|
Post by karajan on Oct 5, 2011 14:38:44 GMT 3
If Violence in the Rift Valley was to further ODMs objectives, then who's objectives were furthered at the Great Naivasha Slaughter. Most Kikuyu claim it was in retaliation for Kikuyu's killed in Eldoret. Fact: There is no HARD evidence that Kikukyu were killed in Eldoret. They lost a GREAT DEAL of PROPERTY in OUTLYING AREAS. But loss of life? Check your FACTS again. Myth: Kales planned violence. Ocampo has failed to establish ANY credible evidence to support this. Myth: Kales burned Kiambaa Church. Again there is no evidence that WILL STAND IN A COURT OF LAW to support this myth. Question: If the Naivasha Slaughter was to hit back on the Kales then it BACKFIRED BADLY. The victims were LUO/LUIYA. Mungiki and their paymasters must go back to SCHOOL and learn Basic Ethnography
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 5, 2011 17:42:43 GMT 3
The violence in the Rift Valley was carried out in furtherance of ODM's goals. (See e.g. para 26 of the Chamber's decision on summons for Ruto et alii.) It was prepared by a group with a common plan consisting mainly of ODM members (para. 22, ibid.) Witness 24 testified that the Prime Minister supported and assisted in the planning. The non-ODM members took instructions from the party. In short, the violence was planned by a subcommittee of ODM. We now know that on every single day in 2007, your party waited and watched for its opportunity to commit crimes such as those described on p. 94-5 of the Waki report. If the violence was planned and executed by ODM as you say isn't it telling that the Prime Minister is not in the dock? The question presupposes that his not being summoned is good evidence for the view that neither he nor his party were involved. This assumption is false, badly so: political expediency makes it easier to leave him alone; as part of the post-election negotiations, he negotiated an indemnity against legal liability arising from his conduct*; and there are other PEV cases (Kibera and Kisumu) which have not been tried for lack of time, capacity or competence, in spite of reasonably good evidence of criminal responsibility. *Presumably, some members of his party are very unhappy at not having enjoyed this favour. One witness said that the PM supported and assisted in the planning, is there any corroborating evidence to support that claim? None that is before the judges (to my knowledge).
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 5, 2011 18:04:43 GMT 3
We are all missing the point. The point is that SOMEONE PLANNED TO STEAL THE VOTE and actually did it. You may be interested to read p. 36 of Ballots to Bullets the Human Rights Watch report: Around Eldoret many Kalenjin politicians stoked ethnic tensions to mobilize political support among their ethnic kinsmen, a tactic familiar to Kenyan politics. To cite just one of many typical examples, a Kalenjin councillor reportedly told a rally in the town of Soi that, if elected, the ODM would “remove the roots” of local Kikuyu communities “so there would be only one tribe there.”
One locally-prominent Kalenjin politician acknowledged to Human Rights Watch that, “Some ODM politicians would say, ‘we have a snake we have to get rid of.’ It was a clear metaphor for the Kikuyu. They did not see the repercussions of this.”
Largely as a result of this ethnic rhetoric, many Kalenjin supporters believed that once elected, the ODM would find a way to redistribute most or all land owned by Kikuyu to them. Human Rights Watch interviewed several Kalenjin involved in anti Kikuyu violence who said they were merely doing by force what they had been denied a chance to do through the ballot box. The premiss is supported by both Waki and the Prosecutor's evidence. Waki 2008: 147 reports the careful arrangements made by Kalenjin attackers at Baharini to arrange (i) the disposal of captured property (ii) to review the progress of their initial attacks, and (iii) to ensure that youth who had participated in the initial violence were ritually cleansed. The same page also reports the DVD evidence of attackers being trained at Kimaranya village in Keringet, as well as the KNCHR's finding of premeditation. See also p. 136 and 137: several witnesses testify to the wide expectation among Kalenjin (in this case Kipsigis) that there would be violent evictions after the elections. Further examples emerge on closer inspection of Waki, but the Prosecutor's evidence that the meetings for violence date back to at least December 2006 should not go unmentioned. Briefly: majimboists in the Rift Valley resolved to use violence whatever the outcome of the election; the violence began before the announcement of the outcome; the perpetrators intended to use violence regardless of the outcome. That is why the violence cannot have been caused by the announcement of the outcome.
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 5, 2011 18:32:18 GMT 3
If Violence in the Rift Valley was to further ODMs objectives, then who's objectives were furthered at the Great Naivasha Slaughter. Most Kikuyu claim it was in retaliation for Kikuyu's killed in Eldoret. Fact: There is no HARD evidence that Kikukyu were killed in Eldoret. They lost a GREAT DEAL of PROPERTY in OUTLYING AREAS. But loss of life? Check your FACTS again. Myth: Kales planned violence. Ocampo has failed to establish ANY credible evidence to support this. Myth: Kales burned Kiambaa Church. Again there is no evidence that WILL STAND IN A COURT OF LAW to support this myth. Question: If the Naivasha Slaughter was to hit back on the Kales then it BACKFIRED BADLY. The victims were LUO/LUIYA. Mungiki and their paymasters must go back to SCHOOL and learn Basic Ethnography (1) See previous post for Kalenjin planning of violence before the election. (2) Gikuyu deaths in Eldoret are attested by eyewitnesses, victims, and perpetrators themselves. One relevant instance of perpetrator testimony comes from p. 41 of Ballots to Bullets.: If we met a Kikuyu, we just beat him. I saw five people die that day personally. They attacked using all forms [of weapons]—arrows, pangas [machetes] and even beating with any crude tool. It was mob justice. The first killing ... they approached him politely and asked him to produce his ID card. The one who got the card announced the name very loudly—it was a Kikuyu name. And the mob just attacked him. Those who produced IDs with Kalenjin or Luo names, they let them go. The perpetrator was one of a group that left a meeting at Kapsoya where they were urged to remove Gikuyu from Eldoret town itself. (3) I think the judges found evidence sufficient to conclude that the attack on Kiambaa was part of the violence organised by the network. (Which network constitutes a subcommittee of ODM). In any case, there is perpetrator testimony from the Guardian of 2.i.2008: Asked if they knew about the church massacre, all the youths nodded. "We were there," said one man, who said his name was Patrick. "We got a message that the Kikuyus were arming near the church. So we went to give reinforcements to the Kalenjins there."
Another man carried on: "The men and women had babies and small children, but they carried pangas to defend themselves. Is someone with a panga innocent? It is not our custom to kill women and children. We told them to come out of the church, but they locked the door and refused to come out. So we burned them." The mashada thread dedicated to denying or obscuring the facts of Kiambaa should be of interest, if only because the mendacious nonsense is of a higher standard there.
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on Oct 5, 2011 19:13:11 GMT 3
danielwaweru,
Just a quick question, could you please furnish us with the figures of the fatalities in Kisumu and Kibera and a breakdown of their ethnic groups. That should lay to rest your claims
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 6, 2011 10:20:03 GMT 3
The question presupposes that his not being summoned is good evidence for the view that neither he nor his party were involved. This assumption is false, badly so: political expediency makes it easier to leave him alone; as part of the post-election negotiations, he negotiated an indemnity against legal liability arising from his conduct*; and there are other PEV cases (Kibera and Kisumu) which have not been tried for lack of time, capacity or competence, in spite of reasonably good evidence of criminal responsibility. *Presumably, some members of his party are very unhappy at not having enjoyed this favour. DW, the above quotation in reference to RAO is heavy. Can you substantiate that? Also, did Kibaki negotiate a similar immunity deal?
|
|
|
Post by Dumekenya on Oct 6, 2011 10:42:04 GMT 3
I'd need to look at my timeline, but on, I think, the 3.i.2008, Ruto announced that a demonstration that had been called would be postponed because the risk of violence was too great. By 3.i.2008, it was clear that calls for mass action were calls for violence. Incidentally, it is quite likely not true that most demonstrators were peaceful: in Nairobi, for example, very large numbers of the marchers committed petty property crime. But this doesn't matter: ODM's leadership called for mass action in the knowledge that such a call would lead to violence; even if many of the demonstrators did not commit violence, it retains responsible for those who did. Waweru you need to tell us from which dictionary did the term Mass Action mean violence as you purport in your post. Mass Action is a Lawful act which is in the constitution of Kenya and it is internationally recognized democratic right of citizens. it is a way of voicing out concerns of a citizenry that feels deprived of certain rights. The mass action which was called by ODM party was a peaceful demos to protest against the stolen election. This was very clearly. The then government took advantage of the situation and provoked the peaceful demonstrators by way of cordoning of Uhuru park and most of the public meeting galleries hence frustration the efforts of the planned mass action. The powers that be were determined to retain power by whatever means they had at their disposal. They tried to demonize Mass action by way of provoking the demonstrators and the launching of the attacks. We even saw the Uganda military in Eldoret, Usenge and Kisumu. They even deployed hooligans to destroy Kisumu so as to paint the community in Kisumu as violent. These info is in the public domain let no one be cheated. As much as ODM was staging up the mass action, the Pro PNU were busy planning the violent attacks under the pretext that they were rallying for peace. We need to call a spade a spade. It was only after the provocation that the Call for mass action turned violent because the ODM supporters felt threatened by the excessive force from the the then government and the Pro PNU. Yes indeed people were maimed, killed, deprived/abused of their rights from both political divide but the world needs to know that merchants of impunity can go to any length to protect their interest. They should be exposed and brought to book. Mass Action is not a call for Violence Waweru needs to know that.
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 6, 2011 11:30:12 GMT 3
The question presupposes that his not being summoned is good evidence for the view that neither he nor his party were involved. This assumption is false, badly so: political expediency makes it easier to leave him alone; as part of the post-election negotiations, he negotiated an indemnity against legal liability arising from his conduct*; and there are other PEV cases (Kibera and Kisumu) which have not been tried for lack of time, capacity or competence, in spite of reasonably good evidence of criminal responsibility. *Presumably, some members of his party are very unhappy at not having enjoyed this favour. DW, the above quotation in reference to RAO is heavy. Can you substantiate that? Also, did Kibaki negotiate a similar immunity deal? No public sources, though it was in a draft of the agreement. I imagine that the provision was removed to a non-public codicil of the final text. I don't know if Kibaki signed a similar deal.
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 6, 2011 11:36:29 GMT 3
I'd need to look at my timeline, but on, I think, the 3.i.2008, Ruto announced that a demonstration that had been called would be postponed because the risk of violence was too great. By 3.i.2008, it was clear that calls for mass action were calls for violence. Incidentally, it is quite likely not true that most demonstrators were peaceful: in Nairobi, for example, very large numbers of the marchers committed petty property crime. But this doesn't matter: ODM's leadership called for mass action in the knowledge that such a call would lead to violence; even if many of the demonstrators did not commit violence, it retains responsible for those who did. Waweru you need to tell us from which dictionary did the term Mass Action mean violence as you purport in your post. Mass Action is a Lawful act which is in the constitution of Kenya and it is internationally recognized democratic right of citizens. it is a way of voicing out concerns of a citizenry that feels deprived of certain rights. The mass action which was called by ODM party was a peaceful demos to protest against the stolen election. This was very clearly. The then government took advantage of the situation and provoked the peaceful demonstrators by way of cordoning of Uhuru park and most of the public meeting galleries hence frustration the efforts of the planned mass action. The powers that be were determined to retain power by whatever means they had at their disposal. They tried to demonize Mass action by way of provoking the demonstrators and the launching of the attacks. We even saw the Uganda military in Eldoret, Usenge and Kisumu. They even deployed hooligans to destroy Kisumu so as to paint the community in Kisumu as violent. These info is in the public domain let no one be cheated. As much as ODM was staging up the mass action, the Pro PNU were busy planning the violent attacks under the pretext that they were rallying for peace. We need to call a spade a spade. It was only after the provocation that the Call for mass action turned violent because the ODM supporters felt threatened by the excessive force from the the then government and the Pro PNU. Yes indeed people were maimed, killed, deprived/abused of their rights from both political divide but the world needs to know that merchants of impunity can go to any length to protect their interest. They should be exposed and brought to book. Mass Action is not a call for Violence Waweru needs to know that. Semantics 101, please. The meaning of a word (in this case, what sort of actions the word referred to) on an occasion of use is given by its conventional semantic content (its dictionary meaning) as well as (at least) facts about the context in which it is uttered. This is why if you call a girl a word that rhymes with witch, you can't argue that you intended to refer to a female animal, rather than a human being. (If you don't like the example, think of PNU's claim that it was 'acting in self-defence.) In the context of serious violence since at least the 29.xii, calls for mass action entailed violence. Calls for mass action were immediately followed by violence, which is why some of your leadership argued that mass action ought to be postponed, and why Kofi Annan urged your party to call off mass action as a show of good faith in the prelude to negotiations.
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 6, 2011 11:41:25 GMT 3
The question presupposes that his not being summoned is good evidence for the view that neither he nor his party were involved. This assumption is false, badly so: political expediency makes it easier to leave him alone; as part of the post-election negotiations, he negotiated an indemnity against legal liability arising from his conduct*; and there are other PEV cases (Kibera and Kisumu) which have not been tried for lack of time, capacity or competence, in spite of reasonably good evidence of criminal responsibility. *Presumably, some members of his party are very unhappy at not having enjoyed this favour. DW, the above quotation in reference to RAO is heavy. Can you substantiate that? Also, did Kibaki negotiate a similar immunity deal? The other point to make is that that sort of clause is fairly standard in deals of that nature. Naturally, it's rarely included in the public version of the text.
|
|
|
Post by nok on Oct 6, 2011 11:53:04 GMT 3
DW, the above quotation in reference to RAO is heavy. Can you substantiate that? Also, did Kibaki negotiate a similar immunity deal? The other point to make is that that sort of clause is fairly standard in deals of that nature. Naturally, it's rarely included in the public version of the text. This is a serious claim to make and would be glad to have or read more evidence that back your postulations. In generall you are suggesting that Henry Kosgey and Ruto are of that opinion and that this could be a major bone of contention
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 6, 2011 12:03:58 GMT 3
DW, this explains a lot! No wonder Ruto's up in arms. No wonder RAO casually talks about others carrying their own cross. Agwambo has pulled yet another '82 surpise. Others take the fall for blood he has spilled. Is this guy lucky or what?
The assumption would be Kibaki signed a similar deal with all those lawyers on both sides negotiating the agreement. But what if he didn't? That would then explain the futile & senseless shuttle diplomacy & the lopsided letter to ICC backing Muthaura...because he knows if Muthaura goes down, all paths lead to him. Boy are we in for interesting days ahead...
|
|
|
Post by moesha on Oct 7, 2011 15:07:52 GMT 3
If Violence in the Rift Valley was to further ODMs objectives, then who's objectives were furthered at the Great Naivasha Slaughter. Most Kikuyu claim it was in retaliation for Kikuyu's killed in Eldoret. Fact: There is no HARD evidence that Kikukyu were killed in Eldoret. They lost a GREAT DEAL of PROPERTY in OUTLYING AREAS. But loss of life? Check your FACTS again.[/font]Myth: Kales planned violence. Ocampo has failed to establish ANY credible evidence to support this. Myth: Kales burned Kiambaa Church. Again there is no evidence that WILL STAND IN A COURT OF LAW to support this myth. Question: If the Naivasha Slaughter was to hit back on the Kales then it BACKFIRED BADLY. The victims were LUO/LUIYA. Mungiki and their paymasters must go back to SCHOOL and learn Basic Ethnography [/quote] @karajan Oh no what do you mean there were no kikuyu's killed in Eldoret? Check your facts again. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22460182/ns/world_news-africa/t/mob-kills-kenya-church/
|
|
|
Post by einstein on Oct 7, 2011 16:19:23 GMT 3
The question presupposes that his not being summoned is good evidence for the view that neither he nor his party were involved. This assumption is false, badly so: political expediency makes it easier to leave him alone; as part of the post-election negotiations, he negotiated an indemnity against legal liability arising from his conduct*; and there are other PEV cases (Kibera and Kisumu) which have not been tried for lack of time, capacity or competence, in spite of reasonably good evidence of criminal responsibility.
*Presumably, some members of his party are very unhappy at not having enjoyed this favour. DW, the above quotation in reference to RAO is heavy. Can you substantiate that? Also, did Kibaki negotiate a similar immunity deal? No public sources, though it was in a draft of the agreement. I imagine that the provision was removed to a non-public codicil of the final text. I don't know if Kibaki signed a similar deal. DW, the above quotation in reference to RAO is heavy. Can you substantiate that? Also, did Kibaki negotiate a similar immunity deal? The other point to make is that that sort of clause is fairly standard in deals of that nature. Naturally, it's rarely included in the public version of the text. DW, this explains a lot! No wonder Ruto's up in arms. No wonder RAO casually talks about others carrying their own cross. Agwambo has pulled yet another '82 surpise. Others take the fall for blood he has spilled. Is this guy lucky or what?
The assumption would be Kibaki signed a similar deal with all those lawyers on both sides negotiating the agreement. But what if he didn't? That would then explain the futile & senseless shuttle diplomacy & the lopsided letter to ICC backing Muthaura...because he knows if Muthaura goes down, all paths lead to him. Boy are we in for interesting days ahead... Danielwaweru, B6K,Guys, this now falls in the domain of very dangerous bar talk and belittles the intelligence of some members of this board! While I do not expect anything else from Danielwaweru, I'm very worried about the direction B6K is headed of late. B6K, you are slowly but surely turning yourself into a laughing stock. Whatever happened to you? You used to be brilliant!! Did you just admit in your post above that Danielwaweru's idle tittle-tattle above really explains a lot? Wow! You believe that and I recommend Mashada for you. Please do not let me down coz I think very highly of you.
|
|
|
Post by nok on Oct 7, 2011 16:22:30 GMT 3
If Violence in the Rift Valley was to further ODMs objectives, then who's objectives were furthered at the Great Naivasha Slaughter. Most Kikuyu claim it was in retaliation for Kikuyu's killed in Eldoret. Fact: There is no HARD evidence that Kikukyu were killed in Eldoret. They lost a GREAT DEAL of PROPERTY in OUTLYING AREAS. But loss of life? Check your FACTS again.[/font]Myth: Kales planned violence. Ocampo has failed to establish ANY credible evidence to support this. Myth: Kales burned Kiambaa Church. Again there is no evidence that WILL STAND IN A COURT OF LAW to support this myth. Question: If the Naivasha Slaughter was to hit back on the Kales then it BACKFIRED BADLY. The victims were LUO/LUIYA. Mungiki and their paymasters must go back to SCHOOL and learn Basic Ethnography [/quote] @karajan Oh no what do you mean there were no kikuyu's killed in Eldoret? Check your facts again. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22460182/ns/world_news-africa/t/mob-kills-kenya-church/[/quote] Lets not distort clear facts here!! Kenyans died; be it in Eldoret, Kisumu, Naivasha, Kibera.................... just to name but a few !
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 7, 2011 20:23:51 GMT 3
Guys, this now falls in the domain of very dangerous bar talk and belittles the intelligence of some members of this board! While I do not expect anything else from Danielwaweru, I'm very worried about the direction B6K is headed of late. B6K, you are slowly but surely turning yourself into a laughing stock. Whatever happened to you? You used to be brilliant!! Did you just admit in your post above that Danielwaweru's idle tittle-tattle above really explains a lot? Wow! You believe that and I recommend Mashada for you. Please do not let me down coz I think very highly of you. Einstein, thanks for the compliment...I think. Let me be honest I have said nothing different since my earliest posts on Jukwaa. Indeed in one of my first posts I expressed disbelief that UK was involved in the retaliatory clashes. Predictably, several Jukwaaists came down on me like a ton of bricks. After the initial ICC summons hearings, UK decided to link up with WSR & exhibited behavior that to me showed the guy was guilty. Now that we've past the confirmation stage & his side of the story has come out, I'm inclined to believe his dance with WSR may have been more an act of desperation than an act of guilt. You corner an an animal expect to get bit. Sounds Michuki-esque but such is life. IMO I don't see how it's possible for old money, as exemplified in UK, to link up with the hoi polloi as embodied in Mungiki. To quote Thuita, it's inconceivable. I'm actually hoping these ICC cases go to trial because we will reap a lot of information that we'd never get to learn about even with a Freedom of Information Act. But I honestly don't expect them to go to conviction. That's just my opinion. I can't speak for DW, but speaking for myself anything I post on Jukwaa is purely my personal opinion or personal observations on what others have posted. I'm not running for office on Jukwaa. I'm not naive enough to believe I can be hailed on Jukwaa. If anything I'm awaiting the day I will be publicly outted the way the Nic-whatshisname was yesterday. Tarred, feathered, & booted. Indeed I prefer if my opinions ruffle feathers or get people to re-analyze their positions. So long as they think rather than operate on auto-pilot, I'm ok with that. Einstein in short, I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to influence people.
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Oct 7, 2011 22:31:18 GMT 3
I'm here to influence people. well well well
|
|
|
Post by job on Oct 7, 2011 23:14:17 GMT 3
I can't speak for DW, but speaking for myself anything I post on Jukwaa is purely my personal opinion or personal observations on what others have posted. I'm not running for office on Jukwaa. I'm not naive enough to believe I can be hailed on Jukwaa. If anything I'm awaiting the day I will be publicly outted the way the Nic-whatshisname was yesterday. Tarred, feathered, & booted. Indeed I prefer if my opinions ruffle feathers or get people to re-analyze their positions. So long as they think rather than operate on auto-pilot, I'm ok with that. [/b] Einstein in short, I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to influence people. [/quote] here to influence people who're probably on auto-pilot, and who likely don't think? Please enlighten JUKWAA further.
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 7, 2011 23:33:53 GMT 3
Lets not distort clear facts here!! Kenyans died; be it in Eldoret, Kisumu, Naivasha, Kibera.................... just to name but a few ! In late February 2008, Balala and Namwamba released a statement urging Gikuyu to leave Kenya (CNN, 22.ii.2008). This is also the time at which Balala publicly told journalists that the party was considering the Lesotho option (Reuters, 21.ii.2008).* They were acting in the name, and at the behest, of ODM---Balala was a member of the Pentagon, as you'll remember. Now that it has been established that crimes against humanity were planned, prepared and perpetrated by your preferred party, it once again professes to believe that Gikuyu are Kenyans, the better to efface the specific and discriminatory intent of its plans and actions in the period 2006-8. I'm old-fashioned enough to despise that sort of cynicism, so you'll forgive me for noticing that the victims were largely Gikuyu, as was the intent of your party. *You may be interested to read the [url=http://jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2085 ]Jukwaa response[/url] to the statements. Apparently it was not widely appreciated on Jukwaa just which member of the Pentagon had made them.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 8, 2011 1:10:02 GMT 3
I'm here to influence people. well well well TNK, before you read a sinister angle into that sentence, read it with the onward before & think of book titles...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 8, 2011 1:14:51 GMT 3
I can't speak for DW, but speaking for myself anything I post on Jukwaa is purely my personal opinion or personal observations on what others have posted. I'm not running for office on Jukwaa. I'm not naive enough to believe I can be hailed on Jukwaa. If anything I'm awaiting the day I will be publicly outted the way the Nic-whatshisname was yesterday. Tarred, feathered, & booted. Indeed I prefer if my opinions ruffle feathers or get people to re-analyze their positions. So long as they think rather than operate on auto-pilot, I'm ok with that. [/b] Einstein in short, I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to influence people. [/quote] here to influence people who're probably on auto-pilot, and who likely don't think? Please enlighten JUKWAA further. [/quote] Supporting the same candidate since '92 pretty much falls in operating on auto-pilot. Shuffle the deck. Try someone new...
|
|
|
Post by Fahari on Oct 8, 2011 19:41:42 GMT 3
Lets not distort clear facts here!! Kenyans died; be it in Eldoret, Kisumu, Naivasha, Kibera.................... just to name but a few ! In late February 2008, Balala and Namwamba released a statement urging Gikuyu to leave Kenya (CNN, 22.ii.2008). This is also the time at which Balala publicly told journalists that the party was considering the Lesotho option (Reuters, 21.ii.2008).* They were acting in the name, and at the behest, of ODM---Balala was a member of the Pentagon, as you'll remember. Now that it has been established that crimes against humanity were planned, prepared and perpetrated by your preferred party, it once again professes to believe that Gikuyu are Kenyans, the better to efface the specific and discriminatory intent of its plans and actions in the period 2006-8. I'm old-fashioned enough to despise that sort of cynicism, so you'll forgive me for noticing that the victims were largely Gikuyu, as was the intent of your party. *You may be interested to read the [url=http://jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2085 ]Jukwaa response [/url] to the statements. Apparently it was not widely appreciated on Jukwaa just which member of the Pentagon had made them.[/quote] For some reason I can't access the post you referenced, perhaps it has been deleted for not being "politically correct". Do you have screen shots of those posts? I'm interested in comparing attitudes before and after
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Oct 8, 2011 20:04:22 GMT 3
In late February 2008, Balala and Namwamba released a statement urging Gikuyu to leave Kenya (CNN, 22.ii.2008). This is also the time at which Balala publicly told journalists that the party was considering the Lesotho option (Reuters, 21.ii.2008).* They were acting in the name, and at the behest, of ODM---Balala was a member of the Pentagon, as you'll remember. Now that it has been established that crimes against humanity were planned, prepared and perpetrated by your preferred party, it once again professes to believe that Gikuyu are Kenyans, the better to efface the specific and discriminatory intent of its plans and actions in the period 2006-8. I'm old-fashioned enough to despise that sort of cynicism, so you'll forgive me for noticing that the victims were largely Gikuyu, as was the intent of your party. *You may be interested to read the [url=http://jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2085 ]Jukwaa response [/url] to the statements. Apparently it was not widely appreciated on Jukwaa just which member of the Pentagon had made them.[/quote] For some reason I can't access the post you referenced, perhaps it has been deleted for not being "politically correct". Do you have screen shots of those posts? I'm interested in comparing attitudes before and after[/quote] My bad, I messed up the link. Here it is again: jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2085
|
|
|
Post by Fahari on Oct 8, 2011 21:41:42 GMT 3
Got it, thanks, you do have a long memory........
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 8, 2011 22:28:08 GMT 3
How interesting. Just 7 days before the signing of the National Accord there was an active e-war cabinet on Jukwaa complete with hopes of acquiring "sophisticated" weapons? With Ocampo's preference of internet investigations some of the Jukwaa hawks should be praying the PTC 1 case doesn't go to trial.
|
|