|
|
Post by joblesscorner on Mar 17, 2012 23:51:05 GMT 3
A member of the British Parliament has accused the International Criminal Court (ICC) of being used by foreign governments — including his own — to clear the way for Prime Minister Raila Odinga to ascend to power. Irishman Ian Paisley cautions that because of the ICC intervention, Kenya was heading towards a “dangerous impasse”. Mr Painsley’s comments mirrored similar allegations in Parliament by some MPs who have accused the British government of working in cahoots with Mr Odinga to have Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto detained by the court. “The ICC intervention is increasingly likely to drive this government and the country further apart, allowing a political leader from one ethnic group to try to remove an opponent from another ethnic group from the scene,” he wrote in the respected New York Times on Friday. “The court’s determination to bring to trial several defendants accused of fomenting violence has enabled Odinga to call for the arrest of his main political opponent, Uhuru Kenyatta who now faces ICC charges.” The MP raised questions about the role of Britain in the Kenyan matter, saying it had funded the protection of a prosecution witness in the Mungiki case of Mr Kenyatta and Mr Francis Muthaura, who has since stepped aside as head of Public Service. “Kenyan case rests on a main witness who has changed his statements several times, and is under a witness protection plan partly funded by the British government, which has publicly supported the trial.” Mr Paisley is a member of the Democratic Unionist Party, the leading in Northern Ireland and the fourth-largest party in the House of Commons of the UK. He is the son of the Reverend Ian Paisley, the former leader of Northern Ireland. Share This Story 3Share Related Stories Uhuru lawyer draws fire for his attack on ICC’s integrity He says that the British had a history of using courts to fix those opposed to them. “At the height of the troubles in the 1970s and 1980s, the British government used the courts to prosecute its opponents in Northern Ireland. People with blood on their hands were portrayed as martyrs by their supporters,” he said. The other suspect in the case is radio journalist Joshua arap Sang. The ICC committed the four to trial for crimes against humanity allegedly committed during the 2007/8 violence. Despite the increasing odds against their candidatures, Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto have declared that they will contest the presidency. Well-oiled crusade Mr Paisley’s comments — and the fact that they were published in the respected paper — is a strong indication of the high stakes attached to the Kenyan case. It could also be part of a well-oiled international crusade to discredit the court and lay ground for non-co-operation by the four Kenyans accused of crimes against humanity. Moreover, it is a well-choreographed escalation of the Kenyan case, which has been the subject of government spear-headed diplomatic efforts at home. MPs allied to Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto last week tabled a document in Parliament sensationally claiming that Britain was pushing to have President Kibaki indicted over the 2007/8 violence. Yatta MP Charles Kilonzo who tabled the document also accused the United Kingdom of propping up Mr Odinga and pushing for the detention of Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto. The document, which has since been dismissed by British High Commission, claimed that the UK wants Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto arrested for allegedly threatening the security of the country through their so-called prayer rallies. Mr Kilonzo indicated that they had obtained the document from a member of the House of Commons. The Yatta MP also told Parliament that the dossier had “divided” the House of Commons. The British High Commission has described the allegations as “preposterous,” and part of an unscrupulous agenda. The National Security Intelligence Service has also urged caution in handling the document. Mr Paisley’s main argument is that peace was more important than pursuit for justice; that “peace must not be the victim of international justice”. Instead of the ICC intervention, Mr Paisley strongly encourages political negotiations and national reconciliation. He says reconciliation is not an easy option, but it allows people to move forward with the hope of unity and the potential for justice in the future, citing the case of Northern Ireland and South Africa. Share This Story Share Related Stories Uhuru lawyer draws fire for his attack on ICC’s integrity “There is nothing more important than peace. If this means the ICC does not always intervene or deliver justice, it may be a price that is worth paying.” Highly critical of the court’s record and ability to promote international stability, Mr Paisley says that the ICC was intended to be an instrument to deliver peace but it has scored poorly on this. He pointed to the Democratic Republic Of Congo where though justice had been delivered (by the Thursday conviction of militia leader Thomas Lubanga), the country remains unstable. The anti-Hague crusade has taken many dimensions. A fortnight ago, Ugandan anti-ICC lobbyist David Matsanga produced a video purporting be a testimony by an ICC witness claiming he had withdrawn his evidence against Mr Kenyatta and Mr Muthaura. And last month, Mr Kenyatta’s lawyer, Steven Kay accused foreign powers of fixing the Kenyan case. “Because they don’t like violence in elections in Africa somebody has got to be made an example,” he told an audience in London. “They are saying we have a problem in Kenya and we have to do something. Let us put a trial going and keep everybody quiet. That might be a good or bad reason but as I understand it, that is not what justice is all about.” His remarks reinforce Mr Kenyatta’s repeated comments at the various rallies during which he has asked foreigners to stop imposing leaders on Kenya through the ICC process. Raw anger greeted recent comments by British Foreign Affairs secretary William Hague that Kenya’s international standing and reputation could be soiled if it elects individuals indicted by the ICC. “No foreigner can tell me that he can tell Kenyans who to elect. Kenyans must be allowed to pick their leaders including the President. Democracy will not be achieved by pouring money into NGOs to wreck peace,” said Mr Kenyatta. In response to the UK minister, Mr Ruto asked him to keep off Kenyan politics. “We know whose messenger he is, but we want to tell him that Kenyans themselves have the ability to decide who they want to elect, and they do not need a foreigner to direct them.” The same fears over the Western hand behind the ICC, partly fuelled the 2010 successful vote by MPs allied to the two suspects pushing for Kenya’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute. www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/British+MP+says+West+plotting+Raila+win++/-/1064/1368462/-/item/2/-/k7osq9z/-/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 18, 2012 0:02:31 GMT 3
Peace Must Not Be the Victim of International Justice Op-Ed Contributor Peace Must Not Be the Victim of International Justice By IAN PAISLEY Published: March 16, 2012 * Recommend * Twitter * Linkedin * Sign In to E-Mail * Print * Reprints * ShareClose o Digg o Reddit o Tumblr o Permalink o An African proverb states, “Peace is costly but it is worth the expense.” This week the International Criminal Court delivered its first guilty verdict in its nearly 10-year existence, with the conviction of the warlord Thomas Lubanga for the coercion of children as soldiers in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The court to date has spent around $1 billion. Justice has been done, but there is no peace in that country. Related in News * Times Topic: International Criminal Court The court’s success as a vehicle for delivering justice continues to be debated. The I.C.C. was founded amid much fanfare, but its track record — with only this single conviction — has been poor. Arguably, the cases before it are complex, and it was always going to take time for a new institution to complete them. But this misses the point. The I.C.C. was intended as an instrument for delivering peace. In this respect it has not been a success. It will continue to falter because its current methods go against the experience of many places in Africa and around the world where peace has been delivered through political negotiations and reconciliation efforts, not the imposition of international justice. Over the past 20 years, countries divided by ethnicity and political turmoil, from South Africa to Liberia, from Sierra Leone to Rwanda, have been brought together through reconciliation. In my own experience, both as a peace envoy for the United Nations and the European Union to Guinea-Bissau, and as a peace-process negotiator in my native Northern Ireland, this was the case. During the height of the Troubles in the 1970s and 1980s, the British government used the courts to prosecute its opponents in Northern Ireland. People with blood on their hands were portrayed as martyrs by their supporters. But through a peace process that was backed by the international community — not driven by it — two hostile communities were able to come together to share power in our common home. People on both sides have committed violence, yet we now sit in government together, determined to put the past behind us for the common good. If the I.C.C. had been in existence during the Northern Ireland peace process, or in 1995, when South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission began its work, there would no doubt have been calls for it to intervene and prosecute those accused of violence. This would have driven old enemies even further apart in recrimination and hostility, hobbling the chance for peace. I am not making an argument against I.C.C.’s existence: In places where there is no functioning government, or the government is hostage to one section of society, or where there is no viable reconciliation process, the international community has a duty to ensure that the court is the guardian of justice. But the pursuit of justice should not replace or undermine ongoing national reconciliation efforts. The foremost challenge facing the I.C.C. is to determine whether its intervention will help or hinder the cause of peace. The wheels of justice must be allowed to turn at their own pace, but that they must not impede the peace process. In Kenya, where one the court’s most high-profile cases is taking place, the I.C.C. has focused on bringing to trial those accused of inciting post-election violence in 2007-8. This risks fueling divisions in a country where tribal loyalties and factionalism still dominate politics. Kenya, often seen as a great African success story, is now heading toward a dangerous impasse. The court’s determination to bring to trial several defendants accused of fomenting violence has enabled Prime Minister Raila Odinga to call for the arrest of his main political opponent, Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, son of the country’s founding president, who now faces I.C.C. charges. Mr. Odinga and Mr. Kenyatta are both leaders in a coalition government that came together with the support of the international community precisely in order to reconcile Kenya’s opposing political and tribal groupings. Yet the I.C.C.’s intervention is increasingly likely to drive this government and the country further apart, allowing a political leader from one ethnic group to try to remove an opponent from another ethnic group from the scene. This is particularly perilous when the root of the post-election violence in Kenya is tribal conflict. The I.C.C. must never be an instrument that can fuel the potential for division. And where the court intervenes it must be an exemplar of justice at its best, with standards that are above question. This has not always been the case: The Kenyan case rests on a main witness who has changed his statements several times, and is under a witness protection plan partly funded by the British government, which has publicly supported the trial. This has fueled the erroneous belief among some Kenyans that the Western powers that fund the court are seeking to divide and rule the country themselves. Proponents of the I.C.C. say there cannot be peace without justice. Yet experience teaches us that this is not always the case. Reconciliation is not an easy option, but it does allow people to move forward with the hope of unity, and the potential for justice in the future. The experiences of Northern Ireland and South Africa show us that there is nothing more important than peace. If this means the International Criminal Court does not always intervene or deliver justice, it may be a price that is worth paying. Ian Paisley is the son of the Rev. Ian Paisley and a member of the British Parliament from Northern Ireland. A version of this op-ed appeared in print on March 17, 2012, in The International Herald Tribune. www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/opinion/peace-must-not-be-the-victim-of-international-justice.html?_r=1 |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 0:20:49 GMT 3
Nowayhaha, you beat me to it. Always best to read direct from source rather than regurgitation from Nation. Things are getting dicey for Raila.
|
|
|
|
Post by amunra on Mar 18, 2012 2:43:05 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by furaha on Mar 18, 2012 3:40:20 GMT 3
Come on, all of you posting links under this heading... Thanks for the service but if you don't give your opinions I have to assume that you share every single sentiment and (inaccurate) fact in the articles concerned.
In the case of Kenya it has never been either peace or justice. It has been both from the beginning. Justice for PEV is and was an integral part of a comprehensive approach, enshrined in the National Accord and Reconciliation Agreement. It is about peace and the formation of the GCG, about ensuring sustainable solutions for IDPs, about reconciliating at all levels, about justice for PEV crimes and so on. Whomever the Right Honorable Member of the British Parliament has been listening to has managed to fill Paisley's head with lies, half-truths and gibberish.
And according to the vast majority of Kenyans the days when peace without justice was the name of the game are gone. They have consistently supported justice for PEV and do not want to be held hostage by the O4 and their (paid) supporters.
Don't underestimate our intelligence with continuing side shows.
furaha
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2012 3:57:22 GMT 3
Come on, all of you posting links under this heading... Thanks for the service but if you don't give your opinions I have to assume that you share every single sentiment and (inaccurate) fact in the articles concerned. In the case of Kenya it has never been either peace or justice. It has been both from the beginning. Justice for PEV is and was an integral part of a comprehensive approach, enshrined in the National Accord and Reconciliation Agreement. It is about peace and the formation of the GCG, about ensuring sustainable solutions for IDPs, about reconciliating at all levels, about justice for PEV crimes and so on. Whomever the Right Honorable Member of the British Parliament has been listening to has managed to fill Paisley's head with lies, half-truths and gibberish. And according to the vast majority of Kenyans the days when peace without justice was the name of the game are gone. They have consistently supported justice for PEV and do not want to be held hostage by the O4 and their (paid) supporters. Don't underestimate our intelligence with continuing side shows. furaha I agree they are side shows. And this Ian Paisley guy reads like Corsi See this article though. FORGERY AND PROPAGANDA
FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 23:56 BY SARAH ELDERKIN
Charles Kilonzo: “‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, produced in Russia probably by the Russian Secret Police, at the turn of the 20th Century, is arguably the most notorious and widely disseminated anti-Semitic publication ever. It is a cautionary tale that demonstrates how intensely dangerous forgery and propaganda can be.”
Imagine this. A document containing lies and slander is widely distributed. It seeks to discredit individuals and it is used by those whose common purpose is to spread fear and loathing of their target. The document was intentionally fabricated to demonise certain people and organisations, and to suggest a conspiracy aimed at domination. The fraudulent work is presented as authentic.
This work of fiction is, above all, a text designed to inflame mass hatred. Alleged meetings, alleged minutes of meetings and secret conspiratorial plans are detailed.But in the end, it turns out that the conspiracy and its alleged leaders never, in fact, existed. The document is an elaborate hoax.You might think, with some justification, that I am talking about the document introduced into Parliament last week by Yatta MP Charles Kilonzo.
You would be wrong. Although the Kilonzo case bears remarkable similarities, I am talking about a document called ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, produced in Russia, probably by the Russian Secret Police, at the turn of the 20th Century, and arguably the most notorious and widely disseminated anti-Semitic publication ever.
This elaborately faked document was intended to portray Jews as conspirators against the state. It took until 1921 to find conclusive proof that showed the document to be “clumsy plagiarism”. But still it persisted. (Don’t expect Kilonzo’s document to go away any time soon.) In 1935, a Swiss court described the ‘Protocols’ as “libellous”, “obvious forgeries”, and “ridiculous nonsense”. In 1964, the US Senate said the document was “fabricated”, describing its contents as “gibberish”.
That, however, was after the document had been widely distributed internationally for more than half-a-century. And it is still widely circulated today, by right-wing, anti-Semitic groups in the US and elsewhere. In parts of the Islamic world, the document’s contents are taught as fact.
Despite the fact that the document had already been proved a fake, it was also used in the 1930s and ’40s by Adolf Hitler and his propaganda genius, Joseph Goebbels, to incite the German Aryan population against Jews, leading to the slaughter of six million people in the gas chambers of Auschwitz and other German death camps.
The story of the ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ is a cautionary tale that demonstrates just how intensely dangerous the consequences of forgery and propaganda can be. And it unfortunately appears that some of our ‘honourable’ members of Parliament have no problem embracing propaganda techniques similar to those used by the Russian Secret Police, Hitler and the Nazis.
Let no one say I’m calling them Nazis. No. I’m saying, very precisely, and as a matter of empirical fact, that these MPs are themselves giving the impression they have no compunction about employing techniques similar to those employed by the Nazis. It is a shocking wake-up call to realise that there are people among us who can countenance using tactics similar to those that were evolved and considered appropriate by a murderous regime in Russia more than 100 years ago.
Propaganda was the biggest and most effective Nazi weapon. And propaganda is the everyday diet being stuffed down our throats by some of our so-called leaders, and, regrettably, by some of our media. That is how we get Prime Minister Raila Odinga “calling for the arrest” of certain leaders – when a statement from his campaign secretariat merely noted the good fortune of those leaders in being free to attend ‘prayer meetings’ all over the country while other people accused of lesser crimes languish in jail. There was no call for anyone’s arrest.
That kind of unwarranted media extrapolation leads to ridiculous statements from the likes of William Ruto, such as, “He [Raila] believes we are criminals and should be hanged.” Nothing remotely close to this has ever been postulated, but this remark, a piece of propaganda par excellence, is classic Ruto.
William Ruto has never been one to hold back from giving vent to any outlandish notion that pops into his head. More significantly, he is a man with nothing to lose, so he has no problem trotting out anything at all – however bizarre. Nor, apparently, does he have any scruples about making things up as he goes along. He seems to think Kenyans are feeble-minded enough to swallow this guff. I think he might find he is mistaken.
Ruto’s remark about being “hanged” apparently doesn’t faze his brother-in-arms, Uhuru Kenyatta, either, who prefers to chastise Raila Odinga for his secretariat’s observation, saying: “It was reckless remarks like this that led to the 2008 violence.”
No, Mr Kenyatta. There were no “reckless remarks” that led to that violence. What led to that violence was something quite different – something that boiled and bubbled up from the hellish depths of longstanding, festering, internecine hatred, as we have quite clearly been told by several investigative reports, such as those by the Human Rights and Waki Commissions, and also by the Kiliku and Akiwumi Commissions before them.
After the stolen election of 2007, Mr Odinga called for peaceful mass action to protest the theft of something that could not be retrieved by any other means. He emphasised peace in every plea he made to the nation and in every conversation he held. At the close of an ODM meeting at Orange House following the election, Mr Odinga bade farewell to MPs and party officials and advised them to go home to their constituencies and “protest peacefully”.
In meetings with the visiting Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, Desmond Tutu and Graca Machel of South Africa, Sir Ketumile Masire of Botswana, Benjamin Mkapa of Tanzania, Joacquim Chissano of Mozambique and other African leaders, Raila Odinga repeated the mantra of peaceful mass action – peace, peace, peace.
He did the same in countless meetings with all manner of Kenyans arriving at the Pentagon headquarters day after day: peace, peace, peace. He repeated it in conversations with foreign leaders – Condoleezza Rice of USA, Gordon Brown of UK and many others: peaceful demonstrations, peace, peace, peace. If any reckless remarks were made, Mr Kenyatta, they were not made by Raila Odinga. He called only for peaceful mass action.
Or are you saying that Gandhi was reckless? Are you saying that Martin Luther King was reckless? Are you saying that Aung San Suu Kyi is reckless? Would you demand that they also be hauled before the ICC because of their repeated calls for peaceful mass action?
Many of the world’s greatest leaders have done as Raila Odinga did. When every other way is blocked, the people have only one option: peaceful mass protest to press for their rights. When self-expression and freedom of choice through the ballot are denied, and the courts are nobbled by controlling political interests, other avenues of protest and progress must be sought.
Funnily enough, according to one newspaper report a few days ago, the Kikuyu Council of Elders has “vowed to organise peaceful demonstrations” against the UK government. Hah! It’s OK for them to do it, apparently. Most amusing of all is Mr Kenyatta’s remark that “It is unfortunate for Raila to make uncalled-for remarks at this sensitive time. He must not be allowed to polarise our country in this manner.”
Here we have another classic propaganda tactic: When you want to deflect attention from yourself, be sure to accuse your opponent of whatever it is that you yourself have been doing.
Who is it, among our leaders, who have been travelling all over their home areas shouting about ‘our community’ this, ‘our community’ that, ‘our community’ the other? Who has been promulgating the idea that one among their community must be unchallenged and must be crowned ‘king’? Has anyone ever heard Raila Odinga shouting about ‘my community’? The only time we have ever heard him speak exclusively about or to Luos was when he was advising them on moderate behaviour.
In fact, can you imagine the furore if Raila Odinga suddenly began talking up his community in the same way leaders among the G7 do theirs? The outcry would be heard from here to Lagos.
Raila Odinga polarising our country, my foot! He is the only one consistently speaking to Kenyans as a nation, not as a group of tribes. He never calls to his ethnic origins, while his opponents continue bashing the ‘our community’ war-drum frantically and incessantly. Then we have Mr Ruto again, speaking of Mr Odinga as the “beneficiary of violence”.
This is the same William Ruto who is currently rushing to avoid court action by surrendering Rift Valley land he acquired after the rightful owner had been displaced in the 2008 post-election violence. Mr Ruto will no doubt claim he innocently acquired the land through a third party. After all, violence in the Rift Valley? Displacement? Who knew.
Let’s now stop kidding ourselves. Mr Ruto is presumably familiar with the topography and demography of the region he claims to rule. That means he could hardly be unaware that land in the area in question belonged to someone else prior to the violence and was vacated during that violence. Ascertaining the true ownership of that land should have been his first and overriding concern.
Instead, he took advantage of the desperate situation of displaced people in his very own Rift Valley to greedily and selfishly augment his own already extensive land holdings. Who is the beneficiary of violence here? This is also the same William Ruto who four years ago protested vociferously about Raila Odinga’s stolen election. Now he’s equally vociferous in saying the opposite. Does William Ruto believe in anything he says?
Are we supposed to find something admirable in this everlasting, flip-flopping, self-serving, commitment-light inconsistency? Is there anything at all of value that William Ruto really stands for? It is truly instructive that Mr Ruto thinks national office is a “benefit”, rather than a responsibility and an obligation (though I can see why, in his particular case).
Being Prime Minister is not a walk in the park. Mr Odinga is the person who took on the unbelievably difficult and onerous task of actually running this country and trying to lead it to progress, struggling against opposition not only from his so-called partners in the coalition government but also from the traitors in his own party.
Who was it, really, who ensured that we achieved a far-reaching, reformist, new Constitution? Does anyone honestly think we would have got this without Raila Odinga? Who are the people in Parliament now desperately trying to reverse the gains of this new Constitution? Think about it.
Meanwhile, day after day, from morning to night (his energy and stamina are legendary among those who work with him) the Prime Minister is involved in conferences, state functions, diplomatic discussions, meetings with foreign leaders, government workshops, bilateral and multilateral negotiations, endless study of copious government documents, trying to keep ministries in line and endeavouring to keep the coalition functioning – all against great odds, and all for the benefit of this nation.
From education to local, international and intra-African trade, alternative energy, conservation, water, sports, ports, slum upgrading, the economy, roads, transport, foreign and local investment – you name it and you’ll find he has been in the forefront of tough negotiations on behalf of this country in all these areas and many more. Don’t take my word for it. Just read the newspapers. Who else is doing all that? The answer is, absolutely no one.
While this serious, challenging, demanding, back-breaking work of running the country is going on, Mr Ruto and his pals, with no responsibilities, and no apparent sense of responsibility either, are buzzing around like blue-assed flies with only five things obsessing their brains – Raila, Raila, Raila, Raila and … er … Raila.
Two years of this bombardment have made virtually no impact on the country, as the opinion polls show, and this is presumably what provokes even more desperate measures, such as introducing forged documents into Parliament. What we have to realise is that we Kenyans, and the media as our voice in many ways, are going to be inundated with material of this nature in the months to come.
There will be need for healthy scepticism and, particularly on the part of the media, for scrupulous, intelligent examination of documents and pronouncements – with an eye not just on headlines and stories that titillate and sell, but on ensuring we all have the information we need in order to know right from wrong. People’s lives and the country’s future are at stake.
Forgery is not a joke. It is a crime. It is an incredibly dangerous crime that can lead to massive bloodshed and death. And looking at the way things are going, we are currently hurtling unchecked towards a worse scenario at the next general election than that of 2007-2008. Should anyone involved in this kind of criminal activity be considered fit to lead our country? The answer to that ought to be unanimous.
The writer is a freelance journalist
www.the-star.co.ke/weekend/siasa/67296-forgery-and-propaganda- |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 9:00:03 GMT 3
Come on, all of you posting links under this heading... Thanks for the service but if you don't give your opinions I have to assume that you share every single sentiment and (inaccurate) fact in the articles concerned. In the case of Kenya it has never been either peace or justice. It has been both from the beginning. Justice for PEV is and was an integral part of a comprehensive approach, enshrined in the National Accord and Reconciliation Agreement. It is about peace and the formation of the GCG, about ensuring sustainable solutions for IDPs, about reconciliating at all levels, about justice for PEV crimes and so on. Whomever the Right Honorable Member of the British Parliament has been listening to has managed to fill Paisley's head with lies, half-truths and gibberish. And according to the vast majority of Kenyans the days when peace without justice was the name of the game are gone. They have consistently supported justice for PEV and do not want to be held hostage by the O4 and their (paid) supporters. Don't underestimate our intelligence with continuing side shows. furaha There there now, Furaha. I hope you know the old adage of what one engages in when they "assume" stuff. You end up making an a** of u & me. This has never been about the G7 duo within the E-4. However, if you believe their rhetoric then you would assume it is. In polarized societies there is always a trade off when it comes to peace vs. justice. I don't think the Kenya situation is any different. Push too much for justice & you risk jeopardizing future peace by creating new perceived injustices. Paisley does make a good case for this. Personally I think the jury's still out on Kilonzo-gate. Let the British under-secretary Bellingham (?) come & either read our MPigs the riot act or grovel for mercy. Then we'll be in a better position to have informed opinions on Britain's ALLEGED interference in Kenyan affairs. |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 9:41:23 GMT 3
Elderkin was doing well until she started comparing Raila to Martin Luther King & Gandhi. Outting propaganda (the protocols) to fight propaganda (Kilonzo dossier) by dishing out a major dose of her own propaganda will convince only the converted. Naturally the new constitution would've been realized even if Raila had been hanged back in the eighties. There were many other individuals fighting for a free Kenya.
The Raila Odinga Secretariat stands to blame for selecting a poor analogy. When you refer to prisoners while your opponents are facing prison time, it leaves little to the imagination as to what you're quietly anticipating.
On Elderkin's part it was unfortunate she made reference to Raila's "energy", "stamina" & "back-breaking" hard work given the allegations to the intimate nature of her relationship with one RAO.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 13:32:02 GMT 3
Elderkin was doing well until .... On Elderkin's part it was unfortunate she made reference to Raila's "energy", "stamina" & "back-breaking" hard work given the allegations to the intimate nature of her relationship with one RAO. Ululululu Mayie! On the contrary, b6k, it gives her testimony the authenticiy of a lived experience. No intellectual abstractions, nor deductions, nor decadent phantasmagoria, but empirical certification of satisfaction! There is a genuine article dear ladies! vote for him! This is a passion stirred. How objective is she then, I hear you ask? This is a propaganda game, and seeing Uhuruto have trashed the love of a passionate woman, I am afraid the firepower she will bring to protect her nest, and promote her interest, outguns the hired hands like Munene who will be fighting Uhuruto's corner. This is a thriller, stay tuned for the sequels. All Elderkin has to do, is balance her heart with her mind. Then she will be Raila's hells instrument. [Historical note: To break walled cities, the Roman army engineering corps designed some then very terrifying weapons: a sling machine that fired shortput like canons; another one which fired multiple arrows with such speedthe arrows went clean through people 500m away! These are a far cry from out modern day Hydrogen and Supra-Nuclear bombs, but in their day they were the hells-weapons!]I suggest every pretender to the presidency have their corps design a few hells instruments. The game is on.  |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Mar 18, 2012 13:37:33 GMT 3
And according to the vast majority of Kenyans the days when peace without justice was the name of the game are gone. They have consistently supported justice for PEV and do not want to be held hostage by the O4 and their (paid) supporters. Don't underestimate our intelligence with continuing side shows. furaha And there is this line in the national anthem which reads --justice be our shield and defender... We have to remove it first from that song of the flag, before we become the ultimate pragmatists. Gosh, it was us Kenyans who took this thing to the Hague. We were not vague! |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 18, 2012 15:26:18 GMT 3
Elderkin was doing well until she started comparing Raila to Martin Luther King & Gandhi. Outting propaganda (the protocols) to fight propaganda (Kilonzo dossier) by dishing out a major dose of her own propaganda will convince only the converted. Naturally the new constitution would've been realized even if Raila had been hanged back in the eighties. There were many other individuals fighting for a free Kenya. The Raila Odinga Secretariat stands to blame for selecting a poor analogy. When you refer to prisoners while your opponents are facing prison time, it leaves little to the imagination as to what you're quietly anticipating. On Elderkin's part it was unfortunate she made reference to Raila's "energy", "stamina" & "back-breaking" hard work given the allegations to the intimate nature of her relationship with one RAO. Please take your head out of the gutter. I credit you with maturity so don't disappoint me. It is only Mashada where anything goes. I don't believe that is where you belong. Here, my experience is that we make attempts at decorum, accuracy and balance. It is so easy to attack somebody that you do not know with false hood and innuendo. It is even easier to attack that person if she is a woman by questioning her morals and character. Generally this kind of sleazy, misogynist attacks are the product of insecure males confronted by intelligent women. I WELCOME any JUKWAAIST who has a CLEAR WELL ARTICULATED ARGUMENT WITH ANY FACTS OR ARGUMENTS raised by SARAH in her piece. BUT I reject SCURRILOUS baseless attacks that have little to do with reality and more to do with inferiority and insecurity. |
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Mar 18, 2012 19:09:43 GMT 3
The question is timing.......is it not odd that his message fits right in with the 'prayer rally' theme?
Charles K tables his forged dossier, right after Matsanga's 'Witness' and regular dose of K24 and FM hullabaloo ....and now this?
It is no coincidence but a widespread orchestrated effort to halt the ICC. Speakers may change but the theme- which invariably centers on ...foreign influence, compromised witnesses, RAO scheme....is and remains the same.
Secondly, note the colorful characters who are the purveyors of the theme message.....Sonko, Matsanga, Koinange and i dare say the newly minted MM.......Then you can spot the game.
This no news. What would make interesting news is...... Uhuruto take on this case of outright foreign interference on our national affairs by Mr.Paisley.
Last time i checked he is no MP for Kamukunji.
|
|
|
|
Post by furaha on Mar 18, 2012 19:44:04 GMT 3
The question is timing.......is it not odd that his message fits right in with the 'prayer rally' theme? Charles K tables his forged dossier, right after Matsanga's 'Witness' and regular dose of K24 and FM hullabaloo ....and now this? It is no coincidence but a widespread orchestrated effort to halt the ICC. Speakers may change but the theme- which invariably centers on ...foreign influence, compromised witnesses, RAO scheme....is and remains the same. Secondly, note the colorful characters who are the purveyors of the theme message.....Sonko, Matsanga, Koinange and i dare say the newly minted MM.......Then you can spot the game.....and perhaps Mutahi Ngunyi, who on Koinange's bench on 17 March, seemed to know exactly who will win the presidential elections under two different scenarios! |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 21:19:34 GMT 3
Elderkin was doing well until .... On Elderkin's part it was unfortunate she made reference to Raila's "energy", "stamina" & "back-breaking" hard work given the allegations to the intimate nature of her relationship with one RAO. Ululululu Mayie! On the contrary, b6k, it gives her testimony the authenticiy of a lived experience. No intellectual abstractions, nor deductions, nor decadent phantasmagoria, but empirical certification of satisfaction! There is a genuine article dear ladies! vote for him! This is a passion stirred. How objective is she then, I hear you ask? This is a propaganda game, and seeing Uhuruto have trashed the love of a passionate woman, I am afraid the firepower she will bring to protect her nest, and promote her interest, outguns the hired hands like Munene who will be fighting Uhuruto's corner. This is a thriller, stay tuned for the sequels. All Elderkin has to do, is balance her heart with her mind. Then she will be Raila's hells instrument. [Historical note: To break walled cities, the Roman army engineering corps designed some then very terrifying weapons: a sling machine that fired shortput like canons; another one which fired multiple arrows with such speedthe arrows went clean through people 500m away! These are a far cry from out modern day Hydrogen and Supra-Nuclear bombs, but in their day they were the hells-weapons!]I suggest every pretender to the presidency have their corps design a few hells instruments. The game is on. Hell's bells, Jakaswanga. MPigs & public officers have a wealth declaration clause lying unused in the statutes. Maybe it's high time media personalities had a loyalty declaration clause imposed on them. |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 21:40:47 GMT 3
Elderkin was doing well until she started comparing Raila to Martin Luther King & Gandhi. Outting propaganda (the protocols) to fight propaganda (Kilonzo dossier) by dishing out a major dose of her own propaganda will convince only the converted. Naturally the new constitution would've been realized even if Raila had been hanged back in the eighties. There were many other individuals fighting for a free Kenya. The Raila Odinga Secretariat stands to blame for selecting a poor analogy. When you refer to prisoners while your opponents are facing prison time, it leaves little to the imagination as to what you're quietly anticipating. On Elderkin's part it was unfortunate she made reference to Raila's "energy", "stamina" & "back-breaking" hard work given the allegations to the intimate nature of her relationship with one RAO. Please take your head out of the gutter. I credit you with maturity so don't disappoint me. It is only Mashada where anything goes. I don't believe that is where you belong. Here, my experience is that we make attempts at decorum, accuracy and balance. It is so easy to attack somebody that you do not know with false hood and innuendo. It is even easier to attack that person if she is a woman by questioning her morals and character. Generally this kind of sleazy, misogynist attacks are the product of insecure males confronted by intelligent women. I WELCOME any JUKWAAIST who has a CLEAR WELL ARTICULATED ARGUMENT WITH ANY FACTS OR ARGUMENTS raised by SARAH in her piece. BUT I reject SCURRILOUS baseless attacks that have little to do with reality and more to do with inferiority and insecurity. RR, it's all well & good throw the mysogynist tag around but I see Makau Mutua attacked every other week on Jukwaa & no one says it's because he's a man. Biased & skewed reporting is clear for what it is. Propaganda. Imagine if it turned out that Oprah had had an affair with Obama back in her early Chicago days? Wouldn't that put her passionate campaigning for him in '08 in a new light? A media personality who's had a personal relationship with a politician whose agenda they then keep highlighting is compromised. Period! You also fail to appreciate the irony in Elderkin waxing lyrical about everybody going on about Raila, Raila, Raila & er, Raila yet week after week all SHE writes about is Raila! Just because her missives paint him in a positive light doesn't make it any less Raila this, Raila that. I even get amazed when people believe Muthamaki isn't worthy of stepping on Jaramogi's compound, yet the same group do not even bat an eyelid when accepting the same Muthamaki's stolen blood money when he sponsors their local FC. Irony & hypocrisy galore! |
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 18, 2012 23:47:49 GMT 3
More reason why parliament's investigation of this thing is very crucial now more than ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by joblesscorner on Mar 19, 2012 1:34:12 GMT 3
Raila Odinga repeated the mantra of peaceful mass action – peace, peace, peace. He did the same in countless meetings with all manner of Kenyans arriving at the Pentagon headquarters day after day: peace, peace, peace. He repeated it in conversations with foreign leaders – Condoleezza Rice of USA, Gordon Brown of UK and many others: peaceful demonstrations, peace, peace, peace. If any reckless remarks were made, Mr Kenyatta, they were not made by Raila Odinga. He called only for peaceful mass action. Or are you saying that Gandhi was reckless? Are you saying that Martin Luther King was reckless? Are you saying that Aung San Suu Kyi is reckless? Would you demand that they also be hauled before the ICC because of their repeated calls for peaceful mass action? To the freelance writer,You lost me here, comparing the PM with Aung San Suu Kyi, a woman that I highly regard as one of the world leaders to admire, she wanted her country to have democratization. Influenced by both Mahatma Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence and by more specifically Buddhist concepts, when did Raila call for Peaceful mass action? and Kenya had institution not military institution like Myanmar. |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Mar 19, 2012 2:06:28 GMT 3
This Paisley fellow has never been known to be immune to "eating". He had a short stint as a junior minister in the N. Irish government but was forced to resign as a result of payroll shenanigans.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 19, 2012 8:53:05 GMT 3
How an article from Ian morphed into discussing Sarah and her pro-Raila propaganda leads me wondering what hijacking of threads means!!
Suffice to say no discussion has taken place on the contents of the article!
|
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 9:28:18 GMT 3
Please take your head out of the gutter. I credit you with maturity so don't disappoint me. It is only Mashada where anything goes. I don't believe that is where you belong. Here, my experience is that we make attempts at decorum, accuracy and balance. It is so easy to attack somebody that you do not know with false hood and innuendo. It is even easier to attack that person if she is a woman by questioning her morals and character. Generally this kind of sleazy, misogynist attacks are the product of insecure males confronted by intelligent women. I WELCOME any JUKWAAIST who has a CLEAR WELL ARTICULATED ARGUMENT WITH ANY FACTS OR ARGUMENTS raised by SARAH in her piece. BUT I reject SCURRILOUS baseless attacks that have little to do with reality and more to do with inferiority and insecurity. RR, it's all well & good throw the mysogynist tag around but I see Makau Mutua attacked every other week on Jukwaa & no one says it's because he's a man. Biased & skewed reporting is clear for what it is. Propaganda. Imagine if it turned out that Oprah had had an affair with Obama back in her early Chicago days? Wouldn't that put her passionate campaigning for him in '08 in a new light? A media personality who's had a personal relationship with a politician whose agenda they then keep highlighting is compromised. Period! You also fail to appreciate the irony in Elderkin waxing lyrical about everybody going on about Raila, Raila, Raila & er, Raila yet week after week all SHE writes about is Raila! Just because her missives paint him in a positive light doesn't make it any less Raila this, Raila that. I even get amazed when people believe Muthamaki isn't worthy of stepping on Jaramogi's compound, yet the same group do not even bat an eyelid when accepting the same Muthamaki's stolen blood money when he sponsors their local FC. Irony & hypocrisy galore! B6K - you have not raised any substantive issues with the article that Sarah Elderkin wrote. The sum total of your attack is to say, based on what you call 'rumours' and 'allegations' that she had an affair with Raila Odinga. This is argumentum ad hominem. You cannot deal with her 'arguments' and her 'facts' so you simply attack the person. But what is worse, is because you base your attacks on 'rumours' most probably cooked up in smoky pubs. It is all so evident that you do not know Ms. Elderkin or her history and relationship with Raila (and Jaramogi before). Do you have a problem with intelligent, independent, well-read women? I have seen this attitude many times: a woman of substance speaks up, insecure men head below the belt with wild talk. It is all about her emotions, her hemline, her behind, her relationships etc. I have no problem with attacks. I have problems with attacks based on falshoods, lies and sexist innuendo. This is what you said: It is the product of a warped and misogynist mind to take words used in other contexts and instead read sexual connotations. You sank to a low. As I said take your head from the gutter and lift debate to a more mature level. |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 9:31:25 GMT 3
How an article from Ian morphed into discussing Sarah and her pro-Raila propaganda leads me wondering what hijacking of threads means!! Suffice to say no discussion has taken place on the contents of the article! I agree. I guess this has to do with the emptiness of the 'article from Ian' and the incredible articulation and impeccable construction that Sarah has. Incidentally both are in a way talking about the same broad topics. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 19, 2012 12:09:53 GMT 3
Please take your head out of the gutter. I credit you with maturity so don't disappoint me. It is only Mashada where anything goes. I don't believe that is where you belong. Here, my experience is that we make attempts at decorum, accuracy and balance. It is so easy to attack somebody that you do not know with false hood and innuendo. It is even easier to attack that person if she is a woman by questioning her morals and character. Generally this kind of sleazy, misogynist attacks are the product of insecure males confronted by intelligent women. I WELCOME any JUKWAAIST who has a CLEAR WELL ARTICULATED ARGUMENT WITH ANY FACTS OR ARGUMENTS raised by SARAH in her piece. BUT I reject SCURRILOUS baseless attacks that have little to do with reality and more to do with inferiority and insecurity. Here you go “Propaganda was the biggest and most effective Nazi weapon. And propaganda is the everyday diet being stuffed down our throats by some of our so-called leaders, and, regrettably, by some of our media. That is how we get Prime Minister Raila Odinga “calling for the arrest” of certain leaders – when a statement from his campaign secretariat merely noted the good fortune of those leaders in being free to attend ‘prayer meetings’ all over the country while other people accused of lesser crimes languish in jail. There was no call for anyone’s arrest.”One has to feel sorry for Raila if this is what he hopes will help him. The statement calling for “arrests” was not repeated by one media house…several did. Even the clarification by Dennis Onyango was not helpful as it led to similar conclusions that his boss was calling for “arrests”. So here is another attempt at revisionism by Sarah: “Ruto’s remark about being “hanged” apparently doesn’t faze his brother-in-arms, Uhuru Kenyatta, either, who prefers to chastise Raila Odinga for his secretariat’s observation, saying: “It was reckless remarks like this that led to the 2008 violence.”
No, Mr Kenyatta. There were no “reckless remarks” that led to that violence. What led to that violence was something quite different – something that boiled and bubbled up from the hellish depths of longstanding, festering, internecine hatred, as we have quite clearly been told by several investigative reports, such as those by the Human Rights and Waki Commissions, and also by the Kiliku and Akiwumi Commissions before them.”Clearly Sarah would like us to turn away from the reckless statements by ODM leadership in the run up to the elections. In any case the violence was only triggered by results relating to the presidential elections rather than the “depths of longstanding, festering… as is told by …Kiliku and Akiwumi Commissions”. Only a fool would not see where this propagandist is taking us – how about take this back to land and mask the real reasons for the violence? The poor people who died in Naivasha, Mathare or Kibera did not die because they had grabbed anyone’s land? The deaths were caused by the call for “Peaceful Protests” if we are to believe Sarah, but she conveniently forgets the chants of “No Raila No Peace!!” “After the stolen election of 2007, Mr Odinga called for peaceful mass action to protest the theft of something that could not be retrieved by any other means. He emphasised peace in every plea he made to the nation and in every conversation he held. At the close of an ODM meeting at Orange House following the election, Mr Odinga bade farewell to MPs and party officials and advised them to go home to their constituencies and “protest peacefully.
In meetings with the visiting Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, Desmond Tutu and Graca Machel of South Africa, Sir Ketumile Masire of Botswana, Benjamin Mkapa of Tanzania, Joacquim Chissano of Mozambique and other African leaders, Raila Odinga repeated the mantra of peaceful mass action – peace, peace, peace.
He did the same in countless meetings with all manner of Kenyans arriving at the Pentagon headquarters day after day: peace, peace, peace. He repeated it in conversations with foreign leaders – Condoleezza Rice of USA, Gordon Brown of UK and many others: peaceful demonstrations, peace, peace, peace. If any reckless remarks were made, Mr Kenyatta, they were not made by Raila Odinga. He called only for peaceful mass action.”Therein lies the confusion in poor Sarah’s mind. She seriously wants us to believe that Raila called for “peace, peace…peace” but some Martians and other aliens from planet Jupiter unleashed violence in the name of Raila and his stolen election? Not once did Raila condemn the violence that was tearing the country apart – and to be sure if he actually did, Sarah would have boldly raised it in this propaganda piece. When Raila is lying through his teeth that he was shouting peace and yet his supporters were supplanting people from their houses, Sarah must take many people for fools. “Many of the world’s greatest leaders have done as Raila Odinga did. When every other way is blocked, the people have only one option: peaceful mass protest to press for their rights. When self-expression and freedom of choice through the ballot are denied, and the courts are nobbled by controlling political interests, other avenues of protest and progress must be sought.”It is one thing to call for peaceful mass protest as was the case with the likes of King and Gandhi. But Raila is none of these! We have had peaceful mass protest in Kenya when not a single life was lost. The recent labour strikes are a form of mass protest that is run without violence as seen in the Raila way of thinking. How do you reconcile these calls by Raila and his famous “Ivory Coast” parallel or has Sarah conveniently forgotten? I could go on but the rest of the Sarah diatribe is nothing more that stuff we read in Mashada and Jaluo.Com so it is pointless going into them and suffice to say she has sunk that low! |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 19, 2012 12:24:32 GMT 3
RR, it's all well & good throw the mysogynist tag around but I see Makau Mutua attacked every other week on Jukwaa & no one says it's because he's a man. Biased & skewed reporting is clear for what it is. Propaganda. Imagine if it turned out that Oprah had had an affair with Obama back in her early Chicago days? Wouldn't that put her passionate campaigning for him in '08 in a new light? A media personality who's had a personal relationship with a politician whose agenda they then keep highlighting is compromised. Period! You also fail to appreciate the irony in Elderkin waxing lyrical about everybody going on about Raila, Raila, Raila & er, Raila yet week after week all SHE writes about is Raila! Just because her missives paint him in a positive light doesn't make it any less Raila this, Raila that. I even get amazed when people believe Muthamaki isn't worthy of stepping on Jaramogi's compound, yet the same group do not even bat an eyelid when accepting the same Muthamaki's stolen blood money when he sponsors their local FC. Irony & hypocrisy galore! B6K - you have not raised any substantive issues with the article that Sarah Elderkin wrote. The sum total of your attack is to say, based on what you call 'rumours' and 'allegations' that she had an affair with Raila Odinga. This is argumentum ad hominem. You cannot deal with her 'arguments' and her 'facts' so you simply attack the person. But what is worse, is because you base your attacks on 'rumours' most probably cooked up in smoky pubs. It is all so evident that you do not know Ms. Elderkin or her history and relationship with Raila (and Jaramogi before). Do you have a problem with intelligent, independent, well-read women? I have seen this attitude many times: a woman of substance speaks up, insecure men head below the belt with wild talk. It is all about her emotions, her hemline, her behind, her relationships etc. I have no problem with attacks. I have problems with attacks based on falshoods, lies and sexist innuendo. This is what you said: It is the product of a warped and misogynist mind to take words used in other contexts and instead read sexual connotations. You sank to a low. As I said take your head from the gutter and lift debate to a more mature level. RR, what substantive issues? Elderkin's article is about The Protocols & the "fact" that Raila is a latter day Gandhi, Martin Luther King, or Aung San Suu Kyi. I addressed the Kilonzo dossier earlier by reserving comment until the British under-secretary comes to Kenya. Everything else is neither here nor there. As to comparing Raila with the 3 leaders, even Richard Branson had to backtrack midsentence when he compared Raila to Mandela. Some ridiculous utterances simply don't warrant any comment. |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 13:10:07 GMT 3
B6K - you have not raised any substantive issues with the article that Sarah Elderkin wrote. The sum total of your attack is to say, based on what you call 'rumours' and 'allegations' that she had an affair with Raila Odinga. This is argumentum ad hominem. You cannot deal with her 'arguments' and her 'facts' so you simply attack the person. But what is worse, is because you base your attacks on 'rumours' most probably cooked up in smoky pubs. It is all so evident that you do not know Ms. Elderkin or her history and relationship with Raila (and Jaramogi before). Do you have a problem with intelligent, independent, well-read women? I have seen this attitude many times: a woman of substance speaks up, insecure men head below the belt with wild talk. It is all about her emotions, her hemline, her behind, her relationships etc. I have no problem with attacks. I have problems with attacks based on falshoods, lies and sexist innuendo. This is what you said: It is the product of a warped and misogynist mind to take words used in other contexts and instead read sexual connotations. You sank to a low. As I said take your head from the gutter and lift debate to a more mature level. RR, what substantive issues? Elderkin's article is about The Protocols & the "fact" that Raila is a latter day Gandhi, Martin Luther King, or Aung San Suu Kyi. I addressed the Kilonzo dossier earlier by reserving comment until the British under-secretary comes to Kenya. Everything else is neither here nor there. As to comparing Raila with the 3 leaders, even Richard Branson had to backtrack midsentence when he compared Raila to Mandela. Some ridiculous utterances simply don't warrant any comment. In bold - you have explained your attitude. Scurrilous attacks at women are neither here nor there. If you did not find substantive issues in the article, why did you choose to launch a sexist attack? Is that what you do when you cannot decipher substance? In terms of calling for peaceful mass action: That is what Gandhi did. It is what Aung San Suu Kyi did. It is what Martin Luther King did. Whether or not you accept that does not change the fact that they did it. It is also what Raila did faced with dictatorial clampdown. Does this mean Raila is Gandhi, King or San Suu Kyi? Of course NOT. The objective of the comparison is to draw attention to the circumstances and to the FACT that peaceful mass action is a legitimate expression of democratic protest. I will also say this: after reflecting on this article, I now can see it crystal clear the indefatigable Raila makes enormous effort on Kenya's behalf. People underestimate and hardly credit Raila for many things we see but I now learn slowly that a lot of progress on economic and social fronts have his imprint on them: I can't argue with this. |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 13:21:20 GMT 3
Kamale, I assume that this represents your version of a well articulated argument. Please see some quick responses Here you go “Propaganda was the biggest and most effective Nazi weapon. And propaganda is the everyday diet being stuffed down our throats by some of our so-called leaders, and, regrettably, by some of our media. That is how we get Prime Minister Raila Odinga “calling for the arrest” of certain leaders – when a statement from his campaign secretariat merely noted the good fortune of those leaders in being free to attend ‘prayer meetings’ all over the country while other people accused of lesser crimes languish in jail. There was no call for anyone’s arrest.”One has to feel sorry for Raila if this is what he hopes will help him. The statement calling for “arrests” was not repeated by one media house…several did. Even the clarification by Dennis Onyango was not helpful as it led to similar conclusions that his boss was calling for “arrests”. The fact that media houses repeated the statement does NOT make it true. It only makes the initial propaganda to distort it more effective. As a matter of fact, this is a public statement. Why don't you re-read it and judge for yourself - after all you are a fairly intelligent analyst. I can see why you prefer simplistic analyses that only look at the superficial. As you know, had the elections NOT been stolen, there would NOT have been calls for peaceful mass action. Had the democratic space for peaceful action been allowed, criminal elements would NOT have resorted to violence. But this is still on the surface. People yearned change. Not for nothing. But as a way to address longstanding, festering issues; social, economic, political. This opportunity was being denied. Ruthlessly. But you are being clever by half - how are Raila's comments on the ICC 4, the forgeries in parliament and the factual observations about how these suspected criminals are so lucky to be roaming free and encouraging impunity likely to lead to violence? They are not reckless, they are factual, self-evident. Does Mr. Kenyatta know something about how to trigger violence that we do not? The statements were made in broad daylight. They can be read and re-read. If Mr. Kenyatta is feeling murderous because he has been asked to defend himself at the Hague, let him not equate that to 'Kenyans' |
|
