| Front Page |
Jamal Gabobe
Seattle, Washington
July 17, 2003
As someone who has heard and read many of the lies spread by Somaliland's enemies through the years, I must say that lately these lies have been getting more and more sophisticated and harder to identify. Some of these lies are so good they almost fooled me until I double and triple checked. Here are some examples.
Lie #1: Some notoriously pro-Abdiqasim Salad Hasan websites, have recently posted a set of recommendations to the chairman and members of the IGAD Technical Committee, that was attributed to the international observers at the Mbagathi conference. The recommendations were given the palatable title "Informal Expression of views from the International Observers Addressed to Chairman and Members of the IGAD Technical Committee and to the Leaders Committee."
These recommendations were brought to my attention by a friend of who thought them authentic. After reading them, I became suspicious. One of the questions that came to mind was why international observers who spent so many months trying to broker a deal between the warring southern factions, would issue a statement that could undermine such an agreement.
The first thing I did was that I checked two different websites in which the recommendations were posted and compared them. Immediately, I noticed that there were some differences. For example The HornAfrik version dated July 10, 2003 states: "In doing so, the international observers see the imperative need for various aspects of the document to be further development."
The same statement was worded a little differently in Goobjoog.com: "In doing so, the international observers see the imperative need for various aspects of the document to be further developed."
The difference in the two above statements was that one used the word "development" and the other used "developed". The correct usage is of course "developed". When I checked a couple of days later, lo and behold, HornAfrik had the correct word "developed". Another such example is that the HornAfrik version uses the word "negations" when negotiations is the appropriate word. Likewise Goobjoog.com uses "raising" where it should have used "arising", while HornAfrik uses the correct word "arising". These inconsistencies only convinced me that the text was not composed by international observers, or even a professional writer, but by a clever hack with an agenda (most likely a Somali), and when this person became aware of the grammatical mistakes in the text, he or she made some corrections and re-sent it, not realizing that there were still other mistakes. I just couldn't envision an international body that keeps issuing new versions of a published document.
In addition to the doctoring of the text and the work-in-progress quality of the recommendations, another clue that alerted me was that it seemed to be a wish list composed by Abdiqasim Salad Hasan himself.
A third clue was that when Abdiqasim was asked about the recommendations, he feigned lack of prior knowledge and pointed out that they even included a point that he forgot to mention in his objections to the July 5th agreement, i.e. the status of the capital, which according to the recommendation should be Mogadishu. By pointing out that the recommendations included a point he forgot to make, he was trying to establish distance between himself and the origin of the document, but the fact that the point itself is part of his agenda only reinforces the connection. Besides, for the international observers to dictate to Somalis where their capital should be would not only be inappropriate but counter-productive, therefore, it stretches credulity that they would issue such a statement.
A fourth clue was provided by Mr. Cabdicasis Axmed, the Ethiopian representative to the Mbagathi conference who when asked by HornAfrik about these recommendations repeated three times that we first have to check if they are genuine ("Horta inaan xaqiijino weeye," were Cabdicasis's words). From Cabdicasis Axmed's answers, it was clear he had doubts about the authenticity of the document.
The fifth and most ingenious clue was the title. By describing it as "Informal" the actual composer of this document created enough room so that international observers would not feel compelled to repudiate it as a forgery, and by inserting "Expression of views from the International Observers" he made it seem if it were actually issued by international observers, an almost perfect stroke in the art of deception.
Such grand deception would not be complete without the participation of IRIN, and as expected IRIN weighed in by quoting from the list of recommendations in an attempt to lend it legitimacy. But even IRIN's quotes show slight variation from the websites. For instance, IRIN says, "the document agreed on 5 July" while HornAfrik says "the document agreed on 5th July", another indication that this document is a work-in-progress and not something issued by an international body.
Lie #2: On July 8, 2003 this headline appeared in www.hargeysa.org : "Mr Kiplagat denounced the breakaway republic of Somaliland for its continued boycott." Source: Daily Nation.
The headline surprised me because I had closely followed the statements made by Mr. Kiplagat and had neither heard nor read such statement. What he said under pressure from Abdiqasim Salad and others who wanted to use the absence of Somaliland to discredit him, was that Somaliland was invited to the conference but refused to attend. It was also clear from what I knew about the proceedings of the conference that the plan was to form a government for the south which would then negotiate with Somaliland. So it did not make sense for someone with such a plan to denounce Somaliland.
A couple of days later, I saw a similar title in somalilandnet.com: "After a meeting with the TNG, The Kenyan mediator condemned secessionist ambitions by Somaliland."
The latter title was attributed to the IGAD Secretariat in Djibouti. The fact that the two titles are similar indicated to me that the source was the same, and the fact that it was directed against Somaliland pointed towards Djibouti, not Kiplagat. In other words, the article was fabricated by Djibouti's government and their operatives. The fact that websites owned by Somalilanders failed to notice the deception shows how cunning Somaliland's foes are.
Lie #3: On June 23, 2003 the BBC Somali section wrote: "Rasaas ka dhacday garoonka diyaaradaha Hargeysa
Axmed Siciid Cige - Hargeisa.
Saaka abbaarihii 11kii subaxnimo ayay rasaasi ka dhacday garoonka diyaaradaha ee Hargeysa kadib markii ay soo weerareen garoonka dhallinyaro hubeysan oo la sheegay inay ka careysan yihiin xariga General Jaamac Maxamed Qaalib oo labadii maalmood ee ugu danbeeyeyba ku xirnaa xabsiga dhexe ee Hargeysa, dawladduna ii sheegtay inay go'aamisay in galbata Jamhuuriyadda la baxday Somaliland laga masaafuriyo Generaalka."
I have listened to that report several times and can definitely confirm that the BBC's correspondent in Hargeisa, Mr. Axmed Siciid Cige, had never used the expression "Jamhuuriyadda la baxday Somaliland" in that report. Anyone who has any doubt should go and listen to the original report. Obviously the phrase "Jamhuuriyadda la baxday Somaliland" was added by the person who wrote the news report after it was filed by Axmed Siciid Cige, which just shows that in their zeal to undermine Somaliland, the Somaliland haters would even go to the extent of forging the work of their own colleagues.
Home | Contact us | Links | Archives