HOW TO JOIN KUMEKUCHA'S CLUB1999 TODAY

HOW TO JOIN KUMEKUCHA'S CLUB1999 TODAY
Click on the image for all the information YOU need!

Sunday, January 04, 2009

Why The Media Bill Is The Beginning of The End For Kibaki And Raila

Based on lots of insider information

This is one of the numerous angry sms messages I received from my contacts mad as hell that any sane President of Kenya would sign any legislation similar to the Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act signed last Friday.

The said SMS read;

Greek proverb: When the gods want to destroy you—they first make you mad with power.

I cannot agree more. As you read this Prime Minister Raila Odinga has called a crisis meeting of all ODM legislators to reassess the party’s "standing in Government" this Wednesday.

But rather than join the well orchestrated campaign by the media against this bill (which affects the mainstream media the most) let us try to analyze this whole situation from a neutral point of view.

The main aim of this post is to get inside the thinking of the major players here. In reaching my conclusions I have been greatly assisted by insider information from mostly impeccable sources.

Let us start with a brief history of where this bill came from. The initial idea was born, bred and nurtured right at the heart of State House Nairobi. This is very important to grasp and you will realize why as you read on.

The first time the bill was presented in parliament during the tenure of the 9th parliament it sailed through. The media and other stakeholders appealed to the president not to sign it. The president faced with a general election where things were not going too well (to put it mildly) listened to the voters and refused to sign the said bill. And that would have been the end of it. However something happened in January last year that changed everything. So am I linking post election violence to the decision by the president to sign the bill into law? The answer is YES.

It is rather obvious that one of the reasons why ODM popularity swept across the country in the run up to the general elections of 2007 had a lot to do with the media. While the Kibaki administration has been very careful to ensure that it has a reasonably good control of the media in the country, including influencing the appointments of CEOs to major media houses, the president’s advisors watched in horror as this control was wrested from their hands. I need to explain exactly how that happened in a simple way that non-experts in media and the art of propaganda can understand.

Opinion polls are very powerful and can tilt any election. So when you control those as well as the bulk of newspaper circulation in the run up to a presidential election, you should be okay. And this was the thinking amongst PNU strategists. But of course their undoing is that they are all old school in a world that is changing too rapidly to analyze.

Take the following scenario that I personally witnessed. The newspapers, TV and opinion polls all say that a certain presidential candidate is the most popular in Kisii. A native of the area reading this at first believes it. After all it is printed in the newspapers and so it must be true. But he has a cell phone so he makes a few calls back home and is shocked at the report he receives. It is a total contradiction to what he has read in the media. And so he sends out a few sms messages and when he goes for a drink in the evening he tells his friends what he has observed. Word spreads fast. Meanwhile the newspaper that has been infiltrated and is reporting only what certain powerful people want to see reported starts experiencing problems of dropping circulation. There seems to be a shift to the rival media which also has certain vested interests. Then to make matters worse we have the World Wide Web. For Kenyans in the Diaspora this is their most convenient tool for obtaining news of what is really going on back home. The people who are on the web are very few, but my oh oh my are they influential!!! They call back home frequently and they talk to their people… and they influence them like hell.

Meanwhile something else is happening. Frustrated journalists in the mainstream media who have a conscience are quietly leaking the articles that cannot be published in the mainstream media (because of the said powerful people) on the web. And some sites are really influential and have a very wide and growing audience.

Within a short time things change dramatically. The circulation of a certain newspaper falls like a heavy stone while that of the other rises dramatically. In desperation the editors of the leading newspaper suffering circulation losses start copying the headlines of the rival paper and are amazed at how high their circulation jumps back up when they report favorably on the rival political party their bosses are up against. A clear indicator as to who is more popular on the ground.

Let me stop there and fast forward to the period after the post-election violence. Those in State House realize that control of the media was wrested from their hands and that their rival won because he was able to “manipulate” the media. They swear that that must never happen again. And so the said bill gathering dust in some shelf is retrieved and dusted and re-introduced. You know the rest of the story.

Now there is one more alarming piece of information.

PNU insiders have been talking for months about the breaking up of the coalition government. Contrary to what many Kenyans think, the collapse of the coalition does not alarm PNU insiders. In fact they look forward to it happening. Already the factors that led to the Kalenjin and Luo sticking together during and after the elections have changed. So if the coalition were to collapse today we will not see any bloodshed.

And forget what the act of parliament that made the coalition possible said. The Constitution of Kenya is still supreme and supersedes everything else. So if ODM were to walk out of the coalition next week, the president will simply form a new government (with those who want to play ball) and life will continue. PNU insiders will certainly be more comfortable with that scenario. But I doubt whether ODM will walk out. I think they will just huff and puff and stay exactly where they are. Observant Kenyans know why.

So is the Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act good or bad for the country? It has some really good parts that will promote the rapid growth of the ICT sector. But mostly it is a law that goes against the very basic principals of the constitution that promote free speech and a free media. But who cares? You see there are other factors that have now taken centre stage.

The question Kenyans should be asking is; Can Kibaki and Raila survive this?

My two cents? I don’t think so

Why? I hear you ask.

The reason is simple. Kenyans are very much awake and at the moment they are fed up with the political class (both PNU and ODM) and when you add other factors like the looming serious famine, every time I try to look into the future I shut my eyes tightly in horror.

Enjoy the latest brand new Nairobi Wi Fi Hotel

SEO training in East Africa
, trainer comes to your office.

57 comments:

Anonymous said...

Chris, Chris,

Why are you such a coward these days?

Who has scared you mpaka you have replaced your mboro with a pussy?

I can tell you one thing. The hits of Kumekucha have also fallen like a stone because you are a coward these days.

Here is the real insider information. Watch one hypocrite called Linus Gitahi.

He met with Kibaki and said the ICT bill would be a good idea as the newsrooms are full of useless Luos, and other ODMers

Wilfred kiboro also signed onto this nonsense and he discussed it with Wangethi Mwangi.

They all believe that Odinga beat them last year via the media.

Chris, don't be a pussy, check this information and you will find that is it is 1,000% accurate.

Anonymous said...

Blogger Ken said...

WHY IS EVERYONE IGNORING THE FACT THAT THIS BILL WENT THROUGH PARLIAMENT AND WAS PASSED BY MP'S BEFORE GOING TO KIBAKI FOR ASSENT????

If those ODM and PNU Shitheads proclaiming their love for Kenya and freedom of press had any sense, they would have SHOT it down in parliament and Gen. Kiguoya would not have had anything to sign.

Lets call a spade a spade. These are the facts:

1) The current crop of leaders is unfit to lead Kenya (Kibaki and Raila AND Kalonzo included)

2)The Kenyan media needs to be regulated. Medias all over the world are regulated, why not KENYA? Someone correctly put it: When they are not running after each other for s.ex, they are busy getting paid to write favorable articles for some politicians. IRRESPONSIBLE Journalism.

1/3/09 11:21 PM

Mwarang'ethe said...

Chris has said that:

And forget what the act of parliament that made the coalition possible said. The Constitution of Kenya is still supreme and supersedes everything else. So if ODM were to walk out of the coalition next week, the president will simply form a new government (with those who want to play ball) and life will continue. PNU insiders will certainly be more comfortable with that scenario.

Our Comment:

Lets recall two things first:

(a) Kivuitu has said he did not know whether Kibaki won the elections.

(b) Krieger report concluded that it was impossible to determine who won the 2007 elections. In simple words, one cannot say whether Kibaki won the elections or not. To the extent that we have sent Kivuitu home, is an acknowledgement of these facts.

So, what is the legal implication of the above points?

(a) For anyone to be legally elected the president of Kenya,the Constitution must be adhered to.

If we go by what Kivuitu and Krieger have said, then, it is obvious Kibaki was not elected as per or in accordance with the Constitution.

So, if thats the case, on what basis is Kibaki the president of Kenya? We venture to say that, he is the president only and only by the virtue of the National Accord. The same applies to the PM.

If that is the case, we would like to be educated on what legal basis, Kibaki can remain the president if the National Accord collapses.

Chris said...

Excellent points Mwarang'ethe.

Your legal thinking is clear, crisp and extremely convincing.

However where you differ with the dinosaurs seated inside State House now is that according to them Emilio was "dury erected" and is therefore the duly elected president of Kenya.

Desmond Tutu, Kofi Annan and company came for a cup of tea. Tutu had good manners and left quickly after tea. Annan and his Nigerian side-kick overstayed their welcome until Wetangula had to remind the Nigerian it was time to go back wherever he had come from.

One more point Mwarang'ethe, do you think any court in Kenya today would concur with your position?

-Kumekucha-

Mwarang'ethe said...

Chris said:

One more point Mwarang'ethe, do you think any court in Kenya today would concur with your position?

Our Comment:

If this matter were to board a train/matatu to the Courts of Law Kenya, we will like to see how these Courts shall avoid to see the truth that stands like the pyramids in the Egyptian deserts.

To the extent that the Cabinet, and more so the Legislature has adopted the Krieger Report, it is clear to all those not blinded by lack of objectivity and misplaced pride, that Kibaki was not elected in accordance with the Constitution.

We venture to argue that, any other contrary assertion, would amount to upholding the letter of the law, while stabbing and leaving the spirit of the law to an agonising death.

Anonymous said...

Chris,
Wewe bure kabisa!
Upende usipende, that dinasour sitting at the statehouse will be with you for the next four years. If you don't like it you know what to do! Raila will never be the president!!!!!!

Phil's Mistress

sereast said...

Chris,
You fail to realize that Kibs is running his last show and will exit the scene sooner than later. So in your title ".....beginning of the end for Kibaki and Raila", it doesn't matter what happens to Kibs as this is his last controversial term. Its Raila and other politicians political lives that are on the chopping board.

Its true media should be regulated but the bone of contention is, to what extent and how?

Let me point people to a comparative study on media regulation in four countries: USA, Mexico, France and Ghana (who seem to be far much better than Kenya in terms of conducting election.)

Check this out: http://www.juridicas.unam.mx/publica/rev/comlawj/cont/6/arc/arc5.htm

Vikii said...

I am not a lawyer, but I will say without battling an eyelid that Mwarang'ethe continues to sound to me like a cowboy attorney spurred by a dangerously gullible spectator in Chris.

"...Kibaki was not elected as per or in accordance with the constitution"

This is warped thinking my friend. I know this is not about the (il)legality of the Kibaki presidency, but when you choose to always flaunt your profession here, then you better make sense. In what aspect was mwai Kibaki's election at odds with th Kenyan constitution? Does Kivuitu giving an interview in some hospital bed and claiming (dismissively) that he did not know who won the election amount to an ammendment of the constitution? Does the judge Kriegler comission passing a verdict of uncertainty as far as who won goes render the provisions of the constitution inadequate?

I am asking this because, as a lawyer (if that is what you are) you should know that the constitution mandates the Electoral Commission and its chairman to oversee the election process up and till they announce the results. Samuel kivuitu did that and why anyone would consider whatever else he said either in a bar or in some hospital superior to the announcement he made on dec 30 is, quite frankly, curious.

You cannot debate the credibility of the Kibaki victory by invoking the constitution especially if you want your argument to be convincing.

I am just saying.

Anonymous said...

Chris,
Every time I see Vikki's name here in Kumekucha, I feel good. He is a breath of fresh air…mmm and a gift to ladies. Vikii is a dream man for every woman albeit we dont how he looks like, but as a Kamba he cant be bad.

Vikii said...

Now, concerning the outrage caused by the bill; I will ask a question to you, Chris, actually two;

1)If we can shun the cheap option of misusing the word "draconian" for a second, what exactly is the offensive clause in the bill? Whipping up emotions is a very easy option, but is it smart? My understanding(and its NOT authoritative) is that we are apprehensive about giving the minister for Internal security the power to raid media houses in the event of a state of emergency, no? How many times have we had a state of emergency in this country? Can the President just wake up and declare one out of the blues?

2)Do you really believe your version of the events leading to the reintroduction of the bill in Parliament?
Look here, Chris; When we made this same noise last year, it was about the clause that compelled media houses to declare their sources(yes those anonymous,impeccable sources)in the event the story triggers a suit. When the President refused to assent to the bill, he URGED Parliament to exclude that offensive provision and send the bill back to him. So we are talking about completely different propositions here. Was the clause we found offensive then done away with? We agreed then that the bill had some pretty good stuff in it. We agree today that this one has pretty good stuff too. But what exactly is the bone of contention? The media has a duty to be honest and tell the people the truth. I am afraid they are not.

Now about Raila Odinga's desire to assess the state of the coalition, well, he is absolutely entitled to do that. What I find really dumb is this little posturing as being opposed to the bill.

One, it was wrong for him to go bragging that he had compelled on the President not to sign the bill. What he is now trying to manage is the embarrassment he caused himself. You do not tell the President what to and here is why; Raila odinga is a member of Parliament who should have been in Parliament and opposed the bill on the floor. Two, he is the leader of the biggest political party and he should have marshalled his troops against it if he really cared (He has done it before on those issues he considers important). Three, he is a cabinet member and this being a government bill, he was completely in the loop. And this is why Uhuru Kenyatta told him to his face in Parliament a couple weeks ago to stop this irressponsible pretense and own up to being party to the bill.

The standard yesterday (for whatever reason) carried a story in which they tried to romp Kalonzo Musyoka in these shenanigans. If the story is true, then again this is dumb. Kalonzo Musyoka, just like Raila Odinga, has no business seeking to be consulted before the President signs the bill. He is a Member of parliament, he is the leader of government in Parliament and he is the Chairman of the House Business committee from where the bill was sanctioned. This is the kind of stupidity that is baffling.

If they have failed to do their job, what gives them the right to stop the President from doing his? I mean, come on, we can do better than this!

Anonymous said...

Chris!

Please stop posting your propaganda here.. go back and read the agreed document that formed the coalition government.. How stupid can you be or should i say foolish to bot check your facts before being a moth piece of PNU

FACTS ARE;

KIBAKI ACCORDING TO THE AGREEMENT SIGNED BY ODM AND PNU CAN NOT FORM A GOVERNMENT - AN INTERIM GOVERNMENT HAS TO BE PUT IN PLACE BY THE HOUSE SPEAKER.

So your information is bullshit and please don't use your blog to be a PNU propaganda mouth piece..

i thought better of you Chris but now you are an embarrassment to us bloggers here - stop and get facts before spewing rubbish on here.

Anonymous said...

Chris

bullshiate if ODM walked out of the coalition it is very clear- KIbaki can not form a government:)

Hey guy get your facts right!!!!!

sereast said...

Perhaps we need to borrow a leaf from the Ghanaians. They seem to have it under control.......read on.

"In Ghana, the national government plays a limited role in regulating media. Regulations are passed by Parliament, but regulations and policies are administered by government-related agencies. Moreover, the pace of legislating regulations is cautious because Parliament is hesitant about unintentionally creating a media industry that leads the country back to a military dictatorship and to stalled economic development. The Ghanaian government provides some funding for a state-owned production company, which supplies programming to the state radio and television broadcasters. Furthermore, the Ghanaian government owns the Ghana News Agency (GNA), which distributes news information primarily to the country´s print and electronic media. This situation of an emerging marketplace in which state-owned media are making adjustments to the flourishing of private media, and both private and state-owned media are attempting to upgrade professionalism, is a defining feature of the media system in Ghana.

In Ghana, the 1992 Constitution guaranteed freedom and independence of both the print and electronic media. However, up until 2000, when an opposition party unseated the party that had formed the government since 1992, journalists were routinely intimidated into refraining from criticism of the authorities. For example, a common method of intimidation was for a military official to sit in the studio during a radio or television broadcast that involved news reporting or reporting on politics. In addition, journalists were imprisoned during this period under a Criminal Seditious and Libel Law if their reporting were deemed to be undermining the State. These two conditions led many journalists to engage in self-censorship. The government elected in 2000 began the process to repeal the Criminal Seditious and Libel Law, which was done in 2001.

In Ghana, two government-related bodies are responsible for regulating the media. The National Media Commission is responsible for regulating content and the National Communication Authority is in charge of the licensing of all telecommunication industries, including broadcasters. Both of these bodies were established by the 1992 Constitution.

The National Communication Authority (NCA) regulates the technical operations of all telecommunication organizations, including wireless, cable, satellite, terrestrial, telephone and the Internet. The NCA is staffed as follows: the director general is appointed by the president or a minister with presidential authority; the directors are appointed by the Board of the National Communication Authority; and the senior managers are appointed by the directors with final approval from the Board.

One of the main areas of regulation by the NCA is licensing. All telecommunications organizations — including Internet providers — have to be licensed by the NCA. In Ghana, the State owns the airwaves, which are leased to broadcasters through licensing agreements. One of the areas in which applicants for licenses are scrutinized is religion. The NCA takes great care to ensure a strict separation between Church and State. This does not mean that radio and television stations cannot provide religious programming. Rather, the intention is to avoid approving an application for a radio or television station offering programming that is dominated by proselytizing a specific religion.

In Ghana, broadcasters and Internet service providers are licensed for one year. License renewals are obtained by paying an annual fixed fee. Normally, the only circumstance in which licenses are revoked is when a company fails to pay the fee. Licensing is not used to stipulate that broadcasters or Internet service providers carry specific content. Licensing is used to approve the technical specifications with which broadcasters and Internet service providers must operate. However, if a radio broadcaster sets up a transmitter or a signal repeater to extend the transmission of content to areas outside the zone specified by the license agreement, the NCA will often ignore the infraction. Owing to a developmental philosophy for media operations, the reasoning is that such expansions are helping to develop the industry so that radio broadcasting is extended to outlying regions receiving little or no coverage.

The National Media Commission regulates media content, but does not fall directly under any government ministry. The National Media Commission was founded mainly to insulate state-owned media from government control, and on a larger scale to promote and ensure freedom and independence for the media to disseminate information. The National Media Commission is composed of 18 members nominated by various interest groups, including religious (Muslim and Christian) denominations, associations of private broadcasters, Parliament, the president, the National Association of Teachers and the National Council on Women and Development. The National Media Commission has a limited authority for regulatory oversight for both state and private media, and for both print media and electronic media (including the Internet). However, because of a lack of financial and other resources, the National Media Commission is not able to regulate the Internet. All newspapers must be registered with the Media Commission. The registration is used only to compile a database consisting mainly of how many newspapers there are, how frequently they are published and where they are based.

The National Media Commission has the authority to propose regulations to Parliament, but not to develop regulations. Instead of focusing on regulations, the National Media Commission relies on goodwill on the part of media organizations to adhere to guidelines that it set forth. The main purposes of providing these guidelines are to establish a code of conduct for ethics and professionalism in the media, and to provide a means of arbitrating complaints made by citizens about media content. The National Media Commission promotes the guidelines by publishing them in pamphlets distributed to media organizations and by conducting workshops for media workers, particularly journalists who are in the early stages of their career.

There are three areas of content guidelines that are particularly distinctive in Ghana, most of which are oriented toward developing a self-sustaining and professional media industry that contributes to a stable democracy and helps to develop the country itself. The purpose of this larger effort is to ensure that the media act as a counterbalance to any potential government efforts to assert authoritarian control. In other words, the operating assumption is that a vibrant media industry will help Ghana continue down the path of democracy.

The first area of content guidelines is political reporting. Most of the guidelines in this area are designed to ensure free and fair campaigns and elections. The guidelines include: balancing discussion of personalities with analysis of the issues; making party manifestos intelligible to the electorate; remaining impartial; refraining from activities that compromise the integrity of the journalist; and avoiding the promotion of violent or ethnic conflict. This latter guideline fits in with the national movement to encourage citizens to think of themselves as Ghanaians first, and regional or tribal communities second. When the National Media Commission wrote this guideline it was particularly mindful of the generally accepted perception that the media had inflamed ethnic divisions in the neighboring African country of Rwanda, which resulted in a bloody civil war and a prolonged campaign of ethnic cleansing. In addition to the political reporting guidelines mentioned above, one of the more strongly asserted guidelines is that the state-owned media should, under no circumstances, endorse candidates for political office.

A second area of content guidelines is rejoinders. This guideline refers to a constitutional guarantee that if media content contains a statement about or against a person, that individual has the right to require the medium to carry a rejoinder — that is, a reply by the person in question to the statement. The preface of the pamphlet detailing the Guidelines for the Publication of Rejoinders acknowledges the precarious position of the National Media Commission in relying on the goodwill of media organizations to gain compliance: "It has not been easy enforcing the constitutional demand for mandatory rejoinders. But if the Commission is to succeed in its endeavors to persuade people not to take the media to court, then their right to rejoinders must be protected".

The rejoinder guidelines are based upon the responsibility of the National Media Commission to protect the rights of individuals from abuse by the media. The guidelines specify that: the aggrieved person or his/her authorized agent can write the rejoinder; the same prominence must be given to the rejoinder as the article or news item that made the statement; it should be made clear by the medium carrying the rejoinder that it is indeed a rejoinder; that media organizations must carry a rejoinder within a reasonable amount of time; and all rejoinders must be copied to the National Media Commission. The guidelines also state that if a rejoinder contains libelous information, the matter may be referred to the National Media Commission.

A third area of content guidelines is broadcasting standards. Some of those standards revolve around promoting a national identity for Ghanaians. For example, two guidelines urge broadcasters to promote national development as a major priority; and to facilitate the participation of marginalized individuals and communities in setting national priorities. But most of the guidelines revolve around protecting Ghanaians from harmful media content. Some of the more distinctive guidelines include ensuring that documentaries about sexual themes do not make public and explicit what should be private and exclusive; presenting drunkenness and robbery only as destructive habits to be avoided or denounced; avoiding advertisements for alcohol that claim it has therapeutic qualities; avoiding the presentation of alcoholic drinks being consumed in a working environment unless it is clear that the working day has ended; avoiding language or scenes likely to incite crime or glorify war; broadcasting programs of an adult nature after 10:00 pm; and refraining from religious programming that attacks or ridicules other religions.

The National Media Commission does not have strong enforcement powers for the guidelines it promotes. The Commission does not have the power to levy fines or withdraw licenses. The main procedure for gaining compliance with the guidelines is an arbitration process headed by a Settlement Committee. This process involves the hearing of a case between the aggrieved party and representatives of the relevant media organizations. In 2003, 47 cases went before the Settlement Committee. If a judgment is reached in favor of the aggrieved party, the Settlement Committee will request that the media organization publish or broadcast a retraction, an apology, or the findings of the Committee. For example, one case involved a complaint by the ownership of a hotel against a newspaper headline titled `How Top Hotels duped Ghanaians´. This case was resolved when the newspaper published a retraction of the association of the hotel with the allegations in the story. Often the Settlement Committee sends out a press statement with the preferred wording to be published or broadcast. Though the Committee relies on the goodwill of media organizations to accede to the request, the outlets almost always comply — in large part to avoid government becoming more actively involved in media regulation. If the Committee does not find in favor of the aggrieved party, then the complainant can take the case to the Supreme Court — but not until the Settlement Committee has reached a judgment."

Comparing Media from Around the World
Robert McKenzie, East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania

Anonymous said...

Chris

We as Kenyans all Know the facts are Kibaki did not win the elections Period so people talking about the paid for and bought ECK by Kibaki are wasting their time

Second if ODM walked out of the coalition then an interim government has to be put in place by a committee headed by the speaker of the house. no party can be in office when the coalition is dissolved and those are the facts

For you to even say that Kibaki will remain an illegal president if and when the coalition dissolves show as that you have no idea what you are posting here or you refuse to post facts on this blog.

Please go and read the signed coalition agreement between ODM and PNU or get one of your lawyer friends to translate it for you.. or better still go tell your PNU informer to get their facts correct..
there is noway PNU can ran the country alone if ODM walks out.. silly you -you forget that happened after the 2002 elections with Narc after the thieving kibaki got into power with the help of Raila last time- he turned around and threw the whole team out of government and replaced them with his own cronies..

Annan and ODM new better never to give this kibaki senile thug another chance to do the same.

Kibaki is heading out of the statehouse he rigged himself in for good this time.. and Kenyans are very ready for an Interim government without Kibaki and his thugs... he has fatted around statehouse enough. boy do I hate this murderer... Kibaki should be hanged like Saddam Hussein period!!

Anonymous said...

sereast

First Kenyans must remove the Illegal kibaki from office then sit down and work out the new Kenya that most kenyans voted for on 27th December 2008 - if we had the Party Majority of kenyans voted for today. then all those problems would be none existance.
like someone mention here ODM must walk out of the coalition - I guarantee you Kenyans will support them 100%
Kibaki must be frog marched out of the office directly to Hague. We as kenyans do not want a murderer in statehouse first and foremost and secondly he is a senile thug who rigged elections by ordering the police to shoot innocent kenyans to give him time to be sworn in at night(the thief that he is)

I repeat ODM must walk out of the coalition with immediate effect..it is not working the senile murderous thug called kibaki is taking kenya back to the dark ages of Nyati house oppression for kenyans speaking the mind and the truth about a corrupt government called Kibaki Anglo leasing, Charter house, Grand Regency, Transcentury(Rift Valley Railway lines) and many more corrupt deals kibaki has his relatives and cronies stealing from the Kenyan people-
This must stop -

Kenyans this is 2009 we must force Kibaki out now!!! now!!

Anonymous said...

Hi Chris/ Kumekucha !!

my sources on the ground and I will tell you very clearly here my uncle is a PNU minister they are shaking and praying that ODM does not walk out of the coalition this weekend starting Friday there have been calls none stop I hear to some ODM members asking them to refuse the walk out by their leader Raila if intact that is what he plans to do.

I also Know for a fact through my uncle that Ababu is going to lead this group of ODM MP's who will go against any Raila's suggestion and I can also confirm that Martha Karua did meet with Ababu last week( I had whispers that lots of money exchanged hands- for what I don't know but one can guess)

Yes I can confirm Chris that PNU and Narc-K MP's are running scared- some of the comments i overhead from my uncle is that Kibaki is in his last term and he doesn't seem to care if the coalition collapses, that he is only listening to a few advisers who seem to be giving him wrong information on the mood of kenyans.
This my friend Chris is from my uncle who it a top minister in the PNU side of the coalition government

Please address your post and your informer who is not stating facts to you from the PNU party- I will keep you posted later since there is a meeting going on now at my uncles house with very interesting persons.' i have already said too much here already" - but the beauty of the blog. one can never guess who my uncle is. by the way I don't support any of the parties. I believe strongly both have failed kenyans.

Kimi Raikkonen said...

Mwarang'ethe, please stop spreading your ODM+ positive and infectious contagion.

You say:

"Kivuitu has said he did not know whether Kibaki won the elections"..

But the fact is that Kivuitu went ahead and declared Kibaki the winner and sealed the announcement by affixing his signature AND presenting the winners certificate. Kivuitu has not claimed he was forced by anyone to do so. Does what he said by the roadside before therefore trump what he approved of officially later? Please use your commonsense before you posture as Johnny Cochran.

You then go on to say:

"Krieger report concluded that it was impossible to determine who won the 2007 elections. In simple words, one cannot say whether Kibaki won the elections or not"...

Well, it then follows that neither can you determine that Raila won either. Your point is therefore meaningless, and utterly hilarious, if you are really a lawyer that is.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Vikii said...

I am not a lawyer, but I will say without battling an eyelid that Mwarang'ethe continues to sound to me like a cowboy attorney spurred by a dangerously gullible spectator in Chris.

Our Comment:

(a) You are not a lawyer. What are you Sir?

(b) "... without battling an eyelid..." This statement should have been,"without reasoning."

(c) Vikii said: "...but when you choose to always flaunt your profession here, then you better make sense."

Our Comment:

Well said. What profession do you flaunt here everyday Sir? And, how much sense do you make?

Vikii said:

In what aspect was mwai Kibaki's election at odds with the Kenyan constitution?

Our Comment:

Firstly, Chapter II, Part 1, section 5, subsection 5, para. E of the Kenyan Constitution provides that:

"the candidate for President who receives a greater number of valid votes cast in the presidential election than any other candidate and who ...shall be declared to be elected as President."

Secondly, if we confirn ourselves to Krieger report what do we make of the above requirement.

We all know this, having perused all the evidence he was given by the ECK and others, he and other members of his commission, came to the conclusion that it was IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE who won the 2007 elections.

From where we stand, that means this. The Krieger Commission, charged with investigation of the disputed 2007 presidential election, was unable to determine the candidate who had obtained/received a greater number of valid votes cast in the presidential election than any other candidate.

Now. Since we never went for another election to determine the winner/candidate who would have received the greater number of valid votes, how does Kibaki meet that requirement when we do not know who won Sir?

And, if the National Accord were to collapse, what will prevent Raila as well from declaring himself the president since we have from Krieger Commission report, adopted by the Parliament, that we do not know who got more valid votes between the two?

Mwarang'ethe said...

Kimi Raikkonen said...

Well, it then follows that neither can you determine that Raila won either. Your point is therefore meaningless, and utterly hilarious, if you are really a lawyer that is.

Our Comment:

There lies the danger. To the extent we do not know who won, what will prevent Raila from asserting he won?

And, if he were to do so in the event that the National Accord collapses, what will be the consequences?

Vikii said...

Good questions, Mwarang'ethe.

First I am not anything. I went to school where they taught me a little bit of actuarial Science. I went to another school where they taught me a lttle bit of business. I am currently attending another school and they are teaching me politics, or so they claim. In between these schools, I was a CFA candidate. I guess I still am. may be maybe not.

Now have I always flaunted all these? until today when i am asked these questions? I do not have to tell you that I went to Gothenburg, Mwarang'ethe, inorder to sound smart.

When you quote Judge Kriegler's findings as evidence that there was a constitutional breach in the election of Kibaki, I can only laugh at the pedestrianism of such an argument. It speaks a lot of doom when we start looking up to Judge Kriegler for the interpretation of our own constitution.

The greater question that you need to ask yourself is whether the ECK was the only constitutionally mandated body to manage the elections. If yes, then yours is a moot allegation. Very moot, sir. Were they constitutionally empowered to release the results? And did they do it?

When you talk about the candidate who wins the most valid votes, mmhhh, well some sense there. But who determines this "valididty"? Election petitions (again if you are still interested in what's constitutional and what's not) are handled by the High coourt. This is the arm of government that should determine the authenticity of the ECK announcement. They determine whether the candidate who was declared winner met the conditions; did he win a plurality of the vote as required? Did he get at least 25% in at least five provinces? In the absence of a petition questioning all this, the verdict of the Electoral Commission stands. Talking about it here and invoking Kriegler's name in the discussion is not different from the kind of talk we engage in at the mutura joint.

But that's the beauty of living in a free society where every Tom, Dick, Prick and Meat can say all they want.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Vikii Said:

When you quote Judge Kriegler's findings as evidence that there was a constitutional breach in the election of Kibaki, I can only laugh at the pedestrianism of such an argument. It speaks a lot of doom when we start looking up to Judge Kriegler for the interpretation of our own constitution.

Our Comment;

(a) The issue is very simple. The two parties agreed in an Accord, witnessed by the international community and passed/endorsed by the Kenyan Parliament to have an independent commisison, headed by a judge to offer the final answer/verdict to the disputed presidential elections.

That commission came back with a final verdict. It was impossible to say who won.

That simply means we do not know who met the Constitutional requirement we quoted above.

Thats the fact you must live with Sir. That Verdict, has huge constitutional implications. You may seek to deny the same, but, thats up to you.

(b) Thus, the issue of election petition does not arise at all. The fact that an independent commission agreed by the two parties has given its verdict, means the issue of election petition does and cannot arise. How that can arise, you better educate us Sir.

All the other issues about who was supposed to release elections results etc are of no relevance to this issue.

The question that you have not answered is this:

(a) In the face of Krieger verdict that we do not know who got the majority of valid votes as per the Constitution in the 2007 election, which has been:

(i)accepted by the Cabinet headed by Kibaki;

(ii) endorsed by the Legislature;

- on what legal basis Kibaki the president?

- And, on what basis is Raila the PM?

Kwale said...

Mwarang'ethe,

Kibaki was elected president of Kenya under a constitution and was sworn in as president as the constitution states, and that's makes him a legitimate president. Whether election was stolen or not that is entirely a different argument!

And, on 28 February 2008, Kibaki and Odinga signed an agreement on the formation of a coalition government in which Odinga would become Prime Minister. Under the deal, the president would retain presidential powers, both executive and legislative (head of state & the government) and also appoint cabinet ministers from both PNU and ODM camps.
And so, if ODM was to walk out of the coalition, Kibaki would still remain a LEGITIMATE president.

Anonymous said...

Mwarang'ethe and Vikii

ha!!ha you are both very hilirious.. what is there to debate?

facts are Kibaki rigged the elections no questions about that even ECK now confirms that. secondly the coalition was only put in place to stop Kibaki using his government machinery called the police and the army to stop the slaughter of innocent kenyans all the way from Nairobi through naivasha, nakuru, kisumu, kakamega, eldoret to Mt. Elgon.

Now my advise to both of you is to post here suggestions how kenyans can frog march Kibaki and his murderous cronies namely Michuki, Karume, Martha Karua, Uhuru and others to the Hague... trust me it will happen they can hide behind the government today but tomorrow will will get them however long it takes us ordinary kenyans.. it happened with Ethiopia(Mengistu) Saddam( Iraq) Idd Amin Uganda- Bosnia murderers and many other leaders who slaughtered their citizens in the name of staying in power by force..
na mambo bado kibaki must pay for killing our children he must!!!!!

Anonymous said...

anon1:36 PM

Yups says Kwale the PNU mouthpiece on here..

Kibaki will not be in statehouse for a minute if and when the ODM walks out maybe in your dreams- or maybe in the dreams of central province goons. We as kenyans will show you how that will not happen.. he rigged and killed. do you really expect Kenyans to let Kibaki to put more shiate in th statehouse toilets?? over many more dead bodies.. in mass we will remove him watch and wait for action - do you really think kenyans are scared of kibaki and his army of thugs?? think again - we will not accept a murderer in office. Raila in fact blundered that is what most kenyans who voted in the winning party ODM think and we are ready to role Kibaki out of office straight to Hague to answer on crimes against Kenyan citizens.

The coalition will be no more and Kibaki will be out on his butt!

Mwarang'ethe said...

Kwale said...
Mwarang'ethe,

Kibaki was elected president of Kenya under a constitution and was sworn in as president as the constitution states, and that's makes him a legitimate president. Whether election was stolen or not that is entirely a different argument!

Our Comment:

To be elected under the Constitution and sworn in as the president, as you put it, means that one must have obtained the majority of valid votes.

Our Comments:

If we can agree up to that point (above), the question u need to answer is this.

The two parties agreed to set am impartial commission to investigate the disputed elections. That Commission came back with a verdict that it was impossible to say who won.

So, if that is the case, on what basis will he remain a legitimate president?

Mwarang'ethe said...

To Kwale, Vikii et al

Perhaps, we would well if we quote the National Accord.

The Preamble provides this:

Preamble:

There is a crisis in this country. The Parties have come together in recognition of this crisis, and agree that a political solution is required. Given the disputed elections and the divisions in the Parliament and the country, neither side is able to govern without the other. There needs to be real power sharing to move the country forward.

A coalition must be a partnership with commitment on both sides to govern together and push through a reform agenda for the benefit of all Kenyans.

Our Comment:

- What is a partnership in legal terms? And, how is it dissolved?

- What is the meaning of political solution?

More so:

The Accord says:

Description of the Act:

An Act of Parliament to provide for the settlement of the disputes arising from the presidential elections of 2007.

Our Comment:

It should be obvious from the above that the settlement of the electoral dispute was entrusted to Krieger Commission.

Thus, the nortion of petitions in the Kenyan High Court is just utter utter nonsense. It cannot arise.

Further more, the Accord provides:

6. The coalition shall stand dissolved if:

(a) the Tenth Parliament is dissolved; or

(b) the coalition parties agree in writing; or

(c) one coalition partner withdraws from the coalition by a resolution of the highest decision-making organ of that party in writing.

8. This Act shall cease to apply upon dissolution of the tenth Parliament, if the coalition is dissolved, or a new constitution is enacted, Whichever is earlier.

Our Comment:

If we look at the Preamble, it says that due to the crisis, no side can govern on its own. What has changed to make it possible for Kibaki to govern alone?

We know that before this Accord, Raila considered himself the president. Is he not entitled to do so again if the coalition is dissolved in the face of the Krieger Report which is endorsed by this Accord and an Act of Parliament?

Simply, it is not as simple as you imagine. This is a legal minefield and we should be very careful. Otherwise, we might plunge our nation into another round of violence.

Kwale said...

Mwarang'ethe,

Was this commission set up to determine who won?

Socialist said...

For ones though not supporting the action I agree with Kibaki.What ODM is today campaigning about is illogical and lacks any merit.When a bill is passed in parliament what is left is the president's signature.Any appeal made to the president is left with him to decide.ODM has 104 elected parliamentarians.Where were they when this bill went through?Is ODM using this bill as a platform to reconnect with the masses?
Both Raila and kibaki are not worthy to lead Kenyans.Time is up for both!

Vikii said...

"Simply, it is not as simple as you imagine. This is a legal minefield and we should be very careful. Otherwise, we might plunge our nation into another round of violence."

Brilliant!

President Mwai Kibaki is happy with the way the coalition is being run. And believe you me, Mwai Kibaki is careful. He has no plans whatsoever of walking out of the coalition. He has not called his party's NEC to agonise over spilt milk and such other little liquids.

But the problem is that he cannot control what anyone else thinks or wishes. In the event anybody was to walk out, then of course we will be happy to cross that bridge when we get there. And I do not even know why such threats should be given so much thought and prominence. Let whoever wants to bolt do it. Quick please!

All this hot air was aparently reignited by Mwai Kibaki's signing into law the Kenya Communications Bill. So now, are we trying to stop the President from exercising his cnstitutional mandate? Are we also under the illusion that the President needs to consult anyone before assenting to or vetoing bills that are passed by Parliament, a Parliament controlled by those now baby-crying? Come on fellows, someone needs to get serious here.

Kwale@ 2.13, thank you. That's a brilliant question. I didn't know Kriegler was charged with determining a winner. Interesting stuff these guys come up with.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Kwale said...
Mwarang'ethe,

Was this commission set up to determine who won?

Kwale@ 2.13, thank you. That's a brilliant question. I didn't know Kriegler was charged with determining a winner. Interesting stuff these guys come up with.

Our Comments:

If you cared to read, you would have come across these statements about Krieger Commission.

But, since you do not appear to have read, or, if you read u did not understand, the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation INDEPENDENT REVIEW COMMITTE's Terms of Reference said:

"... mandated to investigate ALL ASPECTS of the 2007 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS and make FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS to improve the electoral process.

Our Comment:

Mark the words, ALL ASPECTS.


its KEY ACTIVITIES, inter alia were:

(c) Investigation into the VOTE COUNTING and TALLYING for the ENTIRE election with SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS in order to ASSESS THE INTEGRITY OF THE RESULTS and make recommendations for improvements, adjustments or overhaul of the system.

(i) Any other TASKS that the IREC may deem necessary for the fulfilling its mandate.

It is shocking and disturbing to say the least to read someone asking a question like that of Kwale and Vikii.

One must ask, do Kenyans care to read? And, if they read, do they understand simple English?

Anonymous said...

Why are you ignoring the facts that Kibaki refused to sign the same bill in 2007 before the elections because he knew kenyans would not accept such a bill - and that bill was a hand piece of the Narc- corrupt government which was using force to oppress kenyans - Kibaki is still in the dark ages times when he was in Kenyatta and Moi's governments when the government oppressed and executed, jailed journalist and any kenyans that were not afraid to speak the truth on government corruption!!

this is a speech in 2007 from Kibaki on the same bill...
you Ken are clueless!!

Vikki, Mwarang'ethe,Socialist, Kwale and the rest of Kibaki PNU mouthpieces-

can you tell us why Kibaki refused to sign the same bill before the elections of 2007??? or is it because you refuse to accept facts as they are that Kibaki is a dictator and has been since he was serving under Kenyatta and Moi governments?? wasn't he in the front line when Moi was executing and Jailing journalists???

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Kenya president refuses to sign bill that would force journalists to disclose sources


Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki has refused to sign a bill that would give courts the authority to force journalists to disclose confidential sources.

The Media Bill 2007 also establishes an independent council to adjudicate complaints against the media, but Kibaki specifically objected Wednesday to clause 35 subclause (4), which he said "could act as a great inhibition of press freedom and undermine the democratic strides we have made as a nation." The provision reads:

When a story includes unnamed parties who are not disclosed and the same becomes the subject of a legal tussle as to who is meant, then the editor shall be obligated to disclose the identity of the party or parties referred to said Kibaki in 2007.. Kibaki is a thug and he must be removed from statehouse period! kenyans have spoken. ODM must walk out of the Coalition that is run by thugs and thieves. Look around you what has Kibaki done for the people of kenya (IDP's- hunger, unemployment e,t,c and yet his cronies bellies are bulging to the fullest on state funds that they keep stealing.
enough is enough .Kibaki will not stop our freedom of speech .

Anonymous said...

LET KENYANS REMIND YOU!! THIS WAS KIBAKI'S BIG MOUTH THEN!!


Thursday, August 23, 2007

Kenya president refuses to sign bill that would force journalists to disclose sources


Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki has refused to sign a bill that would give courts the authority to force journalists to disclose confidential sources.

The Media Bill 2007 also establishes an independent council to adjudicate complaints against the media, but Kibaki specifically objected Wednesday to clause 35 subclause (4), which he said "could act as a great inhibition of press freedom and undermine the democratic strides we have made as a nation." The provision reads:

When a story includes unnamed parties who are not disclosed and the same becomes the subject of a legal tussle as to who is meant, then the editor shall be obligated to disclose the identity of the party or parties referred to said Kibaki in 2007..

Anonymous said...

LET KENYANS REMIND YOU!! THIS WAS KIBAKI'S BIG MOUTH THEN!!


Thursday, August 23, 2007

Kenya president refuses to sign bill that would force journalists to disclose sources


Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki has refused to sign a bill that would give courts the authority to force journalists to disclose confidential sources.

The Media Bill 2007 also establishes an independent council to adjudicate complaints against the media, but Kibaki specifically objected Wednesday to clause 35 subclause (4), which he said "could act as a great inhibition of press freedom and undermine the democratic strides we have made as a nation." The provision reads:

When a story includes unnamed parties who are not disclosed and the same becomes the subject of a legal tussle as to who is meant, then the editor shall be obligated to disclose the identity of the party or parties referred to said Kibaki in 2007..

Anonymous said...

ANON2:08 PM

Better a nation where people are fighting for their freedom and rights than have an oppressive Kibaki government in office.

We Kenyans are ready to go that route.. do not use fear mongering here.. who started the bloodbath in December 2007 " Emilio Mwai Kibaki" as far as most Kenyans feel.. this murderous thug has no right being in office( he should thank George Bush for being in statehouse) - but Kenyans have had enough. Kibaki must go period!! ODM must walk out of the coalition that is the feeling of the majority of kenyans!

Anonymous said...

anon2:34 PM

Vikii

a thief does not have constitutional rights. get that straight kibaki rigged elections he is no better than Robert Mugabe-

His butt is not fit to be in office- kenyans know this guy is a danger to Kenya's progress and healing. Kibaki must go.

Mwarang'ethe said...

To summarise, the Krieger Commission, established by an Act of Parliament of Kenya to look into the 2007 electoral dispute, in accordance with the National Accord agreed by the:

- Two parties;

- signed and witnessed by the international community;

did ASSESS THE INTEGRITY OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RESULTS.

Its conclusion. With the evidence provided by ECK and others, its verdict was that it was impossible to know the winner. Thus, the results announced by the ECK lacked INTERGRITY. What can be more clear than this fellow Kenyans?

It is on this basis, we ask once again:

- on what legal basis can Kibaki continue to be the president if the coalition is dissolved when a Commission he has agreed to was unable to say he won?

- what in hell and heaven would prevent Raila from proclaiming he is also the president since the winner remains unknown?

Anonymous said...

anon3:07 PM


Mwarang'ethe.(don't equate Raila to Kibaki... Raila is not a thief- he won the elections fair and square- who listens to ECK(who now we hear from sources within the same officials that some were paid through offshore accounts- to help rig Kibaki in office)


Kenyans know what is going on. Raila has to level with them. Kenyans know that. Raila has to accept that fact. Kenyans are waiting to hear his explanation for the facts leading to that sad reality. Raila has to confess to Kenyans that his hopes and dreams of that principled partnership has been brought to zero by the reality on the ground.If the circumstances merit the dissolution of the GCG, Kenyans will tell him to walk.

Those who are begging for this madness to be resumed because they think Kibaki is now out of the woods are making a big mistake. If they dare the country to confront them, they will get what they want. Kibaki should remember Kenyans went out in the streets in mass to protest and fight for their democratic rights in December 2007 through February and kenyans are not scared to go back to the streets.

This time it will not be about ODM or whatever it will be about removing the illegal kibaki from statehouse- when people are pushed against the wall and refused their democratic rights by an oppressive government then the reactions you get is called legit.

Anonymous said...

anon 3:34,

when quoting someone else's sentiments be sure to quote that person's name please. Thank you.

Kwale said...

Mwarang'ethe,

You are right, I understand English, but that is irrelevant, the fact remains the commission was not set up to determine who won the election. According to Judge Kriegler on Commission's role he said and I quote, "Don't expect us to come up with the result of who won the election", he uttered those words before the commission started the proceedings back in April last year.

Anonymous said...

anon4:13 PM

You sound like Kibaki now.. gag media now you want me to tell you my source of information?? we Kenyans (for the democracy and justice unlike you PNU goons) don't snitch on our informers so that Kibaki can get them executed or locked up at Nyati house dungeons but he know kibaki prefers executions without trails.. example Mungiki youths more than 500 executed by kibaki without face court trails

my friend if you are a kibaki mouth piece here go tell him his days are numbered in statehouse!

Anonymous said...

4:38 PM

Kwale? so why did Kibaki appoint him and pay him a huge fee for no work done if indeed he already knew the results of his commission before he start? I call this Kibaki's usual corruption and using government funds to hide his rigging but it hasn't worked has it??? Pole sana to Kibaki..

This senile Kibaki fool must be removed from office without delay ODM must get out of this sham of a coalition now.

Anonymous said...

Kwale,

does the statement ' it is not possible to tell who won', mean anything to you? Obviuosly according to you panuaists it means the sloth won fair and square, but we all know who the real winner was don't we?

Vikii said...

4.52, I have to answer you. This "we Kenyans" nonsense is so off the mark. You need to talk of "ODM supporters" or something like that. Your insinuation that we are not Kenyans for refusing to be identified with that party is not only wrong, it is offensive.

Yesterday I went to this sports bar with some Kenyan who had travelled from Toronto and we talked about the post election violence. He said that most of those stonning people, burning churches and uprooting railway lines didn't care about what happened to the country because "biologically they are not Kenyans, but Sudanese".
That, my friend, is called bigotry. Yours is also some bigotry, but in a rather weird form.

I am not a Member of the PNU, i am not a member of the ODM (and that's a good thing), I am a member of the ODMK and I am as Kenyan as they get. Those in Shirikisho are Kenyans as well. Enough of this nonsense of ODMers riding in this bloody delusional train of being Kenyan than anyone else. 'Fuck you very much, sir'

Anonymous said...

Let me give you THREE scenarios:

(A) 1982- AG Njonjo drafts a "single party" clause which is presented to Parliament by VP Mwai Kibaki and passed by less than 40$ of MP's. This single clause changes the positive future of Kenya by banning freedom of expressions, association and makes Kenya a POLICE STATE. By 1984, AG Njonjo is kicked out and VP Kibaki is sacked by 1988. They spend the next 5-10 years agitating for return to MULTI-PARTY and thousands of Kenyans lose their lives, their properties, are EXILED abroad and numerous corruption takes place (Goldenberg) as MOI uses the NJONJO-KIBAKI clauses to rule by FORCE. Voice of Kenya (VOK later Kenya Broadcasting Corporation) is used as an effective tool to FOOL the masses (especially the rural ones and outside the big-2 tribes) who vote MOI and KANU back time and again.

(B) 2002- CKRC under Ghai has developed a relatively good Katiba which separates powers of the presidency with parliament, some FORM of decentralization (devolution), Land REFORMS, recommends PM office and enhances Electoral Laws and Judiciary Independence. Almost all the major political parties (KANU, NDP, DP, Ford, SDP, SAFINA, KENDA, etc) are in agreement UNTIL the pact is presented to the Kalenjin Mafia who shut it down and convince MOI to disband the CKRC just before the 2002 elections. By 2007, the Kalenjin elites (who went on to lose the 2002 elections) are crying for the SAME constition which has devolution and separates powers and includes LAND REFORMS.


(C) 2008- Kibaki forces return a defeated Media-Control Bill (defeated in 2007) back to Parliament and sneak in conditions to GAG the media and ensure Govt control of Media content. ***Prediction*** In 2013, MP's Kabando wa Kabando, Dr Nguyai, Esther Murugi, Sam Poghiso, Dan Muthama, etc will be on the streets FACING TEARGAS after TEARGAS when the next regime (MAY NOT be led by a person from Central Province) tramples their rights and the MEDIA (they had gagged) wont cover them.

Whats the message Im sending?:
------------------------------

WHAT YOU CONSPIRE IN BLINDED-REVENGE TO ENACT WILL COME BACK TO HAUNT YOU BIG!!!

In 5 years all those here yelling loud in support will have figured out the reality.

Thats how in THEIR FOOLISHNESS, the Kiambu Mafia of 1960-70's created MOI and the Kalenjin-Mafia of the 1980-90's created KIBAKI and the MKM-Mafias of the 2000's will create the next monster. AND EACH MONSTER HAS GONE ON TO DEVOUR AND ANNIHILATE THE MONSTERS BEFORE IT.

KK said...

It is quite amusing watching some tribal apologists of Kibaki falling over themselves trying to justify his rash and inconsiderate assent of this piece of legislation.

One would have thought that having discredited himself by the very act of blatantly stealing an election, Kibaki would have come out and given Kenyans and his coalition partners an unqualified assurance that henceforth they may look to him for goodwill.

But no.

The man is busy hatching!! each and every egg of crime, tribalism and impunity that his accomplices/ apologists have laid for him.

What we are seeing is the usual vanity and offensive traits of that man in State House and his apologists too. These are familiar acts that Kenyans have come to witness – but never accustomed to – over the six years. The vices have kept on growing and taken on the character of CRIMINAL ACTS in the conduct of public affairs ……i.e. Arturs, Grand Regency, election theft et cetera! Et cetera! The unconstitutional pretenses of these crimes are obvious to all.

They cannot see beyond the little, the petty and contemptible personal interests – at the expense of what is good for the nation. All of their thoughts are now withdrawn from Kenya and are currently concentrated on preserving the tribe in power.

Let us not deceive ourselves. Kibaki’s pen that he uses to issue directives is increasingly becoming an “implement of war and subjugation” of Kenyans – the very last arguments that any Mugabe-like figure resorts to. A free press is really not to be drawn into such controversy that Kibaki has pulled the country in. It is undoubted as the right of walking on earth.

I ask, is it not the purpose of this act to force the press into submission? Can these Kibaki apologists assign any other possible motive for it? Has Kenya got any enemy in our part of the world to call for this accumulation of senseless powers on the Internal Security Minister?

No she has none.

The law is directed at Kenyans. It can be meant for no other purpose. It is meant to bind and rivet the free Press and citizens. Let us not be deceived. All those chains which Kibaki has been forging for the last six years are being brandished!

Let ODM and other forces of good governance in Kenya not deceive themselves any longer. Kenyans did everything they could to avert the storm. They petitioned, demonstrated, and implored Kibaki.

But their petitions have been slighted and treated with contempt.

KK said...

It is quite amusing watching some tribal apologists of Kibaki falling over themselves trying to justify his rash and inconsiderate assent of this piece of legislation.

One would have thought that having discredited himself by the very act of blatantly stealing an election, Kibaki would have come out and given Kenyans and his coalition partners an unqualified assurance that henceforth they may look to him for goodwill.

But no.

The man is busy hatching!! each and every egg of crime, tribalism and impunity that his accomplices/ apologists have laid for him.

What we are seeing is the usual vanity and offensive traits of that man in State House and his apologists. These are familiar acts that Kenyans have come to witness – but never accustomed to – over the six years. The vices have kept on growing and taken on the character of CRIMINAL ACTS in the conduct of public affairs ……i.e. Arturs, Grand Regency, election theft et cetera! Et cetera! The unconstitutional pretenses of these crimes are obvious to all.

They cannot see beyond the little, the petty and contemptible personal interests – at the expense of what is good for the nation. All of their thoughts are now withdrawn from Kenya and are currently concentrated on preserving the tribe in power.

Let us not deceive ourselves. Kibaki’s pen that he uses to issue directives is increasingly becoming an “implement of war and subjugation” of Kenyans – the very last arguments that any Mugabe-like figure resorts to. A free press is really not to be drawn into such controversy that Kibaki has pulled the country in. It is undoubted as the right of walking on earth.

I ask, is it not the purpose of this act to force the press into submission? Can these Kibaki apologists assign any other possible motive for it? Has Kenya got any enemy in our part of the world to call for this accumulation of senseless powers on the Internal Security Minister?

No she has none.

The law is directed at Kenyans. It can be meant for no other purpose. It is meant to bind and rivet the free Press and citizens. Let us not be deceived. All those chains which Kibaki has been forging for the last six years are being brandished!

Let ODM and other forces of good governance in Kenya not deceive themselves any longer. Kenyans did everything they could to avert the storm. They petitioned, demonstrated, and implored Kibaki.

But their petitions have been slighted and treated with contempt.

Anonymous said...

anon5:56 PM

Vikii
sorry I can't funk myself since I'm a lady unlike you, by you talking like Kalonzo Musyoka cheap language on here won't help you my dear- ODM-K?? the prostitution party paid for and bedded by Kibaki to keep him in office!! Move on girl you have nothing to tell kenyans - you might as well go to Ukambani and look for some unga for your starving Kamba tribesmen - this is what your leader can not provide for his own people- remind me how long has Kalonzo been in government?? Moi time as a foreign affairs minister he did nothing for the Kamba people- the shame is on both of your asses.. Now if you want to talk about ODM facts are they won the 2007 elections hands down... that is what you can't swallow - you my friend have no voice in kenya- ODM-K's role is to wipe Kibaki's ass when he kunia's mavi- and be his mouthpiece- Majority of Kenyans know the facts!! Kibaki bought Kalonzo musyoka your malaya leader stock and barrel when he gave him the VP position- hey I understand in the negotiations Kalonzo the malaya asked for a new Hammer( this directly from his own wife's mouth why showing off to some lady friends- `` that is the cheapest deal I have ever heard of for selling out his own countries democracy system to help put a thieving thug in office.as for you vikii with the posts you post here.. you are a malaya like your Kalonzo Musyoka- shenzi sana.

Anonymous said...

Kenyans must wake up!!!!!!!!

1. Kibaki must be stop if ODM is too scared to do so then Kenyans must stop this dictator called Kibaki

2. Kibaki has destroyed kenya since he come to power in 2002 he has supported and abetted corruption
(Kibaki must go)

3. Kibaki is the worst leader in the history of East Africa worse than Idd Amin - Kibaki orders execution of kenyans without giving them a fair trail(more than 500 Mungiki youth executed and dumped in forests and ditches since 2006-

4. Kenyans must wake up- to the true reality of this dictator and thug called Kibaki who rigged himself in statehouse
(Kibaki must go)

5. ODM has let down the people of Kenya by allowing kibaki to get away with theft of 27th December election, allowing kibaki to order the police to shoot innocent KENYANS TO DEATH.(Kibaki must go)

ODM - have let down Kenyans allowing Kibaki to sign on a media bill which takes our beloved kenya back to the dark ages- Freedom of press is a must for the interests of the kenyan people( Kibaki must go)

ODM must stop taking for granted the goodwill of the Kenyan people who voted for them and made them win the elections(which they allowed Kibaki to rig)

Now ODM must act .. Kenyans are ready to act with or without ODM
if ODM have no balls to stop Kibaki we will..

Kenyan are tired and we are ready to go on the street in mass to stop this Kibaki madness and if Kibaki thinks he will Kill our families this time round tell him to think again this time we will wipe out his own family,, Kibaki is a murderer and he most be stopped . the Kenyan people are demanding that !!enough is enough
KIBAKI MUST GO - KIBAKI MUST BE STOPPED. KIBAKI IS A DANGER TO KENYA`S PEACEFUL TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY.

Anonymous said...

I maintain ODM Must walk from the coalition kwani what happened to their balls!!! This guys are afraid of an Old Senile fool called Kibaki the thieving thug who rigged the 27th December 2007. The same Kibaki who tole the elections denying kenyans their right to democracy by stealing their votes- Hey ODM when will you guys wake up to the fact that you don't have to be in a coalition with Kibaki's PNU party which as for now most kenyans know that Kibaki does not have the best interest of our dear country out at heart!!

What!!!

By signing the media bill to gag the press??? get real and wake up . Kenyans are ready for the streets Look at Thailand they did it..

My dear Kenyans let us block all the airports and any offices plus statehouse - we have to stop this thug called Kibaki to stop destroying our beloved country..

From now the media has to give Kibaki and the government(PNU) a black out. do not report any anything about Kibaki to Kenyans but report any shoddy deal and corruption that him and his cronies are upto..do you need as ordinary kenyans to give you the information?? remember we have brothers, sisters, uncles, Aunties, cousin working in all parts of government and yes they have sold information on the most corrupt government in the History of kenya!!

Kenyans must act now! Kibaki must be stopped.

Vikii said...

Well, this is the kind of "unlearnedness" that sets us apart from you guys. It is exactly this kind of laughable stuff that you guys spew in fora like these that gets us thinking; 'well do I want to be this kind of sorry-ass motherfucker, NO'.

There is one thing that I always ask myself. The Presidential candidate and subsequently the Party leader of the ODM is Raila Odinga. This man comes from the tribe that we have grown up being told are the most educated of all tribes. Well, I have always disputed it and that's the exact kind of 'education' that I do not need. Someone needs to prove themselves to me. Both this so called party leader and his followers have a lot to prove. I am looking for fellas that are just average in their thinking. Please upgrade, K?

Is there anybody in this blog who can talk from their head as opposed to talking from their anusses? You guys are talking from your asses. ODM people, please drop by the Starehe boys centre library on your way to the Eastleigh cyber cafes that you post from. HELLO!

Fuck this!

Anonymous said...

Anybody disputng whether Kibaki is the President, consitutionally, once you are sworn in as the President by the Consitutional authority, you are the President irrespective of the means and you can jail for life any other person claiming so. Thats how even Museveni assumed Presidency of Uganda after a coup. Kibaki hit Odinga by first having ECK announce him as leader, and then immediately gets sworn in as President. By the way, Odinga never dared declare himself asPresident after that, coz probably now he would be under treason charges. That is the constitutional law. It may suck, but is the constitutional order worldwide. Odinga only challenged the way of election of the President, but never said "I am the President." The Kenyan Constitution knows only one President, and will only protect one person to that claim, one Mwai Kibaki, unless there is a successful coup de tat, or he willingly resigns, dies, the High Court annuls his election or he personally dissolves the government.

On issue of ODM pulling out and calling for dissolution of government and parliament, honestly,(which I still doubt whether can lead to that) how many MPs from ODM are ready to face the people for a fresh mandate? We all know that 80% pee on themselves when they think of an election, given their current greed.

Also remeber as we speak we got no ECK to preside over elections, and only God knows when we shall have one given the current infighting in government that pulls in all directions especially on elections body that is very central to the election of the next president.

Kimi Raikkonen said...

Mwarang'ethe says:

'..There lies the danger. To the extent we do not know who won, what will prevent Raila from asserting he won?..
And, if he were to do so in the event that the National Accord collapses, what will be the consequences?..'

What is the possibility of Raila doing so in the first place? Is he man enough to live with the consequences of such a risky decision? Personally, i would prefer we have a new election so that Raila can be put in his place by Kalonzo.

Mwarang'ethe said...

Kimi Raikkonen said...
Mwarang'ethe says:

What is the possibility of Raila doing so in the first place? Is he man enough to live with the consequences of such a risky decision? Personally, i would prefer we have a new election so that Raila can be put in his place by Kalonzo.

Our Comment:

We warn thee. Do not fall into the fallacy of reaching wrong conclusions or leaving the original issue.

Ours, was to demonstrate that Kibaki has no legal basis whatsoever, to remain the President, unless as a dictator who has imposed himself on the Kenyan people, were the National Accord to collapse. We have done that.

You, Vikii and others have failed to educate us on what other basis he is the President, apart from the strength of the National Accord.

Anonymous said...

does anyone know of any other fearless sites coz chris, honestly you're a coward! I dare you to come out and say everything you know and the everything that is the truth! be an honourable kenyan chris!

Anonymous said...

The post by Anon. 1/4/09 6:42 "Three scenarios from anonymous..." has hit the nail on the head! Nothing more need to be said!

Kimi Raikkonen said...

Mwarang'ethe, the National Accord draws its legitimacy from the original constitution itself, which is the basis of holding an election in the first place and whose outcome was in dispute.
To the extent that the National accord was arrived at in order to resolve that dispute, it gives Kibaki legitimacy as President precisely because that is the capacity in which he put his signature to the document, AS PRESIDENT, NOT AS KIBAKI! This is a position Raila himself has recognized, because he agreed to the subordinate title of Prime Minister, unless you want to say the Prime Minister is another name for President or that he is as powerful as the President, which he isn't.
Under the National accord therefore, Raila has no basis whatsoever to refer to himself as President. If he insists on referring to himself as President, an idea majority of Kenyans disagreed with going by the 2007 election results, then the best way to resolve this is for Raila to tear up the accord, walk out of the coalition and we go to another election. That simple, that clear.

Anonymous said...

Fellows , fellows , fellows
Before you spill your vitroil in this forum , please pull a copy of the peace accord and you will see why kibaki is so confident , the issue of the coalaition breaking was not adressed adequately .It clearly says that the president will continue in office and form a government based on the current constitution.

Google
 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...