SomaliNet Forums

Shirib,

The sweettalk of DS is just another tactic to lure you in this losing war he is waging on Wacdaan. It seems like you have fallen for it

''Southern Somali history is Ajuuraan and Silcis, then Geledi. Geledi are king of kings, every clan in the south knows.''

Here you discharge the centuries old alliance between Geledi and Wacdan by claiming all credit. Weren't Wacdan with you when the Silcis were defeated, the Wacdaan themselves claim to be the ones that defeated them while the Geledi also do the same.

Also, weren't Biyamaal powerful enough to never have submitted to the dominance of Geledi, and even killed Sultan Yusuf and his son at the zenith of Geledi power?

Anyways, never become like the one who is sweettalking to you, never monopolize history and run away with all the fame. If your people behaved in this way, there would not be an alliance that lasted centuries.

Geledi and Wacdaan are the same. Gar and Guul we share everything.

I've been busy with finals and have not been that active these couple of days so I don't know what has been being said.

Anyways Wacdaan is closer to me then they are their brothers Abgaal. An insult at Wacdaan is an insult at Geledi (unless its done by Geledi).

Long live the Geledi, Wacdaan alliance, longest and most powerful alliance Somalia has ever seen.

VIVA GELEDI & GEEL CADDE

You should know the contect Shirib, because you know how the charcter of DS/Voltage is. He never praises others only when he is in a desperate situation.

Look into the discussion if you have time, these people want to hate the fact that Lafole massacre instigated Southern Resistance in which Biyamaal were the fiercest along with Wacdaan (save for the minority that surrender) and which was only SECOND to the Dervish resistance in the North.

First we will adress their arguments ONE BY ONE. Then move on to their shamefull history as LEVIES etc.

All one at a time, no rush involved lol.

DAMEER,


Two pages since my reply, in the other thread your nac-nac of move the topic to this one was all you said, and now two pages since my reply you have not refuted anything I wrote. Listen up dameer, I don't need you to wabeey to me all day for I don't understand that tongue, what I want you to do if refute my statements.


YOUR HISTORY IS NONE, AND YOU LIED ABOUT THE EVENT OF LAFOLE, AND I HAVE PRESENTED IT. ONCE A DAMEER ALWAYS A FOOT SOLDIER DAMER, USED AND ABUSED.


Stop the qosol-gariir, and reply if you can. Attacking my brother will not make your pathetic clan seem anymore better. I have the facts, the sources, and everything else, you presented lies and grandma stories.

WABEEY WABEEY.

From this post on, I don't want to hear your qosol gariir, present your case, and no grandma fairytale. Facts and Sources ya dameerweyne.

looool....


In all honesty my eyes have opened when it comes to Somali history. I've not only realized the lack of contribution to any of Somalia's conquests, triumphs but shameful threacherous actions by certain groups namely the lackeying up to the Italians. Eye opener.

''Stop the qosol-gariir, and reply if you can. Attacking my brother will not make your pathetic clan seem anymore better.''

How sweet, brother-love.

Also, Red Berets are the masters of qosol-gariir, when one replies the rest of the band follows with ''loooooool''. Case in point look above.

--

Anyways, no rush, everything will be refuted one at a time. The site and the error it gives has saved you from quick humiliation. I'll work on dealing with this Error first, after then we'll see.

Finally I have worked on the Error, I had to retyp ever word by word. I cant copy and past unfortuntally which buys you time.

---

Now lets start with SB's first agrument:

''Two Arabs, a mere two Arab men, outsmarted the wacdan clan into fighting the Italians because the Arabs were afraid of losing their interpretor job and wanted Filonardi to die so they can keep the job''

According to SB and co, the Lafoole massacre was instigated by Two arab men, and thus they were behind the Resistance in Benadir against the Italians.

To see why this Topic is a comprehensive historical discussion without distortions and hiding information, you only have to look on page 5, chapter 5 titled: ''The Storm of the Resistance gathers strength''

In there, I discuss the matter of the two Arab men that were used as scapegoats and if this was really the case:

''The first thing, Sorrentino did was arresting Abu Bakr, while Islam bin Muhammed disappeared from the Benadir coast''

After that I discuss the socalled punitive actions the Italians took in which they thought they could destroy the Resistance since the ''Osama Binladen and Al-Zahawari'' were taken care of along with the burning of several villages and coastal towns.

''In March the reinforcements of the two companies of Eritrean askaris finally arrived, and the Italians completed their plans for the punitive expedition against the Wacdaan and Geledi.
On April 20, almost 5 months after the Lafole attack, Sorrentino led his expedition inland and burned first Lafole and then several other villages associated with the Geledi and Murusade clan. The religious settlement of Nimow from where Sheekh Axmed Xaaji preached his religious message, was also bombarded by an Italian warship.''


These actions along with the dealing of the two arab men would have stopped the Resistance if it was that simple as SB and co believe, but this is far from the truth. The Resistance was just sparked off, with the powerful Biyamaal been drawn in the Resistance alongside Wacdaan and allies.

As both Robert L Hess and Lee V. Cassanelli acknowledge, the ''punitive actions'' had nearly any effect on the morale of the Resistance, it only reinforced the groups involved and drew the powerful Biyamaal ever closer to the side of the Resistance.

''The impression made by the punitive expedition after Lafole could hardly have been called lasting'' (Robert L. Hess)

''In the decade following the Lafoole incident, the Italians remained at the coast, their colonial policy marked by uncertainty and indecision. Their only major venture into the interior was the establishment of a garrisson of Arab soldiers at Baardheere in 1902'' (Lee V. Cassanelli )

In another passage, Robert L. Hess writes about the Italian commanders remark:

''We make no expeditions against tribes guilty (of hostilities) but arrest individuals of that tribe who happen to be in town; (this policy) has persuaded the Bimal and the Somali of Mogadishu that we are not strong''

It thus becomes clear that the Italians retreated to the Coast, and only were visible in cities/towns like Mogadishu, Merca, Warsheekh and Baraawe.

----

For more detailed picture just read Ch5 on page 5 and see who is distorting historical events by photo-copying some pieces as indha-sircaad without looking at the matter seriously and turning a couple of pages around to get a fuller picture. At least I discuss the Lafole event comprehensively.


PS:

One last comment,

On page 215 of the book written by Lee V. Cassanelli, we can see what the reasons were behind the Wacdaan decision to resist. SB and co have presented a silly argument that two arab men ''outsmarted'' the Wacdaan into fighting the Italians, this argument has already been shown to be silly and a blatant lie and distortion of events.

Lets see what Lee V. Cassanelli writes on page 215:

''Two factors bearing heavily on Wacdaan attidutes toward the colonial presence were the internal struggle for leadership, and the economic dislocation brought about by the abolition of the slavery and by the famine years of 1889-95''

It continues, on the same page:

''The dry years of the 1890s only exacerbated the economic situation: it was reported in 1898 that one-half of the Wacdaan population had been forced to abandon its home territory for pastures further inland. Apart from weakening their bonds with the Geledi, these developments, we can surmise, made the Wacdaan extremely fearful of any further threat to their land and well-being. They were, moreover, the first Somalis whose territory was actually invaded by colonial soldiers at the time of Cecchi expedition''

From the above pieces it becomes clear that Wacdaan had various reasons to resist, like their traditional fierce anti-infidel attidute, the hard economic situation around 1890s, combined with the famine years of 1889-95, the abolition of the slavery (the destruction of their means of production) etc etc. So to reduce all these factors into: ''two arab men tricked them and outsmarted them to fight the Italians'' is really chidlesh thinking. And I am not even surprised as the one who makes this argument. What actually surprises me is why I even take the time to respond. But its my duty to educate my fellow Somali people who are still reasoning like kids.

Now lets advance to his second argument.

SB says:

1) ''The Geledi Sultan, who is also the Sultan of Wacdan since they have an alliance and one sultan, signed a pledge and OBEDIENCE to the Italians''

2)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''

To ''support'' his argument he again uses the indha-sircaad (which only kids are fooled with).

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


Now lets start with nr1,

Again, to show you that I have presented a comprehensive picture of Axad Shiiki, I direct you to page 2, chapter 3 titled: ''The Somali response to Italian expansion''

In there I discuss the response of the diverse Somali groups to the slow Italian encroucment on their lands.

Like for example that the Sultan of Geledi started to accomodate the Italians and started to establish friendly relationshops with the Italian governors of Mogadishu.

Also, I discuss how this combined with the fierce anti-infidel mentality of Wacdaan lead to the alliance been cooled of.

Lee V. Cassanelli writes (for the owners of the book see page 209)

''In fact, the sultan was in a difficult position. Within his own Gobroon lineage, advisers were urging him to stand against the Italians and so restore his prestige among nearby clans who were fearful of the foreigners. Geledi's long-time allies the Wacdaan had apparently acted independently at Lafoole; and they had been assisted by a handful of warriors from the Murursade, also Geledi allies. Now the Wacdaan were beginning to blockade the caravan routes that ran through their territory to the coast. Osman's uncle and others felt that if the sultan wavered in his resistance, Gobroon authority would be weakened for good''

If we analyze this issue further (unlike the indha-sircaad of one page) and go to page 215, about Wacdaan we can see clearly that the alliance cooled off since the Wacdaan (the largest sections) were determined to resist, while the only section that followed Geledi were the Mahad Moldheere (smaller section) who shared more with Geledi since they were farmers etc.

''Apart from weakening their bonds with the Geledi, these developments, we can surmise, made the Wacdaan extremely fearful of any further threat to their land and well-being.'' Page 215, book of Lee V. Cassanelli.

So there goes silly argument nr1.

If we go further to argument nr2, we can see evidence that only reinforces what has been told in this topic.

For example, if we again go to page 5, chapter 5 we can see that the Italians sought to divide the Wacdaan and persuade sections of the group to submit peacefully. This is nothing new in Colonial warfare and strategy (divide and conquer strategy). They succeeded in luring one section which was called Mahad Moldheere. The most numerous and militarily strongest section of Wacdaan, the Abubakar Moldheere stood their ground and continued to resist. See page 5, chapter 5, the Response of Wacdaan.

Also, the reason why Mahad Moldheere was bribed was because they inhabited the territory contiguous to Afgooye and the fertile lands around Adadleh. They shared more with the Geledi (farmers) then with the fierce pastoralists of Benadir like Biyamaal and Wacdaan (Abubakar Moldheere).

''Their interests coincided more with those of the agricultural Geledi. However, their smaller numbers gave them less influence in Wacdaan clan councils, which came to assume greater importance for policymakers as the Wacdaan began to act independently of the Geledi. While the Mahad Moldheere apparently cooperated in the Lafoole siege, their leader Abiker Ahmed Hassan subsequently struck an independent diplomatic stance'' (Lee V. Cassanelli,page 216)

This quotation kills two birds with one stone.

ON the one hand it SHOWS that Wacdaan and Geledi alliance cooled off, and that the Wacdaan acted independently since they wanted to resist while the Sultan of Geledi wanted to accomodate and collaborate with the Italians.

ON the other hand it SHOWS that the Italians divided the Wacdaan, and that they could only bribe one calool-u-shaqeyste (opportunist) called Abiker Ahmed Hassan, and that they could convince Mahad Moldheere (minority section of Wacdan) using this opportunist that they should not resist. In this they succeed since the Mahad Moldheere shared more with the Geledi and saw the Geledi not resisting, hence they diverged from their Wacdaan brothers that went ahead in the Resistance.

After the Italians fully colonized Somalia and crushed all resistance coming from various Somali groups, the collaboreters (traitors) were treated good, while the brave ones who resisted were reduced in numbers and power. Hence why the minority section Mahad Moldheere in the 1960s (after a half century of Italian preferential treatment since they collaborated with the Italians) became powerfull and rose in status.

''In the early 1960s, a man of the Mahad Moldheere was recognized as titular head of all the Wacdaan'' ( Lee V. Cassanelli, page 217)

Doesn't this support all the other evidences presented so far in this topic? Isn't there so far consistency in the discussion of Axad Shiiki?

Now, who is distorting historical events by indha-sircaad (photo-copying) and by his biased (even envious and hateful) attidute?

I'll adress the other distortions ONE by ONE, in due time.

As has already become clear, the indha-sircaad contains nothing new, and all that they have photo-copied so far has already been discussed in this topic on various capters. What they have done so far, is to photo-copy and distort some pieces out of their context while attaching their biased (more envious/hatefull) views on the pieces. I call this tactic: Indha-sircaad, in which only unsuspecting kids who have no serious interest in objective historical discussion are fooled with.

For the ones who want to study the subject of history, always be objective and critical. Above all, be patient and always futher investigate the issue before running in the open with ''new discoveries''

---

Now The-Screw,

''what i have problems with is the obvious exaggerations and/or sometimes lies told to the unsuspecting and naive minds browsing this forum. my $.02''

Since you said that, why dont you adress the indha-sircaad which finely fits with your conviction of having problems with obvious exaggerations and/or sometimes lies told to the unsuspecting and naive minds browsing this forum.

In this topic I have presented a comprehenisive historical discussion of ''Axad Shiiki'' in which I adress all issues and look at the matter from different perspectives. So far, all the things they have photo-copied and thought were NEW RADICAL REVELATIONS were already mentioned and discussed in the various chapters of this discussion.

Be a man and tell us honestly to who such comment applies? Who is tricking unsuspecting and naive minds browsing this forum with indha-sircaad?

Cecchi was best known
for his journey to Abyssinia and the Galla countries between the years 1877 and
1882.

an other proof that their was one africa one abbyssinia what they call today ethiopia.somalia didnt exsists somalis did and among the oromos they were the largest cushite groups living in abbyssinia.what can i say them luugoo baastoo couldnt colinize gods kingdom.

Dameerweyne,

Are you back to grandma tales?

"According to SB and co, the Lafoole massacre was instigated by Two arab men, and thus they were behind the Resistance in Benadir against the Italians.

To see why this Topic is a comprehensive historical discussion without distortions and hiding information, you only have to look on page 5, chapter 5 titled: ''The Storm of the Resistance gathers strength''
"

Did I say this or did the book, and the author ROBERT HESS, you used to derive your information from said this:

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

"To see why this Topic is a comprehensive historical discussion without distortions and hiding information, you only have to look on page 5, chapter 5 titled: ''The Storm of the Resistance gathers strength''

WHICH BOOK DAMEER? ROBERT HESS BOOK OR LEE'S BOOK, BECAUSE NONE OF THEM TALK SAY THAT. I WANT YOU TO SHOW YOUR SOURCE DO NOT JUST WRITE FAKE LINES.


Listen kid, you've been writing a lot of BS, chapter 5 of what book, in Hess's book chapter 5 starts with page 101 and similar with lee, a lot of those one liners you are using are not in the book. LISTEN KID, I THOUGHT YOU SAID THIS DISCUSSION WAS FOR MATURE PEOPLE WHO CAN DEBATE WITH FACTS AND SOURCES. EVERY STATEMENT I MADE HAD A PHOTOCOPIED PAGE OF THE BOOK SUPPORTING MY STATEMENTS.

NOW DO THE SAME, OR KEEP WRITING YOUR MADE UP LINES AND MAKING NO SENSE.


1) STATE YOUR CLAIM
2) HAVE SOURCE, PHOTOCOPY THE BOOK AND SHOW US THE PAGES AND WHERE IN THE BOOK ITS IN (SINCE SOME PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ACCESS AND WE DO)
3) ORGANIZE YOUR THOUGHT, YOUR LIKE A HEAD LESS CHICKEN.

SOURCES, PAGES, FACTS.

Example of your incompetence and lack of sources:

You said:

"Hence why the minority section Mahad Moldheere in the 1960s (after a half century of Italian preferential treatment since they collaborated with the Italians) became powerfull and rose in status.

''In the early 1960s, a man of the Mahad Moldheere was recognized as titular head of all the Wacdaan'' ( Lee V. Cassanelli, page 217)"

The book says they WERE THE FIRST, but after a little all the other clans collaborated with the Italians. Here is the page, READ IT.
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/ ... alia44.jpg

Killed again wallahi, this is becoming habitual LOlz

[quote="Somaliweyn"]Anyways, never become like the one who is sweettalking to you, never monopolize history and run away with all the fame. If your people behaved in this way, there would not be an alliance that lasted centuries.[/quote]

Somaliweyn, wallahi bro I am not going to disparage you but this reeks of inferiority complex. You are like the Black thief who cries "Racist" when his thievery is exposed.

The fact is I said on SEVERAL occasions that Somali history to me is a positive sum gain and that all clan history benefits Somali history.

HOWEVER, you DID NOT PRESENT HISTORY. YOU LIED AND FABRICATED ERRONEOUSLY AND THE CHICKENS HAVE COME HOME TO ROOST USING THE INFORMATION YOU PROVIDED, PHOTOCOPIED SO THERE IS NO CONTENTION ABOUT ITS CREDIBILITY.

For example you said that WE said Lafooe was instigated by Arabs using you when all we did was provide what the source says, a source you try to corrupt in the hopes no one would follow up.

You said:

"According to SB and co, the Lafoole massacre was instigated by Two arab men, and thus they were behind the Resistance in Benadir against the Italians.

To see why this Topic is a comprehensive historical discussion without distortions and hiding information, you only have to look on page 5, chapter 5 titled: ''The Storm of the Resistance gathers strength''
"

When in reality WE did not say anything but just presented what the same source your tried to corrupt says:

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

Sadeboi,

I have told you this on the other thread and I will tell you again: You have come up with so many absurdities that one is amazed at the startling lack of logic with which you habitually operate. Each and every point you have raised has been proven to be false OVER AND OVER AGAIN. You can't do better than selectively copying and pasting one liners from books, that even when looked at comprehensively DISSMISS, your distorted lies. No wonder, every-one is pointing out to your silly lies and distortions.

Voltage,

is there a blackhole su-cking all criticism in, is criticism disallowed? it takes five seconds to refute that mumbo jumbo. Your comical attempt to turn SNET into a vessel of Marehan propoganda has been rejected by all. So go home and read lullabies ladyboy!

[quote="Twisted_Logic"]copying and pasting one liners from books, [/quote]

Definition of irony to me.

Then again, did I not say you make about as much sense as this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A