|
Post by mank on Sept 20, 2013 19:42:56 GMT 3
... The unmasking of the witness was rather too easy for many and betrayed the OTP's laziness in evidence gathering as she just rendered the same evidence given by PW4 in the Kiambaa 4 case .. . ... So do not blame Kenyans for putting one and one together! Perhaps its Kenyans who should be question the gagging of their rights to imagine or connect dots ... or to express themselves when they do these things. But I think all this was planned to pay into the hands of the prosecutor and he seized the opportunity well. Kenyans were waiting with bated breath for the 4 hours on prosecution evidence to see how Khan was to expose the woman for the liar she was alleged to be. Now if this allegation by Khan that she was a liar had any truth to it, then forcing the court to hear the rest of her testimony in private helped the OTP as the extent of his incompetence would not have been exposed. I had not quite thought about it that way ... but in rear mirror, I now see the game the prosecutor is playing. I must say the witness seemed compelling to me, but you have to know that I know nothing about this other case with a materially identical witness! Then comes the observation I made, that giving evidence in private at this time does not take away any of the very identifying info that the witness has given (I dare not go further on that note, as I have already noted that we are denied the right to share our inferences that could help in identifying a witness). The idea you are now making me see is that it may not be identity that the prosecutor is concerned with at this point ... The negative I see about this case being heard in secrecy is that Kenyans were promised (and repeated here in Jukwaa ad nauseum by Njakip)that the court will have matters heard in the open. The ICC outreach office even went the extra mile to buy large screen TVs for the people in the affected areas to follow the proceedings that are intended to bring justice to them. Now those TV sets are a complete waste of time as no one is seeing what is going on in the court. I would like the victims to believe that the court is after the truth and being in the centre of it all, they would like to see the truth said in the court to secure conviction for those that caused them that much grief.I do not believe they would like the wrong people jailed! There is a chance also of peddling ludicrous allegations as truths, if actors perform their roles properly. Remember how it bothered me when I heard some things that a "witness" had "heard" Muthaura say? No matter what acting face the "witness" would put, I could never have been swayed to consider their allegations as close to anything real (because of the fundamentals I knew of the background of the man that was the target of the allegations). Removing Kenyans from direct audience with the evidence means there are fewer opportunities for fundamental untruths to be exposed! It is absurd that it is the prosecution, not the defense, that wants private hearings. Who knew it would be this way! On the political front, the secrecy does the court a lot more harm for there are those that are closely following the Kenya cases around the world and not just the Kenyans and who would like to confirm the notion of a politicised court. On that score, the court should be a lot more open and allow a truthful witness to testify as well as letting those that would have lied to fall by the wayside without setting foot in court. The present decision only helps the OTP with the first witness for if she is found guilty of perjuring herself, then expect a lot more witnesses to fall away when they realise they can be jailed. I cannot help noticing that those recanting their evidence claim they were coached on how to lie! Given the popular view that OTP did not undertake investigations and that many of its witnesses are frauds (a view given weight by withdrawals and public confessions), submission to secret hearing arrangement would only be seen as the institutionalization (to the court in general) of OTP's failures and deception. In that view those who have been waiting to see the accused tried would be defrauded, and a ruling by the court, especially of "conviction", would not be compelling. Response posted without knowledge whether the the contemplation of secret evidentiary hearings has progressed in the court.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 20, 2013 20:16:09 GMT 3
[ The negative I see about this case being heard in secrecy is that Kenyans were promised (and repeated here in Jukwaa ad nauseum by Njakip)that the court will have matters heard in the open. The ICC outreach office even went the extra mile to buy large screen TVs for the people in the affected areas to follow the proceedings that are intended to bring justice to them. Now those TV sets are a complete waste of time as no one is seeing what is going on in the court. I would like the victims to believe that the court is after the truth and being in the centre of it all, they would like to see the truth said in the court to secure conviction for those that caused them that much grief.I do not believe they would like the wrong people jailed! There is a chance also of peddling ludicrous allegations as truths, if actors perform their roles properly. Remember how it bothered me when I heard some things that a "witness" had "heard" Muthaura say? No matter what acting face the "witness" would put, I could never have been swayed to consider their allegations as close to anything real (because of the fundamentals I knew of the background of the man that was the target of the allegations). Removing Kenyans from direct audience with the evidence means there are fewer opportunities for fundamental untruths to be exposed! It is absurd that it is the prosecution, not the defense, that wants private hearings. Who knew it would be this way! Kamalet, Mank, A small think: witness protection. does this mean something to you? There is a hatred out there which was exposed in two days in Kenyan social media, some of them allegedly with connections to the state, --a hatred even more rabid than that of the howling mob that set the Kiambaa church ablaze. Elsewhere I state it forthrightly like this: My take is: any Gikuyu who wants to have a future in the Rift Valley, and has their identity revealed testifying against William Ruto, is living in Lalaland. It does not work like that in Afrika. Ruto is a warrior king now. Testifying against him is high treason. You do it, you do not live in his backyard. That is the real world I know. The court has stood still on this issue of witness intimidation as it is called, even giving public warnings and seeking legal ways of dealing with witness intimidation! And of course the big predator Khan QC relished a chance to further beat to pulp a woman who had exposed her emotional trauma by breaking down in tears as she recounted the most horrific of situations ---kids being hacked and thrown back into the inferno. Merciless would be Khan earning his keep, seeking to destroy her mental balance completely ---this is standard court procedure which is why women who have been raped are always adviced not to take the public stand to be cross examined by male evil lawyers--- and, thereby, having discredited her, seek to have her de-registered as mentally too unstable and traumatised to speaketh the truth! We all know the deal ---at least I always look for totally cold-blooded lawyers in my disputes, combining legal skill with total cruelty like Khan. The Judges too know the score for they are veterans of court-room drama. Every thinking objective fella would see the point in the camera session. The safety of the witness overrides the advantages of openness. Kenyans can sue for openneness yes, but you may have noticed not many bodies take Kenyans seriously ever since those Kalonzo referral contra deferral trips of the GCG days! NB: Khan can still debunk the lies if any. Only there would be no public cheer crowd --like our idle Mpigs snoring in the public gallery to the cost of Wanjiku!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 20, 2013 20:31:43 GMT 3
[ There is a chance also of peddling ludicrous allegations as truths, if actors perform their roles properly. Remember how it bothered me when I heard some things that a "witness" had "heard" Muthaura say? No matter what acting face the "witness" would put, I could never have been swayed to consider their allegations as close to anything real (because of the fundamentals I knew of the background of the man that was the target of the allegations). Removing Kenyans from direct audience with the evidence means there are fewer opportunities for fundamental untruths to be exposed! It is absurd that it is the prosecution, not the defense, that wants private hearings. Who knew it would be this way! Kamalet, Mank, A small think: witness protection. does this mean something to you? There is a hatred out there which was exposed in two days in Kenyan social media, some of them allegedly with connections to the state, --a hatred even more rabid than that of the howling mob that set the Kiambaa church ablaze. Elsewhere I state it forthrightly like this: My take is: any Gikuyu who wants to have a future in the Rift Valley, and has their identity revealed testifying against William Ruto, is living in Lalaland. It does not work like that in Afrika. Ruto is a warrior king now. Testifying against him is high treason. You doe it, you do not live in his backyard. That is the real world I know. The court has stood still on this issue of witness intimidation as it is called, even giving public warnings and seeking legal ways of dealing with witness intimidation! And of course the big predator Khan QC relished a chance to further beat to pulp a woman who had exposed her emotional trauma by breaking down in tears as she recounted the most horrific of situations ---kids being hacked and thrown back into the inferno. Merciless would be Khan earning his keep, seeking to destroy her mental balance completely ---this is standard court procedure which is why women who have been raped are always adviced not to take the public stand to be cross examined by male evil lawyers--- and, thereby, having discredited her, seek to have her de-registered as mentally too unstable and traumatised to speaketh the truth! We all know the deal ---at least I always look for totally cold-blooded lawyers in my disputes, combining legal skill with total cruelty like Khan. The Judges too know the score for they are veterans of court-room drama. Every thinking objective fella would see the point in the camera session. The safety of the witness overrides the advantages of openness. Kenyans can sue for openneness yes, but you may have noticed not many bodies take Kenyans seriously ever since those Kalonzo referral contra deferral trips of the GCG days! Yes Jakaswanga, witness protection means something to me. But as I have argued, I question whether witness protection is what the secrecy is really meant to deliver. I am sure you can also point to a number of things that we heard from the witness that would be enough to identify her ... unless not everything she says actually happened (in saying this I my point is not to question her credibility). That witness needs to be protected, but her protection is not the secrecy that has now become the way to go ... it is to give her a safe haven from now on! She is exposed already (assuming she is telling it as it was). So what are we left with? The chance that OTP has a fast one to pull here! Don't Ruto and Sang also have rights to be heard? If they believe that they do not have a fair trial under secrecy, why would you not put their concerns on that balance as well? Anyone who believes that Ruto and Sang are guilty will have no problem with the court working in privacy ... as such a path seems much more likely to reach the verdict of conviction ... after all, if the court did not believe in greater likelihood of their guilt than innocence, they would not be still at the court. But those who have followed the proceedings keenly (Jakaswanga included) should have reason to question whether there may not be more trickery here than genuine concern of witness safety - Remember I say all this after noting that, in my view, it is a foregone case that this witness's identity can be secured further if what she testifies is the truth - therefore I question whether extreme measures are still justified under the guise of protecting her identity.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 20, 2013 20:47:02 GMT 3
Yes Jakaswanga, witness protection means something to me. But as I have argued, I question whether witness protection is what the secrecy is really meant to deliver. I am sure you can also point to a number of things that we heard from the witness that would be enough to identify her ... unless not everything she says actually happened (in saying this I my point is not to question her credibility). That witness needs to be protected, but her protection is not the secrecy that has now become the way to go ... it is to give her a safe haven from now on! She is exposed already (assuming she is telling it as it was). So what are we left with? The chance t hat OTP has a fast one to pull here! Don't Ruto and Sang also have rights to be heard? If they believe that they do not have a fair trial under secrecy, why would you not put their concerns on that balance as well? Anyone who believes that Ruto and Sang are guilty will have no problem with the court working in privacy ... as such a path seems much more likely to reach the verdict of conviction ... after all, if the court did not believe in greater likelihood of their guilt than innocence, they would not be still at the court. But those who have followed the proceedings keenly (Jakaswanga included) should have reason to question whether there may not be more trickery here than genuine concern of witness safety - Remember I say all this after noting that, in my view, it is a foregone case that this witness's identity can be secured further if what she testifies is the truth - therefore I question whether extreme measures are still justified under the guise of protecting her identity. Mank, With QC Khan in Ruto's corner arguing every inch for mileage, I frankly do not think the OTP has a chance in hell of pulling any fast one. Khan would feast upon them raw! and have an acquittal granted on a compromised process prejudicial to the justice his clients came to seek! My position is: even in secret, Defence lawyers are still on top of it. Public glare does not make them any sharper! NB: there seems to have been some confusion about the identity of the witness on social media. A circulating photo later proved to be of another woman in Eldoret! Knowing Kenya, indeed I have been bothered some, that perhaps there were volunteers to ICC just for the money. A chance to eat that turned serious! But I always thought any normal lawyer would thrash that out soonest. That is why I have tended to dwell on the --do we deny there was a network? how spontaneous was the eviction of 1/2 a million people in one week? was there a common plan? identifying a common enemy? AND CAN THE OTP TIE RUTO TO IT? Fake evidence, in secret or not, wont help that out.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 20, 2013 23:53:28 GMT 3
Yes Jakaswanga, witness protection means something to me. But as I have argued, I question whether witness protection is what the secrecy is really meant to deliver. I am sure you can also point to a number of things that we heard from the witness that would be enough to identify her ... unless not everything she says actually happened (in saying this I my point is not to question her credibility). That witness needs to be protected, but her protection is not the secrecy that has now become the way to go ... it is to give her a safe haven from now on! She is exposed already (assuming she is telling it as it was). So what are we left with? The chance t hat OTP has a fast one to pull here! Don't Ruto and Sang also have rights to be heard? If they believe that they do not have a fair trial under secrecy, why would you not put their concerns on that balance as well? Anyone who believes that Ruto and Sang are guilty will have no problem with the court working in privacy ... as such a path seems much more likely to reach the verdict of conviction ... after all, if the court did not believe in greater likelihood of their guilt than innocence, they would not be still at the court. But those who have followed the proceedings keenly (Jakaswanga included) should have reason to question whether there may not be more trickery here than genuine concern of witness safety - Remember I say all this after noting that, in my view, it is a foregone case that this witness's identity can be secured further if what she testifies is the truth - therefore I question whether extreme measures are still justified under the guise of protecting her identity. Mank, With QC Khan in Ruto's corner arguing every inch for mileage, I frankly do not think the OTP has a chance in hell of pulling any fast one. Khan would feast upon them raw! and have an acquittal granted on a compromised process prejudicial to the justice his clients came to seek! My position is: even in secret, Defence lawyers are still on top of it. Public glare does not make them any sharper! NB: there seems to have been some confusion about the identity of the witness on social media. A circulating photo later proved to be of another woman in Eldoret! Knowing Kenya, indeed I have been bothered some, that perhaps there were volunteers to ICC just for the money. A chance to eat that turned serious! But I always thought any normal lawyer would thrash that out soonest. That is why I have tended to dwell on the --do we deny there was a network? how spontaneous was the eviction of 1/2 a million people in one week? was there a common plan? identifying a common enemy? AND CAN THE OTP TIE RUTO TO IT? Fake evidence, in secret or not, wont help that out. Amigo, You are probably right, the defense team won't be tricked in secrecy or publicity. Still, openness was the terms of the process. We (especially Ruto and Sang) are getting short-changed, and like Khan I don't see what witness protection has to do with it becuase we were already assured that witnesses are protected. Personally I am not one to take the courts ruling as just when it is reached through unwarranted secrecy. And unlike you, I believe the court can be fooled ... Khan can miss much of fabricated evidence by virtue of not knowing Kenya enough. In that aspect we have to hope more in Katwa Kigen being able to call the bluff in witnesses whose evidence violate fundamental truths of the people or region - these are ellusive areas in secrecy (while I my shouts won't be heard at ICC when I holoring "that's a damn lie, at least I will have heard for myself the lie before someone tells me how someone gave some great evidence). You surprise me with the thought that normal lawayers would thrash out liars ... but what has transpired with these cases so far suggest otherwise. I remember we were gagged on thought with respect to OTP4, but I have to refer you to our discussion of that witness on this board. We'll probably be hearing more when your president takes his place in the court soon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2013 0:19:17 GMT 3
With so many victimized Kenyans, some would surely become witness to the crimes committed. Never mind hiding behind, mara "they are liars", mara "they are being pampered" mara OTP is hiding behind protection, blah blah blah. This right here is what the issue is. And as jakaswanga and many others have said, there is no way this level of violence and displacement happened spontaneously. No way. "The Price of Tribal Politics" photojournalist Boniface Mwangiwww.marsgroupkenya.org/pdfs/2010/03/THE_PRICE_OF_TRIBAL_POLITICS.pdfwarning: the images are graphic
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 21, 2013 2:21:46 GMT 3
With so many victimized Kenyans, some would surely become witness to the crimes committed. Never mind hiding behind, mara "they are liars", mara "they are being pampered" mara OTP is hiding behind protection, blah blah blah. This right here is what the issue is. And as jakaswanga and many others have said, there is no way this level of violence and displacement happened spontaneously. No way. "The Price of Tribal Politics" photojournalist Boniface Mwangiwww.marsgroupkenya.org/pdfs/2010/03/THE_PRICE_OF_TRIBAL_POLITICS.pdfwarning: the images are graphic Watching through the clips you see a connection that only the ICC is too eager to be blind to.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 21, 2013 22:36:23 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 21, 2013 22:39:57 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 21, 2013 22:51:07 GMT 3
Podp, so in your view past & present leaders of the US & UK have committed no crimes because they have not killed any citizen within their borders?!! The charges the three Kenyans face at the ICC are in a nutshell, crimes against humanity. To use the citizen/non-citizen argument gives the impression that you believe that humanity begins & ends within the borders of the US & the UK...until we come to the Kenya case then we suddenly have humans again to allow Uhuruto & Sang to be charged at the ICC... As for the multi-party clashes of '92 & '97, the perpetrator still walks amongst us a free man. We had hoped the ICC would get down to the bottom of the perpetrators of the 2007/8 PEV, as things look so far I doubt they will. And no, PEV cannot be compared to anything the US & UK leaders perpetrate. It is a gerrymandering exercise that is peculiar to the KE political situation which had been practiced pre-election in the nineties & then post election in '07/'08. The US & UK are a lot more "sophisticated" in the way they go about the business of mass murder. They do it with the full cooperation & involvement of the "international community"...they call it the coalition of the willing & the like. After all, if everybody has blood on their hands, then nobody is guilty, au sio? 1st red high light with so many local criminals walking free in Kenya after the atrocities of 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/08 why should I pretend to be able to see the speck in the US & UK presidents and prime ministers and miss the log in my eyes when I remember the presidencies of Moi an Kibaki? will spending energy on US and UK make the atrocities committed in Kenya disappear? 2nd red high light you should have seen the security forces deployed at the Westgate Mall after the terrible attack that so far have claimed 30 lives. that is the spirit that should have been there in 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/8 when dealing with those who killed in the latter case over 1,300 Kenyans. a life is a life, Kiambaa Church witnessed in excess of 30 deaths with no combined forces of police to army sent to deal with the arsonists who killed Kenyans.....or are Kiambaa deaths of lesser people all hell bound? and that of Westgate Mall of heaven bound earthlings!
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 21, 2013 22:51:53 GMT 3
Podp, so in your view past & present leaders of the US & UK have committed no crimes because they have not killed any citizen within their borders?!! The charges the three Kenyans face at the ICC are in a nutshell, crimes against humanity. To use the citizen/non-citizen argument gives the impression that you believe that humanity begins & ends within the borders of the US & the UK...until we come to the Kenya case then we suddenly have humans again to allow Uhuruto & Sang to be charged at the ICC... As for the multi-party clashes of '92 & '97, the perpetrator still walks amongst us a free man. We had hoped the ICC would get down to the bottom of the perpetrators of the 2007/8 PEV, as things look so far I doubt they will. And no, PEV cannot be compared to anything the US & UK leaders perpetrate. It is a gerrymandering exercise that is peculiar to the KE political situation which had been practiced pre-election in the nineties & then post election in '07/'08. The US & UK are a lot more "sophisticated" in the way they go about the business of mass murder. They do it with the full cooperation & involvement of the "international community"...they call it the coalition of the willing & the like. After all, if everybody has blood on their hands, then nobody is guilty, au sio? 1st red high light with so many local criminals walking free in Kenya after the atrocities of 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/08 why should I pretend to be able to see the speck in the US & UK presidents and prime ministers and miss the log in my eyes when I remember the presidencies of Moi an Kibaki? will spending energy on US and UK make the atrocities committed in Kenya disappear? 2nd red high light you should have seen the security forces deployed at the Westgate Mall after the terrible attack that so far have claimed 30 lives. that is the spirit that should have been there in 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/8 when dealing with those who killed in the latter case over 1,300 Kenyans. a life is a life, Kiambaa Church witnessed in excess of 30 deaths with no combined forces of police to army sent to deal with the arsonists who killed Kenyans.....or are Kiambaa deaths of lesser people all hell bound? and that of Westgate Mall of heaven bound earthlings!
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 21, 2013 23:31:03 GMT 3
1st red high light with so many local criminals walking free in Kenya after the atrocities of 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/08 why should I pretend to be able to see the speck in the US & UK presidents and prime ministers and miss the log in my eyes when I remember the presidencies of Moi an Kibaki? will spending energy on US and UK make the atrocities committed in Kenya disappear? 2nd red high light you should have seen the security forces deployed at the Westgate Mall after the terrible attack that so far have claimed 30 lives. that is the spirit that should have been there in 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/8 when dealing with those who killed in the latter case over 1,300 Kenyans. a life is a life, Kiambaa Church witnessed in excess of 30 deaths with no combined forces of police to army sent to deal with the arsonists who killed Kenyans.....or are Kiambaa deaths of lesser people all hell bound? and that of Westgate Mall of heaven bound earthlings! As I write this I am watching a visibly shaken President Kenyatta addressing the nation about the Westgate siege. US UK speck you say, or "a life is a life"? Let's look at the numbers Iraqi civilian deaths since 2003: 125,000 (approximately) Afghan civilian deaths since 2006: 16,179 (NB this isn't counting those who died after the US or coalition led invasion in 2001, a figure which has been calculated to be in the region of 20,000...1,200 from the air-strikes with the balance from starvation. KE PEV: between 1,330 (near official figure) to possibly 3,000 Where is the speck & where lies the beam, my friend? As to the marshaling of security resources, surely it cannot escape your usually discerning eye that one cannot compare a localized attack to one shopping mall within the capital city by a small group of individuals to a "spontaneous" mass uprising that spanned nearly the entire nation overwhelming our stretched security forces. Given the numbers above, if you truly believe a life is a life then you ought to be equally, if not more outraged by the US UK actions than all our PEV's combined. Given the challenges of policing the PEV (& I believe you are one of those who complain about police shooting civilians who were "peacefully demonstrating" I'm sure you can see why locking down a shopping mall is a lot easier to organize than locking down an entire country...
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 22, 2013 0:01:11 GMT 3
Iraqi civilian deaths since 2003: 125,000 (approximately) Afghan civilian deaths since 2006: 16,179 (NB this isn't counting those who died after the US or coalition led invasion in 2001, a figure which has been calculated to be in the region of 20,000...1,200 from the air-strikes with the balance from starvation. KE PEV: between 1,330 (near official figure) to possibly 3,000 Where is the speck & where lies the beam, my friend? As to the marshaling of security resources, surely it cannot escape your usually discerning eye that one cannot compare a localized attack to one shopping mall within the capital city by a small group of individuals to a "spontaneous" mass uprising that spanned nearly the entire nation overwhelming our stretched security forces. Given the numbers above, if you truly believe a life is a life then you ought to be equally, if not more outraged by the US UK actions than all our PEV's combined. Given the challenges of policing the PEV (& I believe you are one of those who complain about police shooting civilians who were "peacefully demonstrating" I'm sure you can see why locking down a shopping mall is a lot easier to organize than locking down an entire country... 2nd last red high light so I should worry more about the dead Iraqis and Afghans by the hands of the USA and UK! who helped me bury my dead? none of those (Iraqis, Afghans, USA and UK) you are so concerned with as if they care about you and I. last red high light “The national bourgeoisie in the underdeveloped countries should not be combated because it threatens to curb the overall, harmonious development of the nation. It must be resolutely opposed because literally it serves no purpose. Mediocre in its winnings, in its achievements and its thinking, this bourgeoisie attempts to mask its mediocrity by ostentatious projects for individual prestige, chromium-plated American cars, vacations on the French Riviera and weekends in neon-lit nightclubs” sadbillionaire.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/and-then-one-fine-day-the-bourgeoisie-is-awakened-by-a-terrific-boomerang-effect/ In a nutshell, if Jubilee has a strategy for governing Kenya, this is being diluted by the fact that it prioritises a particular outcome; that of ending or winning the ICC case. Everything is done in the name of saving The Hague two. At every turn, this end point has influenced the style, demeanour and actions of government. If the coalition gets punched in the month, their plan will blow to smithereens. mobile.nation.co.ke/blogs/Jubilee-has-a-plan-for-Kenya-lost-ICC-demons/-/1949942/2000856/-/format/xhtml/-/11lmtw0z/-/index.html
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 22, 2013 0:26:07 GMT 3
Podp and B6K,
You lose me in this conversation. You both seem to imply that Ruto and Uhuru are guilty of crimes against humanity ... such that your debate is just on how society should be treating them. Is this your sense, that these guys were behind the genocide?
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 22, 2013 0:35:58 GMT 3
Iraqi civilian deaths since 2003: 125,000 (approximately) Afghan civilian deaths since 2006: 16,179 (NB this isn't counting those who died after the US or coalition led invasion in 2001, a figure which has been calculated to be in the region of 20,000...1,200 from the air-strikes with the balance from starvation. KE PEV: between 1,330 (near official figure) to possibly 3,000 Where is the speck & where lies the beam, my friend? As to the marshaling of security resources, surely it cannot escape your usually discerning eye that one cannot compare a localized attack to one shopping mall within the capital city by a small group of individuals to a "spontaneous" mass uprising that spanned nearly the entire nation overwhelming our stretched security forces. Given the numbers above, if you truly believe a life is a life then you ought to be equally, if not more outraged by the US UK actions than all our PEV's combined. Given the challenges of policing the PEV (& I believe you are one of those who complain about police shooting civilians who were "peacefully demonstrating" I'm sure you can see why locking down a shopping mall is a lot easier to organize than locking down an entire country... 2nd last red high light so I should worry more about the dead Iraqis and Afghans by the hands of the USA and UK! who helped me bury my dead? none of those (Iraqis, Afghans, USA and UK) you are so concerned with as if they care about you and I. last red high light “The national bourgeoisie in the underdeveloped countries should not be combated because it threatens to curb the overall, harmonious development of the nation. It must be resolutely opposed because literally it serves no purpose. Mediocre in its winnings, in its achievements and its thinking, this bourgeoisie attempts to mask its mediocrity by ostentatious projects for individual prestige, chromium-plated American cars, vacations on the French Riviera and weekends in neon-lit nightclubs” sadbillionaire.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/and-then-one-fine-day-the-bourgeoisie-is-awakened-by-a-terrific-boomerang-effect/ In a nutshell, if Jubilee has a strategy for governing Kenya, this is being diluted by the fact that it prioritises a particular outcome; that of ending or winning the ICC case. Everything is done in the name of saving The Hague two. At every turn, this end point has influenced the style, demeanour and actions of government. If the coalition gets punched in the month, their plan will blow to smithereens. mobile.nation.co.ke/blogs/Jubilee-has-a-plan-for-Kenya-lost-ICC-demons/-/1949942/2000856/-/format/xhtml/-/11lmtw0z/-/index.htmlRE 2nd last headlight: Whether they care for me or not is not the issue. I care for them. We buried our own dead...I hope you managed to trace yours to do the same. Any loss of life is a tragedy. I don't but that commie nonsense of many deaths being statistics... RE Last headlight: So you see some sort of class struggle where I see a bunch of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists wreaking havoc on my home town? Go figure...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 22, 2013 0:38:17 GMT 3
Podp and B6K, You lose me in this conversation. You both seem to imply that Ruto and Uhuru are guilty of crimes against humanity ... such that your debate is just on how society should be treating them. Is this your sense, that these guys were behind the genocide? I refer you to my post above. Uhuruto are innocent until proven guilty whether one wishes them to be guilty or not....
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 22, 2013 0:38:56 GMT 3
Podp and B6K, You lose me in this conversation. You both seem to imply that Ruto and Uhuru are guilty of crimes against humanity ... such that your debate is just on how society should be treating them. Is this your sense, that these guys were behind the genocide? what is your sense? it might move the conversation to where you desire. did those dead ones in Kiambaa burn themselves? or did the family in Naivasha burn itself? or it was the USA and UK who did it? or the terrorists called al shabab? what is your sense so that we do not lose you?
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 22, 2013 0:41:03 GMT 3
Podp and B6K, You lose me in this conversation. You both seem to imply that Ruto and Uhuru are guilty of crimes against humanity ... such that your debate is just on how society should be treating them. Is this your sense, that these guys were behind the genocide? what is your sense? it might move the conversation to where you desire. did those dead ones in Kiambaa burn themselves? or did the family in Naivasha burn itself? or it was the USA and UK who did it? or the terrorists called al shabab? what is your sense so that we do not lose you? They definitely did not burn themselves. But I don't know who burned them. Someone could say you did!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 22, 2013 0:43:09 GMT 3
Podp and B6K, You lose me in this conversation. You both seem to imply that Ruto and Uhuru are guilty of crimes against humanity ... such that your debate is just on how society should be treating them. Is this your sense, that these guys were behind the genocide? I refer you to my post above. Uhuruto are innocent until proven guilty whether one wishes them to be guilty or not.... Its my sense too that they are innocent till proven guilty. But I felt like in your conversation guilt is assumed. Clearly, your discussant, in his retarded response, asserts his assumption that they are guilty. But I will indulge him not.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 22, 2013 0:50:28 GMT 3
RE 2nd last headlight: Whether they care for me or not is not the issue. I care for them. We buried our own dead...I hope you managed to trace yours to do the same. Any loss of life is a tragedy. I don't but that commie nonsense of many deaths being statistics... RE Last headlight: So you see some sort of class struggle where I see a bunch of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists wreaking havoc on my home town? Go figure... red high light double speak or in plain English a self-reinforcing pretense of significant truth. study of Tautology helps one decipher such occurrences so I do go figure... Sorry on what happened 'on my home town'. what of the dead of our PEV orgies? should we say no one needs to be tried for the tragedy that is still unfolding?
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 22, 2013 0:56:27 GMT 3
what is your sense? it might move the conversation to where you desire. did those dead ones in Kiambaa burn themselves? or did the family in Naivasha burn itself? or it was the USA and UK who did it? or the terrorists called al shabab? what is your sense so that we do not lose you? They definitely did not burn themselves. But I don't know who burned them. Someone could say you did! red high light that is why we have security and judicial institutions. they need to be prodded to perform investigations first and later prosecution. or after we know by any other way like the truth, reconciliation etc. commissions we can have the killers forgiven by the survivors of the self inflicted atrocities. at least it was not Iraqis or USA guys who killed our own in 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/8. or your sense is we move on?
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 22, 2013 1:01:52 GMT 3
They definitely did not burn themselves. But I don't know who burned them. Someone could say you did! red high light that is why we have security and judicial institutions. they need to be prodded to perform investigations first and later prosecution. or after we know by any other way like the truth, reconciliation etc. commissions we can have the killers forgiven by the survivors of the self inflicted atrocities. at least it was not Iraqis or USA guys who killed our own in 1991/2, 1997 and 2007/8. or your sense is we move on? I got B6K's response to my query. I presume I got yours too, in a veiled way. I don't know whether you are starting a new discussion with me, or that you presume we had an ongoing one on the matters you now address me with.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Sept 22, 2013 1:04:59 GMT 3
I refer you to my post above. Uhuruto are innocent until proven guilty whether one wishes them to be guilty or not.... Its my sense too that they are innocent till proven guilty. But I felt like in your conversation guilt is assumed. Clearly, your discussant, in his retarded response, asserts his assumption that they are guilty. But I will indulge him not. red high light To put it gently, any response in the negative simply shows ignorance. www.policymic.com/articles/9899/why-using-the-word-retard-is-retarding-progress
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 22, 2013 1:15:07 GMT 3
Podp,
I have a lot of respect to yield to those who are worthy. You seem to have been waiting for me to post something so you can show me that you are not worthy the respect.
Now I am not in any conversation with you.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 22, 2013 16:52:17 GMT 3
Meanwhile at the Hague, the ICC faces a test of legal finesse! www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/22/us-kenya-attack-icc-idUSBRE98L07X20130922That is why I grit my teeth and say Ruto is loafing at the Hague. There is sure a national crisis here, but there he is, the co-president, detained in a foreign land. He has to REQUEST PERMISSION! It is not his decision, nor that of his mate Uhuru Kenyatta! The vice president of Kenya is effectively a PRISONER! No, Uhuru Kenyatta, when it is your time, you can not possibly go to the Hague and still be President. It is one or the other!
|
|