SomaliNet Forums

SADEBOI,

If you are going to conceal the truth, at least do it so professionally. The outright lies and distortions you tell is quite evident and down-right boring. You are putting too much trying to find whatever dirt sticks, but up to now, you couldn't do better than criticizing a clan that stood up to a super-power while your clan was BEGGING the British to allow them serve against the "EVIL GERMANS". Make no mistake about this: Marehan's terrible shame of licking up to the British is a record unmatched by most Somali clans. It is a record of shame and disgust.

This is what your source said:

"In 1899, the Italian authorities sought to persuade the Wacdaan submit peacefully to the government. They demanded that 40 hostages surrender to the authorities in Mogadishu as a sign of Wacdaan submission. ONLY THE MAHAD MOLDHEERE RESPONDED.....ABUKAR MOLDHEERE REFUSED TO SEND THE 20 REPRESENTATIVES DEMANDED OF THEM AND FOR SOME YEARS REMAINED OPENLY DEFIANT OF ITALIAN AUTHORITY. THEY CONTINUED TO ATTACK CARAVANS AND OCCASIONALLY TO BOYCOTT THE MARKET OF MOGADISHU. THERE IS SOME EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT FEUDING WITHIN THE WACDAAN INCREASED AFTER THIS RIFT BETWEEN THE TWO MAJOR LINEAGES."

In fact the link you provided (http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia5.jpg) clearly says that not all wacdaan chiefs were forced to submit to the Italians.


This is Hess- Raw and unfiltered:

"First at Adowe, then Lafole, the FUTURE of Italian colonialism in the horn of Africa VERY UNPROMISING."

Now run around and temper with the evidence.

[quote="sadeboi"]Twisted, you can not read, and your retarded.

There are two books,

Cassanelli wrote "The Shaping of Somalia: Reconstructing the History of a Pastoral People"

In his book this is what he says of wacdaan,

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

IMBECILE DID I WRITE THIS?

The second book is written by Robert Hess "Italian Colonialism in Somalia"

This is what he said of wacdaan

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia3.jpg

and their willing to submit to colonial powers.

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia5.jpg

and
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia6.jpg

About Marexaan this is what Robert Hess wrote

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... ed-1-2.jpg


Are you dyslexic?

What did I write, robert hess and lee cassanelli wrote this.


Two books, two authors.

1893-1896 Luuq was mostly raxanweyn territory, gasaguur or something even shirib knows it. And that is not speaking of Sade.

The two dameers of somalinet, ARE THE PHOTOCOPIES INCORRECT? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAYING? BECAUSE ITS NOT MY WORDS, ITS ROBERT HESS AND LEE CASSANELLI.[/quote]


Is this Sadeboi "telling" anything or the book as photocopied exactly?

You make the decision..!

Listen up dyslexic kid, we can speak of Marexaan for another topic, no side tracking, you said my first statement was a lie, and your own sources stated it.

Now, can you read? You wrote the first part down, on the bottom it states.

"The conciliatory initiatives of the leaders of the Mahad Moldheere toward the colonial government BORE SOME POLITICAL FRUIT. For thought HASSAN HUSSIEN AND THE ABUBAKAR MOLDHEERE RESIGNED THEMSELVES TO ACCOMMODATION WITH THE ITALIANS AFTER 1908, THEIR SECTION RECEIVED FEW STIPENDED POSITION THEN THE NUMERICALLY SMALLER MAHAD MOLDHEERE (because they were first to submit). Moreover, the stipends they received were smaller tan those of the Mahad Modlheere officials. In the early 60's, A MAN OF MAHAD MOLDHEERE WAS RECOGNIZED AS TITULAR HEAD OF ALL THE WACDAAN."


http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

The last part is amusing, the wacdaan looked up to the mahad moldheere and saw them as head, "reer-magaals" or some sort, because they were the first to submit and be concubines of the colonial power.


About the second book, yea not all wacdaan chiefs submitted, but wacdaan chiefs submitted nonetheless right? Is that wacdaan chief not wacdaan? Lol.

Yea about robert hess, I have already told you that is from page 63

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... ed-2-1.jpg

On pages 65 and 66 he speaks of your clan being used by arab men who wanted their interpreter jobs back and of submitting to the Italians.

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia3.jpg

and

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... itali4.jpg

and on page 90 how wacdaan chiefs vowed absolute submission to the Italians

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia5.jpg

Sadebboi,

How long will you keep tempering and distorting the truth?

After several months in the colony, Carletti was ready to implement Tittoni's plan. RELATIONS WERE PARTICULARLY GOOD,AND CARLETTI CONVINCED THE SULTAN THAT HIS ALIGNMENT WITH THE ITALIANS AGAINST THE BIMAL AND WACDAN WAS TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THEM BOTH"

Does this not reinforce my earlier argument that even though the Geledi sultan signed a deal with the Italians the Wacdaan and even certain sections of Geledi went against the Sultan and took up arms against the Italians>

"The Wacdaan were mainly pastoralist, with a small group turning to farming throughout the centuries for their alliances with the Geledi clan who were mainly agriculuralists. As said above, the Wacdaan were OPPOSED TO ANY COMPROMISE WITH THE FOREIGNERS. The FIERCE ANTI-FOREIGN stance was persistent in the culture of of WACDAAN and in the very Lafoole. The Place has been called Lafoole because apparently the Wacdaan DEFEATED the Gaalo Madoow, when they migrated to the Lower Shabelle around the 18th Century, hence the translation of Lafoole which is: Bones." ( Lee V Canssanelli)

Because of the Sultan of Geledi seemed hesistant to resist the Italian Expansion into Banadir Coast, the alliance was COOLED OFF. Apart from the weakening of their bonds with the Geledi, t he drought of 1890s which lead to a large population of their of wacdaan abandoning their homelands, the Italians posed the GREATEST THREAT TO THE GROUP. They were, moreover, the first inland Somalis who's territory was actually invaded by colonial soldiers at the time of Cecchi expedition."

One of the most influential leaders among the Wacdaan was the leader of Shaykh Ahmed Haji Mahhadi. He was not Wacdaan but became the sheikh of Wacdaan. He was born in Mogadishu and hailed from the lineage of Mogadishu (Abgal). He had lived there most his life, teaching alongside such renowned Muslim Scholars as Shaykh Sufi and Shaykh Mukhdaar. Like the latter, HE FOUND COEXISTENCE IN A TOWN WHICH HOUSES INFIDALS INTOLERABLE, AND HE CHOSE TO RETIRE TO THE SMALL COASTAL ENCLAVE OF NIMOW, a little south of Mogadishu. There he set up a small jamaaca which attracted several of the local inhabitants. When Nimow was shelled by an Italian warship in retaliation for the Cecchi ambush, AHMED HAJJI feld to Day Suufi ( the heart of Wacdaan territory) where intensified his preaching against infidels. As late as 1907, the acting Italian governor considered him 'THE MOST LISTENED-TO PROPAGANDIST' in this area of Shabeelle. Even the Geledi turn to him rather their own sutan for religious consel. ( Lee V Cassanelli)

"One of the Wacdaan leaders apparently influenced Ahmed Hajji Hassan was Hassan Hussain, Titular head of the largest sub-section of the Wacdaan clan, the Abubakar Moldheere. The Abubakar Moldheere WERE THE MOST NUMEROUS AND HENCE THE MOST POWERFUL SECTION OF THE WACDAAN in the late 19th Century. Hassan Hussein is remembered as one of the FIRST wacdaan to OPPOSE THE ITALIANS, WARRIORS FROM HIS LINEAGE WERE PROMINENT AMONG THE FORCES THAT ATTACKED CECCHI AT LOFOOLE. LIKE WISE, HIS LINEAGE WAS SPOKESMEN FOR THE ABUBAKAR MOLDHEERE, WHO MOST STRENUOUSLY ARGUED THE BLOCKADE OF CARAVAN ROUTES TO MOGADISHU ( Economic sanctions)" (Lee v Cassanell)
_________

That is JUST the right approach in response to information. Just deny that it exists, just label it all meaningless. then it will all just go away. knowledge is power in today's world. no harm in being informed and I will continue to take solace in informing you, as I said before

lool! Our in-house Geledi expert spills the beans!


"In November 1896 he and a score of Arab askaris set out to meer with the presumably influential sultan of the Geledi. It was the first colonial attempt to penetrate the interior with a military contingent, and it ended disastrously for the Italians. Cecchi's expedition was besieged and most of it destroyed at a place called Lafoole, along the Muqdisho-Afgooye road, by Somali warriors of the Wacdaan clan. The "Lafoole Massacre," as the Italian press called it, came less than a year after a humiliating Italian defeat at Adwa in Ethiopia. It contributed to the withering of Italian colonial resolve; not for another decade would colonial forces again attempt to reach the Shabelle Valley. Indeed, it was three years before Italian government tried to ratify a pending charter for a new trading company that was to take up burnden of Somalia.

The discontent that produced Lafoole led to further anticolonial incidents along the coast. In Baraawe, Haji Shayk Abbas rallied against his Somali compatriots and called them "women" for allowing the Italians free movement there. Further north, in Warsheekh, a government askari was accosted when he stepped outside the garrison. And in Marka, a young Somali, Omar Hassan Yusuf, assasinated the Italian Resident, Giacomo Trevis. According to local accounts, Omar emerged after praying in the small mosque of Shaykh Osman "Marka-yaale" and knifed the "infidel" Trevis as he walked along the beach. All though there is no proof, Itallian officials believed that Omar was part of a massive anticolonial conspiracy. A report filed by acting governor tried to asess the factor that had provoked the assasination. Among, them he decided, were religous fanaticism, Trevis's disdaintful treatment of slaveholding notables, antagonism aroused by the resident's policy of compulsory labor, and the aforementioned rumor of an Ethiopian invasion.

The decade following the Laaoole inciden, the Italians remained at the coast, their colonial policy marked by uncertainty and indecission."

T-L,

They have clearly problems with reading or they purposely want to distort events.

-------

I'll give ONE EXAMPLE of them not been able to read or just been hatefull and envious.

SB photocopied this:

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

Then he drew this conclusion:

''Anyone who held from Mahad-Moldheere, the clan that was first to show SUBMISSION to the Italians was known as a prestige person of Wacdan lol, this is the clan somaliweyn and co. want to depict as nationalist, the second dervishes.''

Now read the photo-copied piece,

Doesn't it say: The Italians sought to divide the Wacdan in which they succeeded to convince the Mahad Moldheere and the calool-u-shaqeyste Abiker?

Doesn't it say: That the Abubakar Moldheere refused to submitt and remained openly defiant untill the last year of Resistance in 1908.

Doesn't it say: That the conciliatory initiatives of the leaders of Mahad Moldheere toward the colonial government bore some political fruit? Which made them to get more stipends since they were the first to submitt.

Doesn't it say: That when the Abubakar Moldheere finally submitted in 1908 when all groups submitted officially, their leaders received less stipends because of their long defiance?

Finnaly, doesn't it say: That the half century of preferential treatment of the ones that surrender early on led to them becoming leaders of the whole clan of Wacdaan almost near the 60s. Isn't this a ''reward'' for their ''good behaviour'' (submitting to Italians)?


----

Finnaly, what NEW evidence did that photocopied piece bring, and does it support the conclusion SB drew? A kid that still needs to learn how to read and intrepret properly.

I also direct you to PAGE 5, CHAPTER 5 of this TOPIC to see that what he photo-copied was already discussed.

Focking damers got karbashed. The only history the Focking Damers have is to be our loyal servants.

''Twisted I've read it and I'm not interested to hear the personal opinion of Somaliweyn and Yourself. Furthurmore I have an intelligent mind and want to read the sources myself since I'm not around a College campus anymore where I can do the verification myself. Quotations which could very well be fabricated and then a explanation of the quote to Your favor won't prove anything to anybody. ''

Murax,

Are you just been lazy or you just dont want to hear our word? Why in the world would one who wants to present a comprehenisve historical discussion of a crucial period in Somalia's history fabricate quotations? Been raad ma lahan, ever heard about that saying?

---
Anyways, I'll end this silly running in circles with just one photocopied piece which hits three birds with one stone.

1: It will show Murax that all the quotations in this topic are authentic
2: It will refute the argument of SB that since the Sultan of geledi submitted, the Wacdan followed because they came under this sultan.
3:It will refute the argument of SB that Wacdaan submitted to Italians because the Mahad Moldheere submitted.


-------

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff28 ... ng_008.jpg
http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff28 ... _008-1.jpg

First, chose what link is more visible to you.

Lets analyze the piece,

As we can see, the first thing that becomes clear is that Hassan Hussein was the titular head of Abubakar Moldheere. This section of Wacdaan was the largest/most numerous and hence most militarily powerfull. Hassan Hussein is remembered as one of the first Wacdaan persons to oppose the Italians and resisted them till the bitter end in 1908.

There is also Mahad Moldheere, a small section of Wacdaan who had small influence in clan councils because of their smaller numbers. This small section within Wacdaan was influenced by the opportunist Abiker to submitt to Italian rule. Also, they had the same interests as the Geledi which becomes especially clear in the piece which says: ''Their interests coincided with the agricultural Geledi'' which refers to the fact that the Sultan of Geledi submitted and they who had the same agricultural interests decided to submitt to. But fortunately for the resistance they had less influence in the clan councils of the Wacdaan.

So how can a minority group like Mahad Moldheere represent the overal group of Wacdaan? Isn't SB implicating that since the Mahad Moldheere submitted, the Wacdaan as a group submitted to Italian rule, discarding the minority status of Mahad Moldheere and discarding the fact that the largest and most numerous/militarily powerful section of Wacdaan (Abubakar Moldheere) were resisting till the bitter end in 1908? Also, although the opportunist Abiker succeeded in getting support of most Mahad Moldheere, not all individuals belonging to this subclan of Wacdaan followed him. There were brave ones that followed the resistance and fought to the bitter end.

To show you this I have photo-copied the EXACT page SB used to base his distortions on:

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff28 ... ng_005.jpg

Compared that to what SB photocopied:

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

Now can you notice the difference? He left the bottom piece out of it, and only photocopied HALF of the page to base his distortions on. Is this clumsiness or purposefull omition of the bottom half of the page to obscure information just to base his distortions on? You be the judge.

What does the other half say? It says that since the minority subclan Mahad Moldheere submitted led by the opportunist ABiker the others resisted to the bitter end in 1908. Also it shows and supports my above comment of: Not all individuals belonging to Mahad Moldheere submitted and followed the traitor Abiker. There were indivuals who continued to resist. And even when Biyamaal/Wacdaan resistance was broken in 1908 and Hassan Hussein (the most fervent opponent) had to submitt officially, there were individuals from the clan that joined the Southern Dervishes because resistance was all they knew and understood.

Just read the piece I have photo-copied to see who is distorting events, also I direct you to page 5 of this topic, chapter 5 to read the whole story.


---


Finnally, the third bird which can be hit with the single stone is the argument of: ''Sultan of Geledi submitted, and because he is also the sultan of wacdaan they submitted too''

If we go to the photo-copied piece, we can clearly see that the writer says that there were clan councils the Wacdaan held since the alliance cooled off because the Sultan of Geledi wanted to accomodate the Italians while the Wacdaan were determined to resist.

Here I quote the exact words, you can see them for yourselves in the photo-copied piece:

''However, their smaller numbers gave them less influence in Wacdaan clan councils, which came to assume greater importance for policymaking as the Wacdaan began to act independently of the Geledi''

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff28 ... _008-1.jpg


Now do these photo-copied pieces contradict any sentence I have written so far in this topic? The only reason why I haven't photo-copied pages is because of its amateurish way. It is not the academic way to present and quote other people's work. Actually it is a form of plagiarism, which is taken very seriously within academical circles. Also, it testifies of laziness and lack of serious interest, because the person who does it does not take the time to analyze first the content, then link it with the whole story, then paraphrase in your own words while refering to the source. This is what I have been doing all this time, and I will not lower myself down to the amateurish level just to satisfy the needs of people who are new to higher education.

As the Somali saying goes: Beeni raad maleh

Somaliwayne,

You have really nailed the coffin. I don't say this word loosely but you have really killed it. Now let's watch these delusional kids obscure the facts and pat each other on the back.

[quote="Gamadid."]Somaliweyn, great stuff saxib. Very impressive. Murax and his ilk are bothered by the contribution of other somalis to our history. They seem very uncomfortable and keep wasting the topic. Dadkaan cuqdad kama dhamaato, mid cadaalad ku hadlo oo iyaga ka dhashay waa yar yahay, waana kuwa ugu roon qabiil ahaan markii loo eego, inta kale waa kasii xag jiraan. Wadaadadoodaa ugu roon, inta kale waa cuqdad miiran :)) Kulligood cuqdadaa lagu koriyaa.

Diin aan qabiil ahayn malahan. Waa dadaan ka warqabin nafsadooda oo tu kale ilaahay tusay. Ilaa ay toobad keenaan soomaliaya ma hagaageyso wallahi.[/quote]

Very well said brother-man. It is always those who have a tainted history who shout foul at the contributions others made. It kind of gives them a false sense of accomplishment. Sad but true.

Lol, the dameers are confuse as ever.

Twisted, you can't read nor can you even respond to me because your sources, knowledge is limited. You have no argument. Its like I am speaking to a child.


Listen Somaliweyn, the page you even showed shows that wacdaan clan chiefs and even wacdaan clan members submitted to the Italians, some men who are wacdaan still fought against the clan, however this page specifically says by 1908 all wacdaans not just Mahad moldheere submitted, do you disagree with the author? Lol, 1908??? Are you proud that some wacdaans fought until 1908?


Listen,

In lee cassanelli book it says, 1908 all wacdaan chiefs, be it mahad moldheere, hasan hussien, abikar modlheere, submitted to Italians right or wrong?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

In roberts hess book this is what he says of lafoole, right or wrong?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia3.jpg

In robert hess book does it not say that mudulood clans of mobileen and wacdaan swore allegiance to the colonial power?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia5.jpg

And did robert hess not say that wadaans and others taunted carletti to fight the Sayyid?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia6.jpg


IS WHAT ROBERT HESS AND LEE CASSANELLI WROTE NOT SAY THIS?

Sadeboi,

You are bringing the same old recycled rethoric that was proven to be FALSE OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Scroll up to SW's post he has systamtically dissimated your whole argument. You are getting boring now. Come up with new a argument

Twisted, as I have said before you are not capable of debating with me. You even acknowledge it,that is why I await for dameerweyne. I don't think you grasp what been discussed here, dameerweyne made some comments and I asked him some question. WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO OFFER HERE?

[quote="sadeboi"]Twisted, as I have said before you are not capable of debating with me. You even acknowledge it,that is why I await for dameerweyne. I don't think you grasp what been discussed here, dameerweyne made some comments and I asked him some question. WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO OFFER HERE?[/quote]

I don't see any debate going on here. The only thing I see is a delusional making some deluded claims that have been dismissed as false and disingenious over and over again. You would be silly to even think you can debate me on an intellectual level. I am not being cocky here. It is just not possible sxb

Listen,

In lee cassanelli book it says, 1908 all wacdaan chiefs, be it mahad moldheere, hasan hussien, abikar modlheere, submitted to Italians right or wrong?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

In roberts hess book this is what he says of lafoole, right or wrong?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia3.jpg

In robert hess book does it not say that mudulood clans of mobileen and wacdaan swore allegiance to the colonial power?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia5.jpg

And did robert hess not say that wadaans and others taunted carletti to fight the Sayyid?

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... talia6.jpg

IS WHAT ROBERT HESS AND LEE CASSANELLI WROTE NOT SAY THIS?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can you answer this? If no then kindly leave your wabeeying too much.