|
|
Post by nereah on Apr 28, 2012 17:49:10 GMT 3
The statement that cost Raila the presidency  agwambo He celebrated too early even before the actual announcement of the results without the slightest idea of what was cooking. To him victory had been secured. But the devil was in the detail. By David Mwere It is emerging that Prime Minister Odinga’s statement in the 2007 election period might have caused him victory and a place at the coveted State House. The details of these events, unknown to the Kenyan public, are contained in the Memoirs of the Untold Story of Kenya’s Darkest Moment in its election history, by a former Commissioner at the defunct ECK. The memoirs, in their final stages, are set to be launched by next month. These developments occurred between December 27-30th, 2007 the critical period that almost sent the country to the dogs. It is also emerged that the post election violence was not caused by the announcement of presidential election results. Rather, it was caused by the monumental rigging that occurred and the Raila statement that caused panic among the elite Kikuyu business class.
And this is how the violence was ignited. After the closure of polling centers on the evening of December 27th, 2007 counting of votes started at the polling centers. By 6PM the results from various centers had started trickling in at the national tallying center(KICC).Around midnight, there was every indication that Raila Odinga who was the ODM presidential candidate was enjoying unassailable lead against the incumbent, President Mwai Kibaki of PNU. This leads was vindicated the following day and the better part of the day until evening. Sensing the outcome, the PNU strategists had to devise ways to counter ODM fortunes. "When results started trickling in, they knew Raila was winning. They had to negotiate a safe exit,†says the commissioner in his works. The third and the last was to yield and accept defeat. It was agonizing but the mandarins had to find a way of swallowing their pride for their interests. A decision was reached. The resolution was to extend an olive branch to Raila since it was clear that he had won the elections.
This was mooted to seek consensus. In the consensus building efforts with Raila, now the Prime Minster in the grand coalition government, a proposal was reached that (Raila) had to be approached with a message from the PNU side and the messenger was equally identified. By this time, the memoirs reveal that President Kibaki was "busy" preparing to hand over the reins of power. The messenger, a senior official in one of the country’s security agency was sent to Raila with one message: how he would safeguard the interest of Kibaki’s associates. He also disclosed to Raila that he had won and preparations for handing over were in the works. In his response, Raila is reported to have said that he will safeguard their interests the same way he will do to other Kenyans. This statement was just enough to cause him the presidency. The response was delivered in black and white and it did not conciliate Kibaki’s men. more....... Source:the sunday express,issue no. 1777
contact:info@sundayexpress.com |
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Apr 28, 2012 17:55:49 GMT 3
A former minister, now deceased in Kibaki’s government is reported to have quipped:"T his person (Raila) cannot protect our interest. We have to protect what we already have because this is not the guy to rely on†What followed was an elaborate scheme to consolidate power by bringing it back to “its original place" The earlier option, overturning the was revisited and ut had to be sublimely backed by the gap on the media. At this point, by time rigging started on the evening of December 28th, 2007.Calls by the ODM to announce the results on December 29th fell on deaf ears as the margin shrunk against Raila. This raised eyebrows in the ODM.But the Orange Party was yet to see more. At one point former ECK Chairman Samuel Kivuitu complained in the public that his officers had switched off their phones and were “cooking†results. His fears were substantiated when doctored figures especially Juja, Nithi, Molo, Kiambu constituencies etc, went beyond the number of registered voters. The mathematics at KICC was in Kibaki’s favour while Kivuitu’s day at the premise was marked by tight security from the elite GSU unit. Fearing that ODM was mobilizing its supporters to State House, the PNU had to wind up the process of rigging in the wee hours of December 29,2007 as the lead titled towards Kibaki’s favour just before the results were “formally†announced on December 30.2007. At this point the pressure for Kivuitu to announce the results had shifted from ODM to PNU.The ODM protestations at KICC did not help matters nor did the parallel announcement by Musalia Mudavadi, Raila’s running mate that his boss had won. In these circumstances, Kivuitu was quickly bundled into Amos Kimunya’s car for State House under tight security. The ritual to announce President Kibaki the winner had been set and was to be brief without pomp and colour that accompanied the 2002 event when Kibaki was taking over from Daniel Arap Moi. "The former Chairman publicly admitted to us that he never knew what he was doing during that day at State House. He has never gone back there. He says he was forced to announce the results. "He has been seeking an appointment with the Prime Minister but is yet to secure one," a line in the memoirs says of Kivuitu who is currently indisposed. What followed was anarchy in some parts of the country where ODM enjoyed fanatical support. The damage had already been done. The violence spread to other parts of the country on the accounts of retaliatory attacks. The culmination of the violence was deaths, displacements of persons and animals and loses of property. To be continued in the next issue.source:the sunday express,issue no. 1777
contact:info@sundayexpress.com
|
|
|
|
Post by mank on Apr 29, 2012 8:17:42 GMT 3
By David Mwere
.... The messenger, a senior official in one of the country’s security agency was sent to Raila with one message: how he would safeguard the interest of Kibaki’s associates. He also disclosed to Raila that he had won and preparations for handing over were in the works.
Dada Nereah, This is unsettling dossier, if factual. But why has it never been told? As Raila claimed that the presidency was stolen from him, why did he not state that at some point Kibaki was ready to concede to him? Why didn't he ever tell the public about this "protection" business? Why did it take so long for something so significant to come out? Might someone be recreating history? |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 29, 2012 10:34:06 GMT 3
Dada Nereah, This is unsettling dossier, if factual. But why has it never been told? What do you people say in the states? a 60 million dollar question???  |
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Apr 29, 2012 11:45:06 GMT 3
mank ;D
i agree with you.given that this is a publication by an insider and which has been leaked to the media(either deliberately or by happenstance)then it behoves agwambo's media handlers to give it the attention it deserves.
it rubbishes the propaganda that agwambo is the type of a leader who would go any extreme to acquire power. if indeed he adhered to his stringent ideological conviction by turning down the conditional offer by kibaki's men then he has been vindicated in the fullness of time.
one of the poorly kept secrets here in nairobi is the existence of this shadowy group who remain fearful of agwambo's ascendency for reasons stated in the story by mwere.
why would the powermen resort to extra parliamentary/democratic means to block raila? it is not raila but what he stands for which is equal treatment of all kenyans.
now,the question is: was raila indeed approached and would he confirm this? how useful is this bit of info on understanding the post election shenanigans and even the desperate and disparate anti raila formations in kenya's political landscape?
we will know much sooner than expected.
|
|
|
|
Post by Horth on Apr 29, 2012 12:36:49 GMT 3
Nereah,I tend to look at this article slightly differently and also ask whether its publication is to try and convince the reader that Raila is such a principled person, he would purposely scuttle his lifelong dream of being PORK on principles. That’s really hilarious, especially about one of our politicians. First, I personally don’t like Raila very much but I don’t think he’s a complete drooling imbecile. For him to respond to such an offer like he supposedly did would be to portray him as a brainless idiot. We know from history that Raila happily broke bread with the lords of impunity when he dissolved NDP to join KANU, all in a bid to secure the presidency come 2002. Alas, as we are all aware, this “principled” decision came to naught. Forward to 2007 and he cobbles together ODM, well represented by the lords of impunity in a “principled” bid to secure the presidency. Now this article tries to convince us that even though he had won the elections with remnants of the lords of impunity in ODM, he would not have protected the other lords of impunity in PNU. Is this the equal treatment for all Kenyans he supposedly believed in? This sounds like a joke and a poor one at that. Honestly? I peg this article as a poor and desperate attempt to show us that Raila can’t be bought and is an exceptional Kenyan politician driven by principles. But we know better, don’t we all? 
|
|
|
|
Post by mzee on Apr 29, 2012 12:40:50 GMT 3
The confidence by which Raila is approaching this elections and jitters in the other camp indeed points to the fact that the above might have been true.
|
|
|
|
Post by nalinali on Apr 29, 2012 13:17:32 GMT 3
The confidence by which Raila is approaching this elections and jitters in the other camp indeed points to the fact that the above might have been true. Mzee Not that the above might be true, but that it is the same motive driving the current G7 strategy. I think (Whatever OO thinks about divisve ethnic talk on this forum) it is important for kenyans to know that the anti-Raila crusade is actual terms a disguised attempt by the ruling Kikuyu elite to perpetuate the designs that they have had all along and that is refered to in the substance of this thread. For me the likes of Eugene, Ruto, Mudavadi, Musyoka etc, in their engagement with the 7, are at best accessories to a design they know very little about. |
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Apr 29, 2012 14:10:27 GMT 3
horth,  great seeing you and welcome back to where you truly belong. b.t.w what became of the sister member from asia? my regards and best wishes. pleasantries aside....... you command my respect by making known your regard(attitude towards) agwambo before proceeding to help yourself with the narrative that the authoritative nairobi weekly,the sunday express, has gone to town with. this, if you ask me,is how it should be done. i never shy away from re-affirming my unshakeable belief in one raila amollo odinga for reasons that warrant another thread.for record and purposes of this discourse, i am not his supporter but a follower.
now on your brilliant take on the soon to be released memoir by an insider on why raila lost the presidency, i beg to differ with you in the hope that you will be edified at the end of this submission. may i begin by stating that it wasn't in vain for agwambo to have broken bread with kanu, accommodated individuals with questionable reform credentials and even sued for peace when mzee kibaki robbed him of victory and subverted the sovereign will of millions of kenyans by clinging onto power(kriegler report) in what jukwaa's biggest o ;D famously called a civilian coup. may i put it to you, horth, that you, just like most of those anti-raila minds i often countenance, have never understood raila and have miserably failed to appreciate the complexity that is agwambo. without opening another front for debate ,let me disabuse you of the notion that agwambo is kigeugeu by the dint of his political associations and engagements. as you were walking into jukwaa, you may have seen a thread in which 50 cents is provocatively asking what became of the kenyan left. five years later the sunday standard is sufficiently inspired to interrogate their causal effect. and without stripping agwambo of his bragging rights as the last revolutionary standing,the media house goes as far as informing us that the social leftists are seeking fresh bearing under raila's shadow. mischievous vegetarian ugandan journalist onyango obbo, who needs no introduction to you, had the temerity to refer to agwambo as an expired leftist for reasons that informs your contestation of this revelation by an insider:misunderstanding the man. yes, he broke bread with the reactionaries and anti-reformists and even today tag team with most of these elements in the grand coalition government. horth, you may want to inform me if kenya would still be where it was---especially after all those abortive successes by the mutungas and paul muites----if raila had not gone to bed with kanu and destroyed it from within or cobbled up the likes of kalonzo the musyoka,george saitoti,bill ntimama,joseph kamotho,dalmas otieno and mzee mwai kibaki to sent kanu packing in 2002? wasn't it raila who took saitoti to court over goldenberge scam and the very one who was inducting him to the kenya's sphere of social democracy? wasn't it agwambo who said kibaki tosha but rallied the likes of gedion moi, ohuru kenyatta,stephen musyoka and bill ruto in the 2005 no campaign against anti-reformists? those contradictions you are premising your disdain and apprehension on raila are redundant when measured against raila's relevance and pivotal influence in contemporary kenyan politics(instructively without state power). it is idle,lazy and insulting to attempt to be slighting raila the person and deconstructing raila narrative based on his strategic engagements with those our kamale  called dodgy characters while deliberately choosing to ignore the persuasion of the kenyan masses. why have kenyans masses who genuinely believe and want transformation of this society been so unkind to those who you would imagine makes better leaders than raila? is it raila's fault or kenya's historical political infrastructure that some leaders who i cant mention and who were senior to raila in the struggle rues in neglect? was raila to stick to the the tested and unworkable/untenable approach/s? horth, i want to state here without fear of contradiction and equivocation that as things stands in kenya today, there is only one individual and one individual alone who can save the ocampo four. just as he said kibaki tosha to the consternation of many, it would take agwambo declaration of no to hague for the deferral or referral to happen. ( anyone disputing this is welcome for a debate in a new thread for this discussion.note: i am stating that referral and deferral cause falls flat without the crucial concurrence and mobilization of the man kibaki and his handlers are overlooking as they reach out regional statesmen) if i heard you correctly, you were in effect questioning agwambo's reform credentials and ideological convictions. i have therefore attempted to illustrate that he is the only politician in kenya whose relevance stems from a people based and trustworthy agenda irrespective of the tendencies or engagement platform. i have also sought to disabuse you of the notion that agwambo is self-serving and lastly i am confident that i have impressed on you the need to understand the ideological underpinnings and most importantly the inexplicable inevitability of his mission for kenya. i rest my case.
|
|
|
|
Post by destiny on Apr 29, 2012 14:39:17 GMT 3
I have heard similar tales such as this which are quite prevalent in the bars of Nairobi West. Everyone seems to have their take on what cost Jakom the presidency. One of the commonest grapevine is that a military band was sent to Raila's residence in Karen by Muthaura to serenade him as the new head of state. When Jakoyo Midiwo tried to get to Raila past the vast security detail and warn him about "kuzubaishwa" as rigging was going on, he was held back by the elite bodyguards and warned he now needed an appointment to seek audience with the new head of state. Is it true he even inspected a fake guard of honor right there in his Karen home as rigging hit crescendo all over the country? Anyone heard of how Michuki held Kibaki by his collar and shouted "wake up we are losing power!" and they had to hatch something quick? Quite hilarious>>> but go tell it to the birds!
|
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Apr 29, 2012 23:24:42 GMT 3
I think the propaganda of ‘bar talk’ should be left there.
Raila was never a ‘principled man’ portrayed here. To me, he is simply an opportunistic populist. If he won the election, as claimed, then my views rings truer. He won the election to concede defeat and settle for second position, some cheap imitation of the real 'position'. Good grief!
ODM supporters were people who earn their daily bread in any one of the slums that was looted and burnt beyond recognition during the PEV. Their wives and daughters are among the scores of women who were gang raped in the midst of the ongoing violence. Their families burnt beyond recognition in places like Naivasha. Their youth shot by the police.
Raila owed these people the decency to ask for his rightful winning. Justice has been denied to all of them in a rigged election. What ‘principles’ did he then stand for, if not cowardice?
|
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Apr 30, 2012 5:15:59 GMT 3
As this guy's miserable political career comes to a sad end, his toadies are trying to revise history to fit the veneer that has been painted of him all the years. Poleni sana.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Apr 30, 2012 8:11:40 GMT 3
There are usually was of getting your memoirs publicised Take for instance the memoirs of Mgina Miguna. We have snippets of what he will tell us in his book. But most importantly he has declared himself the author.
Now read this statement from the gutter press sheet that Oloo stopped working for:
The details of these events, unknown to the Kenyan public, are contained in the Memoirs of the Untold Story of Kenya’s Darkest Moment in its election history, by a former Commissioner at the defunct ECK.
Just why would the commissioner willing to tell us all about the negotiations and telephone calls between Kibaki and Rala not willing to be identified?
Because this is a fake! You tell fakes when certain thing are alleged and the author cannot possibly link his knowledge of events to any authority. The telephone calls between Raila and Kibaki would have had to be told to the commissioner by someone privy to the conversation hence cannot be authoratatively claimed by the Commissioner.
As Mank asked above, this is such 'hot' information to have been hidded from the pubic!
|
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Apr 30, 2012 8:38:44 GMT 3
The statement that cost Raila the presidency agwambo He celebrated too early even before the actual announcement of the results without the slightest idea of what was cooking. To him victory had been secured. But the devil was in the detail. By David Mwere It is emerging that Prime Minister Odinga’s statement in the 2007 election period might have caused him victory and a place at the coveted State House. The details of these events, unknown to the Kenyan public, are contained in the Memoirs of the Untold Story of Kenya’s Darkest Moment in its election history, by a former Commissioner at the defunct ECK. The memoirs, in their final stages, are set to be launched by next month. These developments occurred between December 27-30th, 2007 the critical period that almost sent the country to the dogs. It is also emerged that the post election violence was not caused by the announcement of presidential election results. Rather, it was caused by the monumental rigging that occurred and the Raila statement that caused panic among the elite Kikuyu business class.
And this is how the violence was ignited. After the closure of polling centers on the evening of December 27th, 2007 counting of votes started at the polling centers. By 6PM the results from various centers had started trickling in at the national tallying center(KICC).Around midnight, there was every indication that Raila Odinga who was the ODM presidential candidate was enjoying unassailable lead against the incumbent, President Mwai Kibaki of PNU. This leads was vindicated the following day and the better part of the day until evening. Sensing the outcome, the PNU strategists had to devise ways to counter ODM fortunes.
If the offer was made some time on the 28/xii, then the rejection of the offer can't have been the cause of the violence, because there were already serious organised attacks in the Rift Valley on the 27 and 28/xii. These couldn't have been organised in the immediate aftermath of the rejection of the offer. |
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Apr 30, 2012 8:44:11 GMT 3
I think the propaganda of ‘bar talk’ should be left there. Raila was never a ‘principled man’ portrayed here. To me, he is simply an opportunistic populist. If he won the election, as claimed, then my views rings truer. He won the election to concede defeat and settle for second position, some cheap imitation of the real 'position'. Good grief! ODM supporters were people who earn their daily bread in any one of the slums that was looted and burnt beyond recognition during the PEV. Their wives and daughters are among the scores of women who were gang raped in the midst of the ongoing violence. Their families burnt beyond recognition in places like Naivasha. Their youth shot by the police. Raila owed these people the decency to ask for his rightful winning. Justice has been denied to all of them in a rigged election. What ‘principles’ did he then stand for, if not cowardice?
This is thoroughly uncompelling. He might have been convinced he won the election, while at the same time accepting (i) he had no decisive evidence for the claim; certainly, no evidence that would convince a neutral observer, and (ii) even if he did have decisive evidence, neither the government, the nation, nor Kenya's imperial overlords were going to let him assume the presidency because of the violence that had already occurred. In any case, it is obvious that he and Kibaki were compelled by outside pressure to accept the deal on the table. I'm not a fan of Raila, but his actions don't show that he didn't believe that he had won the election.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Apr 30, 2012 10:55:48 GMT 3
I think the propaganda of ‘bar talk’ should be left there. Raila was never a ‘principled man’ portrayed here. To me, he is simply an opportunistic populist. If he won the election, as claimed, then my views rings truer. He won the election to concede defeat and settle for second position, some cheap imitation of the real 'position'. Good grief! ODM supporters were people who earn their daily bread in any one of the slums that was looted and burnt beyond recognition during the PEV. Their wives and daughters are among the scores of women who were gang raped in the midst of the ongoing violence. Their families burnt beyond recognition in places like Naivasha. Their youth shot by the police. Raila owed these people the decency to ask for his rightful winning. Justice has been denied to all of them in a rigged election. What ‘principles’ did he then stand for, if not cowardice?
This is thoroughly uncompelling. He might have been convinced he won the election, while at the same time accepting (i) he had no decisive evidence for the claim; certainly, no evidence that would convince a neutral observer, and (ii) even if he did have decisive evidence, neither the government, the nation, nor Kenya's imperial overlords were going to let him assume the presidency because of the violence that had already occurred. In any case, it is obvious that he and Kibaki were compelled by outside pressure to accept the deal on the table. I'm not a fan of Raila, but his actions don't show that he didn't believe that he had won the election.
I find your argument contradictory. If Raila was convinced he won the election, he must have had some ‘evidence’ on which to base that conviction. Unless of course you are arguing it was merely a ‘gut-feeling’ which you have not told us how your reach that view. If he had won, and that is what we are told happened, then everyone would have stood with him as he claimed his coveted prize. I doubt id people would have rubbished his claim, if he stood up and said as such. Contrast with the cases of Zimbabwe and Ivory coast. PEV took place before the coalition and creation of prime minister. It is not the case, if he had not subserviently submitted himself to be the prime minister position, the country would have gone up in flames. By the time they were making deals the country was already burnt, smouldering. He actions to me are clearly of a person who was not sure of himself and jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism when the premier position was flashed before him. |
|
|
|
Post by nuffsed1 on Apr 30, 2012 16:08:08 GMT 3
Danielwaweru you're quite something. You have audaciously claimed there was violence by 27th. Casual reading may let you get away with so much. Are you saying violence before 27th Dec 2007 was POST-election violence? Where was this violence? All reports I've seen refer to violence breaking out after 31st Dec when Kibaki was sworn in at night. If this is another attempt to link Raila to PEV you will have to try harder. I think the propaganda of ‘bar talk’ should be left there. Raila was never a ‘principled man’ portrayed here. To me, he is simply an opportunistic populist. If he won the election, as claimed, then my views rings truer. He won the election to concede defeat and settle for second position, some cheap imitation of the real 'position'. Good grief! ODM supporters were people who earn their daily bread in any one of the slums that was looted and burnt beyond recognition during the PEV. Their wives and daughters are among the scores of women who were gang raped in the midst of the ongoing violence. Their families burnt beyond recognition in places like Naivasha. Their youth shot by the police. Raila owed these people the decency to ask for his rightful winning. Justice has been denied to all of them in a rigged election. What ‘principles’ did he then stand for, if not cowardice?
This is thoroughly uncompelling. He might have been convinced he won the election, while at the same time accepting (i) he had no decisive evidence for the claim; certainly, no evidence that would convince a neutral observer, and (ii) even if he did have decisive evidence, neither the government, the nation, nor Kenya's imperial overlords were going to let him assume the presidency because of the violence that had already occurred. In any case, it is obvious that he and Kibaki were compelled by outside pressure to accept the deal on the table. I'm not a fan of Raila, but his actions don't show that he didn't believe that he had won the election.
|
|
|
|
Post by mank on Apr 30, 2012 19:39:37 GMT 3
Dada Nereah,
This is unsettling dossier, if factual. But why has it never been told?
Mank,
What do you people say in the states? a 60 million dollar question??? , The americans are too proud of their dollar for that .... they'd just say "that's a million dollar question". Snobs! |
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Apr 30, 2012 19:46:19 GMT 3
Danielwaweru you're quite something. You have audaciously claimed there was violence by 27th. Casual reading may let you get away with so much. Are you saying violence before 27th Dec 2007 was POST-election violence? Where was this violence? All reports I've seen refer to violence breaking out after 31st Dec when Kibaki was sworn in at night. If this is another attempt to link Raila to PEV you will have to try harder.
This is thoroughly uncompelling. He might have been convinced he won the election, while at the same time accepting (i) he had no decisive evidence for the claim; certainly, no evidence that would convince a neutral observer, and (ii) even if he did have decisive evidence, neither the government, the nation, nor Kenya's imperial overlords were going to let him assume the presidency because of the violence that had already occurred. In any case, it is obvious that he and Kibaki were compelled by outside pressure to accept the deal on the table. I'm not a fan of Raila, but his actions don't show that he didn't believe that he had won the election.
Violence was meted on so many people in Kisumu and other areas long before the real election begun on suspicion that they were policemen send by Kibaki to rig the elections. |
|
|
|
Post by reporter911 on Apr 30, 2012 21:41:54 GMT 3
Danielwaweru you're quite something. You have audaciously claimed there was violence by 27th. Casual reading may let you get away with so much. Are you saying violence before 27th Dec 2007 was POST-election violence? Where was this violence? All reports I've seen refer to violence breaking out after 31st Dec when Kibaki was sworn in at night. If this is another attempt to link Raila to PEV you will have to try harder. Violence was meted on so many people in Kisumu and other areas long before the real election begun on suspicion that they were policemen send by Kibaki to rig the elections. I guess you want a reminder of Police brutality in Kisumu.. given the shoot to kill order by yours truly Kibaki!!
Ballots to Bulletsresponsibilitytoprotect.org/Kenya.pdf and you need to see some pictures as a reminder www.karelprinsloo.com/#/works/kenya-elections?i=179 |
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Apr 30, 2012 21:44:04 GMT 3
This is thoroughly uncompelling. He might have been convinced he won the election, while at the same time accepting (i) he had no decisive evidence for the claim; certainly, no evidence that would convince a neutral observer, and (ii) even if he did have decisive evidence, neither the government, the nation, nor Kenya's imperial overlords were going to let him assume the presidency because of the violence that had already occurred. In any case, it is obvious that he and Kibaki were compelled by outside pressure to accept the deal on the table. I'm not a fan of Raila, but his actions don't show that he didn't believe that he had won the election.
I find your argument contradictory. If Raila was convinced he won the election, he must have had some ‘evidence’ on which to base that conviction. Unless of course you are arguing it was merely a ‘gut-feeling’ which you have not told us how your reach that view. If he had won, and that is what we are told happened, then everyone would have stood with him as he claimed his coveted prize. I doubt id people would have rubbished his claim, if he stood up and said as such. Contrast with the cases of Zimbabwe and Ivory coast. PEV took place before the coalition and creation of prime minister. It is not the case, if he had not subserviently submitted himself to be the prime minister position, the country would have gone up in flames. By the time they were making deals the country was already burnt, smouldering. He actions to me are clearly of a person who was not sure of himself and jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism when the premier position was flashed before him.
(1) The claim is that his actions aren't inconsistent with his possession of evidence that he had won. That claim turns on the nature of the evidence: in particular, whether it was sufficient to convince a neutral observer. It couldn't have been, because he didn't follow up on his promise to produce it. But it does not follow, from the fact that he didn't produce it, that he had none.
(2) In any case, even if he had produced the evidence, ODMers had killed sufficiently large numbers of people to guarantee a full-blown civil war if he took power. The Ivory Coast example refers.
(3) Again, his not being sure of himself is consistent with his possessing evidence, but not evidence sufficient to convince a neutral observer.
|
|
|
|
Post by danieldotwaweru on Apr 30, 2012 21:45:12 GMT 3
Danielwaweru you're quite something. You have audaciously claimed there was violence by 27th. Casual reading may let you get away with so much. Are you saying violence before 27th Dec 2007 was POST-election violence? Where was this violence? All reports I've seen refer to violence breaking out after 31st Dec when Kibaki was sworn in at night. If this is another attempt to link Raila to PEV you will have to try harder.
You'll want to familiarise yourself with the Waki report, as well as other written evidence in the public domain. |
|
|
|
Post by reporter911 on Apr 30, 2012 22:16:23 GMT 3
Danielwaweru you're quite something. You have audaciously claimed there was violence by 27th. Casual reading may let you get away with so much. Are you saying violence before 27th Dec 2007 was POST-election violence? Where was this violence? All reports I've seen refer to violence breaking out after 31st Dec when Kibaki was sworn in at night. If this is another attempt to link Raila to PEV you will have to try harder.
You'll want to familiarise yourself with the Waki report, as well as other written evidence in the public domain.
YES YES !! KIBAKI WAS IN ODM THAT IS WHY HE GAVE THE POLICE THE SHOOT TO KILL ORDER ALL OVER THE COUNTRY BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER THE 2007-2008 ELECTIONS.. |
|
|
|
Post by reporter911 on Apr 30, 2012 22:19:53 GMT 3
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2012 4:37:06 GMT 3
You'll want to familiarise yourself with the Waki report, as well as other written evidence in the public domain.
YES YES !! KIBAKI WAS IN ODM THAT IS WHY HE GAVE THE POLICE THE SHOOT TO KILL ORDER ALL OVER THE COUNTRY BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER THE 2007-2008 ELECTIONS.. In that first video, the person murdered and kicked as he lay dying was Oloo's brother in law. Imagine. |
|
called dodgy characters while deliberately choosing to ignore the persuasion of the kenyan masses.
