|
Post by justfacts on Nov 7, 2011 21:46:42 GMT 3
Kamalet,
Why would you bring up longevity in this forum as some filter on who/what one can post? I believe a new and fresh perspective is a good thing. Secondly, attacking the person and not the content of their post is the preserve of lesser sites that pal around with hate speech and the avoidance of that is what makes this forum stand out. I come here to pick minds and share opinions on national issues not for a lesson in web etiquette Omwenga would do well to leave it as such. A link to the said rules in one of his blogs would have done the trick though I sometimes get a nagging feeling of an attempt to piggyback on this board’s popularity to drive traffic to his cyber abode. Why can’t we leave rules of procedure to parliament and lawyer? In any case we do have a moderator whose preserve is to weed out those falling short of minimum standards of civility.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Nov 2, 2011 21:52:25 GMT 3
Where and how this started:
Who:- -Sensationalized the story by suggesting the project funding was cancelled yet it was reallocated.
-Suggested that this was as a result of the WB routine review (which it severally called an audit then an investigation to give it a criminal slant) yet it was due to Government request.
- Reported that the funds were misappropriated yet the WB said they may have been misallocated.
-Could not decide on a figure so went on to quote 4.3 bn, 37m, 33m……. …….and counting.
-Relied on a leaked report which is not in itself wrong for public interest sake but twisted it beyond its original meaning that the WB saw it fit to issue a statement suggesting it did not want to be used as a tool in misinformation.
It is naïve to imagine OPM is corruption free; politicians are in their element to jump on the tidal wave of misinformation for political capital- that is their meal ticket. But DN deserves to give an apology for these clear points of misreporting. That is of course a long shot, but selling Kenyans a WB ‘report’ only for its alleged author to refute its representation only confirms what we already know. DN can do better than trying to ‘will’ corruption into existence.
This episode taken in the context of BILLIONS lost through Anglo Leasing, Triton, LAICO….. its a pity that our focus is trained on battles however mundane or baseless based on personalities involved and forget we are losing the real WAR ON CORRUPTION and sliding into being a NARCO/FAILED STATE.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Oct 28, 2011 20:50:15 GMT 3
Sheng or not deadly and Uhuru should not appear on the same sentence given the current events for it is a tag that can evoke even among the most casual of potential voter the negative claims made against this candidate.
And who would in Kenya elects a prezzo because of a fancy URL anyway. This could make sense as a nice hobby for its creators but in Kenya the good old 'massive rallies' and TV/Radio is what will move the voters if at all.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Oct 28, 2011 20:33:50 GMT 3
Dr Mazrui talked about this when he said of we are a collection of ‘tribal nations’ (people with common history, language and culture) residing under the state (boundary of authority) of Kenya. We fight hard to get ‘our man’ into the state house so that he/she can skew tax revenue collected from entire state in favour of our ‘tribal nation’. Abdulnasir introduced an alternative name for it- ‘developmental corruption’ where because money is not plainly going into a few people pockets then there is no talk of corruption in the traditional sense. He gave the example of Thika road and opined that economic sense of improving the Nairobi Mombasa highway was simply outweighed by desire to reward the ‘GEMA nation by the incumbency out of collective tax basket of the state. This developmental corruption is the driving force of our politics and the need by politicians to have one candidate for their region (who is quickly installed tribal elder) so that they gunner the numbers needed to manage state funds and are expected to loot it in a clean and perfect crime that no audit will ever be commissioned about. It is this type of corruption that informs the phobia of domination of smaller tribes by big ones (and they come no bigger than the GEMA nation) and the majimbo and secession talk at the coast. After all if we lack enough numbers to play this game of getting our man on the house on the hill then why not focus on ensuring our taxes remain on their territory?
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Oct 20, 2011 18:44:54 GMT 3
ICC bashing goes on……. that is how this man earns his pay……..But I have to give him one prop………The defamation case does not seem to worry him one bit……….He is still mocking his accusers……That is either bravado masking nervousness, but more likely…… Comfort in the knowledge of the gray area Cyber space has in our laws……..Very easy for a judge to rule either way and get away with it………Hakuna haja ya…..Muthaurasque solid legal defense kitty………. one or two civil servants as defense witnesses blah blah blah……. Hii ni Kenyan style tu…… just buy the Judge/police and be done with it……..Hakuna Judge Trendy presiding hapa....
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Oct 18, 2011 15:53:27 GMT 3
You are mistaken destiny, i am not Daniel, but thanks for the welcome.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Oct 18, 2011 12:25:31 GMT 3
Did Anyone Notice This
The headline on October 14 2011 Daily nation article stated “Ocampo links Raila to poll violence” but the first paragraph of the article states the contrary that:
“One of the International Criminal Court Prosecutor’s witnesses accused Prime Minister Raila Odinga of financing the post-election violence”
So was it Ocampo’s claim or the witness’s claim?
The author goes further to confirm that Ocampo has no proof about Raila’s link to the violence a fact Ocampo has stated before:
“Ocampo however argued before the ICC judges that though the witness said in his statement that the PM was informed of the planning and gave money to Mr Ruto and Mr Kosgey, it is not proof that Mr Odinga was the head of the network that organised and executed the crimes”.
Propaganda is based on suggestions not fact and is intended to gets a life of its own besides its dissonance from facts. Was the headline calculated at driving a point home? The fact that it contradicts the body of the story could be to the author besides the point, his mischievous aims having already been met.
If that be he case, a very likely thing given DN's past record then this is another case of propaganda aimed at stroking the negative passions of those who hold their political allegiance to some or all of the Ocampo 6 or who feel Raila should have been in the dock. The factual headline: Ocampo Witness links Raila to poll violence probably fell short of the author/editor value threshold for propaganda. Knowing Ocampo’s word bears more weight they made a deliberate substitution of the word witness with Ocampo .
Simply put, take:
Ocampo Witness links Raila to poll violence==>add Propaganda it becomes ==> Ocampo links Raila to poll violence
P.S. My first post.
|
|