8:10 am Voltage is the clear winner:

1. Losers resort to personal attack & Ad hominem. Voltage didn't.
2. Losers resort to gang attack. Voltage here is alone vs many.
3. Losers appeal to the audience ("As you guys can see", "Do you see", "Now you know why") to take a side, indication of weakness. Voltage presented his points & arguments without appealing to the audience to take a side.

What point he presented?