Bazj Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 Because they voted for Kenyatta, Wasn't that a Police album? Kenyatta Mondatta?? :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 Wasn't that a Police album? Kenyatta Mondatta?? :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 9, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Errm, presume Kenyata was elected in elections agreed by the British as part of their withdrawal from Empire - that's how these things usually went. You've sort of got to know who your handing the reins of power over to, before you leave! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 They did not have to vote for Kenyata Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 9, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 They weren't voting for Independence, that had already been conceded by the Brits; they were voting for who would form their first Government. As Kenyata was a leader of the majority Kikooyoo tribe; it's hardly surprising he won is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica/articles/art_10816.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 9, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 So? "the colonial administration yielded to (political) pressure" from the new elite, and granted elections as part of the transfer of power. Think you'll find that most revolutions are the replacement of one elite by another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 So the majority wanted independence, and the Mau Mau,, using your own definition are not terrorists ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Errm nope; the majority probably couldn't care less, but would tend do what their tribal leaders told them to do. Independence was already granted by the Brits, hence the elections. The Mau Mau had been defeated and their Leader killed; and wouldn't have been overtly supported by moderates anyway - so they were terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Where the war aims of the Mau Mau met Obs? Their aim being self rule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Your now moving from one flower to the next Kije - must be that butterfly mind! Being defeated militarily doesn't necessarily deny political victory, as many revolutions have shown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 No I'm not your just trying to stop yourself getting pinned down, the war aims of the Mau Mau, were met, they got self rule, we won a battle they won the war. Simples, and if your one of the few that believe what you write, they were not terrorists either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 11, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 If chopping limbs off and killing their own people, burning down their villages is your idea of a freedom fighter - then yes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 But it was all done in the best possible taste! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 I was using your definition Obs, nice try Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 11, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 Think you need to re-read my definition - "overcome the status quo by violent means". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 12, 2013 Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 Did you not say "any minority group" As we have now established they were not a minority group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 Errm, nope, YOU havn't "established" anything - they were a "minority" of the population, engaged in "violence", often against their fellow Kenyans. And they were militarily defeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 12, 2013 Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 So let me get this straight, to be a freedom fighter and not a terrorist, the majority of the population have to take up arms, and not just support them? Have we ever had freedom fighters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 First of all. you have no evidence for popular majority "support" for the Mau Mau; a large number of the Kenyan population were actually Indian, brought over by the Brits to build a railway system, as they seemed to have had a work ethic not found locally! As I said (but you fail to digest), one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorists, it all depends which side your on, and who writes and promulgates the history. A strange irony too, that all these downtrodden populations of the Empire, gagging to be free of British rule, couldn't wait to get their British passports and move to the mother country - and now we're reaping the consequences. Seems political myopia isn't confined to today's liberal luvvies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 12, 2013 Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 . A strange irony too, that all these downtrodden populations of the Empire, gagging to be free of British rule, couldn't wait to get their British passports and move to the mother country - and now we're reaping the consequences. Seems political myopia isn't confined to today's liberal luvvies. ALL, !!!! Didn't take you long to get it on to immigration, are you hoping for support. Why the VAST exaggeration, is that how people on the far right work, try scare tactics and exaggeration. Or did your next door nay neighbour tell you, that everyone from the old empire Countries is trying to get over here, come to think of it, it is on a scale of the old chestnut about the school in Warrington (not yet named by you) where no one speaks English. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 Might help if you read up on the history, rather than depending on those rose coloured glasses. As for exaggeration, you were pretty free with the term "majority", despite having no evidence to support your assertion. btw. I'll stand by the school anecdote - and my comment was "don't have English as their first language". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted June 12, 2013 Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 Very easy to stand by it when you will not name the school, As for me being free with the term "majority", well just think what you are actually saying. If the majority were not if favour, where were the protests when we left, I have trawled the net, can't seem to find anything on them begging us on on knee to stay Obs, maybe you can , Their was an election, Could not find a party advocating the UK stay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 12, 2013 Report Share Posted June 12, 2013 Their was an election, Could not find a party advocating the UK stay. Kije.... if you are so ashamed and insulted by the former British Empire and resent everything this country seemed to have done as leader of that Empire...... Why are you so for the European Empire that Brussels is trying to create? I mean the Euro Empire has already started falling apart; countries are bankrupt, the people are burning EU flags in Athens and Spain, unemployment in some countries is at 25% or more for some sections of the population and still the EU leaders are trying to screw every penny they can from the "well off" members like us and Germany....(similar if you like to the exploitation of the British Empire countries that you try to make us believe) you say that the majority wanted an end to British rule and you agree and support the fact that they got their wish...... 51% of people polled here want out of the EU.... the similarities are extraordinary!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.