|
|
Post by njugunajohn on Feb 15, 2012 8:39:32 GMT 3
Today's Star (February 15, 2012) carries a rather interesting article (page 23) about the trio whose fates are now intertwined; namely, Uhuru, Ruto and Raila. Not only is it an interesting read but also an amusing one. I must say it made my day.    I feel that there is nothing to add. |
|
|
|
Post by destiny on Feb 15, 2012 10:29:33 GMT 3
Wait a minute, is this "our" Double O ama ni the other Oloo who's an advocate? Perhaps it could be an ordinary Joe the plumber e.g Njugunajohn who has hijacked this name for own reasons? On a different note, I thought Hon Beth Mugo was related to Uhuru!
|
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Feb 15, 2012 15:46:43 GMT 3
Today's Star (February 15, 2012) carries a rather interesting article (page 23) about the trio whose fates are now intertwined; namely, Uhuru, Ruto and Raila. Not only is it an interesting read but also an amusing one. I must say it made my day. I feel that there is nothing to add. First of all, both Uhuru and Ruto face serious charges of crimes against humanity at the ICC therefore, at least out of respect and value for lives lost and those still suffering from PEV, let's not trivialize the issue to one being about who has relatives working for him or her of those seeking the presidency. Second, having relatives working for any of these candidates is not a disqualification to seek the presidency; what matters is who is better qualified to lead our country in this phase of our history where we must build on the reforms underway and who overall will minimize ethnicity and tribalism in all its manifestations, including nepotism and that candidate is by far one Raila Amolo Odinga. Third, I do not agree with all the writer quotes Jerry Okungu as saying but would agree with his sentiments that one cannot point to crowds and say, "see, he is a great leader!" especially in Kenya where if you look at those crowds more closely, it's mostly children and many who don't even know the meaning of voting, let alone qualities and qualifications of a good leader. I realize the likes of Uhuru and Ruto--and quite frankly many on these fora hope and pray they can tap into that level of ignorance among and within the populace but the bad news for them is more Kenyans (read the ones not in those rallies) are more enlightened and even more will be such that come election time, an informed public will cast their vote for the best candidate to lead our country forward as our next president. That yours truly and many others are confident about regardless of what the naysayers say chief among them being tribalism must rule. |
|
|
|
Post by Onyango Oloo on Feb 15, 2012 23:09:35 GMT 3
Letter to the Star:
Case of Mistaken Identity
Onyango Oloo
to williamecpike, William, Catherine
In the February 15, 2012 issue of the Star, page 23, column 5, there is a commentary on Uhuru and Ruto penned by one Onyango Oloo. At the footer there is a note describing Onyango Oloo as an "activist". We are further informed that the article was sent "by the office of Uhuru Kenyatta".
I have been getting perplexed, even outraged calls all morning and all afternoon.
For three reasons.
1. I do not share political views with Uhuru Kenyatta nor do I have any great affinity with William Ruto. If anything, I spend a lot of time critiquing the duo.
2. I did not pen the article. ANOTHER Onyango Oloo who is actually an advocate of the High Court and political ally of the above politicians, did.
3. I am THE activist. George Onyango Oloo usually pens off as a lawyer-which I am not.
4. Can you please clear up this confusion for your readers and the wider public?
I do occasionally contribute to the Star, but I submit my pieces DIRECTLY as your own records will attest.
(DAVID) Onyango Oloo
Nairobi
|
|
|
|
Post by subsaharanite on Feb 16, 2012 0:36:08 GMT 3
Double O, thanks for the clarification.
I had thought you had become so cheap. I was actually looking forward to rescinding my Jukwaa membership.
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Feb 16, 2012 10:18:03 GMT 3
Uhuru has plenty of relatives in government. You just can't go looking for the name Kenyatta though. You need to cast a wider net looking at Mugo's, Muigai's, Muhoho's, Gecaga's to name but a few.
|
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Feb 16, 2012 14:03:28 GMT 3
An astonishing article. Beth Mugo is MP for Dagoretti and Minister for Public Health, and it's hardly a secret that she's related to Uhuru. Does the Star not have a fact-checker?
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Feb 16, 2012 14:13:11 GMT 3
An astonishing article. Beth Mugo is MP for Dagoretti and Minister for Public Health, and it's hardly a secret that she's related to Uhuru. Does the Star not have a fact-checker? I am sure the article was alluded to relatives appointed by Uhuru and Ruto to public offices.....rather than those in public office by right or appointment by someone else! |
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Feb 16, 2012 15:41:35 GMT 3
An astonishing article. Beth Mugo is MP for Dagoretti and Minister for Public Health, and it's hardly a secret that she's related to Uhuru. Does the Star not have a fact-checker? I am sure the article was alluded to relatives appointed by Uhuru and Ruto to public offices.....rather than those in public office by right or appointment by someone else!
That can't be right. First of all, the guy says
But the last time I checked, I did not find any of Uhuru's or Ruto's relatives holding any public office.
without qualification. This is just blatantly false, given that Beth Mugo is the incumbent Minister for Public Health, as well as the sitting MP for Dagoretti.
Even if the writer meant, as you suggest, to refer to relatives appointed by the Prime Minister, the claim is still false, since, at the time of the appointments, the executive authority of GoK vested in the President (under § 23 of the old constitution). NARA narrowed that authority by imposing certain conditions—certain appointments now had to be made in consultation with the Prime Minister—but it did not remove it from him or transfer it to the Prime Minister.
In any case, even if your reinterpretation of the claim were correct, the claim itself is expressed in such misleading language that any competent newspaper would have asked for a change or clarification. Anything else just misleads readers, because it is very far from obvious that ... the last time I checked, I did not find any of Uhuru's or Ruto's relatives holding any public office actually means the last time I checked, I did not find any of Uhuru's or Ruto's relatives holding a public office to which they had been appointed by Uhuru and Ruto |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Feb 16, 2012 15:56:21 GMT 3
I am sure the article was alluded to relatives appointed by Uhuru and Ruto to public offices.....rather than those in public office by right or appointment by someone else!
That can't be right. First of all, the guy says
But the last time I checked, I did not find any of Uhuru's or Ruto's relatives holding any public office.
without qualification. This is just blatantly false, given that Beth Mugo is the incumbent Minister for Public Health, as well as the sitting MP for Dagoretti.
Even if the writer meant, as you suggest, to refer to relatives appointed by the Prime Minister, the claim is still false, since, at the time of the appointments, the executive authority of GoK vested in the President (under § 23 of the old constitution). NARA narrowed that authority by imposing certain conditions—certain appointments now had to be made in consultation with the Prime Minister—but it did not remove it from him or transfer it to the Prime Minister.
In any case, even if your reinterpretation of the claim were correct, the claim itself is expressed in such misleading language that any competent newspaper would have asked for a change or clarification. Anything else just misleads readers, because it is very far from obvious that ... the last time I checked, I did not find any of Uhuru's or Ruto's relatives holding any public office actually means the last time I checked, I did not find any of Uhuru's or Ruto's relatives holding a public office to which they had been appointed by Uhuru and RutoSplitting hairs I see. Immediately following the statement about the two not having relatives in public office the name of Raila follows with a list of alleged relatives who hold public office following appointment again allegedly by Raila. The point being made must be about relatives appointed by someone and serving in public service. Trying to drag the name of Beth is blatantly unfair especially as she is my MP and I voted for her in the last two elections. She holds public office not because she is a relative of Uhuru. But surely Raila's relatives are in public office because of Raila's position!!! |
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Feb 16, 2012 20:21:38 GMT 3
What George Onyango Oloo is alluding to is Nepostism -
Defination of Nepotism
Wiki -Nepotism is favoritism granted to relatives regardless of merit
It is an open secret that Foreign Minister Wetangula awarded Railas relatives Ambassadorial Posts without them rising through diplomatic ranks - This culminated to Wetangula getting his job back even after engaging in corruption -Tokyo embassy
Of late there are media reports of a political marriage btwn ODM -Raila and Ford K-Wetangula
Doesnt it sum it up ?
|
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Feb 16, 2012 20:36:02 GMT 3
Immediately following the statement about the two not having relatives in public office the name of Raila follows with a list of alleged relatives who hold public office following appointment again allegedly by Raila. The point being made must be about relatives appointed by someone and serving in public service.
Here is the (immediately) following sentence:
The same cannot be said of Raila: Beryl Achieng of the Railways Pensions Board; Akinyi Wenwa, the Consulate General in USA; and Oburu Odinga Assistant Minister of Finance are his siblings.
There is no allegation in that sentence that Raila was the appointing authority in those instances. Even if it had contained the allegation that Raila was the appointing authority, that allegation would have been false, since the President is the relevant appointing authority, under §23. That power is restricted—and it may be delegated—but it is possessed by no one else, not even the Prime Minister.
And, to repeat, even if you're right about the intended meaning of Oloo's claim, it is still false, and its expression is so severely misleading that no competent newspaper would have published it.
Trying to drag the name of Beth is blatantly unfair especially as she is my MP and I voted for her in the last two elections. She holds public office not because she is a relative of Uhuru. But surely Raila's relatives are in public office because of Raila's position!!!
Beth Mugo is relevant because she's a relative of Uhuru in a public position. The claim made in the article was that neither Uhuru nor Ruto had relatives in public office. Beth Mugo is an obvious counterexample. It may be true that she is deserving of public office in her own right, where Raila's relatives are not. But that is irrelevant, since that is not what the writer of the piece claimed. Rather, he made the blatantly false claim that neither Uhuru nor Ruto had relatives in public office. Beth Mugo falsifies that claim.
The hairs remain resolutely unsplit.
|
|
|
|
Post by subsaharanite on Feb 16, 2012 23:00:34 GMT 3
Whats up with you jukwaaists,
If Uhurutos, do not wanna send their next of kin to school like Railas have done so that they can qualify for high end jobs, it demonstrates their reliance on cronyism.
I am pretty sure that the Railas possessed the basic qualifications for the jobs they were offered. So if RUTO and UHURU have no relatives in the government, it implies their kin did not posses the minimum qualifications required for those appointments.
This should be a wake up call to the two. They should send their relatives to school
|
|
Mukwhasi
Full Member
Justice will live on ..
Posts: 180
|
Post by Mukwhasi on Feb 17, 2012 5:50:17 GMT 3
Im not a Raila supporter but i will defend him today by asking for a compehensive audit to be done across the board and determine how many relatives work in the same government.I know for certain that their is a nephew of the president who is an assistant minister in the ministry of industrial development and nobody says a thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Feb 17, 2012 8:52:36 GMT 3
Immediately following the statement about the two not having relatives in public office the name of Raila follows with a list of alleged relatives who hold public office following appointment again allegedly by Raila. The point being made must be about relatives appointed by someone and serving in public service.
Here is the (immediately) following sentence:
The same cannot be said of Raila: Beryl Achieng of the Railways Pensions Board; Akinyi Wenwa, the Consulate General in USA; and Oburu Odinga Assistant Minister of Finance are his siblings.
There is no allegation in that sentence that Raila was the appointing authority in those instances. Even if it had contained the allegation that Raila was the appointing authority, that allegation would have been false, since the President is the relevant appointing authority, under §23. That power is restricted—and it may be delegated—but it is possessed by no one else, not even the Prime Minister.
And, to repeat, even if you're right about the intended meaning of Oloo's claim, it is still false, and its expression is so severely misleading that no competent newspaper would have published it.
Beth Mugo is relevant because she's a relative of Uhuru in a public position. The claim made in the article was that neither Uhuru nor Ruto had relatives in public office. Beth Mugo is an obvious counterexample. It may be true that she is deserving of public office in her own right, where Raila's relatives are not. But that is irrelevant, since that is not what the writer of the piece claimed. Rather, he made the blatantly false claim that neither Uhuru nor Ruto had relatives in public office. Beth Mugo falsifies that claim.
The hairs remain resolutely unsplit.
If ever you want to change your career, you will find very good grounding in evangelism. Your attempt at explaining it is how they read the bible......as long as the line suits the explanation, the context is never important! |
|
