Archive for January, 2007
Moral rot in Kenyan media: NMG in good company
“It’s crazy and sad, but I’m glad something is finally happening (about NMG),” is what a top-notch journalist friend had to say the moment he heard about the reported troubles at NMG.
Both Kumekucha and Kenyapolitical had some excellent write-ups on the incident; Kumekucha went as far as linking to an alleged letter from disgruntled NMG employees regarding the matter.
My journalist friend was one of my mentors in the trade in my days as a cub reporter at my alma mater’s student newspaper.
He – alongside a few others that also included Aco – was part of an editorial team that remains legendary in the history of Kenyan student journalism: They were just great!
In those days (till a while after I graduated), we used to print our student newspaper with the NMG; it was thus not unussual for some of our lead stories to appear in the NMG’s flagship publications.
But that’s besides the point…my journalist friend, and several others in his editorial team, naturally found themselves interning at the NMG; it’s this crowd that has helped launch some of the NMG’s outstanding products over the past few years.
My first visit to Kimathi Street was on the invitation of this journalist friend and another of his colleagues (a female, also from my alma mater); they were a happy lot at the time.
The next time I buzzed Kimathi Street, both – and scores of others – had left the NMG, citing sexual harassment from some of their seniors.
It is a miracle 2 of the seniors mentioned at the time continue to hold top editorial positions at NMG, pontificating once every week (yes, they are that important) on this or the other issue in society.
The NMG is not alone in this quagmire.
When I wanted to intern, I also applied to the NMG; I passed their aptitude test with flying colours but got no reply regarding when I could begin my duties (Trainning Editor at the time, Mr. Frank Whalley – a good man by all standards, I can’t fault him – could barely hide his suprise when I suggested that I had not heard from the NMG concerning my fate).
I walked away from the NMG to nearby Standard; two female colleagues from my university who had also “failed” to satisfy the NMG accompanied me.
At the Standard, the 2 ladies still “failed” to satisfy another top editor, so they ended up at the People Daily where – desperate for reporters but cash-strapped – they were an easy take for Kenneth Matiba’s media empire.
As for me, I refused to leave the newsroom (from around 8:30 am) till I met the Group Editorial Director (at around 1:00 pm).
When he called me into his office, he asked me to define journalism, went over my media portfolio and asked me to report for work immediately.
I had – graciously – succeeded where others had so “failed.”
My stint in the mainstream media would later impress on me the fact that the moral rot in the industry is mind-boggling to say the least; and it is not just about loose zips!
A clergyman friend often says that – in his prayers – he sees the NMG building along Kimathi Street collapsing one of these fine days.
How that will happen – or is happening – is something I pondered about somewhat the moment the latest tales emerged.
Staying Married Is Not About Staying in Love, Part One
Via Dr. John Piper
January 28, 2007
By John Piper
Read, listen, or watch this resource on our website.
Genesis 2:18-25
Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” 19 Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22 And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” 24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
Between our more substantial sermon series I am taking up a few subjects that seem to me to be urgent. Marriage is always urgent. There never has been a generation whose view of marriage is high enough. The chasm between the biblical vision of marriage and the human vision is, and has always been, gargantuan. Some cultures in history respect the importance and the permanence of marriage more than others. Some, like our own, have such low, casual, take-it-or-leave-it attitudes toward marriage as to make the biblical vision seem ludicrous to most people.
Jesus’ Vision of Marriage
That was the case in Jesus’ day as well, and ours is vastly worse. When Jesus gave a glimpse of the magnificent view of marriage that God willed for his people, the disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10). In other words, Christ’s vision of the meaning of marriage was so enormously different from the disciples, they could not even imagine it to be a good thing. That such a vision could be good news was simply outside their categories.
If that was the case back then with the sober, Jewish world in which they lived, how much more will the magnificence of marriage in the mind of God seem unintelligible to the world we live in, where the main idol is self, and its main doctrine is autonomy, and its central act of worship is being entertained, and its two main shrines are the television and the cinema, and its most sacred genuflection is the uninhibited act of sexual intercourse. Such a culture will find the glory of marriage in the mind of Jesus virtually unintelligible. Jesus would very likely say to us today, when he had finished opening the mystery for us, the same thing he said in his day: “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. . . . Let the one who is able to receive this receive it” (Matthew 19:11-12).
The Biblical Vision of Marriage
So I start with the assumption that our own sin and selfishness and cultural bondage makes it almost impossible to feel the wonder of God’s purpose for marriage between a man and a woman. The fact that we live in a society that can even conceive of—let alone defend—two men or two women entering a relationship and with wild inconceivability calling it marriage, shows that the collapse of our culture into debauchery and barbarism and anarchy is probably not far away.
I mention all this in the hopes that it might possibly wake you up to consider a vision of marriage higher and deeper and stronger and more glorious than anything this culture—or perhaps you yourself—ever imagined. The greatness and glory of marriage is beyond our ability to think or feel without divine revelation and without the illumining and awakening work of the Holy Spirit. The world cannot know what marriage is without learning it from God. The natural man does not have the capacities to see or receive or feel the wonder of what God has designed for marriage to be. I pray that this message might be used by God to help set you free from small, worldly, culturally contaminated, self-centered, Christ-ignoring, God-neglecting, romance-intoxicated, unbiblical views of marriage.
Marriage Is the Display of God
The most foundational thing to see from the Bible about marriage is that it is God’s doing. And the most ultimate thing to see from the Bible about marriage is that it is for God’s glory. Those are the two points I have to make. Most foundationally, marriage is the doing of God. Most ultimately, marriage is the display of God. Let’s allow the Bible to impress these things on us one at a time.
1. Marriage Is God’s Doing
First, most foundationally, marriage is God’s doing. At least four ways to see this explicitly or implicitly are here in our text.
a) Marriage Was God’s Design
Marriage is God’s doing because it was his design in the creation of man as male and female. Of course, this was plain earlier in Genesis 1:27-28, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.’”
But it is also clear here in the flow of thought in Genesis 2:18-25. In verse 18, it is God, not man, who decrees that man’s solitude is not good, and it is God himself who sets out to complete one of the central designs of creation, namely, woman and man in marriage. “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” Don’t miss that central and all important statement: God himself will make a being perfectly suited for him—a wife.
Then he parades the animals before him so that he might see that there is no creature that qualifies. This creature must be made uniquely from man so that she will be of his essence as a human created in God’s image as Genesis 1:27 said. So we read in verses 21-22, “So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman.” God made her.
This text terminates in verses 24b-25 with the words, “They shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.” In other words, it is all moving toward marriage. So the first thing to say about marriage being God’s doing is that marriage was his design in creating man male and female.
b) God Gave Away the First Bride
Marriage is God’s doing because he personally took the dignity of being the first Father to give away the bride. Genesis 2:22, “And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.” He didn’t hide her and make Adam seek. He made her; then he brought her. In a profound sense, he had fathered her. And now, though she was his by virtue of creation, he gave her to the man in this absolutely new kind of relationship called marriage, unlike every other relationship in the world.
c) God Spoke the Design of Marriage into Existence
Marriage is God’s doing because God not only created the woman with this design and brought her to the man like a Father brings his daughter to her husband, but also because God spoke the design of marriage into existence. He did this in verse 24: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Who is talking in verse 24? The writer of Genesis is talking. And what did Jesus believe about the writer of Genesis? He believed it was Moses (Luke 24:44) and that Moses was inspired by God so that what Moses said, God said. Listen carefully to Matthew 19:4-5: “[Jesus] answered, ‘Have you not read that he [God] who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said [Note: God said!], “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”’”? Jesus said that Genesis 2:24 is the word of God. Therefore, marriage is God’s doing because he spoke the earliest design of it into existence—“A man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
d) God Performs the One-Flesh Union
Which leads us to the fourth way that marriage is God’s doing: Becoming one flesh, which is at the heart of what marriage is, is a union that God himself performs.
Verse 24 is God’s words of institution for marriage. But just as it was God who took the woman from the flesh of man (Genesis 2:21), it is God who in each marriage ordains and performs a uniting called one flesh that is not in man’s power to destroy. This is implicit here in Genesis 2:24, but Jesus makes it explicit in Mark 10:8-9. He quotes Genesis 2:24 then adds a comment that explodes like thunder with the glory of marriage. “‘The two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”
When a couple speaks their vows and consummates their vows with sexual union, it is not man or woman or pastor or parent who is the main actor. God is. God joins a husband and a wife into a one-flesh union. God does that. God does that! The world does not know this. Which is one of the reasons why marriage is treated so casually. And Christians often act like they don’t know it, which is one of the reasons marriage in the church is not seen as the wonder it is. Marriage is God’s doing because it is a one-flesh union that God himself performs.
So, in sum, the most foundational thing we can say about marriage is that it is God’s doing. It was his doing:
- because it was his design in creation;
- because he personally gave away the first bride in marriage;
- because he spoke the design of marriage into existence: leave parents, cleave to your wife, become one flesh;
- and because this one-flesh union is established by God himself in each marriage.
A glimpse into the magnificence of marriage comes from seeing in God’s word that God himself is the great doer. Marriage is his doing. It is from him and through him. That is the most foundational thing we can say about marriage. And now we will see that it is to him.
2. Marriage Is for God’s Glory
The most ultimate thing to see in the Bible about marriage is that it exists for God’s glory. Most foundationally, marriage is the doing of God. Most ultimately, marriage is the display of God. It is designed by God to display his glory in a way that no other event or institution is.
The way to see this most clearly is to connect Genesis 2:24 with its use in Ephesians 5:31-32. In Genesis 2:24, God says, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” What kind of relationship is this? How are these two people held together? Can they walk away from this relationship? Can they go from spouse to spouse? Is this relationship rooted in romance? Sexual desire? Need for companionship? Cultural convenience? What is this? What holds it together?
The Mystery of Marriage Revealed
The words “hold fast to his wife” and the words “they shall become one flesh” point to something far deeper and more permanent than serial marriages and occasional adultery. What these words point to is marriage as a sacred covenant rooted in covenant commitments that stand against every storm of “as long as we both shall live.” But that is only implicit here. It becomes explicit when the mystery of marriage is more fully revealed in Ephesians 5:31-32.
Paul quotes Genesis 2:24 in verse 31, “‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’” And then he gives it this all-important interpretation in verse 32: “This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.” In other words, marriage is patterned after Christ’s covenant commitment to his church. Christ thought of himself as the bridegroom coming for his bride, the true people of God (Matthew 9:15; 25:1ff; John 3:29). Paul knew his ministry was to gather the bride—the true people of God who would trust Christ—and betroth us to him. He says in 2 Corinthians 11:2, “I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.”
Christ knew he would have to pay the dowry of his own blood for his redeemed bride. He called this relationship the new covenant—“This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Luke 22:20). This is what Paul is referring to when he says that marriage is a great mystery: “I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.” Christ obtained the church by his blood and formed a new covenant with her, an unbreakable “marriage.”
The most ultimate thing we can say about marriage is that it exists for God’s glory. That is, it exists to display God. Now we see how: Marriage is patterned after Christ’s covenant relationship to the church. And therefore the highest meaning and the most ultimate purpose of marriage is to put the covenant relationship of Christ and his church on display. That is why marriage exists. If you are married, that is why you are married.
Christ Will Never Leave His Wife
Staying married, therefore, is not about staying in love. It is about keeping covenant. “Till death do us part,” or, “As long as we both shall live” is sacred covenant promise—the same kind Jesus made with his bride when he died for her. Therefore, what makes divorce and remarriage so horrific in God’s eyes is not merely that it involves covenant breaking to the spouse, but that it involves misrepresenting Christ and his covenant. Christ will never leave his wife. Ever. There may be times of painful distance and tragic backsliding on our part. But Christ keeps his covenant forever. Marriage is a display of that! That is the most ultimate thing we can say about it.
I have so much more I want to say at this point. So I have decided to stay with this topic next week. Here is where we will go, Lord willing. Genesis 2:25 says, “And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.” Why does the biblical story of the foundation of marriage end on that note just before the Fall? The answer will lead us, I think, to some very practical counsel that I pray will help us in our marriages fulfill the great purposes God has for us.
For now, would you pray with me that God will replace in the church and in our land self-exalting, marriage-destroying, unbiblical commitments to cater to our emotional desires with Christ-exalting, marriage-honoring, biblical commitments to keep our covenants?
Daniel – Engaging with a World
Via the London Institute for Contemporary Christianity
To these four young men God gave knowledge and skill in every aspect of literature and wisdom; Daniel also had insight into all visions and dreams.
My father-in-law was a faithful hard-working Christian, who helped found a church, and was Sunday school superintendent and church secretary for many years. But he never voted, and viewed much of the world’s activities as something to be avoided. When we trotted in from university full of the sociology and economics we were studying, his response was ‘The world by wisdom knew not God.'(1Cor 1:21) He thought there were better things to do!
Daniel, forcibly removed from his God-focussed society into comfortable but restrictive house arrest in a pagan land, did have a few choices. He could have refused to cooperate and been intransigently hostile, probably ending up dead or enslaved. He could have simply given up, accepted total defeat and obediently done what he was told.
Instead he and his friends went to the enemy’s schools, learnt to function in an alien culture and language, read the literature and engaged with the worldview. But at the same time they chose to maintain their independence as the servants of the one true God. Daniel decided to refuse the food allocated them from the king’s kitchens. And because ‘God allowed Daniel to receive favour and compassion from the palace master’, they were permitted to live on vegetables. They established their independence and essential difference from the enveloping and swamping totality of the imperial culture and social world of the palace, with an act of self-effacing humility and self-discipline, without rancour, or disdain for their captors. And after their training, no one was found to compare with them. They were now in a position to influence events within the throne room of a powerful king.
Someone once said that Christians in the world are sometimes chameleons, fading into the colour of the culture, sometimes ostriches with heads in the sand avoiding all contact, and sometimes porcupines, confronting with hackles raised. But Daniel chose to understand the world he was in, to respond with courtesy and friendship to his captors, but to establish his credentials as a servant of the living God.
How do we respond to the world we inhabit?
Margaret Killingray
Inconvenient truths?
Following what NTV has conveniently taken to calling the Bishop Wanjiru soap opera, I chatted up an old, leading evangelical friend on his impression of the state of affairs. I got his permission to share bits of our conversation here.
Q. First it was Bishop Wanjiru. Now it is Pastor Muiru. Are you next?
A. The Church needs to pray. This may be a year of rest and transition but the Church must fight for what is on God’s heart. The two clerics declaring their candidacy is both a good and bad sign. It’s good because evangelical Christians are increasingly waking up to their public responsibilities, responsibilities towards the state and other members of society. Suddenly politicians – both in government and the opposition – as well as mainstream Churches are feeling threatened; both have been calling the shots for long. Regardless of the evangelicals’ performance at this year’s General Elections, the next government is not going to have an easy time. A similar trend emerged in 1980s America during the Reagan administration. The American evangelicals who are listened to today emerged during those years, painstakingly building their political capacity and galvanizing the average American Christian. The result was the emergence of an effective lobby movement. You can’t ignore evangelicals in America. You can’t ignore their Judeo-Christian heritage either. We need to be moving towards a similar direction. We need to be involved in business and politics. Let us not just talk. To change rotten systems in our country, we will have to get involved. If we can fight in our country’s disciplined forces, then cetainly we should immerse ourselves into other aspects of Kenyan public life.
Q. And what bad signs do the latest developments portend for the country?
A. Some spooky folks are likely to get into political office, causing great embarassment not just to evangelicals but also the country. We must be vigilant enought to guard against that; every Kenyan should be vigilant. Spooky folks are not going to help this country.
Q. I take it that is your impression of both Wanjiru and Muiru?
A. Muiru’s evangelistic popularity is no guarantee that he will win the seat. However, I was and still remain confident that Wanjiru will make a good politician. But she will need some PR help so as not to sound preachy.
Q. What do you make of her latest tribulations?
A. I suspect more and more people will want to mess her up. This lady just wants to get married. Why is the media fixing her?
Q. Are you implying that she offers no one an explanation in the matter at hand?
A. Her triumphant attitude was not realistic. God still loves Mr. Kamangu (Wanjiru’s alleged, enstranged husband). But I also take it that Mr. Kamangu is on someone else’s errand against her. I mean – just look at how fast he got his official paperwork processed – I have not been able to process birth certificates for my daughter, born just under a decade ago. Surely the government cannot have suddenly become benevolent. But it is good all this is happening now. She’s not the first person to mess up. I also think we must reach the point of not listening to the media. They want a good story but not in truth, lies and the veracity thereof. There are many sides to the Wanjiru story that are not being explored. We will need people who can tackle real issues.
Q. What stood out for you as the story unfolded?
A. It didn’t suprise me that most leading clergymen didn’t side with Wanjiru. Some of the leading voices in the Church in the country are either pro-government or Freemasons (names with-held). Some of those siding with the opposition are also Freemasons (names with-held). Freemasons have their own interests in the country’s political, social and economic affairs (wikipedia has a contestable list of some in the society). Either way, Wanjiru was not going to get support from some of the people one would have expected to naturally stand by her. I found it odd that the Church could be so quiet when one of their own was being tossed about.
Q. And what struck you about the reportage?
A. Never antagonize the media unless you have your facts right; I guess that is a lesson we could all do with for now. The Nation Media Group, KISS 100 FM, Classic FM and sometimes Royal Media have tended to be generally anti-Christian in their editorial stances for long. I didn’t expect that to change in the Wanjiru story. I’ll tell you this: If Wanjiru was a Sheikh, the fuss would have been non-existent.
Q. Any red flags regarding what is unfolding on the political scene?
A. We should not for once imagine that we can change our nation through politics alone, – we should thus spread our engagement to other aspects of Kenyan public life. Secondly, going into politics without laying spiritual networks is dangerous as well as being extremely naive. It is naive to go into politics without accepting that some of your opponents are witches, high degree Freemasons and Satanists, etcetras.
Q. What does Christian engagement in the country’s politics portend for the future of both the Church and the Kenyan state?
A. It is important to note that many Christians today want to get involved in their country’s politics because of their frustation with the Narc dream that never was. In this journey, believers will do well to learn from William Wilberforce: He did his political homework and the Church stood by him. The Church in Kenya will need to release believers whom God has prepared for the challenge of public service through politics. But it will also need to walk with them in that journey. There, however, exists the real danger that the Church could so easily ignore its Biblical mandate to preach the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ in the process.
Q. What practical things can the Church do to prepare its membership for the political challenges before the nation?
A. Has God called us to politics / governance? Has He given us a strategy? We need to go back to the basics as we ask ourselves some of these questions. We need to teach our people about politics; we are wrong to think the need for that ceased after the 2002 General Elections. Churches need to conduct civic education; such a task should not be left to the government and interested NGOs / civil society. Let’s not vote for people just because they are our tribesmen, or because they bribe us, or because they claim to be Christians like ourselves. God is honoured when there is righteousness in the land. Let us make right decisions.
Q. What would be the practical implications of what you are suggesting?
A. Take the troublesome issue of CDFs. This is our money, not some MPs’ pocket money. That should and would change if we did our stuff right. We should also not reach a point at which we think Narc-Kenya is so bad and ODM-K are our saviours. We have sincere Christian believers on both sides. And we have devils on both sides too. Christians should therefore not defend the indefensible, regardless of the parties to which they belong. Some Christian politicians in Narc-K are not helping President Kibaki at all; continually making matters worse for him and our country.
Q. What do you make of President Kibaki’s recent appointments to the Electoral Commission of Kenya?
A. There is one dangerous possibility here. If Narc-K wins the upcoming elections with the ECK as it is currently composed, there is a high likelihood that the results will be rejected. These elections are critical to the future of this nation.
Q. What is God’s heart on the unfolding political developments?
A. Where are the prophets of God? No one is hearing from the Lord for us. No one is hearing what the Lord is saying to the Church in Kenya. It is not proper that anyone should speak his or her own mind and attribute that to God. We need to listen and know what sort of Kenya God wants as opposed to what just Narc-K and ODM-K might have for us. But in our quest for God’s voice, we will need to be very discerning. There is a difference between charisma and annointing. Kenyans should not be swayed by some Church gymnastics.
Q. How important is 2007 to the Church in Kenya?
A. 2007 is year of completion and rest. There is a big fight in the spiritual realm for the heart and soul of this country. Change won’t happen without a fight. God is going to expose some religious and political leaders in the process. Few political leaders, for instance, are going to return to office in January 2008 regardless of what they plan, say or do.
Q. What major issues are going to stick out for you ahead of the campaigns?
A. The constitution. The constitution would help us respond to insecurity, inflation, graft, etc. The constitution is going to remain as a major issue, regardless of what some in the political echelons do. A constitution defines how we deal with each other and the issues that face us as a nation. We cannot wish that away. We need to deal with our judiciary, legislature and executive. We cannot place our faith in feeble individuals; we need strong institutions. Having a Christian Chief Justice has been nothing to write home about for us as a nation. Cases still lag, miscarriage of justice continues, etc. Kenyans might speak less, but they are witnessing all these seemingly insignificant things. And they ae going to count at the polls.
Why I support Raila Odinga
*Editor’s note: I welcome more letters from readers wanting to support any presidential candidate of their choice. I love short pieces. I love original work. I greatly appreciate genuine, even if feeble, attempts at sobriety and a sense of proportion in analysis. I worry less about your ability to communicate in the English language, – anyone on nodding terms with it will tell you that only a few folks can play around with it so well.
By MOSES OTIENO
I will support Raila Amolo Odinga for the presidency. I believe he has the best qualities compared to the incumbent.
Kibaki’s greatest undoing has been his inability to make all Kenyans feel like they are members of the Kenya family. Being a president is akin to a polygamous father.
My experience with polygamy is that the father should be a unifying figure and should not favour any house at the expense of another.
When dinner is served, he calls all the children and eats with them at the same table. He does not allow the members of the first house to bully and taunt members of the other houses.
He listens to all the children, and counsels them equally regardless of whether they are rich or poor. When a child gets out of line, he rebukes the miscreant but still insists that he eats at the same table.
Kibaki has failed in this test. He has allowed his lieutenants to engage in ethnic jingoism and to exclude other communities from the national dinner table.
He has given more attention to the rich children who can afford to buy shares at the Stock market, and forgotten about the poor ones who rely on fishing and cotton for a living.
He has repeatedly reminded us that Kenya is a “man eat man” family, where “pumbavu’s” whose mothers are out of favour will be disinherited by the favoured ones.
The children who have dared criticize his style have found themselves disowned and expelled from the dinner table.
Raila Odinga gives me confidence that he can heal the divisions that threaten to tear apart the Kenya family.
He has been consistent in the only thing that matters, and that is the pursuit of justice, equality and freedom.
He has been unjust to other causes that conflict with this pursuit; and anyway, if anything was contrary to justice, equality and freedom, would a true patriot embrace it?
By switching parties and making alliances several times, Raila has shown us that he will not waste time in demagoguery that leaves Kenyans worse off.
None of the other contestants in the presidential race has committed their lives to this struggle, including the incumbent.
They have made their careers and money by stepping on our bent shoulders. Raila is the only freedom fighter in the race.
Besides political credentials, he is the only industrialist in the group, and this proves that he will have the industrialization needs of this nation close to his heart.
He has experienced the throes of dictatorship more than any other, and he has articulated devolution, separation of power and a people’s constitution as the remedy to the excesses of the ruling class.
These are qualities that will spur the greatest economists, planners and other professionals in the civil service to steer Kenya beyond economic recovery to real growth.
The Kenya family requires a father who will ensure that equity and justice prevails, no matter how many wives or children there are, or whether the family is rich or poor.
This is the promise we see in ODM-Kenya, an inclusive vehicle where all the children can eat at the same table.
Thank you for helping to stop the killing in Darfur
Dear JM,
Thank you for emailing President Bush and UN Secretary-General Ban to urge them to do more to stop the genocide in Darfur, Sudan.
Already hundreds of thousands are dead, and more than 2 million men, women, and children have been driven from their homes. But if we can convince our leaders to make Darfur a priority, we can save hundreds of thousands of lives.
Please help us spread the word about this crisis before it is too late for more Darfuris.
Simply forward the message below to your friends and family and urge them to join you in standing up for the people of Darfur.
Thank you again for your help.
—————-PLEASE FORWARD MESSAGE BELOW——————–
Did you know that 2.5 million people have been driven from their homes in Darfur, Sudan? Each day, they face threats that are hard for us to even imagine including rape, disease, and starvation.
These people need our help to put an end to the genocide and they need it NOW.
Please join me in taking the first step to stopping the violence.
Together, we can make a difference in the lives of millions of people in the region who desperately need outside help.
The Save Darfur Coalition is urging the international community to prevent further killings, displacement, and rape by deploying the UN peacekeeping force that has already been authorized, strengthen the understaffed African Union force that is already in Darfur, establish a no-fly zone, increase humanitarian aid, and ensure access for delivery of food, medication and other essential supplies.
Please do not stand by while the violence continues – you can make a difference. Click here now to get involved.
Then please forward this message to your friends and family and ask them to join you.
If you’d like to make a donation to support the campaign, click here now.
Thanks for your help.
———————————————————————————————
Donate to Help Save Darfur
Help build the political pressure needed to end the crisis in Darfur by supporting the Save Darfur Coalition?s crucial awareness and advocacy programs. Click here now to make a secure, tax-deductible online donation: http://www.SaveDarfur.org/Donate
Icabod, – the glory isn’t here! (part II)
Someone appears determined to bring Wanjiru down kabisa, the dramatic developments at JIAM earlier today notwithstanding.
Priveledged sources intimate that at least one Kenyan media house is known to have dispatched reporters to South Africa to rake the muck just a little more.
Brings to mind a similar attempt by a Kenyan media outlet to damage-control for the powers-that-be at the height of the Aturs saga.
Motivated by human and public interest?
Perhaps.
Again, perhaps not.
Icabod, – the glory isn’t here!
Bishop Margaret Wanjiru shot herself in the foot, quite literally.
An unbridled arrogance and over-confidence that has sometimes characterized evangelical zeal blinded her eyes to a situation that called for serpentine wisdom and dove-like humility.
A leading journalist friend in one of the country’s leading media outlets was fast, a day after the story broke, to draft a disparaging e-mail about her sprituality and politics which did the rounds.
It was difficult for me not to see politics in what was unfolding, I told him as much when he sounded me out on the same, though I ceded that Wanjiru had been easy fodder when it began hitting her.
At the time of this posting, there appeard to be an emerging sense in which she had began coasting to political recovery, extensive as the damage might have been.
I still think she represented one of the best possible hopes of ousting the incumbent in Starehe, much as I had my own questions about what her candidacy – as indeed that of similarly inclined Christians – would portend for the Fourth Republic.
Another leading journalist friend – good upstairs, Christian and all – had expressed interest in the seat in question a year ago, though he appeard unlikely to get a good groundswell owing to his ethnic background.
Untill he makes up his mind, Wanjiru might be the only possible alternative for the constituency, assuming of course that Jimnah Mbaru makes no return.
In the meanwhile, like wily Bill Clinton, she must conquer the demons of her past once and for all.
My barber – who fellowships at JIAM – isn’t amused at her antics at all.
And neither too are some of my staunchest Pentecostal buddies.
Kenyan Analyst 